MARCH 2020 | VOLUME 29 , NO. 2 THE COUNC I L OF S TAT E GOV E RNMENT S | M I DWE S T E RN OF F I C E
States take lead on pfas problem ‘Forever chemicals’ persist in environment and are linked to health problems; options include drinking water standards, legal remedies to help fund cleanup efforts
regulations on PFAS to protect drinking water (as of February 2020)
State
Details on regulations
Groundwater quality standards in development Groundwater cleanup target levels in effect Health-based guidance levels, ground- water cleanup target levels and surface water discharge limits in effect Maximum contaminant levels proposed and under development Health-based guidance levels and groundwater guidance levels in effect Groundwater cleanup target levels in effect Maximum contaminant levels, ground- water guidance levels and groundwater discharge limits in pre-proposal development phase
Illinois
include chrome plating, electronics manufacturing and oil recovery. Known as “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down, PFAS can accumulate over time, including in drinking water. That aspect, combined with related health hazards that have become known in the last 20 to 30 years, has led many states to begin learning just how pervasive PFAS are, the threats they pose, and how best to regulate them. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “studies indicate that PFOA and PFOS can cause reproductive and developmental, liver and kidney, and immunological effects in laboratory animals. Both chemicals have caused tumors in animals.” (PFOA and PFOS are part of the group of PFAS chemicals.) The federal agency also reports higher cholesterol levels among exposed populations, and more limited findings related to low birthweights, effects on the immune system, cancer (for PFOA) and thyroid hormone disruption (for PFOS). In 2009, the EPA set initial “health advisory levels” at 400 parts per trillion for PFOA and 200 ppt for PFOS. The agency reset those to a sum of 70 ppt for both chemicals in May 2016, but, as stated on EPA’s
website, such advisories “are non- enforceable and non-regulatory” and intended as informational guides for state and local officials on dealing with contamination above the advisory level. While the EPA is working on setting“maximum contaminant levels”— legally enforceable limits on what is allowed in drinking water — for PFAS, states today are left mostly to their own devices. The best thing states can do to gauge their PFAS situations is to monitor and test water systems and wells for contamination, says Rebecca Klaper, director of the Great Lakes Genomics Center at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee’s School of Freshwater Sciences. “It’s not like, ‘Who hasn’t known these compounds were around?’ but we’re able to detect them at much lower levels, and we now know some of the potential health effects of exposure, even at lower levels,”Klaper says. “We don’t really have great ways to clean up the industrial sources, so a good place to start is drinking water.” MICHIGAN’S MULTI-FACETED APPROACH TO PFAS Michigan in 2015 became the first state in the Midwest to set limits on allowable discharges into surface
by Jon Davis (jdavis@csg.org) M ichigan and Minnesota are leading the charge to corral compounds known by an alphabet soup of acronyms that have become the source of widespread concerns about the safety of drinking water across the Midwest. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known collectively as PFAS, are a group of more than 4,700 chemicals that have been in use since the 1940s. Their chemical structures make PFAS resistant to stains, grease and water, which led to their widespread use in paper and cardboard packaging, food wrappers, personal care products, carpeting and clothing— anything treated with Scotchgard, for example — fire suppression foams, and materials with non-stick properties such as Teflon. Industrial applications
Iowa
Michigan
Minnesota
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Sources: American Water Works Association, CSG Midwest research
PFaS-related legislation in midwest (as of february 2020)
PFAS-related legislation introduced, including enforceable limits/standards to protect drinking water
COVER STORY CONT INUED ON PAGE 7
Source: Safer States
Inside this issue
Capitol Insights
8-9
Question of the Month 5 • Do Midwestern states have procurement laws that encourage the purchase of recycled products? 6 • Flooding cost Midwest $6.2 billion in 2019; this year, states are planning for more • In Saskatchewan, new rules on vaping sales take effect • Wisconsin invests in peer-to-peer suicide prevention program • Ohio looks to upskill workforce with micro-credentialing law • Illinois legislators ensure students get excused school absence to vote Capitol Clips
CSG Midwest Issue Briefs 2-3 • Criminal Justice & Public Safety : Michigan’s “deep dive” into county jail populations leads to 18 new policy ideas • Economic Development : Federally designated Opportunity Zones open new options for states • Agriculture & Natural Resources : Minnesota has emerged as national leader in efforts to protect pollinators • Great Lakes : High water levels, shoreline erosion have state leaders searching for policy responses Around the Region 4 • A look at nine policy ideas from nine State of the State addresses delivered in January and February MLC Chairman’s Initiative: Literacy 5 • Wisconsin has new law to help children with dyslexia; other states require screenings, interventions
• Profile : Michigan House Minority Leader Christine Greig • FirstPerson article : North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum
CSG Midwest News 10 • CSG Midwest Under the Dome Initiative helps bring workshop on civil discourse to Kansas legislators 11 • A look at three alumni now serving in key leadership posts in state government • Guest column: Why the ability to project strength and warmth is critical to legislative leadership BILLD Alumni Notes
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs