Requesting A Study On The Feasibility Of Establishing An Environmental Protection Agency-certified Laboratory In Hawaii To Test Drinking Water Samples For Toxic Chemicals And Other Contaminants.
Summary
H.R. 18 is a House Resolution that requests the Legislative Reference Bureau to study whether Hawaii should establish an Environmental Protection Agency-certified laboratory in the state to test drinking water for toxic chemicals and other contaminants. The resolution is framed around the Red Hill water crisis and the broader concern that Hawaii currently lacks an in-state certified lab capable of testing for substances such as total petroleum hydrocarbons and PFAS, requiring samples to be shipped to California for analysis.
The study would also examine whether the Department of Health laboratory in Pearl City could be upgraded to meet EPA certification requirements instead of creating a new facility. In addition to feasibility, the resolution directs the study to consider startup costs, annual operating costs, organizational structure, and possible host entities. The Legislative Reference Bureau is asked to report findings and any recommended legislation to the Legislature before the 2026 Regular Session.
Impact
Because H.R. 18 is a resolution requesting a study rather than a bill amending statutes, it does not itself change Hawaii law or create new regulatory requirements. Its practical impact is to initiate an evaluation of state drinking-water testing capacity and to potentially lay the groundwork for future legislation, funding, or administrative action if the study finds that an in-state EPA-certified laboratory is feasible. The resolution also seeks cooperation from the EPA, Department of Health, and the Honolulu Board of Water Supply, signaling possible coordination among state and local agencies and private entities.
Sentiment
The overall sentiment reflected in the resolution is strongly supportive of improving Hawaii’s drinking-water testing infrastructure and public health protections. The measure is motivated by concern over contamination risks and the delays and logistical vulnerabilities associated with sending samples off-island. No opposing votes, committee testimony, or recorded debate are provided in the available materials, so the bill appears to have been introduced in a generally precautionary and proactive policy context rather than a contested one.
Contention
The main policy questions raised by the resolution are not about whether water testing is important, but about how best to provide it: whether Hawaii should build a new EPA-certified laboratory or upgrade the existing Department of Health lab in Pearl City, and which entity should host and operate the facility. Cost is another likely point of concern, since the study is specifically asked to assess both initial capital costs and ongoing operating expenses. The resolution also implicitly raises logistical and emergency-preparedness issues, emphasizing the risks of off-island sample transport and the need for faster local testing in future crises.
Same As
Requesting A Study On The Feasibility Of Establishing An Environmental Protection Agency-certified Laboratory In Hawaii To Test Drinking Water Samples For Toxic Chemicals And Other Contaminants.