West Virginia House Bill HB2264

West Virginia 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/12/25
• Refer: 2/12/25

Caption

Relating to authorizing the Alcohol Beverage Control Commissioner to promulgate a legislative rule relating to distilleries, mini-distilleries, and micro-distilleries

Summary

House Bill 2264 authorizes the Alcohol Beverage Control Commissioner to promulgate a legislative rule governing distilleries, mini-distilleries, and micro-distilleries in West Virginia. The bill does not itself create a new regulatory framework in the statutory text; rather, it gives legislative approval to an existing rule filed in the State Register and revised to address objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee. The measure is a rule-authorization bill tied to administrative regulation of the alcohol industry. By approving the rule, the Legislature would allow the Commissioner’s standards for distillery operations, licensing, and related compliance requirements to take effect under state law. The bill specifically references rule 175 CSR 10 and the authority in §60-2-11 of the West Virginia Code.

Impact

If enacted, HB2264 would amend §64-7-1 of the West Virginia Code to authorize the Alcohol Beverage Control Commissioner’s legislative rule on distilleries, mini-distilleries, and micro-distilleries. The practical effect is to validate and implement the administrative rule as part of the state’s regulatory structure for alcohol production businesses, affecting distillers, craft spirits producers, and related license holders subject to ABC oversight.

Sentiment

There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so no direct debate or opposition is documented. Based on the bill’s narrow purpose and its status as a rule-authorization measure, the bill appears procedural and administrative rather than controversial, with the available context suggesting a routine legislative approval process.

Contention

No specific points of contention are identified in the provided record. The only notable procedural issue is that the rule had to be modified to meet objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee before being refiled, which suggests prior technical or policy concerns with the underlying regulation. Those concerns are not detailed in the materials, and no named opponents or supporters are listed.