Ann Arbor logo
Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
File #: 20-0538    Version: 1 Name: 4/20/20 Bodman Am #5
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
File created: 4/20/2020 In control: City Council
On agenda: 4/20/2020 Final action: 4/20/2020
Enactment date: 4/20/2020 Enactment #: R-20-140
Title: Resolution to Approve Fifth Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Bodman, PLC, for Legal Services Relative to 1,4-Dioxane from Gelman Sciences, Inc., dba Pall Life Sciences ($92,500.00) and to Appropriate Funds ($92,500.00) (8 Votes Required)
Sponsors: Christopher Taylor
Attachments: 1. Bodman PLC Gelman Am #5 April 2020
Title
Resolution to Approve Fifth Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Bodman, PLC, for Legal Services Relative to 1,4-Dioxane from Gelman Sciences, Inc., dba Pall Life Sciences ($92,500.00) and to Appropriate Funds ($92,500.00) (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, replacing the 85 ppb criterion that was previously in effect, and that cleanup criterion of 7.2 ppb has since been adopted on a non-emergency basis.

Under the circumstances, the State was in negotiations with Gelman regarding possible revision of the consent judgment. In December 2016 the City, various Washtenaw County parties, and the Huron River Watershed Council moved and were granted permission to intervene in the case between the State and Gelman. In February 2017, Scio Township also was granted permission to intervene. Although the intervening parties can pursue litigation as parties to the case, the City and other intervenors became involved in the negotiations in an effort to reach agreement on an amendment to the consent judgment that will be satisfactory to the intervening parties. Since then, the parties have been meeting on a regular basis to negotiate, and have been exchanging drafts of proposed amendments to the consent judgment.

The City Attorney selected the Bodman, PLC, law firm to provide advice, to pursue the motion to intervene, and to assist with the negotiations. That selection was based on the firm's familiarity with the issues and details of this matter because of its repr...

Click here for full text