Tag: Michigan groundwater

Solving Michigan’s Groundwater Crisis to Protect Drinking Water, the Economy, and the Great Lakes

Published on June 4th, 2024 by - Blog Posts, News, Reports & Media Releases

Dave Dempsey, Senior Advisor

By Dave Dempsey

For over three years, FLOW has analyzed and reported on one of the biggest gaps in Michigan’s environmental protection safety net—groundwater protection. Now, during National Groundwater Awareness Week 2021, we are reaffirming and expanding upon our call for stronger state groundwater protection policies and actions. 

Today we’re also releasing our new report, Deep Threats to Our Sixth Great Lake. Click here for a Key Facts sheet.

The stakes are too high not to act. Groundwater supplies 45% of Michigan’s population with drinking water—much of that from 1.25 million private wells that are not routinely monitored. For those who drink from these wells, groundwater contamination is an often-invisible threat.

Groundwater contamination is widespread. The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) says there are more than 14,000 contamination sites whose cleanups are unfunded, underfunded, or on hold. At the current rate of funding, it will take decades to clean up all of these sites—while more polluted parcels are added to the list.

One obvious reason for inadequate groundwater protection is that groundwater is out of sight. Problems caused by improper management of wastes in Michigan typically aren’t diagnosed until drinking water wells are polluted, contamination seeps from groundwater into lakes and streams, or pollution vaporizes into buildings, including residences.

Another reason for failures in Michigan groundwater protection is fragmented government authority. No groundwater focal point exists in state government. Several programs within EGLE touch on groundwater pollution prevention and cleanup, while other agencies, including the state Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, deal with aspects of groundwater stewardship. Some states address this problem by establishing overarching groundwater policies and coordinating mechanisms.

Our state and national groundwater problems are nothing new. Some contaminated sites were created a century ago, and significant taxpayer-funded groundwater cleanups have been going on for almost 50 years in Michigan. This makes inadequate groundwater policies all the more inexcusable.

We do appreciate the limited progress that has been made in Michigan since our 2018 groundwater report, including that:

  • Michigan has become one of the few states to adopt health-protective drinking water standards for PFAS, a toxic contaminant found in groundwater across Michigan.
  • The Legislature approved substantial contamination cleanup funding from the Renew Michigan Fund.
  • Governor Whitmer has proposed a $35 million fund to assist homeowners in replacing failing septic systems.

These actions, while helpful, fall far short of what is needed to safeguard our groundwater. Our new report, Deep Threats, proposes a host of reforms ranging from polluter liability, protective cleanup standards, penalties for groundwater damages, empowerment of citizens to seek relief when their groundwater is contaminated, and ultimately, a holistic Groundwater Protection Act.

Michigan prides itself as the Great Lakes State. But it cannot fulfill that destiny unless and until it conserves and protects its groundwater now and for future generations.

Will Michigan Allow Nestlé to Operate below the Ground and above the Law?

Published on September 18th, 2020 by - Blog Posts, H2Olson, News

Jim Olson is FLOW’s Founder, President, and Legal Advisor

By Jim Olson

In the coming weeks, Liesl Clark, the director of the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE)—and ultimately, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer—will make the final decision required by state law on a Nestlé water bottling permit to remove another 210 million gallons of groundwater a year virtually for free from the directly connected headwaters of Twin and Chippewa creeks just north of Evart, in Osceola County. The administration of former Gov. Rick Snyder supported the permit through the loose interpretation of Michigan’s 2008 groundwater law and acceptance of a model submitted by Nestlé that underestimated impacts. And the approval came despite more than 80,000 public comments against the permit, with just 75 people in favor.

The courts in a separate 2003-2005 case in neighboring Mecosta County over Nestlé’s removal of water from the headwaters of a stream and several lakes found that computer models were not reliable. The only way a model can be used to gauge environmental impacts, the courts ruled, is to verify the estimates of the model with actual measurements of flows and levels of the streams before and during pumping. From the measurements, the effects of flows and levels can be readily calculated, and the actual impacts determined. If this is not done, the impacts in the real world will not be determined, and any resulting decision would be inconsistent with required scientific methodology, and the law.

In 2008, Michigan enacted its first groundwater withdrawal law and amended the Safe Drinking Water Act that imposed specific standards for EGLE to apply to well permit applications to take groundwater for bottled water operations. One critical standard requires that for a decision to be reasonable and lawful, the decision must be based on existing hydrogeological conditions before and during pumping, as well as on predicted conditions. In other words, there must be measurements and calculations of the effects of pumping and, if a model is used to estimate effects, of predicted conditions that are substantiated by the calculations. This is exactly what the courts decided and why this standard is in the statute. Models without calculated effects based on actual observation cannot be used in authorizing a permit. Yet this is exactly what happened when EGLE and the administrative law judge recommended approval of the permit. It was done without the required calculations and scientific methodology in accordance with the 2008 law. Without this verification, the model cannot be relied on to issue the permit.

The question now before Governor Whitmer and Director Clark is: Will they allow Nestlé to slide under the legal threshold required for the groundwater extraction permit? Their answer will have a lasting impact on the future of Michigan groundwater, lakes, streams, and wetlands. In a recent news release, state officials conceded that the upcoming decision must be based on science and the legal standards that apply. The Governor and Director Clark are under the spotlight to see whether they will uphold the true intent of the 2008 law to demand calculated effects, not just a model, for large-volume withdrawals from our headwater creeks and wetlands for export as bottled water.

Their decision will be nothing less than a litmus test on whether the Whitmer administration and EGLE will follow the rule of law that protects the waters of Michigan or follow the bias of the Snyder administration to shave the facts and law in favor of business over our state’s water, environment, and public health.

Take Action: Tell the State of Michigan to Stop the Nestlé Groundwater Grab — Please click here to take action today to stop this unlawful capture of the public’s water. The Director of the Michigan Department of the Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) has the final say on the Nestlé permit. But EGLE has moved to dismiss citizen concerns. Please take action now to write EGLE Director Liesl Clark, as well as Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, to urge them to uphold the law and their roles as trustees of our public water by rejecting the Nestlé permit once and for all.

Learn More: FLOW and the Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation co-hosted a one-hour webinar (You can watch it here) on June 17, 2020, providing frontline, scientific, and legal insights into citizen-led efforts to challenge Nestlé, the Swiss-based corporate giant, in its quest to expand its groundwater grab in Michigan. Every year, Nestlé in its operations near Evart pumps hundreds of millions of gallons of public groundwater virtually for free, bottles it, and sells it under the Ice Mountain brand back to the public at a huge markup—while threatening streams that provide aquatic habitat and flow to Lake Michigan. Presenters included: Jim Olson, FLOW’s President and  Legal Advisor, and MCWC President Peggy Case.

The Drinking Water Source We Forget: Telling the Story of Groundwater

Published on May 6th, 2020 by - Blog Posts, News

Dave Dempsey, Senior Advisor

By Dave Dempsey

During national Drinking Water Week (May 3-9), how can we overlook one of our major drinking water sources?

A resident of Lansing for many years, I once asked several local friends where they thought the city’s drinking water came from. Two said the Grand River, one said “a reservoir someplace.”

All three were wrong, but they deserve no blame. They are among many Michiganders who don’t know that 45% of the state’s population depends on groundwater for drinking, bathing and household uses.

That proportion includes major urban complexes like Lansing and Kalamazoo, and 99% of rural residents of the state, who depend on their own individual wells.

As is the case with surface water sources of drinking water, those who depend on city or individual wells cannot always count on the water that comes out of their taps to be safe for consumption. In fact, individual wells may pose a greater risk, because there is no routine government monitoring of them for contaminants. Utilities that provide groundwater-sourced drinking water must test and analyze frequently.

FLOW has made a major commitment to protect groundwater as a drinking water source. Our report, The Sixth Great Lake, details the contamination issues menacing Michigan’s groundwater and offers solutions. 

The first step toward solutions is awareness. To advance public knowledge of groundwater, we’ve created a story map that illustrates the wonder as well as the waste of this resource. Groundwater springs feed the headwaters of rivers. A steady flow of cold, clean groundwater is essential to the health and productivity of trout streams and supports rare wetlands. And of course, it supplies vital drinking water for millions of Michiganders.

We encourage you to start a journey toward groundwater awareness with the story map, and proceed from there to learn about the drinking water that groundwater supplies. In the end, only a well-informed citizenry can assure our groundwater is protected. Join us in calling for the public policy and private practice reforms that will assure safe, clean drinking water for over four million Michiganders.

It’s Time to Reinvest in our Water Infrastructure—to Protect Drinking Water and to Create Jobs

Published on May 4th, 2020 by - Blog Posts, News

Photo courtesy of Flickr

By Liz Kirkwood, FLOW Executive Director

“Water, water everywhere, and not a drop to drink.”

These (slightly paraphrased) words of the English poet Coleridge from “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” describe the saltwater of the seas. But today they could apply to some areas of Michigan, whose drinking water sources are not salt water, but freshwater.

During national Drinking Water Week (May 3-9) it’s worth observing the sad irony that in Michigan, which is surrounded by an endowment of 20% of the world’s freshwater in the Great Lakes, there are communities where people don’t have access to clean, affordable, safe drinking water.

The most appalling example is the City of Detroit, whose drinking water is unavailable to tens of thousands of residents whose service has been shut off. This unacceptable health hazard is the result of an inhumane policy that automatically shuts off water for delinquent payment of bills. Sister Great Lakes cities Chicago and Milwaukee have adopted policies forbidding similar shutoffs. Until Detroit residents have access to the city’s water, they will be unable to protect themselves from COVID-19 through handwashing or benefit from the same in-home water most of us take for granted.

But the denial of access to clean, safe drinking water is not limited to customers in the cities of Detroit or Flint, where lead poisoned the water supply six years ago. Across the state, private water wells are contaminated by such toxic chemicals as PFAS and nitrates. FLOW’S 2018 groundwater report showed that many rural water wells are contaminated with nitrates, the result of animal waste and nitrogen fertilizer application as well as failing septic systems. Between 2007 and 2017, of drinking water samples tested by state government’s environmental laboratory, 19% were contaminated with nitrates. Nitrates threaten the health of infants and there is growing evidence they may pose cancer risks. With no local or statewide program in place to routinely test private water wells, many well users may be exposed to drinking water contaminants and never know it until their health is compromised.

Public drinking water treatment and delivery systems are nearing or exceeding their design lives. In simple terms, they’re outliving their usefulness, and there is no plan to raise the funds to replace or upgrade them.

These holes in our drinking water systems are the result of federal and state government neglect. According to a 2017 report, the federal government’s contribution to water infrastructure capital spending has dropped precipitously over the past 30 years from 63 percent in 1977 to a meager 9 percent in 2014. Similarly, state governments have fallen short in providing adequate assistance. The eight states of the Great Lakes region face over $77 billion in estimated water infrastructure needs over the next 20 years. This crisis is compounded as many communities already face unaffordable water rates and struggle to maintain already weak infrastructure. In Michigan, the annual gap between available funding and water infrastructure is conservatively estimated at $800 million.

There are few political risks for public officials who champion a funding solution to our clean water woes. A recent national survey found that 84% of Americans support increasing the federal investment in our water infrastructure—and 73% support investing in water infrastructure to increase resilience to climate change, even when told this could cost more than $1.27 trillion.

One of the co-benefits of investments in water infrastructure is job creation. Upgrading and building drinking water treatment facilities would create thousands of jobs in Michigan alone. In the wake of the pandemic-caused economic collapse, creating water infrastructure projects is imperative.

During this national Drinking Water Week, we must focus on the need to rebuild our drinking water infrastructure. Michigan is a water-rich state, and its residents deserve access to safe, clean, and affordable drinking water. All of its residents.

Michigan Groundwater Expert Distills Lessons of a Career

Published on July 16th, 2019 by - Blog Posts, News

Professor David Lusch retired in 2017, after a 38-year career in the Department of Geography, Environment, and Spatial Sciences at Michigan State University (MSU). Beginning in 1992 with the publication of the Aquifer Vulnerability Map of Michigan, Dr. Lusch helped pioneer the use of geographic information systems for groundwater mapping and management in Michigan. The Groundwater Inventory and Mapping Project, which Lusch co-directed, won the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality’s (MDEQ) Excellence Award in 2005. In 2008, MSU awarded Dr. Lusch the prestigious Distinguished Academic Staff Award and IMAGIN, Michigan’s professional geospatial organization, presented him with the Jim Living Geospatial Achievement Award.

As a member of the team that developed the Michigan Groundwater Management Tool (MGMT), Professor Lusch received the annual Director’s Recognition Award from MDEQ in 2009. Dr. Lusch was a co-PI of the recent Ottawa County Water Resources Study which used process-based flow modeling, coupled with field sampling, historical data mining, geostatistical analyses, and geospatial visualizations to better understand the underlying mechanisms controlling the patterns of shallow groundwater salinization in Ottawa County.

We asked him to offer his views on critical groundwater matters.

Do you think the Michigan populace understands groundwater and its importance? Why or why not?

In my opinion, most citizens of Michigan have only the most basic of an understanding of groundwater. Most people seem to intuitively know that there is groundwater beneath the ground surface and they generally know how important groundwater is as a drinking water source. However, they know little or nothing about aquifer systems, which aquifer they get their own drinking water from, the recharge areas in their landscapes, or the intimate connection between groundwater and surface water resources (especially the maintenance of stream flow and temperature).

What is the most important or surprising thing you have learned in your years working on groundwater?

The lack of adequate amounts of fresh (i.e., non-saline) groundwater in central Ottawa County from the Marshall Formation.

What are the biggest threats to Michigan groundwater quality, and what gaps are there in groundwater policy?

Human contamination of groundwater by an increasing number of hazardous chemicals. PFOS/PFOA are good examples of materials that have been used for a long time and that only recently have been found in groundwater because we never looked for it before. PFOS/PFOA were both on the EPA’s 2016 Contaminant Candidate List, but no preliminary regulatory determinations have yet been made due to a paucity of data about occurrence and toxicity. From a drinking water quality perspective, I think the biggest threat is that we don’t know what we don’t know.

Michigan appears to be a water-rich state; why would groundwater become scarce in some areas in the future?

As the Ottawa County Groundwater Study showed, some areas of Michigan are underlain by a very thin layer of fresh groundwater floating on top of saline groundwater. As groundwater use increases, the saline groundwater can upwell into the production zone and cause an increase in the concentration of dissolved solids (chlorides in the Ottawa County case). Drilling deeper will only exacerbate the problem because the TDS concentrations increase with depth (in some places reaching levels three times the TDS concentration of ocean water). In some areas of the state, the transmissivities of the local aquifer materials are small and the recharge rates are slow, so groundwater yield is notably low (less than 8-10 gpm in some places — a typical 3-bedroom home with modern domestic infrastructure requires 15-20 gpm). Lastly, in certain areas of Michigan, cold-transitional stream types need up to 96-98% of the available groundwater discharge in order to maintain their stream habitat. In such water management areas, this leaves only 2-4% of the available groundwater for all human uses.

If you were Michigan’s groundwater czar, what would you do to protect the resource?

As groundwater czar, my first priority would be to financially enhance the Environmental Health Divisions of all of the Local Health Departments in the state. Environmental Health sanitarians staffing these agencies are the first line of defense for protecting and maintaining groundwater quality (through the well and septic installation inspection programs). Currently, these programs are funded with pass-through money from the Michigan EGLE Department, Drinking Water and Environmental Health Division. The minimum program requirement for the LHDs is to field inspect at least 10% of all the wells drilled in any one year. A few of the more affluent counties LHDs (e.g., Oakland Health Department) in the state inspect 100% of all the well installations in their county. Such a level of funding/staffing for all the LHDs in the state would go a long way toward protecting our groundwater resource.

My second priority would be to increase the funding for the Environmental Health Divisions of all of the Local Health Departments in the state in order to have vibrant and vigilant Pollution Incident Planning Programs. Coupled with this, I would also increase funding for local fire chiefs/marshals so they could effectively bolster the PIP Program with onsite inspections under the Firefighter Right To Know statute. Both of these activities should be focused on existing wellhead protection areas for both Community and Non-community Public Water Supplies, with special emphasis placed on non-transient, non-community supplies (schools, nursing homes, apartment complexes, etc.).

Click here to learn about FLOW’s groundwater program, “The Sixth Great Lake: The Emergency Threatening Michigan’s Overlooked Groundwater Resource,” why Michigan needs stronger septic protections, a FLOW podcast about the groundwater connection, videos and infographics about our groundwater, and key policy recommendations for the Michigan legislature and MDEQ.