AN ACT TO CREATE THE "COMMUNITY PUBLIC WASTEWATER SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE SUSTAINABILITY ACT"; TO PROVIDE A STATEWIDE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTABILITY FOR COMMUNITY PUBLIC WASTEWATER SYSTEMS; TO PROVIDE FOR RULEMAKING BY THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND THE MISSISSIPPI COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; TO PROVIDE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A LETTER GRADE SCHEDULE REFLECTIVE OF COMMUNITY PUBLIC WASTEWATER SYSTEM QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE; TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION OF QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE SCORES AND LETTER GRADES; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 49-2-9, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATES TO THE COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY FOR PURPOSES OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 49-2-13, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, FOR PURPOSES OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTIONS 77-3-2 AND 77-3-5, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATE TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION'S POWERS, DUTIES AND JURISDICTION; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 19-5-175, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, FOR PURPOSE OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTIONS 21-27-7, 21-27-13 AND 21-27-203, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATE TO MUNICIPALLY OWNED UTILITIES; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 49-17-743, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATES TO THE POWERS OF COUNTY AUTHORITIES, FOR PURPOSE OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 49-17-745, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATES TO THE PROMULGATION OF RULES AND REGULATIONS RELATING TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF COUNTY WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS, FOR PURPOSE OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 41-67-3, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATES TO THE MISSISSIPPI INDIVIDUAL ON-SITE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM LAW; TO CREATE THE "COMMUNITY DRINKING WATER INFRASTRUCTURE SUSTAINABILITY ACT"; TO PROVIDE A STATEWIDE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTABILITY FOR COMMUNITY PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS; TO PROVIDE FOR RULEMAKING BY THE MISSISSIPPI BOARD OF HEALTH; TO PROVIDE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A LETTER GRADE SCHEDULE REFLECTIVE OF COMMUNITY PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE; TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLICATION OF QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE SCORES AND LETTER GRADES; TO AMEND SECTION 19-5-151, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO AUTHORIZE CERTAIN UTILITY DISTRICTS TO DISSOLVE WHENEVER A MAJORITY OF THE LANDOWNERS OF ANY SUCH DISTRICT SIGN AND FILE WITH THE CLERK OF THE CHANCERY COURT BY WHICH SUCH DISTRICT WAS ORGANIZED, OR IN THE COUNTY IN WHICH SUCH DISTRICT WAS ORGANIZED, A PETITION FOR THE DISSOLUTION OF SUCH DISTRICT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 19-5-165, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATES TO NEWLY FORMED WATER DISTRICT ASSETS AND LIABILITIES, FOR PURPOSES OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTIONS 41-3-15 AND 41-26-3, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RELATE TO THE STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, FOR PURPOSES OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
HB 1632 creates two related statewide accountability programs: one for community public wastewater systems and one for community public water systems. For each, the bill directs the relevant state agency—the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality for wastewater and the Mississippi State Board of Health for drinking water—to establish a letter-grade system (A through F) based on objective performance criteria such as permit compliance, operation and maintenance history, infrastructure condition, financial sustainability, customer satisfaction, and contamination or violation history. The agencies must publish annual scores and grades on their websites, and each system must notify customers of its grade within 30 days of publication.
The bill also sets a deadline for the first published grades no later than January 1, 2028. It defines covered systems broadly to include publicly or privately owned systems serving at least 15 service connections or 25 year-round consumers. In addition to the grading framework, the bill brings forward and, in one case, amends a number of existing statutes governing environmental quality, public health, municipal utilities, county authorities, water districts, and on-site wastewater systems. It also provides that systems receiving a D or F are deemed to be failing to render reasonably adequate service and become subject to limited Public Service Commission jurisdiction under specified statutes.
The bill’s impact on state law is significant because it adds a new layer of state oversight and public reporting for water and wastewater utilities while leaving existing rate and operational structures largely intact unless a system is graded poorly. It does not change the ranking criteria for the Water Pollution Control Revolving Loan Fund Program, and it expressly separates the new grading framework from that loan program. The bill also amends the law on dissolution of certain utility districts, allowing dissolution when a majority of landowners petition for it, and it reinforces or restates the authority of municipalities, county authorities, and health/environmental agencies over utility operations and permitting.
The overall sentiment reflected in the voting history appears strongly favorable. The bill passed the House 112-5, passed the Senate unanimously 50-0 as amended, and then the House concurred in the Senate amendments 119-0. That voting pattern suggests broad bipartisan support for the bill’s focus on transparency, infrastructure sustainability, and customer protection in water and wastewater service.
There is little direct evidence of committee-level controversy in the provided materials, but the bill’s structure suggests likely points of tension. The main potential issue is the use of public letter grades and the possibility that low grades could trigger Public Service Commission jurisdiction, which may be viewed as an accountability tool by supporters and as an added regulatory burden by utilities or local governments. Another possible point of concern is the breadth of the criteria and the requirement for public reporting, which could raise questions about implementation, fairness, and the administrative burden on smaller systems. Still, the recorded votes indicate that any such concerns did not prevent overwhelming approval.
The bill creates new statutory frameworks for statewide oversight of community public wastewater systems and community public water systems, requiring MDEQ and the State Board of Health to adopt rules, score systems, publish annual grades, and notify customers. It also amends Section 19-5-151 to allow dissolution of certain utility districts upon petition by a majority of landowners, and it brings forward multiple statutes governing environmental regulation, municipal utilities, county authorities, and on-site wastewater systems. Systems graded D or F become subject to limited Public Service Commission authority for adequacy-of-service purposes, while the bill expressly preserves existing loan-program ranking criteria and does not tie the new grades to revolving loan fund priority.
The bill appears to have enjoyed very strong support across both chambers. The House passed it 112-5, the Senate passed it unanimously 50-0 after amendment, and the House then concurred in the Senate amendments 119-0. That voting record indicates broad agreement with the bill’s goals of transparency, accountability, and infrastructure sustainability for water and wastewater systems.
The most notable potential point of contention is the bill’s public grading system, especially the provision that a D or F grade can trigger limited Public Service Commission jurisdiction by deeming the system to be failing to render reasonably adequate service. Supporters likely view this as a consumer-protection and accountability measure, while utilities and local operators could see it as an added regulatory threat. Another possible concern is the administrative burden of collecting objective performance data, publishing annual scores, and notifying customers, particularly for smaller or financially stressed systems. The bill’s amendment allowing dissolution of certain utility districts by petition may also be sensitive for local governments and district operators, though the recorded votes suggest these issues did not generate substantial opposition in the legislature.