A Gov. Tony Evers budget plan aims to protect innocent landowners from being put on the hook for PFAS contamination — termed a “good start” by one GOP senator spearheading legislation to combat “forever chemicals.”
Evers and the Republican-controlled Legislature have clashed over proposals to spend the $125 million set aside in the last state budget to fight PFAS. Last session, Evers vetoed a GOP bill co-authored by Sen. Eric Wimberger, R-Green Bay, laying out how to spend the money. The guv argued SB 312 would undermine the Department of Natural Resources’ ability to address contamination and hold bad actors accountable.
The sticking point in negotiations has centered around who should be held liable for contamination and possible protections for those with contamination on their property through no fault of their own.
“It’s nice that he’s finally acknowledging that there are innocent landowners, and he’s deviating from the hard line position of maintaining DNR authority over the situation regardless, and that’s a good start, I suppose,” Wimberger said.
Meanwhile, a Midwest Environmental Advocates attorney says while he sees the exemption as unnecessary, Wimberger should take Evers up on the compromise. But the state’s largest trade association, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, says Evers’ proposal “dramatically falls short” of what’s needed.
Evers’ proposal would codify protections exclusively for agricultural or residential properties polluted with PFAS-contaminated sludge, as long as that sludge was spread on the land in compliance with a Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued by DNR. It would also require those property owners to comply with any other conditions DNR deems necessary to address contamination, and allow the agency to limit public access to the property if necessary.
Under the proposal, the protections would end Dec. 31, 2035. Evers’ office did not respond to a request for comment on why the sunset date was included.
Wimberger has introduced a bill that largely mirrors last session’s SB 312, with protections for a much broader group. He raised concerns about aspects of Evers’ proposal, including the limited scope and provisions requiring property owners to do what DNR deems “reasonable and necessary,” and allowing other responsible parties, aside from DNR, their consultants or contractors to access the property.
He also noted Evers’ proposal only addresses residential and agricultural properties, and doesn’t address residents in towns like Peshtigo, where Tyco Fire Products caused PFAS contamination linked to firefighting foam.
See the full story at WisPolitics.
