Senate Bill 545
Action required to be taken in response to a discharge of hazardous substances, exemption from liability for certain hazardous substance discharges, providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures, and granting rule-making authority. (FE)
Became law
The governor signed it on Mar 2, 2016. It's .
-
Introduced, passed
Jan 8, 2016
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Senate vote, passed
Passed Jan 20, 2016
-
Assembly vote, passed
Passed Feb 11, 2016
-
Governor, passed
Signed
-
Law, here now
2015 Wisconsin Act 204
Latest entry in the official record, Mar 2, 2016: “Published 3-2-2016”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
Terms on this page
Wisconsin Act
The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.
Official term: Act. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
What it does
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
This bill makes changes to the requirements that apply if residual contamination remains on a property after a hazardous substance cleanup is completed. The bill also creates requirements for obtaining a liability exemption relating to contaminated sediment.
Current law generally requires a person who possesses or controls a hazardous substance that has been discharged or who causes the discharge of a hazardous substance to restore the environment to the extent practicable and minimize the harmful effects from the discharge. Generally, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is the agency that administers the laws with respect to discharges of hazardous substances, although the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) has authority to require a person who discharges an agricultural chemical to take necessary corrective action.
Read the full summary Show less
Sites with residual contamination after cleanup This bill makes changes to the requirements that apply if residual contamination remains on a property after a hazardous substance cleanup is completed.
Under current law, DNR or DATCP may impose certain requirements as a condition of approving a cleanup of a hazardous substance discharge or issuing a case closure letter if residual contamination remains on a property after the conclusion of a cleanup. Under current law the agency may require 1) maintenance of an engineering control on the property; 2) investigation and, if necessary, additional remedial action if a structure is removed that had prevented a complete investigation or remedial action at the property; and 3) any other limitations or conditions related to the property to protect public health, safety, and welfare and the environment, and to promote economic development. An engineering control is an object or action that is designed to contain contamination or minimize the spread of contamination, such as a cap or a soil cover. Under the bill, an engineering control does not include a sediment cover, which is a layer of uncontaminated sand or similar material that is deposited on top of contaminated sediment. Under current law, the property owner is responsible for maintaining the engineering control and conducting additional investigation or remedial action, unless there is an agreement in place for someone else to do so. Either the property owner or a person who occupies the property is responsible for complying with any other limitations or conditions that the agency imposes on the property.
Under this bill, DNR or DATCP may impose additional requirements as a condition of approving remedial action or of issuing a case closure letter if a person is required to clean up contaminated sediment or a discharge of a hazardous substance that resulted in contaminated sediment, and the person uses an engineering control to address residual contamination remaining on the property.
If the person uses an engineering control, the agency may require that the person submit a plan and schedule for complying with any of the requirements, limitations, or conditions imposed by the agency, and proof of financial responsibility sufficient to pay the costs of implementing that plan. In addition, under the bill a person who uses an engineering control in a contaminated sediment cleanup must comply with the requirements, limitations, or conditions imposed by the agency regardless of whether the person owns or occupies the property where the engineering control is located, unless there is an agreement in place for someone else to do so. If that person does not own or occupy the property where the engineering control is located, the person must obtain access to that property to allow the engineering control to be inspected and maintained, and, if necessary, for the engineering control and any remaining contaminated sediment to be removed.
This bill also provides that, if a person owns property from which a hazardous substance discharge resulting in contaminated sediment originated, that person is not required to comply with any requirements imposed by DNR or DATCP in relation to any other property that is affected by that discharge if 1) the environment has been satisfactorily restored to the extent practicable and the harmful effects from the discharge have been minimized; 2) the person is a bona fide prospective purchaser;
and 3) another person has entered into an agreement to comply with the requirements imposed by the agency for the affected property and demonstrates the financial ability to do so. A bona fide prospective purchaser is someone who did not own or control the property at the time of the discharge, and who is not affiliated in any way with the person who caused the discharge.
Voluntary party liability exemption for contaminated sediment cleanup This bill creates requirements for obtaining a liability exemption relating to contaminated sediment.
Under current law, if there are hazardous substances on a property, or if a discharge of hazardous substances originated from a property, a person (voluntary party) may be exempt from liability for restoring the environment, and from the requirements of other laws relating to hazardous substances, with respect to those hazardous substances if the voluntary party complies with certain requirements.
This exemption is known as a voluntary party liability exemption (VPLE). In general, to qualify for a VPLE 1) an environmental investigation of the property must be conducted; 2) the environment must be restored and the harmful effects of the discharge minimized according to rules promulgated by DNR; 3) DNR must issue a certificate of completion stating that the cleanup has been satisfactorily completed;
and 4) if the voluntary party owns or controls the property, the voluntary party must maintain and monitor the property according to rules promulgated by DNR.
This bill creates a separate set of requirements for obtaining a VPLE if there is contaminated sediment on a property from a discharge of hazardous substances on or originating from a property. Under the bill, to qualify for a VPLE in that situation 1) an environmental investigation of the property must be conducted; 2) the voluntary party must remove all or part of the contaminated sediment and address any remaining contaminated sediment in a manner approved by the department, such that the environment is restored and the harmful effects of the discharge are minimized; 3) DNR must issue a certificate of completion stating that the cleanup has been satisfactorily completed; 4) if the voluntary party owns or controls the property, the voluntary party must maintain and monitor the property in a manner required by DNR; 5) the voluntary party must obtain insurance to cover the cost of the cleanup in the event that additional remedial action is necessary, unless DNR waives the insurance requirement; and 6) if the voluntary party owns or controls the property, the voluntary party must allow DNR and certain other interested parties to enter the property to determine whether additional remedial action is necessary.
Under the bill, a VPLE is not available for a property where an engineering control is used as a remedial action to address contaminated sediment.
Voluntary party liability exemption for partial cleanup This bill creates additional requirements for obtaining a liability exemption for a partial cleanup relating to contaminated sediment.
Under current law, a voluntary party that conducts a partial cleanup of hazardous substances may be exempt from liability for restoring the environment with respect to those hazardous substances, but not from the requirements of other laws relating to hazardous substances. A voluntary party may qualify for this partial VPLE if 1) public health, safety, or the environment will not be endangered by the remaining hazardous substances; 2) the activities associated with any proposed use or development of the property will not aggravate the discharge; and 3) the owner of the property agrees to cooperate with DNR in addressing the remaining hazardous substances.
This bill provides that, if there is contaminated sediment in addition to contaminated soil or contaminated soil and groundwater on a property from a discharge of hazardous substances on or originating from a property, a partial VPLE may only be provided with respect to the hazardous substances in the soil, or in the soil and groundwater. The bill also creates additional requirements for obtaining a partial VPLE in this situation. In addition to the requirements listed above 1) an environmental investigation of the property must be conducted; 2) the voluntary party must agree to restore the environment to the extent practicable in relation to the contaminated sediment; and 3) the voluntary party must provide proof of financial responsibility sufficient to cover the cost of restoring the environment to the extent practicable in relation to the contaminated sediment.
Other Current law prohibits the Department of Justice (DOJ) from initiating an action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) against a person who has obtained a VPLE to recover costs for which that person is exempt. This bill also prohibits DOJ from initiating an action under certain other federal regulations against a person who has obtained a VPLE to recover damages to natural resources resulting from a discharge for which that person is exempt.
In addition, the bill prohibits DNR from requiring a person who has obtained a VPLE relating to contaminated sediment from taking additional remedial action with respect to the contaminated sediment or discharge covered by the VPLE for the purpose of complying with a federally approved total maximum daily load (TMDL) requirement for a body of water. A TMDL is the maximum amount of a pollutant that a body of water can receive and still meet water quality standards.
Who's behind it
6 senators are its . 4 are Republicans and 2 are Democrats.
16 more lawmakers .
See all 22 names Hide the names
Authors (6)
- Rob Cowles · Republican, Senate
- Dave Hansen · Democrat, Senate
- Frank G. Lasee · Republican, Senate
- Julie M. Lassa · Democrat, Senate
- Jerry Petrowski · Republican, Senate
- Thomas Tiffany · Republican, Senate
Signed on in support (16)
- Alvin Ott · Republican, Assembly
- Terese Berceau · Democrat, Assembly
- Mary Czaja · Republican, Assembly
- Eric Genrich · Democrat, Assembly
- André Jacque · Republican, Senate
- Robb Kahl · Democrat, Assembly
- John Macco · Republican, Assembly
- John Nygren · Republican, Assembly
- Tod Ohnstad · Democrat, Assembly
- Warren Petryk · Republican, Assembly
- Katrina Shankland · Democrat, Assembly
- Christine Sinicki · Democrat, Assembly
- David Steffen · Republican, Assembly
- Lisa Subeck · Democrat, Assembly
- Rob Swearingen · Republican, Assembly
- Paul Tittl · Republican, Assembly
What it would cost
State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.
How lawmakers voted
There was one vote on this bill.
Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy vote to recommend it
Passed, 5 to 0 · Jan 19, 2016
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report passage recommended by Committee on Natural Resources and Energy, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
Mar 2, 2016
The new law was published.
-
Mar 2, 2016
The governor signed it. It became 2015 Wisconsin Act 204.
-
Feb 25, 2016
Sent to the governor.
-
Feb 11, 2016
The Assembly passed it too.
-
Jan 25, 2016
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Jan 25, 2016
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Jan 21, 2016
The Assembly received it.
-
Jan 20, 2016
The Senate passed it.
-
Jan 19, 2016
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 0.
-
Jan 14, 2016
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Jan 13, 2016
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Jan 8, 2016
Sent to the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy.
-
Jan 8, 2016
Introduced in the Senate.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Jan 8, 2016 · Senate
Introduced by Senators Cowles, Lassa, Hansen, Lasee, Petrowski and Tiffany; cosponsored by Representatives Tittl, Genrich, Berceau, Czaja, Jacque, Kahl, Macco, Ohnstad, A. Ott, Petryk, Shankland, Sinicki, Steffen, Subeck, Swearingen and Nygren
- Jan 8, 2016 · Senate
Read first time and referred to Committee on Natural Resources and Energy
- Jan 13, 2016 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Jan 14, 2016 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Jan 19, 2016 · Senate
Executive action taken
- Jan 19, 2016 · Senate
Report passage recommended by Committee on Natural Resources and Energy, Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Jan 19, 2016 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Jan 19, 2016 · Senate
Placed on calendar 1-20-2016 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Jan 20, 2016 · Senate
Read a second time
- Jan 20, 2016 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- Jan 20, 2016 · Senate
Rules suspended
- Jan 20, 2016 · Senate
Read a third time and passed
- Jan 20, 2016 · Senate
Ordered immediately messaged
- Jan 21, 2016 · Assembly
Received from Senate
- Jan 25, 2016 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Rules
- Jan 25, 2016 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 9, 2016 · Assembly
Placed on calendar 2-11-2016 by Committee on Rules
- Feb 11, 2016 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Feb 11, 2016 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Feb 11, 2016 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Feb 11, 2016 · Assembly
Read a third time and concurred in
- Feb 11, 2016 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Feb 11, 2016 · Senate
Received from Assembly concurred in
- Feb 25, 2016 · Senate
Report correctly enrolled
- Feb 25, 2016 · Senate
Presented to the Governor on 2-25-2016
- Mar 2, 2016 · Senate
Report approved by the Governor on 3-1-2016. 2015 Wisconsin Act 204
- Mar 2, 2016 · Senate
Published 3-2-2016
Terms on this page
Wisconsin Act
The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.
Official term: Act. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source
Wisconsin Act
The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.
Official term: Act
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote