OFFICE OF FISCAL ANALYSIS

Legislative Office Building, Room 5200

Hartford, CT 06106 (860) 240-0200

http://www.cga.ct.gov/ofa

sSB-231

AN ACT CONCERNING POLLINATOR HEALTH.

OFA Fiscal Note

State Impact:

Agency Affected

Fund-Effect

FY 17 $

FY 18 $

Transportation, Dept.

TF - Potential Cost

See Below

See Below

Department of Energy and Environmental Protection

GF - Potential Cost

49,661

51,151

Department of Energy and Environmental Protection

GF - Potential Revenue Gain

See Below

See Below

Comptroller Misc. Accounts (Fringe Benefits)1

GF - Potential Cost

19,835

20,430

Note: GF=General Fund; TF=Transportation Fund

Municipal Impact:

Municipalities

Effect

FY 17 $

FY 18 $

Various Municipalities

Cost

Potential

Potential

Explanation

Section 1 requires the Department of Agriculture (DoAg), in conjunction with the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station (CAES) and the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) to develop best practices by January 1, 2017 regarding certain uses and methods of applying neonicotinoid dust (a type of pesticide). As these agencies currently have staff with expertise in this area, there is no fiscal impact anticipated.

Sections 2 and 4 prohibit anyone from applying neonicotinoid insecticides to certain trees or blossoming plants. It allows DEEP and DoAg to enforce the ban and allows the agencies to set penalties for violations. This may result in a revenue gain, to the extent violations occur.

There may be costs to municipalities that currently use neonicotinoids on certain trees or blossoming plants. These costs would vary based on the cost of alternative pesticides.

Section 3 requires DEEP to classify all neonicotinoids that are labeled for treating plants as “restricted use” pesticides, but does not set a deadline for doing so. To the extent DEEP initiates the reclassification; DEEP would incur costs of $49,661 in FY 17 and $51,151 in FY 18, plus associated fringe benefits (of $19,835 in FY 17 and $20,430 in FY 18) for an Environmental Analyst I position.

Section 5 requires CAES to establish a Pollinator Advisory Committee consisting of at least three existing agency staff with certain expertise in pollinators. This does not result in a fiscal impact.

Sections 6, 7, and 12 require DEEP and DoAg, by January 1, 2017, to jointly report to the Environment Committee on (1) the statutory and regulatory changes needed to apply current restrictions, and (2) certain licensing requirements for pesticide spraying related to planting seeds treated with neonicotinoids. Both agencies currently have staff with expertise to make these reporting requirements. As such, these provisions do not result in a fiscal impact.

Section 8 requires the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) to amend the state's Plan of Conservation and Development for certain purposes but does not specify a deadline for doing so. There is no fiscal impact for OPM to update the plan, as the agency is already required to amend the plan periodically.

Sections 9 – 11 require that a model pollinator habitat guide be established under certain conditions. Section 11 specifically requires CAES to develop such a plan. These provisions have no fiscal impact.

Section 13 requires the Siting Council's revegetation orders of overhead transmission line rights-of-way to include vegetation with model pollinator habitat. This may result in a cost to the state and municipalities depending on the ownership of the right-of-way.

Section 14 requires the Department of Transportation (DOT) to (1) identify areas where nonnative, cool-season turf grass installed along state highways could be replaced with pollinator vegetation, and (2) report to the Environment and Transportation committees on these areas by January 1, 2017. To the extent DOT is required to replace the turf grass there will be a cost of up to $20,000 per acre for the initial installation of pollinator vegetation.

The Out Years

The annualized ongoing fiscal impact identified above would continue into the future subject to inflation and the number of violations.

1 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 39.94% of payroll in FY 17 and FY 18.