Both CT's Council on Environmental Quality and the CT Water Planning Council recently released their reviews of the City of New Britain’s Report entitled Environmental Study: Change in Use of New Britain Water Company Land (Proposed Quarry Expansion and Future Water Storage Reservoir). Both the CEQ and the WPC concluded that the environmental damage caused by the expanded strip mining operation in Class I and Class I watershed lands would be significant.  In addition, both expert bodies found  quite questionable the study assumptions and conclusion that an additional reservoir was necessary for New Britain's future water needs.

Given the alarming precedent that this proposal would set-allowing Class I and II protected watershed land to be sold for the benefit of a private for-profit corporation- it is hopeful that these expert analyses of its impact will put a halt to this ill-advised plan.

Read the Executive Summary from the Water Planning Council below. The full C.E.Q. report can be found at:www.ct.gov/ceq/lib/ceq/CEQ_Comments_on_NB_Watershed_Environ_Study_-_final_5-25-18.pdf

The “Water Planning Council’s” Review Pursuant to Public Act 16-61 of the City of New Britain’s Report entitled Environmental Study: Change in Use of New Britain Water Company Land (Proposed Quarry Expansion and Future Water Storage Reservoir):
 
"Public Act 16-61, An Act Concerning An Environmental Study On A Change In Use Of New Britain Water Company Land, required the City Of New Britain to commission an environmental report  to be submitted to the Water Planning Council (WPC), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), and the City of New Britain’s Conservation Commission.  The purpose of the report was to examine the potential impact of changing the use of some of its city water department-owned Class I and Class II land to allow the lease of land for the extraction of stone and other minerals on such property.
 
This extraction operation, which would be done over a period of 35-40 years, could potentially create a new public water supply reservoir of 2.31 billion gallons capacity for the New Britain Water Department.  The reservoir would be filled with water from a flood-skimming operation at Coppermine Brook in Bristol, taking an estimated 6-28 months to fill the reservoir from this source.  The new water supply reservoir is described in the Executive Summary as being 109 acres in surface area (though other figures are given elsewhere in the Report) and up to 130’ deep.
 
PA 16-61 charges the WPC and the CEQ with reviewing the report to determine:

1. the potential impact on the environment and the purity and adequacy of the existing and future public water supply; and
2. to provide guidance to the New Britain Water Department concerning the suitability of the best management practices identified for the protection of the environment, public water supply and public health.

 
Much of the area that would be impacted in the proposed expanded area of quarrying is located in the active public drinking water supply watershed of the Shuttle Meadow Reservoir.  That area also includes rare habitat and, according to the city’s report, the area is also home to a plant species previously thought to no longer to be present in the state.
 
As will be discussed further, the WPC finds that preparation for quarrying, including clear-cutting the forest and removing the stumps, soil and other natural material, followed by quarry operations, would eliminate much of the wild habitat of the site while creating the potential for decades of increased risk to the city’s nearby Shuttle Meadow Reservoir.
 
The WPC finds that the city’s report does not substantiate the need for the proposed new reservoir or, in fact, that the proposed reservoir would even be a viable public water storage facility.  Based on its review, the WPC finds that the proposal’s risks to the current public water system and the environment are significant and the city’s report does not make a plausible case for undertaking such an activity."

 It was a disappointing end to the 2018 General Session, with the failure of the first State Water Plan to be adopted.  But the overwhelming public support for the inclusion of "water as a public trust resource" in the plan - and the vehement opposition by industry groups- brought the importance of our environmental protection laws to the forefront.  Our 1971 CT General Statute 22a-15 declares as state policy that our air, water, and natural resources are held in the public trust. The plan is intact, still contains its important public trust language, and will return to the General Assembly next year, hopefully to more receptive legislators.

Save Our Water CT is taking a necessary break to re-assess, re-group, and re-strategize for the coming year.  As we write, decisions are being made over allowing Tilcon Connecticut to strip mine Class I and II watershed lands, to allow California corporations to buy out CT water utilities, and to potentially re-instate water rate discounts for industrial water bottlers like Niagara Bottling of California.

We hope all those who care deeply for this precious resource make it an issue in the upcoming 2018 elections!

The 2018 legislative session ended at midnight on May 9th with no vote taken on the State Water Plan. After a public hearing on April 17th by the 4 committees of cognizance at at the General Assembly (Environment, Public Health, Planning & Development, and Energy & Technology) further advancement was blocked by a combination of special interest groups. Although a coalition of environmental advocates reached compromise language with the CT Water Works Association (CWWA) and the MDC, the CT Business and Industry Association (CBIA), and Sen. Len Fasano remained firmly opposed. The mere mention that "water as a public trust" was a frequently made public comment during the draft review, along with the citation of CGS 22a-15 in the draft document, was the reported cause. After years of work, the input of countless experts, and over a million dollars of state funds, our first state water plan will sadly need to await next year's legislative session.

With an ongoing bidding war by California corporations for a major CT private water utility, a pending decision on a proposal to grant Tilcon CT access to Class I watershed land for strip mining, and the possible re-introduction of large volume water discounts to Niagara Bottling of CA by the MDC, it's ever more important to make water policy an issue in this fall's elections.

Our first State Water Plan:  developed after years of work, with input by multiple expert stakeholders and with unanimous approval by 4 state agencies (DEEP, DPH, OPM, PURA). It now awaits approval at the General Assembly.  A fierce last minute lobbying campaign by the water utilities and business interests (among them MDC, CWWA, and CBIA) is attempting to strip out public input and delete recognition of water as a public trust resource.  Will big $$ and scare tactics win again at the legislature?  Or will our elected representatives respect citizen's concerns for our vital water resources? See the advocates' statement below.

It's here: the key Public Hearing for CT's first State Water Plan. Four committees of cognizance (Public Health, Environment, Planning & Development and Energy & Technology) will decide whether the plan is forwarded to the General Assembly for adoption. It should be a "no-brainer":

• Over a year of effort and a million dollars worth of in-depth work by multiple expert stakeholders
• Detailed, centralized information on the state's water resources
• Development of priorities for our state's water, some of which include maintaining CT's highest quality drinking water, protection of watershed lands, increased conservation, updated drought planning, safe levels of water for our streams and rivers, and improved scientific data collection
• Creation of a platform for making informed decisions which balance "in-stream needs" for the environment with "out of stream needs" for humans and the economy...and one which provides only guidance, not statutory mandates

Yet, the draft plan is now being opposed by water utilities, the business lobby, and anti-regulatory interests.....all because CT residents overwhelmingly requested the plan include a reference to water as a public trust resource. The demand that the plan remove any mention of "public trust", would threaten our state's long held policy, ALREADY-EXISTING in CT Gen Statute Sec. 22a-15 that: "It is hereby found and declared that there is a public trust in the air, water, and other natural resources of the state"...
As federal regulations protecting our environment are eviscerated, it's ever more important that we let our officials know: water belongs to us all and is our most important resource.

HELP ASK the COMMITTEES to PASS the STATE WATER PLAN AS DRAFTED!

1. Write a brief statement and save it as a word or pdf document. Attach it to an email addressed to phtestimony@cga.ct.gov. Submit it by 2 pm on Friday April 13th.
2. Come to hearing at 11 AM on Tuesday April 17th at the Legislative Office Building: Room 2C at 300 Capitol Ave. Wear your blue Save Our Water CT Button to let legislators know we're watching. Free parking at the L.O.B. can be tough; you may need to arrive early, find on-street parking, or take public transport.
3. If you plan to testify, sign up begins at 9:00 AM in the L.O.B. lobby.
4. Further details of the plan, its Executive Summary and a 2 page description of key topics can be seen at the Water Planning Council's website.

Thanks for acting. If the plan is not passed as is, our public voices may be left out!

Judy Allen for the Save Our Water CT Steering Committee
Follow Us on FACEBOOK
www.saveourwaterct.org
info@saveourwaterct.org

A controversial land swap has been brewing for years: Tilcon is seeking to expand its gravel mining to 131 acres of land which includes Class I and Class II watersheds. In exchange, they'll give $$ to New Britain, acreage elsewhere, and a potential new reservoir- in 40 years. Now the environmental study is out: major habitat destruction and significant species loss in the contested area. There will be more blasting, dust, and the loss of billions of gallons of filtered water from the mined area.

The worst outcome: setting a precedent for swapping our key watershed lands for corporate profits or municipal gain. Class I and II watersheds buffer our water from environmental contaminants and filter it for our aquifers. The recent State Water Plan draft lists protection of watershed land as one of its top ten priorities and re-states CT's dedication to preserving the highest quality drinking water in the nation.
If a critical appraisal of New Britain's drinking water needs demonstrates a real need for more water capacity, let's solve it in a less destructive way.

How You Can Help:
- Write an email to the Water Planning Council at wpc@ct.gov urging them to "Protect Our Watersheds and Reject the Tilcon Proposal". They are tasked with reviewing the recent environmental study.
- Send your email as well to the Director of the Council on Environmental Quality: Karl.Wagener@ct.gov, whose committee is also reviewing the study.

The Water Planning Council and Council on Environmental Quality will review the environmental study and comment to the City of New Britain, which will be holding a public hearing later this spring or early summer.  Stay tuned.

A recent Senate Bill SB-427, introduced by a water utility association president from southeastern CT and Sen. Formica, argued that all well water in the state- no matter how large or small- be exempted from the protections of public trust.  Oral testimony, given by the CWWA lobbyist, registered their opposition to the specifics of the bill, but used it as an opportunity to urge that public trust language be struck from our State Water Plan.  Save Our Water CT regards it as the opening salvo in a battle over protection of our public waters. See the bill at   www.cga.ct.gov/2018/TOB/s/2018SB-00427-R00-SB.htm and read
all the testimony at  www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/CommDocTmyBill.asp?comm_code=env&bill=SB-00427&doc_year=2018

​
Save Our Water CT is a non-partisan, citizen-led group working to protect Connecticut's waters though increased citizen engagement.  Though we started in Bloomfield to fight the incursion of a massive water bottling plant, we now reach throughout the state, allying ourselves with multiple environmental organizations concerned with protection of our water resources. Our core belief is that:
 
WATER IS A PUBLIC RESOURCE, BELONGING TO THE PEOPLE OF CT AND HELD IN TRUST BY THE STATE TO BE MANAGED SUSTAINABLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF GENERATIONS TO COME.
 
Raised SB 427 is problematic in multiple ways and should not be voted out of Committee:

• This bill represents an attempt to subvert CT’s Environmental Protection Act by removing a large proportion of water (“private drinking water wells of any size”) from the public trust considerations of CGS 22a-15.
• It counters the foundational principle that Connecticut’s waters are a natural resource which need to be managed sustainably for all for generations to come. We have “rights” under existing state regulations which allow us to responsibly use water, but these rights are not absolute.  They may, on rare occasions, be overridden by the public interest in decisions involving water resources.
• This law misunderstands the state water plan.  The plan has no regulatory force:  it is a platform for best practices in future decision making about our water resources. 
• This bill fails to recognize the now scientifically proven connection between surface and ground water.  According to the USGS, it is invalid, inappropriate, and scientifically mistaken to view groundwater from wells as somehow separate from the surface water in rivers and reservoirs. What happens to one effects the other.  Removing one part of the system from public oversight opens the other components to harm.
• The provisions of this law would allow major water utilities to claim their well fields are now their private property and not subject to state regulation.  A large water bottling plant could purchase land and drill multiple wells, exporting the water out of state with impunity. During droughts, private well owners could claim they are not subject to any water restrictions.

Save Our Water CT strongly opposes Raised S.B. 457.  Thank you for considering our view.

Some of our natural resources are so essential to life - and so necessary to ALL members of the public-that they are held "in trust" by the state- to preserve, protect, and sustain for this generation and generations to come. So what does that mean for water???

We don't individually OWN the water; instead, we get to USE it.  Even though MDC officials in the Hartford area have been heard to say it's "their water", THEY DON'T OWN IT. They have been given money (from taxpayers and local, state, and federal government) to maintain storage, distribution, and treatment facilities for water use. They deliver water to customers and collect wastewater, and are compensated for their costs.  Some of them are non-profit or municipalities; others are privately held companies, whose shareholders may realize a profit from the business.

Of note,  our individual rights to USE the water are not absolute, but rather subject to the considerations of the public good. Think of it like a bank trust.  The principle (money=our water) is in trust for the public both for now and the future.  We get to use it (have trust monies distributed to use=use the water), but don't OWN the trust.  The state (the trustee) makes sure the trust principle is wisely appropriated.....and if the trust principle is in danger because of misuse (endangering the supply, availability or purity of the water), then the state (and its public) have the right to address that.  This doesn't mean there aren't laws governing how we use water (DPH or DEEP or state statutes) or that you can seize your neighbor's well. In this case, the trust has all the money it will ever get, i.e. there won't be more fresh water created on earth!

A furious letter-writing campaign to the Water Planning Council (WCP) and Department of Public Health (DPH)  prevented a last-minute push by water lobbyists, corporate interests, and-surprisingly- the DPH to remove all mention of "public trust" or to relegate it to the end of the  plan under "future topics to be considered". You can view the plan, its 26 page executive summary, and the compendium of responses to citizen comments at www.ct.gov/water/site/default.asp
 
Page 2 of the Executive summary contains references to "public trust", noting:

• "One related aspect to the the concept of balance, which was widely brought up during the public comment period following Plan development is water as a public trust.  Following Water Planning Council (WPC) discussion of this prevalent comment, it was noted that there is an existing statute as follows: "Sec. 22a-15. Declaration of policy.  It is hereby found and declared that there is a public trust in the air, water and other natural resources of the state of Connecticut and that each person is entitled to the protection, preservation and enhancement of the same.  It is further found and declared that it is in the public interest to provide all persons with an adequate remedy to protect the air, water and other natural resources from unreasonable pollution, impairment or destruction."
  

While the words "public trust"remain, and a citation to the 2014 statute is included, the WPC did not explicitly endorse the principle.  Our first ever state water plan may be one that sadly shied away from declaring the waters of the state to be a resource held in trust for the present and future generations.

The document now heads to the General Assembly where it will be presented to 4 committees of cognizance (Environment, Public Health, Energy and Technology, and Planning and Development). If approved, the Plan will move on to the General Assembly. If not approved, the Plan will go back to the WPC for revisions and then be re-submitted. At 24 months from the date of first submission, if the plan is not approved by the General Assembly, it will be forwarded to the Governor for adoption or rejection.