COMMENTS ABOUT A FELLOW LAWYER.
>>> EARLIER THIS WEEK, A
LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ALLOWED
NEW REGULATIONS FOR P FAST
CONTAMINATION TO GO INTO EFFECT.
A DAY LATER THE E.P.A. RELEASED
NEW FEDERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON
PFAS THAT SHOW WISCONSIN'S NEW
STANDARD IS NOT NEARLY STRONG
ENOUGH TO PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH.
JOINING US IS -- THANKS FOR YOUR
TIME.
>> GOOD EVENING.
>> WISCONSIN'S NEW STANDARD ON
PFAS IS 70 PARTS PER TRILLION
FOR DRINKING WATER.
BUT THE NEW STANDARD FOR ONE OF
THESE SO-CALLED FOREVER
CHEMICALS IS OWN 004 PARTS
PER TRILLION.
JUST HOW BIG OF A DIFFERENCE IS
THAT?
>> THAT'S QUITE A BIG
DIFFERENCE.
SO LET ME BUT PARTS HER TRILLION
IN PERSPECTIVE FOR YOU.
-- PER TRILLION IN PERSPECTIVE
FOR YOU.
A DROP OR TWO OF WATER IN AN
OLYMPIC SIZED POOL.
THAT'S A PART PER TRILLION.
SO WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS THIS
CHEMICAL IS -- TOXIN IS ACTUALLY
A CHEMICAL, IS VERY DANGEROUS
AND VERY, VERY LOW LEVEL -- AT
VERY, VERY LOW LEVELS.
>> MANUFACTURERS AND CHEMICAL
COMPANIES ARE OPPOSED TO THESE
STANDARDS AT ANY LEVEL.
SAYING IT WILL COST TOO MUCH TO
COMPLY OR IT MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE
TO REACH THE STANDARDS.
ARE THESE REALISTIC CONCERNS?
>> YES, BER, BUT THE ARENA THE
E.P.A. -- REASON THE E.P.A. CAME
OUT WITH THIS ADVISORY, THIS HAS
NO LEGAL IMPLICATIONS.
IT'S AN ADVISORY.
LIKE THE 70 PARTS PER TRILLION
WAS AN OLD ADVISORY FROM 2016
THAT WISCONSIN WAS PROPERLY
FOLLOWING.
SO WISCONSIN IS DOING EVERYTHING
THEY COULD DO.
WHAT BASED ON NEW SCIENCE, THEY
HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT
THE 70 WAS FAR TOO HIGH.
AND THEY NEED TO SET LOWER
LEVELS.
BUT YES, THE CHALLENGE IS GOING
TO BE HOW DO WE REACH THESE
LEVELS.
AND THAT'S YET TO BE DETERMINED.
>> NOW, YOUR SPECIALTY IS IN
PEDIATRICS.
WHAT DOES EXPOSURE TO THESE
CONTAMINANTS DO TO CHILDREN?
>> OKAY.
SPECIFICALLY, OVER TIME, WE'VE
LEARNED THAT THE IMPACT OF THESE
CHEMICALS ARE THAT IT CAN
INTERFERE WITH THE BODY'S
NATURAL HORMONES, WHICH ACT IN
VERY SMALL LEVELS, TOO.
IT CAN INCREASE CHOLESTEROL
LEVELS.
IT CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF
CERTAIN CANCERS.
AND IN CHILDREN SOME RECENT
STUDIES SHOW IT'S AFFECTING THE
IMMUNE SYSTEM, TO THE POINT
WHERE CHILDREN MAY NOT BE
RESPONDING PROPERLY TO SOME
VACCINES AND AS FAR AS CHILDREN,
IT CAN HAVE EFFECT ON
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES IN
PREGNANCY -- DISABILITIES.
IN PREGNANCY, WOMEN WHO ARE
EXPOSED CAN HAVE HIGHER BLOOD
PRESSURE AND HAVE LOWER BIRTH
WEIGHT CHILDREN.
>> NOW, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
COMMUNITIES AKRON WISCONSIN THAT
HAVE FOUND LEVELS OF PFAS IN
THEIR DRINKING WATER.
ARE THEY DOING ENOUGH?
WHAT SHOULD PEOPLE DO IF THEY
KNOW THAT IT'S IN FAURES -- IN
THEIR FAUCET?
>> MARINOT HAS HAD A PROBLEM
THERE AND THE DNR HAS STEPPED UP
AND HELD THE FEET OF THE
POLLUTERS TO PROVIDE WATER FOR
THE PEOPLE IN FRENCH ISLAND, WE
ALSO HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE
EXPOSED.
BUT WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO IS
TEST MORE.
WE NEED TO KNOW WHERE THE
PROBLEM IS AND HOW TO ACT OUT.
BUT THE FIRST THING IS TEST ALL
ACROSS THE STATE.
THE CITY HAS TESTED THEIR MUN
PAL WELLS AND I -- MUNICIPAL
WELLS AND I SUSPECT THEY'RE
GOING TO BE TESTING ACROSS THE
COUNTRY BEFORE WE ACT.
>> A LAWSUIT AGAINST DANE COUNTY
AGAINST THE WISCONSIN DNR
BECAUSE OF THESE NEW STANDARDS
AND DANE COUNTY IS KNOWN AS ONE
OF THE MORE PROGRESSIVE COUNTIES
F. THEY'RE SUING, WHAT DOES THAT
SAY FOR THE REST OF THE STATE
MEETING THE NEW STANDARDS?
>> YOU HIT ON A VERY DIFFICULT
SITUATION.
WING THAT MANY OF THE
COMPANIES -- WE KNOW THAT MANY
OF THE COMPANIES WHO HAVE MADE
THESE CHEMICALS OVER THE YEARS
HAVE MADE QUITE A BIT OF MONEY
FROM THE US 0 OF THESE CHEMICAL.
SO I THINK IT SHOULDN'T BE ON
THE ONUS OF THE MUNICIPALITIES
OR THE TAXPAYERS.
IT SHOULD BE ON THE OWNERS OF
THE MANUFACTURERS.
IF YOU MESS IT UP, CLEAN IT UP.
>> THERE'S NEW TYPES OF
CHEMICALS THAT ARE PART OF THIS
PFAS FAMILY AND THEY HAVE THEIR
OWN RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE
QUITE A BIT HIGHER THAN THE NEW
FEDERAL LEVEL.
THE FEDERAL SUGGESTIONS.
WHAT DO BENG ABOUT THEM AND
WHAT -- WE KNOW ABOUT THAT THEM
AND WHAT SHOULD WE MONITOR
THERE?
>> WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT SOME OF
THE SUBSTITUTE CHEMICALS ARE
THEY DO HAVE PROPERTIES THAT ARE
VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONES THAT
THEY ARE REPLACING.
AND THAT'S SHOWING UP IN SOME OF
THE STUDIES, TOO.
BUT WHAT PEOPLE LISTENING ARE
GOING TO SAY, WHAT CAN I DO AS
AN INDIVIDUAL.
WHAT DID YOU -- CAN YOU DO AS AN
INDIVIDUAL IS TO ASK YOUR
MUNICIPALITY TO TEST FOR IT AND
THEN WHAT CAN YOU PERSONALLY DO?
USE WATER FILTERS.
WE KNOW FILTERS WORK
TEMPORARILY.
BUT YES, WE ARE LOOKING AT A
SITUATION THAT'S GOING TO
REQUIRE MANY MINDS TO COME IN
AND HELP US FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE
CLEAN THIS UP.
IT'S SOMETHING ELSE.
WE'RE INVOLVED IN CLEANUP.
THAT'S TWO PRONGS.
THE OTHER PART IS WE NEED TO
STOP THE FLOW OF THESE CHEMICALS
INTO THE ENVIRONMENT.
SO WE NEED TO STOP WHAT I CALL
NONESSENTIAL USES OF THESE
CHEMICALS.
SO DO WE NEED TO HAVE A FRY PAN
THAT'S NONSTICK?
NOT NECESSARILY.
SO THERE ARE SOME NONESSENTIAL
USES OF THESE CHEMICALS THAT WE
COULD ELIMINATE FROM SOCIETY.
>> THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY,