SB2096 addresses wastewater management by requiring certain wastewater treatment works that are approved to land-apply sewage sludge to test that sludge, and any other residual material intended for land application, for the presence of PFAS (perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances). The bill also defines PFAS by reference to existing state law and directs the Department of Health to adopt rules for monitoring, sampling, testing, and data collection for sewage sludge and residual materials containing PFAS.
The bill further amends the wastewater permitting statute to restrict land application when testing shows any PFAS in sewage sludge or other residual material. In that case, permits may not authorize land application on agronomic land, land with drainage tiles, land that drains into waters of the State, or land in a 500-year floodplain. The measure is set to take effect on July 1, 2050, and would operate through the Department of Health’s permitting and rulemaking authority under chapter 342D, Hawaii Revised Statutes.
Impact
SB2096 would add a new PFAS testing requirement to Hawaii’s wastewater law and expand the Department of Health’s regulatory duties over sewage sludge and related residuals. It would also place new substantive limits on permits for land application of sludge or residual material if PFAS is detected, affecting wastewater treatment works, permit applicants, land application operators, and potentially agricultural landowners and downstream water resources. The bill amends chapters 342D and related permitting provisions, but does not create a separate enforcement scheme beyond the existing permit and hearing process.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad support in committee, passing the Senate Agriculture and Environment, Health and Human Services, and Ways and Means committees unanimously and advancing through the House with no recorded opposition at the cited stage. The available voting history suggests general agreement on the need to address PFAS in wastewater residuals and to tighten controls on land application practices. The only noted reservation in the later House action was a vote in favor with reservations, indicating some caution about the measure’s details rather than outright opposition.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely to be the scope and consequences of the land-application prohibition, especially the bill’s trigger of “any amount” of PFAS in tested sludge or residual material. That standard could be viewed as stringent by wastewater operators, municipalities, and agricultural users who rely on land application as a disposal method. Potential concerns also include compliance costs, testing and rulemaking burdens on the Department of Health, and the practical implications of restricting application on agronomic land, drained land, watersheds, and floodplain areas. Supporters, by contrast, are likely focused on public health and environmental protection from PFAS contamination.