water quality; testing; on-site, the official text

REFERENCE TITLE: water quality; testing; on-site

State of Arizona

Senate

Fifty-seventh Legislature

Second Regular Session

2026

SB 1445

Introduced by

Senators
Rogers: Finchem

AN
ACT

Amending sections 49-241 and 49-255.01,
Arizona Revised Statutes; RELATING to water quality.

(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Section 49-241, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE49-241. Permit required to discharge

A. Unless otherwise provided by this article, any
person who discharges or who owns or operates a facility that discharges shall
obtain an aquifer protection permit from the director.

B. Unless exempted under section 49-250, or
unless the director determines that the facility will be designed, constructed
and operated so that there will be no migration of pollutants directly to the
aquifer or to the vadose zone, the following are considered to be discharging
facilities and shall be operated pursuant to either an individual permit or a
general permit, including agricultural general permits, under this article:

1. Surface impoundments, including holding, storage
settling, treatment or disposal pits, ponds and lagoons.

2. Solid waste disposal facilities except for mining
overburden and wall rock that has not been and will not be subject to mine
leaching operations.

3. Injection wells.

4. Land treatment facilities.

5. Facilities that add a pollutant to a salt dome
formation, salt bed formation, dry well or underground cave or mine.

6. Mine tailings piles and ponds.

7. Mine leaching operations.

8. Underground water storage facilities.

9. Sewage treatment facilities, including on-site
wastewater treatment facilities.

10. Wetlands designed and constructed to treat
municipal and domestic wastewater for underground storage.

C. The director shall provide public notice and an
opportunity for public comment on any request for a determination from the
director under subsection B of this section that there will be no migration of
pollutants from a facility. A public hearing may be held at the
discretion of the director if sufficient public comment warrants a hearing.
The director may inspect and may require reasonable conditions and appropriate
monitoring and reporting requirements for a facility managing pollutants that
are determined not to migrate under subsection B of this section.  The director
may identify types of facilities, available technologies and technical criteria
for facilities that will qualify for a determination. The director's
determination may be revoked on evidence that pollutants have migrated from the
facility.  The director may impose a review fee for a determination under
subsection B of this section. Any issuance, denial or revocation of
a determination may be appealed pursuant to section 49-323.

D. The director shall annually make the fee schedule
for aquifer protection permit applications available to the public on request
and on the department's website, and a list of the names and locations of the
facilities that have filed applications for aquifer protection permits, with a
description of the status of each application, is available to the public on
request.

E. The director shall prescribe the procedures for
aquifer protection permit applications and fee collection under this
section. The director shall deposit, pursuant to sections 35-146
and 35-147, all monies collected under this section in the water quality
fee fund established by section 49-210 and may authorize expenditures
from the fund, subject to legislative appropriation, to pay reasonable and
necessary costs of processing and issuing permits and administering the
registration program.

F. For aquifer protection permits
issued to a city or a town with a population of one thousand persons or more
but less than ten thousand persons, the director may require bacteriological
sampling not more frequently than four times per month.  a city or town with a
population of one thousand persons or more but less than ten thousand persons
may test BACTERIOLOGICAL samples on-site with testing equipment that is
approved by the United States ENVIRONMENTAL protection agency.

Sec. 2. Section 49-255.01, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE49-255.01. Arizona pollutant discharge elimination system program; rules and
standards; affirmative defense; fees; general permit

A. A person shall not discharge except under either
of the following conditions:

1. In conformance with a permit that is issued or
authorized under this article or rules authorized under section 49-203,
subsection A, paragraph 2.

2. Pursuant to a permit that is issued or authorized
by the United States environmental protection agency until a permit that is
issued or authorized under this article takes effect.

B. The director shall adopt rules to establish an
AZPDES permit program for discharges to WOTUS consistent with the requirements
of sections 402(b) and 402(p) of the clean water act. This program
shall include requirements to ensure compliance with section 307 and
requirements for the control of discharges consistent with sections 318 and
405(a) of the clean water act. The director shall not adopt any
requirement for WOTUS that is more stringent than any requirement of the clean
water act. The director shall not adopt any requirement that
conflicts with any requirement of the clean water act.  The director may adopt
federal rules pursuant to section 41-1028 or may adopt rules to reflect
local environmental conditions to the extent that the rules are consistent with
and not more stringent than the clean water act and this article.

C. The rules adopted by the director under
subsection B of this section shall provide for:

1. Issuing, authorizing, denying, modifying,
suspending or revoking individual or general permits.

2. Establishing permit conditions, discharge
limitations and standards of performance as prescribed by section 49-203,
subsection A, paragraph 8, including case-by-case
effluent limitations that are developed in a manner consistent with 40 Code of
Federal Regulations section 125.3(c).

3. Modifications and variances as allowed by the
clean water act.

4. Other provisions necessary for maintaining state
program authority under section 402(b) of the clean water act.

5. For a city or town with a
population of one thousand persons or more but less than ten thousand persons,
using on-site testing equipment that is approved by the United States
ENVIRONMENTAL protection agency to detect bacteriological MATERIAL.

D. This article does not affect the validity of any
existing rules that are adopted by the director and that are equivalent to and
consistent with the national pollutant discharge elimination system program
authorized under section 402 of the clean water act until new rules for AZPDES
discharges are adopted pursuant to this article.

E. An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to
any administrative, civil or criminal enforcement action brought for
noncompliance with technology-based permit discharge limitations if the
permittee complies with all of the following:

1. The permittee demonstrates through properly
signed contemporaneous operating logs or other relevant evidence that:

(a) An upset occurred and that the permittee can
identify the specific cause of the upset.

(b) The permitted facility was being properly
operated at the time of the upset.

(c) If the upset causes the discharge to exceed any
discharge limitation in the permit, the permittee submitted notice to the
department within twenty-four hours after the upset.

(d) The permittee has taken appropriate remedial
measures including all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or
sewage sludge use or disposal that is in violation of the permit and that has a
reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment.

2. In any administrative, civil or criminal
enforcement action, the permittee shall prove, by a preponderance of the
evidence, the occurrence of an upset condition.

F. Compliance with a permit issued pursuant to this
article shall be deemed compliance with both of the following:

1. All requirements in this article or rules adopted
pursuant to this article relating to state implementation of sections 301, 302,
306 and 307 of the clean water act, except for any standard that is imposed
under section 307 of the clean water act for a toxic pollutant that is
injurious to human health.

2. Limitations for pollutants in WOTUS adopted
pursuant to sections 49-221 and 49-222, if the discharge of the
pollutant is specifically limited in a permit issued pursuant to this article
or the pollutant was specifically identified as present or potentially present
in facility discharges during the application process for the permit.

G. Notwithstanding section 49-203, subsection
D, permits that are issued under this article shall not be combined with
permits issued under article 3 of this chapter.

H. The decision of the director to issue or modify a
permit takes effect on issuance if there were no changes requested in comments
that were submitted on the draft permit unless a later effective date is
specified in the decision. In all other cases, the decision of the
director to issue, deny, modify, suspend or revoke a permit takes effect thirty
days after the decision is served on the permit applicant, unless either of the
following applies:

1. Within the thirty-day period, an appeal is filed
with the water quality appeals board pursuant to section 49-323.

2. A later effective date is specified in the
decision.

I. In addition to other reservations of rights
provided by this chapter, this article does not impair or affect rights or the
exercise of rights to water claimed, recognized, permitted, certificated,
adjudicated or decreed pursuant to state or other law.

J. The director shall establish by rule fees,
including maximum fees, to pay expenses incurred in implementing the AZPDES permit program. Monies collected pursuant to this
section shall be deposited, pursuant to sections 35-146 and 35-147,
in the water quality fee fund established by section 49-210.

K. Any permit conditions concerning threatened or
endangered species shall be limited to those required by the endangered species
act.

L. When developing a general permit for discharges
of storm water from construction activity, the director shall provide for
reduced control measures at sites that retain storm water in a manner that
eliminates discharges from the site, except for the occurrence of an extreme
event.  Reduced control measures shall be available if all of the following
conditions are met:

1. The nearest downstream receiving water is
ephemeral and the construction site is a sufficient distance from a water
warranting additional protection as described in the general permit.

2. The construction activity occurs on a site
designed so that all storm water generated by disturbed areas of the site
exclusive of public rights-of-way is directed to one or more retention
basins that are designed to retain the runoff from an extreme
event. For the purposes of this subsection, "extreme
event" means a rainfall event that meets or exceeds the local one hundred-year,
two-hour storm event as calculated by an Arizona registered professional
engineer using industry practices.

3. The owner or operator complies with good
housekeeping measures included in the general permit.

4. The owner or operator maintains the capacity of
the retention basins.

5. Construction conforms to the standards prescribed
by this section.

M. If the director commences proceedings for the
renewal of a general permit issued pursuant to this article, the existing
general permit shall not expire and coverage may continue to be obtained by new
dischargers until the proceedings have resulted in a final determination by the
director.  If the proceedings result in a decision not to renew the general
permit, the existing general permit shall continue in effect until the last day
for filing for review of the decision of the director not to renew the permit
or until any later date that is fixed by court order.