[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6309462,"mediaKeyId","2412437-5fdfd123d4c98d982ed0f59d4d73d146","parentId",2412437,"title","Public Health Commissioner outlines five-bill package on fluoride, ED diversion, drinking water, statute revisions and physician recruitment","audioSeconds",612,"startMs",1820000,"endMs",2432000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2412437-5fdfd123d4c98d982ed0f59d4d73d146&start=1820&end=2432","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2412437-5fdfd123d4c98d982ed0f59d4d73d146/thumbnail_1820000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6309462/Connecticut/Public-Health-Commissioner-outlines-five-bill-package-on-fluoride-ED-diversion-drinking-water-statute-revisions-and-physician-recruitment","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6309462-52e5d5ccaadfe16d24a9945d958e0b17/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440103&Signature=dDiVEE8QDFzY7EKMLJuQtZy0SBhOlOspZn-w07XnGnmanKwbeQejCZoeHTCkzzL4V5uo7XXQLP~~sJ2J0mWkyzVNl0cJlAPBYeCxtcfwEv8lEH~1pg1JBIumG4KOKGLAj93MGxMZOStk~TjxdKv3~znj9sHt1nZsfBjuUdAIIEXwihVbZzJ7VahJx5GtpsU2EJ1UUI-~oEbRe2IyHFMbqWiBvdzjK-lG1XzRCYGLKvtOhpK1PF22ZgWyho6aMKUMTqkRM8Oo0bvkFID~f3wurQL1H2KH3j-Nc4E2T8egoxCHrXjWDph9L6dsuEYrToEJMeixuyIRaOlpjCYQkX-N1g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","CGA - Public Health Committee","date","2025-02-26T00:00:00Z","article","Commissioner Jutani of the Connecticut Department of Public Health told the Public Health Committee on Feb. 26 that the department has submitted five separate proposals intended to preserve current public-health practices and expand certain operational authorities.

The package includes: a food safety and oral‑health provision that would codify existing federal guidance on community water fluoridation; a hospital emergency‑department (ED) diversion bill to require hospitals to notify DPH when an ED is taken offline; a drinking‑water measure to complete a transfer of some subsurface sewage rulemaking from DEEP to DPH and to authorize interim policies and procedures if formal regulations are delayed; a set of statutory revisions to clarify internal data sharing and to allow advisory councils to accept grants and donations; and a physician‑recruitment bill that would create a retired‑physician license and restore authority to operate a student loan‑repayment platform if funds become available.

Why it matters: The five proposals are aimed at stabilizing operations that DPH said are already working and adding limited authorities so the agency can respond when standards or federal guidance change, when hospitals seek diversion, or when regulatory transfers require continuity. Committee members pressed for specifics on timing for drinking‑water regulations and on whether DPH seeks permission or notice for ED diversion. Jutani repeatedly said the bills are intended to preserve the status quo where appropriate and to give DPH visibility and limited authority, not to change clinical practice.

Fluoride and food safety: Jutani said the bill on food safety and oral health does not change policy or add new cost and that the intent is to maintain the state’s existing approach to water fluoridation and retain the 2017 model food code already implemented in state regulations. She told the committee that federal guidance recommends an optimal community water level of 0.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L) with an allowable variance of 0.15 mg/L and that DPH is not proposing any increase; the proposal would refer to the existing federal guidance in state statute so local systems serving populations above 20,000 continue to operate under the same standard.

Emergency‑department diversion reporting: On hospital diversion, Jutani said DPH currently has no reliable way to know when a hospital emergency department is offline and that a proposed bill would require hospitals to inform DPH when they go on diversion so the department could provide information to legislators, providers or the public when surges or other system‑level events occur. She emphasized DPH would only seek notification, not permission to divert, and said the aim is transparency and to create an agreed standard that all hospitals may weigh in on.

Drinking water and subsurface sewage: DPH described an ongoing rules transfer from the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) for regulation of some subsurface sewage systems, raising the regulatory threshold from 7,500 to 10,000 gallons for DPH oversight. Commissioner Jutani told the committee a public comment period is open, that staff aim to have rules in effect by July 1, and that the bill would let DPH promulgate interim policies and procedures if the regs are delayed so there is no enforcement gap.

Statutory revisions: The “various revisions” item would authorize limited internal data sharing (for example maternal‑death information within DPH), allow advisory bodies such as the Rare Disease Advisory Council to accept grants and donations, and authorize DPH to waive duplicative inspections when federal inspections are already meeting public‑safety needs. Committee members asked for detail on the inspection waivers; Jutani said waivers would be targeted to entities performing well and would enable DPH to direct resources where problems are documented.

Physician recruitment: The final bill would establish a retired‑physician license aimed principally at facilitating pro‑bono work by experienced physicians in primary and behavioral care settings and would reestablish the statutory authority for a student loan‑repayment program DPH has previously operated (but for which funds are not included in the current budget). Jutani said retired physicians working pro bono could be covered for malpractice by the hiring nonprofit and that the intent is to expand the pool of available primary‑care and behavioral‑health providers in underserved areas.

What the committee asked: Members pressed DPH on several points: (1) whether the drinking‑water rules will be in place by July 1 (Jutani said that is the goal but the regs review committee could delay or reject them); (2) whether ED diversion reporting would create operational burdens during large‑scale catastrophes (Jutani said hospitals already submit continuity‑of‑operations plans to DPH and the goal is notification, not permission); and (3) whether codifying fluoride guidance means an increase in allowed fluoride (Jutani said no).

Next steps: The committee continued questioning and requested additional follow‑up on implementation details for the drinking‑water transfer and on DPH’s plans for outreach to hospitals about diversion reporting.

Ending: Commissioner Jutani turned the hearing back to co‑chairs after summarizing the five bills and opening the session for questions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Public Health Committee Public Hearing 2025-02-26","oneSentenceSummary","Commissioner Jutani briefed the Public Health Committee on five DPH proposals that would codify current fluoride and food‑safety references, require ED diversion notification, allow interim drinking‑water policies during a regulatory transfer from DEEP, authorize limited internal data‑sharing and grant acceptance, and create a retired‑physician license and loan‑repayment statute.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature CT, Connecticut","taxId",77677,"location","Connecticut","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6309457,"Providers and privacy advocates press for changes to Connecticut's health information exchange consent model",308,5613000,5921000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2412437-5fdfd123d4c98d982ed0f59d4d73d146&start=5613&end=5921","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2412437-5fdfd123d4c98d982ed0f59d4d73d146/thumbnail_5613000.jpg","/articles/6309457/Connecticut/Providers-and-privacy-advocates-press-for-changes-to-Connecticuts-health-information-exchange-consent-model","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6309457-2cd80df388f2b932f799f7981f49c85d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440104&Signature=bkT0jHhqXbUDXX-yfTuZiK071DPqjppw5FLkzC7Ih85a95QM1HvmEyD~hBcs9OYo-vlMADxj9bvpes0BloHICkr5anNCzXeeAHGtmRAnwz323GnCnI-mqm1T3ne4nWkNn-YBGNMmulmRSDu3-EcbWqKi-yPCfiAvtvUKxa1vQHM5mNIqYZFpZBdH-Ji3e5d7AxOLRD~oQ~Muth1utViwfesouLxBuK0Eu6FCnyErHeNBhWpC6SX0DzzL7YVVtLswE3ndEnmzQRpKDf3Zoi3ZsZ1g4BmpZh0tQ-2N5amU9YtXOWXO991xYqzrkShPlkuCh1Xh9XivBW6eiXMGrFU4ng__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Connecticut’s statewide Health Information Exchange — known as Connie — drew sustained scrutiny during a Public Health Committee hearing as provider groups and state officials debated whether the exchange’s opt‑in/opt‑out model protects patient privacy while leaving clinicians the information they need.

Sumit Sajnani, Connecticut’s state health information technology officer (Office of Health Strategy), told the committee that Connie was designed and implemented after multi‑year public working groups and that the system currently operates on an opt‑in consent policy by default for full medical records. He described an extensive stakeholder process dating back to 2010 and to a 2024 statute requiring additional public subgroup review. He said the HIE is connected to roughly 3,000 provider locations and that the opt‑in design aligns with established national practice.

Provider groups, dental associations and the Connecticut Nurses Association urged changes. They warned of gaps in patient and provider protections and of practical problems: the timeline between a patient’s choosing to opt out and a provider’s records being excluded from the HIE; costs and contract burdens on small providers; and special handling for sensitive records such as behavioral‑health and substance‑use‑disorder (SUD) data. Several witnesses asked that the committee require clearer, enforceable waivers or carve‑outs for specific categories of sensitive information and for provider protections against liability if commingled records land in the exchange.

Key exchanges:
- Consent timing: Multiple witnesses suggested that patient decisions to opt out may not be fully reflected during a short technical window following a data sweep; some practitioners said they believed records could be included up to several days after an opt‑out. OHS staff disputed a literal “5‑day” gap but agreed that the operational mechanics of consent and of data ingest were technical and needed a clear explanation. OHS provided written materials documenting prior committee and public work and urged stakeholders to review earlier recommendations from a public working group.
- Sensitive data: Providers urged that behavioral‑health and SUD records be handled with separate affirmative consent rules. OHS noted federal restrictions on SUD data (42 CFR Part 2) and said SUD handling is already treated distinctively; providers asked for clearer patient‑facing language and for mechanisms where patients can opt in or out by category.
- Provider burden: Private‑practice dentists, nonprofit clinics and community providers flagged startup, participation and ongoing administrative costs as barriers to joining Connie; they pressed OHS to analyze financial impacts and propose mitigations.

What the witnesses asked for: A number of provider organizations submitted a joint set of concrete technical and policy proposals (dated Nov. 18 and Dec. 30), and asked the committee to incorporate them into the bill language or to require OHS to implement them. The recommendations call for: (1) clearer patient disclosure and education; (2) HIPAA‑compliant provider contracts and waivers; (3) a shorter or clarified technical window between opt‑out action and data‑ingest exclusion; (4) clearer treatment of gender‑affirming care and other sensitive records; and (5) an assessment of provider cost burdens and possible state supports.

DPH/OHS position: OHS staff told legislators that the HIE was built after a multi‑year public process and that many of the recommendations raised by stakeholders had been considered; OHS urged the committee to review documentation from the 2024 working subgroup and the annual Health IT reports that preceded Connie’s operational launch in 2021.

Next steps: Several witnesses asked the committee to amend the bill to incorporate the provider recommendations and to require OHS to publish a technical description of the opt‑out timing, the data ingestion workflow, and a cost analysis for affected providers. Committee members signaled interest in a follow‑up with OHS and with providers to reconcile technical and privacy questions.

Ending: The committee held the item for follow‑up with OHS; stakeholders said they would continue to press for specific technical fixes and clearer patient disclosures.","Providers, the Office of Health Strategy and privacy groups clashed Monday over the statewide Health Information Exchange (Connie), debating opt‑in/opt‑out rules, the handling of behavioral‑health and SUD records, and provider costs and liability.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Public Health Commissioner outlines five-bill package on fluoride, ED diversion, drinking water, statute revisions and physician recruitment

Providers and privacy advocates press for changes to Connecticut's health information exchange consent model