Clearwater

News & Bulletins


4/11/97
New EPA PCB Report Puts
General Electric On The Defensive

Starting in 1947 and ending in 1977, General Electric allowed over
1,000,000 pounds of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) to enter the
environment at an area just south of Glens Falls, NY.  The
concentrations of this chemical among the river's sediments are
sufficient to place the Hudson on the Superfund National Priorities
List. From GE's plants in Hudson Falls and Fort Edward south to New
York City, PCBs have tainted 200 miles of biota and sediment -
virtually the entire Hudson Valley - placing over 10,000,000 people at
potential risk. A once-vibrant commercial and recreational fishery
valued in 1976 at $40,000,000 per year, remains closed to this day with
a few exceptions. Health advisories warn against consumption of any
Hudson River fish, especially by women and children. There are known
deposits exceeding an additional 600,000 pounds in the bedrock and
strata beneath the two plant sites where PCBs were used (Source: NYS
DEC).

PCBs are carcinogens, endocrine disrupters, and neurotoxins (see "Our
Stolen Future," Colborn et al, 1996). They are reaching humans through
drinking water, milk and other foods, and through direct contact such
as swimming, eating Hudson River fish, atmospheric deposition, and
breathing Hudson Valley air.

Since 1989, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been
conducting a multimillion-dollar Reassessment of the upper Hudson's PCB
hot spots. Using its own data augmented by GE's data, EPA expects to
issue a Record of Decision (ROD) by the end of 1998. The ROD will
describe EPA's solution to the ongoing contamination of Hudson River
biota by General Electric PCBs. The Reassessment has been taking place
in a number increments. The most recent report, entitled "Data
Evaluation and Interpretation," is the first to contain substantive
findings.

According to William Greider, author of the New York Times bestselling
book Who Will Tell the People (Simon & Schuster, 1992), GE is adept at
using the Superfund process to create enough make-work to bog-down
EPA's scarce resources and "...spelled out step-by-step tactics for
hanging up the liability process in the tangle of court challenges." GE
has been doing this very effectively for some time. For years, GE has
been telling the people of the Hudson Valley an assortment of "facts".
The latest EPA Reassessment report, however, entitled Data Evaluation
and Interpretation, shows that many of GE's "facts" were wrong, and
removes most of GE's mantle of credibility.

GE's most cherished myths about PCBs in the Hudson River were exploded
by this report. We list them below:

1.
GE:  PCBs will biodegrade, and this biodegradation constitutes a
suitable remedy.  "The truth is, the river is cleaning itself up." (GE
rep. Mel Schweiger, Schenectady Gazette, 9/17/95).
EPA: Biodegradation
has reduced PCB mass less than 10%, and will go no farther.
Dechlorination does not progress to the point of eliminating all
chlorine atoms at any time. "Sediment inventories will not be naturally
 remediated' via dechlorination." (EPA report 2/97).

2.
GE:  Dechlorination occurs in an aerobic environment, and can
effectively destroy PCB molecules. "It is now recognized that PCBs are
biodegradable by aerobic oxidative processes..." (GE scientists
Abramowicz and Olson, Chemtech 7/95).
EPA: "Dechlorination cannot occur
under aerobic conditions." (Dr. Ed Garvey, EPA consultant, at 2/19/97
briefing). Anaerobic dechlorination does occur in areas of heavier
concentrations (above 30 ppm), but always leaves at least one chlorine
atom, and often two or three. In many areas with concentrations below
30 ppm, there is no evidence of dechlorination (EPA report 2/97).

3.
GE:  PCB levels have been declining. (GE River Watch, winter 1997).
EPA: PCB levels have been constant over the last 3 years.
(EPA report 2/97).

4.
GE:  The seeps from Hudson Falls are the principal source of PCBs to
the river. Once we stop the seeps, PCB levels in the river will
virtually disappear. (GE reps at Hudson Falls briefing, 4/1/96).
EPA: The seeps from Hudson Falls only constitute a small percentage of
the total loading going over the Thompson Island Dam, and from there
into the lower Hudson (EPA report 2/97).

5.
GE:  PCBs in sediment do not contribute to water column PCB burdens.
(GE reps at Hudson Falls briefing, 4/1/96).
EPA: PCBs in sediment may
be reentering the water column in two ways -- resuspension, and pore
water outmigration. PCBs from sediment are increasing the PCB burden of
water traveling through the Thompson Island Pool three-fold. "Sediment
is the driving force." (EPA report 2/97).

6.
GE:  We are not the only source of PCBs into the Hudson (GE reps at
Hudson Falls briefing 4/1/96).
EPA: "The area of the site upstream of
the Thompson Island Dam represents the primary source of PCBs to the
freshwater Hudson."  (EPA report 2/97).

7.
GE:  PCBs are coming into the Hudson from the tributaries (GE reps
at Hudson Falls briefing, 4/1/96).
EPA: "The PCB load from the Thompson
Island Pool has a readily identifiable homologue pattern which
dominates the water column load from the Thompson Island Pool to
Kingston..." (EPA report 2/97).

8.
GE:  PCBs are not harmful. "...most evidence...suggests that there
are no adverse health effects attributable to high occupational
exposures to PCBs." (GE scientists Abramowicz & Olson, Chemtech, 7/95).
EPA: GE's own data recently established the carcinogenicity of all
congeners of PCBs, whether heavily or lightly chlorinated. (Dr. Brian
Bush, NYS DOH). "We do not agree that reduction in chlorination levels
equals reduction in risk."(EPA, 2/19/97, at briefing).

9.
GE:  The Thompson Island Pool is anomalous, and needs further study
(GE rep. John Haggard, 2/19/97, at EPA briefing).
EPA: We have enough data to make a determination
(EPA, 2/19/97, at briefing).

10.
GE:  Dredging constitutes "A catastrophic assault on river life."
"Activists like dredging, but science does not." (GE River Watch,
winter 1997).
EPA: "We've selected dredging for remedial action at six
other PCB contaminated sites. EPA does believe that dredging is
possible and can be implemented. There are remedial technologies that
are available at this time." (EPA rep. Douglas Tomchuk, 10/96).

General Electric claims that "...at the end of the day, [it] will be
there with money," and that its only concern has been that we
collectively "find the best solution" (GE rep. David Warshaw, RNN-TV,
2/19/97). For a couple of weeks GE representatives were stumbling over
their words, but now seem to have found their rhetoric again. What will
GE say to regain command of the dialogue? They are falling back on the
same old song, with a new refrain: EPA's findings (which included GE's
own data) are all wrong.  Clearly, according to GE, the emperor is
wearing clothes.

News Clearwater Homepage

Send comments and questions to envaction@mail.clearwater.org