SB 110 revises New Hampshire’s terrain alteration permitting program. The bill increases and restructures application fees charged by the Department of Environmental Services for terrain alteration reviews, including project inspections, and sets a specific $3,125 fee for projects eligible for a new permit-by-notification process. It also raises the fee thresholds for larger projects, adds a per-square-foot charge for many other applications, and changes the fee for permit amendments to a flat non-refundable $500. All fees are deposited into the water resources fund.
The bill also directs the department to adopt rules by January 1, 2026, to create a permit by notification for certain projects with plans covering less than 150,000 square feet that are not subject to the protections in RSA 483-B:9. The act takes effect 60 days after passage. In practical terms, the bill is intended to simplify processing for some smaller projects while increasing the cost of review for larger terrain disturbance applications.
Impact
SB 110 amends RSA 485-A:17, the state’s terrain alteration permitting statute, by changing the fee schedule for applications and amendments and by requiring a new permit-by-notification framework for qualifying smaller projects. It shifts the department’s fee structure from a more limited plan-review model to a broader application-based model, increases fees for many projects, and creates a catch-all fee for projects not otherwise covered. The bill is expected to increase revenue to the Water Resources Fund, with the fiscal note estimating substantial annual gains, while not requiring additional state appropriations or significant new administrative costs.
Sentiment
The available materials suggest generally favorable or pragmatic support for the bill, with the fiscal note emphasizing that the new fee structure would increase revenue without adding state expenses and would simplify processing for applicants and staff. No committee transcript or recorded vote commentary is provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or debate in the supplied record. The bill appears to have been treated as a technical and revenue-adjusting measure rather than a highly controversial policy change.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is the higher cost imposed on applicants, especially for larger terrain alteration projects and for projects that now face a higher fee threshold or per-square-foot charge. Developers, landowners, and possibly municipalities or counties that file such applications may view the bill as increasing project costs, while environmental regulators and supporters may see the changes as better aligning fees with administrative workload and funding needs. Another possible issue is the new permit-by-notification process, which may raise questions about which projects qualify and whether the reduced review pathway is sufficiently protective for environmental and land-use concerns.