An Act amending the act of October 4, 1978 (P.L.864, No.167), known as the Storm Water Management Act, further providing for powers and duties of the Department of Environmental Resources; and making . . .editorial changes.
HB958 amends Pennsylvania’s Storm Water Management Act primarily to update agency references and modernize administration of the law. The bill changes the act’s title and multiple internal references from the former Department of Environmental Resources to the Department of Environmental Protection, and from the Department of Community Affairs to the Department of Community and Economic Development. These are largely editorial and conforming changes that reflect current agency names and responsibilities.
Substantively, the bill expands and clarifies the Department of Environmental Protection’s duties in reviewing and approving watershed storm water plans. It requires annual active water quality testing of surface waters within a watershed storm water plan, using procedures consistent with federal testing standards. If the department lacks resources to do the testing itself, it may rely on testing performed by county conservation districts, state wildlife and conservation agencies, higher education institutions receiving state funding, or accredited private laboratories, and if necessary may use a water quality model. The bill also directs the department to grant a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit waiver to qualifying small municipal separate storm sewer systems (small MS4s) that meet federal criteria.
The bill also preserves and updates the grant and reimbursement framework for municipalities and counties that prepare and implement storm water management plans. It continues to authorize state grants for planning, administration, enforcement, implementation, and plan revisions, subject to appropriations, and retains the requirement that the department report funding shortfalls to the General Assembly and prioritize unpaid reimbursements in the next fiscal year. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment.
The overall sentiment in the available record appears neutral to supportive, but limited, because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes included. The bill’s sponsor list includes members from both parties, which suggests at least some bipartisan interest in updating storm water administration and water quality oversight. Because the bill is mostly technical and administrative, there is no documented public debate in the provided materials.
Potential points of contention, based on the text alone, are the new annual testing requirement and the practical burden it may place on the department or on local entities if state resources are limited. The permit-waiver provision for small MS4 systems may also draw attention from municipalities, environmental regulators, or watershed advocates depending on how strictly the federal criteria are applied. However, no specific opposition or disagreement is shown in the provided context.
HB958 would amend the Storm Water Management Act by updating statutory references to current state agencies and by adding operational requirements for watershed storm water plan review, water quality testing, and small MS4 permit waivers. It would affect the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Community and Economic Development, municipalities, counties, conservation districts, accredited laboratories, and small municipal separate storm sewer system operators. The bill would not appear to create a new regulatory program so much as refine existing storm water administration, while preserving the state grant and reimbursement structure tied to appropriations.
The available context suggests a generally neutral-to-supportive posture toward the bill. There are no committee transcripts or votes showing debate, amendment fights, or recorded opposition. The bipartisan sponsorship list indicates the measure may be viewed as a technical cleanup and administrative update with some policy additions related to water quality monitoring and storm water permitting.
The main areas that could generate disagreement are the annual water quality testing mandate, the fallback use of outside testing sources or models when the department lacks resources, and the requirement to grant permit waivers to qualifying small MS4 systems. Environmental advocates may focus on whether the bill is strong enough on monitoring and enforcement, while municipalities and regulated storm water operators may be concerned about administrative burden, funding adequacy, and how the new testing and waiver provisions will be implemented. No specific contention is documented in the provided record.