Devin Carney

State Representatives Jesse MacLachlan (R-35) & Devin Carney (R-23) have introduced legislation this session that would prohibit the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) from designating additional stormwater sewer systems outside of urban areas.  H.B. 6036 would seek to prevent DEEP from exceeding current federal regulations.

The federal Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has mandated a number of permit programs to deal with stormwater pollution which are in turn administered by our state DEEP, MS4 is one such permit.  The DEEP first issued the MS4 permit in January, 2004 and it has been reissued, without modifications, since then.  The current permit expired on January 8, 2015 and the DEEP, pursuant to federal and state law, is using this opportunity to modify the permit’s requirements.  The current permit will continue in effect until January 8, 2016 or until the DEEP Commissioner makes a final decision on the renewal of the general permit, whichever is earlier.

Both MachLachlan and Carney strongly oppose a renewal draft by the DEEP to update the General Permit for the Discharge of Stormwater from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), as federal regulation should be a sufficient standard to follow. Further regulation imposed by the DEEP would only overwhelm small towns such as those in the 35^th and 23^rd districts.

“State agencies must be more mindful of the fiscal impact that unfunded mandates have on small town budgets,” said Rep. Carney. “This particular mandate goes far beyond what is required under federal law and will overly burden towns in the 23rd District.  I believe state agencies must work with our local governments to come up with options that can alleviate environmental concerns without affecting the ability of municipalities to provide essential services or raise taxes.”

“This unfunded mandate will deeply affect municipal budgets for both increased personnel and equipment costs. I believe that federal standards for stormwater and leaf removal should be sufficient and if not, then why not look to our neighboring states for inspiration in tackling this issue? We need to limit the burden placed on our municipalities not seek ways to add to it,” said Rep. MacLachlan. 

As of yet, there is no detailed analysis of the cost effectiveness versus the benefits of expanding the scope and requirements of the permit, both legislators said the fiscal impact of these new and increased unfunded mandates could be significant, including a likely substantial increase to town budgets. 

The proposed bill has been referred to the Joint Committee on Environment and will await action there.  This session of the Connecticut General Assembly convened on January 7^th, and will conclude at midnight, Wednesday, June 3^rd, 2015.