By Sheila Schimpf

Jan P. Helder Jr., an attorney representing the plaintiffs, told BNA March 25 the suit seeks recovery of the lost value of real estate (including damages) and a medical monitoring trust fund.

"They can't sell their houses," Helder told BNA. "We contend that nobody will buy this property to use as a residence or any other use. We contend that the value of the land is nothing."

Plaintiffs Still in Homes

All the named plaintiffs still live in their homes, Helder said, because they cannot afford to abandon them and buy something else. But they are living in what he called a limited way, not allowing children to play in the backyards near the river.
The suit alleged that "Dow's handling and disposal of dioxin have polluted, impaired and/or contaminated the soil, groundwater, and/or other natural resources in the Tittawabassee River and the Flood Plain and as such constitutes a violation of the Michigan Environmental Protection Act."

Helder, who is with Stueve, Helder, Siegel LLP, in Kansas City, Mo., would not pinpoint the damages the suit seeks, saying the number would be established at trial.

The request for medical monitoring also has no dollar figure, Helder said, because of the nature of dioxin. "There are a large number of uncertainties involved with dioxin," Helder said. "None of these people have been tested. The process for getting tested is expensive and not available to them. They have no place to go. No community help."

Dow Statement

Dow issued a statement March 25 that said: "Nothing we've seen indicates that property values have been adversely affected."
The statement also said, "Dow has been working to understand the concerns of residents along the Tittabawassee River, and has been meeting with the community, individually and collectively, for more than a year. We are working with regulatory agencies to develop a path forward, which includes independent health studies that will conclusively address these concerns."

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality has been negotiating over allowable dioxin limits at the Midland site (34 ER 47, 1/3/03).

Also, the department has been negotiating over a new license for Dow, according to DEQ spokeswoman Pat Spitzley. Dioxin cleanup would be included in that process, she said. A draft license went out for extended public comment in January and February, she said.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency opposed the draft license, Spitzley said, saying it failed to properly address dioxin contamination and cleanup.

The new DEQ director, Steve Chester, and the staff, are reviewing the license and the comments, she said.