In a securities filing this week, Enbridge Energy Partners reported the total cleanup cost of the 2010 Kalamazoo River oil spill to be $85.9 million higher than figures released last year.
According to the Securities and Exchange Commission filing, the $1.21 billion figure included $551.6 million spent on response personnel and equipment, $227 million on environmental consultants and $429.4 million on professional, regulatory, and other costs.
The company estimates it has $219 million in spill costs yet-to-be-paid.
The new numbers follow substantial cleanup activities and restoration of the Kalamazoo River, which was fouled by 843,000 gallons of diluted bitumen, or dilbit, a viscus type of heavy crude oil from the tar sands region of Canada.
The spill occurred when a six-foot break in Enbridge’s Line 6B, which runs from Griffith, Ind., to Sarnia, Ontario, sent oil into the river’s Tallmadge Creek tributary near Marshall on July 25, 2010.
Portions of the river were dredged and riverbank was restored with native plantings along the entire 35-mile stretch of waterway in Calhoun and Kalamazoo counties. Dredging near Ceresco and Morrow Lake is being completed.
On Oct. 9, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources reported that all sections of the river had reopened for public use.
The U.S. Dept. of Transportation fined Enbridge $3.7 million dollars after the spill. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is expected to levy additional fines for violations of the Clean Water Act. In the filing, Enbridge estimates those to be around $40 million.
The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality is taking over responsibility for monitoring and remediation of remaining submerged oil from the EPA.
On Oct. 21, U.S. District Judge Gordon Quist approved an undisclosed settlement between Enbridge and developers who planned to convert 420 acres of undeveloped land in Marshall into a $14 million community vineyard.
In a Nov. 3 earnings call, Enbridge president Mark Maki said the company increased its insurance liability coverage to $700 million following the 2010 spill.
“If you go back over our history, the Marshall incident was without question really a confluence of a number of very, very difficult and bad events in terms of what it cost ultimately,” Maki said. “So we just don’t see a lot of value in ensuring for another Marshall..”