EPA's response to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report dated June 2007.  "Please be aware that based on EPA's attached response and on  EPA's "Evaluation of the Superfund Alternative Approach implementation", the OIG closed their report on this matter."

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has a new regional administrator.  Federal administrator Stephen L. Johnson announced Monday that he appointed Lynn Buhl, a deputy assistant administrator in the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance at EPA headquarters, to the administrator position.

Buhl will replace Mary Gade, who resigned May 1 amid internal fights over dioxin contamination near Dow Chemical Co.'s headquarters in Midland, Mich.

As a Bush political appointee Buhl's tenure may be limited to 6 months depending upon the elections in November. Will recent progress on the Tittabawassee River flood plain clean up come to a screeching halt?  Will Buhl develop a conscious as Mary Gady seemingly did so last year?  Will Dow have any influence on Buhl's actions?  Only time will tell.  Click here for article from Grist Magazine concerning Buhl and her past.

Assumptions without research lead to misinformation

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency shares the view recently expressed in these pages by Bob Van Deventer of the Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce that protecting the health and safety of residents in the Saginaw Valley environment is a top priority.

However, Van Deventer's presentation of the issues concerning dioxin contamination in the Tittabawassee River system leaves out several important details.

Van Deventer claims that "not one individual has ever been ill because of the effects of furans/dioxins" in the river. This is a striking oversimplification. To EPA's knowledge, no specific study has ever been conducted that supports this statement.

Certainly, in the case of dioxin, delaying action until people actually suffer clinical health effects would be irresponsible.

Considerable evidence shows that adverse health effects are possible and may begin to occur when individuals are exposed at levels not much higher than those expected for the general population. Also, available data show elevated dioxin levels in soils near many private homes as well as in local game and fish in the Saginaw Valley.

Another Van Deventer claim, that "wildlife along the Tittabawassee River is flourishing," has little factual basis. The EPA has never received a work plan for an ecological risk assessment by Dow or Michigan State University researchers that meets the agency's baseline requirements. Furthermore, the MSU wildlife studies to date have not undergone peer review.

Finally, in discussing the University of Michigan's preliminary results from its dioxin exposure study, Van Deventer states that it "clearly showed very little difference in dioxin blood levels" between Tittabawassee River floodplain residents and a test group not living in the area. Again, the U-M study has yet to be fully peer-reviewed.

To conclude anything definitive at this early date would seem to be an attempt to limit further discussion. A final report is not expected until late this year at the earliest.

The studies under way clearly demand the full scrutiny of the scientific and academic communities. The agencies also fully support the concept of new, additional studies of human and ecological health in the area by qualified researchers. To do anything less is to short-change the residents and the health of the Saginaw Valley.

As posted in the Saginaw News "My View" column Saturday June 1, 2008, 2-3 months after it was submitted in response to Horn's My View article of 2/29/08

Agencies consider downstream effect of river restoration

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency agrees with state Rep. Kenneth B. Horn that all parties with a vested interest in cleaning up the pervasive, long-standing dioxin and furan contamination in the Tittabawassee and Saginaw rivers should work together to resolve this complex problem.

The residents who live along these valuable natural resources have been waiting for decades and deserve to finally see real action.

The EPA is working closely with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to accelerate the process and help bolster the state's efforts to compel Dow Chemical Co. to clean up the Tittabawassee River.

To be accountable to the public we serve, the EPA must also provide clarity, context and, in a few instances, corrections regarding some issues that were recently raised by Horn in these pages.

In 2006, Dow assured the DEQ that it would clean up three highly contaminated sections of the Tittabawassee River, but in 2007 the company indicated it would not finish by the end of the year. When Dow proposed two more years to finish work on the section near its Midland facility and made no plan to clean up the section six miles downriver, the EPA exercised its authority under Superfund and ordered Dow to complete all three cleanups simultaneously in 2007.

It is important to note that the DEQ and Dow were already planning to remove dioxin-contaminated soil along the 1,600-foot section three miles downriver from Dow's plant before the EPA got involved.

The plan called for Dow to engineer the riverbank to minimize future erosion. The goal was to allow the river to expand up the bank and reduce its energy during high flow periods.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also provided expert opinion, and its recommendations were incorporated into the work plan. The EPA's order ensured that the work got done.

Horn made the point that "lots of rip-rap" should be used to keep the banks from eroding.

While the EPA agrees that using some rip-rap is warranted, overuse may concentrate the river's energy and cause problems for communities downriver.

The EPA and the DEQ recognize that extensive work needs to be done to stabilize rapidly eroding riverbanks. However, neither agency considers lining the river with rip-rap an acceptable solution.

It is also necessary to clarify that as a matter of fact, 300 majestic, 100-year-old oak trees were not ripped from the ground during the cleanup.

According to Dow's tree inventory, only three of the 419 trees cut down were oaks. The rest were fast-growing and short-lived cottonwoods and ashes, generally considered to be less desirable. It is highly unlikely that many of them were 100 years old since most were small in diameter indicating relatively young ages.

Certainly, the EPA realizes it is unfortunate that even one tree was cut down, and that is why Dow was required to plant 430 new trees.

The Fish and Wildlife Service recommended that Dow replace the trees with a greater variety of native species because diversity makes the area less susceptible to blight or infestation.

Dow also replaced groundcover in the area with native grasses, an improvement requested by the Natural Resource Trustees.

The EPA could not agree more with Horn that future work should be accomplished in a way that does the least damage possible to the natural beauty of the rivers. The EPA and the DEQ are working together to make sure that even greater care is taken in the future to protect existing vegetation and, when possible, enhance the habitat with natural bank stabilization methods.

"One sample of household dust had dioxin levels of 3,000 parts per trillion, three times more than the federal cleanup standard. Levels in the yards were as high as 23,000 parts per trillion and averaged 2,000 parts per trillion."

View all Region 5 News Releases

Maybe there is hope yet.  In our previous update (see 12/22/07 entry below) , the EPA negotiations with Dow seemed to be following a  familiar pattern with a predicted outcome.  Today's EPA Press Release (below) may indicate a fundamental shift in the right direction.  Dow influenced Local and State politicians are preventing the MDEQ and it's hard working staff from accomplishing much other than a few public relations "hotspot" cleanup stunts in a long and protracted process that would take decades to resolve the entire watershed.  In contrast, recent EPA comments indicate they are ready to cut through all the bull and prepared to force Dow to come up with a comprehensive plan that protects human health and the environment.  Only time will tell.

What we need is a cleanup plan that immediately addresses the entire 50 mile river system and the floodplains that surround it.  What's next?  Speculation ( that's all it is at this point since the negotiations are closed to the public) is that the EPA may just hire contractors to perform the necessary cleanup and send the bill to Dow.  We doubt Dow would just roll over and pay, a Federal lawsuit may be in the works and Dow's operating license could be in jeopardy.   We hope it does not come to that, maybe Dow will decide to start to play ball in earnest.
---------

Dow missed the EPA's cleanup 60 day negotiation deadline of December 10, 2007.  The October 10, 2007 EPA press release , EPA to Dow Chemical: 60 day clock to negotiate on Tittabawassee River system cleanup starts today,  stated "EPA may choose to extend negotiations until Jan. 9, 2008, if appropriate".  Is anyone surprised?  Dow always delays everything it can. 

What should concern everyone is that on the surface, this process closely resembles the pattern of the last "negotiation" in 2004 when the Governor Granholm stopped the transparent public process and went behind closed doors with Dow.   Is this just another replay of 2004/2005?    Should we substitute the abbreviation "DEQ" with "EPA" in the timeline below?  Any one seen Dave Camp hanging around the EPA office lately?  We hope not, however with negotiations behind closed doors again, only time will tell.

Click here to view the confidential EPA memo detailing Dow's deceptive tactics accidentally released to the Lone Tree Council as part of a FOIA request.  See 12/7/07  Detroit Free Press story for an interpretation.  Note: there have been two breaking stories in the last 24 hours, the whistle blower lawsuit filed yesterday about Dow submitting flawed data to the MDEQ is unrelated to the leaked EPA memo above. However they both share a common theme: a sneaky and unscrupulous Dow Chemical The Detroit Free Press reports (a few snippets)

CONTACT: Anne Rowan, 312-353-9391, rowan.anne@epa.gov Mick Hans, 312-353-5050,
 hans.mick@epa.gov

For Immediate Release No. 07-OPA227

EPA: DOW TO CLEAN UP DIOXIN HOT SPOT IN THE SAGINAW RIVER

CHICAGO (Nov.15, 2007) — U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 and Dow
Chemical Co. of Midland, Mich., today signed a consent order to begin an emergency
cleanup of a previously unknown dioxin hot spot on the Saginaw River.

Under the order, Dow must dredge dioxin-contaminated sediments in the Saginaw.
Field work must begin immediately with the dredging to be completed by Dec. 15.

“The extremely high level of dioxin found in the Saginaw River and its possible
consequences warrant immediate action,” said Regional Administrator Mary A. Gade.
“Today’s Superfund emergency order requires action now to eliminate an imminent
and substantial threat to human health and the environment.

“ Friday evening, Nov. 9, Dow notified EPA and Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality of preliminary results of over 1.6 million parts per trillion (ppt) of dioxin in one
sample of sediment taken from the Saginaw River. This dioxin concentration is probably
the highest ever found in the Great Lakes. The sample came from a location a half-mile
below the confluence of the Tittabawassee and Shiawassee Rivers, roughly adjacent to
Wickes Park in Saginaw.

On Sunday, EPA provided Dow legal notice of its potential liability and the Agency’s intent
 to immediately begin cleanup. Under the Superfund law, EPA gave Dow the option to
 perform the cleanup under EPA oversight. On Monday, EPA and MDEQ technical experts
 surveyed the site and met with Dow to discuss cleanup alternatives. On Tuesday, Dow
 notified EPA that it would agree to perform the work under an EPA order.   ....

####

Click here for a biased Dow media spin article released earlier today to preempt
 the EPA report.  Local media bought it up hook, line, and sinker.  TV news had
the Dow spinmister John Musser comparing the find to 6 drop in a 55 gallon barrel
and interviews with fishermen lowering their hook almost directly over the contaminated
 area.  Both articles are using the term "Dioxin-Like" (assume it was a sound bite provided
by Dow) in an attempt to downplay the discovery.  Regardless of the "dow-ese" used by
the media, the samples taken near Wickes park revel dioxin in unprecedented levels and it
is the same Dow DIOXIN found throughout the Saginaw Bay watershed.  Suffice it to say
that this is  "sound science" at it's finest.

Dioxin-Like refers to compounds from a group of halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons that
have molecules shaped like TCDD and produce similar toxic effects, such as certain other
chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (CDDs) and certain chlorinated dibenzofurans (CDFs),
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs),
brominated dibenzo-p-dioxins (BDDs), and brominated dibenzofurans (BDFs).
 

Chicago, Ill. - Nov. 9, 2007) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 today notified
Dow Chemical Co. that it has found potential clean-air and hazardous waste violations at
the company's Midland, Mich., facility.

EPA issued a finding of violation under the Clean Air Act and a notice of violation under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. It also issued requests for information under
 both acts.

"The issuance of these notices and requests for information shows that the agency takes
seriously its responsibility of protecting human health and the environment," said Regional
Administrator Mary A. Gade. "Our investigation of this very large facility spanned eight
weeks over a two-year period and included personnel from EPA's National Enforcement
Investigation Center. Today's actions are a product of that investigation."

EPA alleges Dow violated the Clean Air Act by, among other things, failing to follow
regulations aimed at detecting and repairing leaks, as well as failing to conduct a required
stack test. Dow was also allegedly found to be in violation of multiple Resource Conservation
 and Recovery Act requirements for managing hazardous waste.

These are preliminary findings of violations. To resolve them, EPA may issue a compliance
 order, assess an administrative penalty or bring suit against the company. Dow has 30 days
 from receipt of the notice to meet with EPA to discuss resolving the allegations.

EPA said Dow's alleged clean-air violations may have increased public exposure to organic
 hazardous air pollutant emissions including, but not limited to, ethyl chloride, toluene, ethylene,
 perchloroethylene, methanol and hydrogen chloride. Hazardous air pollutants may cause serious
 health effects including birth defects and cancer and may also cause harmful environmental
and ecological effects. These pollutants are also volatile organic compounds and are major
 precursors of ground-level ozone (smog).

Smog is formed when a mixture of pollutants react on warm, sunny days. Smog can cause
respiratory problems, including coughing, wheezing, shortness of breath and chest pain.
 People with asthma, children and the elderly are especially at risk, but these health
concerns are important to everyone.

Hazardous wastes have properties that make them dangerous or potentially harmful to
human health and the environment. They exhibit at least one of four characteristics - flammability,
corrosivity, reactivity or toxicity. They can be liquids, solids, contained gases or sludges and
 can be products of manufacturing processes or simply discarded commercial products like
cleaning fluids or pesticides.
 

Click here for the entire press release

To the editor (Midland Daily News):

    Your editorial of Sept. 17th entitled "Our View: EPA should finish its work" suggests that
 because the agency's dioxin reassessment is not yet completed, dioxin toxicity remains
open to serious scientific debate. This is simply not true.

    EPA has extensive scientific knowledge on the toxicity of dioxin. Thousands of peer-reviewed
 scientific studies have been published. No matter how you look at dioxin, one fact remains indisputable:
dioxin is a highly toxic compound. In fact, EPA's reassessment of the most recent science indicated
that dioxin is a more potent toxic chemical than previously believed. A recent University of Michigan
study funded by Dow Chemical revealed that people consuming fish from the Tittabawassee River,
Saginaw River and Saginaw Bay have higher than average levels of dioxin in their blood. Any increase
 in the dioxin levels of fish consumers is a health concern.

    For more than 25 years, the State of Michigan has found it necessary to issue consumption
advisories on fish from the Tittabawassee River, the Saginaw River and the Saginaw Bay because
 dioxin contamination extends over 50 miles. EPA believes that the current science on dioxin is
 sufficient to develop cleanup criteria for the watershed. Even without a final dioxin reassessment,
EPA has moved forward with dioxin cleanups across the nation to protect public health.

    The Midland Daily News is right to urge EPA to continue its work on a final dioxin reassessment
and take into consideration comments provided by the National Academy of Science. And EPA is
 right to urge Dow Chemical to continue and accelerate its work to restore the Saginaw Bay watershed
 so that fish consumers will no longer need to be concerned about dioxin in the fish they eat.

    Richard Karl, Director
    Superfund Division
    U.S. EPA Region 5
    Midland

The United States Region 5 Environmental Protection Agency has declared the current mediation process between
 Dow Chemical and the State of Michigan broken and is pulling out of the process. 

"EPA believes a more open and transparent process is the best way to make important decisions that will affect
the future health and vitality of the watershed for the people of Michigan and the United States," said Regional
Administrator Mary A. Gade. "Despite the best intentions of all involved, the current process is not working as
effectively as it should and it is time to consider a new approach."

Citizens were denied an open and transparent process back in 2005
 when Lt. Governor John Cherry signed the infamous "framework" agreement. 

What's next?  Will the EPA propose or mandate a new plan, sue Dow for
the missing information, or just walk away?  We doubt it's the latter, stay
tuned.

Click here to view the entire EPA press release.

 CONTACT: Karen Thompson, 312-353-8547, thompson.karen@epa.gov
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                 
No. 07-OPA151

EPA issues demand for Midland dioxin sampling data

(Chicago, Ill. - Aug. 31, 2007) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 today issued a request for information to the city of Midland, Mich., for all dioxin sampling data taken within the city in 2006 and 2007. 

The city of Midland has information that would give EPA a more complete picture of Dow Chemical Co.'s dioxin contamination in that area.  EPA has also sent information requests to two other entities that hold relevant information.

"It appears that the data is obscured by an unusual double blind system that EPA has been unable to obtain voluntarily from the city of Midland," said EPA Region 5 Superfund Division Director Richard Karl.  "The city holds the key to the data and we're requiring them to provide it." 

Today's request is part of a larger investigation of dioxin contamination in the Midland area.  In mid-August, EPA issued two requests to Dow asking for  information on off-site and on-site dioxin sampling conducted by Dow and more extensive data on numerous other hazardous materials produced at the Dow Midland plant.  

Dow began a dioxin cleanup in three hot spots of the Tittabawassee River as a result of EPA orders in late June.  Those cleanups are expected to be completed this year and set the stage for additional work downriver.

Speechless.....

A EPA document recently obtained by the Lone Tree Council exposes the TRUE state of the Tittabawassee River and Dows attempts to repeatedly delay addressing the problems.  It's not just dioxin any more folks. 

It seems we are a true silicon valley now thanks to Dow Corning. Silicon has been found in every soil sample taken.  Not to mention another 29+ dangerous chemicals including Octachlorostyrene , Hexachlorobenzene, Aldrin, Dieldrin, Fhloradane, DDT, Mirex, and Toxaphene. 

But lets not forget about the unprecedented levels of dioxin. The document offers valid scientific references which counter almost every lie Dow has purported as "Sound Science" over the last 5 years.

The contents are mind blowing and the implications staggering. This is a must read for everyone, please download it, print it and pass around (it's 44 pages but everyone of them contains important myth busting facts).   Politicians should pay close attention, the cats out of the bag.

Below are a few of the key points of the document, many more are contained in the document with supporting evidence.

Below are a few snippets from the document:

EPA's list of chemicals of concern:

Aldrin/dieldrin

Click here to view the entire document

A few excerpts:

EPA comments on Dow preliminary SOW 082603 (pdf)

EPA objections & comments on draft MDEQ/Dow CACO 110702 (pdf)

EPA Objections & comments on draft MDEQ/Dow Hazardous Material Waste Management License 100702 (pdf)

A recent EPA memo (7/30/04) to the MDEQ indicates the results of the Dow Wild Game study in the Tittabawassee River Flood plain are much more serious than the Dow Press release indicates.  The EPA goes on to state that they may need "to become engaged in the dioxin contamination problem and to re-enforce existing risks to public health and wildlife".  A summary of the memo was published today in the Midland Daily News.  Highlights of the memo:

Click here to read the EPA memo.

STATUS March 11, 2009.  Environmental Protection Agency said this week that it will try to speed the release of its reassessment of dioxin, a chemical that has contaminated Michigan’s largest watershed. “The new administration is familiar with the history of this issue and will be focusing on expediting the study,” EPA spokeswoman Suzanne Ackerman said this week.

“We’re pleased to hear EPA plans to expedite the study,” said Mike Schrade of the Virginia-based Center for Health, Environment and Justice, which together with 100 other groups sent a letter to the Obama administration in late January asking that the dioxin reassessment be released.

Click here for the complete article
 

DRAFT Dioxin Reassessment Report 0402 (pdf)

STATUS October 5, 2007.  EPA is poised to issue a plan detailing how the agency will address recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for improving its risk assessment of dioxin, a move that will provide a long-awaited guide on the agency's future efforts but could prolong uncertainty over how to regulate the ubiquitous contaminant.  Although the plan for responding to NAS will be released in approximately a month, an agency source says EPA may not have a revised risk assessment available for peer review for up to two years, and may not ultimately develop a full toxicological profile for dioxin because the agency's current responsibility "is to respond to NAS."  The source says developing a profile for the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) -- which contains agency risk data used by state and federal officials to set health and cleanup standards -- would be the "logical next step" after preparing the response, but internal discussions of the agency's long-term dioxin efforts remain unsettled.  In July 2006 NAS released its highly critical report -- Health Risks from Dioxin and Related Compounds: Evaluation of the EPA Reassessment -- finding among other things that EPA's 2003 draft risk assessment did not adequately characterize the uncertainties associated with different approaches to dioxin's cancer risks..snip.. Activists and public health advocates have long been critical of the pace of EPA's dioxin efforts, which began in 1991 with an agency announcement that it would proceed with an initial draft reassessment. In the intervening years the substance has generated significant controversy, including an industry push earlier this year for the Supreme Court to review whether EPA cleanup orders at an Arkansas site contaminated with dioxin were unlawful because of the lack of clarity over the substance's risk level. The delay on dioxin has meant significant uncertainty for cleanup officials, including at sites such as the Dow Chemical Company headquarters in Midland, MI, where activists for a number of years have demanded action. Nevertheless, EPA is only now coming around to responding to the NAS critique, the agency source says, adding that limited resources may have contributed to the delay. "There have been all these big IRIS assessments" -- such as trichloroethylene and perchlorate, in addition to dioxin -- "and for all these highly visible chemicals, there's just a finite number of people to work on them," the source says..snip.. The source adds that the response may be made available for peer review only in pieces and will likely not be available in any form for at least a year. "Some NAS questions will be pretty hard to answer," the source says, because the critique "was a prescription for a lot more work." The source says EPA is now looking for individuals within and especially outside the agency who can assist with different parts of the response because of their expertise in a given field. "We're sitting down and deciding what parts to bite off and deal with," the source says, adding that the work plan is "a month away." Gathering needed outside expert assistance will likely prolong the effort, the source says, because of the time involved with going through the grant-making and contracting process. -- Adam Sarvana. Source InsideEPA.com, visit for all the details.

STATUS: November 2004. A White House science official in a surprise move announced plans to release a report on dioxin in an apparent attempt to show administration progress on monitoring and controlling for the highly controversial pollutant. But the move has already drawn protests from environmentalists who say development of the report will likely further delay release of EPA’s dioxin risk review, which has been 13 years in the making. ... But an environmentalist at the meeting dismisses the value of the new report in assessing public health risks from dioxin. "This [progress report] is largely a public relations exercise that mirrors the industry line about declining industrial emissions" even though EPA’s own findings show that current body burdens may pose public health risks that require more immediate action, the source says. ... The environmentalist says EPA’s inability to release its dioxin risk review, which has undergone numerous scientific peer reviews, has prevented a host of state and local governments from taking action on contamination that continues to pose threats to their residents. "Local governments lack the resources to carry out this kind of risk assessment and are waiting for this to be completed before they can start cleanups. But now it looks like it will be at least another two years before it is finalized," the source says

Click here for the entire story.

STATUS: October 2004 Dioxin Reassessment report. The USEPA has updated the dioxin reassessment report and sent its most recent draft to the National Academy of Sciences for their review.  This draft is dated December 2003 and was sent to the NAS in October 2004.  The entire report has been updated including the sources section (Part I), the health effects section (Part II) and the risk characterization (Part III).  The complete updated draft report can be found at:   http://www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/dioxin/nas-review/ .  Source: www.chej.org

STATUS:  July 2004 Dioxin Reassessment report. The release of the U.S. EPA’s Dioxin Reassessment Report, a study on the sources and health risks of our exposure to dioxin that has been 16 years in the making, continues to be delayed for an indefinite period of time.  An Interagency Working Group (IWG) reviewed the dioxin reassessment report in 2003, communicating a level of concern to EPA that triggered a request for the National Academy of Sciences to conduct another review of the science.   The IWG is co-chaired by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA), agencies that have an overriding interest in minimizing the economic impact of dioxin regulation on the cattle, dairy and other food industries.  Inside sources have revealed to CHEJ that although the funding has not yet been given to the National Academy for its review, HHS and USDA have finally settled on their charge to the committee:  to find anything that is not perfect about the draft reassessment!  This fishing expedition is just one more piece of evidence that the Administration’s over-riding concern is to keep this potentially explosive report sitting safely on a shelf until well after the November elections – in fact, for as long after that as possible.  Source: www.chej.org

October 2003: Dioxin reassessment status

April 2003: USDA concerns over EPA dioxin study may prompt narrow NAS review

January 2003: Dioxin reassessment status

EPA Dioxin reassessment website