Table of Contents
State Settles With Procter & Gamble
Poor Equipment ManagementConcerned About The Air You Breathe?
No Local Justice
P&G Can Do Better
We’ve Got Bad Air
Timing is Everything
Thanks to Our Attorneys
Georgia-Pacific NRDA Legal Case Update
First Public Meeting: Fox River / Green Bay Natural Resource Trustee Council
University Credibility Compromised by Polluter Donations
How the Non-Point Issue Serves PCB PollutersScanlan Receives Environmental Award
Examples of Corporate Influence at the University
Just Scratching the Surface
25 Groups Send River/Bay Letter
Key recommendationsFor more information visit www.FoxRiverWatch.com
Signatory Organizations
State Settles With Procter & Gamble
In February, Clean Water Action Council filed a 60-day Notice of Intent to Sue, to enforce the air pollution permit of Procter & Gamble, Inc. (P&G) in Green Bay.
Just a few days before the 60 days ended (and we could proceed with our suit), the Wisconsin Dept. of Justice settled with P&G.
The state action prevents us from pursuing the case further.
On one hand, it’s good to see the state finally step forward to enforce the law. On the other, we would have been more aggressive in pursuing a bigger settlement for the public.
The state settled for $81,091 when they were entitled to $10,000 per day of violation, under federal law, and up to $25,000 per day under state law.
The state’s formal complaint alleges that P&G violated their permit conditions on at least 670 occasions (we counted 930) between April 1, 2002 and February 14, 2003. This equals roughly 300 days of violation, worth between $3 million and $7.5 million in penalties.
Under federal citizen suit provisions, Clean Water Action Council could have asked for up to $27,500 per day of violation. This equals roughly $8.25 million.
The state settled for less than 1% of this number.
The state cited P&G’s own reports, claiming that P&G failed to run their air pollution equipment properly, and/or keep proper records of their equipment’s performance. The state and company could not know if they were complying with their limits or not, given the way their equipment was malfunctioning, but because improper pressures and water flows were noted, air pollution violations were likely. Unfortunately, the permit had not required stack monitors to actually measure air emissions. The permit only assumes that if the equipment is run properly, everything will be fine. It’s a round-about way of tracking pollution.
The state’s settlement does include a “re-opener” which requires P&G to conduct a stack test for air pollution by June 27, with results reported by Aug. 29. If the tests show violations, P&G will pay additional forfeitures and assessments to the state, as negotiated or settled in court.
However, the state’s settlement specifically states that P&G has now “implemented measures to bring its air pollution control device parameter monitoring and recording system into compliance with the applicable permit requirements.”
So it’s doubtful that an air test now will prove anything about P&G’s air emissions over the past year.
We’ll be watching to see how well they do.
Another disappointment is that we had hoped that potential settlement dollars would be directed locally to support health initiatives to study and help those with respiratory problems. We had investigated several possibilities, such as funding a special respiratory health outreach team at the Northeast Wisconsin Community Clinic, a “free” clinic which serves the low income neighborhood impacted by P&G and other pollution sources. (This is the most destitute area in Green Bay.) Now, the neighborhood gets nothing.
Procter & Gamble is an enormous corporation, with $1.2 billion in total net income just for the last quarter, and $42.6 billion in total assets. P&G is fully capable of hiring competent engineers to properly run and maintain their equipment. It’s inexcusable for their operating problems to linger for so long. In fact, the company was given nearly a year for a “shake-down” period, prior to April 1, 2002, to learn how to make their pollution control equipment run properly after it was installed.
So the public’s lungs may have been impacted for much longer than the violation period noted here.
Several organizations have reported that Brown County’s air pollution levels are unusually high. Just recently, the American Lung Association gave Brown County a failing “F” grade for bad air quality.
The state must be more assertive in addressing this problem.
In the media coverage following the state’s settlement, the local DNR staff person indignantly claimed that “If you’d check the files, we initiated our enforcement action well before they [Clean Water Action Council] started anything.”
His statement is highly misleading, because the state’s true enforcement didn’t begin until April, last month.
We began our investigation last fall, and found several “Notices of Violation” (NOVs) in the DNR files concerning P&G. The violations were accumulating rapidly, and we noted another series of NOV letters to P&G in the past 5 years which were simply discussed with the company and dropped with no penalties. We saw this pattern in DNR’s files for numerous other companies as well, including a major air violation at Fort Howard Corporation through the 1990s, with no enforcement or penalties.
We had absolutely no confidence that DNR would follow through on their letters, which seemed to carry no real threat of actual enforcement.
The legislature has refused to give the DNR the authority to issue citations and fines for violations. For enforcement to occur, the DNR has to “refer” the case to the Wisconsin Dept. of Justice (DOJ), and then a DOJ attorney files court cases and/or negotiates settlements. It’s time-consuming and costly for the state, when the DNR should be able to immediately issue fines for each violation.
The DNR found out about P&G’s 2002 violations starting in July, but waited until December to issue a NOV letter to P&G. Nothing appeared to change, and the DNR staff seemed in no hurry to get the company into compliance. We filed our Notice of Intent to Sue on February 21. The DNR issued another NOV letter later in February, then on March 17 the DNR issued another NOV letter.
It wasn’t until mid-April that the DNR finally referred the case to the DOJ for enforcement. Their complaint was filed in court on April 22, and P&G settled by April 24.
Our 60 day lawsuit waiting period ended on April 29, so it seems the state decided to take action just in time to undercut our case.
We owe a debt of gratitude to Andrew Hanson and Melissa Scanlan, of Midwest Environmental Advocates, for representing us in this legal investigation.
We did achieve at least some of our objectives, and we believe it’s due to the hard work and analysis of of these two attorneys who spent hundreds of hours in preparation for this case.
It’s a shame that citizen groups have to work this hard to spur the state to enforce the law.
Concerned About The Air You Breathe?
Free Public Program and Discussion
Sinus problems, asthma, coughs or cancer?
Your symptoms may be caused, or made worse, by
local air pollution. What can you do about it?
Speakers: Dr. Judith Rybicki, Doctor of
Oriental Medicine, and Rebecca Katers,
Executive Director of Clean Water Action Council.
Tuesday, May 20
7:00 p.m.
Brown County Library, 515 Pine Street, Green Bay
Georgia-Pacific NRDA Legal Case Update
We started our federal case last August, to increase the ridiculously low $10.86 million PCB damage settlement with Georgia-Pacific Corp.
Though all the legal briefs were filed last fall, the Federal Judge in Milwaukee has waited to rule because the federal Dept. of Justice lawyers argued that the Federal Government hadn’t made a final decision yet as to whether they supported the settlement, and because they hadn’t finished their “Responsiveness Summary” to citizen comments which were made last summer during the 30 day public comment period. The federal lawyers asked the judge to wait until they had taken a formal written position on the issue.
Meanwhile, all the lawyers have held 4 one-hour meetings with the judge over that time [via conference calls] to argue over whether we have the right to intervene. The judge also urged our lawyers to meet with each other to attempt to settle our differences. We tried this, with unpleasant results, without success.
The state told us they couldn’t renogiate G-P’s deal, because G-P wouldn’t stand for it and the state had already made a commitment. This confirmed our legal claim that the deal was locked in stone before the public comment period started.
At the end of March, the feds finally issued their written decision
and “responsiveness summary” formally supporting the G-P deal. Their
arguments were disturbing, and not “
“responsive.” For example, the feds admit that they “discounted”
the settlement with G-P partly because the state had undercut the federal
case with their competing, duplicate damage assessment, using industry-chosen
consultants (... which is what we warned in 1998 would happen.)
The judge will rule soon. To see the actual legal briefs and other details, please visit our website: www.FoxRiverWatch.com
First Public Meeting: Fox River / Green Bay Natural Resource Trustee Council
This council includes government representatives of the States of Wisconsin and Michigan, U.S. government, the Oneida Nation, Menominee Nation, and Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians.
The council’s purpose is to evaluate and choose restoration and PCB compensation projects for the Fox River and Bay systems, as a conclusion of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment process.
They will distribute funds gained through settlements with the 7 companies who dumped PCBs in the system. According to the Damage Assessment, these polluters owe the public $333 million in compensation (separate from sediment cleanup costs.)
At this first meeting, the council will adopt their charter, decide their public participation process, evaluate restoration project proposals, and budget funds for projects to be done over the next 6 months.
Currently, they have roughly $20 million from the interim partial NRDA settlement with Appleton Paper and NCR Corporation 2.5 years ago. It’s unclear whether that $20 million is already being spent, or if final decisions were reserved for this meeting. The council has actually been meeting informally (without public input) for at least 2 years now. We’ve heard of some projects which may already be underway.
Other NRDA settlements with other companies may be announced at any time, but our legal challenge of the first final settlement with Georgia-Pacific Corporation may have slowed this somewhat.
Tuesday, June 3
at the Radisson Hotel, across from Austin Straubel Airport off
Hwy 172, just south of Green Bay, hosted on the Oneida Reservation
Two Sessions
Morning or Afternoon: Council Meeting
Evening: Open-House with trustee representatives and technical staff available for public questions, comments and discussions.
For the exact times, call Colette Charbonneau (US Fish & Wildlife Service) at 866-1726, or Tom Nelson (Oneida Nation) at 497-5812 x 146. (Our first recommendation for their “public participation process” is that they give us better, earlier notices, with specific times...)
The trustees claim that “Public attendance is encouraged at both sessions. The trustees hope that by participating in their meetings, people will have a better understanding of the process, which would encourage better restoration project proposals and produce a restored environment that addresses the public’s needs.” [note: restoration isn’t possible.]
For this newsletter, we called Tom Nelson (representing the Oneida Nation) for times and details on how the public could participate, but he didn’t know. At the last meeting of the local Science and Technical Advisory Committee, he was openly hostile to questions about the public input process, but claimed public comments would be allowed. Hopefully this will occur before all the council votes are final.
University Credibility Compromised by Polluter Donations
The University of Wisconsin recently received a $1.5 million grant from Arjo Wiggins Appleton (formerly Appleton Paper) for non-point pollution research along the Fox River.
This continues a disturbing trend: Major corporate PCB polluters of the Fox River and Lake Michigan appear to neutralize or prevent input by area scientists on the PCB cleanup issue.
“The DNR and EPA tend to listen to the opinions of University scientists. The public also trusts these scientists to give objective advice. Unfortunately, it appears this advice is being directed or influenced by corporate donations,” warned Rebecca Katers, Executive Director of Clean Water Action Council.
Over the past 10 years, the University of Wisconsin and its professors have received large grants from Fox River paper industries responsible for dumping PCBs.
The grants generally fund work on non-point pollution (land run-off pollution) or other environmental issues not related to the industry.
“The University undoubtedly does good research on the non-point pollution issue, and this is valuable, but we are concerned that University scientists may be self-censoring their research or opinions on industrial pollution and PCBs, in order to receive such corporate grants,” added Katers.
“Corporations should not control the direction of the University’s research or community involvement.”
How the Non-Point Issue Serves PCB Polluters
The recent Arjo Wiggins Appleton $1.5 million grant serves the paper corporations’ interests in several ways:
a. Defining the PCB problem away. Non-point pollution has been redefined by University scientists as “THE most important problem facing the Fox River and Green Bay,” and this is what they teach their students.Examples of Corporate Influence at the UniversityWhile Clean Water Action Council agrees non-point pollution is important and needs to be addressed, the resulting algae is not more important than protecting public health by cleaning up the PCBs. These are completely different issues which should not be competing with each other.
The Fox River and Green Bay system is one of the largest and most serious PCB pollution sites in the world. Several commercial fisheries have been closed, throwing hundreds of fishermen and processors out of work. The sport-fishing and tourism industry have been badly damaged by fish-consumption warnings. Roughly 40,000 people continue to eat unsafe quantities of PCB-contaminated fish (and ducks), at a cancer risk equal to smoking 2 to 3 packs of cigarettes a day. Non-cancer risks such as immune and thyroid system damage, diabetes, heart disease, neurological disorders, and learning disabilities in children are also high. (see www.FoxRiverWatch.com for more on PCB Health Effects)
Hundreds of millions of dollars must be spent to pipe community drinking water from Lake Michigan, 30 miles away. Harbor dredging and disposal is much more costly due to contamination.
University of Wisconsin scientists have tended to ignore these high PCB costs, while focusing attention on their research opportunities and funding.
b. Shifting Blame Attention and blame is shifted to farmers or homeowners, and away from the paper corporations who dumped PCBs into the system. It allows scientists to say “we’re all to blame for pollution” when this is not the case with PCBs. Only 7 of Wisconsin’s 50 paper mills dumped PCBs in the Fox River and Lake Michigan, and the general public and other businesses are not responsible for those corporate decisions.
c. Positive Press Polluters receive unwarranted positive publicity. The corporations appear generous by making grants for research, but this is an illusion. Their seemingly large grants are small when compared to the funds needed for PCB cleanup and compensation for PCB damages to natural resources. Arjo Wiggins Appleton, for instance, owes at least $123.2 million for PCB sediment cleanup and another $133.2 million for damage compensation and restoration projects.
d. Political Influence Polluters use University grants as leverage for political sympathy. Fox River polluters are lobbying heavily in Madison and Washington DC to undercut and block the proposed PCB cleanup efforts. Research grants like this one help them look like “good corporate citizens” who deserve a break. In reality, the polluters should be providing research money, and much more, as part of their PCB cleanup and damage compensation plan.
1. $1.5 million grant by Arjo Wiggins Appleton (AWA). This is a British holding company, owned by a French holding company, which in turn is controlled by an Italian holding company, which is controlled by the wealthy Agnelli family in Italy. Why would these Europeans care about land run-off pollution in the Fox River Valley, USA?Just Scratching the SurfaceWhen Arjo Wiggins Appleton sold Appleton Paper, Inc. to its employees, they kept one of their two mills in the valley (Appleton Coated) and retained the bulk of the PCB liability for the Fox River and Bay. It’s in the Italian’s interests to influence the activities of University of Wisconsin researchers.
Two professors, at UW-Green Bay and UW-Milwaukee, will lead the AWA non-point research effort for 4 years, but it will involve many others. It represents a major coup for their careers.
The Green Bay professor, Dr. Kevin Fermanich, has served several years on the Science and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) for the Fox River and Green Bay Remedial Action Plan. We’ve attended their meetings, and Dr. Fermanich has been very quiet, seldom raising concerns about PCB issues, and certainly not publicly. His UW-Green Bay colleagues on the committee have been equally quiet and uninvolved in the community PCB debate.
The STAC’s sole “community” activity has been to write mild comment letters to the DNR and other agencies one or two times a year. When the agencies ignore the STAC’s comments, the committee does little or nothing.
It appears that the professors are helping Arjo Wiggins Appleton bypass the public input process. Dr. Harris (who now works for AWA) had been told that their $1.5 million non-point monitoring project may not qualify as a PCB damage compensation project under their share of the $333 million Natural Resources Damage Assessment (NRDA); however, AWA has said they would like it to be considered as such.
Ordinarily, NRDA projects must be approved by the Inter-governmental Co-Trustee Council which is being created to review compensation proposals (.. the Council’s first public meeting is coming June 3). The proposals are also subject to public comment at the Council meetings.
It seems that the professors who wanted this project are trying to finesse the process, bypass the public and governments, and get approval after-the-fact by creating a big publicity campaign in their favor. They should have waited for approval, just like everyone else.
2. The Appleton Paper “Expert Panel.” Two years ago, Appleton Paper Inc. (now Arjo Wiggens Appleton) formed a hand-picked committee of consultants to write their own version of a cleanup plan for the Fox River. Not surprisingly, they proposed a vastly weaker plan which would cap roughly a third of the targeted PCB hotspots with a foot of sand and gravel, and let “natural recovery” handle the rest. To strengthen their publicity and lobbying plan, the company hired five University of Wisconsin professors (one from Green Bay, four from Milwaukee), for an undisclosed sum, to “review” the panel’s work and provide feedback.
One of these professors is Dr. H.J. (Bud) Harris, recently retired from UW-Green Bay. Dr. Harris had been an active leader of the STAC for 17 years, and until hired by Appleton, had supported dredging and removal of PCBs from the River. Now, he lobbies legislators for Arjo Wiggins Appleton against dredging.
3. The Fox/Wolf Watershed Alliance. This is a corporate/government alliance formed in 1991 by Fort Howard Corporation and Green Bay Metropolitan Sewerage District. (It had been called “Fox/Wolf Basin 2000,” “Northeast Wisconsin Waters for Tomorrow,” and “Green Bay Waters for Tomorrow.”) Between 1991 and 1999, the Alliance received $617,026 from Fox River dischargers (Fort Howard/James River Corp., Menasha Corp., and Green Bay Metropolitan Sewerage District). Fort Howard Corporation (now Georgia-Pacific Corp.), a major PCB polluter, provided a large percentage of these dollars.
The Alliance has been a problem for environmentalists and the Fox River PCB cleanup for more than 10 years.
The Alliance provided tens of thousands of dollars in grants to University of Wisconsin professors, primarily for work on non-point pollution problems. Again, Dr. Harris received significant grants, as did Dr. Paul Sager and Dr. Robert Wenger of UW-Green Bay.
Dr. Harris and Dr. Sager both serve on the STAC. Neither has been publicly vocal in support of Fox River PCB cleanup, and Dr. Harris now works against cleanup.
While non-point pollution has been the Alliance’s recent focus, it also played a active role in the mid-1990s in opposing Superfund and the Natural Resources Damage Assessment (NRDA) for the Fox River PCB cleanup.
None of the professors contradicted this Alliance activity in the 1990s, though they are now eager to propose how to spend the compensation dollars gained from the NRDA.
Last semester, several UW-Green Bay professors partnered with the Alliance to mentor a large graduate-level student study project on the environmental status of the Fox River watershed.
Not surprisingly, non-point pollution was heavily emphasized along with several other measures, but “public health” was not considered a factor. As a result, the students concluded at their large public presentation that “the PCB issue is overblown” — echoing the corporate/government Alliance’s opinions.
None of the students or professors contacted Clean Water Action Council during the semester to ask for a citizen environmental perspective on the issue.
4. Purchase of Point Au Sable. In 1997, the Fox River Group (the 7 corporations who dumped PCBs) signed a contract with the state to purchase Point au Sable, to sweeten a terrible secret $10 million deal with the state. $7 million from the deal was used for a deliberately botched PCB dredging demonstration at Site 56/57 next to Fort Howard Corporation. Most of the rest of the money was used for a corrupt state/corporate NRDA which undercut the federal NRDA, leading to the recent low compensation settlement with Georgia-Pacific.
The Fox River Group provided UW-Green Bay with $120,000 for a student research endowment at the Pt. Sauble Preserve. The Nature Conservancy purchased the Point (partly with local corporate donations) and turned it over to UW-Green Bay for ownership. Some of the land was donated by Jake Rose, a prominent local banker.
UW-Green Bay helped provide the Fox River Group with major publicity and fanfare. Several University professors praised the generosity of the polluters, and considered the project a plum for the University. Few of the professors were critical of the $10 million deal, of course.
5. The Cofrin Legacy. The Cofrin Family, which founded and owned Fort Howard Corporation (now owned by Georgia-Pacific Corp.) until the 1980s, has been extremely generous to UW-Green Bay, donating tens of millions of dollars to the campus (at least). This has undoubtedly influenced faculty behavior towards this major PCB polluting corporation. The Cofrins have funded the Cofrin Library, the Cofrin Arboretum, the new Mary Cofrin Science Hall, the Weidner Performing Arts Center, and numerous other large and small projects over the years. The Cofrins controlled Fort Howard Corporation during the peak years of that company’s PCB discharges into the Fox River.
6. Collaborating with Polluters For at least 15 years, UW-Green Bay professors on the Fox River and Green Bay “Remedial Action Plan” committees pushed for a “voluntary, cooperative approach” to encourage Fox River PCB polluters to come to the table, talk about the issue, and solve the problem.
It was an amazingly unrealistic effort, and failed miserably. Why would corporations donate hundreds of millions of dollars to a clean-up that gave them nothing in return? These paper companies exist to make profits, not to clean up rivers. Corporate employees can justify the expense only if it is enforced or unavoidable.
In addition, the 7 polluting corporations are competitors with each other. None of them will volunteer to pay millions for the clean-up if the others refuse, or if the companies think they can shift blame for PCB discharges to their competitors (or sewage treatment plants.)
Delays are advantageous to the polluters and they’ve maximized every opportunity, with the assistance of UW-Green Bay professors. Decades of clean-up opportunities have been lost due to the endless committee meetings required by the professors’ “cooperative approach,” and every year a thousand more pounds of PCBs escaped the river into the bay. At the same time, the professors used their stature and power to undercut Clean Water Action Council’s work for a Superfund cleanup and Natural Resources Damage Assessment, which would have speeded the cleanup.
The professors served the polluters’ interests, not the public’s. Even recently, they have continued to insist (at the International Association for Great Lakes Research) that planning and investigations needed to be “in collaboration with” the polluting corporations.
Worse yet, they are indoctrinating thousands of their UW students with this dangerous notion.
Are the professors being rewarded now with generous non-point pollution research grants?
7. What About the Bay? Approximately 13 years ago, the EPA concluded a PCB Mass Balance Study on the Bay, to track the location and movement of PCBs through the system, at a cost of roughly $13 million, in cooperation with UW-Green Bay and several other research institutions.
Dr. H.J. “Bud” Harris was the local Field Supervisor for the project (... the same Harris who now lobbies for Arjo Wiggins Appleton.) We have been shocked to discover that this monumental study took only one PCB core sample in the inner bay (south of Long-tail Point), when logically this area would be much more contaminated than the northern bay. Why did UW-Green Bay allow this to happen when the inner Bay is right on its doorstep? Was it deliberate? Last year, another faulty bay sampling occurred. Again, why did UWGB allow this to happen? The computer models of Green Bay PCB cycling are based on grossly incomplete PCB data.
Keep in mind that UW-Green Bay was founded on, and claims to still have, an “environmental mission.”
Inner bay data is desperately needed now, because it would define the level of PCB clean-up needed in the area. The lack of data cripples any planning attempt, leaving PCB-exposed local residents helpless when arguing for clean-up. The lack of data protects the 7 polluting corporations from requirements for bay cleanup, potentially saving them hundreds of millions of dollars.
Clean Water Action Council has attempted several times over the last year to convince UW-professors on the Science and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) to assertively call for immediate and thorough sampling of the inner Bay, only to be ignored or put down repeatedly.
One of the most vocal opponents of further sampling is Vicky Harris, of the UW-SeaGrant Institute at UW-Green Bay, who just happens to be married to Dr. Bud Harris, Arjo Wiggins Appleton lobbyist.
These are only a few examples of local corporate funding of University research and apparent influence. Undoubtedly, many other grants have been made in recent years, but are unknown to us. Many professors maintain their own independent consulting businesses or research institutes for funneling grant dollars, such as Dr. Harris’ “Institute for Land and Water Studies.”
“All this money is bound to influence the actions of scientists at the University. It certainly appears to have stifled public involvement by professors, because they are seldom seen in public debates regarding the PCB cleanup of the Fox River and Green Bay,” noted Katers.
“It is unfortunate that a trusted, tax-payer funded University should be subject to such influence. UW-Green Bay used to be called “Eco-U” in the 1970s, but clearly doesn’t fit the title. Now, it’s just another institution for corporate hire.”
Scanlan Receives Environmental Award
At our Annual Banquet, we were very pleased to present our 2003 Environmental Advocate of the Year award to Melissa Kwaterski Scanlan, for exceptional leadership in providing legal advice and assistance to struggling citizen groups in the western Great Lakes region.
Melissa is an attorney, Founder and Executive Director of Midwest Environmental Advocates (MEA), based in Madison. She and her organization have been representing us in two lawsuits: the air pollution case with Procter & Gamble (page 1), and our Georgia-Pacific case (page 3.)
Two years ago, Melissa also represented us in the first successful legal
challenge to a large Factory Farm permit in Wisconsin, which closed a leaking
manure pit near Shawano.
Her organization has helped several other local groups challenge
similar permits in Wisconsin.
MEA has also challenged several air and water pollution permits across the state, and with their Government Accountability Project has challenged the state’s policies for “Impaired Waters,” and compliance with the federal Clean Air Act. They’ve also successfully sued to enforce Wisconsin’s Open Records Law, and represented citizens concerned about groundwater depletion from Perrier’s water mining in Adams County. In a short number of years, Melissa’s organization has been centrally involved in a wide variety of the most important environmental issues in Wisconsin.
Melissa was raised in Darboy, near Appleton, and returned to her home state in 1999 to open MEA. She initially received two fellowships that allowed her to work for the public interest.
Melissa received a law degree and a master of science from the Univ. of California at Berkeley. While there, she received the 1999 Harmon Award for Best Environmental Law Writing at Berkeley, and the Alvin & Sadie Landis Scholarship in Water Law, a scholarship given to one member of the class of 1999 for outstanding work in the field of water law.
She is the author of law review articles involving property rights, including “The Evolution of the Public Trust Doctrine and the Degradation of Trust Resources: Courts, Trustees, and Political Power in Wisconsin,” published in the Ecology Law Quarterly.
She has been in the environmental movement for a decade, working with Natural Resources Defense Council & Communities for a Better Environment, both in San Francisco. She also worked for the Wis. Dept. of Justice and the Washington DC lawfirm: Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll.
In addition to providing legal representation, MEA also operates as a clearinghouse to connect groups to attorneys who have joined MEA’s Advocacy Network and have agreed to provide pro bono or reduced fee legal representation. MEA’s mission is to provide high quality legal services that: support a diverse, grassroots social movement, build local leadership, and implement innovative solutions to environmental problems.
We are extremely grateful for Melissa’s leadership, amazing courage and hard work.
To learn more about Melissa and the MEA, please visit their website:
www.MidwestAdvocates.org
25 Groups Send River/Bay Letter
A joint letter has been sent by 25 national, regional and local organizations, representing hundreds of thousands of members, to the EPA, DNR and Governor, calling for a stronger Fox River and Bay PCB cleanup plan It outlines concerns with the partial upriver “Record of Decision (ROD),” released in January, and the downstream decision to be released in June.
“The first ROD set dangerous precedents for the rest of the cleanup. We urge our government leaders to take all steps possible to ensure that these deficiencies are not mirrored in the second Decision,” stated Dr. Jeffery Foran, toxicologist and president of Citizens for a Better Environment.
1. A Stronger Cleanup Level The agencies’ own study shows that the 1 ppm PCB sediment cleanup level in the first ROD is 90 times higher than PCB sediment concentrations that are fully protective of human health, and over 40 times higher than concentrations that are fully protective of wildlife. It also says 0.25 ppm PCBs is the “most cost-effective PCB action level that meets protective thresholds.” We call on the agencies to follow their own research and set a 0.25 ppm PCB action level for the River and Bay.To read the detailed letter, visit www.FoxRiverWatch.com2. No Loopholes The upstream ROD has a loophole that says an “alternative remedy” can be used if it is as protective and costs less. The emphasis in the EPA and DNR documents is on “costs less.” While we agree flexibility must be a component of any cleanup plan as complex as this, such a broad loophole must be removed because it may result in less permanent clean up measures and undermines public involvement. This loophole provides too much latitude to the seven polluting companies, leaving the door open for inappropriate technologies such as the use of capping, with no public input.
3. “Natural Recovery” is Not Acceptable The ROD for the 20-mile stretch of the Fox River between Appleton and Little Rapids does not require removal of PCBs; rather, it relies on “natural processes to break down, dilute, or bury PCBs” in this river stretch. This assumption is in stark contrast with the conclusions of the agencies’ own studies, and with the vast scientific literature on PCBs, which conclude that significant natural degradation will not occur in the Fox River or Green Bay. Therefore, “natural recovery” will not allow the stretch to meet the remedial objectives for public health protection identified by the U.S. EPA and WDNR. We urge that this remedy not be used for the rest of the Fox River and Green Bay.
Citizens for a Better Environment * Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger * Clean Water Action Council * Door County Environmental Council * Environmentally Concerned Citizens of the Lakeland Area * Great Lakes United * Lake Michigan Federation * Lake Superior Alliance * Lake Superior Greens * Madison Audubon Society * Midwest Environmental Advocates * National Wildlife Federation * Northeast Wisconsin Student Environmental Coalition * Random Lake Protection Association * River Alliance of Wisconsin * Sierra Club Great Lakes Program * Sierra Club John Muir Chapter * Sierra Club Fox Valley Group * Wisconsin Audubon Council * Wisconsin B.A.S.S. Federation * Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters * Wisconsin Public Interest Research Group * Wisconsin Resources Protection Council * Wolf River Chapter of Trout Unlimited * Wolf River Watershed Alliance
|
|
|
|
|