But is it true? No.
In 2019 and 2020, the PFAS found in Madison’s drinking water was a big deal. See Wisconsin State Journal articles here, here, and here. In August 2020, the State Journal reported that PFAS was detected in every well.
But according to the Water Utility this week, the PFAS problem has apparently gone away. Whew!
In his December 10 Wisconsin State Journal story about the proposed DNR drinking water standard of 20 ppt for PFOA and PFOS, Chris Hubbuch wrote that Marcus Pearson, the MWU’s new public relations official, said “the proposed state standard — which is 10 times higher than PFOA and PFOS levels in any active city well — should reassure the more than 260,000 Madison-area residents ‘that our water is undeniably safe to drink.'”
“Undeniably safe to drink“? Great news! What a relief!
But wait. There’s more. Hubbuch also reported that “[w]hile the EPA has said it’s safe to drink water with PFOS and PFOA concentrations up to 70 ppt, the agency now says there may be health risks at levels below just 1 ppt. “All indications are it will be lower,” said Jim Zellmer, deputy administrator of the DNR’s environmental management division.”
How much lower? At the December 8, 2021 Natural Resources Board meeting Darsi Foss, the agency’s Administrator of Environmental Management” said this: “Just last month, EPA transmitted to the National Science Advisory Board information on the health effects of PFOA and PFOS, and noted two things. First, that these studies indicate that the level at which negative health effects could occur are much lower than EPA previously understood, including near zero for certain health effects, especially PFOA, which they suspect is a carcinogen. Previous studies have shown that exposures to PFOA and PFOS may lead to reduced vaccine response, particularly in children.”
Since early 2019, in its public letters to the Water Utility Board, MEJO has cited science showing health effects at much lower PFAS levels than EPA’s current health advisory levels of 70 ppt for PFOA and PFOS combined–and even DNR/DHS’s proposed standard of 20 ppt for the two compounds.
It has been three years since we began lobbying the Water Utility to measure a larger number of PFAS in all city wells and for more protective standards. Since then, did PFAS in Madison’s wells, drawing from very deep aquifers over 700 feet deep, somehow get cleaned up? Did our ongoing activism finally pay off? Or did PFAS levels just somehow miraculously drop down to levels top scientists say are safe on their own?
Sadly, no. The PFAS levels in all our wells are pretty much the same as they were for years–with variations due to seasonal fluctuations, different analytical methods, and other factors. These variations notwithstanding, levels in many wells have consistently been well above what top scientists (and now EPA) are admitting can cause health problems. Nevertheless, the Utility insists they are “safe.”
As Isthmus journalist Kori Feener wrote in 2020, even here in highly educated, purportedly science-loving Madison, the Madison Water Utility and its Technical Advisory Committee have chosen to ignore the state-of-the-art science on PFAS, and to dismiss or trash advocates and journalists who dare to bring it to their attention.
In other words, the Water Utility can deem levels in their wells as “undeniably safe” only by ignoring the most current science. The Utility isn’t considering health effects of all of the PFAS compounds we are drinking–just two of them–and the testing methods don’t detect PFAS compounds at the very low levels current science shows are harmful. Effects on fetuses and infants, who ingest far more water per body weight than adults, aren’t appropriately factored into standards.
Municipal and utility lobbying groups oppose state standards, argue to “wait for EPA”
As they have done for years, the Madison Water Utility and other public utilities in the state–represented by the Municipal Environmental Group (MEG)–joined industries and other PFAS polluters in arguing against the DNR’s far from radical proposed standard of 20 ppt for PFOA and PFOS, saying we should “wait for EPA.” The League of Wisconsin Municipalities, which the City of Madison is a member of, also wrote comments against DNR’s proposed standards and supporting the “wait for EPA” approach–and explicitly endorsing MEG’s letter.
We’ve heard these arguments before. We articulated at some length in early 2019 why the city should not “wait for EPA” on PFAS standards.
Even more brashly, MEG joined Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC) and other industrial polluters in arguing that the DNR doesn’t have authority to set PFAS standards at all! This is likely a precursor for how the Republican legislature will trash the DNR’s proposed standards when they come before them.
Why are municipalities and utilities opposing the proposed state standards? Money, of course. It costs a lot to filter PFAS from the water or develop other strategies to prevent people from drinking harmful levels, and utilities and municipalities don’t want to spend that money.
What are the politics behind the “wait for EPA” argument? Are MEG, LWM and WMC anxiously waiting for EPA to promulgate a 1 ppt (or lower) standard for PFAS because they want to follow the best science and are concerned about protecting public health? Of course not. Both entities know very well that, as Darsi Foss stated on Dec. 8, EPA will take around five years to approve final standards, at which point there may be a different president and different EPA leadership (leadership that might not support very protective standards based on current science). Until then, they can point to the EPA’s existing, totally unprotective 70 ppt health advisory for PFOS and PFOA. (The U.S. military, by the way, also would prefer to keep this bogus EPA health advisory level and the Department of Defense is likely lobbying for that at the federal level–or perhaps lobbying for even higher (less protective) PFAS standards).
MWU and Madison Mayor appear to support state standards while their lobbying entities do the opposite. WTF?
In a bizarre political twist–aided by befuddling doublespeak–while the city’s lobbying groups MEG and LWM opposed state standards, Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway wrote to DNR seemingly in support (albeit vaguely) of the proposed state standards.
She began by admitting “As a Mayor, I am fully aware that one of the most fundamental responsibilities of local government is to provide safe, reliable drinking water. Given the pervasive use of PFAS in our products, its persistence in the environment, and the serious associated health risks associated with it, monitoring and limiting PFAS in our drinking water systems is imperative.”
Wow, this sounds great. We strongly agree! But then she went on to highlight the costs to cities and pass the buck to DNR:
“I also acknowledge the technical and cost challenges localities may face in addressing PFAS contamination found in drinking water. Moreover, while water utilities are faced with addressing the contamination, they did not cause the pollution. The best policy would be to require producers of PFAS containing products to take responsibility for remediation. Failing that, I strongly recommend the State continue its efforts to provide support to local governments in numerous ways. Specifically, water utilities need technical assistance and grants to implement treatment systems, and they need the DNR to continue its efforts to hold polluters accountable.”
We agree that DNR should find ways to fund and support local governments in implementing water treatment systems, and we strongly agree–as we have argued for decades– that the agency should do much more to “hold polluters accountable.” Moreover, we concur that it in an ideal world, we would “require producers of PFAS containing products to take responsibility for remediation.”
But this ideal is not the current reality. This is not how our (broken) regulatory system works. At the federal level, U.S. regulatory system has failed to prevent manufacturers from producing poisons in the first place, and also failed to hold them accountable for the myriad damages these poisons cause when they get into our surface water, fish, air, drinking water, and everyone’s bodies. This is really sad.
But again–and this cannot be over-emphasized– the mayor explicitly recognized that “one of the most fundamental responsibilities of local government is to provide safe, reliable drinking water.” In other words, it doesn’t matter where the contamination in the drinking water came from, who produced it, or how it got there. (Case in point–the Water Utility has never argued that we should go after the manufacturers of the PCE, TCE, and many other chemicals that contaminate many of our city wells.) It is the responsibility of the Water Utility to assure that its residents–who are also its customers, and pay for this water–are not drinking harmful levels of pollutants, no matter who produced them.
Also, ironically, the city itself has significant responsibilities for some of the PFAS in our drinking water, including the high levels in Well 15–e.g., from its past ownership and use of the Dane County airport burn pits, Truax Landfill, other city landfills, and more. Further, the city is not powerless to do anything about PFAS and other poisons discharged from other local polluters that end up in our drinking water. The city could fine PFAS polluters in the city under existing water pollution general ordinances that have been on the books for decades–but as far as we know, it never has.
Will the city and/or county use the newly minted Dane County illicit discharge ordinance (which also covers the city and will be enforced by Public Health Madison Dane County) to go after pollution dischargers? Time will tell…
What twisted political calculus is at play?
Why would Rhodes-Conway send a letter to DNR appearing to support the agency’s proposed standards, while the city’s lobbying group opposes them? Is she disingenuously trying to appear to be a good “progressive” city leader, even while city attorneys work with LWM attorneys behind the scenes on policies that undermine DNR’s proposals?
The city knows that LWM’s position will carry the most weight with DNR, not the mayor’s vague letter. The city also knows that DNR’s proposed standards will very likely be trashed by the Republican legislature and perhaps never be promulgated–or be much weaker if they are.
What about the Madison Water Utility? Again, its lobbying arm, MEG, also strongly opposed the DNR’s proposed standards–and even more bizarrely, argued that the agency doesn’t even have the authority to implement them at all. But like the city, even as a member of MEG, the Utility is trying to appear publicly as if they are taking the higher road in a vague, forked tongue way.
According to the State Journal, “[a] spokesperson for the Madison Water Utility said that while utility leaders agree with many of the trade group’s comments, including the need for a cost-benefit analysis, they support immediate state regulation. ‘Both federal and state standards will eventually be implemented,’ Marcus Pearson said. “We know that, but we presume a federal standard could take years to implement.””
Hmmm. It is really difficult to make sense of these convoluted and contradictory messages. Of course right now the MWU publicly says it likes the proposed DNR standards for just two PFAS compounds, because compared to these levels, the Utility can say that all their wells (even Well 15, which is off) are “undeniably safe.” The Utility made this argument before–even after the well was shut down.
But if the arguments of the Utility’s lobbying group MEG hold sway at DNR and/or with the Legislature, the DNR will not develop any PFAS standards at all! If we “wait for EPA,” as MEG is demanding, and EPA proposes a 1 ppt or 0.1 ppt PFAS level five years from now (based on science that has been published for years at this point), the same water we are being assured is safe now will suddenly be deemed unsafe. What will the Utility tell us then?
It’s crazy making to sort this out. My guess is that the city and DNR are banking on the EPA never proposing such protective standards. Of course, the water and waste water utility’s national lobbying groups will fight that tooth and nail if they are ever proposed.
Water Utility General Manager misinforms alders
Meanwhile, the new General Manager of the Madison Water Utility, Krishna Kumar, was invited to the November 29 Common Council President’s Work Group on Environmental Justice to inform the group of alders on how the Water Utility has been addressing PFAS in the city’s drinking water wells, assuring them that–surprise, surprise!–PFAS levels in municipal wells here are really low, perfectly safe, and the best approach for now is to wait for DNR’s rule making to be finalized.
The alders in the President’s EJ group, who don’t know the history of this issue, likely had no idea what Kumar was not telling them.
For that story, see our next post…
*****************
Below, from Steve Verburg’s January 2019 WSJ story:
“As citizens groups prepared to ask the Madison Water Utility Board at its meeting on Tuesday for a more aggressive response to drinking water contamination believed to be emanating from Truax Air National Guard base, the utility announced it is taking a step advocates called for previously by testing for at least twice as many toxic compounds as it tentatively announced last month.” (Steve Apps, State Journal Archive).
