February 27, 2001

The Honorable Christie Whitman

Administrator

United States Environmental Protection Agency

401 M Street SW

Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Whitman:

Last week, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
granted Environmental Disposal Systems, Inc. (EDS) a permit allowing it
to build a deep injection well in Romulus, Michigan. EDS intends to
store hazardous waste at this site. I write you requesting your prompt
assistance in answering some questions regarding this proposal, which
raises serious public safety and environmental concerns.

The merits and legality of this proposal are the subject of considerable
debate. I would note that DEQ ignored the recommendation of its own
review board to deny EDS state permits. However, the most important
issue in this debate is public safety. Because I am deeply concerned
about DEQ's actions, I would appreciate an explanation of the options
available to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to guarantee the
EDS well will not pose a threat, in the short and long-term, to the
public health and welfare of the surrounding communities.

The EDS proposal also raises several environmental red flags. I am
particularly concerned about possible adverse impacts to municipal water
resources and leakage of hazardous liquid waste into the Great Lakes
watershed. Please explain what actions EPA intends to take or have
already taken to guarantee that the proposed well will not contaminate
local drinking water or threaten the watershed.

It is my understanding that EDS is required to submit a detailed plan of
what operations will be performed on its site to EPA, including a full
listing of the hazardous waste materials it proposes to store in its
well. EPA is then required to carefully examine the geological profile
of the area and sample soil before any waste could be stored at the
Romulus site. Please define the rules and steps involved in the
geological data study process, including the length and breadth of tests
and a full listing of the geological characteristics that make a deep
injection well unsuitable. Please include a listing of those geological
characteristics common to Michigan, specifically southeastern Michigan.
Additionally, please include a detailed description of the tests EPA
will be conducting in Romulus, and a timeline of when each step in this
process will be completed.

I have heard that on a previous occasion, EDS attempted to operate a
deep injection hazardous waste at a different location in Wayne County,
Michigan. However, because soil at this site was found to be unsuitable
for storing hazardous waste, the well was abandoned. I would appreciate
you sharing EPA's findings with me in regard to this site's geological
data. Please explain the specific geological characteristics present at
this site that made it unsuitable for use as a deep injection well, and
whether these same geological characteristics are present, or are likely
to be present, in other areas of Wayne County. Can EPA, DEQ, or the
applicant state that the geological characteristics of the rejected site
are not identical to the characteristics of the proposed Romulus site?

Over the last several years, increasing levels of hazardous waste have
been imported into Michigan. In fact, a recent news article noted that
while 90,000 tons of hazardous waste was imported into Michigan in 1992,
more than 350,000 tons were imported in 1998. I would like to know if
these figures are accurate, as well as the origins of this waste and the
locations where it is being stored.

I thank you in advance for your prompt assistance on this matter, and
look forward to reviewing your comments.

With every good wish,

Sincerely yours,

John D. Dingell

Member of Congress