A little-noticed exchange Friday in the Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee between state representative Peter Fischer, DFL-Maplewood, and a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency deputy commissioner underscores just how complicated paying for PFAS can be.
Even when the state wins a big settlement from the polluting corporation.
A bit of context to understand the recent oversight: Minnesota got a dose of more Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) news on Thursday, when the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) released the news that Nearly 60 closed landfills in 41 counties have PFAS contamination in groundwater that exceeds the state's health value.
The state's issues with the "forever" chemicals goes beyond landfills. As the news release noted:
In February 2021, the MPCA, along with other state agencies, released Minnesota’s PFAS Blueprint – a strategic, coordinated approach to protect families and communities from PFAS. The Blueprint included immediate, short- and long-term strategies that state agencies, the Minnesota Legislature, industries, and local governments should consider to prevent, manage, and clean up PFAS contamination
The PFAs Blueprint notes:
In Minnesota, the first ‘discovery’ of PFAS contamination was in drinking water in the East Metropolitan area of the Twin Cities in the early 2000's. Since then, PFAS have been detected in water, sediment, soil, and fish all across Minnesota — from Duluth and Brainerd to Lake Bde Maka Ska and Pine Island and places in between. PFAS are present everywhere in the environment, and because they don't break down, will remain so for generations. . . .
So what did Fischer ask in the hearing? He asked if 3M were making the payments on the 2018 Natural Resources Damages Settlement (Settlement) with 3M. He also noted that the state payments were going up. Deputy MPCA commissioner Kirk Koudelka answered the question.
On page 98 of the agency's 2021 Budget, there's this:
Request:
The Governor recommends an additional transfer of funds in the amount of $4.0 million in FY 2022 from the Environmental Fund to the Remediation Fund. This request would ensure a balanced Remediation Fund and ability to continue existing activities to address contaminated site activities across Minnesota. This proposal does not increase or decrease the funding to the MPCA but aligns the funding between the Environmental Fund and the Remediation Fund. In FY 2022-23, this transfer will represent less than 1% of the MPCA’s biennial budget.
Rationale/Background:
The MPCA is providing temporary drinking water treatment systems to ensure residents of the east metropolitan area have safe drinking water. The area is negatively impacted by Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) contamination that has caused many private and public wells to exceed MDH health based values designed to protect human health. These temporary drinking water treatment systems are in place until the implementation of long-term actions and systems to provide safe and sustainable safe drinking water to be funded by the 2018 Natural Resources Damages Settlement (Settlement) with 3M.
Under the 2007 Consent Order and the 2018 Settlement with 3M, the company is to reimburse the MPCA for these expenses. However, some of these expenses incurred by MPCA are being disputed and not being reimbursed. As a result, the Remediation Fund has funded the remaining expenses to ensure residents of the east metropolitan area have safe drinking water now. Temporary drinking water treatment system expense are not eligible for the 2018 Settlement funds. MPCA and 3M are engaged in efforts to resolve the dispute.
Proposal:
The proposal transfers an additional $4.0 million from the Environmental Fund to the Remediation Fund to ensure resources are available for the temporary drinking water treatment systems in the east metropolitan area and the existing activities funded by the Remediation Fund to address contaminated site activities across Minnesota.
We've highlighted the dispute in bold above. In a fact sheet about the 2018 Natural Resources Damages Settlement, the Agency states:
For the first five years after the 2018 Settlement, 3M will pay up to $40 million for the short-term drinking water needs — out of its own funds on a reimbursable basis — under the terms of the 2007 Consent Order. This includes expenses such as providing bottled water and installing temporary in-home water filtering systems to residents with PFAS-contaminated wells. The company will also pay for the operation and maintenance of temporary municipal drinking water treatment systems, such as those recently installed to treat wells in Cottage Grove. These dollars are intended to be used as a bridge to the long-term solutions funded under priority one.
Once the five years are over or $40 million is spent, any remaining short-term drinking water expenses will be covered by the grant, if grant funds remain available. After the grant funds are gone, 3M under the 2007 Consent Order continues to be required to cover all drinking water expenses due to the contamination.
And of course, there's Jennifer Bjorhuss' January 11 article in the Star Tribune, Minnesota's $850 million settlement plans to address 3M 'forever chemicals' hit resistance in east metro:
. . . The scale of the problem is enormous, and state officials trying to divvy up the settlement face little consensus among cities, residents, environmental groups — and now 3M — over how to spend it. A sample of the more than 200 public comments on the three options the state issued last fall show myriad concerns such as costs being underestimated, priorities being misplaced and PFAS treatment levels not being strict enough.
In its 24-page letter to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the state Department of Natural Resources, 3M Co. lawyers blasted the proposals for violating terms of the settlement. For example, the company said many of the drinking water projects under consideration are not "reasonable and necessary" projects, as the settlement requires.
The MPCA said the settlement clearly gives the state the sole authority to pick projects, and all three of the proposals fit the settlement's goals. 3M has no veto authority, said MPCA Assistant Commissioner Kirk Koudelka.
But it could take the state to court.
"Whether 3M selects to do so and attempts to delay the implementation of a future final decision on projects is up to them," Koudelka said. "We hope after our very public and inclusive process, which 3M is a part of, they do not decide to attempt to delay the implementation of projects."
3M issued a statement saying it "looks forward to continued engagement in this discussion." . . .
We certainly understand why Representative Fischer--who has been on the Environment & Natural Resources committee since taking office in 2013 and chaired the Ways & Means: Water Division in the 91st session--might ask a few questions.
Map: Via the Star Tribune, a Minesota Department of Health map of the 3M PFAS pollution.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the paypal subscription button.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.
NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6
Comments