Bill
HB 2414
Arizona HB 2414 defines 'remedial groundwater' to include PFAS-contaminated groundwater and guides remedial actions, impacting water providers and state agencies.
Summary — HB 2414 (documents provided appear to combine two different state bills)
Note: The materials you provided appear to include text from two different bills both labeled “HB 2414” from different states and on different topics. One is an Arizona bill (sponsored by Rep. Alexander Kolodin) amending groundwater law to address remedial groundwater and PFAS; the other is an Illinois bill (introduced by Rep. Patrick Windhorst, with Rep. Tony M. McCombie listed as a co‑sponsor) amending the Election Code related to vote‑by‑mail and reporting of uncounted ballots. Below are concise, separate summaries of each so you can see the purpose, key provisions, affected parties, and procedural notes.
1) Arizona — HB 2414 (Remedial groundwater; PFAS)
- Purpose / intent
- To add statutory definitions and provisions addressing “remedial groundwater,” especially groundwater contaminated with PFAS (per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances), and to make related amendments across groundwater and environmental statutes.
- Key provisions
- Amends A.R.S. §45‑561 and §45‑576.01 and adds new sections (45‑581, 45‑581.01, 45‑581.02) in Title 45, Chapter 2, Article 9.
- Introduces a new definition of “remedial groundwater” to include groundwater withdrawn under an approved remedial action project (ADEQ or EPA/CERCLA) or groundwater containing PFOS, PFOA, or other PFAS above the MCL for PFAS adopted by the U.S. EPA.
- Clarifies that remedial groundwater does not include groundwater withdrawn as an alternative water supply under A.R.S. §49‑282.03.
- Repeals certain prior statutory provisions (Laws 1997, ch. 287, §52, as amended, and Laws 2021, ch. 272, §1) — exact effect depends on the repealed text.
- Makes conforming edits throughout groundwater statutes (definitions, mined groundwater, replenishment district consistency standards).
- Who is affected
- Municipal water providers, active management areas, groundwater users, the Arizona Department of Water Resources, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and entities performing remedial action projects, and communities with PFAS‑impacted groundwater.
- Procedural / timeline notes
- Bill introduced in the Arizona House by Rep. Alexander Kolodin (date shown in the doc: February 4, 2025). Text indicates legislative session citations for the Fifty‑seventh Legislature, First Regular Session, 2025. Further committee referrals and actions would determine enactment.
2) Illinois — HB2414 (Election Code — vote by mail reporting and receipt deadlines)
- Purpose / intent
- To change timing and standards for reporting uncounted ballots and to tighten the deadlines/receipt requirements for vote‑by‑mail ballots.
- Key provisions
- Requires each election authority to post, on the date of the election after polling locations close (rather than “no later than 48 hours after” closing), the number of ballots that remain uncounted on its website, broken out by categories: election‑day, early voting, provisional, vote‑by‑mail received but not counted, and vote‑by‑mail sent but not returned.
- Requires all election authorities to share the same categorized uncounted‑ballot information with the State Board of Elections on the date of the election after polls close (instead of within 48 hours).
- Changes the vote‑by‑mail receipt rule: ballots must be received by the election authority before the polls close on election day (previously could be counted if postmarked no later than election day and received later during the counting period).
- Removes a provision that allowed election authorities to accept ballots returned with insufficient or no postage.
- Removes authorization for maintaining secure collection sites for postage‑free vote‑by‑mail returns.
- Makes conforming edits to multiple sections of the Election Code. The bill text notes “Effective immediately.”
- Who is affected
- Voters who use vote‑by‑mail, local election authorities, county clerks, and the State Board of Elections.
- Operational impacts for ballot receiving, processing workflows, and public reporting systems.
- Procedural / timeline notes & sponsors
- Introduced in the Illinois General Assembly by Rep. Patrick Windhorst; Rep. Tony M. McCombie listed as a co‑sponsor. Legislative actions in the document include filing and early readings (dates given around Feb–Mar 2025) and an “effective immediately” clause if enacted.
Recommendation / next steps
- Confirm which state’s HB 2414 you want tracked or summarized further (Arizona water/PFAS or Illinois elections). I can expand either summary with section‑by‑section detail, fiscal impacts, potential implementation issues, or analyses of stakeholders and likely legal conflicts.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
