11/24/2010 Pall/Gelman court hearing notes
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Roger Rayle
Nov 25, 2010, 12:41:35 AM11/25/10
to
Here are my notes from the Pall/Gelman court hearing before Donald E Shelton on 11/24/2010.
Even though the case was first on the docket list, it was called up last after several other civil suits.
The Judge seemed pleased that the DNRE and Pall/Gelman had come to the tentative agreement (but that soon faded.)
Asst AG Celeste Gill spoke first. At one point during her summary of the agreement, she misspoke and said the standard for the Eastern System (the part east of Wagner Road) would be 85 ppb instead of what the agreement actually says, 2800 ppb.
One strong point she tried to make was that the recent EPA findings (8/11/2010) meant that the Michigan cleanup standards listed in the agreement may well change within a couple of years, requiring another change in the Consent Judgment.
The Judge picked up on that and asked what the new numbers would be. But instead of responding with something like "the current 85 ppb would change to something as low as 3.5 ppb" (as CARD has determined), she said that the State had not had time since August to determine what the standards might be and that the DNRE would have to wait for the EPA to provide the final slope factor for 1,4-dioxane. The Judge asked more than once what the new, more restrictive standards might be... almost as though he was ready to put those new standards in the agreement right then. But the AG was apparently under orders to not speculate on what the new standards might be.
Defense counsel Micheal Caldwell then jumped in to argue that Pall did not agree with the EPA findings and that they applied a formula wrong and that the resulting standard would be close to the current 85 ppb. But later he offered that the new Michigan standard based on the new EPA slope factor would be about 12 ppb
He made another statement that parties had agree in principal in June 2010 during their secret negotiations.
Caldwell seemed to want the judge to rule on the agreement today since "we'd like to get started" (as if the changes would result in more cleanup, not less).
The Judge dismissed that notion and noted that he only had 4 years left in his term and wondered if the cleanup would outlast yet another judge. (Obviously it will... there's no way a proper cleanup ... or even an improper one... can be finished in 4 years.)
The final ruling was that the parties should be prepared to sign modifications to the Consent Judgment within 21 days or the next step would be an evidentiary hearing in his courtroom starting at 8:00am on February, 2011. (There was no mention how this might affect the DNRE Public Meeting planned for some time in January.)
Even though the case was first on the docket list, it was called up last after several other civil suits.
The Judge seemed pleased that the DNRE and Pall/Gelman had come to the tentative agreement (but that soon faded.)
Asst AG Celeste Gill spoke first. At one point during her summary of the agreement, she misspoke and said the standard for the Eastern System (the part east of Wagner Road) would be 85 ppb instead of what the agreement actually says, 2800 ppb.
One strong point she tried to make was that the recent EPA findings (8/11/2010) meant that the Michigan cleanup standards listed in the agreement may well change within a couple of years, requiring another change in the Consent Judgment.
The Judge picked up on that and asked what the new numbers would be. But instead of responding with something like "the current 85 ppb would change to something as low as 3.5 ppb" (as CARD has determined), she said that the State had not had time since August to determine what the standards might be and that the DNRE would have to wait for the EPA to provide the final slope factor for 1,4-dioxane. The Judge asked more than once what the new, more restrictive standards might be... almost as though he was ready to put those new standards in the agreement right then. But the AG was apparently under orders to not speculate on what the new standards might be.
Defense counsel Micheal Caldwell then jumped in to argue that Pall did not agree with the EPA findings and that they applied a formula wrong and that the resulting standard would be close to the current 85 ppb. But later he offered that the new Michigan standard based on the new EPA slope factor would be about 12 ppb
He made another statement that parties had agree in principal in June 2010 during their secret negotiations.
Caldwell seemed to want the judge to rule on the agreement today since "we'd like to get started" (as if the changes would result in more cleanup, not less).
The Judge dismissed that notion and noted that he only had 4 years left in his term and wondered if the cleanup would outlast yet another judge. (Obviously it will... there's no way a proper cleanup ... or even an improper one... can be finished in 4 years.)
The final ruling was that the parties should be prepared to sign modifications to the Consent Judgment within 21 days or the next step would be an evidentiary hearing in his courtroom starting at 8:00am on February, 2011. (There was no mention how this might affect the DNRE Public Meeting planned for some time in January.)
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages