DNR asked to halt PFAS standards for water
Water utilities groups request suspension
MADISON - A number of groups representing water utilities in Wisconsin are asking the state Department of Natural Resources to hold off on setting standards for “forever chemicals” in drinking water.
The League of Municipalities, the Wisconsin Rural Water Association and the Municipal Environmental Group Water Division are asking the state to hold off on setting standards for PFAS in drinking water until the federal government proposes and sets standards first.
“Drinking water utilities and Wisconsin have always followed the federal drinking water standards,” said Lawrie Kobza, the legal counsel for Municipal Environmental Group. “They have never adopted their own drinking water standard before. This would be the first time, and in our view, they’re following a process that’s not consistent with the federal drinking water process.”
Toni Herkert, the government affairs director for the League of Municipalities, also noted that this would be the first time Wisconsin moved forward to regulate a contaminant in drinking water without the federal government doing so first.
“Drinking water maximum contaminant levels are always set by the federal government,” Herkert said. “It makes sense to wait for the (Environmental Protection Agency) to propose theirs before we pass something on a statewide basis.”
The regulations the groups registered in opposition of would set a standard at 20 parts per trillion for both PFOA and PFOS individually and combined within drinking and groundwater, as recommended by the state Department of Health Services. PFOA and PFOS are two of the most well-researched compounds in the “forever chemical” family.
The rule would also establish initial and routine monitoring for PFAS in public water systems, as well as establishing an approved methodology for conducting sampling. Under the rules, if approved by the Legislature, any water system with PFOA or PFOS above the 20 parts per trillion limit, either separately or combined, will be required to take measures to return to
compliance, which could include drilling a new well or installing an approved treatment system
The implementation and compliance cost of the regulations is expected to be more than $5.6 million in the first year, including the costs for monitoring and for water systems that may be required to mitigate for PFOA or PFOS.
After the first year, the DNR estimates costs will fluctuate, with costs for years two through six being around $4 million
The DNR estimates that nine public water systems will exceed the drinking water standards and will install granulated activated carbon systems. Those systems will be able to access the Safe Drinking Water Loan program to finance the projects. Over 20 years, those nine systems could spend around $35.2 million, including interest on the project, and a total annual maintenance cost of nearly $2 million yearly.
Water systems could potentially get help with upgrades to their systems to remove PFAS, though. Under the $1 trillion infrastructure bill signed by President Joe Biden in November, Wisconsin is set to receive millions in funding to help with issues such as PFAS. However, the state still has little information on how it will be able to allocate the money at this point.
The drinking water standards will go before the Natural Resources Board, which serves as the policysetting arm of the DNR, in February. If they are approved, they will be sent on to the Legislature.
While the Biden administration has moved to begin the regulatory process for PFAS, DNR officials say that those regulations could take years to create, implement and enforce, leaving the residents of Wisconsin without protection in the meantime.
One concern raised in a letter from the Wisconsin Rural Water Association in a letter to the DNR is that federal standards could end up being higher than Wisconsin’s proposed 20 parts per trillion, meaning the cost would likely be higher to adhere to the state’s proposed rules.
Kobza said lower standards could potentially result in higher water bills, as utilities would have to pass along the price tag for water treatment, likely through the use of granulated activated carbon filters.
“Water affordability is a big concern,” she said. “It’s really a cost-benefit analysis.”
PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a family of man-made chemicals used for their waterand stain-resistant qualities in products like clothing and carpet, nonstick cookware, packaging and firefighting foam. The family includes 5,000 compounds, which are persistent, remaining both in the environment and human body over time.
The chemicals have been linked to types of kidney and testicular cancers, lower birth weights, harm to immune and reproductive systems, altered hormone regulation and altered thyroid hormones. The chemicals enter the human body largely through drinking water.
PFAS have been found across the state in cities like La Crosse, Marinette, Peshtigo, Milwaukee, Madison and Eau Claire, with more contaminations being added to the list as testing becomes easier to conduct.
Water groups aren’t the only opposition
Most submitted feedback for the rules from residents and environmental organizations has been positive, with many applauding the steps forward on addressing PFAS. But water utility groups were not the only ones who registered in opposition to the rules.
Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce has stances against several rules regarding regulating PFAS in water, as well as the use of PFAS-containing firefighting foam. The organization was in close contact with the embattled chair of the Natural Resources Board in the months leading up to recent regulations, influencing portions of the approved regulations.
WMC is involved in two lawsuits against the DNR involving PFAS, causing some environmental organizations to worry over the future of the state’s spills law, which requires speedy cleanup of contamination.
On behalf of a number of organizations, including the Wisconsin Paper Council, the Wisconsin Water Alliance and the American Chemistry Council, WMC submitted a letter in opposition of the standards as well. The group, like the others, contended the DNR was stepping outside its boundaries by trying to regulate PFAS in drinking water and that the standards lacked “scientific justification,” and asks the DNR to halt its rulemaking process.
“This action would allow local governments, homeowners, businesses and others to avoid compliance costs associated with expensive ‘Wisconsinonly’ drinking water standards when federal standards are imminent,” WMC wrote in the letter. “This also would ensure a rigorous process for standard setting that follows federal requirements under the Clean Water Act.”
Also in opposition of the standards are 3M, the Wisconsin Civil Justice Council, the Wisconsin Paper Council and the Midwest Food Products Association.
‘I want people to feel safe’
Herkert said that the opposition from the League of Municipalities isn’t coming from a desire to see PFAS remain unregulated in Wisconsin.
It’s also not coming from a political stance, she said.
“PFAS like other issues has blown up to be a very political and divisive issue,” she said. “And water utilities in the state are not choosing a side politically. Their goal is to provide safe drinking water for their residents and their community, and they will continue to do that job. That has not been politicized.”
In Wisconsin, the Republican-controlled Legislature has not shown support for regulations regarding PFAS. Earlier this year, legislators stripped a number of provisions from the budget, including standards and funding for testing of water utilities across the state. Legislation aimed at addressing the issue, such as the CLEAR Act, has also failed to be discussed at even the committee level after being introduced by Democrats earlier this year.
But Herkert said that at the end of the day, water utilities are taking steps to address PFAS when they need to. Places like Eau Claire and Rhinelander shut down wells that were found to have concerning concentrations of PFAS, and other places would take similar steps if issues were found.
“I want people to feel safe that when they turn on their faucets, if they’re receiving water from a municipality, they can be assured that they’re drinking clean water,” she said. “If they have concerns for some reason, with PFAS, then they should reach out to their water utility and see what process they’re going through.”