An Act amending the act of November 26, 1978 (P.L.1375, No.325), known as the Dam Safety and Encroachments Act, further providing for permit issuance and conditions.
Summary
HB328 amends Pennsylvania’s Dam Safety and Encroachments Act to require the Department of Environmental Protection, when issuing an emergency permit, approval, or authorization for stream clearing or maintenance around a water obstruction, to authorize clearing for at least 250 feet from the obstruction in certain emergency situations. The requirement applies when the request comes from a Commonwealth agency or political subdivision and there is a declared disaster emergency at the federal, state, or county level.
The bill is narrowly focused on emergency response and stream maintenance near dams, water obstructions, and encroachments. It does not broadly rewrite permitting law, but it creates a specific minimum clearing distance for qualifying emergency actions, which could speed debris removal, flood mitigation, and related work after disasters.
Impact
The bill would add a new subsection to Section 9 of the Dam Safety and Encroachments Act, changing how emergency permits and authorizations are conditioned in disaster situations. In practice, it would constrain the department’s discretion by requiring authorization of at least 250 feet of clearing around a water obstruction for qualifying requests by government entities during declared emergencies, potentially affecting DEP permitting, local emergency response, and stream maintenance operations.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or partisan sentiment in the available materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears practical and emergency-oriented, with an emphasis on facilitating rapid clearing and maintenance during disaster conditions rather than on regulatory expansion or restriction.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is the balance between faster emergency clearing and environmental or permitting oversight. Supporters would likely favor the bill for giving agencies and local governments clearer authority to act quickly during disasters, while opponents might worry that a mandatory 250-foot clearing minimum could be too broad, reduce case-by-case discretion, or affect stream and habitat protection. No specific stakeholders or objections are identified in the provided record.
In general provisions, further providing for definitions; in residual waste, further providing for disposal, processing and storage of residual waste and providing for exempt special wastes; and making an editorial change.
In general provisions, further providing for definitions; in applications and permits, further providing for permit and license application requirements; and making a repeal.