Further providing for definitions and for variances and exemptions.
Impact
The proposed changes under HB 874 would have significant implications for state laws by allowing public water systems greater leeway in complying with treatment techniques mandated by federal regulations. By streamlining the variance and exemption process, the bill could potentially improve operational efficiency for small to mid-sized water systems, especially those struggling to meet strict regulatory requirements due to specific local conditions. The adjustments may also foster a tailored approach to water system management based on unique environmental factors in different regions of Pennsylvania.
Summary
House Bill 874 seeks to amend the Pennsylvania Safe Drinking Water Act by updating definitions and outlining criteria for variances and exemptions related to public water systems. The bill introduces specific guidelines for the Department of Environmental Resources to authorize variances from treatment requirements under existing drinking water standards when a public water system demonstrates compliance with federal surface water treatment rules. This legislative effort aims to provide more flexibility for certain public water systems in Pennsylvania while ensuring they still meet quality standards.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB 874 appears mixed, as stakeholders express both support and concern regarding the proposed amendments. Supporters argue that the bill will aid public water systems in navigating complex regulatory frameworks and ultimately improve the quality of drinking water without imposing excessive operational burdens. In contrast, critics express apprehension that the variance provisions could lead to lowered health standards if not carefully regulated, particularly if exemptions are improperly granted, potentially jeopardizing public health.
Contention
One notable point of contention in the discussions around HB 874 involves the balance between regulatory flexibility and public health safeguarding. Some lawmakers and advocacy groups have raised concerns that granting variances too liberally could undermine the integrity of drinking water standards set to protect consumers from harmful contaminants. Additionally, there is debate regarding the definition of what constitutes a public water system and the extent to which certain facilities, particularly those operated by religious organizations, could be exempted from regulations that ensure water safety.
In preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions and providing for disaster emergency declaration and for testing requirement, duty to report and public access; in powers and duties, further providing for powers and duties of department; and, in liability and settlement procedures, further providing for responsible person.
In general provisions, further providing for definitions; in residual waste, further providing for disposal, processing and storage of residual waste and providing for exempt special wastes; and making an editorial change.
In general provisions, further providing for definitions; in residual waste, further providing for disposal, processing and storage of residual waste and providing for exempt special wastes; and making an editorial change.
In general provisions, further providing for definitions; in liquid fuels and fuels tax, further providing for definitions and for imposition of tax, exemptions and deductions and providing for electric vehicle road user charge; and imposing a penalty.
In general provisions, further providing for definitions; in liquid fuels and fuels tax, further providing for definitions and for imposition of tax, exemptions and deductions and providing for electric vehicle road user charge; and imposing a penalty.