MADISON, Wisconsin (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court delivered a ruling on Tuesday that marks a significant win for environmentalists in the ongoing battle against “Forever Chemicals,” commonly known as PFAS, allowing advocates to hold polluters accountable.
A court led by liberal justices determined that state regulators have the authority to mandate landowners to remediate emerging contaminants like PFAS even before they are officially classified as hazardous substances.
The 5-2 decision poses a setback for a coalition of states representing businesses and manufacturers, who argued that the state cannot impose regulations on substances until they have been formally recognized as dangerous.
This ruling represents the latest development in Wisconsin’s protracted struggle, involving regulators, environmentalists, politicians, and companies nationwide, over how to address PFAS pollution.
PFAS Issues
Cities big and small across Wisconsin, from Madison to Marinette, Lacrosse, and Wausau are addressing PFAS contamination.
PFAS, or Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl substances, have been present for decades and are now widespread across the country’s air, water, and soil.
These chemicals have facilitated non-stick frying pans, enabled firefighting foams to quell flames, and helped keep clothes and people dry in the rain.
However, they resist degradation. In effect, they remain in the environment and pose risks to human health. Health issues linked to certain PFAS exposure include low birth weight, cancer, and liver disease.
The Wisconsin Incident
The ruling from the Wisconsin Supreme Court came in a lawsuit initiated by Wisconsin Manufacturer & Commerce, the state’s largest business organization. They filed suit against the DNR in 2021 on behalf of Leather Rich, a dry cleaning business in Oconowoc.
Leather Rich detected PFAS contamination in 2018 and began remediation efforts, but after the DNR issued an online notice in 2019 labeling PFAS chemicals as harmful, it required dry cleaners to test groundwater for PFAS without specifying which compounds to examine or what levels would be deemed hazardous.
Leather Rich contended that the DNR cannot compel businesses to conduct tests and clean up contamination from emerging contaminants like PFAS unless they are first designated as hazardous substances. This formal designation can take years and requires congressional approval, during which time exposure could continue to harm the environment and public health, the DNR argued.
A Waukesha County Judge and the State Court of Appeals noted a significant amount of leather.
The DNR appealed, asserting that the lower court’s ruling would undermine the state’s “outflow laws,” which are designed to combat pollution.
This law, enacted approximately 50 years ago, mandates that individuals or entities responsible for releasing hazardous substances into the environment must clean up the contamination.
Weight of the Wisconsin Supreme Court
“Wisconsin’s spill laws are designed to protect human health and the environment in real time by regulating those responsible for the release of hazardous substances,” wrote Judge Janet Protasiewitz for the majority.
She indicated that the DNR need not establish regulations before requiring Leather Rich to begin remediation.
“The DNR has clear authority to enforce reporting thresholds for hazardous substance emissions,” Protasiewicz stated.
The court’s liberal justices were joined by conservative Judge Brian Heggon, while Justices Annette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley dissented.
Dissenting justices argued that the ruling allows officials to “impose regulations and penalties on entities without prior notice, oversight, or deliberation, which contravenes fundamental principles of the rule of law.”
Governor Tony Evers and environmental advocates celebrated the decision.
Evers hailed it as “a historic victory for the people of Wisconsin and my administration’s fight against PFAS and other hazardous pollutants.”
Midwest environmental attorney Rob Lee described it as “a victory for the health and safety of Wisconsinites,” providing “enhanced protections for vital environments and public health that have been safeguarded against toxic contamination for nearly five decades.”
However, WMC Vice President Scott Manley criticized the ruling, claiming it places undue burdens on businesses and homeowners, who must navigate ambiguous dangers and face potentially “endless and exorbitant lawsuits.”
“This ruling endorses a regulatory framework that is fundamentally inequitable, impractical, and impossible to adhere to,” Manley stated.
Fighting over PFAS Regulations
Federal Regulatory Authorities established the first national standard last year, where the Trump administration announced plans regarding drinking water in May. These restrictions have been weakened.
The state imposes strict limits on PFAS levels in surface and drinking water. These standards apply to water supplied through public and non-community systems serving locations like factories, schools, and hotels.
Nonetheless, it has yet to implement PFAS standards for groundwater, which serves as a drinking water source for approximately two-thirds of Wisconsin residents. The agency ceased efforts to draft these regulations in 2023, citing overly ambitious compliance requirements.
Source: apnews.com