PA House Consumer Protection, Technology and Utilities — 2026-07-20

but to ensure we have a clear picture of current practices and potential improvements. I appreciate everyone's expertise as we work through these issues. Some housekeeping. I will call testifiers up as panel. Since committee members have received your written remarks in advance, we ask that you summarize your remarks and not read them past three minutes. Each testifier will have three minutes. Staff will be keeping time and will alert you when you have one minute left and then 30 seconds to wrap up your remarks. After everyone on the panel has presented, members may ask questions. And I will start to my left, Representative. Introductions.

Thank you.

State Representative Pat Gallagher representing the 173rd Legislative District here in Philadelphia.

Good morning.

You speak right into the mic. Mm-hm.

Good morning, Chairman Burgos. I thank you for the invitation and members of the committee. I'll defer my qualifications except for mentioning a few things. First of all, my full-time day job on the faculty at Drexel University as a Betts professor of environmental engineering and a distinguished faculty member. And I've been studying microbial risks and control for 45 years. I've served on two national academy panels, one on managing Legionella risk and one on drinking water distribution systems. I just want to bullet point a few key aspects from my written report, which you all have, and I'll also say that I'm speaking solely on my behalf and not on behalf of any organization that I happen to be a member of. Legionella cases are rising. We certainly know that. It's a shared responsibility between a water utility and customers and users of the water. Under federal law, a water utility's responsibility stops at the property line. And what happens after water goes into a particular property is the responsibility of the property owner. Inside property pipes, water heaters, air conditioning units, showers, etc., there's a lot of potential for the water to sit warm, stagnant, and multiply. And it multiplies naturally under warmer conditions. And then when that water is aerosolized in various uses people become exposed I would leave you with one analogy Think of the electric grid The electric utility is responsible providing power to the individual property. But if an individual homeowner or office owner or commercial renter has a poor electrical outlet, has frayed wires, has malfunctioning appliances, that's not the responsibility of the electric utility. Under a shared responsibility model, both parties need to get their act together. There is a very recent study of 5,000 federal buildings that showed that there is no relationship between the disinfectant residual coming into a property and the presence of Legionella within the building. There's a disconnect. What happens in the building plays the dominant role rather than the residual going into the building. I think what the bill gets right is the requirement for high-risk facilities to have a water management plan. That's where the science says the fight belongs. I urge you to lean in more to that property-level water management portion of the bill, perhaps sharpening it by encouraging the relevant state agencies to develop clear numerical action levels for occurrence of Legionella in various facilities, and those can be science-based. And finally, remove the strategy of turning up chlorine statewide at the utility level. Thank you.

Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Burgos and members of the committee, and thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony at this important hearing regarding water management systems and prevention of Legionnaire's disease. My name is Dr. Hong Chung. I am a faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania-Perlman School of Medicine, as well as Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. I also was former state medical director for the state of Maryland, and I also own Cogency Medical, an organization that investigates waterborne disease outbreaks and other environmental outbreaks. I do serve on the Board of Alliance to Prevent Legionnaires' Disease, a national nonprofit public health advocacy group dedicated to reducing the occurrence of Legionnaires' Disease by promoting education, research, and best practices for comprehensive management and policy to ensure water quality. Legionnaires disease is a leading cause of waterborne illness and deaths in our country. And 50 years ago here in this city we found out and really learned about Legionnaires. But despite the 50 years, the incidence has continued to rise. It's gone up five and a half fold since the year 2000. I think the bill is an excellent bill. It's an excellent bill. It's a comprehensive approach to that focus on Legionnaires' prevention. There are several key steps. One is to ensure water quality throughout the distribution system with monitoring and management of the water and adequate disinfectant levels. Two is early warning for planned disruptions or early alert for unplanned disruptions that can dislodge biofilm and Legionnaires from our system Third is a comprehensive water management plan for certain buildings of certain sizes, occupancy and or equipment. However, for those outside of that requirement, such as homes and homeowners and residential communities, there is no water management plan. And that's where the insurer, having to ensure the adequate water quality is important. I think public education, health care provider awareness is important for early detection. and to have a high index of suspicion when there are at-risk events that are happening in the community. I think there are many factors that cause Legionella bacteria to proliferate in the public water distribution system, such as biofilms, that's in-house the bacteria and feed the bacteria, as well as water temperature, stagnation, disinfectant levels, etc. And I think this bill addresses many of the at-risk points for the risk of legionella. As you may or may not know, a vast majority of these cases are not outbreak related. They are sporadic that happen out in our community. And ORCAS in 2018 did a study that talked about the various sources of the infection. And really, upstream management is the way to go. I just want to close with the story of John Snow, the father of epidemiology, and who found it that cholera was a waterborne disease. What happens is, once he investigated, he took the pump handle off the town water. He could have gone to every home, every restaurant, every building, every piece of equipment to try and manage it, but he took the pump handle off so that he interrupted the distribution of the contaminated water downstream. And I think this bill helps us do that. Thank you.

Sorry. Good morning, members of the Community Protection Technology and Utilities Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Kristina Zolenic, and I'm a waterborne epi research associate at the Pennsylvania Department of Health. My role centers on tracking, analyzing, and investigating pathogens that compromise public health through water exposure. My goal today is to discuss some of our numbers from our 2021-2023 report and then walk through how PADOH protects the public from Legionella. So looking at the data from our recent multi-year report, it shows that Legionella remains a significant and persistent public health burden in Pennsylvania. Between 2021 and 2023, Pennsylvania recorded 1,231 confirmed or probable cases of Legionella infection, averaging around 410 cases per year. For perspective, Pennsylvania's annual infection rate consistently hovers at nearly double the national average reported by the CDC. These counts are similar to other mid-Atlantic states who report some of the highest counts in the country. PROVISIONAL STATE DATA SHOWS THAT THIS BURDEN CONTINUES WITH 337 cases in 2024 and then 450 cases in 2025 And I just briefly walk you through how we investigate our cases Once a case is reported to us, we begin our process of mapping out where exposure history occurred. So in the 14 days prior to illness, which is the incubation for Legionella, We look at workplace settings, occupational exposures, travels, day trips, any sort of exposures with high-risk water features, hot tubs, decorative fountains, misting systems, respiratory equipment. We also look at recent visits to high-risk settings like dental facilities, hospitals, long-term care facilities, as well as home water details and also information on their residential water source. Once we have all of these histories, we start to look at patterns. and we try to determine areas where we find cases clustered together. And if that occurs, we work with the facility to work with an environmental consultant who then helps with a sampling plan. If we're investigating a building that receives water from a public water supplier, we immediately loop in the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, and then they work with the public water supplier to look at treatment performance, look at distribution lines, and then address any issues on the utility side. As far as House Bill 2085, we share the committee's goal in protecting Pennsylvania from Legionella, and we hope that some of our investigative history helps provide useful context on how Legionella behaves inside building water systems. In the majority of the outbreaks that we've successfully identified the source or the exposure, the root cause has been poor maintenance inside the building itself. We routinely trace cases back to poor, irregular, or non-existent maintenance of hot tubs, ice machines, and cooling towers, as well as building renovations that leave water stagnant in unused spaces. Public health data consistently shows that Legionella growth is primarily driven by the conditions inside a building's own plumbing network. Another note is that House Bill 28 places new operational expectations on the department, and the volume of work proposed would exceed our current capacity, and we would need to increase staffing dedicated to this program. Thank you.

Thank you. Chairman Burgos and the committee. And thank you for inviting me to participate in the meeting and provide my opinions, which are presented in detail and supported by the peer-reviewed science in my statement. I've been working on Legionella and Legionnaire's disease since January of 1980 for over 46 years. I've done animal model development to examine Legionnaire's disease pathology, waterborne disease outbreak investigations, method development and testing to improve detection of Legionella pneumophila in water samples, standards development through ASHRAE, training on water management planning, and basic research. I was a principal investigator on the National Legionella pneumophila occurrence study referenced by several of the other participants today. This is the third time I've testified before a Pennsylvania legislative committee in the last decade. The reason I think that legislation has not moved forward is because it's multifold. The issue is complex because Legionell is found in drinking water and it's easy to say let's focus on drinking water. drinking water quality to solve the problem. However, increased regulation of drinking water will not reduce Legionnaire's disease cases. The weak link in the chain from source to tap is after the water leaves the municipal supply and enters individual buildings. The focus needs to be on these building water systems. Control of Legionella needs to happen at that last leg of the chain at the point of use. As part of my consulting practice, I've worked with clients across the U.S. and Canada on development and implementation of water management plans for management of Legionnaire's disease. This is because buildings and their associated plumbings are the source of Legionnaire's disease. The focus of any legislation to protect public health needs to be directed toward water management planning. Current drinking water regulations manage Legionella pneumophila through treatment and best management practices. Our research supports this. This is why the U.S. CDC, the World Health Organization, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the U.S. EPA, OSHA, the European Union, and the Plumbing Manufacturers International direct building owners to develop water management plans. Since 2017, CMS has required health care facilities that receive federal funding to develop water management plans to minimize Legionnaire's disease in hospitals and health care facilities with vulnerable populations. Additional drinking water regulations would not reduce Legionnaire's disease. The water community, including the AWWA, the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, and the Water Research Foundation has played an active role in research and education on Legionnaire's disease management. And water utilities across the U.S. are encouraged to partner with their customers in managing water quality from source to the building. Thank you for the opportunity to provide my comments. And I'm happy to, as a new Pennsylvania resident about a year ago, I'm happy to volunteer to be involved in working with you on this topic going forward.

Thank you, Chair Burgos. And thank you all very much for your testimony this morning. I really appreciate it. I'm old enough to remember Legionnaire's disease here in Philadelphia. And my father is a pulmonologist who treated many patients with the disease as well. So I guess my first question is going to be, and I know there's currently a cluster. I think they're investigating in New York State. I think I heard about that on the news. So obviously it can happen in many different places. But I guess my first question is, you mentioned a lot of institutional facilities, like hospitals and nursing homes and things like that. Is it most often found in large facilities like that, or do you see it in residential homes as well? I'm not sure who wants to answer that.

It's for anybody. Who knows the answer?

Thank you for that. And then I guess my other question is around coordination. So in Delaware County we have a new health department So how do you coordinate with the local health departments if you have a you know you suspect a case I think you noted that you don't wait for there to be a cluster. You could even, you know, start when there's one case. So how do you work with the local health departments? I'd be interested to know that.

Just one quick comment. The Legionella or Legionnaires disease is reportable, so it automatically gets reported to the health department, and that's where it triggers a review and evaluation if necessary, especially if it is considered an outbreak situation. However, in the vast majority of them, they are not investigated because they're sporadic, and whether they're in the homes or some other equipment or hot tubs or even dental sprays and things like that at the dental office, those are some potential sources that need to be investigated during an outbreak.

Thank you, Mr. Sherman. Just a real quick question. When an outbreak occurs and is reported, is that outbreak typically centralized to one facility, one institutionalized facility, or can it be spread across several different complexes or residential homes or something else?

Okay, thank you for that. And one more question. How much does aging infrastructure play into this? Because I know New York City was mentioned. New York City's flooding. There's pipes that are about 150 years old. There's just a major pipe burst in California that was about 80 years old. I know Philadelphia is sitting on a lot of relatively ancient infrastructure. Does that play a role? Does that help this bacteria grow?

But are you referring to the actual, like, distribution, or are you referring more to, like, an HVAC system in a building, like an aging HVAC system?

Okay.

Representative Borowski.

And they still should. The mortality is up there. The typical mortality is about 10%, but if you have certain susceptibilities, whether you're in immunocompromised or lung disease and elderly, now they defined it as age 50 or higher. I'm so sad about that. But smokers and things like that, those would be at risk for legionnaires it doesn't attack everybody it only has about a five percent attack rate and so that's why it's more difficult to kind of investigate and that's why you'll hear the confirmed cases the confirmed findings it's really we're here for prevention the confirmed findings are so such a tiny fraction of the information that we know so so that's why prevention is so much more important

Real quick, Dr. Clancy, I just want to say welcome to the Commonwealth. It's good to have you. Christina, I'm so sorry, because I feel like we've been – pronounce your last name for us.

Zwellenik, okay. I just want to – as somebody with a difficult name, I just want to make sure to get it right. So you mentioned, did I hear you correctly, 1,231 confirmed or probable cases over the time period of? 2021 to 2023. Okay. And did you say this is double? What's the reference? You made a reference to a rate that the CDC reports. It's double national averages. Okay. I could find a more eloquent way to say this, but like, why?

is increased awareness, like more doctors know about in their reporting?

Could be? Okay. Okay, thank you.

MS. Good morning. Chairman Burgess, Chairman Metzger, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of House Bill 2085 and the critical public health goal of preventing Legionnaires' disease. My name is Charlotte Katzenmoyer. I'm the CEO of Capital Region Water. the municipal wastewater and stormwater utility serving Harrisburg and surrounding communities. Capital Region Water shares our commitment to public health. Providing safe, high-quality drinking water is one of our most important responsibilities. And public water systems across Pennsylvania already operate under extensive federal and state requirements. We also recognize the seriousness of Legionnaires' disease and the need for strong science-based prevention strategies. However, Legionella is fundamentally a building water system issue. The bacteria grow in warm, stagnant water and biofilm inside building plumbing, hot water systems, cooling towers, humidifiers, decorative fountains, and other equipment that aerosolizes water. Public water systems do not control or have legal authority over these building-specific conditions. We cannot enter private buildings, manage water temperatures, clean cooling towers, remediate biofilm, or implement facility-level water management plans. Last week in New York City, you referenced that, two deaths linked to Legionnaire's disease illustrate this point. The Health Department traced the outbreak to 76 building cooling towers and ordered building owners to immediately clean and disinfect those cooling towers. The response focused directly on the equipment where Legionella grows and is released, not on the public water system. That is the model Pennsylvania should follow and aligns responsibility with control. House Bill 2085 moves in the opposite direction. It imposes broad new statutory duties on public water systems, including fixed disinfectant residuals, Legionella-focused distribution system plans, reporting, customer notifications, and penalties. Mandating disinfectant residuals in statute is especially concerning to public water purveyors. Disinfection requires careful technical judgment to balance microbial control, water age, corrosion control, taste and odor, infrastructure conditions, and compliance with disinfection byproduct limits. Increasing chlorine levels can also create regulated disinfection byproducts associated with long-term health risks and known carcinogens. These decisions belong to the scientific and regulatory process, not in statute. A more effective policy framework would maintain public water system accountability for treatment, distribution integrity, regulatory compliance, and cooperation with public health agencies, while focusing prevention where risk actually develops, building water management programs. for hospitals, nursing homes, schools, large institutions, buildings and facilities with cooling towers or complex plumbing. Pennsylvania should support recognized standards such as ANSI or ASHRAE 188, provide technical guidance and funding for building owners, and strengthen coordination among DEP, the health department, water systems and facility operators. Legionnaires disease prevention deserves serious science-based action. House Bill 2085, as drafted, assigns responsibility to public water systems for building-level risks that they cannot control and may divert resources away from the systems and facilities where prevention must occur. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to oppose House Bill 2085 and pursue a targeted framework that aligns responsibility with control, protects ratepayers from unnecessary costs and focuses on building-level water management where Legionella risk most commonly develops. Thank you, and I would be pleased to answer any questions.

MR. The overwhelming majority of Legionnaires disease outbreaks are traced to building water systems or cooling towers, not failures of municipal water utilities. Any legislation must address that reality. If evidence demonstrates the utility delivered inadequately disinfected water or otherwise failed to meet its obligations in a matter that materially contributed to any outbreak, it would already be subject to appropriate regulatory scrutiny and accountability. Make no mistake, Legionnaire's disease is the enemy of every one of us. It's not a partisan issue. It does not distinguish between lawmakers, regulators, utilities, building owners, or citizens. It does not care about titles, jurisdictions, or good intention. It exploits vulnerabilities where they exist, and when it does, families suffer. Lives are forever changed, and communities lose confidence in the institutions they depend upon. That is why we cannot afford complacency. Every day, millions of Pennsylvanians rely on us to protect one of life's most essential resources. That responsibility is both an honor and an obligation. Leadership is not demonstrated by resisting change. It's demonstrated by embracing solutions that make our system safer, stronger, and more resilient. This legislation is not about politics. It's about people. The intent behind House Bill 2085 is thoughtful and necessary. Its foundation is built upon sound management principles. As this legislation moves forward, we should continue to refine its language, ensuring that it provides clear accountability while preserving the operational effectiveness needed to protect public health House Bill 2085 represents an important first step towards ensuring that accountability exists where preventable failures occur Accountability is not about assigning blame It about creating clarity It's about ensuring that those with authority to prevent harm also accept the responsibility to do so. Responsibility without authority is ineffective. Authority without accountability is unacceptable. Good governance requires all three to work together. Public trust is one of our most valuable assets. It cannot be demanded. It must be earned every single day. It is strengthened when we acknowledge this, learn from failures, and take meaningful action to prevent them from happening again. As water professionals, we understand the tremendous responsibility placed upon us. We must not resolve one problem by creating another. At its core, this bill embraces the timeless principles of effective leadership, responsibility, authority, and accountability. These are not merely management concepts. They are the foundation of every organization worthy of the public's trust. If not us, who? If not now, when? Progress has never come from standing still. It comes from recognizing challenges, accepting responsibility, and having the courage to act before tragedy compels us to. House Bill 2085 is a constructive, balanced, and necessary step forward. I encourage my fellow wooded professionals to engage thoughtfully in that refinement, and I respectfully urge this body to support legislation that advances accountability, strengthens public confidence, and better protects the people we are all sworn to serve. Let us lead with integrity. Let us strengthen public trust. Thank you.

Good morning, Chairman Burgos and members of the committee and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and provide testimony on House Bill 2085 concerning Legionnaires' disease risk management. I'm Dr. Christopher Crockett. I serve as the Vice President and Chief Environmental Safety and Sustainability Officer for Essential Utilities, which includes Aqua America, which serves over 1,450 water systems in eight states. Of those, 113 water systems are located right here in Pennsylvania, serving an estimated 1.5 million Pennsylvanians. I'm also a lifetime Pennsylvania resident and a Philadelphia resident as well. So House Bill 2085, we really believe that it should focus on the water management part, and we support that. Water management, premise plumbing, cooling towers, health care facilities, and other management systems where Legionella risk is most effectively controlled. However, Essential cannot support the bill in its current form because the provisions directed at public water suppliers are overly prospective, scientifically unsupported in key respects, potentially conflicting with Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, drinking water regulations, and unlikely to produce a measurable reduction in Legionnaires' disease risk. Instead, Essential respectfully recommends the committee amend House Bill No. 2085 to focus on the most effective risk reductions, which are building water management systems, and work with the Pennsylvania Department of Health and PADEP to review what opportunities should happen with drinking water systems. So, I think you've heard a lot of the testimony today so far. there's been numerous research projects one that was quoted by dr clancy one that was quoted by the other representative of thousands of gsa buildings the conclusion is a prescribed numeric number like that proposed in 20 hospital 2085 is not effective it not to make an analogy one tylenol is fine but 10 tylenols is not good for you same thing here we trying to balance the risk between having an adequate control of legionella bacteria and making sure that the chlorine is removing it with not creating additional long-term cancer risk caused by increased disinfection by products in the distribution system so the scientific literature out there says that the current regulation at 0.2 milligrams per liter seems to be the right number past that there's a diminishing return and no numerical improvement so blindly picking a numerical number is not the best method with that being said i do want to say that we respectfully recommend the committee to amend the bill and retain the provisions that address water building management while striking the substantially or or substantially revising the public water supplier revisions that are duplicative or conflicting or unsupported by the current scientific evidence. We include very specific recommendations to the bill language in my written testimony. This approach would serve the bill's public health intent while ensuring that any new drinking water requirements are science-based, technically feasible, cost-effective, and consistent with Pennsylvania's existing regulatory framework. In closing, essential shares, the committee's goal of reducing Legionnaire's disease risk and protecting public health. and we believe and we respectfully urge the committee to amend House Bill 2085 to focus on these building level controls, remove duplicative and conflicting public water system mandates and rely on the PADEP and PADOH expertise in the Commonwealth established regulatory review process. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony. We look forward to working with Chairman Burgos, committee members, PADEP and PADOH and other stakeholders to advance practical science-based regulations.

Good morning, Chairman Burgos and committee members. I'm Ben Jewell, Commissioner of the Philadelphia Water Department, and I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on House Bill 2085 regarding Legionnaires' disease risk management. I recognize the serious health impacts Legionella can have, and nothing in this testimony should be interpreted to minimize those impacts on individuals and families. However, transferring proactive obligations from building owners and operators to the Commonwealth's drinking water systems will have significant detrimental impacts, several of which are outlined in my testimony. For some background, the Philadelphia Water Department is the largest municipal water utility in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, providing 1.6 million residents with safe drinking water and more than 2.2 million people with reliable wastewater and stormwater collection and treatment services. The department uses free chlorine as the primary disinfectant, and monochloramine as secondary disinfectant through the distribution system and at all three of our water treatment plants. PWD staff members work steadfast 24-7, 365 to ensure water leaving our plants and throughout our distribution system maintains adequate monochloramine residual to prevent bacteria growth and ensure the water delivered to our residents, businesses, and visitors is safe. PWD opposes House Bill 2085's proposed requirements for public water systems. The bill would establish numerous requirements that PWD believes would result in significant costs to Philadelphians and all Pennsylvanians, establish poor precedent, be ineffective in achieving its stated purpose, and result in negative impacts on PWD's ability to provide safe drinking water. PWD supports efforts to improve management of Legionella in building water systems, primarily through establishing individual building water management plans and training In my written submittal we have prevented several key concerns with House Bill 2085 These include concerns about water quality standards such as treatment techniques, being mandated in legislation rather than following a formal regulatory process. The effectiveness of the proposed requirements on public water systems to provide any additional risk reduction from Legionella growth compared to the existing requirements of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. Significant costs expected to implement required drinking water infrastructure updates to meet the proposed requirements. Operational and safety concerns for successfully operating and maintaining required drinking water infrastructure. The unintended consequence of the proposed minimum disinfectant residual on disinfectant byproducts. And the feasibility of planning, designing, constructing, and commissioning the required drinking water infrastructure in the timeline set forth in the bill. PWD takes significant pride in providing Philadelphia residents, businesses, and visitors with safe drinking water. The requirements for public water systems proposed in House Bill 2085 may result in harmful water quality side effects while not effectively providing additional risk reduction for Legionella in premise plumbing and would increase financial burden on the Philadelphia. Due to these reasons, we again respectfully request that House Bill 2085 not advance containing the additional burdens on public water systems, including in Philadelphia. This concludes my testimony. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman. Chairman Burkos, sponsor Representative Izzy, and members of the Committee on Consumer Protection, technology, and utilities. My name is Stephen Chintzman, and I am the Vice President of Government Affairs for the Pennsylvania Apartment Association, representing over 310,000 units and 316 property management companies across the Commonwealth. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to testify today on HB 2085. Protecting the health and safety of Pennsylvania residents remains a top priority for the Pennsylvania Apartment Association and the multifamily housing industry. PAA supports the bill's public health objectives and appreciates the sponsor's commitment to preventing Legionella-related illness. At the same time, we believe several targeted amendments would improve the legislation by ensuring compliance requirements are practical, risk-based, and appropriately allocate responsibility among all parties involved. One of PAA's primary concerns is that the bill takes a broad, one-size-fits-all approach to water management. By applying its requirements to all buildings meeting the criteria outlined in ASHRAE Standard 188, the legislation could encompass apartment communities, senior housing, student housing, mixed-use developments, and other residential properties regardless of their actual risk profile. Legionella risk varies considerably depending on factors such as building age, plumbing design, water temperatures, occupancy patterns, the presence of cooling towers and whether a facility provides health care services. We respectfully suggest that compliance requirements be tailored to demonstrate risk rather than based solely on building classification or size. The legislation would also establish significant new compliance obligations for housing providers, including developing comprehensive water management programs, conducting ongoing sampling and testing, maintaining extensive documentation, updating management plans, responding to inspections, and satisfying new reporting requirements. For many owners, particularly those providing affordable in workforce housing, these responsibilities will require the assistance of environmental engineers, industrial hygienists, water consultants, and certified laboratories resulting in substantial reoccurring operational costs. We encourage consideration of implementation approaches that achieve the bill's objectives while recognizing the operational realities facing housing providers. Additionally, mandatory testing raises important liability considerations. Because Legionella bacteria naturally occur in many water systems, a positive test result alone does not necessarily indicate unsafe conditions or negligence. Without appropriate legal safeguards, testing results could be used in litigation even where no illness or outbreak has occurred. PA believes that legislation should recognize that owners who implement and maintain industry-accepted water management programs have exercised reasonable care and should receive appropriate legal protections for acting in good faith. To strengthen the legislation while preserving its important public health goals, PA respectfully recommends consideration of the following amendments. Establish a statutory safe harbor providing that housing providers who adopt and maintain ASHRAE compliant water management program are presumed to have exercised reasonable care. Limit mandatory water management program requirements to facilities presenting a higher risk of Legionella exposure, such as hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, 65-plus senior communities,

Thank you, Chairman, and I want to thank everybody in the panel for their testimony. Since PA currently requires a 0.2 ppm chlorine level, can you expand on how such a modest increase to 0.5 ppm would be problematic? Would the current infrastructure include booster stations throughout the system be able to support the slight increase? It's not directed at anybody specific.

Thank you.

Oh, yeah. Sure, sure. Oh, yeah.

Good morning. My name is Matt Corson. I'm with American Water. Thank you, Parn, for the oversight there.

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for the testimony. Building off the last question and the comments, that amount of chlorine, I mean, throughout an entire system, would that be like drinking cool water? Like if I had turned on a tap or something, I'm basically drinking water from my pool?

are saved and everyone's healthy and i'm just going to say very quickly a lot of this deals with plumbing in the state of pennsylvania and we do not license plumbers in pennsylvania i can go go out and get an insurance policy today, I can go to a neighboring municipality in Bucks County, pay the fee, and then I am allowed to be a plumber in that municipality when I barely know how to be a lawyer, let alone turn off the water to my toilet. So that's something else that we need to be looking at. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you all very much for your testimony. I certainly appreciate stakeholders that come with useful suggestions to legislation and how to perhaps enhance or improve it, even though we may not always agree on that. But this panel, I think, very much represents what one of our first panelists said, that this is a shared responsibility between property owners and the water systems. So I was interested to hear from everybody's perspective, perspective and I thank you for that. I guess one of my main questions and I will pose this to I think the gentleman representing the apartment association. How do you ensure that building plumbing avoids stagnation? Like how do you do that and what would do you have like a conservative estimate on what that might look like if things needed to be repaired?

Okay. And then I guess my other question is, and I'm very interested in certainly hospitals and our health care facilities, our nursing homes, how do you all coordinate? I think this is, I think, posed to the water companies. How do you coordinate with those types of facilities when it comes to the water that's coming into those facilities? What is happening? And do you ever have an opportunity to identify where there might be concerns and share that?

I think you bring up a really important point, and it goes in conjunction with some of the other questions and comments that were made. In Reading, we service 110,000 people. We have our Reading system, and I have three small systems. Each one of those is handled independently, depending on the regulators. But in the city, we don't have a county health department. We don't have a city health department. and then developers come in and they want to develop and to maybe save construction costs, they want to do plumbing their own way. We have absolutely no control over that. If the plumbing inspector says that's satisfactory, that's what happens despite all our objections. And to give you an example, they want to put a reservoir on top of the building so that they can have a smaller service in and save $500 or $1,000 a month. We have no say in that. All we can do is sit down with them and encourage the heck out of them and say, you're making a big mistake because the longer water sits, the less potable it becomes. It's just a fact. Just a follow-up question on that. Do you feel that this legislation might help with addressing those issues? Do you feel like there needs to be more strict standards? Or there needs to be, on the local levels, more available oversight? The legislation misses it completely. Thank you all for your testimony.

Chairman Burgos, Representative Smith-Wade L., members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity today to testify on House Bill 2085 and on the urgent need to strengthen Pennsylvania's approach to preventing Legionnaire's disease. My name is Bill McQuaid. I've been a resident of Pennsylvania. for over 50 years. I've been a professional I've been a regional engineer in Pennsylvania for 28 years. I am a fellow and the immediate past president of the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, Air Conditioning Engineers, a global technical society with more than 55,000 members in over 130 countries. And I serve on the board of the Alliance to Prevent Legionnaire's Disease. I'm here because Legionnaire's Disease is a preventable public health threat. And Pennsylvania has an opportunity to take a thoughtful, science-based, and proactive step forward. This issue has particular meaning here in Philadelphia. Nearly 50 years ago, Legionnaire's disease was identified after a tragic outbreak connected to the American Legion Convention in the city, just down the street from this very location. Since then, we have learned how Legionella grows, how people are exposed, and how risk can be reduced. But continued cases show that knowledge alone is not enough. We need systems, we need accountability, and consistent prevention practices. Legionnaire's disease is a severe form of pneumonia caused when people inhale water droplets containing Legionella bacteria. It is not spread person to person, and it is not caused by drinking a glass of water unless it's aspirated into the lungs. It is a waterborne disease that becomes a respiratory disease when contaminated water is aerosolized or aspirated and breathed into the lungs. The consequences can be serious. Older adults, smokers, people with chronic lung disease, and people with weakened immune systems face higher risk. Roughly one in ten diagnosed cases is fadible, and the fatality rate can be higher among vulnerable populations. Most cases are not part of highly visible outbreaks. They are individual or sporadic cases. They may not generate headlines or trigger a full environmental investigation, but collectively they represent the real burden of the disease. CDC-reviewed outbreak data reinforces the importance of water systems among drinking water-associated outbreaks reported from 28 states between 2015 and 2020. Eighty percent were linked to public water systems. Most were biofilm-associated, and Legionella caused the disproportionate share of severe outcomes, including nearly all hospitalizations and deaths in those outbreaks. This is why prevention cannot be limited after an outbreak. The precautionary principle is relevant here. When a preventable harm is serious, and practical risk reduction steps are available, we should not wait for perfect certainty or a crisis before acting. Historically, many Legionella policies have focused too narrowly on a few familiar pieces of equipment, such as cooling towers. Those systems matter, but prevention cannot stop there. Any water-using system or equipment in a building that can create a spray, mist, bubbles, droplets, or aerosols need to be identified, evaluated, and managed. At the same time, the building is only one part of a larger water pathway. Legionella risk must be managed from the source, through public water distribution systems, into buildings or home plumbings, and finally to the fixtures and equipment where people can be exposed That is what we mean by source approach should I stop or keep going You can keep going Thank you. Water can either enter a building or a home with low disinfectant residual, biofilm in parts of the distribution system, or after disruptions that deserve pipes and change water quality. Inside the building, stagnation, warm temperatures, low flows, dead legs, poor commissioning, and inadequate maintenance can allow bacteria to grow. Exposures can occur through showers, faucets, decorative water features, hot tubs, humidifiers, cooling towers, and other aerosol-generating devices. That is why public water systems cannot be treated as separate from building water safety. Municipal water quality, disinfectant residuals, biofilm, pressure changes, treatment changes, main breaks, constructions, storms, and flooding can all influence the risk that ultimately appears inside the buildings. The practical lesson is simple. A policy that starts only at the point of exposure is already too late. Source-to-tap prevention gives communities a better chance to reduce illness before it occurs. ASHRAE Standard 188 provides a nationally recognized framework for managing Legionella risk in building water systems. It asks building owners and operators to understand their systems, identify where risks exist, establish control measures, monitor performance, and take corrective action and document the process. ASHRAE Guideline 12 provides practical guidance for reducing Legionella risk, and ASHRAE Standard 514 expands the framework to address physical, chemical, and microbial hazards in building water systems. These consensus-based tools allow Pennsylvania to build upon proven knowledge rather than to start from scratch. House Bill 2085 moves Pennsylvania in the right direction because it recognizes that prevention requires shared responsibility. Water utilities, building owners, and public health agencies each influence part of the water pathway. A precautionary approach asks each to identify foreseeable risks, apply practical controls, communicate clearly, and improve the system before an illness occurs. For utilities, that includes maintaining appropriate disinfection residuals, managing systems to mitigate Legionella risk, and communicating disruptions. For building owners, it means implementing a water management program. For public health agencies, it means strengthening surveillance, investigations, education, and coordination. The Flint, Michigan outbreak, the Illinois Veterans Home in Quincy outbreak, and investigations involving Trenton Water Works in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, all point to the same lessons. Changes in source water, treatment, corrosion control, disinfectant residual pressure, and distribution system conditions can create or amplify Legionella risks. Timely plain language notifications helps high-risk facilities and vulnerable individuals take reasonable precautions. I understand that the new legislation raises questions about cost, feasibility, coordination, and unintended consequences. Those questions should guide careful implementation not inaction A precautionary approach is not unlimited regulation It a call for proportionate evidence steps when the risk is serious and preventable Some may argue that current requirements are enough, but rising cases and repeated outbreaks suggest otherwise. Water systems already manage biofilm and disinfectant effectiveness through practices such as chlorine burns or chlorine conversion. I know this because I'm a Pennsylvania water customer and I get notice of chlorine burns each summer. What a chlorine burn does is it's done when you have higher nitrate levels and a biofilm plume is detected. So when they say they can't increase chlorine levels, I don't believe it because they do it every year in my water system. And it's a reminder that biofilm and residual control are real operating issues, not theoretical concerns. Some may suggest that the bill is too broad. In my view, that is exactly why a broader approach is needed. The science tells us that the pathway is broader than one device, one building type, or one point in the system. Others may be concerned about disinfectant residual targets, treatment practices, or operational impacts. Those details deserve technical discussion, but the principle is sound. Public water systems are a significant part of the prevention equation and should be managed, monitored, and communicated accordingly. Some may worry that public notification will create fear. Clear communication does the opposite. It builds trust by giving people timely, accurate, plain language information about risk and reasonable precautions. As the committee considers the bill, I encourage five practical principles. Keep the approach sourced to tap. Include public water systems, distribution systems, building plumbing, and all water-using equipment. Apply the precautionary principle. When harm is serious and reasonable, prevention steps exist. Act before outbreaks occur. Use recognized standards built upon ASHRAE Standard 188, ASHRAE Guideline 12, and related guidance such as the CDC toolkit and the recommendations from the EPA microbiological disinfection byproducts working group report. Clearly communicate. Public notices should be understandable, targeted, and actionable. And fifth, support implementation with education. provide clear explanations, templates, and training so that programs become routine practice and raise public awareness on susceptibility. If implemented well, this legislation can create a culture of prevention, fewer illnesses, fewer emergency responses, and better coordination among utilities, building owners, and public health officials. In closing, members of the committee, Legionnaire's disease is complex, but the basic policy question is straightforward. Do we continue to rely primarily on reaction after illness occurs and accept that Pennsylvania will continue to have approximately 400 cases per year of disease that is fadible for 1 in 10 and a higher rate for people who are immune or compromised? Or do we take the precautionary prevention-first approach that reduces foreseeable risk before people are harmed? Pennsylvania has a unique place in the history of this disease It should also have a leadership role in preventing it House Bill 2085 gives the Commonwealth an opportunity to move forward and toward a comprehensive science-based source-to-tap approach that recognizes community water systems, building plumbing, and water-using equipment as part of the solution. We have the knowledge. We have consensus standards. We have practical tools. What we need now is the will to apply them consistently. For those reasons, I respectfully support advancing House Bill 2085, and I urge the committee to continue working with public health experts, utilities, building owners, and engineers, and advocate to ensure the final policy is comprehensive, effective, and practical. Nearly 50 years after Legionella disease began as a public health tragedy here in Pennsylvania, House Bill 2085 represents a major step forward in helping ensure that it ends in Pennsylvania, not by reaction, but by prevention. Thank you for your time, and I'll be pleased to answer questions later.

Thank you, Chairman Burgos, members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today regarding the important topic of fighting Legionnaires' disease here in Pennsylvania. My name is Steve Hosdovich. I'm the Pennsylvania Campaign's Director for Clean Water Action. Clean Water Action is a national, non-profit environmental organization with a little over 95,000 members across Pennsylvania. Since our founding during the campaign to pass the landmark Clean Water Act in 1972, we've worked to enact strong protections for our health and environment by bringing issue expertise, solution-oriented thinking, and people power to the table. Legionella bacteria, especially Legionella pneumophilia, are naturally occurring worldwide. Usually in warm, fresh water environments, Legionella tends to proliferate in water temperatures between 77 and 113 degrees Fahrenheit, but can survive at temperatures as low as 68 degrees Fahrenheit and grow in temperatures up to 120 degrees Fahrenheit. Climate change is fueling a greater proliferation of these conditions. A 2025 Penn State University study found that heat waves in water are increasing between two to four times more rapidly than heat waves in air. Heat waves in water also persist longer and have greater intensity. The study by Penn State highlights a 2025 heat wave that occurred across much of Pennsylvania, where daily high temperatures in southeastern Pennsylvania range from 86 to 101 degrees for 13 days between June 18th and June 26th. Near the end of the heat wave, the water temperature of the Schuylkill River, measured at the United States Geological Survey gauge at Norristown, reached 85 degrees Fahrenheit on June 26th, and for five days, water temperatures remained above 80 degrees, which is right in that threshold range for Legionella to proliferate. A typical June temperature at this gauge under normal summer conditions would be in the low to mid-70s. But let's be clear, what we consider normal summer conditions are a thing of the past, the numbers I just talked about temperature-wise could easily have been applied to what we were experiencing here in Pennsylvania and Philadelphia just several weeks ago. In Pennsylvania, over 8 million people receive drinking water from public water systems that rely, at least in part, on surface water sources. While Legionella occurs naturally in our environment, Legionella growth can also occur in water systems. Let's touch upon several key factors known to affect this. Water stagnation in closed tanks, including but not limited to water towers, and storage tanks can contribute to the potential proliferation of pathogens. Biofilms and sediments in drinking water systems provide habitats that can support the proliferation and survival of opportunistic pathogens like Legionella. Older infrastructure, which has been discussed at length here, I think, today, carries a greater risk because if biofilms accumulate more readily on pipes with greater wetted surfaces in low-flow conditions. In other words, iron or copper infrastructure that has deteriorated due to oxidation. Free-living amoeba within biofilms are their preferred environmental host. Legionella have demonstrated their ability to survive and multiply within different amoeba and thus may resist disinfectant. Conditions that exert a demand on disinfectants limit the system's ability to maintain a disinfectant residual. For example, biofilms and sediments in piping and tank surfaces can harbor microorganisms that consume the disinfectant corrosion products and other compounds present in finished water can also react with disinfectants. I know my time is winding down there. As has been mentioned, the United States Environmental Protection Agency regulates Legionella and public water systems under the Surface Water Treatment Act as well as revised total chloroform rule. But I think between the growth of Legionella cases and the federal rules for drinking water and water systems remaining stagnant, states are left to decide if the floor set by the federal government is sufficient to ensure the health and safety of its residents. Pennsylvania has previously decided they don't go far enough. Currently, Pennsylvania follows the United States Environmental Protection Agency's numeric value of 0.2 milligrams per liter, but Pennsylvania applies it more broadly to all community water systems using chlorine instead of just surface water systems. New Jersey also decided that it doesn't go far enough, And they decided to go even further, which is what the legislation, Health Bill 2085, is modeled after. The impetus for New Jersey deciding to take steps to go even further was based off of CDC-documented cases of Legionella rising within the state of New Jersey. Pennsylvania's confirmed cases by the CDC are higher than what caused New Jersey to act. And only three states had more alarming numbers. So given what we know, the question before us today is how will Pennsylvania respond? Will it be with the same urgency and equal fervor as New Jersey? House Bill 2085 is a framework that says we will respond. While Section 6703A1 of House Bill 28 moves the milligrams per liter, it also adjusts the standards to be applied at all parts, applied at all times, and to all active parts of chlorine-disinfected systems. Like New Jersey, the higher requirement would mean Pennsylvania systems must maintain a greater residual to meet the state's minimum. The move also means within the practice of most municipal water systems, who, according to the World Health Organization, maintain chlorine residuals between 0 and 1 milligrams per liter and finished water In addition to modifying the application of the standard there a series of best management maintenance practices a water system can take to help ensure Legionella doesn't develop. Given disinfectants' importance in addressing pathogens' growth, mapping disinfectant residuals in the distribution system can be a valuable tool to direct resources to areas that may be dropping below these residuals. Best management practices should also include conducting an evaluation of their asset inventory to identify old components, dead ends, or pipe materials conductive to Legionella growth, cleaning and then installing liners on their water mains to help prevent biofilm adhesion, maintaining pre-established flushing schedules to ensure a sufficient disinfectant residual is present throughout the system. Many public community water systems use a combination of conventional, undirectional, and continuous flow or continuous blow off flushing for routine flushing activities. Cleaning storage towers and tanks every three to five years, or whenever an evaluation, sampling, or indication event suggests the pathogen are present in the system that may be impacting a storage tank or tower. HB 2085 addresses all of these areas through provisions in Section 6703B. Legionnaires' disease may have a history that's connected to Pennsylvania, but it doesn't have to have a future that does. Pennsylvania can fight back against Legionnaires' disease, and the tools to do so are right at our fingertips. That's why Clean Water Action recommends the committee and the General Assembly pursue policies like House Bill 2085 that improve standards for our water systems and other pathways to prevent direct and control cases of Legionnaires' disease. Thank you for your time today.

Representative Smith-Wadell. Gentlemen, since you raised the specter of New Jersey, that sounds disrespectful to New Jersey. I'm not sure that's exactly what I mean. But since you brought it up in the context of the bill language that we have for HB 2085, do we have any data or information about how this has played out in New Jersey?

I could start. I know Illinois is already at .5, and they did that several years ago. That's an American water company there, so they found a way to do it. But in New Jersey, the bill is obviously relatively new. They're still in the implementation phase, so there's not enough, I think, data available to see what the impact has been. But I know they're moving forward with implementation at this point. I don't know if you know better. That was essentially going to be what I would say about New Jersey.

Representative Borowski.

In my opinion, no. But, you know, again, it depends on personal preference. But I can tell you that when they do chlorine burns at my house, I can smell the difference in the water and taste the difference. And they can do up to four milligrams per liter, which is eight times what we're asking for in this bill when they do a chlorine burn, because that's the EPA maximum. So this is, you know, by the water quality reports that all of the utilities publish here, it is clear that they're able to reach 0.5. their results on an annual basis show they're able to do that and that they do that on a regular basis. So I don't think it's an over an amount.

would be? What it helps is that it makes sure that the residual lasts all the way to the point where it connects to the building. Certainly things can go wrong in a building, and that what ASHRAE Standard 188 and Guideline 12 and a water management plan seeks to prevent But what you don want to have is on the longer legs of the water distribution system or low flow areas that disinfectant getting used up before it gets to the building. And we mentioned several times in here older infrastructure here in the northeast. And there is certainly a red zone of Legionella around the Great Lakes in the northeast. but that just shows that it's a water system issue. The older infrastructure means you have infiltration, that you have lines that are dead legs or that don't have enough flow because of changes. It's even more evidence that we should be focused on the water system and the building, not just the building going forward.

You know, ASHRAE was very involved in the mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in buildings, and preventing people from getting sick. And the approach that we took is kind of a fundamental pillar in public health, and that's the precautionary approach. When you can't identify one specific source, you reduce risk in all possible sources. And that's exactly the approach that 2085 does, is it looks from source to tap. It looks at the water system, applies some methods to reduce risk, and it looks at the building and has requirements to reduce risk in the building. Together, you reduce the overall risk to the occupant because you're approaching it in many different areas.

Thank you, gentlemen. Sorry, as my colleague was speaking, a question occurred to me. The EPA report that you referenced, when was it published? 2023?

Okay, November of 2023. Sorry, I don't have that.

That's my question actually. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen.

That's very kind of you. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you to all the members of the committee. And most importantly, thank you to all the testifiers here today. I really value your input, whether you spoke here or whether you submitted. And I've got to tell you, I think as fitting an issue sufficiently complex, this is maybe the thickest hearing packet I've ever had my hands on. That said I've only been in the legislature for four years. Where Legionnaires comes to my path is, despite a recent series of cases, not the recent series of cases that we've had in Lancaster, but that a few years hence multiple cases were identified at Lancaster County Prison, which is our county jail. And I worry deeply about the impact of diseases like Legionnaires on highly vulnerable populations living in what we called like seven times here large institutional facilities and often people who are incarcerated. They kind of go underneath the radar when we talk about public health. And I think the thing that was most concerning to me and encouraged me to engage was that The gentleman first identified as having contracted Legionnaire's disease in the Lancaster County Prison had come from the diagnostic holding facility at SCI Camp Hill, which if you don't know how our incarceration system works, you go to SCI Camp Hill first into diagnostic holding, and then they send you to a variety of other prisons. And so it raises this concern, as I think many of you have identified, where we have people who are getting sick from Legionnaires and we don't know where they contracted it isn't happening in Lancaster is it happening at SCI Camp Hill that said and I know that I'm I may be the fourth person to have my hands on similar legislation it remains very important to me to get this right. I have seen maybe 100 pages of testimony I had a number of conversations I certainly have more conversations before this session is out and will probably be coming back to this next session That said, please know that if you testified here today, you can probably expect to hear from me. I want us to get a version of the bill that prioritizes protecting vulnerable people regardless of where they are. So if we don't know what specific work we can do or what approaches work to protect people in their homes, I want us to figure it out. I want to know more about why it is that Pennsylvania land that I love has double the national average of Legionnaires cases. And then I want to do what works to get it done. So that's my story and I'm sticking to it. I want to thank everybody who came here today. And frankly, those of you who you're in the room, you know who you are, I won't call you out, who saw my name on this piece of legislation and happened to have my cell phone number picked up my phone and called me. Thank you to the members. Thank you to the committee. And briefly, I always like to close this way. I want to thank very much the staff of the City Hall of Philadelphia and committee staff for making this hearing possible today thank you and also recognize the participation of representative Williams thank you