Published December 5, 2002 in the Midland (MI) Daily News

By Beth Medley Bellor

The drive to keep Midland from getting a higher allowable dioxin level has landed in court.

A coalition of six environmental groups planned to file suit today in Ingham County Circuit Court to stop a draft consent order between the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and The Dow Chemical Co. The comment period on the order ends Monday and it could be signed anytime after that.

“DEQ’s proposed action is clearly unlawful,” said Chris Bzdok, an attorney for the citizens. “The agency has failed to follow law and rules in drafting an order that seems designed primarily to serve the interests of The Dow Chemical Company, not the public health.”

Groups filing the lawsuit include Lone Tree Council, Tittabawassee River Watch, Ecology Center, Clean Water Action, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination and PIRGIM. Ten residents of the Tittabawassee River flood plain and Midland also joined the action.

The state allows for site-specific criteria to be used in determining an allowable dioxin level above its usual 90 parts per trillion. A corrective action consent order on dioxin contamination in Midland proposes a level of 831 ppt, although the DEQ has said that is likely to be lowered as more data becomes available.

“Everything about this deal stinks. The public interest has been ignored, the science disregarded, public input has been squelched and the law violated. Now our health is at risk,” said Diane Hebert, Midland resident and director of Environmental Health Watch.

Neil Hawkins, environmental health and safety leader at Dow’’s Michigan Operations, has not seen the suit but noted the consent order has been reviewed by Dow legal counsel and complies with all Michigan statutes. “We’’re expecting that upon review, others will come to the same conclusion,” he said.

Earlier this week, a similar coalition filed a petition under the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, seeking a delay until the DEQ weighs evidence opposing the methodology used in proposing a new standard.

Some flood-plain residents are concerned the new standard will apply to them as well, although soil sampling done in several areas there still would be well above that level. Dow has not proposed a higher standard anywhere but Midland.

Patricia Spitzley, a spokeswoman for the DEQ, disputed the group’s’ contention that state or national precedent could be set.

The higher standard is site-specific, she said. “It’’s not precedent-setting.”

She added the DEQ has not been served or seen the complaint, but the executive office had decided not to extend the comment period.