Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

Michigan requests EPA Approval for of sludge disposal (open dumping) on non-point of pollution agriculture land

A rose by any other name is still a rose,     Sewage sludge by any other name is still a pollutant
Based on an Email from DEQ: (see below)

Michigan Environmental Quality employees think people opposed to sewage sludge use are a mob and truth is stones being thrown
at them.  These gentlemen are highly intelligent, but at best, semi-illiterate concerning sewage sludge, the RCRA and the CWA  
People do not need to make an assumption that there is some large conspiracy to jeopardize the public health.  It all comes back to
a few people at EPA who have encouraged municipalities to violate the law by taking sewage sludge from a point source of pollution
at the treatment plant and disposing of it as a non-point source of pollution on farmland, etc.,  The  DEQ employees don't appear to
realize that sewage sludge is a solid waste by law and that the state is responsible for stopping the creation of open sludge dumps
which are prohibited by federal law.

Michigan courts understand, so why doesn't the Department of  Environmental Quality understand these simple facts? Will DEQ tell
the farmer that the term biosolids was dreamed up so the farmer wouldn't know sewage sludge is a pollutant by law?

g. United States v Kuhn, 165 F Supp 2d 639 (ED Mich, 2001). The United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Michigan. --- First, the court determined that the terms “discharge” and “disposal” were the same for purposes of double
jeopardy. The court based this determination on the definitions of those terms contained in the CWA and in other analogous federal
environmental statutes. Second, the court determined that the terms “sewage sludge” and “pollutant” were synonymous because
the CWA’s definition of “pollutant” expressly includes “sewage sludge.” Third, the court determined that a “treatment works” was
the same as a “point source”  Vol. 20, No. 2, 2002     Michigan Environmental Law Journal    Page 9

Michigan DEQ emails indicate neither of the gentlemen really understand what they are doing as part 503.9(t) assures the DEQ there
could be serious negative incidents to public health from the pollutants. Not only that, but a few people in the
universities still clain to
have little information on sludge and the damage it can do, but they did have a hand in creating this disaster
when they peer reviewed
part 503.  Scientists, who have no background in environmental law,  write studies about sludge funded by EPA and give so many
limitations in the study that the study has no meaning. If the study should reflect badly on an EPA program, the university just might
become a target of the EPA. The reality is that no scientific study has ever claimed sludge was safe, nor has EPA or Congress in the
RCRA or CWA.  Yet, this only becomes a conspiracy if DEQ employees understand the laws and have fully read and comprehend part
503 and part 403 for land applied sludge and then refused to investigated any health and environmental complaints, providing DEQ
employees have any experience in the health related sciences.

Otherwise what we have is semi-illiterate people on the public payroll trying to cover their ass with little regard for farmers,  human
health or the environment. The proper government term is CYA, which is what seems to be happening in the communication
between Mike Campbell and Jim Johnson.

Mike Campbell

Jim Johnson
Public Wastewater and Drinking Water Unit
-----Original Message-----
From: johnsoj1@michigan.gov
To: Epastate@aol.com
Sent: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 5:38 AM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Sludge - three tricks to fool scientists, legislators and the public

Me too. I don't know who sent it out.  Anyone in a mob can anonymously throw stones. From the commentary, the
author (unknown) ignores many years of history ( we have been actively tracking land application for over 25 years with
no negative incidents to public health) and makes an assumption that EPA, all 50 States, universities, USDA, and the
wastewater treatment industry, all must be part of some large conspiracy to jeopardize the public's health!


08/16/06 7:00 AM >>>

Who sent this out?  I am always suspicious when an originator of an email like this doesn't leave their name, address,
and phone number.


>>> <Epastate@aol.com> 8/15/2006 6:11 PM >>>
EPA OFFICE of Water used three tricks to fool scientists, legislators and the public:
Documents show that four people in EPA’s Office of Water (OW) had the power to put public health and the
environment at risk by authorizing the disposal of sewage sludge contaminated with extremely hazardous levels of
chemicals and disease causing organisms as a fertilizer thereby creating very dangerous Superfund sites. Not only did
they claim sludge used as a fertilizer was safe based on a fraudulent risk assessment, which was backed up by
scientists from land grant colleges and Universities, they admitted the levels for 10 toxic metals and disease causing
organisms in the part 503 sludge use and disposal regulation was not based on any risk assessment. In fact, the part
503 regulation itself was based on perceived exclusions in federal laws. The OW claims it has no responsibility to
investigate health or environmental problems caused by this hazardous waste. For these reasons, EPA Office of
Compliance of Enforcement will not get involved in the program.