Connecticut House Bill HB05272

Connecticut 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/17/16
• Refer: 2/17/16
• Report Pass: 3/10/16
• Refer: 3/21/16
• Report Pass: 3/29/16

Caption

An Act Concerning Carbon Monoxide Detection And Warning Equipment In Businesses And Residential Buildings.

Impact

The implementation of HB05272 will result in a notable change in regulations governing safety equipment in both commercial and residential structures. By requiring the installation of carbon monoxide detectors, the bill aims to mitigate risks associated with carbon monoxide, which can be fatal due to its odorless nature. The requirement for compliance with specific testing and certification standards ensures that the devices used are reliable and of high quality, potentially leading to increased safety for occupants across the state.

Summary

House Bill 05272, titled 'An Act Concerning Carbon Monoxide Detection and Warning Equipment in Businesses and Residential Buildings,' aims to enhance safety measures related to carbon monoxide exposure in the state. The bill mandates that all business establishments must equip their premises with suitable carbon monoxide detection and warning devices by January 1, 2017. This initiative represents a proactive approach to preventing carbon monoxide poisoning, addressing a significant public health concern particularly in spaces with fuel-burning appliances and garages.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding HB05272 appears to be positive, especially among public safety advocates and health officials who laud the bill for its anticipated role in protecting lives. Supporters argue that the legislation is a necessary step in safeguarding residents and workers from the dangers posed by carbon monoxide, promoting a culture of safety. However, some business owners may express concerns regarding the costs associated with compliance and potential negative impacts on their operations.

Contention

While the bill is largely viewed as a public health measure, there may be contention surrounding the potential economic implications for businesses, particularly smaller enterprises that might face financial burdens when complying with the new regulations. Concerns about the enforcement of such safety standards and the potential for liability in case of non-compliance could also contribute to the debate. Ultimately, the discussion points towards balancing public safety with the operational realities faced by businesses in the state.