Some families settle with Plum Creek; trial date in remaining pollution cases set

By HEIDI DESCH / Hungry Horse News

Several of the residents who claimed that wastewater from Plum Creek Manufacturing contaminated their wells have settled out of court with the timber company.

About 20 residents filed a suit in 2003 against Plum Creek in Flathead County District Court — claiming that the company discharged formaldehyde along with its wastewater, allowing it to penetrate the groundwater, contaminating several wells.

Those who filed the suit all currently own property or have resided near Plum Creek's mill in Columbia Falls.

Residents claimed that the exposure to formaldehyde caused numerous health problems.

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."

Peggy Seaman, one of the original plaintiff's in the case, said this week she settled with Plum Creek in August.

"I decided to settle when I realized I was a fish swimming upstream," she wrote in an e-mail. "I had to rethink the reason I was allowing this case to continue to consume my life. I realized I need to close that chapter and get on with life."

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released its Toxics Release Inventory last week. The database shows information nation-wide on the chemical releases into the environment reported in 2006.

According to the list, Plum Creek here released 464,250 pounds of formaldehyde through air emissions.

The amount released through underground injection wells or landfills is listed as zero.

The EPA warns that exposure to formaldehyde may cause burning of the eyes and throat, nausea and difficulty breathing. Also, it has been shown to cause cancer in animals and may cause cancer in humans.

In 2003, some of the families contacted the Montana Department of Environmental Quality with complaints that the water smelled bad.

According to court records, the DEQ tested the water and found "high amounts of formaldehyde" in the holding and overflow ponds and monitoring wells.

Separate testing allegedly also found formaldehyde present in a well located on Meadow Lake Boulevard.

A few of the families have not settled with Plum Creek.

Earlier this month Flathead County District Judge Ted Lympus set a Sept. 22 trial date for the case. That date could change again; a trial date has been set numerous times and moved since the case was first filed.

Seaman did not say what the amount of the settlement was, but did say she felt it wasn't enough.

After the testing, Seaman and her husband, Gary, sold their home and relocated the preschool to a new location.

She said the settlement was not enough to cover the expenses of moving, lost income that resulted and would also not cover medical expenses.

Seaman said the ordeal has made her not trust people.

"When I first moved to Meadow Lake, I felt like I had the whole fairy tale life. I was living debt free. I had a big, beautiful home, trees around yet still able to peek through and see the mountains. I was not concerned living next to Plum Creek, we were neighbors and neighbors looked out for each other. Now I realize how naive I was, but at the time it was great," she said.

Much of her concern has come for the children and employees at her daycare, A Joyful Noise Preschool and Child Care.

"The stress of realizing I was not only putting my family in harms way, but also the lives of all the children and employees I cared for, yikes," she said.

Seaman said when she knew what was happening she met with the parents of the children at the preschool.

"What danger had they allowed their child to be in? Some parents decided to remove their children from my care. We ended up moving our child care three times in a six-month period, closing one day at one place, opening the next day at our new place," she said.

Seaman said she decided to close the preschool until it could be in a permanent location.

"We became a joke to other providers … who knew where we would be next? My reputation of a high quality child care was tarnished," she said. "In the last five years, my staff and I have worked hard to rebuild our facility and our reputation."

Plum Creek officials have claimed the suit is without merit.