DNR, EPA, DHS come to Stella to talk PFAS

It was standing room only at the Stella Town Hall on Oct. 1 for the latest in a series of discussions about PFAS between representatives of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Health Services (DHS) and the public. People were demanding answers as to how the PFAS got into the soil and ground water, and what the solution was going to be. Those answers, however, were not readily available, with the statement, “It comes down to funding,” being used over and over again throughout the course of the evening.

Heavy concentrations of PFAS were found in and around the Stella area, and most recently the DNR issued a press release advising citizens to not eat fish from the Moen Lake Chain, or deer harvested from the area where high levels of PFAS contamination had been found.

According to Nancy Sattler of the Moen Lake Chain Association, the fish consumption advisory came as a shock to the association as well as those living on the lake. She reported one resort owner on the chain immediately put their business up for sale after the news broke. The association, she said, had been receiving calls from property owners on the chain, fishing tournament organizers, and even vacationers from out of state. She said the association and residents on the chain felt “blind-sided” by the news, as they felt they had been working closely with the DNR up to that point and lines of communication were always open.

William “Casey” Crump, Stella town board chair, said he wanted to make it clear that he was not representing the town board when he set up the meeting, but he did so simply as a concerned citizen. He told the crowd gathered that the presenters they would be hearing from were not rule-making authorities, but people who were coming to present as much information as they had and people who would be working with the residents to help them navigate through what has proven to be a large and confusing issue.

James Yach from DNR spoke first, stating the PFAS findings in Stella were part of the testing of 450 equilateral areas in the state. He said the meeting was intended to address ground water and soil contamination, but he fully understood there were concerns from residents of the Moen Lake Chain, and said he would be happy to address those after the meeting, or to set a meeting with riparian owners on the chain separately.

Mark Paulie of DNR said he had been involved in the project since its inception and was present to give an update on the drinking water portion of the issue. The first test was done in July of 2022, with several other tests following in the Town of Stella. Now sampling has been expanded to a three-mile radius of the Town of Stella, with property owners getting notification that they are eligible to have their wells tested by the state. Other concerned property owners may have their wells tested also, but must do so at their own expense.

The issue with PFAS, Fred Heggeman said, is that it is an emerging contaminant. It was contained in biosolids and industrial sludges spread on the landscape, and there were no regulations to limit land spreading of those sludges. It is a legacy issue, he said, with little known about what happened in the past. While heavy metals and other contaminants are regulated in code, that is not the case with PFAS. Regulations were started to be drafted in 2024, but it could take several more years before those are in place.

Erica Holtz from EPA Region 5 was present as well. Despite the government shut down, she said, there was still some funding for travel, which allowed her to attend the meeting. 

“The key takeaway that I want you to be aware of is that we are in the early stages of exploring ways to address the soil and ground water in this area,” she said. “We are going to continue to investigate the PFAS in the soil and groundwater to evaluate the site’s long term eligibility for Superfund cleanup.”

Sites eligible for federal funding are nominated on the National Priorities List. The list addressed clean up that cannot be done by any other federal authorities, she said. 

While many residents had questions about how that whole long-term process would proceed, Holtz reiterated that the process was only in its early stage of assessment. She said she was merely assessing whether or not the site would be eligible for funding. 

At this point, she said, more site inspections would be conducted, then reassessed as necessary. A review would then be conducted at headquarters in Washington, D.C. After that time there would be a 60-day public comment period.

 If a site remained eligible, it would then be finalized to the National Priorities List. Even at that point, however, there is a 90-day window where there may be legal challenges. This does happen, she said, meaning it was not a “done deal” or a “slam dunk” to get to that point in the process. The full Superfund Site Assessment Process can be found on the EPA website, but Holtz said it is a multi-year, multi-step process that is quite involved. DNR, she said, would continue to do their own assessment as well.

Reducing PFAS in drinking water

“We want to know if our water is poisoned!” someone from the middle of the crowd yelled. “Isn’t that why we’re all here? We’re scared and we want answers!”

Many residents expressed that concern over the course of the evening, but also said they were there to learn as much as possible about the findings in the area, where testing was going, and what could ultimately be done to keep residents safe. 

The Wisconsin Department of Health Services presented a document instructing residents on how to reduce PFAS in drinking water. DHS personnel recommended residents who were concerned about possible PFAS in their drinking water purchase water purification for drinking water as well as water for cooking. It would not be necessary to treat all water coming into a home, as water for activities such as bathing or laundry would not need to be treated. These filters are widely available and affordable, according to DHS.

Health effects

While there are some health effects that are linked to PFAS, Nathan Kloczko of Wisconsin DHS, it was not possible to tell each and every person what health issues they would definitely have if there were certain levels of certain PFAS in their bodies. If residents wanted to know the levels of various PFAS in their bodies, tests are available, and residents could ask their health care providers for those tests. However, he reiterated that a certain level of a certain compound did not necessarily equate to any specific health malady. The lack of PFAS in a person’s system, though, could lead to a certain peace of mind. Still, he said it would be up to each person whether they felt the need to have their blood or urine tested by their doctor. 

PFAS has been linked to  several health issues. Those include cancers, especially prostate, kidney and testicular cancers, increased cholesterol, immune effects, reproductive issues and developmental effects in children.

Responsible parties letters

Trevor Noble from DNR said two responsible parties had been identified and had been sent letters, which DNR stated in a press release the previous Friday. The responsible party letters require those parties to clean up the environment to the amount practicable. He said no land owners or residents would be pursued in relation to biosolid spreading contamination.

 He said the responsible party letters were available on the PFAS database on the DNR website. When asked who the parties were multiple times, he directed people to the website repeatedly. 

“Just say who they are!” demanded Tom Weinsch. With that, Noble finally told the crowd that Ahlstrom and Wausau Paper Company were the two parties.

What about the farm fields?

After residents learned they should use alternative water sources to water their garden vegetables, the question came from several places in the room as to the crops grown on farm fields and how large commercial growers in the area could be somehow immune to PFAS affecting their crops. There seemed to be no definitive answer here, either.

The crowd was told that there was no clear answer, but that different crops had different uptake of chemicals in the soil. The DHS recommendation for individuals and families, however, was still to use unaffected water for watering garden vegetables, especially root vegetables. With those in attendance once again left with more questions than answers, the question fell to the floor, to be blown around in the wind, unanswered, at least for now.

Possible study

Amy Schultz, PhD, MS, an environmental epidemiologist at UW-Madison brought her research proposal to the Stella meeting as well. She is still looking for funding for the project, but said her research aimed to do three things. She was looking to help rural communities investigate environment exposures and health impacts, provide evidence with data and statistics and to make scientific discoveries that can “improve the health of Wisconsinites and beyond.”

She said her proposed research would focus specifically on PFAS exposure routes in rural communities and their effects on lipids. She urged those in the room to become involved in her study, should she secure funding, as more data meant results could be more accurately assessed. 

Participation, she said, would start with her making a community site visit to do an interview as well as a blood draw from interested parties. From there a home visit would be conducted. Individual results of the blood work would be received within a few months of the study, with total study results available at the conclusion of the work. 

The study would look to measure PFAS in the environment as well as in people’s blood to help identify the primary pathways of exposure. It would also look at how PFAS exposure would change over time and how that exposure might affect cholesterol and lipids in the blood. 

She added that individual results would be kept private and confidential. Those who agreed to become part of the study would receive a free PFAS testing kit, they would have a better understanding of their exposure levels and also understand how those levels were changing over time. She urged residents to get involved in the study to help find answers to the unknowns in this situation.

Beckie Gaskill may be reached via email at [email protected].