Sales and Use Tax - Cut Flowers - Exemption
HB0909 would require sewage sludge utilization permits issued or renewed by the Maryland Department of the Environment for land application of sewage sludge on agricultural land to include limits on certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Specifically, the bill sets a cap for the total concentration of PFOS or PFOA at the lowest of three benchmarks: 1 microgram per kilogram, any applicable U.S. EPA health-based standard, or any stricter limit adopted by the Department by regulation.
The bill also requires permit compliance to be shown through laboratory analysis of a sample of the entire quantity of sludge to be land-applied, using Department-acceptable methods and timing rules. In most cases, the sample must be tested no more than 14 days before land application, though a later test window is allowed if the sludge is hauled directly from the generator to the field and is not stored off-site or mixed with other material. The Department is also authorized to adopt regulations setting stricter PFOS/PFOA limits and additional limits for other PFAS or other substances not specifically listed in the bill.
HB0909 would amend Maryland Environment Article provisions governing sewage sludge utilization permits by adding a new section that imposes PFAS concentration limits and testing requirements for land application of sewage sludge on agricultural land. It would directly affect permit holders, sewage sludge generators and transporters, agricultural land application operations, and the Department of the Environment, while preserving the Department’s authority to adopt more stringent standards by regulation.
The available record shows no committee transcript, vote tally, or recorded debate, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to assess. Based on the bill’s subject matter and structure, the measure appears to be a regulatory and environmental protection bill focused on reducing PFAS exposure through sewage sludge application controls.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the cost and feasibility of compliance testing, the strictness of the PFOS/PFOA cap, and the Department’s authority to impose even tighter limits by regulation. Agricultural interests, sludge handlers, and wastewater operators may be concerned about operational burdens and disposal constraints, while environmental and public health advocates are likely to support the added safeguards against PFAS contamination of farmland and the food chain.