Legislative committee reviews bill to extend PUC telecom siting sunset to 2030
Loading...
Summary
Legislative Council staff told the committee H.527 would extend the sunset on section 2 48a—Vermont’s PUC telecommunications siting process—by four years to 2030 and direct the Public Utility Commission to hold workshops and report back by Dec. 15, 2027. Members raised concerns the process remains legalistic and hard for laypeople to use.
LJ Kowski of the Legislative Council told the committee H.527 would extend the statutory sunset for section 2 48a, the Public Utility Commission procedure for telecommunications siting, four years to 2030. “So currently, in statute, effective 07/01/2026, no new applications for certificates of public good under the section may be considered by the PUC. This is extending it 4 years to 2030,” Kowski said.
The bill’s supporters described 2 48a as a land‑use‑focused PUC siting path that lets some telecommunications projects pursue a single PUC certificate of public good instead of parallel Act 250 and municipal permitting. Kowski said federal law limits state review of technical matters such as radio‑frequency emissions, leaving siting and visibility to state review: “It is a siting process. So it is a land use process, at least in part.”
Why the Legislature has repeatedly renewed the sunset was a theme: Kowski outlined renewals in 2010, 2011, 2014, 2017, 2020 and 2023 and said the sunsets force periodic legislative review. The House version of H.527 also instructs the PUC to hold at least two stakeholder workshops and to submit an overview of the process, recommendations and any rule changes to the House Committee on Digital Energy and Digital Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy by Dec. 15, 2027.
Committee members questioned whether the PUC process remains accessible. One committee member said the procedure is “legalistic” and “a layman typically can’t do a reasonable job in answering it,” adding it “discourages [municipalities and individuals] from participating … because there’s no way you could participate adequately without hiring an attorney.” Kowski and others said prior reviews and stakeholder testimony—attorneys, utilities and municipal representatives—have informed the draft language and that the PUC has posted guidance documents and procedural steps on its website.
Kowski walked the committee through specific workshop topics written into the bill: advanced notice content and length (including a 60‑day advanced notice for larger projects), distribution requirements, prepetition hearings and site visits, standards for supplements and amendments to petitions, contested‑case procedures and discovery, evidentiary burdens, and guidance on when municipalities receive substantial deference. The bill also contemplates simplified administrative transfers of certificates of public good and instructs the PUC to consult widely, including with the Vermont League of Cities and Towns and regional planning commissions.
The chair said the committee will take public testimony and invite the PUC and Department of Public Service to appear. No formal action was recorded in the session; members signaled interest in hearing from people who have used the process and from municipal officials about whether the PUC workshop approach will improve transparency and participation.
