It will be years before PFAS contamination sites are cleaned up in Michigan, according to the Department of Defense. Residents are concerned that more delays could cause further contamination of the forever-chemical.
Cathy Wusterbarth is an Oscoda resident and the co-founder of Need Our Water activist group.
Wusterbarth said recent delays came at a time when community members were working well with the Department of Defense.
“This was a real disappointment for us," Wursterbarth said. "We want to be able to praise them and say that they did the right thing. And it's not too late, we will do that if just get moving."
The Air Force announced a new timeline that will delay cleanup at Wurtsmith by five years. This is one of many delays the site has seen over a decade. Residents are worried that new proposed PFAS regulations from the EPA could jeopardize progress at Wurtsmith and Camp Grayling, another PFAS-Ridden site in Michigan.
Tony Spaniola is a member of the Great Lakes PFAS Action Network — a group of community members trying to prevent and clean up PFAS contamination .
Spaniola said the most recent delay is necessary because the Air Force is working to implement recommendations from a group of citizens and activists.
“We've got to go back and do things that should have been done right the first time and weren't,” Spaniola said. “And there's some new ideas now that need to be incorporated in order to do the cleanup right.”
"It's going to take decades"
The toxic chemical was found in and around the former Air Force base in Oscoda over a decade ago. The contamination was attributed to PFAS-laden firefighting foam used during military operations.
Right now, residents in Oscoda have access to clean drinking water; whether that's through water filters, new water sources or plastic bottles.
But plumes of PFAS-contaminated water are still flowing out of the base and into the Au Sable river and Van Etten Lake, according to Wursterbarth and Spaniola.
"We recognize that the entire property is contaminated and it will take a long time to clean that up — it's going to take decades," Wursterbarth said. "But they can stop the flow off of the base."
According to the EPA's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), any polluter is required by law to prevent contaminants from leaking outside of a site by water or air.
Spaniola said the Air Force is working with a team of community members to remedy the issues after years of complications.
"We shouldn't be in this place. It should have been done right in the first instance, but we need to get it done right now," Spaniola said. "And it's being done with the recommendations from this work group in which we have a great deal of faith."
Contamination spreads in Grayling
In 2017, the forever chemical was found at Camp Grayling, the largest National Guard Training facility in the country.
Ray Basile is the community co-chair for the Camp Grayling Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) — a community group that holds the military accountable during clean up.
Since the initial discovery of PFAS on and around the site, residents have changed the way they get access to clean water.
"Right now, they're using filters that go on your faucet," Basile said. "Some people have bottled water being delivered to their homes paid for by the government. And some people have full house water filters."
Basile says municipal projects that will connect community members to a new source of clean drinking water are estimated to be complete in 2027.
"It's a very slow process to do the testing and more importantly, get the funding," Basile said.
This year, Basile said PFAS was detected in a municipal drinking water well in the northern part of the city.
"So now we've got the city of Grayling's water being compromised," Basile said the contaminated well was a back-up to the main well.
The military is paying for a new well to be installed in a different location, according to Basile.
To help prevent more PFAS from spreading outside of the base, Basile said the military is considering installing a "permeable absorptive barrier."
"Think of it was a big Brita filter," Basile said.
The project would involve installing a thousand-foot wall that would divert water deeper into the soil where it would interact with charcoal, which would extract the chemical.
"Then what comes out on the other end is clean drinking water," Basile said.
Basile said that project will cost millions and more research has to be done before the military starts construction.
Some residents are worried that new EPA proposals that cut back PFAS regulations would affect the municipal water project and general clean-up at and around Camp Grayling.
Basile and military officials said the site would be "grandfathered in" by the previous set of EPA PFAS rules.
Federal setbacks
After the EPA found that PFAS chemicals can be extremely harmful to humans, the agency implemented regulations for six of the chemicals.
Those regulations were adopted in 2024, but chemical companies and utilities sued the EPA in the U.S. Court of Appeals.
The companies argued that the EPA made a procedural error when approving four out of the six regulated chemicals. They also argued it wasn't feasible for companies to comply with the new limits in a short time frame.
Melanie Benesh, the vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group, said the EPA originally defended itself and the new PFAS regulations.
“Some environmental groups intervened in the case on behalf of affected community members and sided with the EPA saying no, these rules were done correctly,” Benesh said.
But under the Trump Administration, the EPA switched sides and agreed with the chemical companies that the EPA had made an error that would disqualify four of the six chemicals from being regulated.
Benesh said the EPA asked the court to void the rules in question.
After the court would not completely void the 2024 regulations that were made under the Biden administration, the EPA proposed new PFAS standards to comply with the federal regulator’s request.
The proposed rules eliminates four of the six chemicals it previously regulated and it grants companies extra time to comply with the new standards.
“To me just seems premature and unnecessary because the court hasn't made any decision yet so why would the EPA take away the public health protection?” said Benesh.
Jared Thompson is a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. If the court decides that the EPA did not violate procedures in 2024, Thompson said the new proposed rule that cuts back on standards would violate the anti-backsliding provision in the Drinking Water Act.
"Once EPA has set a standard for a drinking water contaminant, the agency cannot weaken the health protections of that standard," Thompson said. "It's not allowed to set a new standard that would be weaker and provide less protection of public health than the existing standard."
Thompson said the EPA has not said the chemicals are any less toxic or prevalent in America's drinking water than the agency found last year.
“EPA has expressly said that their current action is based solely on this procedural argument and has nothing to do with reevaluating the science,” Thompson said.
Thompson said the federal government’s behavior looks more like deregulation than protection.
"If EPA is serious about regulating PFAS in drinking water, EPA should be moving quickly to repropose whatever aspects of the rule are held invalid."
WCMU's Rural Life and Agriculture reporting is made possible through the generous support of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
