Residents fear that project will pollute their water

Three Hudson River towns are threatening legal action that could further delay a dredging project to remove contaminants, unless the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) satisfactorily addresses their concerns.

The project to dredge for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) is set to start in May 2009, as construction of the sludge processing and treatment facility is almost complete.

GE capacitor plants discharged at least 1.3 million pounds of PCBs into the Hudson River for three decades until it Congress banned PCB use in 1977. PCB has caused cancer in animals and is suspected to cause cancer and other health problems in humans.

In 2002, the EPA ordered GE to design and pay for the $700 million project to remove and clean up 2.65 million cubic yards of river sediment contaminated with the pollutant. This would be one of the biggest environmental cleanup projects in US history.

The project has suffered delays for years, weighed down by legal and bureaucratic wrangling. Finally, in the last two years, massive infrastructure has been installed or built from the ground in a 110-acre site. The facilities include five miles of railroad track, a big wharf for docking barges, and enormous water presses to squeeze the water out of PCB-laden sediment. After processing, the sediment will be trucked across the country to a remote area in Texas.

Elected officials and residents of Halfmoon, Waterford and Stillwater fear that the project will stir up the pollutants and contaminate the Hudson River water. All three towns get their drinking water from the river.

To make sure the towns would still get safe drinking water, the EPA also ordered GE to construct a $6 million 4-1/2 mile waterline to carry water from Troy to service the towns.

Construction of the waterline was delayed for many months because the towns refused to give access to the waterline unless the EPA gave prior guarantees that the line would be finished before dredging of the river bottom begins.

Finally, in September, the EPA issued orders to both towns to grant the needed access. According to the EPA, the agency had no choice but to invoke its authority under federal law to compel the towns and property owners to grant access so that the long-delayed waterline construction could be started. It is now targeted for completion April 1 — about a month before the scheduled start of dredging in May.

The communities feel the waterline construction schedule is too tight while the completion of the dredging facilities is imminent. They are again demanding a guarantee from the EPA about the completion of the waterline. So far, the EPA has refused to give that guarantee.

The EPA has back-up protection protocols in case the waterline project is delayed. There are sampling stations along the river to monitor PCB levels to make sure they do not exceed federal and state drinking water standards. Dredging will be stopped if the standards are breached.

The communities are not satisfied with that back-up plan; they want the guarantee. And they would go to court to get it. The question is whether the back-up safety protocols are adequate or whether the guarantee is necessary.