Back Up NextTittabawassee River Watch   www.trwnews.net
WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Note: the CAP described below is dead and gone.  The state has capitulated to Dow and has not held a meeting in over 240 days (as of 1/21/05).  The open and transparent process promised by Governor Granholm has evaporated.

Citizen Advisory Panel  (not official MDEQ page) Image10.gif (11974 bytes)

        What is the Citizen Advisory Panel?

        Meeting Schedules

        Meeting Agenda's & Summaries

        Related Documents

        Media Coverage

        TRW Abstracts, Comments & Opinions

wpe5.jpg (34932 bytes)

The MDEQ does not have an official CAP website, some of the related documents can be viewed on the MDEQ website, click here

What is the Citizen Advisory Panel?

The Community Advisory Panel was formed to  provide input to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) on issues related to corrective action activities for Midland area soil contamination and Tittabawassee/Saginaw River sediment and floodplain soil contamination.  The CAP is intended to be an advisory group to the WHMD on corrective action activities for contamination beyond the facility boundary of The Dow Chemical Company, Michigan Operations, Midland Plant under the hazardous waste facility operating license that was issued on June 12, 2003, and related issues. 

Mr. Bruchmann indicated that this expanded corrective action public involvement effort is strongly supported by DEQ Director Steve Chester.  Since this is the WHMD’s first effort of this type, he asked for everyone’s patience through the process.  The initial work of the CAP will be to provide input to the DEQ on the Scopes of Work (SOWs) for Remedial Investigation for Midland area soil contamination and Tittabawassee River sediment and flood plain soil contamination that Dow is scheduled to submit on August 11, 2003.  Mr. Bruchmann mentioned that the operation of the CAP could be affected if Dow contests the operating license [Note:  Dow did not contest the operating license.  The deadline for filing a petition for contested case hearing on the operating license is also August 11, 2003.  Cheryl Howe, the WHMD’s project manager for the Dow operating license, will moderate the CAP and provide staff support, along with several other agency technical staff.  It is expected that the group will control the topics that are of interest to the CAP and topics will emerge as meetings progress.

Back to the top

CAP Meeting Schedule

Meetings of the CAP will not be public noticed and are not subject to the Open Meetings Act. 

bullet11/15/04 The Department of Environmental Quality regrets to inform you that the Community Advisory Panel meeting scheduled for 6:30 p.m. on November 17 in Freeland has been canceled. Dr. Linda S. Birnbaum, the scheduled speaker at the event, is unfortunately in the hospital and will be unable to travel to Michigan in time for the meeting. Dr. Birnbaum, Director of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Experimental Toxicology Division in the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, was to have provided information relating to dioxins and their health effects.

The meeting will be rescheduled at a later date. Please contact DEQ Press Secretary Patricia Spitzley at 517-241-7397 for more information.
bulletCanceled: 11/17/04 6:30-8:30 p.m.   The Department of Environmental Quality announces a Community Advisory Panel meeting that will be open to the general public on November 17 in Freeland. Dr. Linda S. Birnbaum, Director of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Experimental Toxicology Division in the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, will be the featured speaker. Her presentation will be on dioxins and their health effects.  The meeting will be held at the Freeland High School Auditorium, at 8250 Webster Road, Freeland, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.  Please contact DEQ Press Secretary Patricia Spitzley at 517-241-7397 for more information.
bulletAugust 2004 meeting cancelled due to MDEQ workload and behind closed door negotiations with Dow.
bullet05/26/04 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm, Note Time Change. James Twp Hall, 6060 Swan Creek Rd., Saginaw:  At the  last meeting on March 10, it was expected that the SOW review and approval would be completed in April prior to the DEQ CAP meeting scheduled to be held on May 5.  Although DEQ staff have made a great deal of progress on the SOW review, they will not be able to complete the review and the SOW modifications for approval in time to meet with Dow prior to the May 5 DEQ CAP meeting and finalize the approval documents to share with the CAP members.  The new date is May 26.
bullet03/10/04  4:30 pm - 7:00 pm, CAP meeting, Saginaw Township Firehall #1, 6171 Shattuck Rd., Saginaw (corner of Shattuck and Lawndale Rds., one mile east of Hospital Rd. and one mile west of Center Rd.).  This meeting rescheduled by MDEQ on 1/22/04, had been scheduled for 2/4/04.  Future meetings will be held on a  bi-monthly basis.  MDEQ says rescheduling is necessary due to current Dow related workload.
bullet01/07/04  4:30 pm - 7:00 pm, Green Point Nature Center
bullet12/03/03  4:30 pm - 7:00 pm, Tittabawassee Township Memorial Park Building
bullet10/08/03  4:30 pm - 7:00 pm, Midland's Strosacker Center in Conference Room 110.
The address is 220 W. Main Street, Midland (right downtown)
bullet09/03/03  4:30 pm - 7:00 pm, Tittabawassee Township Memorial Park Building
bullet07/31/03  4:00 pm - 6:00 pm, Thomas Township Library, 8207 Shields Drive, Saginaw

Back to the top

CAP Meeting  Agenda's & Summaries

bullet05/26/04 Agenda
bullet03/10/04 Meeting Summary
bullet12/03/03 Meeting Summary
bullet12/03/03 Agenda
bullet10/08/03 Meeting Summary
bullet10/08/03 Agenda
bullet09/08/03 Meeting Summary
bullet09/03/03 Draft Agenda
bullet07/31/03 Meeting Summary
bullet07/31/03 Draft Agenda

Back to the top

Related Documents

bulletThe Science behind Michigans 90 ppt RDCC for dioxin
bullet

"Cleanup criteria for environmental contamination are determined under Part 201, Environmental Remediation, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended (Act 451). The soil generic residential direct contact criterion (DCC) for dioxin is 90 parts per trillion (ppt). That criterion was developed in 1995 using the best information available at that time. The scientific information that has developed since 1995 indicates that dioxin poses even more of a risk than considered in 1995. Recent work conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO),  the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the European Commission Scientific Committee on Food, and in the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) draft dioxin reassessment supports standards even lower than those in effect in Michigan. The United States Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer, as well as the EPA, have concluded, based on literally hundreds of animal and human studies, that 2,3,7,8-TCDD is a potent human carcinogen."  Source: MDEQ response to Midland 5/26 meeting

bullet

The Part 201 DCC of 90 ppt for dioxin is based on exposure assumptions and toxicity information available in 1995. The toxicity of dioxin is currently being re-evaluated in a major reassessment done by the EPA, including review by the National Academy of Sciences. When promulgating the Part 201 cleanup criteria rules in 2002, the DEQ determined that it was more scientifically defensible to continue to apply the 1995 DCC of 90 ppt than to update the criterion before the results of the federal dioxin reassessment are available. It is anticipated that revision of the dioxin DCC to reflect current science and risk assessment would result in a generic residential soil DCC in the range of 10 to 70 ppt. An update of the soil DCC for dioxin would require: (Source: MDEQ response to Midland 5/26 meeting)

bullet

A re-evaluation of the cancer potency value.

bullet

An evaluation of noncancer toxicity.

bullet

An appropriate animal-dose to human-dose conversion to account for differences between species.

bullet

Selection of the most sensitive toxicity endpoint.

bullet

Identification of an appropriate relative source contribution factor (which accounts for the fact that a significant source of dioxin exposure is from the diet).

bullet

Incorporation of the updated generic exposure assumptions (i.e., the exposure assumptions used in the Part 201 Administrative Rules).

bullet

The 90 ppt calculation simplified

bullet

Part 201 Generic Soil Direct Contact Criteria

bullet

Carcinogenicity Slope Factor

bullet

EPA Great Lakes Water Quality Criteria for protection of Human Health

bulletEPA to demonstrate new dioxin detection technology at Greepoint Nature Center 4/28/04
bulletMDEQ T.River/Saginaw River/MIdland Soils Information Bulletin #4 March 2004
bulletRevised Dow SOW T.River sediment and floodplain 021704 - under MDEQ review
bulletAttachment A - IRA work plan: Communications 021704
bulletAttachment B - IRA work plan: T.River floodplain soils 021704
bulletAttachment C - IRA work plan: Imerman Park 021704
bulletAttachment D - IRA work plan: West Michigan Park 021704
bulletAttachment E - IRA work plan: Freeland Festival Park 021704
bulletAttachment F - IRA work plan: Center Road Boat Launch 021704
bulletAttachment G - IRA work plan: SOW Schedule (need adobe 6.0 or higher) 021704
bulletAttachment H - IRA work plan: RI Work Plan Outline 021704
bulletRevised Dow SOW Midland Area Soils 021704 - under MDEQ review
bulletMDEQ grants Dow extension to respond to SOW Notice of deficiency (NOD) 1/26/04
bulletMDCH Pilot Exposure Investigation Protocl Power Point Presentation 12/1/03
bulletMDCH PEI protocol: Dioxin exposure in Adults living in the Tittabawassee River Flood Plain 12/1/03
bulletMDEQ Notice of Deficiency to Dow concerning draft IRA's in T.RIver & Midland SOW's 12/12/03
bulletPilot Exposure Investigation participant selection process flowchart 120303
bulletPilot Exposure Investigation fact sheet 12/3/03, Page 1 Page 2
bulletStatus of Scope of Work (SOW) Related Reviews 12/3/03
bulletMDEQ graph of Tittabawassee River flooding 1960 -1999
bulletMDEQ releases public comment on Dow SOW 10/22/03
bulletMDEQ approves ow WIld Game IRA scope with stipulations 10/22/03
bulletDr. Hector Galbraith MDEQ sponsored Aquatic ERA presentation  & FInal Report 10/8/03
bulletMDEQ Part 201 Rules and Regulations
bulletMDEQ follow-up info to Dow on issues raised in 9/3/03 CAP meeting
bulletCAP 9/3/03 flip chart record of brainstorming session
bulletEPA's response to Dow's 8/12/03 preliminary SOW  
bulletMDEQ's response to Dow's 8/12/03 preliminary SOW
bulletDow's preliminary Scope of Work for Tittabawassee River Flood Plain (08/12/03)
bulletDow's preliminary  Scope of Work for Midland Soils (08/12/03)
bulletMDEQ draft document describing CAP's place in Tri-County Project Coordination Plan (08/03)

Back to the top

Medial Coverage

bulletThe Great Divide                                                  09/26/03 Saginaw News
bulletWaves of Frustration & valuable public input         09/23/03 Midland Daily News
bulletPublic offers input on Dow's dioxin                         09/04/03 Midland Daily News
bulletDow gets advice on cleanup                                   09/04/03 Saginaw News
bulletDow Chemical meets with public on dioxins           09/03/03 ABC WJRT-TV
bulletScope of work                                                       08/23/03 Midland Daily News  
bulletState demands more from Dow                              08/20/03 Saginaw News
bulletCritics call Dow's dioxin plan a 'stall technique       08/13/03 Saginaw News
bulletDow outlines plans for dixoin in floodplain             08/12/03 Saginaw News
bulletDow submits dioxin study plans                             08/12/03 Midland Daily News
bulletDow Chemical Releases Plans For Dioxin Issues     08/12/03 CBS WNEM-TV

Back to the top

TRW Opionions & Comments

02/1/04  Corporate Science at work: Dow to fund dioxin testing.

On January 30, 2004, Dow published a press release stating they will provide a grant to the University of Michigan to design a study to determine the typical blood level of dioxin in residents of Saginaw and Midland counties.

Dow states the test results will "compliment" the MDCH Pilot Exposure Study by developing " an understanding of whether residents who live along the Tittabawassee River and in Midland have higher dioxin levels in their blood compared with a similar group of residents living outside of those areas."

In our opinion, the word "compliment" suggests the Dow study will provide control group data for the  MDEQ PIE study.  Unfortunately, this is not true. The MDCH PIE protocol states:

"Another purpose of this Pilot Exposure Investigation is to test the sampling criteria, questionnaire, and blood and indoor dust sampling methods prior to the implementation of a larger investigation that will include residents from the city of Midland, the flood plain of the Tittabawassee River, Saginaw County, Michigan and a control community with no known exposure to polychlorinated dioxins, furans, and coplanar PCBs beyond background."

The problem is this: non-floodplain residents of Saginaw and Midland Counties may be contaminated as a result of dioxin exposure as well.  For decades, Tittabawassee floodplain soils may have been used all over the area for fill dirt and landscaping.  In addition,   airborne contaminants and fish/wildgame consumption may increase local residents dioxin exposure.  Saginaw and Midland counties are not a good choice for a "control community with no know exposure" to dioxins and furans.

Hopefully, the ATSDR and MDCH will review the Dow study protocol and clearly indicate what is or is not "complimenting" the MDCH PIE.  Until more is know about the study and it's contractor, Dr. David Garabrant, we remain skeptical of  Dow's motives in funding this "study".  Why?  Click here

8/14/03 MDEQ preliminary review of Dow's SOW - needs lot's of work.

A few excerpts appear below, click here for entire summary.

bulletThe preliminary review identified a number of key issues that must be
resolved prior to approval of the SOWs.  Many of these issues were discussed
by WHMD and Remediation and Redevelopment Division staff at our August 5
meeting with Dow and in the follow-up e-mail on August 7.  Our preliminary
review included a side-by-side review of the SOWs in comparison to Condition
XI.B. of the operating license.  This review indicates that Dow did not
adequately address all of the applicable elements that are required by the
license to be included in the SOWs.
bulletSpecifically, Condition XI.B.3.(a) of the license requires the SOWs to
identify and propose the implementation of specific interim response
activities (IRAs) for the protection of public health for the areas
identified in Condition XI.B.2. of the license that are known through prior
environmental sampling to be impacted by releases from the facility. 
bulletYour proposal to conduct sampling and an exposure evaluation without controlling
potential ongoing exposures is not acceptable as an IRA.  As noted in the August 7
e-mail to you on this issue, consideration should be given to offering the residents in
this area a range of alternatives to begin reducing the potential for exposure
immediately - before the results of an exposure study are available.  Sampling and
exposure investigation can and should be a part of the IRA for this area, but direct
mitigation is also required.
bulletIn addition, the Tittabawassee River Area SOW should propose to identify any
other residential properties in the Tittabawassee River area of concern that
are or could be contaminated so that immediate IRAs (sampling and exposure
controls) may be implemented, if necessary.
bulletThe SOWs do not appropriately prioritize work in a schedule based on
consideration of potential risks to human health and the environment in
accordance with Condition XI.B.3.(b) of the license. 
bulletIt is also not clear why a six-month period is necessary to prepare a
current conditions report or why approval of that report is necessary to
begin the development of a Remedial Investigation work plan. 
bulletCondition XI.B.3.(b)(i) of the license requires Dow to identify in the SOWs
additional potential exposure pathways that do not have Part 201 of Act 451
generic criteria (e.g., food chain exposures, house dust, etc.).  Currently
the SOWs state that additional exposure pathways will be identified and
evaluated and, therefore, do not address this requirement.
bulletCondition XI.B.3.(b)(ii) of the license requires  the SOWs to identify the
specific areas proposed for investigation and the process proposed for
selecting those areas. 
bulletThe SOWs appear to only address dioxins and furans as the "contaminants of
concern."  It is not appropriate to narrow the SOWs to dioxins and furans at this point.
bulletAs we have discussed, Dow may begin to implement interim measures to begin
reducing exposure immediately, without waiting for MDEQ approval.

Timely resolution of these issues is necessary and prudent for
the protection of public health and the environment.  Meeting prior to the
September 3 CAP meeting will afford Dow the opportunity to address the
preliminary concerns and provide a meaningful basis for discussion at the
September 3 meeting and subsequent public meetings as to how you intend to
address concerns already identified.

As mentioned previously, we will be meeting with the CAP on September 3 and
will be hosting two public meetings later in September to solicit public
comment on the SOWs.  We have requested Dow participation in these meetings
to present your SOWs.  To date, we have not received confirmation that Dow
intends to present the SOWs.  Please let us know so that we can coordinate
these efforts.

George Bruchmann, Chief
Waste & Hazardous Materials Division
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

8/12/03 Dow releases SOW

Today, At the 11th hour, Dow submitted it's preliminary Scope of Work (SOW) to the MDEQ as mandated in it's new Hazardous Waste Site Operating License and Corrective Action Consent Order.  This was not something Dow did on it's own recognizance to serve the public, rather, it was something the State of Michigan forced them to do after a long and drawn out battle.  This is not an announcement of a solution to the problem.

Two SOW's where submitted, one for Tittabawassee River and flood plain, the other for soils outside Dow's facility in the Midland area.  In summary, their purpose is as follows (links to actual document are at the end of this article):

Dow’s Hazardous Waste Site Operating License ("License"), Condition XI.B.2., issued on June 12, 2002, requires Dow to submit to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality ("MDEQ") for review and approval a Scope of Work ("SOW") for conducting Remedial Investigation ("RI") of the Midland area soils and the Tittabawassee River Sediments and Floodplain. The SOW outlines the general steps involved in the implementation of a RI, which will be elaborated upon in the RI Workplan that will be submitted to MDEQ for review and approval following approval of the SOW. The License also requires Dow to propose Interim Remedial Activities and a Public Participation Plan along with the SOW.  The SOW is intended to be a preliminary outline that provides an overview of the contents of the RI Workplan that Dow will prepare after approval of the SOW by MDEQ.  The RI Workplan will be developed by Dow working with the MDEQ after Dow and MDEQ receive public input on the SOW. As it is developed, the RI Workplan may vary from the SOW in its organization, task, prioritization of activities, or other aspects, subject to MDEQ approval.

After a very brief review of the SOW's, a few opinions by TRW (more in-depth analysis will follow):

Some good things:

bulletDow admits they are responsible for the dioxin (are we out of the denial stage?)
bulletParks will receive immediate attention to reduce exposure until a permanent solution is found.
bulletThose most likely to be contaminated will be focused on first.

Some bad things:

bulletBoth SOW's state that Dow intends to use "Probabilistic Risk Assessment" techniques to measure human health risks. 
bulletThis is the same junk science that the MDEQ and EPA strongly criticized last fall during Dow's failed attempt to raise the human contact level from 90 ppt to 831 ppt!
bulletEPA's objections & comments on draft MDEQ/Dow CACO) 11/02
bulletEPA objections & comments on draft MDEQ/DOW Hazardous Waste Management License 10/02
bulletSOW's intend to focus on cancer  health effects. 
bulletCancer is a terrible disease, however dioxin can lead to many non-cancer related illnesses.  Click here for a list.   In our opinion, the SOW must be modified to include these other diseases.
bulletDioxin testing:  So far the MDEQ has done a lot of dioxin testing with the limited funds available.  It can cost over $1200 per sample. Why does Dow want to perform it's own testing?  A better solution would be for the MDEQ to continue testing using funds from Dow.  Why let the fox into the chicken coop?  Check with a lawyer before your let Dow on to your property to perform  dioxin testing on your family or   property.  If you do not have a lawyer or want to talk with one that understands the issues, click here.

Accompanying the SOW release was the usual Dow PR spin-masters media blitz, consider the source before you believe anything you hear. 

bulletDow's says emissions have decreased to nearly zero.
bulletTRW asks them to prove it.  They have said this in the past, yet scientific data and methods of analysis have never been released to the public (to our knowledge).
bulletWhat relevance does the term "near zero" have when measuring dioxin pollution.   We are talking about toxic chemicals that can have a severe, detrimental impact on the health of you and your children.  The State says we should not be exposed to more than  90 parts per trillion in residential soils.  That's 90 parts per TRILLION ( a 9 preceded by 10 zeros to the right of the decimal point, 0.000000000090).  Looks pretty close to zero to Dow, however to the rest of the world, it's a big number.
bulletDow stated the dioxin pollution occurred back in the early 1900's.
bulletTRW asks them to prove it, wasn't Agent Orange manufactured by Dow in the 60's and 70's?
bulletHas anyone read the book "The Pollution Signature" by Richard A. Maltry?   Check it out, library number 628.1.  It chronicles Dow's outrageous disregard for the Tittabawassee River over the last 100 years.  Watch out, you might get sick reading it.

Back to the top

hit counter for myspace

Locations of visitors to this page

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Back Up Next  Back to the top   Site Map  www.trwnews.net