The December answer is...

B, Vermont

Because wastewater plants across Minnesota collect water from various contaminated sources and don’t have the technology to remove the PFAS, both the discharge of “treated” water and the leftover biosolids spread as fertilizer will continue to be primary pathways of these chemicals into our environment if something doesn’t change. When it comes to biosolids, Minnesota has no requirements to even monitor for the presence of PFAS,  let alone label it like Vermont. 

MCEA’s recent report on PFAS in our environment makes it clear that the state needs to take stronger actions now to reduce PFAS in both sources - wastewater and biosolids. “The costs of protecting drinking water from these chemicals are going to be extraordinary,” Griffith says. “We are facing down the barrel of that gun and we don't have any more excuses not to use the source reduction tools that we have. PFAS pollution controls need to be written into our wastewater permits.”