Concern about unregulated “sober homes” has reached Washington, D.C., where lawmakers want a federal review of the drug recovery homes.

The move comes after two young adults from Danbury and Ridgefield died of heroin overdoses in sober homes earlier this year.

“There have been several recent overdoses that have occurred in Connecticut sober houses,” Sen. Chris Murphy wrote to the federal Government Accountability Office. “These deaths have raised questions about these facilities and the GAO review will be helpful in determining whether state and federal policymakers should consider additional oversight.”

Meanwhile, in Hartford, the state legislature completed hearings this week on a bill that would require sober homes to register as a business, among other measures.

“There seems to be about 240 of these sober homes in Connecticut, and they can run the gamut from 24/7 staffing and support services to glorified boarding houses,” said state Rep. Bob Godfrey of Danbury, who sponsored the bill with state Rep. Michelle Cook of Torrington.

Torrington is the location of separate sober homes where Kaitlyn Knapp, 21, of Danbury, died of a heroin overdose in late December, and where 29-year-old David Anderson of Ridgefield died a week later.

Sober homes are often the final supportive living environment for people recovering from drug abuse before they make the transition back into society. Unlike residential treatment homes and halfway houses that are licensed by the state, sober houses are not regulated.

“Michelle and my concern is those people who are running these more like a boarding house are using up their tenants’ social security disability payments without providing anything outside of a roof,” Godfrey said. “We want sober homes to register with municipalities and the state so we can start collecting data and make policy decisions.”

Murphy and colleagues in Washington, D.C., have the same idea.

Murphy on Wednesday joined fellow Democrat Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Republican Sens. Orrin Hatch and Marco Rubio in calling on the GAO to investigate:

At a public hearing Wednesday in Hartford, the state’s top mental health official said Connecticut had “serious concerns” about regulating sober homes.

The reason: people who live in sober homes are protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act, and a law targeting people because of their disability would be discriminatory, said Miriam Delphin-Rittmon, commissioner of the state Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services.

“We are concerned that requiring sober houses to self-identify and register with the state as a business entity and notice municipalities that people recovery are living together in sobriety would limit the ability to live in residential areas,” the commissioner told the legislature’s Public Health Committee. “We are concerned that it will provide increased opportunity for discriminatory or stigmatizing behavior towards people with a substance abuse disorder.”

A statewide group that represents Connecticut’s cities and towns disagreed that the bill would subject sober homes to unequal treatment.

“Local officials believe this will serve tremendous value because, as stated, one of the difficulties with sober homes is not knowing where they exist,” the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities wrote.

Godfrey said he was hopeful the bill would make it out of the committee and be passed by the legislature.

“Enough people have testified in favor of this,” Godfrey said. “So we know there is support for this at the basic neighborhood level.”