Skip to content
Bills from the 2013–14 session

Senate Bill 35

Powers and duties of an electric transmission company and certificates of public convenience and necessity and permits for certain electric generating facilities and high-voltage transmission lines

Became law

The governor signed it on Apr 24, 2013. It's ⁠.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Feb 20, 2013

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, passed

    Passed Apr 9, 2013

  4. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed Apr 9, 2013

  5. Governor, passed

    Signed

  6. Law, here now

    2013 Wisconsin Act 10

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 24, 2013: “Published 4-25-2013”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it does

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

With certain exceptions, current law prohibits a person from constructing a large electric generating facility or high-voltage transmission line unless the Public Service Commission (PSC) has granted the person a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN). Current law defines a "large electric generating facility" as a facility designed for nominal operation at a capacity of 100 megawatts or more and a "high-voltage transmission line" as an electric transmission line exceeding one mile in length that is designed for operation at a nominal voltage of 100 kilovolts or more. Within 30 days after an application for a CPCN is filed, the PSC must determine whether the application is complete. If the PSC determines that an application is incomplete, the PSC must notify the applicant, who is allowed to refile the application. If the PSC fails to determine that an application is complete within 30 days after filing, current law provides that the application is considered to be complete. This bill clarifies that an application is considered to be complete if the PSC fails to determine that the application is complete within 30 days after filing or refiling of the application.

Current law also requires the PSC, within ten days after an application for a CPCN is filed, to submit copies of the application to the clerk of each city, village, and town in which the proposed large electric generating facility or high-voltage transmission line is to be located and to the main public library in each such county.

Read the full summary

This bill requires instead that the PSC must submit the copies within ten days after the PSC determines that the application is complete or after the application is considered to be complete. In addition, current law requires an applicant for a CPCN for a high-voltage transmission line to submit a detailed project plan to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) at least 60 days prior to filing the CPCN application. This bill eliminates the requirement to submit the plan to DNR.

Current law also provides that, if an applicant for a CPCN is also required to obtain one or more permits from DNR, the applicant must use a procedure for submitting only one application to DNR for all of the required DNR permits (combined permit procedure), rather than submitting separate applications to DNR for each permit. However, the combined permit procedure does not apply if the only DNR permit the applicant is required to obtain is a storm water discharge permit.

Current law specifies two deadlines for DNR to complete action on the permit applications. The first deadline is that DNR must complete action within 120 days after the date on which the permit application is complete or considered to be complete. Like the PSC, current law requires DNR to determine whether an application is complete within 30 days after filing, allows an applicant to refile an application that is incomplete, and specifies that, if DNR fails to determine that an application is complete within 30 days after filing or refiling, the application is considered to be complete. The second deadline is that DNR must complete action on the permit application within 30 days after the PSC issues its decision on the CPCN application. This bill provides that, if the combined permit procedure applies to an applicant, the second deadline applies to DNR, and not the first deadline.

Also under current law, certain electric utilities have contributed their transmission facilities to a transmission company, which is defined, in part, as a company whose sole purpose is the planning, constructing, operating, maintaining, and expanding of transmission facilities that it owns. In addition, under current law, the transmission company has certain duties and powers, including the power to purchase or acquire transmission facilities in addition to those contributed by the electric utilities, subject to any approvals that are required under federal or state law. This bill revises that power so that the transmission company is also allowed to purchase or acquire the right to provide transmission service over transmission facilities that it does not own. The bill makes a related change to the definition of "transmission company" so that the purpose of the transmission company is to provide transmission service, which is not limited to transmission facilities that it owns. Finally, the bill specifies that the transmission company may exercise its powers either directly or through one or more affiliates.

Who's behind it

Paul F. Farrow, a Republican, is its ⁠.

1 more lawmaker ⁠.

See all 2 names

Author (1)

Signed on in support (1)

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There were 4 votes on this bill.

Senate Committee on Government Operations vote on an amendment

Passed, 7 to 0 · Mar 28, 2013

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate Committee on Government Operations vote on an amendment

Passed, 7 to 0 · Mar 28, 2013

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate Committee on Government Operations vote to recommend it

Passed, 7 to 0 · Mar 28, 2013

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote to pass it

Passed, 32 to 1 · Apr 9, 2013

See how each of the 33 senators voted

D: Democrat, R: Republican

Official motion: “Read a third time and passed, Ayes 32, Noes 1”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Apr 24, 2013

    The new law was published.

  2. Apr 24, 2013

    The governor signed it. It became 2013 Wisconsin Act 10.

  3. Apr 23, 2013

    Sent to the governor.

  4. Apr 9, 2013

    The Assembly passed it too.

  5. Apr 9, 2013

    “Read” (the official wording)

  6. Apr 9, 2013

    The Assembly received it.

  7. Apr 9, 2013

    The Senate passed it, 32 to 1.

  8. Apr 9, 2013

    The Senate adopted it.

  9. Mar 28, 2013

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 7 to 0.

  10. Mar 28, 2013

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0” (the official wording)

  11. Mar 28, 2013

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0” (the official wording)

  12. Feb 26, 2013

    The committee held a public hearing.

  13. Feb 20, 2013

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications.

  14. Feb 20, 2013

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Feb 20, 2013 · Senate

    Introduced by Senator Farrow; cosponsored by Representative Honadel

  2. Feb 20, 2013 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications

  3. Feb 26, 2013 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  4. Feb 27, 2013 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 1 offered by Senator Farrow

  5. Mar 4, 2013 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 2 offered by Senators Farrow and Shilling

  6. Mar 5, 2013 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 3 offered by Senators Farrow and Shilling

  7. Mar 27, 2013 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  8. Mar 28, 2013 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  9. Mar 28, 2013 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  10. Mar 28, 2013 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Government Operations, Public Works, and Telecommunications, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  11. Mar 28, 2013 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  12. Apr 8, 2013 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 4-9-2013 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  13. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Read a second time

  14. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 2 adopted

  15. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 3 adopted

  16. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  17. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  18. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 32, Noes 1

  19. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  20. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  21. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Read

  22. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Rules suspended and taken up

  23. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  24. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  25. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  26. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in

  27. Apr 9, 2013 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  28. Apr 9, 2013 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  29. Apr 12, 2013 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled

  30. Apr 23, 2013 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 4-23-2013

  31. Apr 24, 2013 · Senate

    Report approved by the Governor on 4-24-2013. 2013 Wisconsin Act 10

  32. Apr 24, 2013 · Senate

    Published 4-25-2013

Terms on this page

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote