MADISON (Wis.) – The Wisconsin Natural Resources Board will soon take up proposed standards for regulating harmful forever chemicals known collectively as PFAS in drinking, surface and groundwater. This is after more than two years.
Federal regulators have known for over two decades about the dangers of PFAS to human health. Even so, the Environmental Protection Agency is yet to create standards for the chemicals. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has proposed strict standards to protect public health and the environment. However, federal standards are still many years away.
The proposed regulations by the DNR have caused a rift between Wisconsin environmental groups and residents who are PFAS-affected. David Strifling from Marquette University Law School, director of the Water Law and Policy Initiative, stated that there is agreement that chemicals should be controlled.
Strifling said that while there is general agreement that they should not be ingested and distributed throughout the environment, there is still much to debate.
Here’s a quick overview of PFAS and the standards proposed by the DNRs policy-setting committee Wednesday, February 23.
What is PFAS and how does it work?
PFAS (perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a group that includes thousands of manmade chemicals. They can be found in firefighting spray and everyday products such as nonstick cookware and stain resistant clothing.
Where did PFAS come?
PFAS chemicals were first developed in the 1930s. They have been used in industry since the 1940s. Companies such as DuPont, based in Delaware, and 3M, based in Minneapolis made products with PFAS chemicals. These chemicals included the two most studied substances PFOA (PFOS) and PFOA (PFOS).
What are the risks of using PFASs?
The environment doesn’t easily break down the chemicals, which is why they are so concerning. Numerous studies have shown that PFOA levels can cause serious health problems in people who live and work in areas with high levels. These include an increased risk of developing cancers of the kidneys and testicular, thyroid disease, and fertility issues. There has also been a reduced response to vaccines.
Where have PFAS been found?
As PFAS contamination has become more common, more people are aware of its existence. The DNR stated that regulators had begun to address PFAS pollution at more 50 sites in 25 communities as of last fall.
Residents in small and large communities have been affected by these chemicals, contaminating both public and private water supplies.
Peshtigo, Campbell and other towns have been forced to rely upon bottled water because of PFAS contamination in private wells. This is due the the use firefighting foam containing the chemicals. Concerning levels of chemicals in municipal water supplies have caused cities like Madison, Eau Claire, La Crosse to shut down their wells. Wausau is the latest city to report elevated levels in its city wells.
What standards are being proposed to the DNR?
Gov. Tony Evers gave the order to the agency to create standards to address PFAS in accordance with an executive order dated August 2019. The Natural Resources Board approved the development of those standards in January 2019.
As recommended by the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, the DNR proposes a 20 part per trillion individual and combined standard for PFOA/PFOS in water. Nearby states, including Illinois or Michigan, have also proposed or established similar or more restrictive drinking standards for PFAS.
In the meantime, the EPA has announced a broad plan to set federal drinking-water standards. The agency has set a current health advisory level at 70 parts per trillion.
Strifling stated that EPA is examining that number and the rulemaking currently underway. Strifling said that it was not clear where that will settle. However, this is in the area of scientific disagreement between supporters and opponents of this rule package: How should we set that number.
State regulators propose a standard 20 parts per billion for the chemicals in groundwater. A preventive action limit of only 2 parts per million is also proposed. This level is used to initiate actions to prevent further contamination.
The agency proposes a standard of 8 parts for trillion for PFOS in surface water. There are limited exceptions. The DNR recommends a standard for PFOA of 20 parts per billion in waters deemed to be public water supplies, and 95 parts per trillion in all other surface waters.
Who wants state PFAS regulation, and who doesn’t
Industry and water groups have urged DNR to wait for federal standards before proposing statewide limits for PFAS. These groups include Wisconsin Rural Water Association, Municipal Environmental Groups Water Division and Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce.
Multi-jurisdictional manufacturers don’t want to have to deal in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Connecticut, and so forth, Strifling stated.
Residents from PFAS-polluted areas and environmental groups submitted comments stating that state standards are essential to protect the environment and public health. These groups include Midwest Environmental Advocates and Clean Wisconsin, River Alliance of Wisconsin. Sierra Club of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Conservation Voters and the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin.
Strifling said that many environmental and public-health advocates would tell them that the numbers aren’t precise enough.
Why is the DNR proposing PFAS guidelines now?
The state rulemaking process gives the agency 30 months to develop environmental regulations. Time is running out since the agency launched this effort two years ago.
Strifling said that if the NRB does not approve the rule, it seems very likely that the DNR would have no choice but to cancel this effort and go back to square 1.
The DNR ran out time, so the agency decided to abandon its proposal for nitrate standards in groundwater-contaminating areas.
How much would it cost for PFAS regulation?
The DNR estimates that it will cost local governments and businesses $5.6 million to provide drinking water. In the following years, it will cost an average of $3.9million annually.
According to environmental regulators, nine systems will likely surpass those standards and resorts to treatment systems that could have been financed through the state’s Safe Drinking Water Loan program. The nine systems will cost $35.2 million over 20 years, with maintenance costs of almost $2 million each.
The DNR estimates that groundwater compliance costs would average $2.6 million annually. The agency estimates that surface water will have a maximum annual cost of $4.8 million to meet the standard.
Regulators estimate that 48 small businesses including paper companies, metal finishers, and chemical manufacturers will face an additional $2.1 million in annual costs.
Strifling claimed that the cost of proposed standards could hinder their passage. Under the REINS Act, lawmakers required legislative approval for regulations that exceed $10 million in a two-year period.
Strifling stated that there is another objection: The DNR underestimates the cost of this.
According to the DNR’s economic impact analyses, the cost of implementing PFAS standards would be below $10 million for any two-year period.
The DNR does not have state-specific data on health. The agency used two reports to estimate that Wisconsin could save hundreds and millions of dollars on health care costs due to low birth weights and hypertension. The agency stated that regulations would likely limit any loss of property values or recreational revenue in areas affected by contamination.
What’s next?
The proposed standards will be discussed by the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board at its meeting on Wednesday, February 23rd. If the NRB approves the agencys PFAS standards, the rules would require the approval of the Republican-controlled Legislature. Republican lawmakers will likely oppose the standards. Republican legislators have in the past weakened PFAS regulations, and taken most Evers funding proposals to address PFAS off the budget.