SB 258 - HB 1139
FISCAL NOTE
Fiscal Review Committee
Tennessee General Assembly
March 14, 2025
Fiscal Analyst: Rebecca Chandler | Email: rebecca.chandler@capitol.tn.gov | Phone: 615-741-2564
SB 258 - HB 1139
SUMMARY OF BILL: Excludes water softening systems from the definition of a public
water system (PWS) by revising the criteria for treatment facilities under operator control.
FISCAL IMPACT:
OTHER FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed legislation may jeopardize federal funding of up to $20,000,000 should the
Environmental Protection Agency determine Tennessee’s regulatory scope falls below federal
standards and lead to the Environmental Protection Agency revoking state primacy.
Assumptions:
• Pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 68-221-703(19)(A)(i), the existing definition of a PWS
includes any collection, storage, distribution, or treatment facility under the control of the
system operator.
• The proposed legislation revises this definition to specify that a treatment facility is not
considered part of the PWS if it treats solely for the purpose of softening hard water.
• Pursuant to 42 United States Code § 300g-2, states have primacy over drinking water
regulation only if their standards are at least as stringent as federal law. If the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determines noncompliance, it revokes primacy
and federal funding and assumes regulatory control.
• Pursuant to 40 CFR § 142.10(b)(6), states with primacy agreements are mandated to
regulate all PWSs under the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
• The provisions of 40 CFR. § 141.2 define a PWS to include treatment, storage, or
distribution facilities under system control.
• As the proposed legislation excludes water softening treatment systems from Tennessee's
definition of a public water system, this narrows the state’s regulatory scope below the
federal standard.
• Based on information provided by the Department of Environment and Conservation, if
the EPA revokes the state’s primacy, the state may lose over $20,000,000 in federal funding,
and would make EPA directly responsible for regulating drinking water systems in the state
instead.
• If the EPA assumed regulatory control over PWSs in the state, the impact on state
expenditures and revenue cannot be reasonably determined.
SB 258 - HB 1139 2
CERTIFICATION:
The information contained herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Bojan Savic, Executive Director