Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers weigh bill to exempt low‑hazard buildings from backflow‑device rule
Summary
Senator Pardee said HB 458 seeks to exempt low‑hazard residences and offices from mandatory backflow devices, citing retrofit costs; public‑health witnesses and water associations urged keeping the regulation to protect aquifers and municipal water supplies.
Senator Pardee presented House Bill 458 on June 30, explaining the bill would exempt certain low‑hazard residential and office buildings from a Department of Public Health regulation that recommends installation of cross‑connection control devices (backflow preventers).
Pardee told the committee that small installations can range "anywhere from $400 to maybe as much as $1,200" for a residential valve and that costs, plus installation and annual testing, can be burdensome for homeowners and small businesses. He said the bill would include a sunset tied to updated regulations so the exemption would lapse after the Department revises definitions.
James Barahill of the Delaware Division of Public Health said the existing regulation lists "low risk" but does not define it; the department believes the bill's listed items "create a high enough bar" to avoid public‑health problems while the department updates administrative code. Barahill recommended defining "low hazard" in administrative code to align the statute and regulation.
Public commenters pushed back. Phil McGinnis of the Delaware Association of Realtors said the regulation had been poorly worded and that the Department agreed to reopen it for refinement, and he warned that water providers intend to enforce requirements that could force retrofits on residential customers. Heather Warren, executive director of the Dillard Rural Water Association, urged preserving the rules to protect Kent and Sussex County aquifers and described garden‑hose backflow and other common causes of contamination; she said remediation costs would fall on local municipalities.
Warren confirmed she opposed the bill and asked that regulations remain to protect drinking water. The committee did not take a vote on HB 458 during the session.
