RFR-Page 3
B. Are the rules mandated by any applicable constitutional or statutory provision? If so, please
explain.
MCL 324.20120a(17) mandates that the department shall promulgate all generic cleanup criteria
and target detection limits as rules. MCL 324.20120a(23) requires that new generic cleanup
criteria that are published pursuant to this subsection take effect and are legally enforceable when
published by the department if the department also initiates rule-making to promulgate rules for
the new criteria within 30 days.
9. Please describe the extent to which the rules conflict with or duplicate similar rules,
compliance requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.
These rules do not duplicate or conflict with any other state rules. There are no promulgated
federal cleanup criteria.
10. Is the subject matter of the rules currently contained in any guideline, handbook, manual,
instructional bulletin, form with instructions, or operational memoranda?
No
11. Are the rules listed on the department’s annual regulatory plan as rules to be processed
for the current year?
Yes
12. Will the proposed rules be promulgated under Section 44 of the Administrative Procedures
Act, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.244, or under the full rulemaking process?
Full Process
13. Please describe the extent to which the rules exceed similar regulations, compliance
requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federallevel.
The process to develop the residential and non-residential generic cleanup criteria for groundwater
used for drinking water for the seven PFAS compounds relies on the SDWS that were
promulgated on August 3, 2020. Based on a comparison of state, regional, and federal regulations,
compliance requirements, screening levels, or other adopted standards and guidance values for
PFAS in groundwater or drinking water, only Massachusetts (PFHxS), Vermont (PFHxS and
PFOS), New York (PFOS), New Hampshire (PFHxS and PFOS), Texas (PFHxA), North Carolina
(GenX), New Jersey (PFOS), Minnesota (PFOS and PFHxS) and California (PFOA and PFOS)
have values for drinking water or groundwater protection that are lower than the promulgated
SDWS. Without a complete understanding about how each state’s various values are applied to
implement their programs, it is difficult to make a direct comparison.
(Source: October 2020 Interstate Technology Regulatory Council)
14. Do the rules incorporate the recommendations received from the public regarding any
complaints or comments regarding the rules? If yes, please explain.
No
15. If amending an existing rule set, please provide the date of the last evaluation of the rules
and the degree, if any, to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed
the regulatory activity covered by the rules since the last evaluation.
MCL 24.239