HB 5217 — AN ACT CONCERNING THE USE OF CERTAIN RODENTICIDES.

ProposedOFA additionsFiscal areNote indicatedState byImpact: 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.

1114Agency 3Affected Fund-Effect FY 25 $ FY 26 $ Department of 3Energy and GF - Cost 79,000 66,000 Environmental Protection Department of Energy and GF - Potential 113,000 116,000 Environmental Protection Cost State Comptroller - Fringe GF - Cost At least At least Benefits1 20,000 27,000 Department of Energy and GF - Potential Potential Potential Environmental Protection Revenue Gain Note:

GF=General Fund Municipal Impact:

None Explanation The bill, which bans the use of certain rodenticides with some exceptions, is anticipated to result in a cost to the state of at least $99,000 in FY 25 and $93,000 in FY 26, and a potential revenue gain.

The bill's reporting requirement may result in an additional state cost in FY 25 and FY 26.

It is anticipated that the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) will require one new full-time Environmental Analyst 2 to enforce the bill's ban.

The associated partial year costs in FY 25 total an estimated $99,000 ($49,000 salary, $20,000 fringe benefits in the Office of the State Comptroller, and $30,000 in other expenses including a vehicle).

The full-year annualized costs are anticipated to 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 41.25% of payroll in FY 25.

sHB5217 / File No.

98 5 sHB5217 File No.

98 be $93,000 in FY 26 ($65,000 salary, $27,000 fringe benefits, and $1,000 in other expenses).

The bill may additionally result in a cost in at least FY 25 and FY 26 associated with the requirement to report by January 1, 2026 on, among other topics, the potential effects of the ban, including impacts on raptor health.

While the new Environmental Analyst 2 may be able to write the report, DEEP may choose to engage in thorough research and monitoring of raptor health.

The department anticipates it would hire a State Veterinarian specializing in wildlife, at a cost of approximately $147,000 in FY 25 ($83,000 salary, $34,000 fringe benefits, and $30,000 in other expenses, including a vehicle) and $162,000 in FY 26 ($111,000 salary, $46,000 fringe benefits, and $5,000 in other expenses).

The bill makes a violation of the ban subject to a civil penalty of up to $5,000 per violation, resulting in a potential revenue gain to the General Fund beginning in FY 25.

The extent of the revenue gain depends on the number of violations and the amount of each fine collected.

The Out Years The annualized ongoing fiscal impact identified above would continue into the future subject to inflation and the amount of fines collected.

sHB5217 / File No.

98 6 sHB5217 File No.

98 OLR Bill Analysis sHB 5217 AN ACT CONCERNING THE USE OF CERTAIN RODENTICIDES.

SUMMARY This bill generally prohibits the use of “second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides” in Connecticut (i.e., pesticide products containing brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difenacoum, or difethialone;

see BACKGROUND).

It exempts several uses from the ban, such as by state employees for public health or water supply protection reasons, agricultural activity, or at a medical waste generator location.

Under the bill, a violation of the ban is subject to a civil fine of up to $5,000 per violation by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP).

The bill also allows DEEP to adopt regulations on thecontinueduse oftheserodenticidestoensurethatitisnotreasonably expected to have significant adverse effects on nontarget wildlife.

The regulations must include provisions for the rodenticides’ use if it is necessary to eradicate invasive rodent populationsto protect threatened or endangered species or their habitats.

Lastly, the bill requires, by January 1, 2026, DEEP to report to the Environment Committee on the potential implications of applying existing statutory and regulatory restrictions and licensing requirements on second-generation anticoagulant rodenticide use.

The report must include (1) an analysis of the consistency of applying the restrictions and requirements with federal law;

(2) potential effects, including improved raptor health and expenses and delays that the changes may have on public health and agriculture in Connecticut;

and (3) required administrative resources to oversee the restrictions.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

October 1, 2024 sHB5217 / File No.

98 7 sHB5217 File No.

98 RODENTICIDE EXEMPTIONS The bill exempts the following uses from the ban:

1.

by 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.

by a health director to control mosquito or vector breeding areas to protect public health;

3.

in a location that is a medical waste generator or a drug or device production facility that is annually registered, subject to inspection under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and complies with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act;

4.

to eradicate nonnative invasive species inhabiting or found on offshore islands in a way that is consistent with federal and state laws and regulations;

5.

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 6.

for agricultural activities, including those done at a warehouse for storing foods for human or animal consumption;

a factory, brewery, or winery;

an agricultural food production site (e.g., slaughterhouse or cannery);

or an agricultural production site housing water storage or conveyance facilities or rights-of-way and other transportation infrastructure.

Under the bill, a “public health need” is an urgent, nonroutine situation posing a significant human health risk.

It must also be documented that other rodent control methods, including nonchemical sHB5217 / File No.

98 8 sHB5217 File No.

98 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 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 and are currently under federal Environmental Protection Agency registration review.

COMMITTEE ACTION Environment Committee Joint Favorable Substitute Yea 33 Nay 1 (03/08/2024) sHB5217 / File No.

98 9