Public pushes EPA for further Hudson cleanup

While the future of the Hudson River cleanup remains unknown, the public has called on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to continue the removal of PCBs. 

The EPA is reviewing 2,000 comments on the Proposed Second Five-Year Review Report for the Hudson River. General Electric has requested a certificate of completion for its cleanup of cancer-causing poly-chlorinated biphenyls in the Hudson, but the EPA said in a Jan. 2 letter it was delaying judgment until it finalizes the five-year review of the river’s recovery.

The comments — collected over a three-month period — mostly ask the EPA to deem the cleanup incomplete, and extend the comment period to allow the public more time to review the more-than-1,000-page report.

The EPA has posted the official comments, which represent 51 entities, on its website.

HUDSON RIVER: Hudson River at a crossroads: GE, groups await EPA decision on PCBs

CUOMO AND HUDSON: New York will sue EPA if Hudson River cleanup deemed complete

HUDSON RIVER WATERSHED: Hudson River Watershed needs $4.8B investment: Riverkeeper

The agency needs to complete the review of comments before finalizing the five-year report, which it has said will be ready in early 2018. The EPA then plans to issue a much-anticipated response to GE’s request for a certificate of completion.  

Hayley Carlock, the environmental advocacy attorney at Scenic Hudson, called the EPA’s decision to post the comments “a great show of transparency by the agency, and it makes it absolutely clear the overwhelming support for additional cleanup in (the) upper Hudson.”

Public comments have played a role in the EPA’s decision to delay its response to GE on the completion certificate.

In a Jan. 2 letter to GE, the EPA’s Gary Klawinski, director of the agency’s Hudson River Office, cited “the number and complexity of comments submitted during the public comment period” and letters from elected officials as factors in the delay.

“I’d certainly think the comments had played a role in the delay," said Richard Webster, legal director for the Riverkeeper environmental organization. "I am not sure if it’s the number or quality of the comments, but the number shows they want more cleanup.”

Environmental groups and other interests pushed the EPA for an official public comment period, which did not occur in the first five-year review in 2012.

Review of public comments

A review of the comments found the highest number represented by local government in the mid-Hudson Valley and a wide variety of organizations, including chambers of commerce, unions, businesses and environmental groups. Other comments came from elected officials and government agencies.

The public-comment period, which began on June 1 and ended on Sept. 1, attracted comments from U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.; Basil Seggos, commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Conservation; state Assemblywoman Didi Barrett, D-Hudson; local governments and companies, and environmental groups such as the Sierra Club, Scenic Hudson and Riverkeeper.

GE, the American conglomerate at the center of one of the largest environmental cleanups in modern history, also posted comments.

The following is a sample of comments representing various interests:

• In a five-page letter, John Haggard, the GE project coordinator, included detailed information and data suggesting the company has met the EPA’s requirements based on a 2006 consent decree. “GE is proud to have completed this unprecedented project that EPA selected, New York state endorsed, and both oversaw, and GE is proud of the environmental improvements that have been achieved so far, the result of a very productive working relationship,” he wrote. “The data collected to date, and summarized in the Second FYR Report, demonstrates that the remedy — chosen by EPA with the concurrence of New York state — is reducing PCB levels as planned and shows why no additional dredging in the Upper or Lower Hudson is recommended or warranted.” Next steps include more collection of scientific data as part of post-dredging monitoring, Haggard wrote. 
• Joseph Bonura Jr. owner of the Bonura Hospitality Group that owns high-profile businesses including the Poughkeepsie Grand Hotel and Shadows on the Hudson, called on the EPA to deem the PCBs cleanup “not protective” of human health and the environment, hold more cleanup in the upper Hudson and launch a review of the lower Hudson, the roughly 150 miles of river not included in GE’s cleanup. “Only additional dredging will make the Hudson healthy as soon as possible,” he wrote.
• Gil Hawkins, vice president of the Hudson River Fishermen’s Association, is pushing for additional cleanup. “Though fish are important, the plight of the marinas in the lower river who cannot dispose of contaminated dredge spoils will go on much longer,” he wrote.
• Schumer made note of public meetings on the five-year review held in Poughkeepsie and Saratoga Springs and asked the EPA for a public information meeting in New York City “to give the maximum number of New Yorkers who live adjacent to the Hudson River an opportunity to participate in the public-comment process.” He added that the EPA should reach out to more under-served communities including “elderly, disabled, low-income and other residents who have hectic schedules.”
• Seggos, in a letter dated June 7, asked the EPA to extend the public-comment process to 90 days and said the DEC needed more time to review the draft five-year review. “To be clear, DEC has concluded that USEPA-led cleanup of the Hudson River is incomplete and the findings of the USEPA’s draft Five Year Review Report are unacceptable and not based on science,” he wrote.
• Barrett wrote, “We are asking the EPA to stand up for the people that live by, work on, and visit the majestic Hudson River, and tell GE to take responsibility for the tremendous damage it has done to the river and the local economy. The EPA must require GE to achieve 'protective' status for the entire 200-mile stretch of the Hudson River ensuring that PCB levels are truly safe for humans and the environment.”
• Dutchess County Executive Marc Molinaro, in a letter dated June 28, said the cleanup was part of environmental protection and the region’s economic revitalization. “The Hudson’s ability to achieve these objectives depends on the successful completion of the PCB cleanup, which is needed to improve the economy, health and quality of the life of citizens in Dutchess Country and throughout the Hudson Valley,” he wrote.
• Then-Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino called the river a “keystone of the Hudson Valley’s multi-billion-dollar tourism industry,” and said it plays an important role in economic projects in the pipeline, including fishing and marine transport on the Champlain Canal.
• Ian Doromal, vice president of ecoSPEARS, a company that has products that extract PCBs from sediments, pitched their product to the EPA as a solution for future cleanup.

While the comment period is over, the lobbying for further cleanup continues.

Scenic Hudson’s Carlock said the group is urging the community to contact the EPA Region 2’s new chief, Pete Lopez.

“We are asking people to let him know how much a clean Hudson River means to them. The public outcry and engagement on the issue is the reason we’ve gotten so far,” Carlock said.

GE dumped PCBs into the river from its manufacturing sites along the Hudson.

Amy Wu: 845-451-4529, awu@poughkeepsiejournal.com; Twitter: @wu_PoJo