Tag: groundwater

Report Brief: Institutional Controls push environmental costs on to future generations

Published on November 13th, 2024 by - Blog Posts, Reports, Reports & Media Releases

Click to download (PDF)

Out of sight, out of mind: measures designed to shield public from contamination push costs on future generations

Here in Michigan, 45% of the population gets its drinking water from groundwater, including two million who rely on private wells. Groundwater also feeds streams and rivers, and sustains wetlands. It is an invaluable resource, but Michigan has thousands of sites where groundwater is unsafe and undrinkable due to industrial pollution.

Since 1995, state policy has allowed contaminated groundwater to remain degraded, rather than requiring that contamination gets cleaned up. The legal tools that enable this are called institutional controls.

Download our report brief (PDF) to learn more about institutional controls in Michigan, the consequences of this policy, and FLOW’s recommendations for how Michigan can do a better job protecting groundwater.

Michigan taxpayers left holding the bag for contamination caused by now-defunct businesses

Published on October 17th, 2024 by - Blog Posts

If there was ever any doubt that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, a recent estimate of the cost to Michigan taxpayers of cleaning up environmental contamination should have dispelled it.

According to the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE), there are some 13,000 so-called orphan sites across the state of Michigan. These are sites where no party responsible for the contamination can be identified. That is typically because the contamination happened so long ago it is unclear who caused the pollution and/or the potentially responsible parties are bankrupt.

In its new video highlighting EGLE’s efforts to address these orphan sites, the agency estimates that the cost to taxpayers of doing so could be as high as $13 billion.

FLOW and the MSU Institute for Water Research recently issued a report analyzing the costs of not cleaning up many contaminated sites. So why doesn’t the state have an up-to-date strategy for preventing contamination in the first place? Until it does, the public cost of cleanup is likely to grow beyond $13 billion as pollution taints more groundwater.

Other states have made more effort. Some have groundwater coordinating councils that bring together the state agencies that deal with groundwater. (In Michigan, four principal departments have some level of groundwater responsibility.) That helps assure a holistic view from state governments in groundwater policy and management. Michigan does not have such a council.

Some states, like Iowa, have groundwater protection acts that make education about and prevention of groundwater pollution a priority. Michigan has no such law.

And some states, like Minnesota, have groundwater monitoring programs that serve as an early warning system and design and enable the development of strategies for best management practices to prevent contamination. Michigan has no such program.

Since 2018, FLOW has been calling for a comprehensive state groundwater strategy. We will step up those efforts in the months ahead. We can do no less for a resource that provides drinking water for 45% of Michigan residents.

The Filthy Five: Michigan’s most notorious contamination sites

Published on September 18th, 2024 by - Blog Posts

Out of Michigan’s 24,000 Contaminated Sites, These Are Among the Most Notorious

Once upon a time, Michigan scientifically ranked our thousands of contamination sites by the hazard they represented to public health and the environment. Released annually, the list generated extensive publicity and legislative attention, resulting in significant appropriations for the cleanup of the worst sites.

In 1995, the state eliminated the annual ranking, in large part because the head of the agency resented the publicity and pressure. But while there is no annual ranking and public report, some sites are especially notorious because of both their hazard and their history.

The legacy these corporate polluters have left behind is especially important to consider as the Michigan legislature is likely to consider a package of Polluter Accountability bills later this year. The legislation would hold corporations responsible for cleaning up their own messes – rather than Michigan taxpayers.

Gelman Sciences – Washtenaw County

Source: Detroit Free Press

The Gelman Site is an area of groundwater contamination in Washtenaw County that includes portions of the City of Ann Arbor, and Scio Township. The groundwater is contaminated with the industrial solvent 1,4-dioxane (dioxane). The contamination plume encompasses a total area approximately 1 mile wide and 4 miles long. From 1966 until 1986, Gelman Sciences, Inc. manufactured medical filters using dioxane in the manufacturing process. In 1985, dioxane was discovered in residential drinking water wells in the area. Almost four decades later, the liable party and the state continue to haggle, with additional involvement by the County Court, local government, and active community members.

Packaging Corporation of America – Filer City (near Manistee)

Source: epa.gov

In 1949, Packaging Corporation of America switched to a new cooking process at this pulp mill, which produced much more contaminated wastewater. Waste from the cooking process depleted oxygen in Manistee Lake and resulted in a massive fish kill. From 1951 to 1976, the plant pumped seven billion gallons of wastewater resulting from use of a black pulping liquor into eight unlined seepage lagoons on 105 acres of land, resulting in an extensive plume of groundwater contamination. The plume initially flows under 1.5 square miles of industrially zoned land east of Manistee Lake.

Despite state studies confirming a discharge of at least a portion of the groundwater plume to the lake, and a high level of aquatic toxicity in the venting groundwater, U.S. EPA officially found no current or potential unacceptable risk to human health and the environment. The company is no longer being required to do more than monitor the plume.

Upper Peninsula Stamp Sands – Hubbell (in Houghton area)

Photo: Michigan Tech Archives

Copper mining activities in the area from the 1890s until 1969 produced mill tailings that were deposited along the Torch Lake shoreline. About 200 million tons of copper mill tailings were dumped into the lake. Stamp sands, tailings, and slags were deposited in the vicinity of former copper smelters, stamp mills, leach plants, reclamation plants and power plants. Extensive cleanup has taken place, but much more remains to be done.

Ott/Story/Cordova – Muskegon County

The Ott/Story/Cordova Superfund site has extensive soil and groundwater contamination resulting from waste disposal and chemical manufacturing practices in the 1950s through the 1980s. A pumping system extracts the contaminated groundwater, which is then treated and discharged to local surface waters. Court rulings have essentially created an obligation for the state (meaning taxpayers) to fund groundwater treatment and operations maintenance essentially in perpetuity –to the tune of millions of dollars per year.

Wickes Corporation – Mancelona

In 1986 Wickes disclosed that toxic Trichloroethylene (TCE) had been used at the site by a previous (and by then bankrupt) owner, Mt. Clemens Metal Products. EPA conducted groundwater testing and discovered extensive TCE contamination in groundwater and drinking water. It is now known that 13 trillion gallons of groundwater are contaminated by the use of chemicals at the site (by comparison, Grand Traverse Bay contains approximately 9 trillion gallons). This contamination has spread six miles to the northwest, affecting private drinking water wells. The state decided, in order to conserve limited public remediation funds, to support the development of a local drinking water authority and connecting homes to municipal water, rather than treat the contaminated water. Because of the ever-spreading groundwater plume, this “solution” has cost taxpayers over $27 million.

New Report Explores the Long-Term Costs of Relying on Institutional Controls in Responding to Groundwater Contamination

Published on September 3rd, 2024 by - Blog Posts, Reports, Reports & Media Releases

Download the report:
Institutional Controls for Groundwater Management: Long-Term Costs and Policy Impacts

The true economic, ecological, and social costs of relying on land use restrictions to address groundwater and soil contamination instead of active clean up are likely significantly higher than generally estimated. That is a conclusion of a new report submitted to the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE).

Institutional Controls for Groundwater Management: Long-Term Costs and Policy Impacts, authored by the Institute for Water Research (IWR) at Michigan State University and by FLOW, an environmental law and policy center in Traverse City, Michigan, analyzes the effects of such measures. Institutional controls (ICs), often in the form of deed restrictions or local ordinances that prohibit the use of contaminated groundwater, have been put in place at over 2,000 sites across Michigan, affecting a cumulative area more than twice the size of the City of Grand Rapids.

The project originated with a request for proposals from EGLE to assess the long-term economic cost of using ICs and other restrictive actions to manage risks associated with groundwater contamination compared with the cost of other potential management actions.

The IWR/FLOW team conducted extensive background research at seven case study sites, reconstructing timelines and gathering relevant cost data. That research informed the subsequent economic analysis that sought to isolate costs related to IC implementation and extrapolate them into the future. The team found that when responsible parties or their consultants estimated the cost of an IC-only response as part of a remedial action plan, those estimates fell short, often significantly, of the actual costs incurred. The differences were mainly attributable to failures to anticipate contaminant migration (necessitating additional monitoring and the extension of municipal water sources) or the adoption of stricter criteria for acceptable contamination levels based on emerging science.

Despite the tendency to underestimate their true long-term costs, the analysis found that IC-driven approaches were still cheaper in the near term than active remediation efforts to restore contaminated aquifers, such as pumping and treating or soil vapor extraction. It is often more affordable for responsible parties to fall back on approaches that do not actively clean up contaminated aquifers. But choosing to let groundwater contaminants attenuate for decades (centuries in some cases) allows them to continue to migrate with the flow of groundwater, effectively writing off a public resource, resulting in orphan sites and contaminating public and private drinking water across the state of Michigan.

Though the analysis focused on more readily quantifiable costs, such as the extension of municipal water lines, monitoring well installations, and staffing, the team acknowledged the broader social and ecological impacts of not actively remediating groundwater contamination sites. These include the erosion of public trust, threats to environmental justice, the stigmatization of cities and regions, and degraded ecological function.

The team developed a decision framework tool, organized as a spreadsheet, to help evaluate the potential costs of an IC-only approach, potentially as part of the development of a remedial action plan. While the tool’s cost estimates are limited to those that the project team was able to quantify in its analysis, it also informs users of the harder to quantify societal and ecological impacts of not actively removing contaminants from the ground and encourages their consideration as part of remediation planning.

From the report: “This project highlights the need for a market-based correction that imposes much more of the impacts associated with groundwater contamination to be captured in the cost of doing business by the contaminating entities.”

In addition to the cost analyses and development of the decision framework tool, the report provides recommendations on how groundwater management policy, specifically regarding the management of ICs, could be improved. These include:

  • Prioritization of Sites: Prioritize the investigation and identification of all source areas and removal or prevention of those source areas from continuing to contaminate and migrate.
  • Natural Resources Damage Assessment: Consider a natural resource damage assessment payment to the state for any responsible party that utilizes an IC on groundwater as a part of its remedy. This fee could be a function of the extent to which the responsible party implements remedial actions to remove source materials, reduce concentrations of the contamination in the aquifer, and restrict expansion of the plume.
  • Sellers Disclosure Act: More strongly enforce the Sellers Disclosure Act, Act 92 of 1993. Require landowners with knowledge of existing contamination, institutional controls, or restrictive covenants to notify EGLE, local government, and prospective new purchasers/lessees of the contamination/RCs/ICs. Include such information in title searches for mortgages.
  • Future Hazardous Conditions: During remedy selection processes, EGLE should consider the possible future generation of hazardous conditions, such as explosive vapors (e.g., methane) from the biodegradation of organic materials (wood, charcoal, landfill content) in groundwater. Potentially affected properties should be eligible for free groundwater and soil vapor testing.
  • One-call System: Develop a one-call system like Michigan’s 811 program (MISS Dig) to include all sites with use restrictions due to soil or groundwater contamination.

“Institutional Controls are an important part of the environmental remediation toolkit. They help protect the public from exposure to dangerous chemicals. But if they are the only tool used in response to contamination, then it creates long-term economic, social, and environmental risks to be borne by current and future generations. We have to find ways to prioritize the removal of contaminants from the environment, not just shielding ourselves from them.” – Glenn O’Neil (Environmental Scientist, IWR)

“This report underscores the need for a greater emphasis on active cleanup of groundwater contamination sites. The fact that groundwater is out of sight does not mean it is worthless. It supplies drinking water to 45% of Michigan’s population. This report documents both quantitative and qualitative costs from the use of institutional controls, which generally let groundwater contamination persist.” – Liz Kirkwood (Executive Director of FLOW)

Download the full report and access an IC cost calculator tool online at: https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/ic-report

FLOW Coalition Calls on EGLE to Deny Groundwater Discharge Permit for Fremont Regional Digester

Published on August 7th, 2024 by - Reports & Media Releases

Traverse City, Mich.— On Friday, August 2, 2024 FLOW submitted comprehensive legal and technical comments (PDF) to the Michigan Department of Energy, Great Lakes, and Environment (“EGLE”), calling on EGLE to deny a groundwater discharge permit for the Fremont Regional Digester owned by Generate Upcycle, a Delaware corporation.

The Coalition of signatories includes Fremont area farmer Kathleen Morrison, Michigan Farmers Union, Michigan Lakes and Streams Association, Michiganders for a Just Farming System, Progress Michigan, Socially Responsible Agriculture Project, and U.S. Representative Rashida Tlaib, who has recently drawn attention to the need for improved public participation in environmental permitting. The FLOW Coalition requested a public hearing in or near Fremont, and coordination with the Office of the Environmental Justice Public Advocate, to initiate a comprehensive evaluation of measures needed to operate the digester safely.

The Fremont Regional Digester generates biogas from commercial food waste, factory farm waste, and other sources. The byproduct is a more concentrated liquid waste called digestate. The digestate is applied to fields, where it can create toxic runoff, leach to groundwater, and negatively affect water quality.

EGLE granted Generate Upcycle a waiver of the required hydrogeological report on its land application fields, based on Generate’s representations that the “purpose of the hydrogeological report can be met without the submittal of the full hydrogeologic report due to the infrequent use of each land application location.”1 On the contrary, the use of hundreds of different application sites, each with different risks, indicates the need for an exceptionally comprehensive hydrogeological report. The waiver decision is not supported by any analysis, and casts serious doubt on the effectiveness of the entire Draft Permit. Geologist recommendations developed as part of the permitting process show that spreading digestate on fields without the required setbacks – and in some cases, even with setbacks – creates “very high risk” of groundwater contamination.2

Generate Upcycle claims that feedstocks for the digester are only “food waste, food waste waters, food byproducts and food sludges from food manufacturers and consumer packaged food and beverages that have been depackaged”, but lagoon effluent testing shows metals, nutrients, sodium, chloride, and other contaminants in vastly higher concentrations than Michigan discharge standards allow.

Michigan law requires Generate Upcycle to analyze “feasible and prudent alternatives consistent with the reasonable requirements of the public health, safety, and welfare.” However, according to Generate Upcycle, “We do not discharge to the groundwater. A feasibility of alternatives to discharging to the groundwater is not applicable.” The Coalition questions how Generate can diligently avoid discharges it considers imaginary.

In December 2023, Generate Upcycle president Bill Caesar3 of Houston, a former McKinsey consultant, went public with his objections to EGLE’s permitting action, telling Michigan news outlets that the Facility would be forced to close.4 In Caesar’s words:

Not only are the proposed changes to our permit prohibitively expensive, because huge portions of the fields we currently use will be off limits, but these regulations are also operationally impossible for us to comply with…After months of discussion with legal we made the very difficult decision to cease operations at the end of December unless and until it can operate under a rational regulatory approach…I don’t think that we’re going to find a solution with the approach that EGLE has propositioned us with…

EGLE Director Phil Roos rebutted many of Caesar’s allegations, including that the agency was being “aggressive” with Generate Upcycle, in a November 30, 2023 letter.5 Caesar’s position that regulatory compliance is too costly for the Facility and its parent company, Generate Capital, is remarkable in light of the firm’s “sustainability” branding6 – and financing. In January 2024, Bloomberg reported on a $1.5 billion investment in Generate Capital by the California teachers’ retirement fund and other institutional investors in “clean” energy.

The problems with the Fremont Digester aren’t just a case of one bad apple. Industrial scale biodigesters create vast waste streams full of concentrated toxins – a threat to land, air, and water. The FLOW Coalition calls on EGLE to go back to the drawing board and figure out how to handle this technology in a way that protects us all.

NOTES:

1 EGLE Groundwater Basis for Decision memo, July 20, 2023, at 3.
2 See Geologist Recommendations Fact/Decision Sheet, Table 7, Comparison of Risk Evaluations Based on Isolation Distances.
3 https://www.linkedin.com/in/bill-caesar-020688/
4 Kyle Davidson, “West Michigan Digester to Close Doors Amid Permitting Conflict with State”, Michigan Advance, Dec. 6, 2023.
5 Roos letter to Caesar, Nov. 30, 2023.
6 https://generatecapital.com/

Michigan Legislature: Important environmental bills we’re tracking this fall

Published on August 2nd, 2024 by - Blog Posts

With the Michigan Legislature’s summer break almost over, and less than 100 days until the election, the focus of legislators on both sides of the aisle will shift to their hometown districts. The outcome of the November polls – where Democrats will strive to maintain their majority in the House and Senate, and Republicans will seek control of the House – will significantly shape the legislative landscape. In September, the legislature will hold several sessions to pass important bills and a possible supplemental budget – all of which will be influenced by the upcoming elections. Following the election is the so-called “lame-duck” session, which is an opportunity to pass legislation less unencumbered by electoral considerations.

As lawmakers gear up for the November lame-duck session, we at FLOW are keeping strategic focus on the following legislative efforts:

Polluter Pay Accountability

“Polluter Pay” is the common-sense idea that companies that contaminate our environment and water should be responsible for cleaning up their messes. Michigan had Polluter Pay laws on the books in the early 1990s, which were subsequently gutted by the business-coddling Republican Engler and Snyder administrations. Today, there are over 24,000 polluted sites in Michigan (11,000 of which are considered “orphan sites” without a responsible paying party), and 66,332 acres have land-use restrictions due to contamination.

A package of bills to bring back polluter accountability has been introduced in both the Senate and the House; however, none of the package bills have been scheduled for a hearing in either chamber. The House has referred House Bills (HBs) 5241-5247 to the Committee on Natural Resources, Environment, Tourism, and Outdoor Recreation, while the Senate has referred Senate Bills (SBs) 605-611 to the Committee on Energy and Environment. Due to the complexity of this package, concerns have been raised about the likelihood of passage in the fall.

There is widespread support among voters who no longer wish to foot the bill for the contamination created by corporations, but it has faced significant opposition from DOW, automotive, utility, and chemical industries, all of which will be impacted by these bills if they are to pass in the lame-duck session. Despite the questionable future of this package, we remain optimistically hopeful that we can clean up Michigan’s industrial legacy, and to promote lasting water stewardship and land management.

FLOW’s report, “Making Polluters Pay: How to Fix State Law and Policy to Protect Groundwater and Michigan Taxpayers,” offers a comprehensive overview of the background and evolution of “Polluter Pay” laws in Michigan.

Statewide Septic Code

House Bills (HBs) 4479 and 4480, along with Senate Bills (SBs) 299 and 300, have been introduced in both the Senate and House. HBs 4479 and 4480 have been referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, Environment, Tourism, and Outdoor Recreation. SBs 299 and 300 have been referred to the Committee on Energy and Environment. None of the bills have been scheduled for a hearing in either chamber. 

The purpose of this legislation is to initiate regular inspections and necessary maintenance for all 1.3 million septic systems in the state of Michigan. Additionally, the proposed legislation would establish an inspection registry, an accreditation process for inspectors, and a technical advisory group to provide guidance on septic system maintenance. Michigan – which lies at the heart of the Great Lakes – is the only state in the country without statewide septic standards.

FLOW has been working with a coalition of groups, including SEMCOG, the Michigan Municipal League, local government organizations, and the environmental community to propose solutions that reconcile conflicting opinions on the bill, create a path for its implementation, and address the urgent threat posed by failing septic systems to our lakes, rivers, and groundwater.  

Opposition to these bills comes mainly from local and regional Health Departments, which are concerned about insufficient resources and capacity to conduct inspections; and Realtors, who are worried about a time-of-sale inspection approach. To ensure the passage of these bills during the lame-duck session, it is crucial for every Democratic legislator to vote in favor, given the absence of support from Republican legislators.For more details, check out FLOW’s Policy Brief, “The Case for a Statewide Septic Code in Michigan.”

Stormwater Utilities

Senate Bill 660 was introduced in the fall of 2023 and subsequently referred to the Committee on Local Government. A hearing was held on June 4, 2024, but no vote was taken. This legislation would enable small and mid-sized communities in Michigan to legally establish stormwater utilities and secure a reliable funding source for this crucial infrastructure. The legislation, however, does not mandate any community to establish such stormwater utilities. 

A stormwater utility is a mechanism through which localities provide stormwater management infrastructure, funded by fees paid by property owners. Fees are based on the amount of impervious surfaces, such as parking lots and driveways, rather than property taxes. This allows all properties, including tax-exempt properties, to contribute to the fund.

By granting legal authority and allocating funding mechanisms to utilities, communities can effectively enhance their ability to construct more resilient stormwater management systems. FLOW and many other environmental advocates, such as the MI Water Environment Association, Great Lakes Water Authority, and the Michigan Municipal League, supported this legislation during the hearing. Although this bill is less controversial and local governments could choose whether and how to run a stormwater utility, it still has tough opposition from groups such as various Chamber of Commerce and Realtor Associations.  For more information, see FLOW’s policy brief, “Revolutionizing Stormwater Management through Stormwater Utilities and Green Infrastructure.”

Other items in the works: 

Trichloroethylene (TCE) – A forthcoming bill set to be introduced this fall aims to prohibit the manufacturing, usage, and distribution of trichloroethylene (TCE) in the state of Michigan. This legislation is designed after a federal initiative seeking to outlaw TCE, a hazardous chemical known to cause cancer and have serious non-cancer health effects.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and Plastics – Michigan currently has legislation on EPR for products including desktops, laptops, monitors, printers, tablets, and televisions. 

EPR is an environmental policy that holds producers responsible for a product’s entire lifecycle, from design to end of life. EPR policies encourage producers to consider environmental factors when designing products and packaging, and to make them more sustainable and recyclable. As of June 2024, five states in the U.S. have adopted EPR legislation, and other states are contemplating joining this movement to address plastics pollution and recycling. 

Lawmakers are now considering EPR legislation to assign financial responsibility to producers of product packaging. It is imperative for producers to actively engage and be part of the solution in addressing the plastic crisis. The primary objective will be to encourage manufacturers to adopt standardized packaging for improved recyclability, and to foster comprehensive improvements in the recycling industry. 

MI Public Water Trust Fund – FLOW developed this model legislation, the Michigan Public Water Trust Act (PDF), to bring the colliding crises of water extraction, failing infrastructure, and water affordability under a comprehensive legal framework, and to recalibrate Michigan’s priorities on protecting its water and its people. Michigan and the seven other Great Lakes states should pass this model legislation drafted by FLOW in order to:

  • Affirm public ownership over water,
  • Protect sensitive water resources,
  • Prohibit the sale of water, except for the sale of bottled water authorized by a royalty licensing system, and
  • Recoup for public purposes royalties derived from these bottled water sales.

This model law places royalties into a public water, health and justice trust fund to serve people and communities for specific dedicated public purposes, such as replacing lead service lines or creating water affordability plans for disadvantaged people or cities and rural communities.

Michigan leaders hit “pause” on tax breaks for water-guzzling big tech data centers

Published on July 12th, 2024 by - Blog Posts

The environmental community has achieved a major victory – although temporary – in convincing legislative leaders to press the “pause” button on a set of bills that would pose a significant threat to the Great Lakes.

Slated for a final vote in the House of Representatives on the last day of session before the summer recess on June 25, the bills sought to offer tax incentives to Big Tech companies such as Amazon, Microsoft, and Google to build new data centers in Michigan. But the bills did not adequately address the extraordinary energy and water needs of data centers and the threat to vital groundwater aquifer resources, and could potentially jeopardize Michigan’s ability to meet its new climate energy goals passed in November 2023.

Lawmakers and environmental organizations will work on the bills over the summer to see whether these concerns can be addressed.

“The Great Lakes are vital resources for all the communities that surround them,” said FLOW Executive Director Liz Kirkwood. “As we look to the future, citizens and policymakers must carefully consider the impact of high-volume energy and water consumption on this precious natural resource. We must ensure that the terms set for such consumption are clear and protective of the Great Lakes.”

One crucial consideration for Michigan is transitioning from traditional Rust Belt industries to more sustainable Blue Belt industries. Communities across the Great Lakes Basin recognize the economic potential of the Great Lakes, which comprise the third largest economy in the world. As we move forward, it’s important to champion and steward the Great Lakes, inviting industries that will prioritize the well-being of this invaluable natural resource.

Recognizing the obstacles encountered by Environmental Justice Communities (EJC), it is vital for legislators to actively engage these communities in the decision-making processes regarding the preservation and management of the Great Lakes. For example, we should leverage data center development in Michigan to help ensure safe and affordable water by requiring state-of-the-art water efficiency practices and utilizing existing capacity at municipal water systems. Further, priority must be given to community water systems devastated by reduced revenue caused by a shrinking base of ratepayers, while also ensuring that the data centers protect the health of residents in those communities. We should prioritize using existing municipal water infrastructure, rather than relying on extracting precious groundwater resources.

Environmental justice communities have a crucial role in influencing policy related to the Great Lakes. These communities have and must continue to voice their lived experience and knowledge to our lawmakers, and those lawmakers must respond constructively. By actively participating in the policymaking process, EJC can help ensure that the protection and preservation of the Great Lakes water system, as well as equity considerations, are included in any proposed legislation.

The Water We Drink, The Land We Live on: A Call to Action Against Confined Animal Feeding Operations

Published on June 11th, 2024 by - Blog Posts

Friends of FLOW,

As a descendant of early Montana homesteaders, I’ve been blessed to spend much of my life close to pristine trout streams and millions of acres of wilderness. I’ve pulled lambs, witnessed calves being born on open range, and found myself way too close to grizzlies and bison. Both the responsibility of an animal whose life is in our hands and the awe of a brush with a truly wild creature offer insight into our humble human place in the universe.

As an environmental lawyer, I’ve also witnessed the insidious creep of industrial agriculture, which disrupts these natural rhythms and threatens the very foundation of our rural communities by replacing careful husbandry with the profitability of volume. Nowhere is this threat more evident than in the rise of the confined animal feeding operation (CAFO), an industrial model of livestock production that undermines the quality of the food we eat every day, while dumping cities’ worth of untreated sewage onto our land and into our water.

“[CAFO] waste contains a noxious cocktail of pathogens, antibiotics, hormones, and excess nutrients, all of which can and do seep into our groundwater, contaminate our rivers and lakes, and pollute the air we breathe.”

— Carrie La Seur, FLOW Legal Director

CAFOs, as you likely know, are large-scale facilities where thousands of animals live foreshortened lives fueled by diets nature never intended. Their cramped, unsanitary conditions contribute to the current avian flu outbreak. CAFOs generate massive amounts of sewage, often stored in open cesspits or spread onto fields as fertilizer in quantities even the poorest soil could never absorb. This waste contains a noxious cocktail of pathogens, antibiotics, hormones, and excess nutrients, all of which can and do seep into our groundwater, contaminate our rivers and lakes, and pollute the air we breathe.

When I started working with For Love of Water in Michigan late in 2023, one request rose above all the other urgent water quality issues on this water-obsessed peninsula: please, people said, help us do something about CAFOs. Michigan has nearly 300 permitted CAFOs, a number that’s doubled in the last 20 years, as the total number of farms plummeted. They’re concentrated in rural areas where residents rely on private wells for drinking water. These communities, full of generational residents who value open spaces and the gifts of nature, are now at increased risk of water contamination, with potentially devastating consequences for public health. We’ve all witnessed outbreaks of waterborne illnesses, elevated levels of nitrates in drinking water (especially dangerous for infants), and even the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

See EGLE, Regulated Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) map and MSU Extension, Small Farm Manure Management Planning. <​​https://egle.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=0fae269e1c45485f876c99391403bd3e>, <https://www.canr.msu.edu/animal-agriculture/uploads/files/Small%20Farm%20Manure%20Management%20Planning.pdf> (visited April 18, 2024).

But the damage doesn’t stop with threats to human health. CAFO waste can also degrade soil quality, contribute to harmful algal blooms, and drive the decline of fish and wildlife populations. The sheer scale of these operations places an immense strain on local infrastructure, from roads and bridges to downstream wastewater treatment plants. Residents on municipal water pay more to cover expensive filtration of CAFO pollution.

And let’s not forget the toll CAFOs take on rural communities – displacing small family farms and concentrating economic power in the hands of a few corporations. Industrial agriculture churns workers through low-paying, dangerous jobs often held by migrants who don’t dare report health and safety violations. Unlike the traditional family farm, these animal factories change the feel of a community. They breed a sinister atmosphere, where complaints are met with threats of violence and penalties for complaining written into state law: Michigan’s Right to Farm Act allows the ag department to bill its investigation costs to anyone who complains more than three times about a CAFO, if the department finds that the CAFO is complying with a set of loosely defined, industry-friendly standards called “Generally Accepted Agricultural Management Practices”, or GAAMPs. The point is clear: don’t complain.

So, what can we do? We won’t stand by and watch as our water is poisoned, our land is degraded, and our communities are hollowed out. We must raise our voices in defense of clean water, healthy food, and vibrant rural communities.

“CAFO waste can also degrade soil quality, contribute to harmful algal blooms, and drive the decline of fish and wildlife populations. The sheer scale of these operations places an immense strain on local infrastructure, from roads and bridges to downstream wastewater treatment plants.”

FLOW, with its deep commitment to protecting Michigan’s waters, is uniquely positioned to lead this charge. I urge all our members and allies to expand your advocacy efforts to include the fight against CAFOs in favor of an agriculture that honors people, land, water, and animals. This means working with legislators to strengthen regulations, supporting community-led initiatives to monitor water quality, and expanding public understanding about the dangers of an unethical, corporatized agriculture.

But we must go further. We must challenge the notion that CAFOs are the only way to produce food. We must support farmers — they’re all around us, please go meet them! — who are raising livestock in a way that respects the land, the animals, and the people who depend on them. We must build a food system that is not only sustainable but also just and equitable.

This is not just an environmental issue. It’s a moral issue. It’s a question of how we want to live, how we want to eat, and what kind of future we want to create for ourselves and our children. It’s a question of whether we will continue down a path of pollution and exploitation, or whether we will chart a new course toward a more sustainable and humane way of life.

I believe that we have the power to choose a different path. I believe that we can build a food system that nourishes both body and soul, a system that honors the land and the people who work it. I believe that we can create a future where clean water flows freely, where rural and urban communities thrive, and where all beings are treated with dignity and respect.

Let us work together to make this vision a reality.

In solidarity,

Carrie La Seur

Find a local farm market near you!

Farm markets can reduce environmental impacts on communities when food systems stay local. Finding a farm market near you can be a great place to start and can make a difference!

Find a market!

What Do the Election Results Mean for the Great Lakes State?

Published on June 4th, 2024 by - Blog Posts, News

While the word “water” was not on the November 8 statewide general election ballot in Michigan, it was present on the ballot in various local communities and in different, more subtle ways across the Great Lakes State.

In some of Michigan’s 276 cities and 1,240 townships, voters considered new regulations to safeguard water resources and taxes for sewer and drinking water system improvements. In northwest Michigan’s Leelanau Township, for instance, 60% of voters approved zoning amendments designed to protect water quality; and Leelanau County is poised by month’s end to implement a county-wide septic code ordinance after the county board’s bipartisan vote in August following years of rancorous debate and unsuccessful attempts at passage.

In Ann Arbor, a whopping 71% of voters favored a proposal to fund the City’s A2 Zero Action Plan, which aims for a transition to carbon neutrality by 2030 to curb climate change. The funds will come from an up to 1-mill ($1 for every $1,000 in taxable value) increase in city property taxes over the next 20 years, which will raise an estimated $6,800,000 in the first year levied. Authorized uses include year-round composting; expanded residential/multifamily recycling; community and rooftop solar programs; rental and low-income household energy programs; bicycle, pedestrian and transit infrastructure; neighborhood resource centers; electric vehicle infrastructure; and tree plantings.

In some of Michigan’s 276 cities and 1,240 townships, voters considered new regulations to safeguard water resources and taxes for sewer and drinking water system improvements.  A whopping 71% of Ann Arbor voters favored a proposal to fund the City’s A2 Zero Action Plan, which aims for a transition to carbon neutrality by 2030 to curb climate change.

At the county level, decisions made by voters on whom to elect as commissioners in each of Michigan’s 83 counties could affect whether these jurisdictions in the near term take on one of the problems most threatening the state’s waters, an estimated 130,000 failing septic systems. Michigan remains the only state without a statewide law to set minimum standards for inspecting, maintaining, and replacing broken septic systems to protect surface water and groundwater and safeguard public health, so regulation is limited for now to a patchwork of local ordinances.

Historic Shift in Michigan’s Government

For the first time since the 1980s, Democrats have won the governor’s office, with the re-election of Gretchen Whitmer, and majorities in both chambers of the Michigan Legislature, albeit by just two seats in each chamber, which Republicans had controlled during Whitmer’s first term. The historic shift, along with the re-election of Dana Nessel as attorney general, promises to have enormous influence on the quality of water and other natural resources of the state.

enbridges-line-5-under-the-straits-of-mackinac-4f9997139d321d60

A diver points to a segment of the dual Line 5 oil pipelines operating under in the Straits of Mackinac since 1953.

As an example, Whitmer and Nessel have been partnering on a legal strategy to shut down Line 5, Enbridge’s risky, antiquated twin petroleum pipelines operating in the Straits of Mackinac, while their Republican opponents had pointedly promised to drop the litigation if elected. And Gov. Whitmer will have the opportunity to speed up progress on her climate action plan, restore polluter-pay cleanup laws weakened under former Republican Gov. John Engler, and protect and restore the Great Lakes. Widespread PFAS contamination, E. coli pollution, and harmful algal blooms also remain key priorities.

In the 2023-2024 session of the legislature, lawmakers will likely decide whether to enact a statewide law to control failing septic systems and whether to spend a part of several billion dollars in federal aid to maximize Michigan’s historic investments in clean drinking water, wastewater, stormwater, and other water infrastructure projects – including aging dams on Michigan rivers.

FLOW: It’s Time to Seize the Opportunity to Protect Fresh Water for All

As the Great Lakes State, Michigan must lead on every imaginable freshwater policy to protect this fragile, water-rich ecosystem and to secure safe, affordable drinking water for all.

FLOW Executive Director Liz Kirkwood

“For the first time in almost 40 years, the Whitmer administration and the legislature have an opportunity to profoundly shape water policy in the Great Lake State,” said FLOW Executive Director Liz Kirkwood, reflecting on the recent election results. “A lasting watermark would include securing clean, safe, and affordable water for all and protecting groundwater for the health of our lakes and communities.”

“For the first time in almost 40 years, the Whitmer administration and the legislature have an opportunity to profoundly shape water policy in the Great Lake State,” said FLOW Executive Director Liz Kirkwood, reflecting on the recent election results. “A lasting watermark would include securing clean, safe, and affordable water for all and protecting groundwater for the health of our lakes and communities.

Public Water, Public Justice

Governor Whitmer should play a leading role to close the bottled-water loophole in the Great Lakes Compact that presently allows diversions of water in containers less than 5.7 gallons. To do so, Kirkwood called on the governor and legislature to adopt FLOW’s “Public Water, Public Justice” model legislation that would generally prevent diversions by requiring small container diversions to be aligned with Public Trust principles, licensed by the state, and subject to royalties that would generate state revenue for Michigan’s vast water infrastructure needs.

“Michigan must seize this window of opportunity to think about systemic changes needed and make the greatest gains we can to protect fresh water, the environment, Pure Michigan economy, and our way of life in the face of impacts from unrelenting climate change and a water-scarce world,” said Kirkwood. “Big, bold ideas for a vibrant future vision are necessary to generate public engagement and support. So if there ever was a moment, this would be it.”

“Michigan must seize this window of opportunity to think about systemic changes needed and make the greatest gains we can to protect fresh water, the environment, Pure Michigan economy, and our way of life in the face of impacts from unrelenting climate change and a water-scarce world,” said Kirkwood. “Big, bold ideas for a vibrant future vision are necessary to generate public engagement and support. So if there ever was a moment, this would be it.”

On the Federal Front

Finally, all 13 of Michigan’s seats in the U.S. House of Representatives were contested in the November 8 election, with all incumbents who ran winning re-election, and Republicans gaining a slim majority in the chamber. Democrats retained narrow control of the U.S. Senate, and all Midwest governors on the ballot were re-elected.

The U.S. House will consider legislation in 2023 to address PFAS, the so-called “forever chemicals,” which have contaminated over 200 sites in Michigan, and renewal of federal funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

Everywhere you look, water issues colored Michigan election choices and outcome. Now comes the real work that we all must do together: Hold our elected officials accountable to ensure the waters of the Great Lakes Basin are healthy, public, and protected for all.

SepticSmart: Leelanau County Board Wisely Votes to Protect Fresh Water and Public Health from Septic Pollution

Published on June 4th, 2024 by - Blog Posts

Image courtesy of Leelanau.gov.

Editor’s note: This opinion article by FLOW Legal Advisor Skip Pruss was originally published in the Traverse City Record-Eagle on Sept. 4, 2022. During SepticSmart Week, which runs through Friday, FLOW is sharing updates on efforts to protect fresh water and public health from uncontrolled septic system waste, as part of an annual educational campaign that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency launched a decade ago, with the State of Michigan, other states, communities, and organizations, including FLOW, as partners and participants. Stay tuned during SepticSmart Week to www.ForLoveOfWater.org and FLOW’s Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter for the latest articles, videos, and fact sheets. In case you missed it, here is additional coverage this week from FLOW: SepticSmart Week: Progress on Protecting Public Health and Fresh Water and Get SepticSmart to Stop Pollution, Save Money.

By Skip Pruss, FLOW Legal Advisor

In August, the Leelanau County Board of Commissioners voted to task the Benzie-Leelanau District Health Department with drafting an ordinance requiring the inspection of septic systems upon the transfer or sale of a home. The bipartisan vote endorsing this ordinance came after years of rancorous debate and unsuccessful attempts at passage.

Skip Pruss, FLOW Legal Advisor

The vote was a hopeful sign of progress, demonstrating an understanding that malfunctioning septic systems can affect surface water and groundwater locally and statewide, potentially burdening communities with avoidable harmful economic, health and environmental outcomes.

Scientific studies have found human fecal contamination affecting 100% of our river systems in the Lower Peninsula and that substandard, failing, or nonexistent septic systems are the primary driver of human fecal bacteria found in our rivers and streams. A study this year found that as many as 27 percent of all septic systems in Michigan households may be failing.

Scientific studies have found human fecal contamination affecting 100% of our river systems in the Lower Peninsula and that as many as 27 percent of all septic systems in Michigan households may be failing.

The Great Lakes surrounding Michigan hold 95 percent of all fresh surface water in the United States and 84 percent of all fresh surface water in North America. Leelanau County, a peninsula within a peninsula, has the most freshwater shoreline of any county in the Lower Peninsula.

Remarkably, Michigan, seated at the very heart of the Great Lakes, is the only state without a state law setting minimum standards for the construction, maintenance and inspection of septic systems. Counties and local governments have had to step up, enacting local ordinances in recognition that a septic system inspection requirement would help identify failing systems, protect groundwater, reduce contaminated wastewater migration to our beautiful lakes and protect property values.

Remarkably, Michigan, seated at the very heart of the Great Lakes, is the only state without a state law setting minimum standards for the construction, maintenance and inspection of septic systems. Counties and local governments have had to step up, enacting local ordinances.

The good news is that, despite daily indications of bitter polarization in our politics, our community’s concern for safeguarding our Great Lakes is a deeply shared value, an important area of common ground that bridges the political divide — as affirmed by the vote of the Leelanau County Board of Commissioners. The State of Michigan and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency also have proclaimed Sept. 19-23 to be SepticSmart Week and are providing outreach materials encouraging homeowners and communities to inspect and maintain their septic systems.

For Love of Water (FLOW), the Traverse City-based law and policy center, has focused on the protection of groundwater and its relationship to Great Lakes water quality. FLOW’s recent work includes creating and moderating the Michigan Groundwater Table, an 18-month collaboration among local government organizations, state agencies, environmental and justice organizations and Michigan’s universities to identify key groundwater-protection strategies and make recommendations for their implementation (See related storymap here).

FLOW continues to focus on the protection of groundwater and its relationship to Great Lakes water quality.

Among the findings of the Groundwater Table is that septic system performance writ large is, in fact, an infrastructure issue.

With the influx of state and federal funding targeted at water infrastructure support, this may be a particularly opportune time to revisit statewide solutions, including provisions for low-income assistance to address substandard systems.

Meanwhile, hats off to the Leelanau County Board of Commissioners for recognizing that protection of this extraordinary, globally unique natural endowment that is our Great Lakes is an environmental, economic and public health imperative.

About the author: Skip Pruss is a legal adviser with FLOW and formerly directed the Michigan Department of Energy, Labor, and Economic Growth. You can reach him at pruss@5lakesenergy.com.

Stay tuned during SepticSmart Week to www.ForLoveOfWater.org and FLOW’s Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter for daily updates. To get you started, here is today’s tip from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reminding all of us: Don’t Strain Your Drain!