Tittabawassee River Watch Editorial          Back to editorial page  

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Richard Maltby, 11/18/05, Letter to the Editor Saginaw News

Where is fairness?

Editor, The News:

I see Rep. John Moolenaar and Sen. Mike Goschka are still promoting their ill-conceived Homeowner Fairness and Protection Act.

Supposedly, the legislators' initiative is to protect local landowners along the Tittabawassee River and ensure fairness regarding the state's "facility" designation policy.

The Homeowner Fairness and Protection Act will not provide any protection from dioxin-contaminated soil and sediment. On the contrary, existing state law now provides the best protection to homeowners.

Left unsaid by Moolenaar and Goschka is how the act would help, rather than hinder, cleaning up the dioxin contamination. Dividing the floodplain into individual, pre-designated properties as mandated by Moolenaar and Goschka won't make the dioxin go away either.

The Legislature already has provided cleanup criteria. A standard equation or algorithm was used for calculating the direct contact criteria for dioxin and many other hazardous substances in 1995. The 90 parts per trillion dioxin level is the state's residential direct contact cleanup criterion.

For public health protection the 90 ppt residential cleanup criterion is the state's regulatory level for environmental investigation and remedy decisions associated with releases of chemical contaminants.

The dioxin contaminant is quite evenly distributed along the Tittabawassee River, with many samples exceeding the 90 ppt residential direct contact criterion by as much as 10 ppt to 3,300 ppt.

The Homeowner Fairness and Protection Act will not provide any protection from dioxin-contaminated soil and sediment.

Where is the fairness in that?

Richard A. Maltby

Midland

Back to editorial page