Marisa Wojcik:

Welcome to Noon Wednesday. I’m Marisa Wojcik, a multimedia journalist with Here & Now on PBS Wisconsin. So new bi-partisan legislation introduced late last week is attempting to slow pollution of a class of chemicals known as PFAS through regulation, increase testing and remediation efforts. PFAs are also referred to as forever chemicals. They’re in many industrial and household products and because of their resistance to extreme temperatures and water and oil, they’re commonly used in a lot of different ways and in they’re in a lot of our everyday products but they’re also found in firefighting foams and that’s a big cause of environmental contamination when these foams are sprayed on the ground. So the awareness of PFAs contamination has grown over the last year especially nation-wide and in Wisconsin. Joining me to talk about all of this contamination in Wisconsin and the proposed legislation is Carly Michiels from Clean Wisconsin. Thanks so much for being here.

Carly Michiels:

Thanks for having me.

Marisa Wojcik:

I want to touch on the back story of PFAs in Wisconsin really quick, for those who don’t know. So, where is the epicenter of PFAs contamination in the state?

Carly Michiels:

So right now it’s really in Marinette, Wisconsin so north of Green Bay, that’s where the first and the biggest contamination issue has happened and popped up. It’s from a local firefighting training and testing facility so as you can imagine, lots of firefighting foam leeching into the ground water.

Marisa Wojcik:

And when did that start?

Carly Michiels:

So it officially started in 2017 but they have been testing and training firefighting foam up there for decades.

Marisa Wojcik:

And a little bit about, kind of, how we came to know about it and what’s been happening since it was discovered?

Carly Michiels:

Yeah so, so very long convoluted story but the DNR found out that this contamination of PFAs had leeched into the ground water and there has been some back and forth between the industry and DNR and residents dealing with contamination and they’ve kind of slowly but surely tested in zones outwards into the population and found that it’s not just in, you know, the ground water and drinking water. But it’s in bio-solids that they spread on agricultural fields and it’s in surface waters that have run off from that facility and then you get to where we are today and you have some of the highest contamination instances in the nation.

Marisa Wojcik:

And you’re from Mariette?

Carly Michiels:

Yes.

Marisa Wojcik:

What have you heard from people being from that area?

Carly Michiels:

Yes, it’s scary. I think a lot of people don’t know a whole lot about PFAs. I mean, it seems like it kind of just popped up this year and there’s a lot of unknowns about it. But, there is instances of people where they have drinking water that’s contaminated at 1900 parts per trillion which is well over the federal and state recommended health standard. And there really isn’t anything that you can do other than drink water or put a fancy treatment filtration system in your house.

Marisa Wojcik:

And parts per trillion, there had been some debate over well it’s so small, parts per billion is what other contaminates are usually measured in. But more research that’s become public has shown that parts per trillion actually is very harmful.

Carly Michiels:

And, like you were saying, PFAs is unique in that it builds up in the body over time and it’s really hard to break down. So even though it is a small amount they measure it in parts per trillion because it’s over your entire lifetime you’re accumulating this chemical in your body, in your blood and it’s building up and not releasing. So that’s why it’s such a small amount but if you’re drinking contaminated water for 10 years, it’s not leaving your body.

Marisa Wojcik:

And the Centers for Disease Control has said that 98% of the population in the U.S. has some sort of detectable amount of PFAs in their blood and the new legislation touches on some blood testing and we’ll get to that in a minute. But really quick, where else is contamination known to be in the state?

Carly Michiels:

So, the DNR right now has over 30 contamination investigation sites in the state. There’s Marinette, which is the one that everybody talks about but it’s also in Madison, Milwaukee, Rhinelander. There’s a lot of different places and it’s always around either sites that are manufacturing PFAs chemicals, locations that are heavy users of PFAs so like airports in Madison and Milwaukee. In Marinette it’s the firefighting foam that they use at the training facility. Or it’s wastewater treatment plants that essentially just receive all of the PFAs.

Marisa Wojcik:

And how bad is contamination? Do we know what this looks like in the landscape of the state right now?

Carly Michiels:

We don’t, we just have these 30 sites that DNR have identified. That’s why this bill is so important and we need to have resources and funding to start identifying these sites. If you look at the state of Michigan, our neighbor, they have seriously invested in PFAs and they have identified hundreds of sites in their state. So, we’re going to keep finding more, we know we are, it’s just having the resources to go out and identify those sites.

Marisa Wojcik:

So we’re identifying where they are but PFAs currently isn’t fully regulated. What does it look like on the federal level? Does the Environmental Protection Agency have standards against acceptable levels of PFAs?

Carly Michiels:

So the EPA has a healthy advisory level and that’s at 70 parts per trillion. There is a lot of debate around that number being much too high because it was set a while ago. But it’s not enforceable and there are no requirements that come for testing or remediation if you test above that level, it’s just a recommendation.

Marisa Wojcik:

And for Wisconsin, there’s no specific standard but over the summer some of this was bubbling up with the Department of Health Services and with the DNR. And there are recommendations. What do those recommendations say and are those enforceable?

Carly Michiels:

So this summer DHS came out with a health based ground water standard of 20 parts per trillion. Which is actually pretty middle of the road compared to other states that have gone and done this. Some go as low as 2 parts per trillion. But this standard still has to go through the entire rule making process, yet and that has just begun and it’s about a three year process. So there is some time yet until we can actually have an enforceable standard. But now that we have one that’s recommended we can kind of point to that as something that we should be looking at.

Marisa Wojcik:

So but nothing can be kind of officially enforced at this point. And so you said 20 parts per trillion for a ground water standard for two of these chemicals. PFAs is technically considered thousands of chemicals and so the two that are considered most common are the ones that are regulated. Some groups in Wisconsin came out and said that a standard like that they’re deeply concerned that it could devastate Wisconsin’s economy, significantly raise the cost of residential water, require municipal utilities, industrial facilities and energy producers to reach near zero discharge levels of compounds and that they already exist in the ground water. Are their concerns legitimate, is this going to devastate Wisconsin’s economy? Is this going to put a huge strain on municipal budgets that can’t afford to remediate this chemical in their local facilities?

Carly Michiels:

So, I think that that argument frankly is unacceptable. I don’t think you can pit public health and contaminating communities at a rate, like you are in Marinette, against businesses. But with that being said, there is some serious investment that needs to happen in cleaning up this problem. We have been using PFAs compounds since the 40s. It’s in the environment that is true. It is contaminating our waterways. To your point 98% of all people have PFAs in their blood. But our neighbor, Michigan, is seriously investing in this and providing resources and remediation efforts for the people that are dealing with this contamination and that’s what we have to do. I don’t think it’s going to jeopardize the economy businesses because they’re not going to be the ones on the hook for paying for a lot of this if the state steps up and takes this seriously.

Marisa Wojcik:

Looking back at Tyco for a minute, they have taken financial responsibility for remediating the pollution for the plume of ground water contamination. Is that something that they volunteered to do or knowing that there’s not an enforceable standard or was there some sort of mechanism that required them to clean up those chemicals and could require other entities, where contamination is found, to clean up chemicals in Wisconsin?

Carly Michiels:

I’m not exactly sure on the specifics of how that happened but I do know that I think there’s a lot of fear with liability and using these chemicals and knowingly contaminating certain populations and not notifying that they’re using and doing what they’re doing.

Marisa Wojcik:

Looking at the new legislation, tell me a little bit about, kind of, what it’s looking to accomplish.

Carly Michiels:

Yeah so, there was it was called the Clear Act. So it was a big bold, you know, one of the most comprehensive bills in the nation that was out there. And that regulated more chemicals, more mediums, than this compromised bill does but it was only Democrats signed onto that bill. So this bill is a bi-partisan, they’re calling it the PFAs Compromised Bill. It goes, kind of, in the middle. And it is also a huge step in regulating PFAs in Wisconsin. It sets, you know, recommendations, remediation, it starts an action fund so there’s a long-term funding source to start dealing with some of these contamination sites. It provides staff at our state agencies. It does blood testing and cancer cluster study. It does a lot of different things that I think we’re really hopeful since it is bi-partisan and it seems to be moving through the legislature, that we can see this happen by the end of the session.

Marisa Wojcik:

You are thinking by the end of the session this could be introduced into both chambers and passed.

Carly Michiels:

Well there’s a public hearing already this week on the bill. It seems to be moving very quickly, there’s just a lot of leg work that needs to be done. It’s a little unfortunate that this had happened so last minute and, you know, there’s only about a month of session left. So there is a lot of work that needs to be done but if both sides are committed to passing this bill, I think that’s possible, yeah.

Marisa Wojcik:

Why do you think, if there is opposition to a bill that involves public health, why do you think this is gaining traction? Representative Nygren, a Republican, is one author and then Dave Hansen, a Democrat, both kind of in that north east Wisconsin area kind of worked together to make this bill happen. Why do think there is, they are finding compromise?

Carly Michiels:

I really think it’s because of their constituents. It’s all of these local communities groups that have, kind of, come together and said, you know, we’re not going to stand for this type of pollution and nothing being done anymore. And they’ve been really active and really outspoken on what they want and demanding action from their legislators and I think that this is a result of all that continued work and pressure and all of the conversations that have happened this last year.

Marisa Wojcik:

And there was another piece of legislation that involved firefighting foams and what happened with that?

Carly Michiels:

So that bill was, it prohibited the use of PFAs firefighting foam in training facilities or testing and training facilities and scenarios. So it’s a very narrow, niche bill that gets at the specific type of contamination that happened in Marinette. It is necessary, it is something we should do but it is so small in the grand scheme of all the things you could do on PFAs that we were really looking for something more. And that’s why we were happy to see this compromise bill out there. But that bill did pass both the senate and assembly and was sent to the Governor, I think, a couple days ago for his signature.

Marisa Wojcik:

Why do you think you, you know, you said Tyco had been putting these chemicals in the ground for decades but even in 2013 they knew what had been happening. You know, PFAs is commonly found in like Teflon and it’s been known some of the dangers. Why is there such a rapid awareness happening now both on the national level and in Wisconsin where we’re possibly going to see some movement on a pretty sweeping piece of legislation?

Carly Michiels:

I think there’s a lot of things that are going on. The federal government is failing to act on PFAs so that’s driving a lot of states taking that leap and protecting their own citizens and residents from PFAs with their own state standards and different resources and funding mechanisms. It’s an emerging contaminate but it seems like everybody kind of knows about it now with all of the educational outreach that’s going, the different movies that are out there talking about PFAs. I think it is one of those things that once you learn about it you realize that it’s everywhere and it’s in everything and so it’s kind of scary. And you can never learn enough about it. There’s always more things coming out because it is new and there’s always research happening and always different states pursuing different things. So it is fast moving in that way.

Marisa Wojcik:

All right Carly, thank you so much for telling us more about it. For more from Here & Now and PBS Wisconsin you can visit PBS Wisconsin dot org and thank you so much for joining us on Noon Wednesday.