 |
 |
- Is Dioxin Dow's Next Asbestos?
|
 |
|
Dioxin Risks and Information Not Provided to Shareholders
|
 |
| Dioxin and International Treaties
|
|
Michigan Contamination Issues
|
 |
- "Dow faces class-action suit", March 26, 2003, Associated Press
- "State's proposed contamination deal with Dow falls apart", December 28, 2002, Associated Press
- "Unhealthy Deal: Dow Cleanup agreement a toxic disappointment", December 19, 2002, Detroit Free Press Editorial,
|
 |
 |
| |
|
For more information contact:
|
| |
| Michael Passoff |
| As You Sow Foundation |
| San Francisco, CA 94104 |
| Phone: (415) 391-3212, extension 32 |
| email: |
| michael@asyousow.org |
| |
| |
|
|
EDITORIAL - Unhealthy Deal: Dow cleanup agreement a toxic disappointment
|
 |
| December 19, 2002 |
|
The Detriot Free Press
|
Virtually everyone is saying "stop." But the state Department of Environmental Quality is plowing ahead on a too-good-to-be-true agreement with Dow Chemical Co. on cleaning up dioxin contamination along the floodplain of the Tittabawassee River.
The critics don't just come from the ranks of environmental advocates, who are trying to stop the settlement in court. Others include:
- The state Attorney General's Office, which says the agreement is legally flawed.
- The state Department of Community Health, which said "additional sampling is urgently needed" and "the MDEQ is essentially abdicating its authority."
- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which had 41 objections to the agreement. For example, it "does not provide for a comprehensive remedy to protect human health and the environment."
Dioxin is about the baddest of the bad toxic chemicals. Links between exposure and cancer are clear. Links to other problems, such as damage to the immune system, are showing up in newer studies. The floodplain along the Tittabawassee River downstream from Midland is laced with dioxins. The amounts range from the level that should mandate a cleanup -- but won't under the state's suddenly higher trigger standard -- to amounts that constitute a toxic nightmare.
The judge hearing the environmentalists' case would not issue an injunction but assured that a trial could be held on the settlement's merits even if the Engler administration makes it final by Jan. 1.
Given the administration's ability to withstand harsh criticism so far, don't bet on Engler backing down. But he should leave things loose enough to let incoming Gov. Jennifer Granholm renegotiate terms. As attorney general, she is one of the deal's chief critics. Unless Engler comes up with a surprise with which Granholm -- and the people -- can live, he shouldn't make this part of his legacy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FAIR USE NOTICE. This document contains copyrighted material whose use has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
Proxyinformation.com is making this information available in our efforts to
advance understanding of social and environmental issues. We believe that
this constitutes a `fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in
section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted
material for purposes of your own that go beyond `fair use', you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.
|
