MEDC: Remediation and Redevelopment Division


Published on

Track 1- Influence the Policy

Michael Wilczynski, Senior Geologist at the MEDC

Michael co-presented with Peter Anastor

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Photo : Liquid Disposal Inc. (LDI) Superfund site, Shelby Twp., Macomb County
  • MEDC: Remediation and Redevelopment Division

    1. 1. Remediation and Redevelopment Division <ul><li>Our cleanup programs are vital to Michigan’s future </li></ul>
    2. 2. <ul><li>Why we’re here </li></ul><ul><li>Who we are </li></ul><ul><li>What we do </li></ul><ul><li>Accomplishments </li></ul><ul><li>Funding issues/needs </li></ul><ul><li>Consequences of funding shortfalls </li></ul>Today’s presentation will address… Clean land Clean land Fresh water Healthy future
    3. 3. <ul><li>Our Legacy . . . </li></ul><ul><li>100+ year industrial heritage </li></ul><ul><li>Tens of thousands of contaminated sites </li></ul><ul><li>Hundreds of new sites discovered each year </li></ul><ul><li>---------------- </li></ul>Why we’re here Aggressive cleanup initiatives are vital to Michigan’s continued economic and environmental health
    4. 4. Who we are <ul><li>260 RRD staff statewide; </li></ul><ul><li>8 district and 5 field offices </li></ul><ul><li>Geologists </li></ul><ul><li>Toxicologists </li></ul><ul><li>Engineers </li></ul><ul><li>Chemists </li></ul><ul><li>Legal experts </li></ul><ul><li>Environmental analysts </li></ul><ul><li>Equipment technicians </li></ul>
    5. 5. What we do Safeguard our natural resources Remediation : Manage soil and groundwater cleanups Protect public health Redevelopment : Facilitate brownfield redevelopment and a strong economy Before After
    6. 6. What we do Drum removals Abating imminent fire, vapor, explosion hazards Tank removals Monitor well installation
    7. 7. What we do Emergency spill response Investigations and assessments Demolition Alternate water provisions
    8. 8. What we do <ul><li>Basic Programs </li></ul><ul><li>Michigan Contaminated Site Cleanup Program </li></ul><ul><li>Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program </li></ul><ul><li>Federal Superfund Program in Michigan </li></ul><ul><li>Brownfield Redevelopment/Financial Incentives </li></ul><ul><li>State-Owned Sites Cleanup Program </li></ul>
    9. 9. Accomplishments <ul><li>Oversight/assistance on more than 10,000 cleanup projects performed by liable parties </li></ul><ul><li>$927 M in state funds committed at nearly 1,800 orphan sites for cleanup/redevelopment activities </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1,019 sites with cleanup actions completed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>521 of the completed sites prepared for redevelopment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>10,000+ homes/businesses provided safe drinking water </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>16 municipal water supply systems completed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>49 abandoned landfills contained/addressed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hundreds of sites where fire, vapor and explosion risks mitigated, or where abandoned, hazardous buildings demolished </li></ul></ul>
    10. 10. Accomplishments <ul><li>Tank Program </li></ul><ul><li>12,000 leaking underground storage tank releases have been addressed (closed) -- both liable party and orphan </li></ul>
    11. 11. Accomplishments <ul><li>Superfund Program </li></ul><ul><li>$853M spent at 82 MI Superfund sites (incl. $32 M in state funds) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>16 sites are completed (cleanups achieved) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>59 sites have final cleanup remedies underway </li></ul></ul>
    12. 12. Accomplishments <ul><li>Brownfield Grants and Loans Program </li></ul><ul><li>$95 M awarded to 228 grant/loan projects statewide </li></ul><ul><li>$3.1 B in private investment generated </li></ul><ul><li>18,000 jobs created </li></ul>Before After
    13. 13. Accomplishments <ul><li>Publicly Funded Sites </li></ul><ul><li>Goal is risk reduction , not complete cleanup </li></ul><ul><li>Range of cleanup costs and timeframe varies per site: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Low: $50,000; 1-3 years </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Medium: $500,000; 3+ years </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>High: $3.5 M - 100+ M; 10+ years </li></ul></ul>
    14. 14. Why It Matters Detroit Riverfront Project <ul><li>The Problem </li></ul>
    15. 15. Why It Matters Detroit Riverfront Project Remediation After Lafarge Silo Holnam Silo Medusa Silo
    16. 16. Why It Matters Detroit Riverfront Project Remediation New Lafarge Plant Former Detroit Coke site Detroit River
    17. 17. Why It Matters Detroit Riverfront Project Future The Watermark (former Medusa silo) @Water Lofts (former Lafarge silo) Chene East (former Holnam silo)
    18. 18. Detroit International Riverfront Project PROGRESS SO FAR Promenade State Park – Harbor GM Plaza-Riverfront Rivard Plaza - Carousel
    19. 19. Detroit International Riverfront Project THE FUTURE Former Uniroyal Site Port Authority Phase II enhancements Tri-Centennial Park-Harbor Dequindre Cut Walkway
    20. 20. Why It Matters Six Star Landfill – Rochester Hills <ul><li>The Problem: </li></ul><ul><li>Fire and explosion risks from methane gas build-up in soil </li></ul><ul><li>House near landfill explodes from methane gas entering home; other homes/occupants threatened </li></ul><ul><li>Leaking landfill wastes seep out at multiple locations due to eroded landfill cover </li></ul>
    21. 21. Why It Matters Six Star Landfill <ul><li>Site Actions to Date: </li></ul><ul><li>$2.2M state funds committed </li></ul><ul><li>Trench dug near homes to capture leaking landfill wastes </li></ul><ul><li>Methane extraction systems installed at affected residences </li></ul><ul><li>Monitor/reduce risk of methane migration in the soil </li></ul><ul><li>Unmet Need: $500K </li></ul><ul><li>Operation/maintenance of methane monitoring system at affected residences only </li></ul>
    22. 22. Funding Needs <ul><li>Thousands of sites we already know about need more work: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>More than 400 current projects need additional funding to complete, including long term operation and maintenance of treatment systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>At least 1,600 abandoned landfills require assessment/control to address potential methane and groundwater problems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>There is a continuing need to provide safe alternative drinking water supplies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4,500 orphan underground tank releases require action </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Thousands of derelict buildings pose public safety hazards and blighting influences in urban communities </li></ul></ul>
    23. 23. Funding Needs <ul><ul><li>Current level of cleanup effort </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Additional tank program needs </li></ul></ul>What will the cleanup program cost?
    24. 24. Funding Needs (current level) <ul><li>Total need can’t be quantified </li></ul><ul><li>Need will exist for foreseeable future </li></ul><ul><li>Continuing level of effort will cost $95 million* per year for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Liable party oversight </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Publicly funded cleanups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Brownfield grants and loans </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Brownfield technical assistance </li></ul></ul><ul><li>* Excludes leaking underground storage tanks and </li></ul><ul><li>state-owned sites </li></ul>
    25. 25. Funding Sources (Historical) <ul><li>Unclaimed Bottle Deposits </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cleanup & Redevelopment Fund (CRF) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Recovery of State Costs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Environmental Response Fund (ERF) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>General Obligation Bonds </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1988 Quality of Life Bond </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1998 Clean Michigan Initiative Bond (CMI) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>General Funds (prior to 2002) </li></ul><ul><li>Refined Petroleum Fund (RPF) Fee </li></ul>
    26. 26. Funding Challenge <ul><li>One-time funding sources depleted </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1988 Quality of Life Bond </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1998 Clean Michigan Initiative Bond </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Continuing revenue (ERF/CRF) is only ~$14 million/year after September 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Brownfield grant funding depleted after September 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Based on $95 million/year program, shortfall is $81 million per year </li></ul>
    27. 27. Immediate Consequences <ul><li>No new projects </li></ul><ul><li>Unable to address emergency needs </li></ul><ul><li>Existing projects are being scaled back </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Threats to public health, natural resources will be uncontrolled </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Investment in cleanup systems may be lost </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Redevelopment opportunities lost </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Work will be sacrificed at some sites so others can proceed. </li></ul>
    28. 28. Future Needs (current level) <ul><li>$95 M / Year </li></ul><ul><li>$60 M/year for project funding* </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sites with critical public health/natural resource threat </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sites with significant redevelopment potential and environmental contamination issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Some of these sites may later become brownfield projects </li></ul></ul><ul><li>$25 M /year staffing & direct costs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide liable party compliance assistance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provides brownfield and redevelopment assistance </li></ul></ul><ul><li>$10 M /year for Brownfield Grants-Loans </li></ul><ul><li>* Excludes Leaking Underground Storage Tanks and State-Owned Sites </li></ul>
    29. 29. Funding Needs (Tank Program) <ul><li>More than 21,000 confirmed releases </li></ul><ul><li>9,000 remain unaddressed </li></ul><ul><li>Almost half of these are “orphan” sites </li></ul><ul><li>Expected costs to address orphan sites is > $1.5 billion </li></ul><ul><li>About 300 new releases confirmed/year </li></ul><ul><li>About 300 releases “closed”/year </li></ul>
    30. 30. Funding Needs (Tank Program) <ul><li>Michigan’s backlog of releases is exceeded only by California and Florida </li></ul><ul><li>Our three states account for about a third of all releases unaddressed in the country </li></ul><ul><li>California and Florida each have fees that produce more than $200 million/year </li></ul>
    31. 31. Funding Needs (Tank Program) <ul><li>Refined Petroleum Fee </li></ul><ul><li>7/8 cent/gallon </li></ul><ul><li>Raises $56 million/year </li></ul><ul><li>Only 7% of revenue collected in FY 05-07 made available for leaking tank program </li></ul>
    32. 32. Funding Needs (Tank Program) <ul><li>$177 M / year* </li></ul><ul><li>$140 M newly reported releases </li></ul><ul><li>$ 25 M critical needs at existing orphan sites </li></ul><ul><li>$ 12 M program administration (7%) </li></ul><ul><li>*Minimum funding level for tank program, depending on program design </li></ul>
    33. 33. To Recap . . . <ul><li>TOTAL ANNUAL FUNDING NEEDS </li></ul><ul><li>Non-Tank Program $ 95 Million </li></ul><ul><li>Tank Program $177 Million </li></ul>
    34. 34. To Recap . . . <ul><li>Michigan’s industrial legacy -- while propelling the state’s economic success -- has resulted in significant, long-standing pollution problems </li></ul><ul><li>While we’ve done a good job with the funding we’ve had, much remains to be accomplished </li></ul><ul><li>Under the current scenario, we will be out of cleanup dollars by September 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>We need $95M a year to address current needs, and at least $177 M a year for tank releases </li></ul><ul><li>Michigan’s natural resources, public health and economic health will be in jeopardy without long-term, stable funding. </li></ul>