Ann Arbor logo
File #: 23-2134    Version: 1 Name: 1/22/24 - Bodman, PLC Tenth Amendment for Legal Services
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
File created: 1/22/2024 In control: City Council
On agenda: 1/22/2024 Final action: 1/22/2024
Enactment date: 1/22/2024 Enactment #: R-24-025
Title: Resolution to Approve the Tenth Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Bodman, PLC, for Legal Services Relative to 1,4-Dioxane from Gelman Sciences, Inc., dba Pall Life Sciences ($200,000.00) (8 Votes Required)
Attachments: 1. BODMAN PLC GELMAN AM #10.pdf
Title
Resolution to Approve the Tenth Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Bodman, PLC, for Legal Services Relative to 1,4-Dioxane from Gelman Sciences, Inc., dba Pall Life Sciences ($200,000.00) (8 Votes Required)
Memorandum
The City has previously litigated against Gelman Sciences, Inc., dba Pall Life Sciences (Gelman) relative to the 1,4-dioxane that Gelman released at its property in Scio Township that has migrated as one or more plumes, via aquifers, both under properties within the City of Ann Arbor and under properties in Scio Township.
On October 27, 2016, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) promulgated, and Governor Snyder approved, an emergency cleanup criterion of 7.2 ppb for 1,4-dioxane, which criterion of 7.2 ppb has since been adopted on a non-emergency basis.

The City was granted permission to intervene in a lawsuit brought by the State of Michigan, through various state agencies, against Gelman Sciences, Inc., dba Pall Life Sciences regarding the 1,4-dioxane plumes originating on Gelman's property. Through this intervenor suit, the City joined negotiations regarding possible amendment to the consent judgment between the State and Gelman in the State's case.

In 2021, in the State's case, the Washtenaw County Circuit Court issued a response activity order that modified the parties' prior consent judgment. Gelman appealed and the Michigan Court of Appeals vacated the response activity order, reinstated the parties' prior consent order, and ordered the Washtenaw County Circuit Court to require the intervening Plaintiffs to either file complaints or be dismissed from the case. Following the Court's order, the City did not file an intervenor complaint and the intervenor case was dismissed without prejudice.

During that time, the City filed a separate complaint against Gelman in the Washtenaw County Circuit Court to enforce the parties' 2006 settlement agreement and have been in negotiations for the location of vario...

Click here for full text