ALBANY - Following the results of the first phase of toxic cleanup in the Hudson River, leading environmental groups and an independent scientist told the Environmental Protection Agency they believe it can continue to successfully meet its major objectives through reasonable adjustments and should see the project through to completion.

As General Electric, the company responsible for the polychlorinated biphenyls (or PCBs) polluting the river, tries to limit the cleanup through cost-cutting and artificial scheduling constraints, the groups – Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Natural Resources Defense Council, Riverkeeper and Scenic Hudson – concluded that there is nobasis to curtail the Phase 2 cleanup, and that the project should proceed on schedule with the second phase starting in May 2011.

Ned Sullivan, President of Scenic Hudson said, “It is essential that we end the public war of words and competing theories of how to complete this cleanup and forge a consensus that will ensure compliance with the USEPA’s 2002 Record of Decision.  We cannot squander the historic opportunity to achieve a lasting cleanup that will restore the health of the river for humans, fish and wildlife and create near term cleanup jobs and a lasting economically viable upper Hudson region.

The groups submitted formal comments to EPA in response to the agency’s Addendum to Phase 1 Evaluation Report for the Hudson River dredging project. This is the second set of formal comments the groups have submitted to EPA about the project, and are based on extensive review of the latest reports from EPA and GE on the success of the first phase.

“For years, GE has said the Hudson River couldn't be cleaned up, but the experience gained from the first phase of the project shows it can be done,” said NRDC senior attorney Lawrence Levine. “And the higher-than-expected levels of contamination found in Phase 1 reinforce the need to finish the job.  We have leading world innovators on the job – no one is better equipped to rectify the mistakes of their past than GE.”

The groups proposed several technical adjustments to improve the success of the next phase of the cleanup, including:

• Targeted additional core sampling to better assess the depth of contamination, in combination with taking deeper ‘bites’ with the dredge to provide a margin for error, which will help ensure the cleanup does not leave behind substantial PCB contamination
• Prohibition on so-called decanting of water from the dredge bucket before it is emptied into a barge, which releases PCBs back into the river
• Use of alternative dredging technologies, where appropriate, that can help minimize the amount of sediment stirred-up in the water column, such as covered excavators or hydraulic dredges with onboard dewatering equipment
• Adding surface absorbent mats to containment booms to help capture any PCB oil that floats to the surface
• Enhanced capacity for unloading barges carrying dredged sediment, to avoid bottlenecks that substantially and unnecessarily slowed progress in Phase 1

Riverkeeper Senior Counsel Rebecca Troutman noted, “These adjustments should make significant differences in achieving the project goals. There’s no question that GE can readily afford the changes, and any posturing about costs should be set aside. After enduring decades of this toxic legacy, the Hudson River deserves no less, and we’ve all come too far to support anything other than the most professional, comprehensive cleanup.”