Comité Natural Resources and the Environment del Senado, 2 de marzo de 2026

Transcripción

360 turnos. Seleccione un tiempo para reproducir ese momento del video.

1. 0:15:04

   I'm almost asked, uh, Senator Ginn to lead us in a word of prayer. What number are you?

2. 0:15:11

   Uh, four is what this says.

3. 0:15:13

   Okay.

4. 0:15:15

   If you would please bow with me. Lord, our heavenly Father, today is a special day as we look forward to the, picking our leaders for where we go and the leadership of our state. I hope that you'll put your hand upon us and make sure that the public, uh, chooses the right people to move our state forward and move it in a direction that you find virtuous. A- and, uh, please bless our committee work for what we're gonna do today, and, you know, put your hand upon us as we make decisions that impact our residents of the great state of Georgia.

5. 0:15:51

   Amen.

6. 0:15:52

   Amen. Today we got, uh, one bill we're gonna hear in, uh, house, one house bill. Then we got three Senate bills that we're gonna hear, just hearing only. And, uh, with the hearing only, it will not be no public input. We're just having the author to present the bill to committee right now, and later on in the future we'll have public input on that.

7. 0:16:22

   But if there's anybody wants to, uh, sign up for the, uh, House Bill 946, you may so do that. All right. We bring House Bill... Oh, let me back up. We, uh, last meeting we had a new face on our committee. Now we have a new- another new face on our committee, a new member. He's pretty fresh. He's, uh, what, how many days?

8. 0:16:55

   Has it been a week?

9. 0:16:57

   One week.

10. 0:16:58

    One week. He's one week old in the Senate this week. But we, uh, we are honored to have Senator Mc- McNeel on our, uh, Natural Resources committee, and, uh, I'll give you 10 seconds to speak to the people.

11. 0:17:19

    What number are you?

12. 0:17:21

    Three.

13. 0:17:21

    Three.

14. 0:17:24

    Three.

15. 0:17:24

    Thank you for the warm introduction, Chairman.

16. 0:17:26

    Yes, sir.

17. 0:17:27

    I am Steven McNeel from the 18th District, and look forward to working and serving with y'all.

18. 0:17:33

    Very good. You did better than the other freshman. He, he tried to carry on and on and on. Anyway. All right. House Bill-

19. 0:17:43

    Get the other words

20. 0:17:44

    ... 946. We have a, uh, house member named Rob Clifton coming forward to present this bill. And, uh, have a seat.

21. 0:18:01

    Representative Clifton, the, the floor is yours.

22. 0:18:04

    Thank you, Mr.-

23. 0:18:05

    There we go.

24. 0:18:06

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. I bring to you House Bill 946. Uh, this is, uh, the feral hog bill. Uh, the way this bill came about is I had some constituents reach out to me about, um, hog problems on their property. Asked if they could use a drone in order to locate said feral hogs in the attempt of, um, eradicating them. We reached out to DNR, which the orishal- initial, uh, comment was, "Sure. Not a problem." Um, after talking to law enforcement, it was a problem, and DNR asked me to, uh, run this bill in order to fix that.

25. 0:18:41

    So, uh, real quick, uh, in 2020, UGA Extension, uh, found that an estimated $150 million of damage was done every year due to feral hogs. Uh, in running this bill and talking to others, uh, the consensus is that is very low and is somewhere between 200 and $250 million of damage every year. Um, let's see. So this bill, does two things. Um, interestingly enough, in my, um, newness of all of this, this is the first bill that deleting words does almost more than what we add to it.

26. 0:19:15

    So you'll see in line 23 through 35, I'm sorry, and I'm on LC44-

27. 0:19:19

    Yeah, I'm looking

28. 0:19:20

    ... 3279. Um, there is no substitute, so this is the only one. Um, line number 23 through 35 essentially is, um, eliminating, um, current rules and, um, restrictions in order to kill feral hogs. We are making it much easier. Um, there is no, um, there's no season. There's no permit required. There's no license. Um, before you were not allowed to shoot them from a motorized vehicle. You will be able to do that, um, now if this bill goes through.

29. 0:19:51

    Um, and then on the very, um, 47 is where we get into the drones aspect of it. So I wanna be clear, this is personal drones on private property. We are not allowing drones on federal property, WMAs. This is only personal use on private property. Um, that is the short and sweet of it, of this bill, and I would, uh, stand for any questions.

30. 0:20:20

    Number four. Senator Ginn.

31. 0:20:23

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Clifton said they, uh, oh, the thing about drones and things, this does not allow for anybody to put a, any kind of weapon or grenade or nuclear bomb or, or a- any, uh, well, kind of, uh, thing on a drone. They can just locate the, the animals with the use of a drone. Is that correct?

32. 0:20:43

    That is correct.

33. 0:20:43

    Okay.

34. 0:20:43

    Thank you for that clarification.

35. 0:20:45

    I said the, uh, I, I still think it's illegal to shoot them out of a helicopter, but I don't know why yet.

36. 0:20:49

    This bill will allow you to now in Georgia shoot them out of a helicopter if we pass this bill all the way through.

37. 0:20:53

    Okay.

38. 0:20:54

    M- motorized vehicle would be including a helicopter, and if this bill is, um, passed and signed by the governor, you will be allowed to shoot hogs from a helicopter similar to how they do in Texas.

39. 0:21:03

    We, we eradicated 10 on the Ginn farm, uh, th- this Saturday, so.

40. 0:21:07

    Congratulations.

41. 0:21:08

    They, uh, they are tearing the, uh, world up.

42. 0:21:10

    I bet another 10 have been born since then, unfortunately.

43. 0:21:12

    They, uh, I'm gonna keep working on those numbers.

44. 0:21:15

    In fact, quick anecdote, I bought some property last year and, um, got some trail cameras for Christmas. I put those up and last week I got a video of about It's two different litters from what we can tell. There was about four adults that ran up, and then a litter followed, another by another four adults and another litter. We counted about 30 hogs right there, and based on the age and talking to DNR, we think they were born in the last couple months. So it's-

45. 0:21:35

    Being a hog expert, can you tell me the gestation period for a hog?

46. 0:21:39

    Uh, funny enough, I believe about two years old they can start having babies, and they can have t- two, sometimes rarely up to three litters a year. And you're averaging anywhere between 8 and 18 hogs per litter.

47. 0:21:50

    You didn't answer the question, sir. That's three months, three weeks, and three days-

48. 0:21:53

    I didn't know that

49. 0:21:54

    ... is the gestation period of a hog.

50. 0:21:56

    Wow, I had no idea.

51. 0:21:56

    So I just wanna make sure, you know-

52. 0:21:57

    Three months, three weeks and two days

53. 0:21:58

    ... they- they're, they're not quite as fast as rabbits, but they're getting faster. More, more I think in a litter.

54. 0:22:04

    Three months, three weeks, and two days?

55. 0:22:05

    Three days.

56. 0:22:06

    Three days. Okay, I can remember that. Three, three, three.

57. 0:22:08

    I figured you might be able to since-

58. 0:22:09

    Yes, sir

59. 0:22:09

    ... you appear to be an expert.

60. 0:22:10

    Yes, sir. Thank you.

61. 0:22:11

    Thank you for, for presenting the bill.

62. 0:22:14

    Um, do you think that possibly with the drone that you could also help with, um, coyotes too, locate coyotes?

63. 0:22:25

    Right now this is specific to hogs. Uh, I do know there is appetite for varmint and other predators. Um, that would be something we maybe if the committee would like to, or maybe in, um, the Senate itself, I would be completely open to that. I would d- I would want to check with DNR to make sure they don't have an, a issue with that. Uh, but I do know, um, predators is a big issue. The turkey population is, um, falling dramatically, and one of the aspects of that they do believe is predators.

64. 0:22:52

    Is, is DNR here today?

65. 0:22:55

    Yes.

66. 0:22:56

    C- come forward, please.

67. 0:23:09

    Ma'am, I'm gonna go and tell you right now, you upgrade that situation tremendously.

68. 0:23:14

    Thank you, Senator.

69. 0:23:17

    All right. Um, do you see this possibly being a, a help- helpful use for locating coyotes also?

70. 0:23:27

    I'm gonna let...

71. 0:23:28

    Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Trevor Santos with DNR. I'm gonna let, uh, Dr. Jo Hanson from our Wildlife Resources Division-

72. 0:23:35

    Okay

73. 0:23:35

    ... uh, she's the assistant chief for our Game Management section. I'm gonna let her touch on that. Uh, we were just having a discussion in the back about it.

74. 0:23:44

    Good morning. Can y'all hear me?

75. 0:23:45

    Morning. Yes.

76. 0:23:48

    As the bill is currently worded right now, it only applies to feral-

77. 0:23:51

    Right

78. 0:23:52

    ... hogs.

79. 0:23:52

    Understood.

80. 0:23:52

    However, yes, absolutely, if you wanted to add coyotes or if you wanted to just make it generic to invasive species, that would cover hogs. We consider coyotes an invasive species as well. Um, but it would certainly be useful for that application.

81. 0:24:11

    Okay. All right. Thank you, ma'am.

82. 0:24:15

    Put them on here.

83. 0:24:17

    Senator.

84. 0:24:19

    Senator Jones.

85. 0:24:21

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I'm just curious, how large of a problem are feral hogs and these invasive species in Georgia?

86. 0:24:29

    You're the expert.

87. 0:24:30

    Yeah.

88. 0:24:31

    I can say what y'all have given me, but you're the expert.

89. 0:24:33

    I, I'm trying to think of the largest word I could use. Ginormous, perhaps? Um- ... the, what makes feral hogs good livestock, or what makes hogs good livestock, that rapid, uh, and intense ability to reproduce also makes them a scourge on the landscape. Um, the way that they forage, digging things up, not only do they dig up whatever it is you've planted, but they feel compelled to rut it up where you can't get equipment in there easily.

90. 0:25:04

    And so a- as was mentioned, we're talking billions of dollars in agricultural damage, and I, I agree. That's, it's an underestimate by far.

91. 0:25:16

    Senator, to, to give you example, you can have a perfect, smooth hay field-

92. 0:25:25

    Mm-hmm

93. 0:25:25

    ... one that you're proud of.

94. 0:25:26

    Mm-hmm.

95. 0:25:27

    Wake up the next morning and you got the ugliest mess-

96. 0:25:32

    Yeah

97. 0:25:32

    ... that you've ever seen in your whole life. I mean, it's just rough, and then you got the, the expense of having to-

98. 0:25:39

    Mm

99. 0:25:39

    ... try to get it back in shape. And not only that, but try to hope and pray that they don't come back.

100. 0:25:46

     Mm-hmm. Yeah.

101. 0:25:48

     Does a lot of damage on good, good, fertile land.

102. 0:25:52

     Mm-hmm.

103. 0:25:53

     But, uh, any other questions?

104. 0:25:56

     Just a couple.

105. 0:25:56

     Senator Sims, what number are you, dear?

106. 0:25:59

     Nine.

107. 0:26:00

     You need to be number one, but-

108. 0:26:02

     Thank you so much.

109. 0:26:03

     You're number nine. Ms. Hilliard.

110. 0:26:06

     Representative, thank you so, so much for bringing this bill. My farmers in Southwest Georgia are truly in your debt because Senator Jones just asked how much damage. These individ- those, these farmers plant, and just as, um, and we know that they come in, they root up the fields, they take out the, the seeds that have been planted and the, the early ones, and it's so costly to them.

111. 0:26:41

     Mm.

112. 0:26:41

     They have to go back in and replant, and some of mine have done not just twice, but three times. They have to go back in and replant because of the damage that is being done by these feral hogs. So, uh, this will help them tremendously. Thank you so very much. Thank you.

113. 0:27:02

     I, I couldn't quite find a question in that, but-

114. 0:27:05

     I know. But y- they also come in your yards.

115. 0:27:09

     They-

116. 0:27:09

     They come into your yards.

117. 0:27:10

     They do.

118. 0:27:11

     Yeah.

119. 0:27:12

     All right, any other questions? Uh-oh. What number are you, young man?

120. 0:27:21

     Number three.

121. 0:27:22

     Number three, the freshman. The week old freshman.

122. 0:27:26

     I, I, I had a question about-

123. 0:27:27

     McNeel-

124. 0:27:28

     ... armadillos

125. 0:27:28

     ... sorry, McNeel, you can have the floor now.

126. 0:27:31

     Oh. Thank you, Chairman. Be- beyond these feral hogs and, and coyotes, are armadillos considered invasive too by the DNR?

127. 0:27:41

     They are. They're another invasive exotic

128. 0:27:41

     So if you were to add coyotes, you would suggest adding armadillos as well?

129. 0:27:45

     No. Yes. Um, they're... I don't know how useful a drone would be relative to finding armadillos. Really? Um, right now there's no, there's no rules on taking armadillos.

130. 0:27:57

     Well, I know for, uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but they're very damaging on ground-nesting birds, including quail, turkey, um, m- many other songbirds as well. But, um, but you would suggest adding armadillos to that-

131. 0:28:12

     You can kill them anytime

132. 0:28:13

     ... potential list?

133. 0:28:14

     There's no, there's no limit on bagging armadillos.

134. 0:28:17

     Okay.

135. 0:28:17

     Actually, correct. So armadillos and some of the other nest predators, there's no limits on, on removing those-

136. 0:28:24

     Year-round limits

137. 0:28:24

     ... other than, I suppose- Year round, yeah ... your capacity to do so. Mm-hmm.

138. 0:28:29

     The be- the best thing I've found to, to take out a armadillo is the white line on the highway. They don't very seldom get past that white line. But I mean, yes, I, they, they are a problem. They sure are. But, um, any other questions? Hearing none, um, Representative Clifton, would you mind in a little amendment to add coyotes in your bill?

139. 0:29:01

     Yes, sir. I would welcome that.

140. 0:29:03

     Okay. Now, where would you put it?

141. 0:29:07

     I guess where we put change-

142. 0:29:10

     Oh, this

143. 0:29:10

     ... probably line 44.

144. 0:29:12

     Start on line two, continue on line three.

145. 0:29:20

     Yep.

146. 0:29:20

     All the way down to 14. I would still say it'd be line 48.

147. 0:29:25

     Well, we need to-

148. 0:29:26

     Used to locate feral hogs

149. 0:29:27

     ... well, we need to start on 12, shall be a unlawful in the person possessing wildlife or feral hogs without possessing. Now I guess that really wouldn't cover that.

150. 0:29:36

     Right, because this only applies-

151. 0:29:37

     Yeah, sure

152. 0:29:37

     ... to trapping and-

153. 0:29:39

     Representative Clifton, would you wanna take some time and let's get it right and come back?

154. 0:29:46

     Yes, sir.

155. 0:29:48

     And maybe, maybe meanwhile, we can look at armadillos and see if there's anything there. You know, let's, let's look at ev- all the damage, you know, that, that each one of them make to the farm.

156. 0:30:02

     It sounds like based on DNR, if we change the word feral hog to invasive species, that would cover coyotes-

157. 0:30:08

     That's... I was wondering

158. 0:30:09

     ... armadillos.

159. 0:30:10

     I'm, I'm glad to hear that.

160. 0:30:11

     By that somewhere.

161. 0:30:12

     Yes, sir.

162. 0:30:13

     Mm-hmm.

163. 0:30:13

     Would that include everything?

164. 0:30:15

     I'm sorry?

165. 0:30:16

     Would that include everything then?

166. 0:30:18

     We should be able to include anything. I'm, I'm not remembering off the top of my head the code section, but we call them the lu- unlucky 14. Um, so we may be able to just refer to that language.

167. 0:30:29

     Okay.

168. 0:30:29

     But we'll definitely tidy it up.

169. 0:30:31

     Let's, uh, if it's okay, would you, Representative, can you come back and, um, we'll have it a m- a more powerful, um, bill?

170. 0:30:42

     Yes, sir. Absolutely.

171. 0:30:44

     Okay. Thank you so much.

172. 0:30:46

     Thank you.

173. 0:31:03

     All right. As I said, the, the next three bills are just hearings only, and, um, and we will just be hearing from the, the, uh, the s- the senator that would be presenting the bill. And it, and also if the senator would like to have one person with him at the, at the, at the microphone to help him present the bill. But later on in, we would have, um, input later on. So at this time, I'm gonna ask for, um, Chairman Watson to come forward and present SB 577.

174. 0:31:47

     Senator, would you like to have anyone?

175. 0:31:50

     Uh, yes, sir. Uh, Brittany Hull with Georgia Association of Manufacturers-

176. 0:31:53

     Okay

177. 0:31:54

     ... can, can join please, sir.

178. 0:31:55

     Is she here? Oh, there she is.

179. 0:31:56

     Yes.

180. 0:31:56

     She is. She's ready. All right. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, members of the committee. I do bring before you Senate Bill 577, uh, LC 600307. And, uh, I'm just gonna walk through, uh, this bill. But before I do, I just wanna, I guess, get started and say on line 15, you'll notice that this, uh, bill will be known as the Coordinated PFAS Remediation Act. Um, and I just wanna put some emphasis on coordinated.

181. 0:32:30

     Um, obviously that is, uh, an important word, and we have a, a patchwork of things going on across the state, uh, with competing, uh, lawsuits and issues that in some cases may be dictating our environmental law in, in a courtroom, and that may not be the best place. It also, um, is I guess, resulting in, uh, different outcomes in different locations in different parts of the state that may or may not, uh, be a, a good situation.

182. 0:33:01

     Uh, but you'll see there as we move through the bill that we're, we're finding as the general assembly that our natural resources are important, um, that public health is vitally important, that safe drinking water is very important. Um, we're also, for those of you that don't know what PFAS is, um, we are, um, talking about it here, and actually it stands for perfluorocarb and polyfluorocarb. And I didn't wanna say that publicly, but I tried.

183. 0:33:32

     Um, so there, should get extra points for that. Um, but obviously I think most people know, uh, what this product is and, and how dangerous it can be if not treated and taken care of. Um, as you go through there, you'll see some general findings of the bill and, and what's involved, uh, with PFAS. As we move to, uh, line 44, uh, you will see what the intent of this legislation is in the general assembly. Uh, again, you will see the w- word coordinate, uh, litigation to make sure that resources are available to the state for the treatment of abatement, removal, and remediation of PFOS contamination of public waters, lands, and facilities.

184. 0:34:12

     You'll also see that we want to promote, conserve, and again, coordinate, uh, resources to ensure that those resources are directed to benefit the citizens of this state as a whole, and that would be 100% of those resources. Um, if we don't, uh, make sure that we get 100% of those resources, then, um, usually our rate payers are the ones that are having to, to pick up the other end of that. As we move on, you'll see, uh, a long list of definitions.

185. 0:34:42

     Obviously, it's a complicated, uh, issue, so there's several pages of those, uh, definitions there. Uh, but we'll pick back up on line 116. Um, and this is probably, uh, the most important, um, part of the bill where, uh, you'll see that we're turning over all the PFOS, uh, claims over to the state, and the state would become the sole, uh, plaintiff, uh, in these, uh, cases and claims. Uh, there is a, uh, prohibition on our local governments at this point, uh, because those will be turned over to the state.

186. 0:35:17

     Um, as you'll see on line 128, uh, section C there, this does not affect individuals, it does not affect private companies, personal injury, or private property. You still have those rights, and you still get to carry on as you wish in those cases. Starting on line 137, and this is kind of the nuts and bolts of what we wanna do after these cases are turned over to the state. Uh, we're granting powers to EPD to file claims on behalf of the state.

187. 0:35:50

     Uh, they are the ones that are overseeing this and making sure that our water is clean and taken care of and managed properly, so they know what's supposed to be done and what's not supposed to be done, and so that's why we're involving them. As you see, if there is a problem, the attorney general's office, um, becomes involved at that point, and you'll notice as well if there is an abundance, uh, that they are allowed to select and employ a private counsel, uh, to help them with these, uh, situations to make sure that we again, get them solved and that we coordinate, uh, moving forward.

188. 0:36:26

     Moving on to, uh, 169, uh, GEFA will be the holder of these funds. Uh, obviously you all know what GEFA does across our state to make sure that our resources are managed well, taken care of, and provided for, uh, with resources when needed. Um, section two, um, that is where we're setting up a, uh, segregated account at GEFA so that, um, they can put any of these proceeds into this fund to be dispersed back out, uh, to the, uh, local governments to make sure that remediation, uh, is taken care of properly.

189. 0:37:06

     To finish out the, the bill, uh, transparency is a very important part of this as well. Obviously, this is a complicated issue, and we wanna make sure that 100% of these resources are being spent to, uh, cover remediation cost, and you'll see, uh, who all gets to look at these reports to make sure that things are happening like they're, uh, supposed to be. Um, and if you're familiar, I guess, to just have some closing comments, uh, this structure is, uh, similar to, um, what, uh, you've seen in tobacco settlements and opioid settlements, uh, across the, the country.

190. 0:37:43

     Um, and then there are several other states that are taking this, uh, structure. Uh, I think Texas and, and New Jersey are two of those that obviously have a lot of manufacturing, uh, in their states. Um, and again, this is just trying to find a, uh, coordinated, common sense approach, um, that requires and allows our state to have one voice, uh, as one state. Um, contamination does not stop at the city limits, it doesn't stop at the county line, it doesn't stop at the state line.

191. 0:38:16

     Um, this bill provides the transparency needed to make sure that we, uh, manage that properly and move forward properly and actually solve the problems. Um, as of today, I don't know how well we are solving a lot of these problems with the current structure that we have. And, you know, finally, just for me personally, um, y'all know that I am a farmer and I make a living on our natural resources. I provide for my family with our natural resources. I provide for your family, uh, with natural resources, and they are very, very important to me.

192. 0:38:50

     And, um, so that is why this is, uh, important to me, and I just wanna make sure that we protect our natural resources going forward in a very responsible, uh, way. And, uh, that's the, uh, bill, Mr. Chairman, and I'd be glad to, uh, take any questions if there are any.

193. 0:39:07

     You, um... How does it work if, uh, say a county or city is already in a, a suit, and say the state takes over? How does that work?

194. 0:39:21

     It's, it's my understanding that they will, uh, all be turned over to the state, and the, the state will-

195. 0:39:26

     Even, even if they're in the middle of one.

196. 0:39:28

     E- even if they're in the middle of one, um, that the state will pick those up, um, and, and move forward with those. Obviously, um, we didn't put any, uh, defined, uh, rules as it, uh, pertains to GEFA and the monies allocated, um, but as this bill moves through, Mr. Chairman, I would feel certain that if we d- make- need to make sure that all of those costs, costs previously incurred would be included in any reimbursements that need to be m- made on behalf of those, uh, local governments to make sure that they are made whole.

197. 0:40:02

     And again, this is to make sure that we're spending 100% of these funds, uh, on, on remediation and making sure things are taken care of.

198. 0:40:11

     Does a, uh, does a county or city have the right to be- Uh, part of the attorney general's case at the same, at the same time?

199. 0:40:27

     Well, as, uh, being the- their client, um, I don't know from a legal standpoint how much of, you know, the coordination between them would be. Uh, that may be more of a-

200. 0:40:36

     Okay

201. 0:40:36

     ... an attorney question. Um, but I would assume that they would be very involved, uh, in, in the case as it, as it moves forward.

202. 0:40:45

     Okay. Uh, any questions?

203. 0:40:47

     Mm-hmm.

204. 0:40:52

     What number are you, Senator Davenport?

205. 0:40:54

     Uh, 10.

206. 0:40:55

     10? All right. Senator Davenport.

207. 0:40:59

     Yeah. I have some, uh, questions about this. Uh, I know you said this is a coordinated effort, but it sounds like the state is taking over and the attorney general may or may not, uh, pursue this. And if we talking about poison, we talking about these poison chemicals, especially in drinking water.

208. 0:41:19

     Mm-hmm.

209. 0:41:19

     And so, uh, the municipalities are more likely to make the citizens whole, make sure that they get their f- th- make sure that they get a fair share. And if it's going over to the attorney general, I don't see how... Kinda explain, explain that to me again. I-

210. 0:41:40

     Well, I would-

211. 0:41:40

     I mean, these chemicals-

212. 0:41:40

     I would first say-

213. 0:41:41

     ... we have so much, all these-

214. 0:41:43

     Mm-hmm

215. 0:41:43

     ... poison chemicals, and we have so many health issues-

216. 0:41:46

     Uh-huh

217. 0:41:46

     ... I'm only just saying it 'cause I have health issues. But I, uh, you know, I just left Grady this morning, not Grady, but Emory this morning, and the people there-

218. 0:41:55

     Mm-hmm

219. 0:41:55

     ... uh, uh, uh, just have so many health issues. So I'm just concerned about this. Uh-

220. 0:42:01

     That's right. Yep. No, that's a good question. Um, well, I would, I would first say that the, uh, the attorney general is elected by the, the people of Georgia, uh, and they have a obligation to, uh, to make sure that our state is, uh, taken care of. So it would be under their best interest to make sure, uh, all of these cases are taken up in a, in a proper manner, that they can be managed and coordinated together to maybe even, uh, provide more resources as a larger body moving forward.

221. 0:42:32

     Um, again, even in the courts, sometimes the court may take it up today, sometimes they may take it up a long time from today. So, uh, there can be variabilities, uh, in the current system, uh, as well. Uh, but when you pull resources together, when you pull staff together, when you pull everything, multiple cases together, uh, then I think you're gonna have a much better outcome, uh, as a larger group.

222. 0:42:54

     Oh, okay. Uh, uh, okay. Thank you.

223. 0:42:58

     What number? Senator Ginn.

224. 0:43:03

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The, uh, Senator Watson, uh, I know if I go to judici- judiciary and tell them I'm not a lawyer, it costs me $5. But I just want you to know I'm not a lawyer. But I, I think the way that they've got this bill worded, it, it's basically dealing with local governments and, and, uh, uh, whether that be cities, counties in the state. And this money would be used to, uh, enhance the drinking water quality by all of those local governments and water providers. So does it, uh, prevent a class action suit from individuals that feel like they were harmed, the, uh, uh, one-on-one?

225. 0:43:40

     The, uh... Any individual can bring a, a, a individual suit. The, uh... So, uh, basically we're, what we're doing if we pass this legislation is organizing, uh, your local governments to have one concerted front so that we can use that money for environmental remediation. Because PFOS is one of those things that's regulated on EPA, the, uh, and what's gotta happen there to remove that from-

226. 0:44:05

     Mm-hmm

227. 0:44:05

     ... drinking water so that we can meet certain standards, and this would be the coordination tool to do that?

228. 0:44:10

     That's correct.

229. 0:44:11

     Thank you.

230. 0:44:14

     Any other questions? Senator Sims, we're at 10.

231. 0:44:20

     Nine.

232. 0:44:20

     Nine.

233. 0:44:22

     Thank you.

234. 0:44:22

     Senator Sims.

235. 0:44:23

     Thank you very much. I have received numerous letters of concern about this piece of legislation. First of all, when we're speaking of monies, tell me what you're talking about.

236. 0:44:42

     So the, the monies, um, the local governments are, uh, filing claims, um, to, um, obtain resources necessary to come into compliance. Um, now, I don't know if those resources they're asking for are adequate or not. They probably vary based on the local government's, uh, situation. They, they could be requesting, um, enough remediation funds to pay for their, um, resources.

237. 0:45:14

     Uh, they may not. Um, and if they're not, then they have no place to get those resources from but the, the ratepayers. Um, and again, this is part of the coordination with this with EPD being involved and knowing, uh, what really needs to happen and what really needs to be, uh, spent, uh, on making sure that we do what is, uh, right. Um, and so that would be the, the, the resources that, that we're talking about.

238. 0:45:45

     Are we not r- usurping local authority here? Are, are we taking away from local communities? Um, I don't know how diligent or how devoted attorney generals would be, depending on who it's gonna be, uh, we don't know who it's gonna be, uh, would devote to, uh, an issue that deals with local government. I, I'm just not sure how devoted they would be.

239. 0:46:16

     Uh, local, local officials have m- so much more to lose than a person sitting in Atlanta, Georgia, and you calling them your attorney general.

240. 0:46:25

     So-

241. 0:46:26

     The-

242. 0:46:26

     I have real concerns about that.

243. 0:46:29

     Well, and, and, and I do too, Senator. And, and one of the reasons that, that I, I appreciate this coordinated effort is, uh, you and I both represent a, a tremendous amount of rural communities-

244. 0:46:40

     Mm-hmm

245. 0:46:41

     ... that do not have the resources, uh, available to obtain, um, representation to make sure that, uh, they can handle these needs. And so in those cases-

246. 0:46:52

     Mm-hmm

247. 0:46:52

     ... uh, the Attorney General and the EPD and GEFA would be a much better coordinated effort to make sure that they are represented properly and that we solve, uh, those problems, especially in our, uh, rural communities where they may not have the resources available to, to manage those problems.

248. 0:47:11

     Thank you.

249. 0:47:11

     Thank you.

250. 0:47:15

     Senator Ginn, I got one follow-up. I, I know... Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Se- uh, Senator, w- I can see there, there are a lot of people that like to sue. I, I, I watch TV and there's enough commercials on there for everybody. But when I look at it and I said, let's say a city is being sued by their residents saying, "Okay, well, there's PFAS in the water," and you know, you've given me, uh, PFAS. Now I know there's no city that's putting PFAS in the water. They, uh, but what would be the situation where cities now is not acting the, uh, uh, in the litigation against, uh, uh, somebody that, that was responsible for putting PFAS in water, but at the same time they're getting sued by residents.

251. 0:47:59

     So they're, they're preempted if this bill passes from, from taking action, the, uh, as an individual city, but then they, they may be being sued by their water customers or something along those lines. What would you s- suggest there? Are they gonna... I, I, I... I'm not a lawyer, so I, I, uh, don't know if we want to defer to the lawyers on the, uh...

252. 0:48:22

     Thank you, Senator. Um, at this point I am not-

253. 0:48:25

     State your name.

254. 0:48:25

     Sorry. Brittany Hull, Georgia Association of Manufacturers. Um, at this point I do not have a straight answer for you on that. Um, I can't give you a specific example on that, but I will say under this bill, that citizen is still allowed to do that. Um, and be happy to get back with you since this is just a hearing to answer your question on that.

255. 0:48:46

     Yeah, and, and, and if I understand you correctly, in this situation, you know, the citizens are, are, uh, suing the local government and probably in turn the local government's gonna go sue somebody else. And, uh, we're just gonna have, uh, a lot of, a lot of things going on, and much time will pass and, uh, it may eventually get taken up in court and, and eventually resources may flow back down to those citizens who originally had a problem at some point.

256. 0:49:11

     Well, they, uh... I think that's, that's where to me, I, I'd like to see that, you know, uh, I don't think there's any cities that are out there putting PFAS in the water. So it's not, you know, we, we have to, uh, required to put certain disinfectants and so forth in the water, but PFAS is not one of them. So-

257. 0:49:28

     That's right

258. 0:49:28

     ... you know, I'm hoping that, you know, not taking their rights away for a class action suit or an individual suit to somebody that they feel like has harmed their water, you know, they can pursue that. But thank you for your...

259. 0:49:40

     Thank you.

260. 0:49:43

     Senator, would it, the bill, would it have the flexibility of if a county or city wanted to take the lawsuit on their own, they could do so, or if have another option of letting the state handle the lawsuit?

261. 0:50:03

     Not under the current language. They would all be, uh, as a local government, as we have defined in this legislation, they would be reverted to, uh, the state, the state to manage.

262. 0:50:15

     Okay. Any other questions? Would you like to close with any kind of comment or anything?

263. 0:50:22

     I, I'm good, Mr. Chairman. I, I think we've, uh, outlined a, a pretty good bill here and I, I appreciate the, uh, the committee's, uh, questions. And, uh, again, I think we all know how, uh, dangerous, uh, this subject matter is and, uh, we just again wanna make sure that we as a state, um, try to develop more of a coordinated, uh, effort to, uh, you know, at the end of the day protect our, our natural resources and our, and our families, uh, that use them every single day. So thank you for letting me be here.

264. 0:50:52

     Well, I do have one last question. What, um, what does other states do? I mean, do we have any other states that already have this in place?

265. 0:51:01

     Um, I can let Brittany touch on that I believe. Brittany?

266. 0:51:03

     Our... Thank you, Senator. Um, our understanding is Texas and New Jersey do something very similar to what we're, what this bill would do. The allowing that local government's claims to EPD, EPD sends the claims to the Attorney General, the settlement and judgment from that would go to GEFA, and GEFA would dole out the sum of the money to the municipalities to upgrade and remediate their treatment systems.

267. 0:51:29

     Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Senator.

268. 0:51:32

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman-

269. 0:51:33

     Thank you

270. 0:51:33

     ... and members of the committee.

271. 0:51:34

     All right.

272. 0:51:38

     Thank you.

273. 0:51:41

     Next up is, uh, Chairman Hufstetler.

274. 0:51:49

     Thank you. Um, I don't know. Jesse, could you come on up here, Jesse?

275. 0:52:00

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

276. 0:52:01

     This is, uh, Senator, we are working off of LC560559, correct?

277. 0:52:10

     Correct.

278. 0:52:12

     All right. Senator, Chairman, uh, Hufstetler, Senate Bill 538. The floor is yours.

279. 0:52:22

     Thank you, and thank you for the committee's time for hearing today. Um- Certainly as a biologist originally and, and a healthcare provider, I d- I do have concerns of, uh, these chemicals that we have very heavily concentrated in northwest Georgia in our district. Um, but my bill's not really about lawsuits and who's suing who or anything like that. It's just simply that we wanna make sure that all our municipal water systems are aware of any of these that would be sent to them.

280. 0:52:58

     And so it sets some parameters on, on, uh, who this would apply to if you've discharged 25,000 gallons or more, if you're more than 5% of the process stream, and that you have to send them notice if you manufacture one or more of these PFAS, if you produce any byproducts, waste, use it in any industrial processes, any raw materials, commercial products. Um, that's basically, you know, no bills are simple, but basically, that's what we're trying to do, is just to make sure that there's transparency, that people are aware of what's coming to them.

281. 0:53:36

     Now, um, in a conversation, I'll, I'll just give you an example with, with, uh, Oglethorpe Power over the weekend, or maybe it was Friday, I can't remember. They actually take gray water from Dalton Utilities, send it back to them, and they wanted to make sure in whatever language that, that, uh, that doesn't apply to them because they're, they're not re- r- producing anything. They're using it for coolant and sending it right back. They're not making anything. And so if there's any language ... They felt like in one section here it was covered, in the other one they wasn't sure.

282. 0:54:08

     And I know you're not taking testimony today, I think I, I heard on these-

283. 0:54:12

     Right

284. 0:54:12

     ... just a hearing. So I'm just saying for the record, I want you to know that I'd be open to, to making sure that's taken care of. Um, that's, that's my explanation. And this is, uh, Jesse here is with, works on the rivers up there a lot, if you wanna make a few comments-

285. 0:54:30

     Sure

286. 0:54:31

     ... as well.

287. 0:54:31

     Thank you, Senator.

288. 0:54:32

     Is that okay, Mr. Chairman?

289. 0:54:33

     State your name.

290. 0:54:34

     Jesse Dembrion Chapman. I'm the executive director of Coosa River Basin Initiative.

291. 0:54:39

     Okay.

292. 0:54:40

     Thank you, Chairman, uh, and thank you, Senator Hufstetler. Um, we, uh, my organization has worked on this issue for the better part of the last decade. Um, and I, I agree with a lot of the, the previous bill's testimony. We, we desperately need some leadership on this issue. Um, one of the, one of the concerns that we've seen grow across northwest Georgia is this lack of information has led to sluggish response to PFAS contamination being spread across northwest Georgia because these compounds are being sent to publicly-owned treatment works without the operators' knowledge.

293. 0:55:17

     And so as a result, the effluent from these treatment plants that don't have the technology in place to treat them is contaminated, and as are the biosolids that are sometimes land applied after the fact. Um, what this bill is endeavoring to, en- endeavoring to do is shine a little bit of light on that relationship so that, uh, local leaders have public accou- accountability for developing a plan. Um, what, what is no longer working is using these compounds with any plan for how we're going to manage wastewater.

294. 0:55:51

     And so our hope is that with transparency in how these compounds are being sent to the public sewer, that transparency will encourage creative solutions at the local level before we reach lawsuits everywhere in other communities.

295. 0:56:07

     Okay. Any questions?

296. 0:56:15

     Any questions?

297. 0:56:19

     Hearing none, do you want, you wanna close?

298. 0:56:21

     I, I, I just wanna add one thing. You know, my, my city of Rome had to put in a $100 million treatment system here in the last few years to, to, uh, try to help mitigate this, and it is, it's a big issue in our area. And we wanna make sure we know where, where they're all coming from, uh, so that, not that we could sue somebody, but that we can make sure we're catching them all and keeping them out of people's, uh, bodies where, where they've accumulated extremely high levels up there. And that's the intent of the bill.

299. 0:56:52

     I thank you for j- for hearing my bill today, Mr. Chairman.

300. 0:56:55

     Okay. Oh.

301. 0:56:56

     Sorry.

302. 0:56:57

     We, we woke up. Yeah.

303. 0:57:00

     Boy.

304. 0:57:00

     What number, Senator Merritt?

305. 0:57:03

     Number two?

306. 0:57:04

     Number two.

307. 0:57:04

     Yes.

308. 0:57:05

     All right, Senator Merritt.

309. 0:57:07

     Now, it seems like we already have some federal regulations, that this would fall under, under EPA, so how is this different necessarily?

310. 0:57:16

     I could answer that.

311. 0:57:16

     How's this closing the loop?

312. 0:57:17

     I, I would probably have the water expert answer that. He's probably more in tune with the federal regs.

313. 0:57:22

     So, uh, at the federal level, we have, uh, drinking water standards coming online for two compounds. PFAS is a general term that covers thousands of compounds, and the federal regulations do not mandate this disclosure. Other states around us do have this mandated disclosure if the chemicals are gonna be sent to a public treatment work, but in Georgia, we don't, and the federal regulations won't require that either.

314. 0:57:50

     Uh, one follow-up question.

315. 0:57:51

     Yes, ma'am.

316. 0:57:51

     So if, um, if the state is going to be doing the reporting, the P- PFAS reporting, how are we going to determine the accuracy of that? Like, who is going to be in charge of making sure that report is accurate?

317. 0:58:03

     So, uh, in the bill, and, and I don't know the line off the top of my head, in the bill, uh, a principal in the organization that is answering the questionnaire has to sign under penalty of perjury that the information is correct. This bill does not include any new monitoring or testing. It is-

318. 0:58:20

     That's line 118, by the way

319. 0:58:22

     ... it is only an affirmation-

320. 0:58:23

     Okay

321. 0:58:23

     ... of whether or not they are using these compounds and suspect that they're sending them into the public sewer. Um, so we, we tried to make this as zero cost as possible. It's just information sharing.

322. 0:58:33

     One, two. Thank you.

323. 0:58:36

     Senator Sims, seat number nine.

324. 0:58:39

     Thank you, s- Mr. Chairman. Um,

325. 0:58:44

     Senator Hufstetler, um, Rome has spent $100 million for a new treatment plant. Is that what you-

326. 0:58:54

     Correct

327. 0:58:54

     ... indicated? Where did you guys get the money from?

328. 0:58:57

     Well, there, there was, there was money recovered from, from the companies that, that went towards that, uh, system. But, um, a lot of times these are part of splost packages, and to, to, to get it done. We've actually, even before that, there's three rivers, the, the Oostanaula, the Etowah, and the Coosa-

329. 0:59:17

     Mm-hmm

330. 0:59:17

     ... that converge in Rome.

331. 0:59:19

     Mm-hmm.

332. 0:59:19

     And they had switched intakes also from one river to another, even before this treatment system, to try to help out.

333. 0:59:27

     Mm-hmm.

334. 0:59:27

     So there was... I don't know the cost involved in switching to a different river, but, um, it's, it's certainly been an issue up there, and we have a lot of people that get tested and have extremely high levels of these in their system.

335. 0:59:41

     One more question.

336. 0:59:42

     Yes, ma'am.

337. 0:59:43

     I'm so- thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do you have any data on health issues, the frequency of the kinds of diseases, the illnesses that are, uh, most prevalent?

338. 0:59:57

     I can provide that to the committee.

339. 0:59:57

     Do you have anything you can share with us?

340. 0:59:59

     I can provide that to the committee, yeah, and I, I think thyroid's been a big issue up there, uh, multiple times the, the normal rate. Um, and, um, has even, uh, been an issue with the, uh, the, the, uh, Trump supported candidate up there, him personally. Uh, uh, Clay Fuller, that's in a race right now, has talked about it personally affected him and his family.

341. 1:00:24

     Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

342. 1:00:27

     Any other questions?

343. 1:00:31

     Hearing none, thank you, Senator.

344. 1:00:33

     Thank you.

345. 1:00:34

     We have, uh, one more bill, um, that I do not see the senator here.

346. 1:00:41

     I know. She, you want to do her's?

347. 1:00:42

     Senator James.

348. 1:00:44

     You want to do her's?

349. 1:00:45

     Don't believe she's here.

350. 1:00:46

     Oh, it's just about... It's real simple. I think she was coming in. She was coming in earlier.

351. 1:00:54

     She, she been notified.

352. 1:00:56

     She's qualified.

353. 1:00:57

     She's qualified. She said they, she said they said she's qualified.

354. 1:01:02

     She's been on the way up. Well, she better qualify on up here and get that bill in.

355. 1:01:06

     We'll, we'll bring, we'll bring that bill up another day.

356. 1:01:10

     Yes, sir. Okay.

357. 1:01:12

     All right.

358. 1:01:12

     I'm sad.

359. 1:01:13

     All in favor to adjourn, rise.

360. 1:01:25

     One more, one more meeting. And as soon as