Cleanup Plans and Documents

Click on a category below to navigate and view documents

Lower River Sampling and Investigations

Beginning in spring 2023, the General Electric Company (GE) will sample water, fish and sediment as part of an investigation of the Lower River portion of the Hudson River PCBs Superfund site under a legal agreement with EPA. 

The Lower Hudson River extends from the Troy Dam to the southern tip of Manhattan bordering New York and a portion of New Jersey. Data collection will focus on polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), but other contaminants will be evaluated as well.

The results of the sampling will be used to improve EPA’s understanding of the Lower River and inform EPA’s investigations moving forward. GE remains legally responsible for its PCBs in the Hudson River, including the lower portion of the river. EPA is continuing to evaluate whether others may also be responsible for PCBs, as well as other contamination in the Lower Hudson.

The new data will supplement information collected during EPA's investigation of the Lower Hudson River in the 1990s and GE’s periodic monitoring of Lower Hudson River fish and water since 2004. EPA has also been gathering additional information and data about the Lower River in coordination with New York State and other project stakeholders since 2019 to support these efforts.

Upper Hudson River Floodplain Investigation

As part of the Hudson River cleanup, the Upper Hudson River floodplain (low-lying shoreline area) is being evaluated for the presence of PCBs.
In October 2014, GE agreed to conduct a comprehensive study (Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study) of PCB contamination in the floodplain. Under the agreement GE is investigating the PCB contamination in a 43-mile stretch of the Hudson River floodplain from Bakers Falls in Hudson Falls, New York to Troy, New York. This study will include an evaluation of human and ecological risks and potential long-term clean up solutions. All work is being conducted under EPA oversight.

Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

The purpose of the RI/FS for the Upper Hudson River floodplain is to determine the nature and extent of PCB contamination in the floodplain, assess the risk that the contamination poses to human health and the environment, and evaluate potential cleanup alternatives. The RI/FS is being conducted in accordance with EPA’s guidance documents for conducting remedial investigations and feasibility studies under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund.
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Work Plan, Upper Hudson River Floodplain (November 2014) [PDF 1.8 MB, 231 pp]

Operations, Maintenance & Monitoring (OM&M)

Addendum to Surface Sediment Sampling Work Plan for 2016 (October 2017)
This Addendum to the 2016 Sediment Sampling Work Plan described the approach for conducting the first year of the surface sediment sampling inside dredge areas, which was performed in the fall of 2017. It also described certain additional sediment sampling in non-dredge areas completed in River Section 3 following a data sufficiency analysis conducted by EPA.
Sediment Sampling Work Plan Addendum [71 pp, 7.47 MB]

Surface Sediment Sampling Work Plan for 2016 (October 2016)
At EPA’s request, GE developed a work plan for conducting the first year of OM&M sediment sampling in non-dredge areas for 2016 based on the description of the scope of the program from the Phase 2 OM&M Scope. The primary purpose of this initial round of post-remediation sampling was to collect data to establish baseline post-dredging concentrations of PCBs for use as a point of comparison in later sediment sampling rounds to estimate the rate of sediment recovery. This sampling was performed in the fall of 2016.
Sediment Sampling Work Plan [103 pp, 5.05 MB]

Attachment E to Statement of Work: Operation, Maintenance, and Monitoring Scope for Phase 2 of the Remedial Action (December 2010)

The OM&M Scope describes the post-construction operation, maintenance, and monitoring program that EPA required GE to carry out under the Remedial Action Consent Decree. The OM&M Scope set forth the requirements that GE is required to meet in conducting post-construction monitoring and maintenance of the remedy. The OM&M Scope covers water column, fish, and sediment monitoring following the completion of all remedial activities to assess long-term recovery, activities to support evaluation of fish consumption advisories, monitoring and maintenance of sediment caps installed in particular dredge areas, and monitoring and adaptive management of habitat replacement/reconstruction measures.
SOW Attachment E, Operation, Maintenance & Monitoring Scope (December 2010) [35 pp, 159 KB]

Dredging Design & Implementation - Phase 2 Dredging & Design Documents

Project Design Documents

Phase 2 Final Design Reports
These reports include the final details and specifications for Phase 2 dredging. The reports include comprehensive descriptions of the processes and systems used both in the river and at the on-land sediment processing and dewatering facility.
2015 Supplemental Design Revisions (September 2015) [5.1 MB, 35 pp]
2014 Final Design Report (FDR) (June 2014) [3.3 MB, 80 pp]
2014 Reach 7 Final Design Report (FDR) (June 2014) [5.0 MB, 83 pp]
2013 Final Design Report (FDR) (April 2013) [7.2 MB, 103 pp]
2012 Final Design Report (FDR) (May 2012) [2.8 MB, 140 pp]
2011 Final Design Report (FDR) (April 2011) [2.3 MB, 163 pp]

Intermediate Design Report for Phase 2 Dredging (May 2008)
This report evaluates the existing technologies identified in the Phase 1 Preliminary Design Report for effective implementation of the Hudson River project. It addresses the requirements of EPA's Phase 1 Quality of Life and Engineering Performance Standards, and incorporates results of the pre-2008 sediment-sampling program and treatability studies. This report also specifies the following for Phase 2: dredging technology and equipment to be used; measures that will be used to control PCB resuspension; how water will be extracted from dredged material and treated at the on-land sediment processing and water treatment facility; and how sediments will be transported to final disposal locations.
Intermediate Design Report for Phase 2 Dredging (May 2008) [977 KB, 171 pp]

Phase 2 Dredge Area Delineation Report (December 2007)
In January 2008, EPA approved the Phase 2 Dredge Area Delineation report (Phase 2 DAD), prepared by General Electric Company which identified the areas that will be dredged during the second phase of the project. The Phase 2 DAD Report was used by GE to design Phase 2 of the dredging project.
Phase 2 Dredge Area Delineation Report (December 2007) [1.6 MB, 124 pp]

Work Plans

Remedial Action Work Plan for Phase 2 Dredging and Facility Operations
These work plans describe the steps in the design process, including the development of plans to remove sediments from the river bottom; process, dewater and treat dredged materials; transport and dispose of dewatered sediments; and replace habitat in dredged area.

2015 Remedial Action Work Plan (RAWP) for CU60 (June 2015) [3.4 MB, 47 pp]

Statement of Work for Remedial Action (December 2010)
Phase 2 Statement of Work (SOW) (December 2010) [291 KB, 45 pp]

Phase 2 Performance Standards

Performance Standards for Phase 2 (December 2010)
EPA issued performance standards for Phase 2 dredging based on the knowledge gained during Phase 1 and input from the Peer Review Panel.
Phase 2 Engineering Performance Standards (EPS) (December 2010) [824 KB, 124 pp]
Phase 2 Quality of Life Performance Standards (QoLPS) (December 2010) [35 KB, 6 pp]

Community Health and Safety Plans

Community Health and Safety Plan
These plans describe key health and safety personnel for Phase 2 and include detailed health and safety plans to protect surrounding communities while dredging work was underway, including emergency and public notification procedures and water supply protection.

Phase 2 Community Health and Safety Plan (CHASP) for 2015: Appendix F of the Remedial Action Work Plan is the Phase 2 CHASP for 2015 (April 2015) [4.3 MB, 130 pp]

Phase 2 Community Health and Safety Plan (CHASP) for 2014: Appendix F of the Remedial Action Work Plan is the Phase 2 CHASP for 2014 (April 2014) [13 MB, 150 pp]

Phase 2 Community Health and Safety Plan (CHASP) for 2013: Appendix F of the Remedial Action Work Plan is the Phase 2 CHASP for 2013 (April 2013) [9.6 MB, 131 pp]

Phase 2 Community Health and Safety Plan (CHASP) for 2012: Appendix F of the Remedial Action Work Plan is the Phase 2 CHASP for 2012 (April 2012) [4.1 MB, 120 pp]

Phase 2 Community Health and Safety Plan (CHASP) for 2011: Appendix F of the Remedial Action Work Plan is the Phase 2 CHASP for 2011 (April 2011) [2.8 MB, 119 pp]

Habitat Restoration

Habitat Assessment Report for Phase 2 Dredging (June 2009)
This report documents the existing range of habitat conditions in the river and along the shoreline in the areas targeted for dredging in Phase 2. The work supports the design of habitat replacement and reconstruction following dredging.
Habitat Assessment Report for Phase 2 Dredging (June 2009) [17 MB, 320 pp]
*Appendix 1 is the Habitat Assessment Report for Phase 1 Dredge Areas

Habitat Delineation Report (December 2008)
This report documents the existing range of habitat conditions in the river and along the shoreline in the areas targeted for dredging in Phase 2. The work will support the design of habitat replacement and reconstruction following dredging.
Habitat Delineation Report (December 2008) [30 MB, 141 pp]
Appendix C [263 MB, 105 pp]

Facility Demobilization

GE Phase 2 Sediment Processing Facility Demobilization and Restoration Plan (September 2015)
This document describes the plans for demobilization and restoration of the sediment processing facility used to support the dredging remedy in Fort Edward, New York. Demobilization and restoration of the sediment processing facility commenced in 2015 as dredging operations began to ramp down and were completed in December of 2016. Demobilization and restoration generally involved facility decontamination, post-decontamination sampling, removal, demobilization and off-site disposition of equipment, structures, and materials, post-decontamination environmental sampling, and property restoration.
Plan Text, Tables, Figures [PDF 5.9 MB, 88 pp]
Plan Appendices [PDF 5.8 MB, 589 pp]

Dredging Design & Implementation - Phase 1 Dredging & Design Documents

Dewatering Facility Siting

In order to implement the cleanup of PCB-contaminated sediment in the Upper Hudson, a processing facility was required to remove the water from the dredged sediment and to prepare the material for transport to approved disposal facilities. After evaluating a series of locations, with extensive public input, the Energy Park site in the Town of Fort Edward was selected. The main operations that occurred at the facility included: unloading of dredged sediment from barges to the facility; processing and dewatering of sediment; water treatment; and railcar loading for the transport of dredged sediment to permitted off-site disposal facilities.

Facility Siting Report (December 2004)
This report is an update to the Draft Facility Siting Report that was released for public review and comment in April 2004. The Facility Siting Report summarizes the facility siting process from the initial Concept Document to the identification of Suitable and Recommended sites. The report also describes how final candidate sites were evaluated and selected. The final report includes comments received during the public comment period on the Draft Facility Siting Report.
Facility Siting Report (December 2004)

Draft Facility Siting Report (April 2004)
This report summarizes the facility siting process from the initial Concept Document to the identification of Suitable and Recommended sites. The document describes how the final candidate sites were evaluated and selected. The report also presents conclusions about the feasibility of water-based facilities.
Draft Facility Siting Report (April 2004)

Sediment Processing/Transfer Facilities Technical Memorandum: Identification of Preliminary Sites (June 2003)
This report provides the results of the evaluations and screening used to identify the 24 preliminary candidate sites for the sediment dewatering facility.
Sediment Processing/Transfer Facilities Technical Memorandum: Identification of Preliminary Sites (June 2003) [16 MB, 108 pp]

Sediment Processing/Transfer Facilities Concept Document (December 2002)
This report identifies the criteria and process that were used to identify and select the site of the sediment dewatering facility.
Sediment Processing/Transfer Facilities Concept Document (December 2002) [1 MB, 34 pp]

Design Documents

The design reports for the Hudson River dredging project describe dredging processes, locations, and equipment.

Final Design Report (FDR) for Phase 1 Dredging (March 2006)
This report includes the final details and specifications for Phase 1 of the dredging project. It includes comprehensive descriptions of the processes and systems used both in the river and at the on-land sediment processing and dewatering facility.
Final Design Report for Phase 1 Dredging [1.2 MB, 103 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment A [1.5 MB, 174 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment B [3.9 MB, 105 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment C [266 KB, 15 pp] | C-A [6.8 MB, 4 pp] | C-B [934 KB, 95 pp] | C-C [11.8 MB, 253 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment D [298 KB, 18 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment E [373 KB, 30 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment F [9.9 MB, 106 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment G [70 KB, 13 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment H [4.25 MB, 68 pp] | Part 2 [14 MB, 163 pp]
Phase 1 FDR Attachment I [3.3 MB, 103 pp]

Phase 1 Intermediate Design Report (August 2005)
This report evaluates the existing technologies identified in the Preliminary Design Report for effective implementation of the Hudson River project. It addresses the requirements of EPA's Quality of Life and Engineering Performance Standards, and incorporates the results of the sediment-sampling program and the treatability studies. This report also specifies the following for Phase 1: dredging technology and equipment; any measures used to control PCB resuspension; the extraction of water from dredged material; the treatment of dredged material at the on-land sediment processing and water treatment facility; and the transport of sediments to final disposal locations.

Report (text, tables, figures)
Attachments

Phase 1 Intermediate Design Report Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site Treatability Studies Report (August 2005) [433 KB, 40 pp]

Dredge Area Delineation Report for Phase 1 Dredging (February 2005)
This report identifies areas where and to what depth dredging would occur within in the three locations for Phase 1 dredging: (1) the northern part of River Section 1; (2) near Griffin Island in River Section 1; and (3) near Northumberland in River Section 2.
Dredge Area Delineation Report Text, Tables and Appendices
Figures are available upon request by contacting epahrfo@outlook.com

Target Area Identification Report for Phase 1 Dredging/EPA's Selection of Phase 1 Dredge Areas (September 2004)
The report compares the general areas of the Upper Hudson River that were candidates for dredging in Phase 1, and identified the specific areas proposed by GE for inclusion in Phase 1. EPA used this document to identify areas to be dredged during Phase 1.
Target Area Identification Report [338 KB, 89 pages]
Report Figures (Fig. 1 - Fig 2.19) [8 MB, 25 pages]
Report Figures (Fig. 2.20 - Fig. 2.44) [6.2 MB 27 pages]
Report Appendices [370 KB, 19 pages]

Preliminary Design Report (April 2004)
The report conceptually describes Phase 1 and Phase 2 dredging processes, from removal of sediment to disposal. It evaluates the full spectrum of existing dredging technologies, including dredging equipment; resuspension control measures; material handling and processing; dewatering and water treatment processes; transport to disposal locations; composition of backfill and capping materials; and habitat replacement. The report also includes design criteria based on EPA's draft performance standards, and other EPA criteria identified in the ROD (e.g., no transport of processed sediment by truck; dredged material to be disposed outside the Hudson River Valley).
Preliminary Design Report [1.4 MB, 229 pages]
Appendices [5.7 MB, 81 pages]
Tables [1.8 MB, 21 pages]
Figures 1.1 - 3.13 [8.5 MB, 18 pages]
Figures 3.13 - 3.32 [9.8 MB, 20 pages]
Figures 3.33 - 3.51 [10.2 MB, 20 pages]
Figures 4.1 - 11.1 [8 MB, 20 pages]

Work Plans

The work plans prepared for Phase 1 of the Hudson River cleanup explain decision-making processes, steps involved in project design, and monitoring.

Remedial Action Work Plan (RAWP) for Phase 1 Dredging and Facility Operations (May 2009 revision)
This work plan describes the steps in the design process, including the development of plans to remove sediments from the river bottom; process, dewater and treat dredged materials; transport and dispose of dewatered sediments; and replace habitat in dredged areas.
Remedial Action Work Plan for Phase 1 Dredging and Facility Operations [2.3 MB, 75 pp]
Remedial Action Health and Safety Plan [1.88 MB, 205 pp]
Phase 1 RAWP for Phase 1 Dredging and Facility Operations Appendix A [1.4 MB, 113 pp]
Phase 1 RAWP for Phase 1 Dredging and Facility Operations Appendix B [1.4 MB, 86 pp]
Phase 1 RAWP for Phase 1 Dredging and Facility Operations Appendix C [1.8 MB, 50 pp]
Phase 1 RAWP for Phase 1 Dredging and Facility Operations Appendix D [561 KB, 125 pp]
Phase 1 RAWP for Phase 1 Dredging and Facility Operations Appendix E [1.25 MB, 22 pp]

Phase 1 Remedial Action Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Project Plan (February and May 2009)
This plan describes the methods used to monitor the Phase 1 dredging operations so that those operations could be compared to EPA’s performance standards.
Phase 1 Remedial Action Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Project Plan [1.2 MB, 344 pp]
Phase 1 RAM QAPP Tables and Figures [8.9 MB, 181 pp]
Phase 1 RAM QAPP Appendix 1 [30 MB, 2012 pp]

Treatability Studies Work Plan (February 2004)
This work plan describes the studies used to help select equipment for sediment dewatering and handling and treatment of water removed from the sediments. These studies also provide information used in refining procedures for loading and unloading barges; handling unprocessed sediment; and staging and loading dredged material and backfill.
Text and Tables [775 KB, 84 pp]
Figures [3.9 MB, 20 pp]
Appendices [13 MB, 321 pp]

Remedial Design Work Plan (August 2003)
This work plan describes the steps in the design process, including the development of plans to remove sediments from the river bottom; process, dewater, and treat dredged materials; transport and dispose of dewatered sediments; and replace habitat in dredged areas.
Remedial Design Work Plan [1.2 MB, 84 pp]

Engineering Performance Standards

Engineering performance standards are the technical requirements that were developed for the project to help ensure that the cleanup met the objectives for protecting people's health and the environment set forth in the 2002 ROD (Record of Decision) and did not cause adverse health or environmental impacts.

Engineering performance standards were developed for dredging-related resuspension (to limit downstream transport of PCB-contaminated dredging material); dredging residuals (to evaluate the concentration of PCBs remaining in residual material remaining in dredged areas); and dredging productivity (designed to keep the dredging work on schedule).

An extensive water quality monitoring program was developed and implemented to measure PCB concentrations at upstream, near-field, mid-field, and far-field locations. The performance standard for dredging sets a resuspension level of 500 parts per trillion (ppt) total PCBs – the EPA drinking water standard under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Phase 1 Engineering Performance Standards (April 2004)
This 2004 report describes the final Engineering Performance Standards. The draft Engineering Performance Standards were released for public review and comment in May of 2003 and for peer review and comment in October 2003. A report summarizing the findings of the peer review and EPA's responses is included with the Final Engineering Performance Standards.
In 2010, EPA revised the performance standards for the second phase of the project based on the knowledge gained during Phase 1 and input from the peer review panel.

Volume 1: The Standards
Volume 2: Resuspension
Volume 3: Residuals
Volume 4: Productivity
Volume 5: Case Studies

Quality of Life Performance Standards

The February 2002 Record of Decision required the development of performance standards that set specific goals and requirements for the project. The quality of life performance standards are intended to reduce the effects of dredging; sediment processing, transferring and dewatering; and support operations on the nearby community. EPA reviewed project design plans for consistency with the quality of life standards, and provided oversight of cleanup activities to ensure they are met. Standards have been developed for air quality, noise, lighting, odor, and navigation.

Quality of Life Performance Standards (May 2004)
This 2004 document describes the Final Quality of Life Performance Standards intended to reduce the effects of the dredging, sediment processing, transfer, and dewatering, and support operations on people, businesses, recreation, and community activities in the project area. Performance Standards were developed for air quality, noise, lighting, odor, and navigation. This document reflects comments received from the public and the design team.
In 2010, EPA revised the performance standards for the second phase of the project based on the knowledge gained during Phase 1 and input from the peer review panel.

Final Quality of Life Performance Standards (May 2004)

Draft Quality of Life Performance Standards (December 2003)

Sediment Sampling

Dredge areas were identified using the results of a multi-year sediment core-sampling program conducted by GE that began in 2002 and generated more than 50,000 sediment samples.

Supplemental Engineering Data Collection Work Plan (SEDC Work Plan) (February 2004)
The SEDC Work Plan describes the technical approach for collecting additional engineering data to assist in the design of the dredging project. The SEDC Work Plan is a framework for field activities conducted by General Electric Company during the Year 2 Supplemental Engineering Data Collection Program (Year 2 SEDC Program) to support the development of the project design, as described in the Remedial Design Work Plan.
Transmittal Letter [125 KB, 2 pp]
Text and Tables [928 KB, 84 pp]
Appendices A-C [2.9 MB, 128 pp]
Figures 1-6 [2.5 MB, 6 pp]
Figures 7-12 [3 MB, 6 pp]

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP): Design Support Sediment Sampling and Analysis Program (October 2002-Revision 4)
The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the sediment sampling program includes a detailed description of the data quality objectives – essentially, why the data are being collected, how they will be used, what they will be compared to, and how they will be interpreted - as well as provisions necessary to ensure that appropriate analytical techniques are selected. Also included in the QAPP are descriptions of sampling methods, analytical and testing methods, sampling locations and frequency of sampling.
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) For the Hudson River PCBs Site: Design Support Sediment Sampling and Analysis Program October 2002-Revision 4 [12 MB, 1385 pp]

Design Support Sediment Sampling and Analysis Program Field Sampling Plan for Year 1 (July 2002)
This report, which provided the data needed to design the remedy, describes the 2002 sediment-sampling program, the methods used for sediment characterization, data management and evaluation, and reports submitted to EPA.
Design Support Sediment Sampling and Analysis Program Field Sampling Plan for Year 1 (July 2002) [1.6 MB, 64 pp]

Community Health and Safety Plans

The Community Health and Safety Plans (CHASP) addressed potential health and safety issues for the public associated with the dredging project. The CHASP identified potential hazards to the community during work in-river, on-shore, and at the processing facility and the control of these potential hazards. Several planning meetings with residents and emergency responders were held to refine the plan. The CHASP was updated for each year of dredging (See Phase 1 and Phase 2 CHASPs).

Phase 1 Remedial Action Community Health and Safety Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2009)
This plan describes key health and safety personnel for Phase 1 and details health and safety plans to protect surrounding communities. It also describes how local emergency personnel and the community would be contacted if an emergency occurred. Additionally, this report discusses what measures would be implemented to ensure local residents, communities, and water supplies are protected. Revisions to the April 2007 document were issued in February and May 2009.
Phase 1 Remedial Action Community Health and Safety Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2009) [2.8 MB, 132 pp]

Revised Community Health and Safety Plan (June 2003)
This report was developed to ensure that the fieldwork associated with design activities was done in a manner that was safe for the public and the environment.
Revised Community Health and Safety Plan (June 2003) [2.2 MB, 30 pp]

Sediment Sampling Community Health and Safety Plan (September 2002)
This plan describes the key health and safety personnel for Sediment Sampling and includes detailed health and safety plans, including contingency plans, which were designed to protect surrounding communities. It also describes how local emergency personnel and the community would be contacted if an emergency occurred. Additionally, this report includes what measures would be implemented to ensure local residents, communities, and water supplies are protected.
Sediment Sampling Community Health and Safety Plan (September 2002) [826 KB, 28 pp]

Habitat Restoration

Some dredged or project-impacted areas were repopulated with aquatic plants in the growing season following the year in which the area was dredged/impacted. The habitat replacement program is designed to limit impacts on habitats from the dredging project and includes reconstruction, replacement, and/or stabilization of river bottom, submerged aquatic vegetation, wetlands, and shoreline areas. Prior to dredging, shoreline and in-river habitats were surveyed to identify the types of habitat that exist within and around the Upper Hudson River dredge areas, and planting plans were developed for wetland and submerged aquatic vegetation habitat. In both Phase 1 and Phase 2, as dredge areas were backfilled and/or capped, shoreline areas were stabilized and plants and seed mixes were installed in some areas. These areas are being surveyed and monitored to determine if reconstruction areas are developing as expected. After several years of monitoring, the habitats will be measured against various benchmarks and success criteria to verify that they met the habitat reconstruction objectives and that the habitat functions are assessed.

Habitat Assessment Report for Phase 1 Candidate Areas (November 2005)
The Habitat Assessment Report for Candidate Phase 1 Areas (Phase 1 Habitat Assessment Report) documents the habitat assessment results for candidate Phase 1 dredging areas that were assessed in 2003 and 2004. Habitat assessment information was used to develop the basis of design for habitat replacement and reconstruction in Phase 1 areas. The Phase 1 Habitat Assessment Report provides the foundation for implementing the habitat replacement and reconstruction program for the Phase 1 dredging areas. Habitat assessments followed the scope of work outlined in the Habitat Delineation and Assessment Work Plan.
Habitat Assessment Report for Candidate Phase 1 Areas (November 23, 2005) [696 KB, 75 pp]
Habitat Assessment Report Final Phase Appendices (November 23, 2005) [18.6 MB, 175 pp]

Supplemental Habitat Assessment Work Plan (September 2005)
The Supplemental Habitat Assessment Work Plan presents the approach and locations for collecting additional habitat assessment data to assist in the design of the dredging project.
Text of Report [244 KB, 26 pp]
Figures [15.8 MB, 20 pp]
Attachments [239 KB, 38 pp]

Habitat Delineation and Assessment Work Plan (August 2003)
This report develops a plan for determining the types and locations of aquatic and wildlife habitat.
Habitat Delineation and Assessment Work Plan (August 2003) [639 KB, 96 pp]

Phase 1 Evaluation & Peer Review

After completing the first phase of dredging PCB-contaminated sediment in the upper Hudson River, in March 2010, EPA and GE each released a detailed technical assessment of the work to a panel of independent scientific experts for their review. The EPA report detailed the effectiveness of the first phase of dredging, as well as the challenges encountered during the first dredging season. It also laid out the Agency's proposed modifications to the engineering performance standards for dredging resuspension, residuals, and productivity for the second phase of the project.

The panel was asked to consider certain questions relating to the engineering performance standards and the monitoring program for Phase 2 of the project. EPA’s report included the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s observations and recommendations as an appendix.

The peer review panel publicly discussed its views on the EPA and GE reports in early May 2010 and the members' individual views on the questions were compiled into a report. The Draft Hudson River Peer Review Report [1.4 MB, 100 pp] underwent factual review by EPA and GE and was provided to the public for informational purposes in mid-August 2010. EPA received the Final Hudson River Peer Review Report from the panel in September 2010.

During the independent peer review, EPA also sought public comments on the EPA and GE reports. EPA accepted public comment on the Phase 1 Evaluation Reports until April 26, 2010. In response to requests from the public, EPA provided additional time for the public to submit comments on the Addendum to EPA's report. Public comments on the Addendum were accepted until May 17, 2010. These comments were provided to the panel members for consideration during their evaluation.

In December 2010, EPA issued performance standards for Phase 2 dredging (see “Phase 2 Performance Standards”) based on the knowledge gained during Phase 1 and input from the peer review panel. The second phase of dredging began on June 6, 2011.

EPA Phase 1 Evaluation Report (March 2010)
Report Text [1.1 MB, 293 pp]
Executive Summary [89 KB, 20 pp]
Entire Report, Including Tables and Figures [17.5 MB, 716 pp]
Report Appendices* [31.4 MB, 931 pp]
*Please see subsections below for Appendix II-D & E.
Appendix II-D CU-01 through CU-06 [43.7 MB, 680 pp]
Appendix II-D CU-07 through CU-18 [53.1 MB, 444 pp]
Appendix II-E CU-01 through CU-02 [49.5 MB, 44 pp]
Appendix II-E CU-03 through CU-06 [57.5 MB, 62 pp]
Appendix II-E CU-07 through CU-18 [58.1 MB, 63 pp]
Addendum to the Phase 1 Evaluation Report [7.4 MB, 211 pp]

Phase 1 Peer Review Documents (2010)
Peer Review of Phase 1 Dredging Final Report (September 2010) [888 KB, 102 pp]
Changes Made in Final Hudson River Phase 1 Dredging Peer Review Report Matrix [8.9 KB, 2 pp]
Draft Hudson River Peer Review Report [1.4 MB, 100 pp]
EPA Response to Draft Hudson River EPS Peer Review Report [7.6 MB, 17 pp]

Baseline Monitoring

Baseline monitoring was used to document river conditions before dredging began and provided the data needed to support development of dredging and post-dredging monitoring programs.
Baseline monitoring was conducted throughout 2010, between the end of Phase 1 and the start of Phase 2.

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Hudson River PCBs Site Baseline Monitoring Program (May 2004)
Text of Report [3.7 MB, 162 pp]
Figures [4.8 MB, 15 pp]
Tables [1 MB, 52 pp]
Appendices [10 MB, 899 pp]

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Hudson River PCBs Site Baseline Monitoring Program (May 2004)
The river conditions of primary interest for Baseline Monitoring include PCB concentrations in the river water, PCB mass load from the Upper Hudson River to the Lower Hudson River, and PCB concentrations in fish. This Quality Assurance Project Plan is consistent with the approved Baseline Monitoring Program Scoping Document, August 2003, which defines the goals and details of the Baseline Monitoring Program.

Baseline Monitoring Program Scoping Document (August 2003)
This report describes pre-dredging or “baseline” fish and water quality monitoring that would be used to evaluate whether dredging activities are achieving EPA's engineering performance standards and to track long-term recovery trends.
Baseline Monitoring Program Scoping Document (August 2003) [215 KB, 17 pp]

Record of Decision and Responsiveness Summary

The EPA’s 2002 Record of Decision selected dredging to address PCB-contaminated sediment in the Upper Hudson River, as well as monitored natural attenuation (MNA) of PCB contamination that remains in the river after dredging.

Record of Decision & Responsiveness Summary

Master comments are organized according to topical areas in Book 1 of the Responsiveness Summary and are assigned a three- or six-digit identification number to identify the master comment, the associated response, and any companion tables and figures throughout the Responsiveness Summary.

Methodologies used and results obtained from additional technical analyses are presented as “white papers” in Book 2 [1.2 MB, 395 pp] of the Responsiveness Summary. White papers cover a variety of topical areas, providing more in-depth analysis and supporting detail concerning topics addressed in various comments

Record of Decision & Responsiveness Summary (2002)
Proposed Plan (2000)

Site Reassessment and Feasibility Study

Site Reassessment
In December 1989, EPA announced its decision to initiate a detailed Reassessment Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (Reassessment RI/FS) of EPA’s 1984 interim No Action decision for the Upper Hudson River sediments. This was prompted by the five-year review required by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), technical advances in sediment dredging and treatment/destruction technologies, as well as a request by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) for a re-examination of the 1984 decision. The Reassessment RI/FS was divided into three phases:

  • Phase 1, consisting primarily of a review of existing data, was completed in August 1991.
  • Phase 2, which included the collection and analysis of new data as well as modeling studies and human health and ecological risk assessments and peer reviews, began in December 1991 and concluded in November 2000.
  • Phase 3, also known as the Feasibility Study (FS), began in September 1998.

Feasibility Study and Reassessment Reports

Reassessment RI/FS Phase 3 Report: Feasibility Study (December 2000)
Book 1 of 6
Book 2 of 6
Book 3 of 6
Book 4 of 6
Book 5 of 6
Book 6 of 6

Database Report

Data Evaluation and Interpretation Report (February 1997)
Book 1 of 3 (Text)
Book 2 of 3 (Tables Figures Plates)
Book 3 of 3 (Appendices)

Low Resolution Sediment Coring Report (July 1998)
Book 1 of 2 (Text)
Book 2 of 2 (Tables Figures Plates)

Revised Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment (November 2000)
Book 1 of 2 (Text)
Book 2 of 2 (Tables Figures Plates)

Revised Human Health Risk Assessment (November 2000)

Revised Baseline Modeling Report (January 2000)
Book 1 of 4 (Fate and Transport Models Text)
Book 2 of 4 (Fate and Transport Models Tables and Figures)
Book 3 of 4 (Bioaccumulation Models Text)
Book 4 of 4 (Bioaccumulation Models Tables and Figures)

The Feasibility Study was released concurrently with the Proposed Plan for the Hudson River PCBs site in December 2000.

Legal Agreements & Certifications

Floodplain

Floodplain Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) for Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (September 2014)
The Agreement, embodied in an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), provides for a comprehensive study of the contamination in the floodplain of the upper Hudson River. This will include a human health and ecological risk-based assessment of PCB contamination of over 40 miles of floodplain encompassing more than 3,000 properties extending from Hudson Falls to Troy, New York. The agreement includes additional sampling needed to better understand the distribution of PCBs in the floodplain and will require the development of a Feasibility Study (FS) to evaluate remedial cleanup options for the protection of human health and the environment. GE will pay for costs incurred by EPA in overseeing the work performed.
Floodplain Agreement [2.3 MB, 38 pp]
RI/FS Work Plan [1.8 MB, 231 pp]

Floodplain Sampling Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) (September 2008)
The agreement, embodied in an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), provided for soil sampling at approximately 350 properties within the Upper Hudson River floodplain. The agreement also required GE to map human use and ecological use areas in those floodplain areas to identify areas where removal of contaminated soils may be needed. GE will pay for costs incurred by EPA in overseeing the work performed under this agreement.
Floodplain Agreement [1.6 MB, 30 pp]
Letter August 4, 2008 [167 KB, 1 pg]

Floodplain Administrative Order on Consent for Removal Action (July 2007)
The agreement, embodied in an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), requires GE to reduce exposure to PCBs in four general areas along the Upper Hudson River where elevated levels of PCBs in floodplain soil could potentially present an unacceptable risk to public health and the environment. The settlement agreement requires GE to install warning signs, cover soils to prevent exposure to PCBs, and periodically monitor and maintain the areas. These measures are temporary pending completion of comprehensive studies of floodplain areas and selection of the final floodplain remedy.
Press Release [22 KB, 1 pp]
Floodplain Administrative Order on Consent for Removal Action [525 KB, 36 pp]

In-River Sediment

Certification of Completion of Remedial Action (April 2019)
In late 2005, GE entered into a legally binding agreement with EPA to carry out the work called for in the 2002 ROD. This lengthy, detailed agreement, called a judicial Consent Decree, was finalized by a federal judge in 2006. The Consent Decree provides, among other things, that once GE has performed the dredging and associated construction work that it was required to do under that agreement (which included dredging, capping, habitat restoration, and deconstruction/decontamination of the sediment processing facility), the company is entitled to request and receive from EPA a certification that it properly completed these activities. This is called the “Certification of Completion of the Remedial Action,” and it is one of three such certifications provided for in the Consent Decree. The others are the “Certification of Completion of Phase 1 Field Activities,” which was provided to GE in 2012; and the “Certification of Completion of the Work,” which is the final certification confirming that all work required under the Consent Decree has been completed. This latter certification is not expected to be available to GE for more than five decades.
EPA Letter to GE (04/11/19) Re: Certification of Completion of Remedial Action
GE Report (March 2019): Remedial Action Completion (text, tables, & figures)
EPA Letter to GE (12/26/18) Re: Comments on GE’s December 2016 Remedial Action Completion Report
NYSDEC letter to EPA (04/05/19): Re: Certification of Completion
EPA letter to NYSDEC (04/11/19): Re: Certification of Completion

Consent Decree Modification No. 2 (August 2011)
On August 15, 2011, the U.S. Department of Justice filed in United States District Court a second modification to the Consent Decree between the United States and General Electric Company (GE) regarding the cleanup of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from the Hudson River. Consent Decree Modification No. 2 revises certain provisions of the Consent Decree to address EPA’s December 17, 2010 decision on changes to the project for Phase 2 and makes adjustments to administrative requirements of the Consent Decree.
Consent Decree Modification (CD Mod) No. 2 [481 KB, 11 pp]
CD Mod Cover Letter [189 KB, 3 pp]
Appendix Documents:
EPA's 12/17/10 letter to GE regarding Phase 2 Standards [1.2 MB, 3 pp]
Phase 2 Engineering Performance Standards [844 KB, 124 pp]
Quality of Life Performance Standards [66 KB, 6 pp]
December 2010 Statement of Work (SOW) [1.3 MB, 251 pp]

Consent Decree Modification No. 1 (March 2009)
The United States filed the first modification, Consent Decree Modification No. 1, with the Court on March 23, 2009. The modification of the 2006 consent decree required GE to pay a portion of the costs of protecting the Waterford, Halfmoon, and Stillwater, New York water supplies during dredging, and to improve its program for monitoring water quality and further protect the Waterford and Halfmoon water supplies.
Attachment to Consent Decree Modification No. 1 [196 KB, 37 pp]
Consent Decree Modification No.1 [5.02 MB, 12 pp]
Consent Decree Fact Sheet [81 KB, 2 pp]

Access Order for Waterline Construction (September 2008)
To ensure that contingencies were in place to protect drinking water supplies prior to the start of Phase 1 dredging, EPA issued orders to the town of Halfmoon, New York and the Water Commissioners of the town of Waterford, New York to gain access needed to construct a water line to carry drinking water from the City of Troy, NY to Halfmoon and Waterford. The new water line provides the towns with an alternate water source.
Order Issued to The Town of Halfmoon [474 KB, 11 pp]
Order Issued to The Water Commissioners of the Town of Waterford [586 KB, 13 pp]

Consent Decree (October 2005)
The October 2005 agreement with GE includes provisions that cover Phase 1 dredging, the construction of the sediment transfer/processing facility, the independent peer review of Phase 1, and the remaining dredging work.
Consent Decree [372 KB, 83 pp]
Appendix A Record of Decision
Appendix B Statement of Work [2.95 MB, 271 pp]
Appendix C Environmental Protection Easement and Declaration of Restrictive Convenants [90 KB, 9 pp]
Appendix D Description of Sediment Processing/Transfer Facility Properties [606 KB, 4 pp]
Fact Sheet (October 2005) [77 KB, 2 pp]
Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree [138 KB, 1 pp]

Design Administrative Order on Consent (August 2003)
In 2003, EPA signed an agreement with General Electric Company (GE) to perform the project design work for the cleanup of PCB-contaminated sediment in the Hudson River. Under the agreement, embodied in an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), GE developed detailed approaches for removing sediment from the river bottom, transporting and disposing of the material, and replacing the habitat in dredged areas. The company also agreed to pay up to $28 million in partial reimbursement of EPA’s past and future costs associated with the dredging project.

The AOC covers the detailed design of the dredging project, but does not cover the performance of the actual dredging work itself. The AOC includes work plans for the design of the dredging work, baseline monitoring, cultural and archeological resources assessment, and habitat delineation and assessment.
Design Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) August 2003 [390 KB, 52 pp]

Sampling Administrative Order on Consent (July 2002)
General Electric Company (GE), the potentially responsible party at the Hudson River PCBs Superfund site, signed an AOC with EPA in July 2002 (referred to as the Sampling AOC) to fund and perform sediment sampling as the initial step in the design of the site cleanup (dredging project).
Sampling Administrative Order on Consent (July 2002) [73 KB, 37 pp]

Community Involvement Plans

The Community Involvement Plan (CIP) is the foundation for EPA’s Superfund Community Involvement Program for the Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site. The CIP specifies the outreach activities used by EPA to address community concerns and expectations. It also serves to help the Community Involvement Coordinator, who serves as the liaison between community members and Hudson River site team members and other agency officials, to advise them on effective and appropriate ways to inform and engage the public. The CIP is a public document, readily available to the community, which community members can use to make sure that EPA is responsive to their needs and concerns.

EPA has established the following goals for the overall community involvement program.

  • Provide the public with accurate, timely, and understandable information and/or access to the information needed to understand the project as it moves forward,
  • Provide the public with the opportunity to give informed and meaningful input,
  • Ensure adequate time and opportunity to provide input and for that input to be considered before final decisions on major issues are made,
  • Respect and give full consideration to community input, and
  • Assist the public in understanding the project decision-making process during project design and cleanup and the community’s role in that process

EPA's Community Involvement Plan (CIP) for the Hudson River PCBs Superfund site identifies tools and activities that will be used to address community concerns. Together they serve as a toolkit for EPA’s public participation program at the site and provide the public with myriad opportunities for involvement in the project. The CIP provides detailed descriptions of these tools and identifies how they will be used to address community concerns and promote public involvement in the project. The CIP also contains a glossary, and a series of appendices designed to serve as resources for both EPA and the community.

Community Involvement Plan – In-River Sediment
A draft version of the Community Involvement Plan (CIP) [3.2 MB, 151 pp] for the Hudson River PCBs Superfund site was released to the public for review and comment on April 24, 2003. It proposed that a Community Advisory Group, or CAG, be formed to create a forum through which members of community and stakeholder groups along the entire site could discuss their viewpoints as design and cleanup work progresses. In response to public comments, EPA modified the proposed CIP in a number of areas, foremost among them being the increasing of membership of the Community Advisory Group (CAG) from 17 to 25. The first meeting of the Hudson River CAG occurred on January 6, 2004. The membership of the CAG has varied over time and fluctuates based on project status and progress, as well as stakeholder availability, focus or interest. The CIP was updated in 2009 in anticipation of the start of dredging.
2009 Hudson River PCBs Site Community Involvement Plan [6.3 MB, 180 pp]

Hudson River Community Advisory Group (CAG) webpage: www.hudsoncag.wspis.com

Five-Year Reviews

The purpose of a five-year review is to determine if a Superfund cleanup remedy is working as intended and is protective of human health and the environment. Two five-year reviews have been conducted to date for the Remnant Deposits and the in-river sediments of the Upper Hudson River. The reviews were conducted pursuant to Section 121(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 (CERCLA) and 40 CFR 300.430(f)(4)(ii) and undertaken in accordance with the Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance, OSWER Directive 9355.7-03B-P (June 2001). The first five-year review was completed in June 2012. The Proposed Second Five-Year Review report was provided to the public in June 2017 and included a public comment period. The final version of the report was released in April 2019.

First Five-Year Review:
First Five-Year Review Report for Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site [1 MB, 82 pp]
Written Correspondence Received on the First Five-Year Review [3.44 MB, 74 pp]

Second Five-Year Review:
Final Second Five-Year Review Report for the Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site (04/11/19)
Technical Memorandum Evaluation of 2016 EPA/GE and 2017 NYSDEC Surface Sediment Data (04/11/19)
Public Comments Received on Proposed Second Five-Year Review Report (2017)

Third Five-Year Review:

Draft Third Five-Year Review Report for the Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site (07/10/24)

White Papers

EPA White Paper “Responses to NOAA Manuscript Entitled 'Re-Visiting Projections of PCBs in Lower Hudson River Fish Using Model Emulation'”

On March 25, 2016, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) published a technical report, “Re-Visiting Projections of PCBs in Lower Hudson River Fish Using Model Emulation,” which focuses on the long-term recovery rate of fish in the Lower Hudson River. The EPA prepared a scientific “white paper” which presents detailed responses to NOAA’s analysis.
EPA White Paper “Responses to NOAA Manuscript Entitled 'Re-Visiting Projections of PCBs in Lower Hudson River Fish Using Model Emulation'” (March 2016) [PDF 5.5 MB, 101 pp]
Fact Sheet Summary [PDF 1.3 MB, 4 pp]

Administrative Record, Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site (OU1 & OU2)

The administrative record includes the body of documents that forms the basis for the selection of a particular response at a site. For example, the administrative record for remedy selection includes all documents that were considered or relied upon to select the cleanup remedy through the Record of Decision.

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.
Last updated on July 10, 2024