Connecticut 2022 Regular Session Status: In Committee 8 D cosponsors

SB 239 — AN ACT PROHIBITING THE USE OF CERTAIN RODENTICIDES FOR THE PROTECTION OF HAWKS, RAPTORS AND OTHER WILDLIFE.

Last action — FILE NO. 308

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed House
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

179 added · 105 removed

179 line(s) added, 105 removed.

→
Previous
Latest
General Assembly Raised Bill No.
Senate General Assembly File No.
239 February Session, 2022 LCO No.
308 February Session, 2022 Substitute Senate Bill No.
1506 Referred to Committee on ENVIRONMENT Introduced by:
239 Senate, April 5, 2022 The Committee on Environment reported through SEN.
(ENV) AN ACT PROHIBITING THE USE OF CERTAIN RODENTICIDES FOR THE PROTECTION OF HAWKS, RAPTORS AND OTHER WILDLIFE.
COHEN of the 12th Dist., Chairperson of the Committee on the part of the Senate, that the substitute bill ought to pass.
AN ACT PROHIBITING THE USE OF CERTAIN RODENTICIDES FOR THE PROTECTION OF HAWKS, RAPTORS AND OTHER WILDLIFE.
(1) "Second generation anticoagulant rodenticide" means any pesticide product containing any of the following active ingredients:
(1) "Second-generation anticoagulant rodenticide" means any pesticide product containing any of the following active ingredients:
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (c) of this section, LCO No.
sSB239 / File No.
1506 1 of 5 Raised Bill No.239 theuse ofany secondgenerationanticoagulant rodenticideisprohibited in a wildlife habitat area.
308 1 sSB239 File No.
(c) The use of any second generation anticoagulant rodenticide is prohibited in this state until the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection adopts regulations pursuant to subsection (g) of this section.
308 (b) The use of any second-generation anticoagulant rodenticide is prohibited in a wildlife habitat area.
(d) The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection shall encourage federal agencies in the state to comply with the provisions of subsections (b) and (c) of this section.
(c) The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection shall encourage federal agencies in the state to comply with the provisions of subsection (b) of this section.
(e) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any of the following uses:
(d) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any of the following uses or locations:
(1) The use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides by any state employee who uses second generation anticoagulant rodenticides for public health activities in accordance with any provision of the Public Health Code and in furtherance of such employee's duties;
(1) The use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides by any state employee who uses second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides for public health activities in accordance with any provision of the Public Health Code and in furtherance of such employee's duties;
(2) The use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides when used by any state employee for the purposes of protecting water supply infrastructure and facilities in a manner that is consistent with all otherwise applicable federal and state laws and regulations and in furtherance of such employee's duties;
(2) The use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides when used by any state employee for the purposes of protecting water supply infrastructure and facilities in a manner that is consistent with all otherwise applicable federal and state laws and regulations and in furtherance of such employee's duties;
(3) The use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides by a director of health to control mosquito or vector breeding areas in order to protect the public health;
(3) The use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides by a director of health to control mosquito or vector breeding areas in order to protect the public health;
(4) The use of any second generation anticoagulant rodenticides for the eradication of nonnative invasive species inhabiting or found to be present on offshore islands in a manner that is consistent with all otherwise applicable federal and state laws and regulations;
(4) The use of any second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides for the eradication of nonnative invasive species inhabiting or found to be present on offshore islands in a manner that is consistent with all otherwise applicable federal and state laws and regulations;
(5) The use of any registered second generation anticoagulant rodenticide to control an actual or potential rodent infestation associated with a public health need, as determined by a supporting LCO No.
(5) The use of any registered second-generation anticoagulant rodenticide to control an actual or potential rodent infestation associated with a public health need, as determined by a supporting declaration from the Commissioner of Public Health or a director of health.
1506 2 of 5 Raised Bill No.
For purposes of this subdivision, "public health need" means an urgent, nonroutine situation posing a significant risk to human health in which it is documented that other rodent control alternatives, including nonchemical alternatives,are inadequate to controltherodent sSB239 / File No.
239 declaration from the Commissioner of Public Health or a director of health.
308 2 sSB239 File No.
For purposes of this section, "public health need" means an urgent, nonroutine situation posing a significant risk to human health in which it is documented that other rodent control alternatives, including nonchemical alternatives,are inadequate to controltherodent infestation;
308 infestation;
and (6) The use of any registered second generation anticoagulant rodenticide for research purposes related to the adoption of regulations in accordance with subsection (g) of this section.
(6) A medical waste generator;
Before using such a registered second generation anticoagulant in the manner described in this subdivision, a written authorization for research shall be obtained from the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection.
(7) Any facility registered annually and subject to inspection under Section 510 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 USC 360 et seq.
The commissioner may specify the conditions under which such research shall be conducted.
and that is compliant with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 USC 135 et seq.;
The commissioner may terminate, amend or refuse to issue an authorization for research if the commissioner makes any of the following determinations:
(8) Agricultural activity.
(A) The research may involve a hazard to the environment;
For purposes of this subdivision, "agricultural activity" additionally includes activities conducted in any of the following locations:
(B)The researchmay be usedfor purposesunrelatedto pesticidedata development;
or (C) A violation of the authorization for such research or of the provisions of this section has occurred in connection with the research.
(f) (1) The provisions of this section shall not apply to the use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides in any of the following locations:
(A) A medical waste generator;
or (B) Any facility registered annually and subject to inspection under Section 510 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 USC 360 et seq.
and that is compliant with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 USC 135 et seq.
(2) This section shall not apply to the use of second generation LCO No.
1506 3 of 5 Raised Bill No.
239 anticoagulant rodenticides for agricultural activity.
(3) For purposes of subdivision (2) of this subsection, "agricultural activities" additionally includes activities conducted in any of the following locations:
(g) The Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection shall adopt regulations, in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54 ofthe general statutes, to ensure that the continued use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides is not reasonably expected to result in significant adverse effects to nontarget wildlife.
(e) The Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection shall adopt regulations, in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54 ofthe general statutes, to ensure that the continued use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides is not reasonably expected to result in significant adverse effects to nontarget wildlife.
This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:
sSB239 / File No.
Section 1 October 1, 2022 New section LCO No.
308 3 sSB239 File No.
1506 4 of 5 Raised Bill No.
308 This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:
239 Statement of Purpose:
Section 1 October 1, 2022 New section ENV Joint Favorable Subst.
To prohibit the use of certain rodenticides in locations such as state parks and forests for the protection of hawks, raptors and other wildlife that feed upon such rodents.
sSB239 / File No.
Show all 91 changed rows (51 more)
Previous
Latest
[Proposed deletions are enclosed in brackets.
308 4 sSB239 File No.
Proposed additions are indicated by underline, except that when the entire text of a bill or resolution or a section of a bill or resolution is new, it is not underlined.] LCO No.
308 The following Fiscal Impact Statement and Bill Analysis are prepared for the benefit of the members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and explanation and do not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose.
1506 5 of 5
In general, fiscal impacts are based upon a variety of informational sources, including the analyst’s professional knowledge.
Whenever applicable, agency data is consulted as part of the analysis, however final products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any specific department.
OFA Fiscal Note State Impact:
Agency Affected Fund-Effect FY 23 $ FY 24 $ Department of Energy and GF - Potential 62,351 60,042 Environmental Protection Cost State Comptroller - Fringe GF - Potential 25,271 24,335 Benefits1 Cost Note:
GF=General Fund Municipal Impact:
None Explanation The bill prohibits the use of certain pesticides used for rodent control in state parks, wildlife refuges, forests, or conservancies, allowing for certain exemptions.
It also requires the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to:
(1) encourage federal agencies in Connecticut to comply with the ban and, (2) adopt regulations on the use of these rodenticides.
To the extent the bill requires DEEP to enforce this new pesticide ban, it would result in annualized costs of $60,042, plus fringe benefits, for a Wildlife Biologist to track the cases, health status, and outcome of impacted hawks, raptors and wildlife.
The Out Years The annualized ongoing fiscal impact identified above would continue into the future subject to inflation.
The fringe benefit costs for most state employees are budgeted centrally in accounts administered by the Comptroller.
The estimated active employee fringe benefit cost associated with most personnel changes is 40.53% of payroll in FY 23.
sSB239 / File No.
308 5 sSB239 File No.
308 OLR Bill Analysis sSB 239 AN ACT PROHIBITING THE USE OF CERTAIN RODENTICIDES FOR THE PROTECTION OF HAWKS, RAPTORS AND OTHER WILDLIFE.
SUMMARY This bill prohibits the use of “second generation anticoagulant rodenticides” (i.e.,pesticide products containing brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difenacoum, or difethialone, see BACKGROUND) in state parks, wildlife refuges, forests, or conservancies.
It also requires the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to:
1.
encourage federal agencies in Connecticut to comply with the ban and 2.
adopt regulations on the continued use of these rodenticides to ensure that it is not reasonably expected to have significant adverse effectsonnontargetwildlife, including provisionsforthe rodenticides’ use if it is necessary to eradicate invasive rodent populations to protect threatened or endangered species or their habitats.
The bill exempts from the rodenticide ban several uses and locations, such as use by state employees for public health or public water supply protection reasons, agricultural activity, and at a medical waste generator.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
October 1, 2022 RODENTICIDE EXEMPTIONS The bill exempts eight locations and uses from its ban.
The exempt locations are (1) medical waste generators and (2) drug or device production facilities that are annually registered, subject to inspection under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.
§ 360 et seq.), sSB239 / File No.
308 6 sSB239 File No.
308 and comply with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C.
§ 135 et seq.).
Exempt uses are the following:
1.
a state employee within the scope of his or her duties (a) for public health activities conducted in accordance with the Public Health Code or (b) to protect water supply infrastructure and facilities in a way that is consistent with federal and state laws and regulations;
2.
a health director to control mosquito or vector breeding areas to protect public health;
3.
to eradicate nonnative invasive species inhabiting or found on offshore islands in a way that is consistent with federal and state laws and regulations;
4.
to control an actual or potential rodent infestation associated with a public health need that the public health commissioner or a health director determines by a supporting declaration;
and 5.
for agricultural activities, including those done at a warehouse for storing foods for human or animal consumption;
factory, brewery, winery, or an agricultural production site (e.g., slaughterhouses or canneries), including a site housing water storage or conveyance facilities or housing rights-of-way and other transportation infrastructure.
Under the bill, a “public health need” is an urgent, nonroutine situation posing a significant risk to human health.
It must also be documented that other rodent control methods, including nonchemical ones, are inadequate to control the infestation.
BACKGROUND Second-Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticide Most rodenticides are anticoagulant compounds that interfere with blood clotting and cause death from excessive bleeding.
Second- generation anticoagulants were developed to control rodents that are sSB239 / File No.
308 7 sSB239 File No.
308 resistant to first-generation anticoagulants.
These pesticides are more likely to be effective after a single feeding and may remain in animal tissuelonger thanfirst-generationproducts.They areregisteredonlyfor the commercial and structural pest control markets.
COMMITTEE ACTION Environment Committee Joint Favorable Substitute Yea 31 Nay 0 (03/21/2022) sSB239 / File No.
308 8
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (3)

Action History

  1. FILE NO. 308

  2. SENATE CALENDAR NUMBER 227

  3. FAV. RPT., TAB. FOR CAL., SEN.

  4. RPTD. OUT OF LCO

  5. REFERRED TO Office of Legislative Research AND Office of Fiscal Analysis 04/04/22

  6. FILED WITH LCO

  7. Joint Favorable Substitute

  8. PUBLIC HEARING 0307

  9. REF. TO JOINT COMM. ON Environment

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

14 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 173 not signed on

Sponsors (14)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (173)

173 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 173 →

"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.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

environment
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

Who sponsors SB 239?
SB 239 is sponsored by Smith, Brian T., Michel, David, Brandon Chafee (Democratic), Mary M. Mushinsky (Democratic), Palm, Christine, Patricia A. Dillon (Democratic), Kerry S. Wood (Democratic), Rick Lopes (Democratic), Jane M. Garibay (Democratic), Josh Elliott (Democratic), Winkler, Michael A., Lucy Dathan (Democratic), Hampton, John K., and Hennessy, John "jack" F..
What is the current status of SB 239?
This bill died with 2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” 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 239?
Track SB 239 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 239

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.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 239

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →