(a) The commissioner shall, not later than one hundred twenty days after the close of the hearing, make a decision either granting or denying the application as deemed complete in section 22a-371, or granting the application upon such terms, limitations or conditions, including, but not limited to, provisions for monitoring, schedule of diversion, duration of permit and reporting as the commissioner deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of sections 22a-365 to 22a-378, inclusive. The commissioner shall state in full the reasons for the commissioner's decision.
(b) In making the commissioner's decision, the commissioner shall consider all relevant facts and circumstances including, but not limited to:
(1) The effect of the proposed diversion on related needs for public water supply including existing and projected uses, safe yield of reservoir systems and reservoir and groundwater development;
(2) The effect of the proposed diversion on existing and planned water uses in the area affected such as public water supplies, relative density of private wells, hydropower, flood management, water-based recreation, wetland habitats, waste assimilation and agriculture;
(3) Compatibility of the proposed diversion with the policies and programs of the state of Connecticut, as adopted or amended, dealing with long-range planning, management, allocation and use of the water resources of the state;
(4) The relationship of the proposed diversion to economic development and the creation of jobs;
(5) The effect of the proposed diversion on the existing water conditions, with due regard to watershed characterization, groundwater availability potential, evapotranspiration conditions and water quality;
(6) The effect, including thermal effect, on fish and wildlife as a result of flow reduction, alteration or augmentation caused by the proposed diversion;
(7) The effect of the proposed diversion on navigation;
(8) Whether the water to be diverted is necessary and to the extent that it is, whether such water can be derived from other alternatives including, but not limited to, conservation;
(9) Consistency of the proposed diversion with action taken by the Attorney General, pursuant to sections 3-126 and 3-127; and
(10) The interests of all municipalities which would be affected by the proposed diversion.
(c) In making a decision on an application, the commissioner shall consider (1) capital expenditures and other resource commitments made prior to July 1, 1982, in connection with a proposed diversion, except that such expenditures or commitments shall not be binding in favor of such proposed diversion, and (2) proposed diversions recommended in any water supply plan developed pursuant to section 25-32d or coordinated water system plan prepared pursuant to section 25-33h in the same manner as proposed diversions not recommended in any such plan.
(d) If a decision is not made in the time required pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the application shall be deemed granted.
(P.A. 82-402, S. 9, 16; P.A. 85-544, S. 5, 6; P.A. 89-301, S. 8; P.A. 10-32, S. 88.)
History: P.A. 85-544, effective July 5, 1985, added Subsec. (b)(10) re interests of municipalities affected by proposed diversion; P.A. 89-301 added Subsec. (c)(2) re consideration of proposed diversions in water supply plans; P.A. 10-32 made technical changes in Subsecs. (a), (b) and (c), effective May 10, 2010.
If the legislature had intended the Connecticut Water Diversion Policy Act to confer the authority to consider or regulate activities facilitated or enabled by a proposed diversion whose sole relation to such diversion is the use of the diverted water at any point during the facilitated activity, it certainly could have inserted language to that effect; the single reference to “area of influence” in regulation re mapping wells in stratified drift aquifers is not intended to incorporate the area of influence metric into the act as a universal substantive element. 317 C. 628.
Cited. 28 CA 674.