Commissioners hear Brownfields cleanup options for Ekalaka hospital; EPA sign‑off and $200,000 subgrant discussed

Federal and regional Brownfields program staff told commissioners that an updated cost estimate for hazardous‑materials abatement at the former Ekalaka hospital puts total project costs considerably higher than earlier estimates and that the county could combine an EPA Brownfields subgrant of up to $200,000 with a 0% loan for the remainder.

Carly (Great Northern Development Corporation) and other Brownfields staff described an estimate produced by an environmental firm that lists abatement costs (hazardous‑materials removal) near $305,000, with additional costs for QEP (qualified environmental professional) services, testing, and contractor work bringing the total estimate cited in discussion to about $431,980. Staff said a 0% loan through the Brownfields coalition (AMBC/EMBC) could finance the county’s share and that the coalition prefers a mix of subgrant and loan projects to balance its portfolio.

Commissioners and staff discussed site eligibility: the Brownfields coordinator said she submitted a site‑eligibility application to the EPA on May 5 and that EPA legal review was still pending. That sign‑off is needed before the coalition will allocate subgrant funds and before the QEP/contractor bid process moves forward. Staff said EPA processing times have slowed because of federal staffing reductions and that timing could range from a few weeks to longer.

Questions from commissioners focused on hazardous material disposal logistics and cost drivers. Staff said hazardous‑material hauling and disposal — potentially to Miles City or another permitted landfill — were included in the abatement estimate and that if disposal crossed state lines there would be additional permitting requirements, which the EPA would cover as eligible costs when necessary. Commissioners asked for an estimate of number of disposal truckloads, distance to the chosen landfill, and concrete figures on the QEP/contractor scope so they could compare loan versus pay‑up‑front options.

Brownfields staff said the subgrant program supports commercial properties and nonprofits and will provide loans for private owners; loans can be 0% with flexible repayment to ease county cashflow. Using the loan would also let the coalition or loan administrator manage invoices and reporting to reduce the administrative burden on county clerks.

Staff also noted a separate petroleum‑release cleanup at the same site — funded by the state petroleum cleanup program — remains open because of lingering contaminated soil that has not met closure criteria. Brownfields staff said the county could, after building abatement, apply petroleum funds already allocated to the site to address subsurface petroleum contamination and potentially obtain a site closure.

Ending: Commissioners asked Brownfields staff to follow up with the EPA on site eligibility, to provide an estimate of disposal truckloads and distances, and to prepare a QEP bid package and timeline for publication if EPA approval arrives. No funding commitment was made until commissioners review final estimates and the EPA eligibility determination.