logo
Texas bill seeking to keep toxic 'forever chemicals' off farmland misses key deadline

Texas bill seeking to keep toxic 'forever chemicals' off farmland misses key deadline

Yahoo14-05-2025

A bill aimed at limiting the spread of toxic chemicals on Texas farmland has hit a political wall — missing a key deadline that decreases its likelihood of passage this session.
House Bill 1674, introduced by Rep. Helen Kerwin, R-Cleburne, aims to regulate the use of fertilizers made from treated sewage, also known as biosolids, by requiring regular testing for PFAS — a group of long-lasting, harmful chemicals often called 'forever chemicals.'
Supporters of the bill say it would protect agricultural land and the nation's food supply from dangerous chemicals that don't break down and are linked to health problems including cancer, birth defects, liver damage, and immune system disorders. However, opponents — including wastewater utilities — say the measure lacks clarity and could drive up disposal costs of biosolids without offering other alternatives to get rid of the sludge.
Kerwin, who is in her first legislative session after being elected in November, says the bill is her top priority — it's the first bill she filed after becoming a lawmaker. And the proposal has won bipartisan support in the House, where 75 of her colleagues signed on as either authors or co-authors.
The House Environmental Regulation Committee heard testimony on the bill last week. Although 74 people had signed up to speak on the bill — 34 in support, 33 against, the rest neutral — only about half got the chance after waiting more than 18 hours for the bill to be heard. After two and a half hours of testimony and debate, the committee left the bill pending.
At this point, its chances of advancing further in the legislative process are slim. Monday was the deadline for House bills to advance out of committee, although there are ways to revive bills up to the end of the legislative session.
'We are not out to impact a large industry, but we just want to begin the narrative so that we can start preventing the disposal of these biosolids,' Kerwin said at the hearing.
A number of Texas wastewater plants have contracts with fertilizer companies to take their biosolids. Those companies market the fertilizers as nutrient rich and environmentally friendly and sell them to farmers as a cheaper alternative.
The bill would require companies that manufacture products made from biosolids to test them monthly for certain PFAS before selling them. Products exceeding certain PFAS limits would need to dispose of them through incineration or at a landfill that will accept them. Companies would be required to publish results online, and violators could face criminal penalties.
PFAS contamination is already impacting Texans. The bill comes after at least five farmers in Johnson County sued a fertilizer company alleging that PFAS-contaminated fertilizer made from Fort Worth's municipal waste poisoned their land, killed their livestock, and left them unable to sell anything produced on their farms. County officials issued a disaster declaration earlier this year asking for Gov. Greg Abbott to request federal disaster assistance after dangerous levels of contamination were found on agricultural land.
Dana Ames, the environmental crime investigator who discovered PFAS contamination in Johnson County farmland, testified at the hearing that started at 1 a.m last Thursday.
'We've gotten a lot of calls from a lot of farmers that have felt deceived,' she said. 'They feel like they've been duped and lied to … by the companies that are encouraging them to use the product.'
Nationally, more than half of sewage sludge was treated and spread on land, according to one study; 19 billion pounds of it was spread on American farms between 2016 and 2021, the nonprofit Environmental Working Group found in 2022.
'Across the country family farms like mine are vanishing, not just from economic pressure, but from environmental negligence,' said Karen Coleman, a farmer from Johnson County.
Coleman and her husband Tony took over her father's farm in 2018. The couple didn't spread biosolids-based fertilizer on their land, but they claim storm runoff from a nearby property that used the fertilizer poisoned their land.
Groups representing wastewater treatment operators, water utilities and the chemical industry testified in opposition to Kerwin's bill, warning that the bill would have sweeping consequences for how Texas manages biosolids and create costly logistical challenges for cities and utilities without fully understanding the sources or risks of PFAS.
'[The bill] creates a de facto ban on land application… and would result in significant increases in wastewater rates paid by the public,' said Sarah Kirkle, policy director at the Texas Water Association.
Kirkle and others raised logistical concerns, saying there are only two labs in Texas currently offering PFAS testing for biosolids. She also said there's a lack of short-term storage for biosolids awaiting test results, and uncertainty around landfill space — all of which would make compliance difficult under the bill's timeline.
Rep. Tom Oliverson, R-Cypress and a member of the committee, challenged the idea that land application of biosolids should continue at all — especially given emerging concerns about PFAS contamination.
'It seems so obvious that the solid material left over from wastewater treatment is probably not the best thing to spread on land we're going to grow food on,' Oliverson said. 'How did we ever get to a point where someone thought that was a bright idea?'
Julie Nahrgang, executive director with the Water Environment Association of Texas, pushed back, arguing that biosolids recycling is a long-regulated, widely practiced method supported by the Clean Water Act. She said the real focus should be on identifying and regulating the sources PFAS comes from.
'Let's ensure that [PFAS] do not make their way into the environment, to then be passively received by utilities,' she said. 'Let's understand that before we create legislation that impacts all of Texas and impacts us overnight.'
Oliverson remained unconvinced. 'Just because something's been done historically doesn't mean it's safe,' he said. 'We used to put asbestos in for insulation for a long time and we thought that was a good idea, and then we realized it caused cancer.'
Logan Harrell, representing the Texas Chemistry Council, cautioned that the bill sets a precedent for legislating environmental standards directly, rather than deferring to agencies like the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state's environmental regulator. 'This bill departs from the standard process,' he said.
The hearing highlighted a key regulatory dilemma: no Texas agency currently has both the authority and responsibility to monitor PFAS in biosolids that are applied to land. Until that changes, officials said, Texas will remain limited in its ability to assess risks or enforce protections.
The TCEQ, which permits biosolids disposal, acknowledged that it has not conducted its own PFAS testing in Johnson County. Instead, the agency relied on third-party data provided by the county to draw conclusions. Lawmakers pushed back on that approach.
'You didn't generate any of your own data,' Oliverson said. 'You're just taking their word.'
Sabine Lange, TCEQ's chief toxicologist, said the data the agency reviewed showed PFAS levels below the agency's own limits it has set for soil and water. Those limits, originally developed in 2011, are now being updated to reflect the growing body of toxicology research.
There is a lot of buzz surrounding PFAS — the chemicals are under increasing scrutiny nationwide. Nearly a dozen Texas counties have passed resolutions urging farmers to stop using biosolids on their land until further testing is conducted. And states like Maine, Vermont, Michigan, and New York have already implemented bans or strict testing protocols.
Last year, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit against chemical giants 3M and DuPont, accusing them of misleading the public about the risks of PFAS in various consumer products.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin outlined the agency's plans to address PFAS contamination, such as establishing a liability framework to hold polluters accountable. The announcement also said it would continue soliciting public comment on a risk assessment of biosolids, which found fertilizers that contain treated sewage tainted with PFAS can pose a health risk to people who consume milk, eggs and beef.
And most recently, during a visit to Texas A&M University in College Station, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told WFAA that addressing PFAS contamination was a 'high priority' for him. He said he was aware of the situation in Johnson County and is working with the EPA to come up with solutions like 'ending the production of PFAS.'
Days after the hearing, Kerwin said she remains encouraged, even if the bill doesn't advance this session.
'I think the door is opening where we can address this going forward,' she said, acknowledging that the legislation will likely need to be reintroduced next session.
Disclosure: Texas A&M University has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Castro to seek reelection to state Senate rather than make U.S. House bid
Castro to seek reelection to state Senate rather than make U.S. House bid

Chicago Tribune

time23 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Castro to seek reelection to state Senate rather than make U.S. House bid

State Sen. Cristina Castro, D-Elgin, has announced she will seek reelection to her District 22 post rather than make a bid next year for the Congressional seat being vacated by U.S. Rep. Raja Krisnamoorthi. 'When I first entered public service, it was with a singular goal: to deliver for my community and make life better for the people of the 22nd District, who I've been lucky to call my neighbors for my entire life,' Castro said in a news release. 'Over the past eight years as state senator, I'm proud to have stayed true to that mission — delivering real results and championing the working families of my district. As I think about the future and how I can continue to make the biggest impact, that goal remains my North Star.' In addition to Elgin, Castro's district encompasses all or part of 10 communities in Cook and Kane counties. Her statement came the same week that state Rep. Anna Moeller, D-Elgin, also announced she also would seek reelection to the House instead of making a bid for Congress. Krishnamoorthi, who represents the 8th District in the U.S. House, has announced plans to run in the primary for the seat currently held by U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, who plans to retire. Both he and Durbin are Democrats, as are two other candidates who have announced they're running for the job: Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton and U.S. Rep. Robin Kelly, D-Matteson. Castro, elected to the state Senate in 2016, is the majority caucus whip for the 103rd General Assembly, chair of the Senate Executive Committee, and a member of the Latino Caucus, according to her website biography. She serves on the Appropriations, Energy and Public Utilities, Insurance, Labor and Revenue committees. Prior to being elected to the state Senate, she served on the Kane County Board from 2008 to 2016. Castro holds an associate degree from Elgin Community College and bachelor's and master's degree in business administration from Northern Illinois University.

House GOP Unveils Bill to Claw Back $9.4 Billion in Funding Ahead of Vote
House GOP Unveils Bill to Claw Back $9.4 Billion in Funding Ahead of Vote

Epoch Times

time35 minutes ago

  • Epoch Times

House GOP Unveils Bill to Claw Back $9.4 Billion in Funding Ahead of Vote

House Republicans released their bill on June 6 to rescind $9.4 billion in federal spending ahead of a floor vote next week. The package would include eliminating funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which supports NPR and PBS. The seven-page bill would rescind $22 million from the U.S. African Development Foundation, $15 million from the U.S. Institute for Peace, and billions of dollars in bilateral economic assistance.

Speaker Johnson tries to protect fate of megabill from Trump-Musk crossfire
Speaker Johnson tries to protect fate of megabill from Trump-Musk crossfire

Yahoo

time44 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Speaker Johnson tries to protect fate of megabill from Trump-Musk crossfire

Speaker Mike Johnson is working to keep the focus on the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" on Friday as all eyes remain on President Donald Trump and Elon Musk amid their bitter public feud. Johnson is pushing the House-passed bill that advances Trump's legislative agenda, which is being negotiated in the Senate. Musk has publicly criticized the bill, calling it a "disgusting abomination" and encouraging members of Congress to "kill the bill." Musk's criticism reached a boiling point on Thursday -- ending with an explosive spat between the president and the tech billionaire. On Friday morning, Trump told ABC News that Musk had "lost his mind." MORE: Trump tells ABC Musk 'lost his mind'; 'not particularly' interested in talking to him Johnson was once one of Musk's most powerful boosters on Capitol Hill. Johnson met with Musk repeatedly and would even talk him through legislation by phone. Musk even addressed a meeting of House Republicans in March. Asked by ABC News if it was a mistake to trust Musk, Johnson dismissed the question and turned the focus back to the bill. "I'm not going to engage in this back-and-forth stuff. I don't think the American people care much about Twitter wars. I think they care about us accomplishing our legislative agenda, and the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' does that." Johnson reiterated Friday that he has a job to do -- and it's not to get involved in the Musk-Trump squabble. Still, Johnson engaged in the online battle Thursday, responding to a Musk post criticizing the speaker. MORE: Trump Musk feud explodes with claim president is in Epstein files Several other House Republicans are weighing in on the dispute and whether Musk's influence and strong opinions about the megabill could influence its passage. "I think Elon probably did change the trajectory of this bill two or three days ago when he came out against it because people trust the guy who can land rockets backwards more than they do the politicians," Republican Rep. Thomas Massie said. Massie was one of two House Republicans who opposed the bill when the House voted on it last month. GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene sided with both Trump and Musk on different aspects of the bill -- favoring Musk on the price tag. She said ultimately she thinks the focus should be on passing Trump's agenda. "I don't think lashing out on the Internet is the way to handle any kind of disagreement, especially when you have each other's cell phones," Greene told reporters Friday. "I hope this gets worked out, but I will tell you right now that people are going to be focused on making sure that we get the agenda that we voted for." Republican Rep Troy Nehls, a staunch Trump ally, called for an end to the spat between the president and Musk, saying "enough is enough." MORE: Thune plows ahead to pass Trump's megabill as Musk continues to bash it Despite Musk publicly clashing with the head of their party -- even seeming to suggest the House should impeach the president -- some Republicans didn't go out of their way to bad mouth the billionaire. "Elon Musk can use his funds as he sees fit," Republican Rep. Ralph Norman said when asked if he's worried Musk would primary Republicans. "Again, he's a patriot and if he disagrees, I respect the honesty, really." Republican Rep. Warren Davidson called for unity. "I just hope that people that I care a lot about get along, that they mend, that they patch up their relationship," he said. "It's disappointing to see them arguing in public that way." House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries capitalized on the clash, calling it a "welcome development." "To the extent that the developments of this week will make it more likely that we can kill the GOP tax scam, that's a welcome development," he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store