EPA agreement sets new Gelman Plume cleanup duties in Ann Arbor

An Oct. 23 EPA announcement said a federal agreement requires Gelman Sciences LLC to undertake five cleanup, monitoring and review actions at the Gelman Plume, a 1,4-dioxane contamination zone in the aquifer beneath Scio Township and western Ann Arbor, Michigan.

What must Gelman Sciences do?

The agreement requires Gelman to:

• Excavate contaminated soil at a former Gelman-run burn pit on the Wagner Road site.
• Conduct a new remedial investigation and feasibility study to determine how much groundwater has been contaminated.
• Accelerate removal of groundwater from the eastern side of the plume.
• Install new 1,4-dioxane groundwater monitoring stations on the eastern side.
• Make grant funding available for an outside group to hire an independent expert to check the work.

The EPA announcement describes work still ahead. It does not say the new monitoring stations, soil excavation or independent review are complete, and it gives no deadline for them. The agreement moves Gelman from general containment efforts toward specified excavation, sampling and outside verification.

The next job is physical work and measurable data, not another announcement.

Where did the plume come from?

According to MLive’s earlier reporting, a University of Michigan student discovered the aquifer contamination in the 1980s. Since then, the City of Ann Arbor and Scio Township have spent decades trying to contain the 1,4-dioxane patch beneath the Wagner Road site and nearby ponds.

The pollution began when Gelman, then operating on Wagner Road, discharged wastewater from medical equipment manufacturing into nearby ponds from 1963 through 1986. The discharge created the plume. EPA says 1,4-dioxane can cause liver and kidney damage and cancer.

In 2001, Ann Arbor had to close one of its drinking water wells because of the plume. The closure shows the practical cost of contamination that remains unresolved for decades.

The plume comes from a manufacturing discharge that ran from 1963 to 1986.

Why does the federal listing matter?

The site was nominated for the federal National Priorities List about five years before EPA added it in March. The list identifies contaminated sites that warrant federal cleanup priority.

Anne Vogel, EPA Region 5 administrator, said: “Since adding the Gelman Sciences site to the National Priorities List in March, EPA has moved quickly to put strong oversight and clear expectations in place.” She added that the order provides a focused path for critical work, resident protection and long-term aquifer restoration under the Superfund program.

U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Ann Arbor, welcomed the announcement in an Oct. 23 release: “This will help accelerate the investigation and cleanup of the contamination, reduce the spread of the groundwater plume, and provide the community with additional resources to better understand the work ahead.”

Dingell said the progress reflected residents’ persistent demand for safe drinking water and accountability. She also called the agreement meaningful action after six decades of advocacy by residents, local officials and community leaders, with clearer responsibilities, stronger federal oversight and a closer route to groundwater restoration. She thanked EPA for the latest progress.

The State of Michigan also maintains a publicly available map that lets the public track the known spread of the plume.

Federal listing gives the cleanup’s next stage a public checkpoint.

What decides the next phase?

Work will begin with the plume’s eastern side, where the agreement calls for faster groundwater extraction and additional monitoring. Excavation addresses soil at the former burn pit, while the remedial investigation and feasibility study must establish how much groundwater has been contaminated.

The independent expert will check Gelman’s work rather than merely endorse it. The agreement itself provides no completion date for the study, station installation or excavation. Its next regulatory milestone is the remedial investigation and feasibility study, because its findings must define the plume before long-term restoration can move forward.

The study is the next gate; until it reports, the cleanup has direction but no map.