Committee advances bill to restore broad industrial exemption for utilities; engineers and co-ops clash over public-safety and cost

House Bill 323, proposed to clarify and restore an ‘‘industrial exemption’’ in engineering practice law, advanced from committee after sharply divided testimony from rural electric cooperatives, utilities and engineering regulators.

Sponsor Representative Sanchez said the measure is a ‘‘cleanup’’ to return to long-standing practice so rural co-ops can use national standards and routine design drawings without obtaining a professional engineer’s stamp for every distribution-line change. Sanchez said cooperatives have been using U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service (RUS) standards for decades and that requiring a PE stamp on routine distribution work would add cost and delay.

The nut graf: cooperatives and utilities argued the exemption keeps electricity affordable and avoids project delays in sparsely populated service areas. The New Mexico Rural Electric Cooperative Association, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association and several local co-ops testified that distribution-line modifications, pole replacements and routine maintenance are done to national safety standards and that requiring PE-stamped designs would increase project costs by an estimated 10–20 percent in witnesses’ testimony and potentially delay service to customers.

The New Mexico Board of Professional Engineers and Professional Surveyors and board members testified in opposition, saying the bill is too broad and could decrease public health and safety. Board chair Emily Dolman said the board “feel[s] that this bill is too broad,” and argued many utilities have secured licensed engineers or had standards reviewed; the board urged a narrower approach that targets specific, limited activities rather than blanket exemptions.

Representatives of co-ops described practical impacts. Vince Martinez of the New Mexico Rural Electric Cooperative Association said cooperatives serve large land areas with few customers and that the extra engineering costs would be passed to ratepayers. Representative Sanchez said the change is meant to return to prior practice and noted the amendment includes a sunset provision through July 1, 2030, in the draft under discussion.

Witnesses discussed specific hazards: the board cited examples from other states of infrastructure-related accidents; cooperative witnesses said many incidents involve vegetation and right-of-way management, not routine design. Engineers warned the exemption could touch projects that cross tribal easements, rights of way and other lands; sponsors said the exemption applies to work within the utility’s control and right of way.

The committee took testimony from multiple stakeholders, debated the scope and whether the bill should be narrowed to co-ops only, and ultimately moved the measure forward with a committee substitute and a vote. The transcript records a roll-call and an announced committee action; the sponsor and supporters said the bill restores prior practice and prevents added costs for rural customers.

Ending: The committee advanced HB 323 as amended; further floor debate and possible narrowing were discussed by members who expressed unease about the bill’s breadth and public-safety implications.