Maryland 2025 Regular Session

Maryland House Bill HB25

Introduced
1/8/24  
Introduced
1/8/25  
Refer
1/8/24  
Refer
1/8/25  
Report Pass
2/10/25  
Engrossed
2/13/25  
Refer
2/14/25  
Report Pass
3/31/25  

Caption

Environment – Reservoir Augmentation Permit – Establishment

Impact

This legislation significantly impacts both environmental and public health statutes in Maryland by introducing regulations regarding the treatment and use of reclaimed water before its introduction into reservoirs. It mandates a thorough application process for permits, including feasibility studies for each project and the establishment of compliance standards that must be met. The revenues generated from permit fees will be directed specifically towards operation and oversight initiatives of the program, ensuring a sustainable model for maintaining water quality standards.

Summary

House Bill 25 establishes a Reservoir Augmentation Program within the Maryland Department of the Environment, requiring permits for any reservoir augmentation activities. This program is designed to ensure that reclaimed water, used to augment reservoir levels, meets strict treatment standards before entering public drinking water systems. The law aims to align with existing environmental regulations while providing a framework for the safe, regulated use of reclaimed water, thus serving to alleviate pressures on water supply in the state.

Sentiment

Sentiment surrounding HB 25 has been largely positive among environmental advocates and public health officials who recognize the necessity of having a structured program for managing reclaimed water. They argue that this initiative symbolizes a progressive step toward water conservation and sustainable resource management. However, there are concerns regarding the complexity and cost of the permit application process that may deter smaller entities from pursuing reservoir augmentation projects.

Contention

Notable points of contention include provisions related to the revocability of permits if certain conditions or standards are not met, which some critics argue could create significant liabilities for applicants. Furthermore, the insistence on comprehensive documentation and inspections raises concerns about the regulatory burden that could be placed on smaller municipalities or organizations. The legislation is also viewed by some as potentially overly stringent, leading to debates over the balance between necessary environmental protections and practical implementation of water augmentation strategies.

Companion Bills

MD SB265

Crossfiled Environment - Reservoir Augmentation Permit - Establishment

Similar Bills

NJ A427

Requires DEP and owners of certain reservoirs to implement certain flood control measures; authorizes Office of Emergency Management to order lowering of reservoirs levels in response to severe weather events.

CA AB707

San Luis and Delta-Mendota Water Authority: B.F. Sisk Dam Raise and Reservoir Expansion Project.

TX HB3744

Relating to a requirement that a geological survey be conducted before a location may be identified as a site of unique value for the construction of a reservoir or recommended for the construction of a reservoir or dam.

MS HB1351

Ross Barnett Reservoir; rename as the "William F. Winter and Fannie Lou Hamer Reservoir."

TX SB81

Relating to the naming of a reservoir by certain water districts.

CA AB1146

Water infrastructure: dams and reservoirs: water release: false pretenses.

TX SB1268

Relating to the taxing power of the North Plains Groundwater Conservation District.

TX SB1870

Relating to the regulation of mineral interest pooling by the Railroad Commission of Texas.