Mixed stakeholders push for clearer one‑call law after testimony highlights ambiguous penalties, burden of proof and municipal delays

Representative Becky Larson opened a wide‑ranging review of the Wyoming Underground Facilities Notification Act on May 5, telling the Joint Transportation, Highways & Military Affairs Committee that contractors and operators had identified ambiguous statutory language and inconsistent enforcement after an eight‑month stakeholder effort.

Larson and contractors raised four principal issues: (1) the allocation of the burden of proof when underground facilities are struck (current statutory language places the obligation on the excavator to prove it used "reasonable care" even when an operator failed to respond within the statutory window), (2) unclear enforcement responsibility and an informal penalty process administered by the Attorney General and the Public Service Commission (PSC), (3) a statutory exemption for certain governmental entities that can produce locate delays with no penalty, and (4) an agricultural exemption that many farm and ranch stakeholders want to preserve but narrow with depth‑ or activity‑based limits.

Assistant Attorney General Damie Metsler described how enforcement works in practice: complaints and damage tickets are routed through the one‑call portal; the AG’s office meets monthly with the PSC and One Call to screen complaints; dispositional options include warning letters, negotiated settlements, training and civil penalties; most matters are settled administratively and rarely litigated in district court. The AG’s office uses aggravating and mitigating factors when assessing fines and has used settlement and training to secure compliance rather than strictly applying the $5,000 statutory amount in every case.

Deputy Chairman Petri (Public Service Commission) said federal pipeline‑safety oversight prompted the state to develop a more active enforcement posture. He provided recent enforcement data: in 2024 the PSC generated 44 warning letters, 19 civil penalties (totaling $22,500) and 12 trainings; 2025 counts so far showed 24 warnings, 32 civil penalties (totaling $3,800) and 18 trainings. One Call Wyoming reported processing roughly 600,000 locate requests last year with about 800 self‑reported damages; One Call testified that locate volumes are increasing and that abandoned or unmarked facilities remain a complex national problem.

Contractors (Associated General Contractors) and private operators asked the committee to clarify statutory burden and civil penalty mechanics, to remove or narrow municipal immunity for noncompliance, and to create a predictable administrative penalty structure (either a PSC board or PSC decisionmaking with an appeals path). Municipal officials (Wyoming Association of Municipalities and several public‑works directors) warned that local governments already expend significant staff time on locates — thousands per year in larger cities and hundreds of staff hours in small towns — and urged the committee to account for municipal resourcing and the operational reality of out‑of‑state contractors that submit large batches of tickets.

Agricultural stakeholders supported keeping an agricultural exemption, but many suggested clearer parameters (for example, excluding routine tillage that does not exceed 18–24 inches or exempting minor maintenance) and suggested a practical mapping approach to identify remote areas where no facilities exist. Several witnesses asked the committee to consider a permanent GIS locate or mapping solution for recurring field operations to avoid repeated ticketing for routine agricultural operations.

After extended testimony, Senator Cole moved and Representative Nicholas seconded that LSO draft statutory changes to address the issues discussed. The committee voted to direct LSO to prepare a bill draft for consideration at the next meeting. Members also asked LSO, the Attorney General’s Office and One Call to supply summary data (number of tickets, damage incidents, frequency of municipal delays and historic penalty outcomes) to help staff craft draft language.

The committee’s direction did not assume a single final solution; options under discussion include (a) shifting burden of proof when operators fail to do timely locates, (b) creating an administrative enforcement board under PSC or giving PSC structured penalty authority with an appeals path, (c) narrowing the governmental‑entity exemption to remove a perverse disincentive for timely locates, and (d) defining agricultural exceptions by depth and repetitive‑operations criteria.

Stakeholders and state officials agreed on two procedural points: statutory language should be clarified so expectations are consistent, and enforcement should emphasize education and training where appropriate while preserving a structured penalty path for egregious or repeat violations.