An Act Concerning A Climate Change Superfund.
HB 5156 creates a Connecticut “Climate Change Superfund” cost recovery program administered by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP). The bill would require DEEP to identify a limited set of large fossil fuel companies and related entities as “responsible parties” if they are attributable for more than one billion metric tons of covered greenhouse gas emissions during the covered period of January 1, 1995 through December 31, 2024. Those responsible parties would be strictly liable, without regard to fault, for a proportional share of the state’s climate-related costs, and DEEP would issue notices, calculate cost recovery demands, collect payments, and maintain a public registry.
Revenue collected under the program would be deposited into a nonlapsing Climate Superfund Cost Recovery Program Fund and used only for climate change adaptive infrastructure projects and program administration. The bill defines climate adaptation broadly, including coastal protection, stormwater upgrades, grid resilience, cooling and weatherization, flood-related infrastructure relocation, public health responses, and other resilience measures. It also requires DEEP to develop regulations, a statewide adaptation master plan, public hearings, annual evaluations, and an assessment of the costs of climate impacts in Connecticut, with at least 40% of qualified expenditures directed to projects benefiting environmental justice communities.
The bill would add a new statutory program in the general statutes creating a state-level cost recovery mechanism aimed at fossil fuel extractors and refiners, while also establishing a dedicated fund and new DEEP administrative duties. It would not replace existing remedies; instead, it expressly preserves civil actions and other legal remedies. The measure would also appropriate $300,000 from the General Fund to seed the new fund, with the first $300,000 deposited into the fund used to reimburse that appropriation.
The available voting history suggests the bill had meaningful support in the Environment Committee, where it received a Joint Favorable Substitute vote of 23-10. That tally indicates a clear majority in favor, but not broad consensus. No committee transcript was provided, so the record here shows support for advancing the bill, alongside a substantial minority of opposition.
The main points of contention are likely the bill’s strict-liability approach, the retroactive-looking covered period reaching back to 1995, and the targeting of fossil fuel companies for state climate costs. Opponents may object to the legal and constitutional questions raised by imposing large cost recovery demands on a narrow class of entities, while supporters are likely focused on shifting climate adaptation costs to major emitters and directing funds to resilience and environmental justice communities. The bill’s detailed emissions accounting, public registry, installment payment rules, and DEEP’s authority to assess and collect demands also suggest likely debate over implementation, fairness, and administrative burden.