![]() Members of the community advisory group from south of Troy expressed intense frustration with the lack of cleanup in the lower Hudson. The sprawling 200-mile Hudson River Superfund site is the largest in the country and the dredging and restoration agreed to by General Electric in 2006 only addressed one piece of the multi-layered, complex legal and public health challenge it presents.ĮPA’s 2019 fish data also highlight that the recovery of fish in the lower Hudson River continues to lag compared to the incremental improvements seen post-dredging in the upper Hudson River samples. ![]() The state’s lawsuit is one development in the effort to remove approximately 1.3 million pounds of PCBs dumped by GE’s capacitor plants in Fort Edward and Hudson Falls into the Hudson River between the 1940s and 1970s.Ī hearing on EPA and GE’s motion to dismiss the state’s case and related motions is scheduled for June 15 in Utica. The certificate was issued in April 2019, and the lawsuit was filed in August last year. That lawsuit focuses on the agency’s decision to issue a “certificate of completion” to General Electric after dredging to remove a portion of PCBs in the sediment concluded. The state’s lawsuit challenging EPA’s position on the Hudson River cleanup is pending in federal court. “We need at least eight years of data post-dredging to be confident in a statistical trend,” EPA’s Gary Klawinski said during the discussion. The EPA maintains that more data is needed before a conclusion can be made. “You can’t wait eight years to see if we hit our five-year targets.” Figure 1: Locator Map.“The probability of hitting five-year target gets less likely,” said Riverkeeper’s Richard Webster during the meeting, referring to one of the time frames outlined in the dredging agreement.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |