Business/industry and municipalities: Affected entities include facilities that discharge PFAS to surface waters that are required to conduct monitoring or that receive new PFAS WQBELs. Compliance with these PFAS WQBELs may involve the implementation of new treatment methods and/or source reduction measures by wastewater treatment facilities, businesses, and/or industries with current or historic use of PFAS.
Public: From a public health perspective, the public will benefit from any reductions in PFAS discharged associated with the imposition of PFAS limitations in WPDES permits.
7. Summary and preliminary comparison with any existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the proposed rule:
Federal statutes and regulations direct states to establish and periodically review water quality standards. State adoption of water quality standards and revisions to standards require EPA approval pursuant to 40 CFR 131.20 and 131.21. - 33 USC s. 1313(c) (section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act) requires that states periodically review and modify or adopt, if necessary, water quality standards. This requirement applies to all surface waters in the state.
- 33 USC s. 1314(a) (section 304 of the Clean Water Act) requires that EPA develop and publish criteria for water quality for all waters for uses such as aquatic life, public health protection, and recreation.
- 40 CFR s. 130.3 defines water quality standards as setting water quality goals for a waterbody that will protect its designated uses (such as protection of fish, wildlife, recreation, and public health and welfare). Criteria will be set to protect those uses. - 40 CFR s. 131.4 specifies that states are responsible for reviewing, establishing and revising their own water quality standards. - 40 CFR ss. 131.10 and 11 require states to develop water quality standards including uses and criteria to protect the uses. 40 CFR s. 131.11 (b) states that the criteria must be based on federal guidance, federal guidance modified to reflect site-specific criteria, or other scientifically-defensible methods. - 40 CFR s. 131.11 specifies that criteria must protect the designated uses and that criteria must be based on sound scientific rationale and must contain sufficient parameters or constituents to protect the designated use. Furthermore, states must review water quality data and information on discharges to identify specific water bodies where toxic pollutants may be adversely affecting water quality or the attainment of the designated use or where the levels of toxic pollutants are at a level to warrant concern, and must adopt criteria for such toxic pollutants applicable to the water body sufficient to protect the designated use. - 40 CFR 131.20 requires states to periodically review water quality standards. - 40 CFR 132 and Appendices contain requirements for developing water quality standards in the Great Lakes System as well as implementation procedures for the standards and NPDES permitting requirements for point source discharges to the Great Lakes System. - 40 CFR 123.25 lists the federal regulations in 40 CFR 122 and 124 that states must follow in the administration of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. State rules must be at least as stringent as these federal requirements. 8. Anticipated economic impact of implementing the rule (note if the rule is likely to have a significant economic impact on small businesses):
The economic impact to sources of PFOS and/or PFOA that will have to provide treatment as a result of this rule is expected to be significant. However, exact concentrations of PFOS and PFOA in surface waters of the state and wastewater effluents are unknown at this time, although monitoring efforts are scheduled to begin in summer 2019. Should monitoring results identify effluents that are exceeding the proposed criteria, there are currently three treatments that effectively remove PFAS from wastewater: granular activated carbon, anion exchange resins, and reverse osmosis (RO) combined with granular activated carbon treatment of RO reject water. There are costs associated with installation, operation, and maintenance with each of these treatment technologies, so permitted facilities whose effluent has the reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the water quality standard would be expected to incur costs. Treatment costs, however, could be reduced or avoided altogether through source reduction measures. A permittee may apply for a variance using the procedures outlined under Wis. Stat. s. 283.15 if its treatment costs are expected to result in substantial and widespread adverse economic impacts. The economic impact of this rule to small businesses is uncertain at this time as surface water monitoring has not been completed, but additional work will be completed during rule development to evaluate small business impacts.
9. Anticipated number, month and locations of public hearings:
The Department anticipates holding two public hearings in August of 2021. Hearing cities will be: Madison and Wausau or Eau Claire (or other as appropriate).
The Department will hold these hearings in these locations to receive input from affected parties based in the Madison area and at a centrally located city in the state.
