Hastings officials are puzzling over how to fund a $62 million water treatment project to scrub “forever chemicals” from the city’s water supply — and they’re doing it without the millions of dollars from a 3M Co. settlement that other east metro cities have received.

Three new treatment plants will likely be needed in Hastings when the state and federal government release more stringent drinking water standards for PFAS chemicals in the coming months, city officials said.

Unlike 14 cities and townships in Washington County, Hastings — across the Mississippi River in Dakota County — so far hasn’t received any money from an $850 million settlement 3M reached with the state in 2018 for polluting groundwater with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS.

“When the standards get lowered, we expect that we’re going to need to have treatment for all six wells,” said Hastings City Administrator Dan Wietecha. “We certainly think we’re part of [the east metro] and believe we’re eligible.”

The city also hasn’t received any funding from a 2007 consent decree between 3M and the state that has paid for water treatment projects in other cities, like Woodbury.

State officials say that’s because they haven’t yet been able to show a definitive connection between Hastings’ water supply and a 3M disposal site in Oakdale or Woodbury, the company’s Cottage Grove manufacturing facility or the Washington County landfill in Lake Elmo.

The site assessment process for Hastings is a “highly technical” one that each city receiving settlement funds has undergone, said Tom Higgins, the MPCA’s Superfund section manager.

But Ryan Stempski, Hastings’ city engineer and public works director, said city officials are convinced the polluted water reached the city through 3M’s disposal sites.

“Where else would it be coming from?” he said.

PFAS — toxic chemicals pioneered by Maplewood-based 3M and used in products ranging from frying pans to firefighting foam — have been linked to liver damage, thyroid disruption and cancer.

Hastings officials said they have known about PFAS in their water for years, but the levels hovered just below the Minnesota Department of Health’s drinking water standards.

“We’re probably at the worst position you can be in because [our levels] are high enough to be just below their current index,” Stempski said.

Hastings officials last month asked the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), co-trustees of the 3M settlement funds, to prioritize the funding of their water treatment project because it met all the necessary criteria.

The project’s details are still being finalized, but it’s expected to cost around $62 million and involve building three plants that would use granular activated carbon filter systems to remove PFAS, city officials said.

WSB, the Golden Valley-based engineering firm conducting a feasibility study and preliminary plans for the project, will share its recommendations with the city Aug. 7.

In a statement, 3M spokeswoman Carolyn LaViolette noted the company’s national settlement last month for $10.5 billion — still awaiting court approval — that would help public water suppliers pay for PFAS treatment without the need for lawsuits or admission of liability. The company also has pledged to stop manufacturing PFAS by 2026.

Taking action

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in March released a “proposed rule” on standards for PFAS in drinking water, the first time it’s regulated PFAS, said Todd Johnson, an engineering supervisor in the Health Department’s drinking water program. He said the EPA hopes to have the draft document finalized by the end of the year, when the state would begin enforcing the standards.

The state is also re-evaluating its own standards, which are not legally enforceable but have “held a lot of weight” historically, he said. They’re likely to be released this fall.

Five of Hastings’ six wells exceed the draft EPA standards and will require treatment if the standards become final, he said.

“We have enough data to know it will impact Hastings,” Johnson said. “They would need to take some sort of action.”

Options for cities with PFAS include hooking up to a neighboring community’s unpolluted water supply or drilling into a deeper aquifer, he said.

Johnson said he believes every other east metro city affected by PFAS pollution has already received settlement money, adding that Hastings “is in a bit of a unique situation.”

An MPCA report indicated that $675 million was in the 3M settlement fund at the end of 2022 to ensure clean drinking water for east metro residents.

Higgins said that even if it can’t be proven that Hastings’ PFAS problem stems from 3M, the MPCA and DNR are committed to helping the city solve its water issues. Several sources might help Hastings pay for its project, he said, including $25 million the Legislature dedicated this year to fixing drinking water systems affected by PFAS. There’s also the Health Department’s revolving fund, which offers low-interest loans for infrastructure improvements, as well as the possibility of federal money.

Without assistance, the water treatment project’s price tag is “a budget buster” for Hastings, Wietecha said. The city would need to more than double its water rates to afford the construction, even with an interest-free 20-year loan. The city has submitted the project for inclusion in the 2024 bonding bill and is looking at other funding options, he said.

City Council Member Tina Folch said it’s “really daunting” that the project’s cost is millions of dollars higher than the city’s annual budget.

“My whole takeaway is that it’s really troubling that our local residents, our local taxpayers, are … at this point looking at having to foot the bill by themselves,” she said.