Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drinking Water Pfas Well9 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Onalaska officials fast-track design work after tests show Well 9 near proposed PFAS limit
Summary
City staff reported quarterly test results that show Well 9 hovering at or above the EPA'proposed 4 nanograms per liter threshold for PFOA. The Board voted unanimously to submit an intent-to-apply for state funding, issue an RFP for design services and put $50,000 in the 2026 capital-improvement budget toward pilot/design work.
The Board of Public Works and Utilities in Onalaska voted unanimously Oct. 7 to submit an intent to apply for state drinking-water funding and to issue a request for proposals (RFP) to design treatment for Well 9 after quarterly tests showed levels of PFOA close to the Environmental Protection Agency'proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL).
City Public Works Director Jared Holter said the city has monitored PFAS compounds at its wells since 2021 and that recent quarterly results have trended near the 4 nanograms-per-liter level the EPA has proposed for PFOA. "We are going to put the intent to apply in by the October 31 deadline," Holter told the board.
The nut of the decision: Holter and other staff urged moving quickly to develop design plans so the city can qualify for state Safe Drinking Water loan funding that includes principal forgiveness for emerging-contaminant projects. Kevin Schubert, city engineer, said the timeline is tight but feasible and that the state program has in recent rounds provided principal forgiveness equal to up to 50% of a project and up to about $3.5 million in forgiveness per project.
Board discussion and technical context
Holter summarized the monitoring: Onalaska tests quarterly for a small subset of PFAS compounds and has seen PFOA readings that rose from 4.2 to as high as 6.1 ng/L at Well 9 in the last year of quarterly sampling. He said Well 9 supplies the south end of the city and is important to keep in service because of the city's system layout and reservoir configuration. Holter estimated capital cost for a treatment system at "somewhere in the neighborhood of $6 to $7 million" to retrofit the existing well site with a proven treatment such as granular activated carbon.
Ashley Kramer, the city's water quality lab supervisor, explained staff's testing protocol and seasonal consistency in the results, and Schubert said the city has been tracking funding windows created by federal infrastructure programs and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Schubert said Onalaska has previously filed claims in nationwide settlements with manufacturers and has received some proceeds, but those funds will not cover full treatment costs.
Finance implications and next steps
Finance Director Sabrina Steger asked how the intent-to-apply (ITA) process works; Schubert and Holter said the ITA is a placeholder that does not obligate the city but is required to be on the DNR's project list and that award decisions and principal-forgiveness amounts will be clearer when the DNR issues its project-priority list in spring 2026. Holter said the city has budgeted $50,000 in the 2026 capital improvements program for pilot testing and design work and noted an additional $150,000 in the proposed 2027 CIP would bring available design funds to $200,000 if the board moves forward.
Board action
The board voted unanimously on two related motions: first, to submit the ITA and issue an RFP for engineering design services to meet the DNR's June 30, 2026 application requirements; and second, later in the meeting, to place $50,000 in the 2026 capital-improvement budget for Well 9 treatment design/pilot work. Both motions passed on voice votes with no dissent.
Why this matters
If the state and federal schedule proceeds, the EPA'proposed PFOA MCL of 4 ng/L would require utilities to either install treatment or cease use of a noncompliant source after the enforcement dates in the rule (staff said public-notice and enforcement milestones are expected to roll out during 2027'2029). For Onalaska, the city's consultants told staff the combination of treatment cost and the potential for partial principal forgiveness makes an accelerated design timeline financially sensible.
What remains uncertain
Staff acknowledged several open questions: (1) the final scope and cost of a treatment system will depend on the selected technology and site modifications; (2) grant/forgiveness awards cannot be guaranteed until the DNR publishes its priority list; and (3) whether more wells will trend upward over time. Staff said design contracts would be brought back to the board for approval after the RFP process and before final commitment to construction.
Ending note
The board directed staff to proceed with the ITA, the RFP and the $50,000 CIP allocation and to return with consultant proposals and more detailed costs before any construction commitment.
