Committee hears bill to stop default 2.5-person assumption that can reclassify small water systems

House Bill 1615 would bar the Department of Health from using a default residents-per-service-connection number if that assumed figure would reclassify a public water system from group B to group A, witnesses told the Environment & Energy Committee.

Supporters said the bill aims to prevent small, seasonal or sparsely occupied systems from being shifted into a stricter regulatory class — and the higher costs that can follow — based on a statewide default occupancy assumption. An intern for the committee explained that state rules currently treat a system as group A if it has 15 or more service connections, serves an average of 25 or more people per day, or serves 1,000 or more people for two consecutive days. Department of Health guidance currently uses a default estimate of 2.5 residents per dwelling to calculate population served.

Committee staff and sponsors said the measure responds to a real community example in the Key Peninsula where a long-standing 12-connection well system was reclassified under Department of Health calculations. Jack Dunn, president of the South Head Water Association, testified the association has 12 homes, nine full‑time residents and peak summer use around 15 people. He said the DOH's use of the 2.5-person default pushed his system toward group A with what he described as substantially increased costs and paperwork for residents.

"It costs so we start to become group a. It costs us 40 k over a year. Some of us don't have $4,000," Dunn said, summarizing the financial strain a reclassification imposed on his community.

Committee intern Srinandan Ramachandran summarized the bill's technical change: it would prohibit using a default number of people per service connection when that assumption alone would cause a system to be classified as group A rather than group B. He said group A and group B systems are subject to different Department of Health approval standards and testing regimes. When asked whether PFAS testing requirements differ between group A and group B, Ramachandran said he would need to follow up with the Department of Health on the specifics.

Representative Michelle Caldier, the bill sponsor, said the bill grew from constituent concerns where Department of Health occupancy estimates raised a long-standing well system into a higher classification and with it a larger compliance cost burden.

The hearing consisted of a short presentation followed by public testimony and committee questions. Committee members asked staff to clarify which monitoring and testing requirements apply to each group and where the Department of Health bases its default occupancy assumptions.

No committee vote was recorded at the hearing; sponsors closed the public testimony portion and moved on to the next agenda item.

Clarifying details from testimony: the Department of Health currently treats a system as group A if it has 15 or more service connections, or serves an average of 25 or more people per day, or serves 1,000 or more people for two consecutive days (staff presentation). The Department of Health presently assumes 2.5 residents per dwelling for population calculations; the bill would prohibit using that default in cases where it alone changes the system's classification. Jack Dunn reported his system has 12 homes, nine full‑time residents and peak use of about 15 people; he said reclassification can impose roughly $40,000 in additional annual costs on his community and that some residents cannot afford the resulting expenses.

Sources: testimony by Srinandan Ramachandran (committee staff intern), Representative Michelle Caldier (bill sponsor), and Jack Dunn (South Head Water Association).