Panel hears bill to lift $25 cap on Kansas water-operator exam fees; proponents and rural water groups clash

The Committee on Water heard competing testimony on House Bill 2112, which would remove the statutory $25 cap on water and wastewater operator exam fees and repeal KSA 65-4506, the statute that allows correspondence courses to substitute for classroom instruction.

KDHE and industry groups said lifting the cap would allow the agency to move to standardized, up-to-date exams, expand testing locations and formats, and improve reciprocity with other states. "Eliminating the $25 fee cap will allow us to provide a variety of exam formats, and expand the opportunities for more exam locations," said Kathy Tucker Vogel, representing the Kansas Department of Health and Environment's public water supply program. Vogel said KDHE currently administers 10 separate exams (five drinking water and five wastewater classifications) and in 2024 administered 539 drinking-water exams and 440 wastewater exams.

Industry witnesses endorsed the change. "This necessary and welcome change will enable operators to utilize current relevant standardized quality control and accessible exams," said Katie Miller, director of water services for Kansas Municipal Utilities. John Gilroy, chairman of the Kansas section of the American Water Works Association, said the current exam materials are dated and that a modern, standardized testing platform used by about 20 other states would improve reciprocity and accessibility.

KDHE staff and witnesses described cost ranges and pilot programs. Vogel said third-party exam costs could run from $46 to $104 depending on format and proctoring; she described a pilot under consideration with community colleges (Johnson County Community College and Allen County Community College) to proctor web-based exams closer to operators' homes.

Opponents, led by Darren Martin of the Kansas River Water Association (speaking on behalf of many rural systems), warned the bill could impose new costs and certification burdens on small systems and that national exams may not match Kansas system types. "If this bill passes, KDHE is going to purchase a national exam... KDHE will add a new distribution certificate," Martin said, arguing larger municipalities and many systems above 500 population could end up needing separate certifications for treatment and distribution and additional continuing-education obligations. He urged creation of a statutory advisory committee to review exam content and to pursue electronic testing options for small systems.

KDHE and witnesses emphasized pass-rate data and training gaps. Vogel told the committee that the statewide 2024 pass rate for drinking-water exams was 68.47 percent (small-system pass rate 75.43 percent; higher-class pass rates lower), and that for wastewater exams the overall pass rate was 68 percent (small-system pass rate 80.71 percent; Class 4 pass rate 63.71 percent). Vogel and Gilroy argued more relevant, modern exams and expanded testing opportunities would help recruitment and training for a workforce the witnesses described as short-staffed in many areas.

Representative Smith and others raised concerns about access for very small, rural utilities and the risk that new requirements would force long travel or higher costs for operators. KDHE said customized classifications and pilot electronic testing could limit burdens for very small systems. "None of this is possible with the current $25 fee," Vogel said, describing the agency's plans to convene advisory committees and follow a public regulation process to set exam fees.

Committee members noted a forthcoming legislative post audit of KDHE's program; the chair said the committee would not act on the bill until members have reviewed the audit. The hearing closed with proponents and opponents on the record but without a committee vote; the chair indicated the panel expected to consider bills after the audit and during the next available committee days.