Studying Time: 4 minutes
Click on right here to learn highlights from the story
- Dueling proposals would shield sure “harmless landowners” — those that didn’t knowingly trigger PFAS air pollution on their land — from monetary legal responsibility to wash it up below the state’s spills regulation.
- Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ narrower proposal would exempt solely residential and agricultural properties polluted with PFAS-contaminated sludge.
- Republican draft payments would forestall the Division of Pure Sources from implementing the spills regulation on a broader swath of “harmless landowners,” leaving the DNR to wash up property at its personal expense.
- Each proposals would create grant applications for municipalities and homeowners of PFAS-contaminated properties, however solely Evers’ proposal would launch a further $125 million in help to PFAS-affected communities that has sat in a belief fund for 18 months.
Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican lawmakers proceed to dig of their heels throughout a years-long tug-of-war over how regulators ought to maintain property homeowners chargeable for contamination attributable to “perpetually chemical substances” often called PFAS.
They’re pushing competing proposals to guard so-called harmless landowners — those that didn’t knowingly trigger their PFAS air pollution — from legal responsibility below Wisconsin’s decades-old environmental cleanup regulation.
Evers’ two-year price range proposal, launched final week, exempts some homeowners of residential and agricultural land. The proposal would additionally fund testing and cleanups of affected properties.
His price range takes a narrower tack than the method spearheaded by a Republican who has lengthy sought to guard harmless landowners.
Through the earlier legislative session, Sen. Eric Wimberger of Oconto co-authored an harmless landowner invoice that lawmakers handed alongside social gathering strains earlier than an Evers veto.
The governor accused Republicans of utilizing farmers as “scapegoats” to constrain state authority. His employees warned that if Republicans current the identical proposal this session, Evers would possibly veto it once more.
Wimberger says Evers’ employees has failed to reply to his requests for an overview of harmless landowner exemptions Evers would assist. Wimberger is now circulating two draft payments co-authored with state Rep. Jeff Mursau, R-Crivitz, that include provisions just about similar to the vetoed laws. These embody grants for municipalities and homeowners of PFAS-contaminated properties.
The proposals additionally would restrict the Division of Pure Sources’ energy to require property homeowners to pay for cleanups and lengthen legal responsibility exemptions to sure companies and municipalities.
“The governor needlessly vetoed the plan over protections for harmless landowners,” Wimberger stated in a press release. “Now, after delaying this reduction for a 12 months, he says he desires to guard harmless landowners. Whereas it’s encouraging to see him change his thoughts, he’s no champion for air pollution victims.”
How does the state deal with PFAS-contaminated farmland?
Wisconsin’s spills regulation requires reporting and cleanup by events that pollute air, soil or water or in the event that they uncover contamination from a previous proprietor. That’s as a result of, partly, permitting air pollution to stay on the panorama may very well be extra harmful to human well being than the preliminary spill.
The DNR has held events chargeable for PFAS contamination they didn’t trigger but in addition has exercised discretion by searching for remediation from previous spillers as a substitute of present property homeowners.
PFAS, brief for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a household of greater than 12,000 compounds generally present in shopper merchandise like meals wrappers, nonstick pans and raincoats together with firefighting foam used to smother sizzling blazes. Some are poisonous.
The chemical substances go by means of the waste stream and into sewage therapy vegetation, which generally contract with farmers to just accept processed sludge as fertilizer.
Testing is now unearthing PFAS on cropland from Maine to Texas. A number of sizzling spots are positioned in Wisconsin too, among the many greater than 100 PFAS-contaminated case recordsdata the DNR presently screens.
The company maintains it has by no means, and has no plans to, implement the spills regulation towards a property proprietor who unknowingly acquired PFAS-contaminated fertilizer. However Republican lawmakers don’t belief these guarantees.
How do the price range and draft invoice proposals evaluate?
Evers’ invoice would exempt solely residential and agricultural properties polluted with PFAS-contaminated sludge. Affected landowners must present the DNR entry to their property for cleanup and never worsen the contamination.
Evers’ harmless landowner exemption would sundown by 2036.
In the meantime, the Republican draft payments would forestall the DNR from implementing the spills regulation when the accountable social gathering qualifies as an harmless landowner and permit the division to wash up its property at its personal expense.
The primary invoice focuses on harmless landowner provisions, whereas the second, bigger proposal provides grant applications with out specifying appropriations. Wimberger defined introducing two payments would “make sure the victims of PFAS air pollution get the controversy they deserve” and stop Democrats from “enjoying politics” with PFAS funding and coverage.
In contrast to Evers’ price range proposal, the draft payments don’t launch $125 million in help to PFAS-affected communities that has sat in a belief fund for 18 months.
The Legislature allotted the funds within the earlier two-year price range, however its GOP-controlled finance committee hasn’t transferred the money to the DNR.
Lawmakers in each events have bristled over the languishing cash, with Democrats contending the committee may switch it with out passing a brand new regulation. The nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Council says lawmakers can be on “comparatively agency authorized footing” in the event that they did so.
Republicans, in the meantime, say transferring the {dollars} with out limiting DNR enforcement powers wouldn’t successfully assist impacted landowners. They are saying the DNR may deal with a landowner’s request for state help as an invite for punishment.
The earlier, vetoed invoice garnered assist from all three Wisconsin native authorities associations, however environmental teams, the DNR and Evers stated it shifted PFAS cleanup prices to taxpayers.
Environmental teams additionally feared Republicans on the finance committee would proceed withholding the $125 million even when the laws had superior — protracting the stalemate whereas weakening the DNR.
Nor would risking “unintended penalties” of weakening the spills regulation be value $125 million, which might scratch the floor of remediation prices, environmental critics stated.
Bills in Marinette County alone, which is dealing with PFAS contamination linked to a firefighter coaching web site owned by Johnson Controls Worldwide, already exceed that quantity.
The Milwaukee Enterprise Journal reported the corporate upped its reserves by $255 million to finance the cleanup. With the rise, the corporate has recorded expenses of about $400 million since 2019.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for authentic tales and our Friday information roundup.
Republish our articles without spending a dime, on-line or in print, below a Inventive Commons license.
