New Jersey Senate Bill S3582

New Jersey 2022-2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/9/23
• Refer: 2/9/23
• Report Pass: 2/16/23
• Refer: 2/16/23

Caption

Requires DEP to study feasibility of using alternative water supply source when perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances exceed maximum contaminant level.

Impact

If enacted, S3582 would significantly influence state laws regarding water quality standards and the management of drinking water supplies. The bill empowers the DEP to actively explore and identify alternative water sources that could be utilized in cases where PFAS contaminants are detected above the permissible levels. Involving public community water systems, academic experts, and environmental groups in the decision-making process is vital for a comprehensive understanding of the local water supply challenges posed by PFAS contamination.

Summary

Senate Bill S3582 focuses on addressing the public health concerns associated with perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water. The bill mandates that the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) conduct a study regarding the feasibility of utilizing alternative water sources when PFAS levels exceed maximum contaminant levels. This legislation aims to ensure that public community water systems can maintain safe drinking water standards, mitigate risks related to PFAS exposure, and uphold public health and safety alongside environmental integrity.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding S3582 has generally leaned toward a proactive stance on environmental health, with widespread support for measures that seek to protect public health from harmful substances in drinking water. However, there may be underlying concerns regarding the feasibility of implementing alternative water supplies and the timeline of required studies, as these elements could impact local water systems' operational capabilities and responsiveness to PFAS pollution.

Contention

A notable point of contention may arise from the timelines stipulated in the bill, as the DEP is required to submit findings within one year of enactment, and failure to do so adds accountability measures. This aspect may lead to discussions on regulatory timelines vs. local government preparedness, and it highlights the tension between immediate public health responses and practical implementation challenges. The requirement for DEP to hold public hearings is a step towards inclusivity but may also introduce complexities in gathering and addressing community feedback effectively.