Between 1947 and 1977 GE dumped an estimated 1.3 million pounds of PCBs into the Hudson River. Last December, the EPA gave tentative approval of a plan that would force GE to spend over $400 million to remove the PCBs by dredging the river. The public has until April 17th to submit comments to the EPA on whether or not GE should be forced to clean up the river. There is now an intense political battle going on. GE claims, amongst other things, that "there is no evidence that PCBs cause cancer or other serious illnesses in people." They are also claiming that dredging would stir up the soil so this project would actually make things work (Despite GE's claim, new dredging techniques could be used that do not stir up the soil.) GE also claims that the river is cleansing itself of PCBs and is getting cleaner all the time, though critics dispute this. Here are two web-sites, the first sponsored by GE and the second sponsored by a citizen-based organization that wants to get GE to clean up the mess it made. You be the judge, after looking at both sites, to decide if a massive cleanup is a good idea.
hudsonvoice.com
cleanhudson.org
Personally, I think at the very least, GE should be required to clean up a small stretch of the river on a trial basis. The cleanup should be closely monitored to see if it results in greater contamination of the river as GE claims it would do. The other hot spots slated for cleanup should be monitored as a control and to determine whether the river is getting cleaner on its own as GE claims. A more intelligent decision can be made after extensively monitoring a small controlled cleanup.
Of course, constant monitoring is essential no matter what course of action is taken. If GE is forced to do a massive cleanup then monitoring is essential to make sure they do not make matters worse. And if it is decided that it would be best to avoid dredging then GE should monitor the river on an ongoing basis to be ready to do a localized cleanup should dioxin levels rise unexpectedly.
This, of course, creates an opportunity for Paracelsian and it creates an opportunity for us to help our company. I urge you to write the EPA. Tell them that careful monitoring is essential, whatever plan they decide on. There is no excuse not to do extensive monitoring now that there is a new assay that can do it cheaply and effectively. And make sure you include PRLN's web site in your letter:
paracelsian.com
Here is some information on where to send your mail. I took it from this site:
cleanhudson.org
The Best Way for Your Comments to Have Impact:
Personal, hand-written letters will receive more attention
than form-generated emails, so if you have the time, please
write a real, paper letter to the EPA at:
Ms. Alison Hess / Mr. Doug Tomchuk
Region 2, U.S. EPA
Hudson River PCBs Public Comment
290 Broadway, 19th Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866
and send copies of your letter to EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whitman and Governor Pataki:
Administrator Christine Todd Whitman
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1101A, USEPA Headquarters
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20460
Governor George E. Pataki
Executive Chamber
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
The Second Best Way for Your Comments to Have Impact:
E-mail your comments to the EPA Public Comment mailbox at
HudsonComment.Region2@epa.gov and copy them to Governor Pataki at
gov.pataki@chamber.state.ny.us.
Here's Another Thing You Can Do
Your Representatives in Congress Need To Hear From You Too
Senator Charles E. Schumer
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
senator@schumer.senate.gov
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
senator@clinton.senate.gov
To write the Member of the House of Representatives in your area, use this online form:
house.gov |
