Month: May 2020

HARTFORD, CT) – Governor Ned Lamont announced that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has approved another portion of his ongoing request  for disaster assistance as part of the State of Connecticut’s Major Disaster Declaration due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Today’s approval includes funding for crisis counseling under the individual assistance category, which will help support mental health initiatives designed to benefit individuals affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Previously, FEMA approved  Governor Lamont’s request for public assistance for Connecticut, allowing impacted state agencies, municipalities, and tribal nations in all eight of the state’s counties to be reimbursed by the federal government for 75 percent of the costs associated with their response and emergency protective measures. A supplemental request from the governor to increase that reimbursement to 100 percent is still pending.

Other requests by Governor Lamont for individual assistance remain under review by FEMA, including in the categories of disaster unemployment assistance, disaster case management, disaster legal services, child care assistance, and funeral assistance.

“This pandemic is having an impact on nearly every segment of our society and daily lives, and that includes mental health services,” Governor Lamont said. “Approval in this category of aid will mean a lot to so many people living in our state, and I appreciate FEMA’s approval. I also thank the members of Connecticut’s Congressional delegation who have been helping to advocate for this aid on our behalf.”

This press releases was made possible by:

Hartford, CT) –Attorney General William Tong joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s effort to gut longstanding Clean Water Act protections by unlawfully narrowing the definition of “Waters of the United States. The EPA final rule removes protections for all ephemeral streams, many wetlands, and other waters that were previously covered under the Act. In the lawsuit, the coalition argues that EPA’s rule directly conflicts with the text of the Clean Water Act, Supreme Court precedent, and the EPA’s own scientific findings.

“The whole point of the Clean Water Act was to clean up our nation’s waterways, and that requires a full and comprehensive application of the law. This revised rule, however, turns a blind eye to basic science, and will have disastrous implications for public health and the environment. The EPA ignored basic federal law in their rush to push through this damaging rule, and Connecticut joins with our partner states in defending the goals of the Clean Water Act in court,” said Attorney General Tong.

The definition of “Waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act is critical to maintaining a strong federal foundation for water pollution control and water quality protection that preserves the integrity of our waters. While the Clean Water Act has resulted in dramatic improvements to water quality in the United States, its overriding objective has not yet been obtained. Many of the nation’s waters remain polluted. The 2015 Clean Water Rule enacted during the Obama Administration provided much-needed clarity and consistency in federal Clean Water Act protections by specifically including within the scope of protected waters the headwaters of rivers and creeks as well as other non-traditionally navigable waters, which have significant impact on downstream water quality.

The 2020 rule narrows the definition of “Waters of the United States” to eliminate federal protections for many of our nation’s waterways, including waters we rely on for drinking water, wildlife habitat, agriculture, and recreation. In the lawsuit, the coalition highlights that exclusion of these waters directly harms environmentally responsible states by increasing the risk of pollution from less-protective jurisdictions; incentivizing polluters to relocate to states with less stringent water quality protections; and disrupting state regulatory programs.

The coalition asserts that the 2020 rule is unlawful under the federal Administrative Procedure Act because it:

• Contradicts the Clean Water Act’s objective of maintaining and restoring the integrity of the Nation’s waters and the EPA’s own scientific findings;
• Arbitrarily and capriciously reduces and eliminates protections for ephemeral streams, tributaries, adjacent waters, wetlands and other important water resources that significantly affect downstream waters;
• Fails to comply with controlling Supreme Court precedent established in Rapanos v. United States; and
• Lacks a reasoned explanation or rational basis for changing long-standing policy and practice.

In filing the lawsuit, Attorneys General Tong joins the attorneys general of California, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. The California State Water Resources Control Board, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, and the City of New York also joined the coalition in filing the lawsuit.

This press release was made possible by:

#WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) are asking the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Assistant Administrator to be transparent, expedient, and fair in determining how Fishery Disaster Assistance funding is allocated to fishermen and seafood processors across the country, and urged the agency to consider a minimum allocation for smaller coastal states.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has devastated fisheries, fisheries distributors, and fisheries processors, who are experiencing severe economic losses as domestic purchasing has plunged and exports have slowed. With limited capital, fishing communities – business owners, crews, and processing plant workers – are facing unforeseen financial hardships that put their livelihoods at risk.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act appropriated $300 million to NOAA for fishery disaster assistance. However, NOAA and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) are still considering how to distribute these funds among impacted fishing states. Without a minimum allocation, larger operations may receive a disproportionate amount of available funds, leaving struggling small businesses in states like Delaware and Connecticut with little help—and little recourse.

“As NOAA continues its process of determining how it will distribute this critical funding, we urge you to be as transparent and communicative as possible and to engage a wide range of fishery participants,” the senators wrote.

“Further, we strongly urge you to consider a minimum allocation for small, coastal states,” the senators continued. “Doing so will protect struggling small fishing operations that might be underserved if funding is distributed in proportion to the value of commercial fisheries in each state without instituting a minimum allocation. We fear that any allocation to states based solely on commercial landings may not accurately reflect where our fishermen live and work.”

This press release is made possible by: