SB 691 — Authorizing DOH to provide reimbursement for timely relocation of utilities
Last action — Communicated to House
-
1Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed House of Delegates
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2026 Session. It reached “Introduced” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there are no live odds of enactment. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Authorizing DOH to provide reimbursement for timely relocation of utilities
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
2 added · 137 removedPlain-language change summary
The recent amendment to Bill SB 691 clarifies the process for utilities to relocate their facilities when state highway projects require it. Key changes include setting a maximum notice period of 18 months for utilities to adjust their lines, outlining the required procedures for utilities to follow in these situations, and specifying the conditions under which utilities may receive reimbursement for relocation costs. This matters because it aims to create a more efficient collaboration between state highway projects and utility companies, potentially reducing construction delays and costs.
WESTSB691 VIRGINIAHEPW LEGISLATUREAM. REGULAR SESSION Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 691 BYSENATORM.
AYNARD#1 [Reported3-9Casto February3264The 23, 2026, from the Committee on TransportationEnergy and Infrastructure]Public CSWorks formoved SB 691 A BILL to amend and reenact §17-4-17b of the Codebill ofby Weststriking Virginia,out 1931,everything asafter amended, relating to authorizing the Divisionenacting ofclause Highwaysand toinserting providein reimbursementlieu forthereof the timelyfollowing: relocationARTICLE of4. utilities.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:
ARTICLE 4.
§17-4-17b.
(a) Whenever the division reasonably determines that any public utility line or facility located upon, across, or under any portion of a state highway needs to be removed, relocated, or adjusted in order to accommodate a highway project, the division shall give to the utility reasonable notice in writing as mutually agreed, but not to exceed 18 months, directing it to begin the physical removal, relocation, or adjustment of such utility obstruction or interference at the cost of the utility, including construction inspection costs and in compliance with the rules of the division and the provisions of §29A-3-1 et seq.
of this code.code.(b) If the notice is in conjunction with a highway improvement project, it will be provided at the date of advertisement or award.
(b)Prior Ifto the notice isdirecting inthe conjunctionphysical withremoval, relocation, or adjustment of a utility line or facility, the utility shall adhere to the division’s utility relocation procedures for public road improvements which shall include, but not be limited to, the following:(1) The division will submit to the utility a letter and a set of plans for the proposed highway improvement project,project;(2) itThe willutility bemust providedwithin ata reasonable time submit to the datedivision a written confirmation acknowledging receipt of advertisementthe plans and a declaration of whether or award.not its facilities are within the proposed project limits and the extent to which the facilities are in conflict with the project;(3) If the utility is adjusting, locating, or relocating facilities or lines from or into the division’s right-of-way, the utility must submit to the division plans showing existing and proposed locations of utility facilities;(4) The utility’s submission shall include with the plans a work plan demonstrating that the utility adjustment, location, or relocation will be accomplished in a manner and time frame established by the division’s written procedures and instructions.
Prior to the notice directing the physical removal, relocation, or adjustment of a utility line or facility, the utility shall adhere to the division’s utility relocation procedures for public road improvements which shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(1) The division will submit to the utility a letter and a set of plans for the proposed highway improvement project;
(2) The utility must within a reasonable time submit to the division a written confirmation acknowledging receipt of the plans and a declaration of whether or not its facilities are within the proposed project limits and the extent to which the facilities are in conflict with the project;
(3) If the utility is adjusting, locating, or relocating facilities or lines from or into the division’s right-of-way, the utility must submit to the division plans showing existing and proposed locations of utility facilities;
CS for SB 691 (4) The utility’s submission shall include with the plans a work plan demonstrating that the utility adjustment, location, or relocation will be accomplished in a manner and time frame established by the division’s written procedures and instructions.
The division will review the work plan to ensure compliance with the proposed improvement plans and schedule.schedule.(c) If additional utility removal, relocation, or adjustment work is found necessary after the letting date of the highway improvement project, the utility shall provide a revised work plan within 30 calendar days after receipt of the division’s written notification of the additional work.
(c) If additional utility removal, relocation, or adjustment work is found necessary after the letting date of the highway improvement project, the utility shall provide a revised work plan within 30 calendar days after receipt of the division’s written notification of the additional work.
The division shall reimburse the utility for work performed by the utility that must be performed again as the result of a plan change on the part of the division.(d) Should the utility fail to comply with the notice to remove, relocate, or adjust, the utility is liable to the division for direct contract damages, including costs, fees, penalties, or other contract charges, for which the division is proven to be liable to a contractor caused by the utility’s failure to timely remove, relocate, or adjust, unless a written extension is granted by the division.
(d)The Shouldutility theshall utilitynot failbe liable for any delay or other failure to comply with thea notice to remove, relocate, or adjust,adjust that is not solely the utilityfault isof liablethe toutility, including, but not limited to, the following:(1) The division forhas directnot contractperformed damages,its includingobligations costs,in fees,accordance penalties,with the division’s rules;(2) The division has not obtained all necessary rights-of-way that affect the utility;(3) The delay or other contractfailure charges,to forcomply whichby the divisionutility is provendue to bethe liabledivision’s failure to amanage contractorschedules causedand bycommunicate with the utility’sutility;(4) failureThe division seeks to timelyimpose remove,liability relocate,on the utility based solely upon oral communications or adjust,communications unlessnot adirected writtento extensionthe isutility’s granteddesignated bycontact person;(5) The division changes construction plans in any manner following the division.notice to remove or relocate and the change affects the utility’s facilities;
Theor(6) utilityOther shallgood cause, beyond the control of and not bethe liablefault forof anythe delayutility, including, but not limited to, labor disputes, unavailability of materials on a national level, act of God, or otherextreme failureweather conditions.(e) In order to complyavoid construction delays and to create an efficient and effective highway program, the division may schedule program meetings with the public utility on a noticequarterly basis to remove,assure relocate,that schedules are maintained.(f) If a utility that is required by law to bear all or adjusta portion of its own relocation costs elects to pursue a reimbursement agreement with the division pursuant to this subsection and provides the division with sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the utility is not solelyadequately staffed, equipped, or capitalized to perform such relocation work with its own forces or contractors at a time convenient to and in coordination with the faultassociated ofhighway project, the utility,division may pay for the associated relocation costs, including, but not limited to, design engineering, design review, construction, and inspection costs, out of the following:State Road Fund:
(1) The division has not performed its obligations in accordance with the division’s rules;
(2) The division has not obtained all necessary rights-of-way that affect the utility;
(3) The delay or other failure to comply by the utility is due to the division’s failure to manage schedules and communicate with the utility;
CS for SB 691 (4) The division seeks to impose liability on the utility based solely upon oral communications or communications not directed to the utility’s designated contact person;
(5) The division changes construction plans in any manner following the notice to remove or relocate and the change affects the utility’s facilities;
or (6) Other good cause, beyond the control of and not the fault of the utility, including, but not limited to, labor disputes, unavailability of materials on a national level, act of God, or extreme weather conditions.
(e) In order to avoid construction delays and to create an efficient and effective highway program, the division may schedule program meetings with the public utility on a quarterly basis to assure that schedules are maintained.
(f) If a utility that is required by law to bear all or a portion of its own relocation costs elects to pursue a reimbursement agreement with the division pursuant to this subsection and provides the division with sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the utility is not adequately staffed, equipped, or capitalized to perform such relocation work with its own forces or contractors at a time convenient to and in coordination with the associated highway project, the division may pay for the associated relocation costs, including, but not limited to, design engineering, design review, construction, and inspection costs, out of the State Road Fund:
(1) (1) Preliminary engineering design work associated with utility relocations to be paid for by the division pursuant to a reimbursement agreement shall be completed by any of the following methods:methods:(A) The division’s or the utility’s internal forces;
CS for SB 691 (A) The division’s or the utility’s internal forces;
oror(C) (C) Inclusion as part of the highway construction contract let by the division as agreed to by the utility:
Provided, That the subcontractor performing the preliminary engineering design work associated with the relocation is pre-approved by the utility.utility.(2) Utility relocation construction work paid for by the division pursuant to a reimbursement agreement shall be completed by either of the following methods:(A) A contract awarded by the division to the lowest qualified bidder based on an appropriate competitive solicitation:
(2) Utility relocation construction work paid for by the division pursuant to a reimbursement agreement shall be completed by either of the following methods:
(A) A contract awarded by the division to the lowest qualified bidder based on an appropriate competitive solicitation:
or (B) (B) Inclusion as part of the highway construction contract let by the division as agreed to by the utility:
Provided, That the subcontractor performing the utility relocation construction work is pre-approved by the utility.(3) All design and construction work paid for by the division pursuant to a reimbursement agreement is subject to the reasonable inspection and acceptance of the utility, whose acceptance shall not be unreasonably withheld, and shall be performed in accordance with the specifications and standards required by the utility.
(3)(4) All designrelocation and construction work paidperformed for by the division pursuant to a reimbursement agreement isshall subjectconform to theapplicable reasonablestate inspection and acceptancefederal laws or regulations.(5) The provisions of thethis utility,subsection whoseare acceptancecompletely voluntary and shall not be unreasonablyinterpreted withheld,to andrequire shallany beutility performedto inenter accordanceinto a reimbursement agreement with the specificationsdivision andor standardsavail requireditself byof the utility.options authorized by this subsection.
(4) All relocation work performed pursuant to a reimbursement agreement shall conform to applicable state and federal laws or regulations.
(5) The provisions of this subsection are completely voluntary and shall not be interpreted to require any utility to enter into a reimbursement agreement with the division or avail itself of the options authorized by this subsection.
of this code and the division may promulgate emergency rules pursuant to the provisions of §29A-3-15 of this code in order to comply with this subsection.subsection.(g) Notwithstanding other provisions of this section,(1) Where Federal highway funds are available to reimburse the cost of utility relocation, the commissioner of highways shall include within the cost of highway construction the cost of relocation necessarily incurred by any public utility, and any pipeline company subject to the jurisdiction of the federal energy regulatory commission, in relocating any public utility line, pipeline or facility.(2) Where Federal highway funds are not available to reimburse the cost of utility relocation, the division may, in its discretion, provide partial or full reimbursement for the relocation of a utility if the physical utility relocation is successfully completed to the satisfaction of the division on or prior to the deadline established by the division.
CSA forutility SBis 691not (g)eligible Notwithstandingto otherreceive provisionsany ofreimbursement pursuant to this section,subsection unless the division may,notifies the utility in itswriting discretion,of providethe partialfollowing:(A) orThat fullthe utility is eligible for reimbursement for theutility relocation ofat a utilityspecified iflocation theor physicallocations;(B) The deadline for completion of the utility relocationrelocation;(C) isThe successfullypercentage completedor monetary amount the division offers to provide for partial or full reimbursement at the satisfactiondivision’s ofproject expense if the divisionutility completes physical relocation at the location on or priorbefore to the deadline establishedset by the division.division;
Aand(D) utilityAdditional isrequirements, notif eligibleany, that the division specifies the utility must meet to receive anyreimbursement.(E) Any such reimbursement pursuantshall be subject to thisa subsectionwritten unlessagreement entered into by the division notifiesand the utility that specifies reimbursement terms in writingadvance of the following:relocation.
Show all 46 changed lines (6 more)
(1)This Thatsubsection thedoes utilitynot isaffect eligiblea utility’s eligibility for reimbursement forwhen the utility relocationhas atthe aright specifiedof occupancy in its existing location because it holds the fee, an easement, or locations;other real property interest, the damaging or taking of which is compensable in eminent domain. AdoptedRejected
(2) The deadline for completion of the utility relocation;
(3) The percentage or monetary amount the division offers to provide for partial or full reimbursement at the division’s project expense if the utility completes physical relocation at the location on or before the deadline set by the division;
and (4) Additional requirements, if any, that the division specifies the utility must meet to receive reimbursement.
Any reimbursement shall be subject to a written agreement entered into by the division and the utility that specifies reimbursement terms in advance of the relocation.
This subsection does not affect a utility’s eligibility for reimbursement when the utility has the right of occupancy in its existing location because it holds the fee, an easement, or other real property interest, the damaging or taking of which is compensable in eminent domain.
Show all 46 changed rows (6 more)
View plain text versions (3)
- sb691 hepw am. _1 3-9 adopted.htm View text Current html
- Committee Substitute View text pdf
- Introduced Introduced Version pdf
Action History
-
Filed for introduction
-
To Transportation and Infrastructure
-
Introduced in Senate
-
To Transportation and Infrastructure
-
Committee substitute reported
-
On 1st reading
-
Read 1st time
-
On 2nd reading
-
Read 2nd time
-
On 3rd reading
-
Read 3rd time
-
Passed Senate (Roll No. 238)
-
Ordered to House
-
House received Senate message
-
Introduced in House
-
To Energy and Public Works
-
To House Energy and Public Works
-
Markup Discussion
-
With amendment, do pass
-
On 1st reading, Special Calendar
-
Read 1st time
-
On 2nd reading, Special Calendar
-
Read 2nd time
-
Amendment reported by the Clerk
-
Committee amendment adopted (Voice vote)
-
On 3rd reading, Special Calendar
-
Read 3rd time
-
Passed House (Roll No. 550)
-
Communicated to Senate
-
House Message received
-
Senate refused to concur; requested House to recede (Voice vote)
-
Communicated to House
Sponsors
- M. Maynard · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 151 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- M. Maynard
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (151)
151 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 151 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
Roll call published as PDF — view source.
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 81 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| Democrat | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 92 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 7% |
How each member voted (99)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Flanigan | — | Yea |
| Linville | — | Yea |
| Anitra Hamilton | Democrat | Yea |
| Evan Hansen | Democrat | Yea |
| Hollis Lewis | Democrat | Yea |
| John Williams | Democrat | Yea |
| Kayla Young | Democrat | Yea |
| Mike Pushkin | Democrat | Yea |
| Rick Garcia | Democrat | Yea |
| Sean Hornbuckle | Democrat | Yea |
| Shawn Fluharty | Democrat | Yea |
| Adam Burkhammer | Republican | Yea |
| Adam Vance | Republican | Yea |
| Andy Shamblin | Republican | Yea |
| Betsy Kelly | Republican | Yea |
| Bill Bell | Republican | Yea |
| Bill Ridenour | Republican | Not Voting |
| Bob Fehrenbacher | Republican | Yea |
| Bryan Smith | Republican | Not Voting |
| Bryan Ward | Republican | Yea |
| Carl "Bill" Roop | Republican | Yea |
| Carl Martin | Republican | Yea |
| Charles Sheedy | Republican | Yea |
| Chris Phillips | Republican | Yea |
| Christopher W. Toney | Republican | Yea |
| Chuck Horst | Republican | Yea |
| Clay Riley | Republican | Yea |
| D. Rolland Jennings | Republican | Yea |
| Dana Ferrell | Republican | Yea |
| Dave Foggin | Republican | Yea |
| David Cannon | Republican | Yea |
| David Green | Republican | Yea |
| David McCormick | Republican | Yea |
| Dean Jeffries | Republican | Yea |
| Doug Smith | Republican | Yea |
| Elias Coop-Gonzalez | Republican | Yea |
| Eric Brooks | Republican | Yea |
| Erica Moore | Republican | Yea |
| Evan Worrell | Republican | Yea |
| Gary G. Howell | Republican | Yea |
| Geno Chiarelli | Republican | Yea |
| George Miller | Republican | Yea |
| George Street | Republican | Yea |
| Gregory A. Watt | Republican | Yea |
| Guy Ward | Republican | Yea |
| Henry Dillon | Republican | Yea |
| Ian T. Masters | Republican | Yea |
| James Robert "JB" Akers II | Republican | Yea |
| Jarred Cannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jeff Campbell | Republican | Yea |
| Jeff Eldridge | Republican | Yea |
| Jeffrey Stephens | Republican | Yea |
| Jim Butler | Republican | Yea |
| Jimmy Willis | Republican | Yea |
| Joe Ellington | Republican | Yea |
| Joe Funkhouser | Republican | Yea |
| Joe Parsons | Republican | Yea |
| Joe Statler | Republican | Not Voting |
| John Jordan | Republican | Yea |
| John Paul Hott | Republican | Yea |
| Jonathan Kyle | Republican | Yea |
| Jonathan Pinson | Republican | Yea |
| Jordan Bridges | Republican | Yea |
| Jordan Maynor | Republican | Yea |
| Josh Holstein | Republican | Yea |
| Kathie Hess Crouse | Republican | Yea |
| Keith Marple | Republican | Yea |
| Laura Kimble | Republican | Yea |
| Lisa White | Republican | Yea |
| Lori Dittman | Republican | Yea |
| Margitta Mazzocchi | Republican | Yea |
| Mark Dean | Republican | Yea |
| Mark Zatezalo | Republican | Yea |
| Marshall W. Clay | Republican | Yea |
| Marty Gearheart | Republican | Yea |
| Matthew Rohrbach | Republican | Yea |
| Michael Amos | Republican | Not Voting |
| Michael Hite | Republican | Yea |
| Michael Hornby | Republican | Yea |
| Mickey Petitto | Republican | Not Voting |
| Pat McGeehan | Republican | Yea |
| Patrick Lucas | Republican | Yea |
| Phil Mallow | Republican | Yea |
| Ray Canterbury | Republican | Yea |
| Rick Hillenbrand | Republican | Yea |
| Roger Hanshaw | Republican | Not Voting |
| Roy Cooper | Republican | Yea |
| Ryan Browning | Republican | Yea |
| S. Chris Anders | Republican | Yea |
| Sarah Drennan | Republican | Yea |
| Scot C. Heckert | Republican | Yea |
| Stanley Adkins | Republican | Yea |
| Tresa Howell | Republican | Yea |
| Tristan Leavitt | Republican | Yea |
| Vacant1 | Republican | Yea |
| Vernon Criss | Republican | Not Voting |
| Walter Hall | Republican | Yea |
| Wayne Clark | Republican | Yea |
| William Anderson | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democrat | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 34 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (34)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| MR PRESIDENT | — | Yea |
| Anitra Hamilton | Democrat | Yea |
| Mike Woelfel | Democrat | Yea |
| Mike Woelfel | Democrat | Yea |
| Rick Garcia | Democrat | Yea |
| Ben Queen | Republican | Yea |
| Carl Martin | Republican | Yea |
| Chris Phillips | Republican | Yea |
| Chris Rose | Republican | Yea |
| Chris Rose | Republican | Yea |
| Dean Jeffries | Republican | Yea |
| Eric Tarr | Republican | Yea |
| Eric Tarr | Republican | Yea |
| Glenn Jeffries | Republican | Yea |
| Jack Woodrum | Republican | Yea |
| Jack Woodrum | Republican | Yea |
| Jay Taylor | Republican | Yea |
| Jimmy Willis | Republican | Yea |
| Mark R. Maynard | Republican | Yea |
| Mike Oliverio | Republican | Yea |
| Patricia Rucker | Republican | Yea |
| Patricia Rucker | Republican | Yea |
| Robbie Morris | Republican | Yea |
| Rollan A. Roberts | Republican | Yea |
| Rollan A. Roberts | Republican | Yea |
| Rupie Phillips | Republican | Yea |
| Rupie Phillips | Republican | Yea |
| Ryan Weld | Republican | Yea |
| Ryan Weld | Republican | Yea |
| Tom Takubo | Republican | Yea |
| Tom Takubo | Republican | Yea |
| Tom Willis | Republican | Yea |
| Trenton Barnhart | Republican | Yea |
| Trenton Barnhart | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 691 do?
- Authorizing DOH to provide reimbursement for timely relocation of utilities
- Who sponsors SB 691?
- SB 691 is sponsored by M. Maynard.
- What is the current status of SB 691?
- This bill died with 2026 Session. It reached “Introduced” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 691?
- Track SB 691 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 691
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 691
Last checked for changes 7 days ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →