Dioxane: A Sleeping Giant or Future Superfund?
How a 40-year plume of pollution threatens a community
—By Grant Wakeland
“It is definitely scary to think about, I mean I wouldn’t want to move to an area of the city that has to get their drinking water sent to them. You just can’t predict the future and pollution is not something I want to have to plan around in my future home,” says Marissa Gordon, a software engineer and UM Alum who is considering moving back to Ann Arbor.
The pollution of 1,4 Dioxane in groundwater, a potent chemical that can cause serious harm to one’s health if ingested, has been an ongoing issue in Ann Arbor for decades. The initial event that created the pollution occurred around 1966 by Gelman Sciences, a medical filter manufacturer, who incorrectly disposed of their waste containing 1,4 Dioxane. Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency has proposed that the pollution plume become a superfund site. This would cause remediation efforts to control the spill to be fully funded and the liable party (Gelman Sciences) would be required to pay for the cleanup. However, the potential for this is years away and only adds to the over 40-year history of a complex back-and-forth between the city of Ann Arbor and Gelman Sciences over controlling the plume.
How did we get here?
According to the Huron River Watershed Council, an environmental organization dedicated to the protection of rivers in the Huron watershed, the plume was discovered in 1984 by a graduate student of the University of Michigan School of Public Health in Third Sister Lake. The water council states “By 1985, the Washtenaw County Health Board found the presence of dioxane in 30 water supply wells. The state sued Gelman in 1988 which led to a 1992 Circuit Court Consent Judgement. Gelman agreed to pay the state over $1 million in damages and begin a $4 million cleanup project.” For a seemingly clear-cut case of who the responsible party is and who should pay for the cleanup efforts, this case has dragged on in the courts since the discovery of the plume and continues to this day.
The dispute in the court system has not been made clearer due to the help of differing politics. In the mid-1990s, the governor of Michigan (John Engler) passed a policy that allowed for a higher amount of dioxane to be permitted in groundwater. The policy changed the standard from 3 parts per billion (ppb) to 85 ppb, while the EPA recommended guidelines for dioxane remained at 0.35 ppb, according to the Huron River Water Council.
Remediation has been implemented as a way to remove some 1,4 Dioxane from the groundwater. During this process, groundwater that is contaminated is removed, treated, and then dumped back into a water source that returns to the Huron River. In addition, well monitoring and groundwater sampling remain key ways to track the extent of the plume, which officials say is growing every year. “The plume is about 3 miles long and 1 mile wide but we do not have a perfect sense of where the plume is exactly. We can use these techniques to approximate its location based on sampling done quarterly to every six months,” says Kristen Schweighoefer, Environmental Health Director for the Washtenaw County Health Department.
As the plume expanded, dioxane was discovered in new locations that were previously not mapped. This was the case in 2017 when dioxane was found in the Ann Arbor Waterworks Park. This discovery prompted EGLE (Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy, formerly known as DEQ) to implement the emergency limit of 7.2 ppb of 1,4 dioxane that is allowed in the residential drinking water of Ann Arbor.
Recent developments
In 2023, the state and Gelman reached an agreement that would increase the oversight of monitoring and remediation of dioxane. According to the attorney general, “the proposal requires compliance with the current cleanup criteria of 7.2 ppb for dioxane in groundwater, which replaces the 85-ppb standard from 2011 and cements the emergency standard from 2017.” The proposal also requires Gelman to implement to ensure compliance with the lower cleanup criteria for drinking water, surface water, and soils.
This proposal was a step towards limiting dioxane levels and increasing oversight in mapping and monitoring by Gelman. However, despite initially agreeing to the proposed terms, Gelman felt they were being asked to do too much. In a recent MLive article, Gelman’s attorney Bruce Cortade states, “There is no legal basis for the county to ask for additional remediation protocols outside of what was stated in the consent agreement.” Gelman also argues that the city did not file their motion in time and that the statute of limitations has expired on the case.
In an MLive article, Judge Connor states resolving this issue “will take probably years.” Judge Connors has presided over this case for over a decade. He predicts there will be continued fighting over “every word, nuance, and argument in the case.” As the court battle drags on, many who have followed the issue see the EPA superfund as one of the only resolutions.
Implications
Few would argue that any industrial-scale chemical pollution in groundwater is safe to ingest, that’s part of what makes something a pollutant in the first place. So what is unique about this pollution spill and what are the wide-ranging effects it poses other than making drinking water unsafe?
For starters, ingesting 1,4 Dioxane is harmful to one’s health. In a study conducted by the NIH, long-time exposure to 1,4 Dioxane can cause liver and kidney damage. They also found that lifetime exposure to Dioxane is cancer-causing and increases the cancer-causing abilities of other chemicals. These factors alone make Dioxane an extreme threat to public safety. What makes Dioxane uniquely dangerous in groundwater is that the chemical is highly soluble in water, making it extremely difficult to remove from groundwater. To remediate the contaminated groundwater, it must first be pumped out of the ground then treated and returned to a water source that feeds into the Huron River.
A huge concern on many citizens’ minds surrounds the implications of the plume reaching the Huron River. Ann Arbor pulls most of its drinking water from the Huron River, and if the plume enters the river upstream of where the city pulls from, there could be major disruptions. “Movement upstream would mean Ann Arbor treating its drinking water before it goes out to the consumer.” States Kristen Schweighoefer. ‘The city does not have the capacity to do this right now and would be a couple of years away from having that capability.’
Dioxane has also already caused a major groundwater well to go offline due to elevated levels of the chemical, raising concerns about the future of Ann Arbor’s water system as a whole as the plume continues to spread. “There should be considerations for how municipal water should be run to residential areas, we’re not sure groundwater will be able to be used forever based on the detections we have, but there are difficult considerations like crossing I-94 with a waterline, and many people do not want municipal water and new water bills.” Says Schweighoefer.
Another concern is basement contamination. Some residents have basements that come into contact with groundwater. Not only is it a poor idea to have basement moisture due to mold concerns, if the water that enters a basement is contaminated with Dioxane, that Dioxane could evaporate and be ingested.
Community response
The 1,4 Dioxane plume has been a large and painstaking issue to many for almost 40 years. There has been no fatigue over the issue, however, in active community groups such as CARD. The Coalition for Action on Remediation for Dioxane works with the city of Ann Arbor as many of its members have been affected by the plume or could be affected in the future as the plume area grows. Members of CARD meet quarterly and discuss important issues surrounding the plume and its remediation with government representatives from EGLE, The City of Ann Arbor, The County Health Department, and members of the State Representative Debbie Dingell’s office.
It is here in these quarterly sessions that citizens can voice their opinions and work with the government to curb the spread of Dioxane. ‘We have a real concern with homeowners on the west side of the city having issues with their basement exposure. We have Fountain Street, Bath Street, and Water Hill, they are all called those things for a reason so I am glad EGLE could do testing but there is still a need for continued testing,’ says Vince Caruso, a concerned citizen and treasurer of CARD.
Members of CARD feel they are a critical group of communicators on this issue and represent those who would like to see the pollution remediated. ‘The city of Ann Arbor did not do very efficient testing, the higher-ups didn’t come to CARD to see what we thought, we need to look further eastward to protect more homeowners, hopefully, the EPA looks into it when they take over. I hate to see more money spent that is not effectively used and we need to ensure EGLE and the EPA communicate with CARD about what we think would be effective tests and discuss then come to an agreement.’ Vince states.
Outlook
The relationship many Ann Arbor residents have with the 1,4 Dioxane plume is similar to the relationship some have with climate change. There is a strong will to solve this issue but infuriatingly slow progress. “Inherent in this is wanting immediate action, and cleanup of a plume that is difficult and costly to treat, so what does feasible progress look like?” Says Erin Donnelly, Environmental Services Manager for the city of Ann Arbor. Due to the nature of the plume and its size, it will likely never be completely removed from groundwater. “Residents want it cleaned up as soon as possible and to a non-detectable level, I don’t know if those two things are going to coexist. Frustration is one of the driving forces for the national priorities list and superfund.” States Erin.
These circumstances necessitate constant surface water and groundwater monitoring for the foreseeable future. ‘We have negotiated an assurance with Gelman of 5 million dollars, this means if Gelman walks away, that money is sent to EGLE to continue remediation and monitoring For a total of 55 million budget for this project.’ States Chris Svoboda, a geologist for EGLE. ‘This could suffice for the time between now and when the EPA takes over and if not we can negotiate another assurance.’
Due to the lengthy and ongoing legal dispute with Gelman, many are viewing the proposed EPA Superfund takeover of the project as a panacea. The possibility of a Superfund site is alluring but there isn’t enough known about the logistics of that plan currently, ‘The EPA is proposing the site for superfund status and hopes to have it approved by fall 2024 or spring 2025’ says Chris ‘It could be 2027 before the EPA has everything in their hands but we don’t have a ton of clarity on the timeline.’
Superfund sites are areas of pollution where releases of contamination pose significant human health and environmental risks. They are identified on a National Priorities list based on how severe a threat they pose to people and surrounding communities. According to the EPA, Superfunds of the past have ‘been responsible for cleaning up some of the nation’s most contaminated land and responding to environmental emergencies, oil spills, and natural disasters’.
The Dioxane plume certainly fits the bill for a potential superfund site, but it still must be approved and added to the list for the EPA to have any authority. Out of all the options available, the superfund site is the most alluring as it will force Gelman to pay for the remediation while possessing greater authority that Gelman cannot oppose. This option may bring greater peace of mind to residents and could help Ann Arbor avoid a larger environmental disaster if the plume can be halted from reaching the Huron.
Moving forward
“It will far outlast me and my employment and probably my kids and their kids in this community.” Says Kristen Schweighoefer, Environmental Health Director for the Washtenaw County Health Department. The lengthy legal battle of the past 30 years has left Ann Arbor residents with little hope of a swift and just resolution with Gelman Sciences and has caused many to shift their attention to the EPA superfund. A superfund designation has the potential to solve many issues the plume has caused, however, the EPA has only proposed the site be considered and any action to come from the EPA may be years away. But as the plume slowly expands and threatens to seep into the river and the only known alternative is a court battle destined to last another 30 years, where else are the residents of Ann Arbor supposed to turn?
Feature Photo: Water Pollution, by Austris Augusts on Unsplash