The bill requires DNR and the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System to enter into a memorandum of understanding to ensure that the state laboratory of hygiene reduces the costs of conducting testing for PFAS by at least 10 percent within two years. The bill requires the state laboratory of hygiene to prepare a report on its efforts to reduce the cost of PFAS testing and the timeline for receiving testing results.

The bill requires DNR and the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System to enter into a memorandum of understanding to 1) study and analyze the cost, feasibility, and effectiveness of different methods of treating PFAS before they are released into a water system or water body; 2) conduct a cost-benefit analysis of different options for disposing of biosolids or sludge that contains or may contain PFAS; 3) study and analyze the cost, feasibility, and effectiveness of different destruction and disposal methods for PFAS; 4) study and analyze the migration of PFAS into the bay of Green Bay; and 5) create a comprehensive, interactive map showing all available PFAS testing data and, for each data point, whether it exceeds any applicable state or federal standard for PFAS. Such data may not contain any personally identifiable information unless the entity to which the data applies is required to test and disclose its results under state or federal law.

The bill requires DNR to report to the legislature once every six months for a period of three-years to provide a detailed description of DNR’s expenditures under the bill and a detailed description of DNR’s progress in implementing the provisions of the bill.

Under current law, the Department of Administration and DNR administer the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program (SDWLP), which provides financial assistance to municipalities, and to the private owners of community water systems that serve municipalities, for projects that will help the municipalities comply with federal drinking water standards. DNR establishes a funding priority list for SDWLP projects, and DOA allocates funding for those projects. Also under current law, DNR administers the Clean Water Fund Program (CWFP), which provides financial assistance to municipalities for projects to control water pollution, such as sewage treatment plants.

Under the bill, if DNR, when ranking SDWLP or CWFP projects or determining an applicant’s eligibility for assistance under those programs, considers whether an applicant that intends to extend service outside of municipal boundaries because of water contamination is “small” or “disadvantaged,” DNR must determine the applicant to be small or disadvantaged if the area receiving the extended service would normally be determined to be small or disadvantaged, regardless of whether the existing service area would normally be determined to be small or disadvantaged.

Under current law, a public utility may not engage in certain construction, expansion, or other projects unless the Public Service Commission grants a certificate of authority (CA) for the proposed project. Under the bill, if a water public utility or a combined water and sewer public utility (water utility) fails to obtain a CA before commencing a project for which one is required, PSC may not investigate, impose a penalty against, or bring an action to enjoin the water utility if 1) the water utility undertook the project in response to a public health concern caused by PFAS or an emerging contaminant, the presence of which was unknown to the water utility until shortly before it commenced the project, and, if there is an applicable state or federal standard for the contaminant, the contaminant exceeded or was close to exceeding that standard; 2) the water utility submits the appropriate application and supporting documentation to PSC no later than six months after commencing the project; and 3) the total cost of the project is not greater than $2,000,000 or 50 percent of the utility’s operating expenses for the previous year, whichever is less.

Under current law, a water utility may not change the rates that it charges to customers without first applying to PSC for approval of the change. This bill requires PSC to authorize a separate rate class of customers if requested by a water utility under certain circumstances. Specifically, the bill requires this authorization with respect to those customers to whom water or combined water and sewer utility service was extended outside of the water utility’s service territory in response to a public health concern caused by contamination. Under the bill, PSC must authorize higher rates for this class of customers for the purpose of financing the extension of service. The bill requires PSC to allow the class to remain in effect for 10 years or for the duration of any financing authorized to fund the extension of service, whichever is longer.

Under the bill, no city or village may annex territory for which water or sewerage services have been extended beyond the city’s or village’s municipal boundaries due to an immediate public health concern from an emerging contaminant for at least three years following the completion of the extension of services unless two-thirds of the qualified electors residing in the affected territory vote to approve the annexation.

The bill also authorizes a municipal public utility or metropolitan sewerage district to use revenues from its water or sewerage services for up to half of the cost of pretreatment or other PFAS source reduction measures for an interconnected customer or other regular customer if the costs incurred are less than the costs of the upgrades otherwise required at the endpoint treatment facility and if the costs are approved by the governing body of the municipality or the metropolitan sewerage district.

SB312,,6666.0224 Annexation of territory for which water or wastewater service is extended. Notwithstanding ss. 66.0217, 66.0219, 66.0221, and 66.0223, no territory for which water or sewerage services have been extended beyond a city’s or village’s municipal boundaries due to an immediate public health concern from an emerging contaminant may be annexed by the city or village that extended services for a period of 3 years following the completion of the extension project unless a number of qualified electors residing in the territory for which services have been extended and subject to the proposed annexation equal to at least two-thirds of the votes cast for governor in the territory at the last gubernatorial election vote to approve the annexation.

SB312,,8866.0811 (4) Notwithstanding subs. (2) and (3) and s. 66.0901 (11), a municipal public utility or a metropolitan sewerage district created under ss. 200.21 to 200.65 may use funds derived from its water or sewerage services for up to half of the cost of pretreatment or other perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances source reduction measures for an interconnected customer or other regular customer if the costs incurred are less than the costs of the upgrades otherwise required at the endpoint treatment facility and if the costs are approved by the governing body of the municipality or the metropolitan sewerage district.

SB312,,1010196.03 (7) At the request of a water public utility or combined water and sewer public utility, the commission shall authorize a separate rate class of customers for those customers to whom water or combined water and sewer utility service was extended outside of the public utility’s service territory in response to a public health concern caused by contamination. The commission shall authorize higher rates for a class of customers authorized under this subsection than for other classes for the purpose of financing the extension of service to these customers. The commission shall allow the class of customers to remain in effect for 10 years or for the duration of any financing authorized to fund the extension of service to these customers, whichever is longer.

SB312,,1212196.49 (7) With respect to a water public utility or a combined water and sewer public utility, the commission may not investigate, impose a penalty against, or bring an action to enjoin the utility for failing to obtain a certificate of authority before commencing a project for which one is required under this section if all of the following apply:

SB312,,1313(a) The public utility undertook the project in response to a public health concern caused by an emerging contaminant or by PFAS, as defined in s. 292.315 (1), the presence of which was unknown to the public utility until shortly before it commenced the project, and, if in response to a contaminant for which there is an applicable state or federal standard, the contaminant exceeded or was close to exceeding that standard.