Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Biosolids Pfas topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Broken Arrow council hears utility warning on proposed biosolids bans, directs staff to draft resolution
Summary
City utilities director warned proposed Oklahoma bills banning or restricting land application of biosolids tied to PFOS/PFOA could sharply raise operating costs for regional wastewater utilities. Council asked staff to draft a resolution urging a science-based, state-level approach and DEQ involvement.
Broken Arrow’s utilities director told the City Council that three pieces of draft state legislation concerning biosolids and PFOS/PFOA chemicals could force immediate changes in how the city and its regional partners handle treated sewage solids, and the council directed staff to draft a resolution conveying the city’s concerns to legislators and state regulators.
The nut of the presentation came from Timothy Robbins, Broken Arrow’s utilities director, who described the proposed measures—referred to in the meeting as Senate Bill 3, Senate Bill 268 and House Bill 1726—as ranging from new chemical limits for biosolids to an immediate moratorium on land application. Robbins said the bills “would mean no more land application across the state immediately, and all permits would be revoked” under the strictest version.
Robbins briefed the council on how biosolids are handled in Oklahoma and nationwide, explained that their plants use dewatering and transport to landfills or land-apply the dried material, and described PFOS and PFOA as “forever chemicals” that bind in the environment and are expensive to remove. He urged a measured, science-based response that involves manufacturers and federal guidance from the Environmental Protection Agency rather than an immediate statewide ban.
During discussion, Robbins and the council flagged several potential operational and financial consequences if a ban or strict limits were adopted without more phased planning. Robbins provided the council with rough cost projections: he said the city’s portion of additional landfill and processing costs could range from about $750,000 to $1,000,000 annually for the local authority and roughly $1.5 million to $2 million for the regional RMUA operation; he said Tulsa’s system would face substantially higher capital and operating costs, referenced at roughly $9 million in one analysis. Robbins also warned of possible lost federal grant support for a planned $48 million composting project tied to USDA funds if sales or distribution of certain biosolids were prohibited.
Council members and staff discussed practical impacts on landfills’ capacity and permitting timelines, agricultural effects (farmers currently use biosolids as fertilizer) and the potential for higher municipal solid-waste tipping fees if landfills must invest in new handling capacity. City Manager Michael Spurgeon said staff could prepare a formal resolution for council consideration and noted the value of urging the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality to take a science-driven role in any new standard-setting.
After discussion, the council moved and seconded direction for staff to draft a resolution summarizing the information presented and advocating for a science-based approach and engagement with DEQ and legislators; the motion passed on roll call.
Council members were clear that they consider PFAS chemicals a serious public-health concern but urged an approach that balances public safety, technical feasibility, and financial impacts on ratepayers and regional partners.
The council asked staff to return with a draft resolution to share with the legislature and state agencies; RMUA (the regional municipal utility authority) will continue coordination with Tulsa and other partners while the bills proceed through the legislative process.
