West Virginia House Bill HB2609

West Virginia 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/23
• Refer: 1/17/23

Caption

To require the Department of Environmental Protection to assume responsibility of cost and permitting of dams that are deemed to be under state control

Impact

The bill could significantly alter how the state handles the necessary repairs or removals of deficient dams. By placing financial responsibility for certification and permitting squarely on the DEP, it may alleviate the burden on private dam owners who might struggle to cover the upfront costs associated with compliance. This change is anticipated to enhance state-led interventions in dam safety, potentially reducing risks of dam failures that could lead to environmental and economic repercussions. However, it could also increase the financial obligations on state resources, requiring careful budget planning.

Summary

House Bill 2609 mandates that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in West Virginia must assume all costs associated with the certification and permitting of privately owned dams that are deemed deficient. This legislation emphasizes the state's responsibility in managing public safety and environmental risks associated with these structures. The bill's introduction stems from concerns over the integrity of privately owned dams and the potential hazards they pose to surrounding communities if left unregulated or improperly managed.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding HB 2609 appears to be supportive from environmental advocates and safety officials who understand the risks associated with failing dams. The bill is perceived as a necessary step towards ensuring public safety and environmental stewardship. However, there may be concerns from private dam owners who could view these requirements as an additional financial burden, potentially complicating their operational responsivities.

Contention

One notable point of contention relates to the balance of responsibility and financial implications for the state versus private property owners. While the bill aims to protect both the environment and public safety, some critics may argue that it essentially shifts the costs of private maintenance to public funds, raising questions about sustainability. Additionally, the specifics of enforcement and recovery of costs through civil action could be points of legal contention, particularly in how civil actions might play out against private owners.