Sunday, November 24, 2024
28.0°F

Neighbors claim Plum Creek fouled their wells

| September 22, 2005 11:00 PM

Hungry Horse News

A group of residents are claiming wastewater from Plum Creek Manufacturing caused their wells to become contaminated with formaldehyde.

According to court documents filed in Flathead County District Court, the company is accused of discharging formaldehyde along with its wastewater, allowing it to penetrate into the groundwater, contaminating several wells.

Those listed as making claims against the company include Kathryn and Darin Price, Rubianna Masa, Rick and Chris Terrillion, Jon and Angela Lemburg, Gary and Peggy Seaman, Marilyn and Bruce Riley, Scott and Tracy Dereu, Carla and David Shaffer, Krista and Darrell LaRoque, Michelle and Robert Goodman, Robyn and David Kehr, Craig and Lisa Turk, Phillip Kiser, Bryan E. and Cindy B. Slaubaugh, Andrew C. Schmidt, Mark and Kimberly Gallagher, Laura and Jeff Kearns, and Lisa Jackman.

All those listed currently own property or have resided near Plum Creek's mill here.

Formaldehyde is a by-product of Plum Creek's manufacturing process, according to court documents, and results from the manufacturing process are "to be disposed of through means other than being co-mingled with wastewater and discharged into the groundwater."

Court documents state that the facility is "one of the top 10 formaldehyde releasing facilities in the United States" and 319,250 pounds of formaldehyde were released from the facility in 1998.

The company operated under a Montana Ground Water Pollution Control System Permit until Oct. 31, 2001. The plaintiffs claim that this permit allowed the company to "discharge wastewater into the unlined ponds and eventually into the ground water."

Since the permit expired the company has been operating without a permit, according to court documents, and is currently in the process of trying to renew their wastewater discharge permit.

Under the permit issued by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, according to documents, the company was required to perform quarterly testing for certain compounds and install monitoring wells near each of its retention ponds and overflow areas from which to take test samples.

But formaldehyde was not one of the compounds the company was required to test for, according to documents.

Testing was performed, the plaintiffs claim, by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and Plum Creek in 2002 and 2003 have found "high amounts of formaldehyde" in the holding and overflow ponds and monitoring wells.

Separate testing allegedly also found formaldehyde present in the Price's well located on Meadowlake Boulevard.

Plum Creek has since added a wastewater treatment plant to its facility.

The residents are seeking damages for the destruction of property and the cost of restoring the property to its original condition.

They also claim pain and suffering from allegedly experiencing headaches, skin irritation and respiratory problems. Damages also include increased expenses for mental and emotional distress, including the fear of contracting diseases including cancer. As well as, the cost of present and future medical examinations.

Claims are also made that because of the formaldehyde and other contaminates the Seamans were forced to sell their property and relocate and that they suffered damage to the reputation of the pre-school operated by Peggy Seaman, as well as, lost income.

The residents are also claiming Plum Creek had been negligent in its actions and is making money at nearby residents' expense. They also claim that Plum Creek violated the Montana Constitution by polluting and contaminating the residents' land.

The claims were initially filed in 2003, subsequent filings have amended the original claim. The case was supposed to go to trial this fall, but has since been delayed.

Residents are also seeking an injunction to prevent Plum Creek from releasing any more formaldehyde into the groundwater.

Kathy Budinick, Plum Creek's director of communications, said Plum Creek strongly believes that this lawsuit has no merit.