AN ACT to create and enact a new chapter to title 23.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to onsite wastewater treatment systems; to amend and reenact sections 23-35-02 and 23-35-08 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the powers and duties of the boards of health and public health units; to repeal sections 23-35-02.2 and 23-35-02.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the onsite wastewater recycling technical committee; to provide for a legislative management report; to provide a penalty; and to provide an appropriation.
SB 2267 creates a new state regulatory framework for onsite wastewater treatment systems, commonly known as septic systems. It gives the Department of Environmental Quality exclusive authority to adopt rules for licensing, permitting, and inspections of these systems, while allowing local public health units to continue performing permitting and inspections under state rules and, in some cases, through cooperative agreements with counties or cities. The bill also requires public health units to conduct an in-person or virtual inspection within one business day of a request.
The bill establishes a licensing system for individuals who install onsite wastewater treatment systems, with exemptions for homeowners installing systems on their own property for personal use. It authorizes the department to set license issuance and renewal rules, revoke or suspend licenses for fraud, lack of reasonable care, or environmental law violations, and impose civil penalties for violations of the chapter or for false statements and tampering. It also provides a process for appeals of local permit decisions to the department, and allows the department to create variance procedures for existing nonconforming or nonfunctional systems based on environmental impact, public health, cost, and least restrictive means.
In addition to creating the new chapter, the bill amends the powers and duties of boards of health and public health units to align with the new septic-system framework and removes references to the repealed onsite wastewater recycling technical committee. It also repeals two existing sections related to that committee, and appropriates $99,500 in one-time general fund money to the Department of Environmental Quality for implementation and regulation of onsite wastewater treatment systems, with a report due to legislative management by August 1, 2026.
The overall sentiment appears broadly supportive, as reflected by strong bipartisan passage in both chambers, with only a small number of dissenting votes. The bill’s structure suggests an effort to standardize regulation statewide and clarify authority between state and local entities, which likely appealed to supporters seeking consistency and clearer oversight. At the same time, the bill contains potential points of contention around state preemption of local ordinances, the department’s exclusive rulemaking authority, the licensing requirement for installers, and the short one-business-day inspection requirement, all of which could raise concerns among local governments, installers, or public health units about administrative burden and loss of local control.
The bill would substantially shift regulatory authority over onsite wastewater treatment systems to the Department of Environmental Quality, preempting conflicting local ordinances and creating a statewide licensing, permitting, inspection, enforcement, and appeals structure. It amends existing public health statutes to require public health units to participate in onsite wastewater permitting and inspections under state rules, repeals the onsite wastewater recycling technical committee provisions, and adds civil penalties and appropriated funding to support implementation.
The bill appears to have been received positively overall, as shown by its strong final votes in both the Senate and House. The vote margins suggest broad agreement on the need for a clearer statewide framework for septic-system regulation, though the presence of some dissent indicates not all members were fully comfortable with the scope of state control or the operational requirements imposed on local entities and installers.
The main points of contention are likely the bill’s centralization of authority in the Department of Environmental Quality and its preemption of local rules, which may concern counties, cities, and public health units that currently exercise some control. The licensing requirement for installers, the department’s power to suspend or revoke licenses, and the civil penalties may also be controversial among industry stakeholders. In addition, the one-business-day inspection mandate and the appeal process from local permit decisions to the state could be viewed as burdensome or as limiting local discretion.