After fighting for PFAS clean-up funds, Lake Elmo and Hastings still face astronomical expenses
LAKE ELMO, Minn. — PFAS are forever chemicals used in everyday items like nonstick pans, dental floss and food packaging that can build up in our bodies and harm our health.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, they have the potential to cause certain cancers and birth defects.
Funds from one of the largest environmental damages suits in U.S. history — between the state of Minnesota and 3M — are paying for $140 million treatment facilities in Cottage Grove, but other communities will have to foot some of the bill on their own.
From the air, Lake Elmo's Raleigh Creek looks like a serene stream. But city officials say the water carves a path of pollution.
"It's really a creek that flows from Oakdale to Lake Elmo, and it's been the pathway of the PFAS from the Oakdale disposal site," said Lake Elmo city engineer Jack Griffin.
Lake Elmo found out there was PFAS in the city's drinking water in 2004. After investing $20 million in city funds to start tackling the problem, the city is now one of several in the east metro filtering this out on 3M's dime.
"We have an expectation, and rightfully so, that the water we drink from our tap is clean and healthy," said Jeff Holtz, a member of the Lake Elmo City Council. "Those dollars are being used to protect our health."
Head south to Hastings and you'll find the PFAS problem there, too. Ryan Stempski, the city's public works director, says they have nowhere to turn to find clean water.
"Unfortunately, all six of our wells have PFAS in them," Stempski said.
He brought WCCO to the site where the city will soon build its first of three treatment facilities, with a total cost of $70 million, and another million a year for upkeep.
But unlike Lake Elmo, Hastings doesn't have a plan to cover all the costs.
"We in Hastings believe the polluters should pay," Stempski said. "And we're working with the state on many investigations right now."
Kirk Koudelka, assistant commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), agrees with Stempski.
"Those responsible for the contamination of the drinking water should be those that pay for the improvements to provide safe drinking water to those residents," Koudelka said.
After years of being shut out of 3M PFAS pollution settlement dollars, Hastings recently found out it will get about $14.5 million from it to treat one well after an MPCA investigation connected the PFAS source to a 3M dump site.
That's on top of a few million MPCA dollars to design the treatment plants. While that could expand with ongoing investigations, they wonder who will pay for the other $55 million it will take to build the needed treatment facilities and the ongoing, expensive operating costs.
Stempski says the city will still have to raise rates for residents who are still drinking water containing PFAS.
"Our residents feel uneasy," Stempski said. "And it's frustrating."
Lake Elmo's Well Two is used sparingly because its PFAS levels are at about 10 parts per trillion, more than double the EPA's recently lowered limit of under 4 parts per trillion.
That's drops in an Olympic-size swimming pool, but the federal government says it's enough to make people sick. So the city will build a filtration system at Well Two.
The city is also drilling a new well to meet growing demand, but they're constructing it knowing the site is contaminated with PFAS, so they'll have to treat it. It's the only option for this small community dealing with an overwhelming problem.
"It feels like an enormous waste of money," Griffin said.
And they won't be alone. With the new EPA regulations, there will be countless communities across this state and country going through these same steps to filter out PFAS.
In Minnesota alone, the MPCA says 20 years of cleanup for wastewater streams will cost between $14 billion and $28 billion. For drinking water, the agency estimates expenses will exceed $1 billion.
"We can lead by example and maybe can help to expand the understandings for others to know here's how you do it," Holtz said.
It's a staggering and costly undertaking, regardless of who's paying for it.
"We're on the leading edge of something that we don't want to be, but yet here we are," Holtz said.