Lawmakers debate bill to extend PCB testing deadline, create remediation fund for schools

Lawmakers and agency officials debated a bill that would extend the deadline for completing polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) testing in school buildings, create a special fund for testing and remediation, and decouple PCB work from state school-construction master planning.

Supporters and staff described several possible revenue streams for the proposed fund — litigation recoveries, reimbursements from districts that later recover awards, direct appropriations from the General Assembly and donations — but multiple lawmakers said there is currently no guaranteed funding to pay for remediation.

The bill would allow the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) to administer grants from the fund when money is available and would require ANR, in consultation with the Agency of Education (AOE), to report to the General Assembly an estimate of the additional cost to complete testing, mitigation and remediation and a plan to fund those costs.

"This continues the program as it exists today with a 2033 timeline and kind of decouples it from the school construction process," said Matt Chapman, director of the Waste Management Prevention Division at NTC. He cautioned that removing PCB requirements from construction aid timing reduces opportunities to carry out remediation as part of planned construction projects.

Campbell, the deputy secretary of education, told the committee that independent schools are currently included in the program and that the state has been paying for testing, mitigation and remediation in at least some approved independent schools. "For the record, Campbell, deputy secretary of education: current state is that independent schools are included in the requirement," Campbell said.

Committee members pressed two central questions: who ultimately pays for remediation, and which agency should write implementing rules. Counsel and staff noted that previous session law frames parts of the state’s obligations and that while testing may be a reasonable state-funded activity, remediation raises policy choices and legal questions that have not been decided by courts.

One staff explanation of the fund’s mechanics said recoveries from state litigation against manufacturers, reimbursements from districts that receive awards, and occasional appropriations would flow into the fund and ANR could run a grant program to administer awards. "If there's recovery, money goes into the slot," a staff member said of litigation recoveries.

Several members argued the AOE lacks the staff and positions to undertake major rulemaking on school construction and PCB implementation. "There are zero positions in the Agency of Education available to do this work," a committee member said, urging alignment with DEC/ANR environmental rules rather than assigning new technical regulatory duties to AOE.

Lawmakers also debated whether PCB testing and remediation should be eligibility criteria for state construction aid or remain separate. Some said linking testing to master planning would improve outcomes because master plans normally include environmental-hazard analyses; others said decoupling could allow testing to proceed sooner in places not seeking construction aid.

The committee discussed the program deadline, with options including 2030, 2031 and 2033. Supporters of an earlier deadline argued the urgency of preventing prolonged exposure for students, while others favored additional runway for districts completing master facility plans. Members agreed to continue drafting the bill and to bring revised language back to the committee.

Next steps: staff will revise draft language, clarify the rulemaking assignment and funding mechanics, and return to the committee for further consideration.