Table of Contents
In Kentucky, House Bill 116 (HB 116) represents the state’s first structured legislative step toward understanding and addressing PFAS impacts — not through immediate product bans, but through data gathering, coordination, and policy development.
Unlike states such as Maine or Connecticut, Kentucky’s approach under HB 116 is foundational, not prohibitive.
What Is Kentucky PFAS Bill HB 116?
Kentucky House Bill 116 proposes the creation of a PFAS Working Group attached to the Cabinet for Health and Family Services for administrative purposes.
The bill’s primary goal is to establish a formal mechanism for:
- evaluating PFAS-related health and environmental data,
- coordinating across state agencies, and
- developing evidence-based recommendations for future action.
HB 116 does not impose immediate statewide PFAS product bans.
Kentucky PFAS Working Group
The PFAS Working Group would consist of 21 members, representing a cross-section of state agencies, academia, industry, and public stakeholders.
Representation Includes:
- Cabinet-level officials from public health and environmental agencies
- Representatives from fish and wildlife resources
- Academic and scientific experts
- Industry and local government representatives
- Legislative members serving in an ex-officio capacity
Responsibilities of the Working Group
Under HB 116, the Working Group is charged with:
- reviewing available research on PFAS and human health outcomes,
- sharing and analyzing PFAS-related data generated at the state level,
- consulting with affected stakeholders, and
- developing recommendations to mitigate PFAS exposure risks in Kentucky.
The group is required to submit a report to the Governor and the Legislative Research Commission by December 1, outlining findings and recommendations.
PFAS Reporting Provisions in HB 116
HB 116 includes manufacturer reporting concepts, but these should be interpreted carefully.
What the Bill Does
-
Establishes authority for the state to request information from manufacturers regarding products containing intentionally added PFAS.
-
Identifies core data elements that may be required, such as:
- product description or identifiers,
- purpose of PFAS use,
- amount of PFAS present,
- manufacturer contact information,
- and other information requested by the state.
What the Bill Does Not Clearly Do
- It does not clearly set a fixed reporting start date in statute.
- It does not establish a public PFAS product database.
- It does not yet define thresholds, frequency, or categories through detailed rules.
Any reporting obligations would depend on final enactment, amendments, and subsequent rulemaking.
Enforcement and Penalties (Current Status)
HB 116 includes enforcement concepts, but publicly available bill text and summaries do not conclusively define:
- specific daily penalty amounts,
- automatic enforcement timelines, or
- finalized administrative penalty structures.
References to dollar-per-day penalties or county-level enforcement appear in secondary summaries, not in clearly codified statutory language.
For compliance accuracy, penalties should be described as:
“subject to enforcement mechanisms defined in statute or subsequent regulations.”
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
HB 116 references PFAS monitoring concerns related to wastewater treatment facilities in policy discussions, but the publicly available bill text does not clearly mandate:
- annual PFAS sampling requirements,
- reporting thresholds, or
- acceptance/refusal conditions tied to PFAS concentrations.
Any wastewater-specific obligations would require confirmation in final enacted text or implementing regulations.
What HB 116 Signals for Manufacturers
Kentucky HB 116 is best understood as a policy-development and data-gathering bill, not a compliance cliff.
That said, it sends a clear signal:
- Kentucky is building the institutional groundwork for future PFAS regulation.
- Manufacturer data — especially material-level PFAS information — will matter.
- States that start with working groups often move next to targeted reporting or category-specific restrictions.
Manufacturers operating nationally should not treat Kentucky as irrelevant simply because it has not yet imposed bans.
Practical Takeaways
- There are no immediate PFAS product bans under HB 116.
- There is no confirmed universal reporting deadline in statute.
- Manufacturer obligations will depend on future legislative or regulatory action.
- Companies with existing PFAS data systems will adapt fastest if Kentucky expands regulation.
Final Takeaway
Kentucky HB 116 is an early-stage PFAS governance law, not an enforcement hammer.
It reflects a state moving from awareness to structure — laying the foundation for future decisions based on data, not assumptions.
For manufacturers, the smart move is preparation:
- understand where PFAS exist in products,
- maintain defensible supplier disclosures,
- and monitor how Kentucky’s recommendations evolve into binding rules.