Jump to main content or area navigation.

Contact Us

Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site

May 2004 Final Quality of Life Performance Standards Hudson River PCBs Site Summary of Changes to the December 2003 Draft Quality of Life Performance Standards – Public Review Copy

Draft Quality of Life Performance Standards (December 2003) | Final Quality of Life Performance Standards (May 2004)


  • Added several check marks (as suggested by commentors) on Table 4-1 to indicate additional quality of life considerations for major project activities.

  • In Table 5-1 clarified that the complaint management program will be included in the Remedial Action Community Health and Safety Plan (RA CHASP).

  • Clarified that the complaint resolution procedure presented in Figure 6-4 applies to each of the standards.

  • Updated Section 7 – Review/Finalizing of the Standards – to reflect the current status of the standards and clarified that if during design EPA determines that adjustments to the Quality of Life Performance Standards are warranted, EPA may adjust the standards. EPA will involve the public before finalizing any new changes to the standards.

  • Clarified that the Quality of Life Performance Standards will not supersede federal and state regulations such as Federal Railroad Administration Exit EPA disclaimer and Surface Transportation Board Exit EPA disclaimer regulations that apply to project operations.

  • Clarified that EPA will consult with appropriate federal and state agencies in determining whether any especially sensitive or unique habitats exist in the Upper Hudson River that may warrant special consideration as the remedy is designed.

  • Clarified that impacts to water quality are being addressed by other standards (such as the engineering performance standard for resuspension) and regulatory requirements.

  • Clarified that the RD Team will evaluate potential impacts of facility-related traffic and complete the design to minimize the potential for community traffic impacts (e.g, ensure that facility entrances can adequately handle anticipated traffic).

  • Clarify that EPA is continuing to work with appropriate federal and state agencies in the design-review process.

Air Quality Standard

  • Explicitly stated that where commercial and residential areas are mixed, the residential standard for PCBs will apply. The residential standard will also apply to commercial or industrial locations where children may be present for extended periods of time (e.g., schools, day care facilities).

  • Reduced the turnaround time for analysis of PCB concentrations in air during start up of operations or changes in operations from 72 hours to 24 hours. Additionally, EPA will require shorter turnaround time in situations where data is within the concern or exceedance level.

  • Revised Table 6-2 to include a 24-hour turnaround time for PCB analysis under concern and exceedance levels.

  • Provided additional examples of mitigation to include minimizing staging time and covering exposed sediment on barges and trucks. ¦ Added low and ultra-low sulfur fuel as examples of alternative fuels that could be used to reduce emissions from project equipment and operations.

Odor Standard

  • Revised Figure 6-4 so that it is no longer specific to the odor standard. The revised Figure 6-4 illustrates the general complaint procedure and applies to each of the Quality of Life Standards.

Noise Standard

  • Clarified that the required monitoring frequency for noise is a minimum of once every 4 hours. Increased monitoring will be required if the control level (established for daytime) is exceeded. In addition, more frequent monitoring (i.e., hourly monitoring) shall be conducted as needed to evaluate changes in operations (e.g., changes in the type of dredging and/or processing equipment used) or complaints.

  • Acknowledged that the Remedial Action Team may need to measure background levels if noise levels approach the standard or to distinguish between project-related and non-project-related noise.

Lighting Standard

  • Removed reference to the type of lighting equipment to be used on the project. Specifics of the lighting design will be developed during the remedial design.

Navigation Standard

  • Added receipt of complaint as a navigation condition triggering the concern level. Revised Table 6-13 accordingly.

Jump to main content.