ANN ARBOR, MI — Alexander Weinstein has lived off Lakeview Avenue, in part of Scio Township on Ann Arbor’s western border, for the past two years.
He’s a stone’s throw east of an old manufacturing complex where Gelman Sciences discharged large amounts of dioxane into the environment between the 1960s and 1980s.
A new proposed cleanup plan for the toxic chemical plume creeping through the groundwater calls for installing new extraction wells for pump-and-treat remediation.
But some of the purged water would be discharged into First Sister Lake after going through treatment to reduce pollution levels, and it still could contain some dioxane.
That’s “unbelievably unacceptable,” said Weinstein, who lives near the lake and is worried about it being polluted.
“I’ve been very thankful that we get zero dioxane in our waters, in our lake,” he said. “I live on a well. This would, by design, introduce pollutants directly into the lake — First Sister Lake and Second Sister Lake — as well as a number of other problems of overflow and flooding.”
The proposed cleanup plan is part of a new legal settlement negotiated between the state, polluter and local officials and it now awaits a final vote by Ann Arbor, Scio Township and Washtenaw County elected officials.
Several residents voiced objections at a virtual public hearing hosted by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy Monday night, Sept. 14.
It would be a horrible settlement and a step backward, Weinstein said.
“There are children that swim in these lakes,” he said. “There are a lot of people that would be affected very negatively, and I ask that you ensure the safety and the environmental responsibility and hold the polluter much more responsible than this settlement would do.”
Ann Arbor resident Beth Collins, who lives next to First Sister Lake near Jackson and Wagner roads, said she also finds it “very concerning” that water containing pollutants could be discharged into a standing body of water.
“And the amount of 200 gallons per minute, which equates to about a 100-year storm event each day, or approximately five inches of rainwater in a 24-hour period,” she said.
Collins, secretary of the local Coalition for Action on Remediation of Dioxane, said she’s yet to see any science to support the plan and residents are frustrated.
Dolph Nature Area, where the lake is located, is a wetland preserve that’s supposed to be protected, she said.
“Why would you be doing this to damage our wetlands?” she asked. “Wetlands provide carbon sequestration, which should be even more important now with all the climate problems we’re having. It’s also a habitat to all this wildlife in this area.”
Dioxane is classified by the Environmental Protection Agency as likely to be carcinogenic to humans by all routes of exposure. It also can cause kidney and liver damage, and respiratory problems.
EGLE officials declined to respond to questions and concerns aired Monday night, though they said they’ll be compiling a document responding to specific questions and feedback after the public comment period ends Sept. 21.
In a presentation Monday night, EGLE officials defended the proposed cleanup plan.
“The fourth amended and restated consent judgment comprehensively addresses the Gelman groundwater contamination and provides multiple layers of protection, putting into place safeguards that make the remedy more protective of human health and the environment,” said Mike Neller, EGLE’s remediation and redevelopment director.
A map presented by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy at a virtual public meeting Sept. 14, 2020, showing plans for more monitoring wells to track the spread of the Gelman dioxane plume at the northern boundary in Ann Arbor where there's concern it could spread toward Barton Pond, the city's main drinking water supply.EGLE
EGLE began negotiations with the polluter to update a Circuit Court consent judgment governing the plume in March 2016, due to an anticipated reduction of the state’s limit on dioxane in drinking water from 85 parts per billion to 7.2 ppb.
The city, county, Scio Township and Huron River Watershed Council intervened, gaining a seat at the table in the negotiations.
The proposed consent judgment puts in place a new limit of 280 ppb, down from 2,800 ppb, for dioxane allowed to vent to surface waters, Neller said.
And there would be an expansion of the groundwater-use prohibition zone for the plume because it’s now defined by more restrictive criteria, he said.
“Importantly, the expanded prohibition zone only affects areas already served by the municipal water, ensuring that the daily lives of homeowners and residents in the expanded area and their drinking water won’t be affected,” he said.
The monitoring well network to track the plume’s spread would be expanded to add up to 36 new monitoring wells at 14 key locations, Neller said, and pump-and-treat operations would double with new extraction wells.
A map presented by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy at a virtual public meeting Sept. 14, 2020, showing plans for more monitoring wells to track the spread of the Gelman dioxane plume in the western area of the plume in Scio Township.EGLE
The proposed plan includes “an early-warning contingency planning trigger process” so EGLE and Gelman can take prompt action to prevent the plume from migrating beyond designated boundaries, Neller said.
There would be a contingency plan to extend municipal water to areas that rely on wells if needed, said Dan Hamel, EGLE project manager.
“On the Gelman property, the company will conduct additional remediation activities to control areas where existing 1,4-dioxane contamination is a continuing source to the groundwater contamination migrating from the property,” Hamel said, noting that includes three more extraction wells in areas north, northeast and east of Third Sister Lake.
“These new extraction wells will be pumped at a combined pumping rate of 75 gallons per minute, which will enhance and accelerate removal of 1,4-dioxane from the shallow groundwater on the property,” Hamel said.
Based on the performance of those wells, up to three additional extraction wells may be installed on the Gelman site to accelerate dioxane removal, Hamel said.
The proposed plan for attacking the pollution at the source also includes phytoremediation using trees and heated soil vapor extraction, along with installing impervious barriers to inhibit water from percolating through soils.
Gelman also would install up to three new extraction wells in the eastern area of the plume.
A map presented by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy at a virtual public meeting Sept. 14, 2020, showing plans for more monitoring wells to track the spread of the Gelman dioxane plume in the West Park area of Ann Arbor, where there are concerns dioxane in shallow groundwater could infiltrate basements and rise to the surface in some spots.EGLE
Several longtime activists who’ve been tracking the Gelman plume said they’re hoping local officials reject the settlement and petition the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for a more complete cleanup under the federal Superfund program.
“The EPA route is the way to go,” said Scio Township resident Roger Rayle, chairman of the CARD coalition. “It’s the only entity with the enforcement capability to make a multibillion-dollar, recalcitrant polluter to do the right thing.”
Dan Bicknell, an environmental remediation professional and former EPA Superfund enforcement officer who is credited with discovering the plume in the 1980s, said the proposed settlement would just continue a “dilution” strategy.
It will not stop the pollution from spreading toward Barton Pond, which is Ann Arbor’s main drinking water source, or people’s drinking water wells in Ann Arbor Township, Scio Township and Barton Hills Village, Bicknell said.
“The shallow dioxane plume will travel through the city of Ann Arbor unabated, presenting a risk to building occupants from dioxane vapor intrusion or flooded basements, as well as to workers in a trench who are in contact with the polluted shallow groundwater,” he said. “The consent judgment is really not protective of public health or the environment.”
Bicknell believes a Superfund cleanup could halt the plume and restore the local aquifers to drinking water quality.
Under what’s proposed, safeguards are included to ensure any migration of dioxane above 7.2 ppb is detected before it goes outside the prohibition zone, Hamel said.
If there is a detection of 4.6 ppb or greater in any boundary well, the frequency of testing for dioxane would increase from quarterly to monthly, Hamel said.
Exceeding 4.6 ppb three consecutive months would trigger a process that includes testing nearby drinking water wells and evaluating the need for more remediation and potential hookups to municipal water, he said.
New monitoring wells near the northern boundary would help evaluate concerns about dioxane migration toward Barton Pond, Hamel said.
If dioxane is detected above 7.2 ppb in those wells, additional monitoring wells would be installed near the northern boundary, Hamel said.
Scio Township Trustee Kathleen Knol shared residents' concerns about potential discharges into First Sister Lake after the water goes through treatment with ozone/hydrogen peroxide or ultraviolet light and oxidizing agents.
The proposed plan states conditions for those discharges would be no more restrictive than what’s included in the polluter’s previously issued permit for discharges into Honey Creek, allowing daily dioxane concentrations up to 22 ppb and a monthly average up to 7 ppb, plus other limits for bromate, hydrogen peroxide and barium.
Those limits were put in place several years ago before the state’s dioxane standards were tightened and the limit for drinking water was lowered to 7.2 ppb, Knol noted.
“EGLE needs to do its job, review the discharge application, step up to the plate, protect the public health of our residents,” Knol said. “Don’t allow for this document to preempt what EGLE should be doing in the first place.”
Scio Township resident Jillian Kerry questioned why Gelman’s parent company, Danaher Corp., isn’t required to use more effective treatment technology available through Trojan Technologies, one of its companies.
She argued the proposed settlement is not in line with the company’s own mission statement about water quality confidence and environmental stewardship.
Ann Arbor Township Trustee Michael Moran said he finds aspects of the proposed settlement distressing and doubts its ability to keep the plume from spreading.
Far too few monitoring wells and extraction wells are proposed, he said, and local officials would be giving up “way too much” for very little improvement.
“They have to waive all other future claims, known or unknown, for the pollution caused by Gelman,” he said.
Ann Arbor Township is not a party in the litigation against the polluter.
Rita Loch-Caruso, a University of Michigan toxicology professor and founding CARD member, said she doesn’t support the settlement.
“There are too many ways in which Gelman is being allowed to abdicate its responsibilities for this cleanup and that is my major concern,” she said. “We should not be allowing them out clauses."
Ann Arbor resident Mozhgan Savabieasfahani, an environmental toxicologist, expressed disappointment in EGLE officials, saying they sounded like salesmen for Gelman.
The settlement would be a “mega break” for the polluter, allowing dioxane to spread further, she said, though she also doesn’t think turning to the EPA will help.
“Ann Arbor’s City Council must launch an immediate and complete cleanup of the toxic Gelman plume, instead of wishing for another 30 years that Gelman or the state or the EPA might do it,” she said.
Rayle, who has been watching over the plume since the 1990s, said only a fraction of CARD’s concerns would be addressed by the settlement.
“Even the couple of good items in the proposal have some flaws,” he said, arguing some of the remediation proposed wouldn’t target areas of highest concentration.
“The southwest area near the core is largely ignored, even though it has some of the highest readings moving off the original Gelman site,” he said.
Rayle also argued the plan does not take into account the length of time needed to control the pollution.
“Local governments should not have to give up their future decision making in order to get this limited cooperation from the polluter,” he said. “The local governments and the state government have to work together to protect our waters of the state from Gelman’s dioxane.”
MORE FROM THE ANN ARBOR NEWS:
A closer look at the proposed Gelman plume cleanup plan. Is it enough?
Expert explains cleanup plan for Ann Arbor dioxane plume in 7 new videos
‘We’re really, really slow,’ EPA tells local officials seeking pollution cleanup
Ann Arbor finalizing plans to test for dioxane leaking into residents' basements
Ann Arbor council rehashes drama before choosing Tom Crawford as next city administrator
"plan" - Google News
September 16, 2020 at 03:53AM
https://ift.tt/3mnwtj7
Plan to address Ann Arbor pollution ‘unbelievably unacceptable,’ residents argue - MLive.com
"plan" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2un5VYV
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Plan to address Ann Arbor pollution ‘unbelievably unacceptable,’ residents argue - MLive.com"
Post a Comment