PCBs -- TIMES UNION EDITORIAL FROM APRIL 2002

"GE's new image"

( Albany) - General Electric's announcement Tuesday that it is prepared to do its part in dredging the Hudson of PCBs was both welcome and not totally unexpected. The company's decision came on the last day of the government's timetable for a response. Failure to meet that deadline would have exposed GE to court action by the Environmental Protection Agency, and likely financial penalties on top of a cleanup project that most experts estimate will cost $500 million.

Even so, GE could have complicated matters further by refusing to respond and taking its chances in the courts. That, in turn, would have left the EPA searching for ways to pay for the cleanup with Superfund money that is rapidly being depleted. While the government eventually would be able to recoup that money by billing GE for the cleanup expenses, such a process would take years and likely further delay the goal of removing tons of PCBs from the riverbed, where they can be ingested by fish and work their way into the food chain.

It still remains for the EPA to decide if GE's offer is in good faith. If the answer is no, more litigation will ensue. But the company's offer, at first glance, appears acceptable. It will either perform or pay for cleanup operations required by EPA. But it will not attempt to set performance standards, leaving that duty to the government, along with other sensitive issues such as designating a site to deposit contaminated sludge or constructing the plant that will be needed to separate water from it.

Some perspective is in order. Under its former chairman, Jack Welch, GE opposed dredging as a matter of stubborn policy. The last attempt to resist was an advertising campaign, by some estimates costing $50 million, designed to persuade both the government and upstate residents that dredging was unnecessary and potentially harmful to the Hudson. Before that, GE funded numerous scientific studies designed to bolster its contention that the river was healing itself, and that dredging PCBs from the riverbed would redistribute them into the water and create a greater environmental risk than leaving them undisturbed.

Under its new chairman, Jeffrey Immelt, GE might have continued such resistance. It's to his credit that the company has decided to take a more constructive approach by assuming an active role in the PCB cleanup. But there is more that needs to be done. While moving toward an agreement on dredging, GE is still in court challenging the federal Superfund law. If the company should win, the Hudson dredging project could be stopped in its tracks.

There's no question that GE, like any other company, has a right to challenge laws when it believes that it has been denied its right to due process. But the Superfund law was passed in 1980, and challenging it at this late date gives the appearance of one last desperate attempt to derail the Hudson cleanup. How much better if GE were to drop that lawsuit now. By doing so, the company would gain a reputation for environmental stewardship as well as cutting edge innovation and scientific research. Next to $500 million, that reputation would be priceless.

First published on April 11, 2002.