Michigan House Bill HB5673

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/25/24
• Refer: 4/25/24

Caption

Administrative procedure: other; cross-reference to administrative procedures act within the natural resources and environmental protection act; update. Amends sec. 20120a of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.20120a). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5674'24

Impact

The bill enhances transparency and allows the department greater discretion in approving cleanup plans. It establishes significant criteria for evaluating hazardous substances, requiring that cleanup criteria be developed using scientific data from trusted sources, such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Additionally, the department can adopt and update cleanup criteria periodically to incorporate the latest scientific findings, ensuring that environmental protection standards remain current and effective against emerging threats.

Summary

House Bill 5673 seeks to amend the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act of 1994 by modifying section 20120a. This amendment allows the Michigan Department of the Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (the department) to establish and approve cleanup criteria for contaminated sites based on different land use categories, including residential, nonresidential, limited residential, and limited nonresidential. The proposed bill emphasizes the importance of environmental health, safety, and welfare, as well as public health considerations in determining the adequacy of any proposed remedial action.

Contention

Discussions regarding the bill may revolve around the balance between regulatory compliance and local governance, as it could limit local jurisdictions' power to impose more stringent regulations than those applied statewide. Stakeholders may express differing opinions on the adequacy and appropriateness of the cleanup criteria established, particularly concerning their potential impact on economic development and environmental justice. Furthermore, the comprehensive assessment processes for new criteria require extensive public involvement, which could lead to contention if parties have differing views on scientific interpretations and associated risks.