<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Clean Watershed Campaign &#187; Documents</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/category/documents/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org</link>
	<description>EMBRACING THE URGENCY OF NOW FOR OUR RIVERS, BAY AND NEIGHBORS</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:59:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>EPA fails to Release Dioxin Reassessement</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/02/01/administration-fails-to-release-dioxin-reassessement/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/02/01/administration-fails-to-release-dioxin-reassessement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Press Release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lone Tree]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1673</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Late yesterday the EPA, capitulating to industry, announced it would not be releasing the non-cancer portion of the dioxin reassessment. Shameful! Lone Tree Council Press Release below. Lone Tree Council PR FEB 2012 Recent Dioxin Timeline]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/02/01/administration-fails-to-release-dioxin-reassessement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tracey Easthope&#8217;s compelling arguments to Adminstrator Jackson</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/30/tracey-easthopes-compelling-arguments-to-adminstrator-jackson/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/30/tracey-easthopes-compelling-arguments-to-adminstrator-jackson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1660</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Ann Arbor based Ecology Center is without a doubt one of Michigan&#8217;s finest advocates for children and public health issues &#8211; hands down they just rock. Below are their compelling comments to Lisa Jackson to release the dioxin reassessment. The failure to finalize the document until now represents a political, moral and ethical failure. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/30/tracey-easthopes-compelling-arguments-to-adminstrator-jackson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NRDC calls on Lisa Jackson to release the Dioxin Reassessement</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/29/nrdc-calls-on-lisa-jackson-to-release-the-dioxin-reassessement/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/29/nrdc-calls-on-lisa-jackson-to-release-the-dioxin-reassessement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1653</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Natural Resources Defense Council making the best argument for release of the dioxin reassessment. As an added bonus, NRDC argues in detail why the EPA must stop listening to the disingenuous petition of the chemical industry to once again delay the release. NRDC DRA 1-2012]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/29/nrdc-calls-on-lisa-jackson-to-release-the-dioxin-reassessement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Clean Water Action Letter to Lisa Jackson</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/26/clean-water-action-letter-to-lisa-jackson/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/26/clean-water-action-letter-to-lisa-jackson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1644</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Clean Water Action calling upon Administrator Jackson to release the dioxin reassessment. We are concerned that the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and other industry trade associations are once again pressuring the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to further delay the release of this important document. We believe the American public has a right to know about [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/26/clean-water-action-letter-to-lisa-jackson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dear Administrator Jackson</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/13/dear-administrator-jackson/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/13/dear-administrator-jackson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:59:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lone Tree]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1619</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lone Tree Council joining a chorus of environmental and public health advocates calling on Administrator Jackson to finally release the EPA&#8217;s long delayed dioxin reassessment. Jan. 2012 EPA Jackson dioxin reassessment.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/13/dear-administrator-jackson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Practice collides with rhetoric</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/10/practice-collides-with-rhetoric/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/10/practice-collides-with-rhetoric/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:32:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toxic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1610</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ringing in the New Year, EPA announced this past week that Dow Chemical is second among toxic chemical emitters. And then there&#8217;s the rhetoric. Sustainability begins at home, but its destiny is to engage the problems of the world. We will build on our company&#8217;s rich legacy of leadership in solving the world&#8217;s most pressing [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2012/01/10/practice-collides-with-rhetoric/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Put a value on nature.</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/12/29/put-a-value-on-nature/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/12/29/put-a-value-on-nature/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 00:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cleanup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[River]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toxic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s perhaps very telling the value that Dow Chemical holds all of the regional area by how long they have sought to delay, and avoid responsibility for their pollution. If they really valued the &#8216;human element&#8217;, like their PR campaign claims, you would think that they, as a corporation, would also value the environment that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/12/29/put-a-value-on-nature/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MDEQ also declining to use Dow funded UM Dioxin Study</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/10/21/mdeq-also-declining-to-use-dow-funded-um-dioxin-study/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/10/21/mdeq-also-declining-to-use-dow-funded-um-dioxin-study/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 02:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CAG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MDEQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toxic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1545</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For the first time an agency stated in plain language their rationale for declining the use of a study funded by Dow Chemical. Below is MDEQ&#8217;s written and succinct comments to the EPA&#8217;s Community Advisory Group (CAG) who invited Dr Garabrant to speak to them about the findings in his Dow funded study. DEQstatementfor10-17-2011CAG]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/10/21/mdeq-also-declining-to-use-dow-funded-um-dioxin-study/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EPA will not use Dow funded UM Dioxin Study</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/10/20/epa-will-not-use-dow-funded-um-dioxin-study/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/10/20/epa-will-not-use-dow-funded-um-dioxin-study/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 21:23:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CAG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meetings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cleanup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MDEQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toxic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1532</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As reported by the Saginaw News, EPA and MDEQ are again declining to use the Dow Chemical funded U of M Dioxin Exposure Study for protection of public health and response activities along the river. Good for EPA and MDEQ. While acknowledging the study has some valuable information, the agencies remain firm in the belief [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/10/20/epa-will-not-use-dow-funded-um-dioxin-study/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where is the outrage?</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/09/29/where-is-the-outrage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/09/29/where-is-the-outrage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 18:52:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mhr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Eye on the EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scandal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toxic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/?p=1527</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here is an outrageous video of contaminated sediments being pumped into the Army Corp of Engineers/Saginaw County dredge site. Currently, there is no coordination on this site among the agencies who have all expressed concern about the site integrity, wildlife contamination, lack of permits or long term implications of this dump site. Dow Chemical is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cleanwatershedcampaign.org/2011/09/29/where-is-the-outrage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

