Policy Committee Meeting Agenda Clean Water Council February 26, :30 a.m. 12:30 p.m. WebEx Only

Transcription

1 Policy Committee Meeting Agenda Clean Water Council February 26, :30 a.m. 12:30 p.m. WebEx Only Policy Committee members: Rep. Patty Acomb, John Barten (Chair), Pam Blixt, Warren Formo, Rylee Hince, Bob Hoefert, Raj Rajan, Victoria Reinhardt (Vice Chair), and Phil Sterner 9:30 Regular Business Introductions Approve today s agenda Approve minutes of previous meeting Chair and staff update o Legislative update o Pharmaceutical waste in California o Newly released PFAS Blueprint o Bills to watch: manure, chloride, soil health 10:00 Data Sharing through Underground Utilities Mapping Project Barbara Cederberg, COO, Gopher State One Call Steve Swazee, Chair, MN Geospatial Advisory Council s Emergency Management Committee. 10:45 Governor s Climate Initiative, Climate Subcabinet, Climate Action Teams, and Connection to Water Natural and Working Lands Team: DNR Assistant Commissioner Shannon Lotthammer and MDA Assistant Commissioner Andrea Vaubel 11:15 Alignment of Council Policy Statements with Bills from Subcommittee on Minnesota Water Policy Jim Stark, Director, Subcommittee on Minnesota Water Policy Paul Gardner 12:00 New Business 12:30 Adjourn Future meeting topics suggested by the committee Irrigation impacts on water quality (Met Council, DNR, MDA) Zoning issues with riparian properties (DNR) Groundwater Management Areas (DNR) Hearing from legislators and/or others about clean water impacts of new Biden Administration policy How wildlife/aquatic management areas intersect with watershed-based approach to address impaired waters wq-cwc5-21b

2 Policy Committee Meeting Summary Clean Water Council (Council) January 22, 2020, 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Committee Members present: Rep. Patty Acomb, John Barten (Chair), Warren Formo, Raj Rajan, and Victoria Reinhardt (Vice Chair). Members absent: Pam Blixt (excused), Bob Hoefert, Rylee Hince, and Phil Sterner. To watch the WebEx video recording of this meeting, please go to or contact Brianna Frisch. Regular Business Motion to approve the January 22 meeting agenda, as well as November 20 meeting summaries, by Victoria Reinhardt, seconded by Raj Rajan. Motion approved unanimously. Chair and Staff Update o Council appointments by the Governor should be complete around April. There are three members on the Policy Committee who have not reapplied, so there will be three openings for this committee. This include Pam Blixt, who is also the Vice Chair on the Council (until those appointments come through). There will be an interim period for that position. o The Council s field tour is looking at locations in southwest Minnesota. This may be virtual, a hybrid option, or possibly in person, depending on the COVID-19 pandemic impacts. o The House and Senate Legacy committees have asked the Council to present on the budget recommendations for FY There is an interest on the impacts of Covid-19 for the Legacy Amendment, on items that have been delayed. The state agencies will report on the details. The Conservation Fund s Purchase of Potlatch Lands in the Mississippi Headwaters, by Kim Berns Melhus, Minnesota State Director, The Conservation Fund; and Emilee Nelson, Minnesota Conservation Acquisition Associate, The Conservation Fund (Webex 00:09:30) The Conservation Fund (TCF) was founded in They are a national nonprofit and have worked in all fifty states to protect over eight million acres of land. They look at conservation solutions that also have an economic benefit. In the past thirty years, the country has lost 36 million acres of forests and is projected to lose another 37 million in the next few decades. They have a goal to save 5 million acres in the next ten years. The Conservation Fund has successfully issued a $150 million bond in The goal is to invest all proceeds from the bond into the Working Forest Fund. These funds were used for the purchase of the Minnesota Heritage Forest Project. This includes purchases from the PotlachDeltic Corporation (Potlach) properties, who have been selling off their forest lands. o A graphic of the map of central Minnesota reveals the lands recently purchased from Potlach (about 72,280 acres total). The blue are the lands purchased from Potlach in the past decade. They total around 200,000 acres, for conservation. This was purchased across 14 counties in Minnesota. Additionally, about 30,440 acres are in the Mississippi River Headwaters area. However, Potlatch has sold more land, which has been converted from forest to agriculture. About 27,000 acres are found in the Bois Forte Reservation. o Nearly $48 million dollars have been used to purchase these lands (purchased from Potlatch in November 2020). TCF will pay property taxes in all 14 counties. The Bemidji Mill was included, and will continue to be used to harvest the lands (3% to 5% per year), until the lands can be conveyed into public ownership for conservation. o They have project goals. They plan to hold the lands until they have worked out solutions to support these as working forests, support local economies, and support timber related jobs. They are looking to conserve forestlands for clean air and water, maintaining climate resilient habitats for wildlife, recreation opportunities, as well as climate change mitigation.

3 o o o o The former Potlatch lands that are now being managed by TCF, will continue to be managed as working forests. TCF is Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) certified. The logs and time will continue to feed mills. They will work with counties and local government on land adjustments. There are a number of tools they can use for conservation outcomes, including direct acquisition by public and tribal entities, land exchanges, and conservation easements. Other projects in Minnesota with Potlatch in the past (since 2012): They purchased 63,000 acres, and exchanged 73,000 acres benefitting counties and the State of Minnesota. This has resulted in increased revenues to benefit counties and the School Trust for Minnesota. It lifts conservation on all sides. Land exchange allows the county and state to select different lands that generate more revenue for eventual county and state ownership. The county and state receive land assets more quickly compared to direct acquisition methods. There is not mechanism for direct purchase of School Trust or Tax Forfeited lands (auction only). They are looking for opportunities as they come along. They look to help partners, counties, and the State of Minnesota further their goals. They consolidate lands for simplified forest management. They tie in watershed plan implementation efforts. In addition, to help build new partnerships. Questions: The purchase from Potlatch--was the 63,000 separate from the 72,000? Answer: We purchased the 63,000 before that 72,000, so there is a history of purchasing land. Regarding recreation, are these lands wide open for people? How do you manage who is on those lands? Answer: We had to hire Compass Land Associates. They are managing these lands for us. The lands are open for the public (i.e., hiking, walking, biking, berry picking). For hunting, people have to call and ask permission, and they are provided a document approval. They are not sure on allowing hunting in the future (beyond 2022). They are assessing the land for recreation and timber inventory. Once they have more of that information, they will continue with the leasing and hunting permission. For the timber harvesting, does that just involve working with the counties to decide? Answer: There will be some work with the counties coming up because they just purchased in November They will talk with the counties and find out more about the timber resources and where they are in the rotation. There are different activities and leasing that are happening, asking for a permit to hunt, how does the average person know which land is which? How do they navigate that? Answer: There are some applications that are helpful. There are many calls that come in asking to do recreation (hiking, hunting, etc.). People find out from public records, from calling, checking on that land use. In the Council s Strategic Plan, looking towards 2034 when the Legacy Amendment runs out, they are looking to reach 200,000 protected acres in the Mississippi Headwaters and 200,000 restored acres as achievable goals. Could this 30,440 acres of land be counted towards that goal? Are working lands considered protected? Answer: Working lands are considered protected and they are open to working with the Council and other partners to figure out the best outcomes for these lands. They want the land to remain protected. They can continue to be working timber lands to feed the mill. After they convey these lands into public ownership or conservation ownership, it is their goal to have the conservation continue. The purchase of these lands, is there an opportunity for the tribal governments? Answer: They are working with the Leech Lake Band. They had an agreement with Potlatch (5,000 acres). That contract is honored, and will take them to Bois Forte Reservation has also been interested, as they were in conversations with Potlatch, and they would like to honor those as well. That would be 27,000 acres that would be in their reservation boundaries. Regarding the FSI label versus the FSC, what water quality elements are there in those certifications? Answer: Not sure on the specifics of the water quality measurements, but they can follow up on that item. Are there more purchases in the future? Answer: Right now, they are pretty busy. However, they are happy to be in the conversation, and try to help as they can. They have a lot of expertise in real estate. You indicated that you had received some funds from the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, through the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Fund. What was purchased for Potlatch was public funds versus private dollars? Answer: The Minnesota Deer Hunters Association was the grant recipient. They were the intermediary and got the land under contract by helping with negotiations. The money never came TCF, other than to cover certain costs (i.e., appraisal). For purchasing Potlach lands with TCF, all of it was private capital,

4 none of it was public money. However, with the out sale, they hope to be available to the Lessard-Sams group for any opportunities. They would have their partners apply and convey the lands to the out sale partners. Could you talk more about the green bond? Do investors expect funds back? This is looking into at all the tools available for water quality goals. Answer: I would direct you to the website (conservationfund.org/greenbonds), and the impact report. They offer a low interest rate to be able to use that money for conservation efforts. They are concerned about the loss of the large tracks of forests across the states. TCF does have to pay the funds back with interest. The investors do care about the climate and forests, and the goal is outlined on the green bond. It is the first tool of its kind by TCF, and may be offered for other purposes. The sales to mills and the conveyance of these lands to other parties, help pay for the costs as there is small interest to be paid. The impact report can be provided to the Council. The Council would like to stay in touch, connecting again in the future. Governor s Climate Initiative, Climate Subcabinet, Climate Action Teams, and Their Connection to Water, Resiliency and Adaptation Team: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Assistant Commissioner Katrina Kessler, MPCA s Sharon Stephens (WebEx 00:48:30) There are multiple climate action teams among state agencies. o Five climate action teams were created under the Climate Subcabinet created by Governor Walz, in Executive Order o The Resiliency & Adaptation Action Team (R&AT), was expanded from the long-term (2004) Interagency Climate Adaptation Team (ICAT). o Sub-teams drafted climate action recommendations based on six areas identified in the 2017 ICAT Report Adapting to Climate Change in Minnesota. o Emphasis is on adaptation climate actions that bring resiliency to communities and vulnerable populations. o The Natural and Working Lands Teams focuses on policies and strategies to make Minnesota s natural resources, working lands, and communities more resilient to climate change while reducing or mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. The Climate Change Subcabinet involves different levels of organization (see organization chart graphic). There are many professionals across fields and are able to bring many perspectives to this work. This helps with engaging Minnesotans at all levels. The R&AT Climate Initiatives: o 1. Create state adaptation funding. This involves a cost share grant program for local governments units (LGUs) to use for assessment, planning and design of resilient infrastructure and critical facilities; habitat protection; acquiring easements in vulnerable areas; and agricultural resilience; but is currently not eligible for bonding. The Public Facilities Authority (PFA) administered bond funding for grants and loans to LGUs to use for resilient infrastructure projects such as wastewater, stormwater and water supply, and other critical facilities. In addition, create guidelines and criteria for resilient projects receiving resilience funding, including ways to prioritize needs of vulnerable populations. o 2. Fund University of Minnesota (UMN) to produce high-resolution, dynamically-downscaled climate projections for Minnesota. o 3. Create a credit system to incentivize ecosystem-based green infrastructure and natural stormwater management. o 4. Develop vulnerable populations climate data tools. This is to expand the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) pilot program that provides extreme heat and flooding regional and county data, about vulnerable populations to include climate and health data on air pollution, vector borne disease, and other climate hazards that place vulnerable populations at higher risks. o 5. Increase building resiliency. This would be to research the ability to increase resiliency of Minnesota s buildings to address extreme precipitation, urban heat islands, and other climate change impacts.

5 o 6. Create a state inventory of water storage opportunities in agricultural landscapes. This inventory provides opportunities or on-farm and off-farm temporary storage using landscape mapping (through tools such as LiDAR) to identify potential water storage areas. o 7. Launch a Climate Change, Impacts, and Adaptation website. This would provide a single portal access to climate change observations, projections, impacts, and adaptation strategies specific to Minnesota. It would include customizable summaries, data sets, graphics, and analyses of Minnesota s observed climate trends and projected climatic conditions through Questions: Is there an entry point for participation for non-profit groups and organizations? How do people get engaged? Answer: They are working on this right now. It is a question they receive frequently. The state is putting together a series of seminars and multi-media webinars. The information will be shared with the Council. In the context of climate change and water, the way the MPCA groups agriculture and forestry should be separated. All the benefits from more forestry are more than taken away by crop and animal agriculture. Answer: In the MPCA emissions forecast, and agriculture is its own item in those reports, and there is a lot of work to be done. The MPCA is not trying to minimize or deemphasize the work that needs to be done. Do you foresee any interactions from the Strategic Plan, based on what this cabinet may come up with? If they have new areas to highlight. Do we even know yet? Answer: There are some possible leverage points. About a year ago, there was more work to shine some light on the water storage issue in the watershed management plans. The more work they complete, the more information to share on potential areas to focus on. There are a lot opportunities. Comment from Paul Gardner: In the Council s Strategic Plan, climate is something that would be considered an additional multiple benefit to water quality projects. There can be more information generated from this area, to keep the conversation active, as this includes many different groups. Can you touch on the impact of biofuels on water quality? Answer: It is a complicated question. There is the impact from biofuel; the ethanol plants. They have become more efficient over time. The discharges are permitted, and are regulated with permits. Another impact is from the corn growth which goes into ethanol plants, and all the water used to grow and farm it. If those acres were not being farmed for biofuels, but could be farmed with similar crops, there may not be a net difference anyways. Subcommittee on Minnesota Water Policy and/or Fate of Council Policy Recommendations, by Jim Stark, Director, Subcommittee on Minnesota Water Policy (Webex 01:27:30) The members include: Senators Draheim, Eaton, Eken, Goggin, Weber, and Wiger. The Representatives include: Brand, Fisher, Heintzeman, Lippert, Poston, and Torkelson. It is a bipartisan committee, and the chairs are Rep. Fischer and Sen. Weber. Updates to these members have not been done yet, so there are expected committee membership changes soon. This subcommittee had a sunset in December 2020, so they are not meeting right now. The status depends on the Legislative Coordinating Committee (LCC), and they have not met yet to re-initiate the subcommittee. They have recommended eight bills based on those introduced in the 2020 session as well as emerging issues. They are: Water Sustainability; Water-Quality Protection; Incentives for Water and Agriculture; Safe Drinking Water; Improved Wastewater Treatment; Water Retention: Keeping Water on the Land; Improved Water Governance; and Compensation for Ag Buffers (tax credit). They are grouped by themes (from 33 bills introduced last session). They are based on policy needs, bipartisan support, minimal fiscal impact, and general significance. o Bill 1: This bill is focuses on water for the future, for the environment and economy (water quantity). One section focuses on a policy on sustainability of Minnesota s groundwater in response to the water train issue. Another section is a policy on groundwater recharge, based on recommendations in a report by The Freshwater Society and the UMN. Another section is a policy on water appropriation allocation priorities changed for golf courses using water stewardship enhancements. There is also a pilot to plan for sustainable drinking water as a next step in the county atlas program. o Bill 2: The focus is to increase water quality protection. It looks to accelerate implementation of the MPCA Chloride Management Plan. One section looks at policy for limiting liability for trained and certified salt

6 applicators. Another section looks at a ban on future sales of water softeners that overuse salt. It also encourages a pilot pollutant trading, looking at a policy to allow a third party broker system. o Bill 3: This focuses on water quality and agricultural improvement. It includes a pilot plan for a statewide soil health action plan. There is a second on precision agriculture research and outreach developing a plan for a program. It also includes a plan for transferring monies from the general fund to the commissioner of agriculture, in the agricultural and environmental revolving loan account. o Bill 4: This is focused on safe drinking water. It is looking at emerging contaminant monitoring for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), with the plan to increase monitoring of unregulated contaminants to sources of drinking water. There is a section on forever chemicals in food waste, looking for a policy for acceptance of compostable products containing PFAS. There is also a section looking a policy which the UMN and MDH Drinking Water Report recommends a statute for private well testing during the transfer of properties with wells. o Bill 5: This looks at improving wastewater treatment. There is a part on labeling of products to not be labeled as flushable unless they meet a specific definition. This also looks at the threats of emerging contaminants: prioritizing and managing emerging contaminants to make sound decisions about optimizing water treatment also from the UMN and MDH Drinking Water Report. o Bill 6: This focuses on water retention. One part is to prepare a plan to enhance efforts to keep water on the land. The other part is to look at a plan and policy to address storm water retention and infiltration. o Bill 7: This focuses on water governance. It looks to reestablish an advisory council on water supply systems and wastewater treatment. There is a plan to phase out some of the Clean Water Funds as a source of Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD) funding. This looks to evaluate models for assessing best management practices (BMPs). It looks to reestablish the Legislative Water Commission. It also has a section on policy, focusing on improved governance, form the UMN and MDH report that recommends a coordinating entity for drinking water. o Bill 8: This is a complicated tax bill that would provide compensation for Ag buffers. It creates an agricultural riparian buffer credit. This group of bills has been endorsed by the subcommittee. The bill language can be found at Questions: Regarding the private well testing during the transfer of properties with wells, what does that mean? Does it mean the results are revealed, or that there was testing completed within the six month time period? Answer: That is still under discussion. It could be required, or it could be required to disclose that a water quality test has, or has not been done. They are looking to be protective of the purchaser as well as the seller. Do you know if there is product labeling included with the Chloride bill? The Policy Committee had that as part of the Council s policy recommendations. Answer: It is not included. It would be important. It has not been tackled yet. It would be impactful, considering products cross state lines. Is there anything that the Council can do to help? Answer: The Council s support would be appreciated. A brief statement to the subcommittee or letter to the chairs. o Comment from Victoria Reinhardt: The Policy Committee has provided policies in the Council s report. It has have been voted on and published. Since, they are already in place, it does not seem to fall under lobbying. Therefore, the Council s approved policies could be included in the letter. o Question: Is this letter something the Policy Committee would like to seek approval at the next full Council meeting? Answer: Yes. o Comment from Jim Stark: Also, if Paul Gardner, or any Council members, could be present at the hearing, to compliment the policies, saying they support these bills. They can also be amended in the hearings. o Comment from Jim Stark: If Paul were in the gallery, he might be called out and asked to speak. o Comment from John Barten: It is allowed as part of Paul s position. If asked about other items, Paul can say the Council has no position on items. This is stating what is already in the Council s recommendations, so going down this path would be appropriate. New Business: Topics for 2021 (Webex 01:54:00)

7 Previous suggestions include: The Conservation Fund, water quantity and quality in irrigation (metro and rural), impact of new crops on water quality, climate change impacts on water quality, an overview by the Legislative delegation, an overview of the groundwater management areas like the Northeast Metro. Additional suggestions: House zoning issue status (addressing large houses and resorts on rural lakes). In addition, follow up on the pharmaceutical status in other states across the country. There may be more activity with the new presidential administration, so paying attention to changes there would also be important. Adjournment (Webex 01:59:10)

8 Clean Water Council Policy Implementation Progress Policy Adopted In Key Policy Recommendations Progress Future Actions Needed Legislation Initiated by Subcommittee on MN Water Policy 2021 Riparian Buffers Water Retention, Storage and Infiltration FY FY Require buffers along Public waters and ditches and private ditches that drains into Public waterways Fund local implementation & enforcement One State Agency oversee Local activities Require all major (HUC 8) watersheds outside 7-county metro area develop comprehensive watershed management plans. Minnesota Buffer Law was signed into law in June 2015 and requires 50 foot buffer along Public waters and 16.5 foot buffer along Public drainage systems CWF provides funding for technical support for local units of government Board of Soil & Water Resources (BWSR) has overall implementation responsibility with technical support from other Agencies. All non-metro water planning and implementaiton is based on major watersheds. Water retention/storage goals have been incorporated in 1W1P requirements via statute (103B.801) and agency plan content requirements. All the policy goals are achieved. The State Agencies and Local governmental units are responsible for ensuring the buffers are maintained. BWSR currently working on white paper looking at the technical issues, policy considerations, and potential costs necessary to scale up adoption of water storage and treatment. [This is from FY18-19] Buffer tax credit/payment; SF 251/HF508 SF261/HF731 on water storage; HF 518/SF81 on MN River storage; HF932/SF1037 on water storage; SF 228/HF629 on aquifer recharge Living Cover for Drinking Water Protection FY16-17 Require the establishment of living cover in vulnerable areas such as wellhead & upstream of surface water intakes These areas are targeted, but voluntary, the progress is limited. SF793/HF1010 on Soil Health plan development Property Transfers: Notify the buyers the potential existance of lead-pipes between the water main and taps, and provide informational material to mitigate risks. Legislation may be necessary to ensure the seller discloses the existence of lead piping. [New Lead & Copper Rule requires water utility notify property owner about possibility of lead pipes] SF228/HF 629: Artificial aquifer recharge; SF884: Well monitoring plan and well owner education; SF148/HF630: Well testing at property transfer, monitoring for PFAS & unregulated

9 Clean Water Council Policy Implementation Progress Advancing Drinking Water Protection De-icing Chloride Reduction FY FY [revised FY22-23] Renters: Notify the renters the potential existance of lead-pipes between the water main and taps and provide informational material to mitigate risks. Establish a panel of subject matter expert from around the country to advise MN lawmakers and Agencies ways to protect and improve drinking water quality. State mandate source water protection plans (SWPP) for surface water systems. Fully fund the Smart Salting applicator training and certification program, and MPCA chloride reduction program aimed at reducing salt use. Request that the Legislature give MPCA the authority to charge a fee for chloride training. Provide liability protection for the Smart Salting program certificd private winter de-icing applicators to reduce salt use. Provide research funds to develop new technology, alternatives and best management practices MDH has a contract with U of MN's Water Resources Center and Humphrey School of Public Affairs to convene an expert panel and their report is now in the review phase. Minneapolis, St. Paul, and St. Cloud has them, but 21 others are yet to draft SWPPs. [This is from FY18-19] The MPCA's Strategic Plan includes chloride reduction efforts. The MPCA has requested and CWC has recommended CWF monies to provide the training program statewide. During 2018 and 2020 legislative sessions, bills were introduced in the both houses, but were not included in the Omnibus bills. Legislation may be necessary to ensure the landlord discloses the existence of lead piping. [Note above for Lead & Copper Rule revision in 2021] Policy Committee review the report and recommend policy actions [done 2020]; CWF recommended in FY22-23 to support implementation of report. CWC strategic plan: Complete revised source water assessments for all 23 surface water systems by 2025 & complete source water intake protection planning by The CWC has recommended funding for the Chloride Reduction Program for FY New recommendation FY22-23 Re-introduce, pass and sign into law the liability protection Bill. contaminants; SF883: Emerging contaminants assessment program SF884: Establishing program to certify salt applicators; limiting liability; prohibiting water softeners that cause excessive chloride pollution; $1M for chloride reduction program including on water softeners

10 Clean Water Council Policy Implementation Progress Pharmaceutic al Pollution Prevention FY18-19 Encourage and support the adoption of the MPCA's Chloride Reduction Model Ordinance language by local government entities. Have the MPCA convene and lead a stakeholder process to develop recommendations for new labelling requirements on bags of de-icing chemicals sold in Minnesota. Require the words or symbols for do not flush be printed on all prescription pharmaceutical labels, and remove any existing instructions to flush unused portions. Adopt a Secure Drug Take-Back- Act modeled after the legislation recently adopted by Washington State. The Policy approved in mid 2018, hence CWC has not taken any action yet. The MPCA is working on a small card with collection informaton that can be stabled to prescription medicine bags. New recommendation FY22-23 New recommendation FY22-23 Establish a coalition of stakeholders to help draft legislation and adoptation of the Act during the 2019 legislative session. Increasing Continuous Productive Vegetative Cover FY18-19 Establish a Minnesota Agricultural Diversification Steering Council Create a Minnesota Agricultural Diversification Network The Council recommended funding to establish the Minnesota Agricultural Diversification Steering Council at the University of Minnesota. Legislature to approve the CWC's recommendation.

11 Clean Water Council Policy Implementation Progress Chloride Reduction: Water Softening FY22-23 Provide financial support and technical assistance to municipalities to reduce chloride discharges and allow flexibility for how municipalities achieve these reductions. Update the state plumbing code to effectively prohibit the installation of new water softeners in Minnesota that use timers rather than on-demand regeneration systems. The CWC has recommended funding for the Chloride Reduction Program for FY New recommendation for FY22-23 SF884: Establishing program to certify salt applicators; limiting liability; prohibiting water softeners that cause excessive chloride pollution; $1M for chloride reduction program including on water softeners Fund a program for activities, training, and grants that reduce chloride pollution. Grants should support upgrading, optimizing, or replacing water softener units. The CWC has recommended funding for the Chloride Reduction Program for FY Disclosure of Well Water Quality at Time of Sale FY22-23 Require all sellers of real property to test drinking water from wells for bacteria, nitrate, arsenic, manganese, and lead Inform buyers and renters of the test results Direct buyers to mitigation guidance from the Minnesota Department of Health SF148/HF630: Well testing at property transfer for arsenic, bacteria, and nitrate (but not lead or manganese)