Pall-Gelman seems to be trying to hide what's going on at monitoring well 2575 Valley Drive in 2009 like Gelman Sciences did with monitoring well MW-30d in 2003.



In 1993, Gelman Sciences quit sampling MW-30d even though the dioxane levels were on an upwards trend reaching 9 ppb (three times the 3 ppb cleanup standard at the time).

MW-30d was a deep well, bottom of screen elevation = 725 ft, the only well in the deeper E aquifer being sampled that had significant dioxane levels.

When MW-30d sampling was finally resumed in 2001, the dioxane levels had reached 67 ppb.







Since 2007, MW-30d dioxane levels have been over 1100 ppb. Had MW-30d been sampled all along between 1993 and 2001, maybe the deep E aquifer contamination would have been detected up to seven years sooner, and Ann Arbor's Northwest Supply Well would not have been contaminated and had to be shut down.

(Incidentally, when Pall transferred Gelman Sciences' sampling data to Pall's computerized database, Pall left off the MW-30d sampling prior to 2001... but one can still view it on the SRSW's 1995 Gelman Sciences' database archive... except for the last 9 ppb reading which Gelman Sciences failed to record from its paper records.)






Now in 2009, Pall-Gelman (officially Pall Life Sciences, PLS) proposes to quit sampling a well at 2575 Valley Drive even though the dioxane levels there are on an upwards trend reaching 75 ppb in 2008 (almost to the current relaxed cleanup standard of 85 ppb). Why would Pall want to do this? Pall's well data table says that the well is not in the E aquifer, nor is it in the D2/Evergreen aquifer... Pall labels it as being in a "Not Determined" aquifer... this, in spite of the well screened elevation being consistent with the D2/Evergreen aquifer (~837 feet above sea level). While the 2575 Valley well depth is not deep enough to be in the E aquifer even though Pall's latest E aquifer plume map would encompass it. In fact, Pall does not show the well on any of its recent maps justifying its May 5, 2009, proposal to relax its cleanup responsibilities nor was it on Pall's recent Evergreen analysis maps ... it only appears on the 2009 Base Map.

A nearby well at 2601 Dexter is also labeled as being in a "Not Determined" aquifer even though it is has a depth similar to 2575 Valley's well. 2601 Dexter's dioxane levels also had been on an upwards trend (up to 8 ppb) before the well was abandoned in 2007.

Is Pall labeling these wells as being in a "Not Determined" aquifer to hide the fact that Pall is once again in violation of the current Consent Judgment by letting the D2/Evergreen plume escape beyond its purge wells? Or is Pall hiding the fact that there is yet another (a "Not Determined") aquifer that is about to be contaminated above the current 85 ppb cleanup standard? Either way, loosening the cleanup criteria in the Evergreen area to 2800 ppb and halting sampling of these "Not Determined" aquifer wells is a way to keep the problem hidden.

Will the MDEQ allow sampling of a key well to be halted like the DNR did with MW-30d in 1993?








One of the next closest wells upgradient to these two is 456 Clarendon which is labeled as being in the D2/Evergreen aquifer and has dioxane levels on an upwards trend since Evergreen purging was reduced.













The well at 440 Clarendon lacks well log data to determine at what elevation the well is screened, but its dioxane levels were on an upwards trend reaching 192 ppb when sampling stopped in 2005. Pall claims in its well table note that this well is "Access Denied" when in fact the homeowner is waiting for Pall to repair the well so it can be sampled.