A00803-612183.pdf

Massachusetts Department Of Transportation Highway Division Proposal No.612183-134691

A00803 - 1

DOCUMENT A00803

HAZMAT REVIEW MEMO

Massachusetts Department Of Transportation Highway Division Proposal No.612183-134691

A00803 - 2

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Technical Memorandum 400 Unicorn Park Drive Woburn, MA 01801 781.721.4000

To: Mr. Michael A. Cruz, P.E., Vice President-Structural, Green International Affiliates, Inc.

From: Ileen S. Gladstone, P.E., LSP AP and Chris Ragnelli, GEI Consultants, Inc.

Date: April 11, 2024, Revised September 4, 2025 Re: Summary of PCB Research, Sediment Sampling and Estimated Material Management Costs

Division Street Bridge (G-11-002) over the Housatonic River Great Barrington, Massachusetts MassDOT Project No. 612183

This letter provides a summary of GEI’s review of available information from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) related to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) impacts to the Housatonic River from the General Electric (GE)-Pittsfield Housatonic River Superfund Site, near the Division Street Bridge in Great Barrington, Massachusetts (Fig. 1). This includes a summary of GE’s legal responsibilities to manage PCB impacted soil and/or sediment, and a cost estimate to manage excess soil and/or sediment for the replacement bridge.

Approximately 1,500 cubic yards (approximately 2,600 tons) of excess soil and/or sediment may require excavation and disposal, as estimated by others. In December 2024, GEI performed an in-situ sampling program at the Division Street Bridge for PCB and lead analysis to evaluate the entity responsible for cost of PCB disposal (MassDOT, GE, or both) and the approximate costs. Based on the sampling results of PCBs less than 1 part per million (ppm), MassDOT is responsible for the disposal costs. The estimated cost for the sediment and/or soil disposal is approximately $170,650 based on the MassDOT Weighted Bid Prices for District 1 for the period of September 2024 to September 2025.

1. Background

1.1. Project Area and Description

Green International Affiliates, Inc. has been contracted by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) to design a replacement bridge carrying Division Street over the Housatonic River in Great Barrington, Massachusetts (the Project, Fig. 1). The proposed bridge alternative (Alternative A) uses the existing abutments and replaces the existing temporary truss superstructure with built-up plate girders. The reuse of the existing abutments poses a scour concern and requires installation of rip rap countermeasures in the channel. Approximately 1,500 cubic yards (cy) of soil and/or sediment will be disturbed to install the countermeasures.

Since the early 1900s, GE operated a large-scale industrial facility along the Housatonic River in Pittsfield, Massachusetts that manufactured and serviced power transformers, defense, and aerospace (ordinance), and plastics. From approximately 1932 through 1977, GE manufactured and serviced electrical transformers containing PCBs. Years of improper disposal of PCB and industrial chemical use led to extensive contamination around Pittsfield, as well as the Housatonic River.

Proposal No. 612183-134691

A00803 - 3

Cleanup of PCBs and other hazardous substances in Pittsfield and the Housatonic River has proceeded under an October 2000 Consent Decree (CD) between EPA, Massachusetts, Connecticut, the City of Pittsfield, the GE Company, and the Pittsfield Economic Development Authority. Cleanup was required for 20 contaminated areas outside the river, five groundwater management areas, and three River segments—the Upper ½-Mile Reach, the 1.5 Mile Reach, and Rest of River (ROR). The ROR covers nearly 125 miles from the confluence of the East and West Branches of the Housatonic River in Pittsfield to the end of Reach 16 just before Long Island Sound in Connecticut.

The Project is located within “Reach 9” of the ROR. Reach 9 flows downstream of Rising Pond Dam of the Rising Paper Company in Great Barrington to the Connecticut border in Sheffield.

1.2. PCB Data in Reach 9

According to a 2003 report prepared by Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Inc. (BBL) titled “Housatonic River – Rest of River RCRA Facility Investigation Report, a total of 63 sediment samples were collected in Reach 9 between 1997 and 2003 and analyzed for total PCBs.

• The average concentration of PCBs from 60 samples collected from surface sediment (within the top 0.5 feet) was 0.27 mg/kg, with a maximum concentration of 1.2 mg/kg.

• The concentration of PCBs from three samples collected from subsurface sediment (greater than

0.5 feet) were below the method detection limits (MDLs).

Additional data was available in a report prepared by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Public Health Assessment for GE Site – Housatonic River (August 2008). According to this report, 310 samples were collected from sediment and soil in Reach 9 between 1978 and 2002.

• The average concentration of PCBs from 88 samples collected from surface sediment (within the top 0.5 feet) was 0.50 mg/kg, with a maximum concentration of 2.8 mg/kg. There were detections of PCBs above the MDL in 53 samples.

• The maximum concentration of PCBs in 41 samples collected from subsurface sediment (from

0.5 to 1 foot) was 1.7 mg/kg. There were detections of PCBs in 34 samples above the MDL.

• The maximum concentration of PCBs in 26 samples collected from subsurface soil (from 0.5 to 1 foot) was 6.32 mg/kg. There were detections of PCBs in 16 samples above the MDL.

The ATSDR Report included a figure of “Total PCB Results, Reach 7, 8, 9, Tile 6/10” (Fig. 2), that showed 10 samples collected from sediment within 200 feet of the Division Street Bridge.

Eight samples were collected from surface sediment with an average PCB concentration of

5.8 mg/kg and a maximum PCB concentration of 18 mg/kg. These results were not consistent with the summary of PCB results in sediment provided in the ATSDR report and discussed above.

According to correspondence with the EPA, an uncontrolled release in 1993 likely due to an upstream dam failure may have caused a flux of PCBs within a portion of the river near the bridge. It is unknown why this data was not discussed in the ATSDR report.

Two samples were collected from subsurface sediment with an average PCB concentration of

0.565 mg/kg and a maximum PCB concentration of 0.91 mg/kg.

A00803 - 4

2. Regulatory Context

2.1. Consent Decree

The 2000 CD provided performance standards and other requirements relating to the cleanup of GE’s facility in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, the portion of the Housatonic River between GE’s facility and the confluence of the East and West Branches of the Housatonic River (the Confluence) in Pittsfield, and other adjacent and nearby areas. It also addressed the ROR and established a process for the investigation and evaluation of that area and, ultimately, for the EPA to select a Remedial Action as a modification to a pre-existing Corrective Action Permit under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA issued a permit modification on October 20, 2016, setting forth a selected Remedial Action for the ROR. On December 16, 2020, with respect to the ROR, the EPA signed a Revised Final Permit Modification to the 2016 Reissued RCRA Permit (Revised Final Permit). The Revised Final Permit details the required cleanup measures to be followed by GE to remediate contamination caused by PCBs.

According to the Revised Final Permit, performance standards and corrective measures apply to the Project, as discussed in Section 2.1.

2.2. Future Projects or Work

Section II.B.2.k of the Revised Final Permit sets forth Performance Standards and Corrective Measures for other (i.e., non-dam-related) additional response actions for sediments, riverbanks, backwaters, and impoundments in Reaches 5 through 9. Specifically, it requires that, if a third party conducts a Legally Permissible Future Project or Work in such an area, GE must conduct PCB-related response actions necessary to allow the project or work to be conducted in a manner that maintains the applicable Performance Standards and/or the effectiveness of the ROR Remedial Action. Details of GE’s Plan for Implementing Future Projects or work in the ROR is provided in the report titled “Revised Plan for Implementing Future Projects or Work for the Housatonic River – Rest of River” revised on August 8, 2023, and attached as Appendix A. According to the revised report, the following steps are required to trigger GE’s obligations for response actions:

1. The project proponent needs to demonstrate that the work meets the conditions of a “Legally Permissible Future Project or Work” as defined by the CD. To do this, MassDOT must:

• Show that it has submitted plans to the appropriate governmental authorities to authorize the work (if such plans are necessary) and that the plan has been approved; or if no plan is required, show that the work is otherwise legal.

• Provide sampling data to EPA and GE (either directly or through EPA) to document that the sediments and/or soils in the affected area contain total PCBs at concentrations greater than 1 mg/kg (GE is not required to perform this sampling).

• Provide to EPA and GE (either directly or through EPA) other documented evidence of a commitment to the project, such as evidence of financing or other financial assurances, other relevant plans (like architectural plans), or an affidavit that shows intent to move forward with the project.

A00803 - 5

After EPA receives this documentation and determines that the required conditions of a Legally Permissible Future Project or Work have been met and that response actions are necessary, EPA will notify GE. GE has 30 days to evaluate whether it is obligated to conduct response actions, and either explain to EPA why it is not obligated or provide a work plan that will outline how GE will conduct the necessary response actions. The response actions proposed will be limited to those that are in accordance with and pursuant to the CD that governs the site, and consistent with the scope of the response actions selected in the Revised Permit. Such additional response actions include, as necessary, sampling and analysis, engineering controls during the project or work, and, if the project or work will involve the removal, handling, and/or excavation of sediments or soils, actions to ensure the proper excavation, management, and disposition of such sediments or soils (including off-site disposal if required) and the protection of workers and other individuals during such activities. GE’s responsibility of the costs of such response actions will be limited to those

2.3. Other Considerations

The industry standard was for all steel structures in the United States to be painted with lead-based paint. Although lead-based paint was suspended in the United States for residential use in 1978, it was allowed for commercial and industrial use until 1992.

The original bridge was constructed in 1950 and included a 138-foot-long single-span steel truss structure that carried Division Street over the Housatonic River. The bridge was closed to vehicular traffic in 2019 due to deficiencies. The existing bridge superstructure was demolished, and a temporary bridge was installed and opened on November 1, 2022. No site-specific information related to the abatement of hazardous materials, including lead, was available from the MassDOT.

Based on the original bridge construction date, lead-based paint was likely used. Over time, and due to years of winter weather, delamination may have caused some paint to flake off and fall onto surface sediments of the Housatonic River. The presence of lead-based paint in sediments will likely increase disposal costs. Additionally, if the concentration of lead in the sediment or soil is greater than 100 mg/kg then the sample must be tested by the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for lead (per 310 CMR 30.155). When TCLP results for lead are greater than 5 mg/L, “fails TCLP,” the material requires management as a D008 TC characteristic hazardous waste.

3. Sediment Sampling – December 2024

3.1. Field Program

On December 19, 2024, GEI observed TG&B Marine Services (TG&B) of Monument Beach, Massachusetts advance six sediment cores (SED-1 through SED-6; Fig. 3) within the Housatonic River channel. Sediment cores were advanced by TG&B using vibracore/direct-push methods with the rig staged on a 12-foot catamaran-style platform equipped with a sampling winch and A-frame. TG&B used a 2 5/8-inch inner diameter core barrel with plastic liners to retain the sediment samples. Sediment cores ranged in depth from approximately 2 to 10 feet. During subsurface investigations, GEI logged the lithology and physical observations of environmental impacts (i.e., visual/olfactory evidence of contamination, if any). We did not observe any visual or olfactory evidence of contamination in the sediment samples. Copies of boring logs are in Appendix B.

A00803 - 6

3.2. Sediment Analysis

GEI collected 14 sediment samples from the six sediment cores (Fig. 3):

• At four locations (SED-1 through SED-4), sediment cores were advanced to approximately 2 feet.

Samples were collected from approximately 0 to 0.5 feet, and 0.5 to1.5 feet. Samples were submitted to ESS Laboratory of Cranston, Rhode Island (ESS) for laboratory analysis of PCBs and lead.

• At two locations (SED-5 and SED-6), sediment cores were advanced to approximately 10-feet.

Samples were collected from approximately 0 to 1.5 feet, 2 to 6 feet, and a 6 to 8 feet. Samples were submitted to ESS for laboratory analysis of PCBs and total lead.

3.3. Sediment Sampling Results

Fourteen samples were submitted to ESS for analysis of PCBs and lead. The concentration of PCBs was compared to the GE Response Action Level (1 ppm). The concentration of lead was compared to the trigger for conducting toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) analysis (100 ppm). Concentrations of PCBs and lead were detected above laboratory reporting limits in some samples, but they were below the GE Response Action Level and the TCLP trigger, respectively. The analytical results are summarized in Table 1. The associated laboratory data report is in Appendix C. Total PCBs were detected in only one sample (SED-4-0.5-1.5ft) collected from 0.5 to 1.5 feet at a concentration of 0.2 mg/kg.

Total lead was detected above the laboratory reporting limit in 11 of the 14 samples, ranging from 6.85 to 26.6 mg/kg. Because total lead concentrations were reported less than 20 times the TCLP regulatory limit for leachable lead (100 mg/kg), TCLP-lead analysis was not conducted.

3.4. Sediment Sampling Conclusions

Based on chemical testing results for PCB analysis, it is GEI’s opinion that sediment at the Division Street Bridge has not been significantly impacted by the GE-Pittsfield Housatonic River Superfund Site. Only one of the 14 samples collected from the six sediment core locations had detections of PCBs above laboratory detection limits. This sample (SED-4) was located directly adjacent to the eastern downstream abutment and was collected from 0.5 to 1.5 feet. The total PCB concentration of 0.2 mg/kg in sediment is less than 1 mg/kg, which is the concentration GE is legally responsible to conduct response actions for.

Additionally, based on chemical testing results for lead analysis, sediment has not been significantly impacted by the likely presence of lead-based paint used on the former 1950 steel truss bridge. Although lead was detected in 11 of the 14 samples collected from all six sediment core locations, the concentrations are below background levels in natural soil documented by MassDEP. Lead concentrations were also less than 20 times the TCLP regulatory limit for leachable lead; therefore, it is unlikely that sediment would be characterized as a hazardous waste (D008).

4. Estimated Disposal Costs

Our April 2024 cost estimate included four potential disposal scenarios (scenario A through scenario D) that are contingent upon results of chemical testing for PCBs and lead. Each scenario identified the entity responsible (MassDOT, GE, or both) and the approximate costs as follows:

A00803 - 7

• Scenario A: All soil and/or sediment have PCB concentrations less than 1 mg/kg and otherwise meets Unregulated Soil acceptance criteria.

• Scenario B: All soil and/or sediment have PCB concentrations less than 1 mg/kg but fails TCLP for lead and requires on-site treatment prior to transportation and disposal to declassify the soil as a D008 TC characteristic hazardous waste.

• Scenario C: All soil and/or sediment have PCB concentrations greater than 1 mg/kg but less than 50 mg/kg and does not fail TCLP for lead.

• Scenario D: All soil and/or sediment have PCB concentrations greater than 1 mg/kg but less than 50 mg/kg and fails TCLP for lead.

Based on results of sediment sampling, it is GEI’s opinion that Scenarios B through D are unlikely to apply to this project. Therefore, all sediment has been assigned as Scenario A, which is MassDOT’s sole responsibility. The estimated soil disposal cost is approximately $170,650. as shown in Table 1 below.

Also, per MassDOT’s recommendations we have added contingency quantities for Items 181.12 through 181.14.

Table 1: Estimated Disposal Costs

Item No. Description Units Estimated Quantity

Unit Price Total Costs Responsibility

Scenario A: PCBs < 1 mg/kg and meets Unregulated Soil criteria.

181.11 Disposal of Unregulated Soil Ton 2,6001 $622 $161,200 MassDOT

Contingency Items

181.12 Disposal of Regulated Soil –

In-State Facility Ton 10 $1052 $1,050 MassDOT

181.13 Disposal of Regulated Soil –

Out-of-State Facility Ton 10 $1802 $1,800 MassDOT

181.14 Disposal of Hazardous Waste Ton 10 $6602 $6,600 MassDOT

Notes:

1. Based on quantities provided by Green for 1,500 cy of disturbed soil/sediment using a multiplier of 1.7 tons/cy.

2. Pricing from MassDOT Weighted Bid Prices, 9/2024-9/2025, Median Bid Price, District 1 only

3. Special Provision number assigned, as no standard item exists.

Appendices Table Figures Appendix A Revised Plan for Implementing Future Projects or Work Appendix B Boring Logs Appendix C Laboratory Report

BCJ/CMR;jma B:\Working\GREEN INTERNATIONAL AFFILIATES\2400718 Division St over Housatonic River\01_ADMIN\Env Memo Addendum\Division St over Housatonic River (G-11-002) Environmental Letter Addendum.docx

A00803 - 8

Table

A00803 - 9

Table 1. C hem ical Testing R esults - Sedim ent Soil C haracterization R eport

D ivision Street B ridge G reat B arrington, M assachusetts

SED

-1-0-0.5ft

SED

-1-0.5-1.5ft

SED

-2-0-0.5ft

SED

-2-0.5-1.5ft

SED

-3-0-0.5ft

SED

-3-0.5-1.5ft

SED

-4-0-0.5ft

SED

-4-0.5-1.5ft

SED

-5-0-1.5ft

SED

-5-2-6ft

SED

-5-6-8ft

SED

-6-0-1.5ft

SED

-6-2-6ft

SED

-6-6-7.8ft

Sam ple D epth (ft):

0-0.5

0.5-1.5 0-0.5

0.5-1.5 0-0.5

0.5-1.5 0-0.5

0.5-1.5 0-1.5

2-6 6-8

0-1.5 2-6

6-7.8 12/19/24

12/19/24 12/19/24

12/19/24 12/19/24

12/19/24 12/19/24

12/19/24 12/19/24

12/19/24 12/19/24

12/19/24 12/19/24

12/19/24 24L0776-05

24L0776-06 24L0776-01

24L0776-02 24L0776-07

24L0776-08 24L0776-03

24L0776-04 24L0776-12

24L0776-13 24L0776-14

24L0776-09 24L0776-10

24L0776-11

Analyte M ethod

G E

R esponse Level

U nits

Polychlorinated B iphenyls (PC

B s)

8082A m g/kg Aroclor 1254

N S

<0.06 <0.06

<0.06 <0.06

<0.06 <0.06

<0.07 0.1

<0.06 <0.06

<0.06 <0.07

<0.06 <0.06

Aroclor 1260 N

S <0.06

<0.06 <0.06

<0.06 <0.06

<0.06 <0.07

0.1 <0.06

<0.06 <0.06

<0.07 <0.06

<0.06

PC

Bs, Total

N D

N D

N D

N D

N D

N D

N D

0.2 N

D N

D N

D N

D N

D N

D 6010D m g/kg

Lead

<5.91 6.85

10.7 <5.64

14.7 <5.58

10.5 9.11

8.88 7.64

7.76 26.6

8.24 12.0

G eneral N otes:

1.2.

"<" = The analyte w as not detected at a concentration above the specified laboratory reporting lim it.

3.

G E R esponse Level, as defined in Section II.B.2.k of the R evised Final Perm it 4.

R eportable C oncentrations (e.g., R C

S-1), w here identified, are cited from the M C

P.

5.

m g/kg = m illigram s per kilogram

6.

Values in bold exceed G E R esponse Levels (1 ppm or 1 m g/kg).

In general, only analytes detected in at least one sam ple are reported here. For a com plete list of analytes see the laboratory data sheets.

Sam ple ID

Sam ple D ate:

Lab ID

M etals

G

EI C

onsultants, Inc.

Project 2202652 Septem ber 2025 B:\W orking\G R

EEN

IN

TER

N

ATIO

N

AL AFFILIATES\2400718 D

ivision St over H ousatonic R iver\01_AD

M

IN

\Env M em o Addendum \Tables\Table 1

A00803 - 10

Figures

A00803 - 11

SCALE, FEET

10000 2000 4000 6000

Fig. 1September 2025

SITE LOCATION MAP

Division Street Bridge Over the Housatonic River

Great Barrington, Massachusetts

Green International Affiliates, Inc.

Tewksbury, Massachusetts Project 2400718

MASSACHUSETTS

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

B:\Working\GREEN INTERNATIONAL AFFILIATES\2400718 Division St over Housatonic River\00_CAD\Figures\Gt\2400718-01

This Image is from U.S.G.S. Topographic 7.5 Minute Series Great Barrington, MA Quadrangle, 2024.

Datum is North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88).

Contour Interval is 10 Feet.

SITE

A00803 - 12

PROJECT LOCATION

CLINGEN, PAUL B:\Working\GREEN INTERNATIONAL AFFILIATES\2400718 Division St over Housatonic River\00_CAD\Figures\Gt\2400718-02.dwg - 4/11/2024

Fig. 2

Division Street Bridge over the Housatonic River Great Barrington, Massachusetts

Green International Affiliates, Inc.

Tewksbury, Massachusetts

HISTORICAL PCB DATA

September 2025Project 2400718 Consultants

SOURCE:

1. AGENCY FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND

DISEASE REGISTRY (ATSDR) PUBLIC

HEALTH ASSESSMENT FOR GE SITE -

HOUSATONIC RIVER (AUGUST 2008).

SCALE, FEET

0 400 800

A00803 - 13

D

IVISIO

N

HOUSATONIC STR

EET

RIVER

SED

-2

SED

-1

SED

-3

SED

-4

SED

-6

SED

-5

C

LIN

G

EN

, PAU

L B:\W orking\G R

EEN

IN

TER

N

ATIO

N

AL AFFILIATES\2400718 D

ivision St over H ousatonic R iver\00_C

AD

\Figures\G t\2400718-03.dw g - 1/9/2025

Fig. 3

D ivision Street Bridge O ver H ousatonic R iver G reat Barrington, M assachusetts

G reen International Affiliates, Inc.

Tew ksbury, M assachusetts

SAM

PLIN

G

LO

C

ATIO

N

PLAN

Project 2400718 Septem ber 2025 Consultants

LEG

EN

D

:SED

IM

EN

T C O

R E

N O

TES:

1.

BASE PLAN

FR

O

M "G

R E

A T B

A R

R

IN

G

TO

N D

IV

IS

IO

N

S

TR

E E

T O V

E R

H O

U S

A

TO

N

IC

R

IV

E R

, A

LTE

R N

A

TIV

E A

- LIM

IT O

F D

IS

TU

R

B A

N C

E

," PAG

E N

o. 9.11.1 PR

EPAR

ED

BY

G

R

EEN

IN

TER

N

ATIO

N

AL AFFILIATES, IN

C

. AN

D D

ATED

SEPTEM

BER

2023.

SC

ALE, FEET

SED

M

IC

R

O

SO

FT BIN

G

IM

AG

E 2023.

A00803 - 14

Appendix A Revised Plan for Implementing Future Projects or Work

A00803 - 15 f

Kevin Mooney Senior Project Manager Global Operations - Environment, Health & Safety

General Electric Company 1 Plastics Ave.

Pittsfield, MA 01201

T (413) 553-6610 kevin.mooney@ge.com

Via Electronic Mail

August 8, 2023

Mr. Alexander Carli-Dorsey Office of Site Remediation and Restoration U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I 5 Post Office Square - Suite 100 Boston, MA 02109-3912

Re: GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site Rest of River (GECD850) Revised Plan for Implementing Future Projects or Work

Dear Mr. Carli-Dorsey:

In accordance with discussions between GE and EPA, enclosed for EPA’s review and approval is a revised version of GE’s Plan for Implementing Future Projects or Work in the Rest of River area.

Please let me know if you have any questions about this revised Plan.

Very truly yours, Kevin G. Mooney Senior Project Manager – Environmental Remediation

Enclosure

Cc: (via electronic mail) Dean Tagliaferro, EPA Anni Lauglin, EPA Tim Conway, EPA John Kilborn, EPA Richard Fisher, EPA Joshua Fontaine, EPA Christopher Smith, EPA Christopher Ferry, ASRC Federal Thomas Czelusniak, HDR Inc.

Scott Campbell, Taconic Ridge Environmental Izabella Zapisek, Taconic Ridge Environmental

*675580* SEMS Doc ID 675580

A00803 - 16

Michael Gorski, MassDEP John Ziegler, MassDEP Ben Guidi, MassDEP Michelle Craddock, MassDEP Jeffrey Mickelson, MassDEP Mark Tisa, MassDFW Jonathan Regosin, MassDFW Betsy Harper, MA AG Traci Iott, CT DEEP Susan Peterson, CT DEEP Graham Stevens, CT DEEP Carol Papp, CT DEEP Lori DiBella, CT AG Molly Sperduto, USFWS Mark Barash, US DOI Ken Finkelstein, NOAA James McGrath, City of Pittsfield Andrew Cambi, City of Pittsfield Michael Coakley, PEDA Melissa Provencher, BRPC Christopher Ketchen, Town of Lenox Town Administrator, Lee Town Manager, Great Barrington Town Administrator, Stockbridge Town Administrator, Sheffield Jim Wilusz, Tri Town Health Dept.

Andrew Silfer, GE Andrew Thomas, GE Matthew Calacone, GE James Bieke, Sidley Austin David Knutsen, Arcadis Public Information Repository at David M. Hunt Library in Falls Village, CT GE Internal Repository

A00803 - 17

Plan for Implementing Future Projects or Work

Housatonic River – Rest of River

General Electric Company

Revised August 8, 2023

A00803 - 18

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1. Introduction

2. Plan Relating to Future Projects or Work in the Housatonic River

2.1 Projects or Work Relating to Dams and Impoundments in Massachusetts

2.1.1 Applicable Requirements

2.1.2 Implementation Plan

2.2 Other River-Related Projects or Work in Massachusetts

2.2.1 Applicable Requirements

2.2.2 Implementation Plan

2.3 River-Related Projects or Work in Connecticut Portion of Rest of River

2.3.1 Applicable Requirements

2.3.2 Implementation Plan

3. Plan Relating to Future Projects or Work in the Housatonic River Floodplain

3.1 Projects or Work in Floodplain Exposure Areas in Reaches 5-8

3.1.1 Applicable Requirements

3.1.2 Implementation Plan

3.2 Projects or Work in Other Floodplain Areas in Reaches 5-16

3.2.1 Applicable Requirements

2.3.3 Implementation Plan

4. Schedule

Table 1: Ownership of Non-GE-Owned Dams in Rest of River

Attachments

A. Figures 1 and 2 of Revised Permit

A00803 - 19

B. Table 1 of Revised Permit

C. Figures 3 and 4 of Revised Permit

A00803 - 20

1. Introduction

On December 16, 2020, pursuant to the 2000 Consent Decree (CD) for the GE-Pittsfield/ Housatonic River Site, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued to the General Electric Company (GE) a final revised modification of GE’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Permit (Revised Permit) for the Housatonic Rest of River (RoR). The RoR is defined as that portion of the Housatonic River and its backwaters and floodplain (excluding Actual/Potential Lawns as defined in the CD) located downstream of the confluence of the East and West Branches of the Housatonic River (the Confluence). The Revised Final Permit set forth a Remedial Action selected by EPA to address polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the RoR.

The Revised Permit required GE to develop and submit a Statement of Work (SOW) specifying the deliverables and activities that GE will conduct to design and implement the RoR Remedial Action. In accordance with that requirement, after receipt of EPA’s comments on an earlier version, GE submitted a Final Revised RoR SOW on September 14, 2021, and EPA approved it on September 16, 2021.

Several provisions of the Revised Permit impose requirements on GE relating to Legally Permissible Future Projects or Work. That term is defined in full in the Revised Permit (Paragraph 19 of Definitions) as follows:

“‘Legally Permissible Future Project or Work’ shall mean when the property owner, the owner’s successors and assigns, or any other party with an interest in the property such as a lessee or easement holder: (1) has submitted a plan to the appropriate governmental authority(ies) to authorize any project or work (if such plan or authorization is necessary) and such plan (if required) has been approved by the governmental authority(ies), or, provides documentation that a proposed project or work is legal without additional government approvals (for example, authorized by an easement or existing permit) and (2) provides to EPA and to [GE] (directly or through EPA) other documented evidence of a commitment to such project or work (for example, such evidence may include evidence of financing or other financial assurance for the project or work, other plans for implementing the project or work (such as architectural plans, contracts for performance of the project or work, or other similar plans), or an affidavit that the owner intends to go forward with the project or work or if the necessary response actions are taken). Legally Permissible Future Projects or Work includes, but is not limited to, construction and repair of structures; utility work; flood management activities; road and infrastructure projects; dam removal, maintenance, repair, upgrades, and enhancement activities; and activities such as the installation of canoe/boat launches and docks.”

The specific provisions of the Revised Permit relating to Legally Permissible Future Projects or Work consist of the following:

A00803 - 21

• Sections II.B.2.j.(1)(c) (page 38) and (2)(e) (page 41), governing such projects or work relating to non-GE-owned dams and impoundments in Massachusetts (Reaches 5 through 9);1

• Sections II.B.2.k (page 41), governing such projects or work involving the river sediments, riverbanks, backwaters, and impoundments in the Massachusetts portion of the RoR;

• Section II.B.2.l (page 43), governing such projects or work involving the dams, impoundments, river sediments, riverbanks, and backwaters in the Connecticut portion of the RoR;

• Sections II.B.7.b.(1)(a) (page 59) and (2)(b) and (c) (pages 61 and 65), governing such projects or work in the floodplain Exposure Areas (EAs) (as defined in the Revised Permit) (including vernal pools within such EAs) in Massachusetts;2 and

• Section II.B.7.c (page 66), governing such projects or work in other floodplain areas in Massachusetts and Connecticut.

These provisions were also described in Sections 2.2.10 through 2.2.12 and Section 2.6 of the Final Revised RoR SOW.

These provisions are already in effect under the Revised Permit. However, in accordance with Section II.H.20 of the Revised Permit and Section 4.5.1 of the Final Revised RoR SOW, this document presents GE’s plan for implementing the requirements of these provisions going forward.

The RoR reaches and subreaches subject to the Rest of River Remedial Action are as follows (from upstream to downstream), as shown on Figures 1 and 2 of the Revised Permit (attached hereto as Attachment A):

• Reach 5, from the Confluence downstream to Woods Pond (the first significant impoundment), further divided into the following subreaches:

1 These provisions are separate from the provisions in Section II.B.2.j of the Revised Permit requiring GE to prepare and implement plans to ensure the inspection, monitoring, and maintenance of the dams in the Massachusetts portion of the RoR and to conduct response actions in the event of a catastrophic failure or material breach of any of these dams. Those requirements are (or, for one dam, will be) addressed in separate monitoring and maintenance plans relating to these dams.

2 The provisions addressed in this Plan consist primarily of those that relate to the performance of future projects or work in the floodplain EAs. The provisions of Section II.B.7.b relating to the obtaining of Grants of Environmental Restrictions (EREs) or Notice EREs on properties within the floodplain EAs were addressed in GE’s final separate Plan for Obtaining Environmental Restrictions and Easements and Inspecting Subject Properties (ERE Plan), submitted on December 14, 2018 and approved by EPA on December 20, 2018. The provisions relating to implementation of a Conditional Solution to address post- remediation changes in use at floodplain properties without an ERE are summarized in this Plan, but will be addressed in detail, after the remedial actions in the subject area have been completed, in the Interim and Final Remedial Action Completion Reports covering the subject areas.

A00803 - 22

‒ Reach 5A (Confluence to the Pittsfield Wastewater Treatment Plant)

‒ Reach 5B (Pittsfield Wastewater Treatment Plant to Roaring Brook)

‒ Reach 5C (Roaring Brook to the start of Woods Pond)

Reach 5 also contains several backwater areas adjacent to the Housatonic River, particularly in the more downstream portion of the reach.

• Reach 6, Woods Pond

• Reach 7, Woods Pond Dam to Rising Pond (the next significant impoundment), further divided into the following subreaches:

‒ Reach 7A (Woods Pond Dam to the Columbia Mill Dam Impoundment)

‒ Reach 7B (Columbia Mill Dam Impoundment)

‒ Reach 7C (Former Eagle Mill Dam Impoundment)

‒ Reach 7D (Former Eagle Mill Dam to the Willow Mill Dam Impoundment)

‒ Reach 7E (Willow Mill Dam Impoundment)

‒ Reach 7F (Willow Mill Dam to the Glendale Dam Impoundment)

‒ Reach 7G (Glendale Dam Impoundment)

‒ Reach 7H (Glendale Dam to Rising Pond)

• Reach 8, Rising Pond

• Reach 9, Rising Pond Dam to the Massachusetts/Connecticut border

• Reach 10, Massachusetts/Connecticut border to Falls Village Dam

• Reach 11, Falls Village Dam to Cornwall Bridge

• Reach 12, Cornwall Bridge to Bulls Bridge Dam

• Reach 13, Bulls Bridge Dam to Bleachery Dam

• Reach 14, Bleachery Dam to Shepaug Dam (Lake Lillinonah)

• Reach 15, Shepaug Dam to Stevenson Dam (Lake Zoar)

• Reach 16, Stevenson Dam to Lake Housatonic Dam (Lake Housatonic)

A00803 - 23

2. Plan Relating to Future Projects or Work in the Housatonic River (Non-Floodplain Portions)

This section describes GE’s plan for implementing the provisions of the Revised Permit relating to future projects or work in the river, on the riverbanks, or in the backwaters or impoundments of the RoR. Future projects or work related to floodplains are discussed in Section 3.

2.1 Projects or Work Relating to Non-GE-Owned Dams and Associated Impoundments in Massachusetts

2.1.1 Applicable Requirements

Sections II.B.2.j.(1)(c) (page 38) and (2)(e) (page 41) of the Revised Permit address response actions relating to the non-GE-owned dams and associated impoundments in the RoR in Massachusetts. Those dams are the Columbia Mill, Willow Mill, and Glendale Dams.3 (They would also include the Woods Pond Dam and/or the Rising Pond Dam if GE transfers either of those dams to a third party.) These provisions require GE to conduct response actions “to be protective” of any Legally Permissible Future Project or Work4 relating to such dams or impoundments, including dam removal (other than the required dam removals in Reaches 7B and 7C and regardless of whether the project or work occurs before or after the remedial actions required by the Revised Permit in Reaches 6 through 8). They provide more specifically that GE shall conduct such response actions (including materials handling and off-site disposal and engineering controls) to allow such Legally Permissible Future Project or Work to be conducted in a manner that maintains the Performance Standards and/or maintains the effectiveness of the RoR Remedial Action. Section II.B.2.j.(2)(e) of the Revised Permit provides further that GE may seek EPA approval for another party to implement some or all of these obligations. It also specifies that any response actions conducted under these sections will be in accordance with and pursuant to the CD5 and consistent with the scope of response actions selected in the Revised Permit, and that GE’s responsibility for the costs of such response actions “will be

3 As noted above, the requirements of Section II.B.2.j of the Revised Permit relating to the inspection, monitoring, and maintenance of these dams and to the performance of response actions in the event of a catastrophic failure or material breach of any of these dams are not addressed in this Plan, but are (or, for the Glendale Dam, will be) addressed in separate plans submitted to EPA relating to those dams.

4 The Revised Permit requires in numerous provisions that GE conduct response actions “to be protective” of a Legally Permissible Project or Work. For purposes of this Plan, the quoted phrase means that GE is to conduct response actions to ensure that the project or work is conducted in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment (as defined by applicable EPA guidance and regulations, including, without limitation, the factors cited in 40 C.F.R. § 300.430(e)(2)(i)(A)(1) and (2), as amended) and/or in a manner that maintains the Performance Standards in the Revised Permit and/or the effectiveness of the RoR Remedial Action.

5 In particular, Paragraph 39.a of the CD provides that any modifications to the RoR SOW must be consistent with the scope of the response actions for which the modification is required and must not modify the applicable Performance Standards

A00803 - 24 limited to those costs solely related to the presence of PCBs.”

In addition, Section II.B.2.j.(2)(d) (page 40) requires that: (i) GE determine every five years whether there has been a change in ownership of each non-GE-owned dam on the RoR in Massachusetts; and (ii) whenever there is change in ownership, as well as following implementation of response actions behind such a dam, and at five-year intervals after any such events, GE must provide notice to the dam owner (and, for the initial notice, to the holders of any easements) containing the following:

• GE’s commitment to implement the requirements of Section II.B.2.j.(1)(c) regarding the performance of response actions for any Legally Permissible Future Project or Work and Section II.B.2.j.(1)(b) regarding performance of response actions after a catastrophic failure and/or a material breach of the dam;

• An identification of contact persons for GE, EPA, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP), and the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT DEEP).

• A request that the dam owner notify the relevant GE and agency contact persons prior to conducting work at the dam; and

• A description of the PCB contamination behind the dam.

Copies of such notices must be sent to EPA, MassDEP, CT DEEP, and other applicable regulatory agencies, such as the Massachusetts Office of Dam Safety or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), whichever is the applicable dam regulatory authority.

2.1.2 Implementation Plan

To implement the above provisions, GE will conduct the following activities:

a. GE’s obligation to conduct response actions under these sections will be triggered if the owner of a non-GE-owned dam in Massachusetts or the associated impoundment or other party with an interest in such dam or impoundment plans to undertake a project or work at such a dam or the associated impoundment, including dam removal (apart from the removal of the Columbia Mill Dam and the former Eagle Mill Dam, which GE is already required to conduct under the Revised Permit), and such party meets the conditions for a Legally Permissible Future Project or Work. As provided in the Revised Permit’s definition quoted in Section 1, those conditions are that the project proponent must:

(i) Show that it has submitted a plan to the appropriate governmental authority(ies) to authorize the project or work (if such plan or authorization is necessary) and that such plan (if required) has been approved by the governmental authority(ies), or if no such approval is required, that the project or work is otherwise legal; and

A00803 - 25

(ii) Provide to EPA and GE (directly or through EPA) other documented evidence of a commitment to such project or work, such as evidence of financing or other financial assurance for the project or work, other plans for implementing the project or work (e.g., architectural plans, contracts for performance of the project or work, or other similar plans), or an affidavit that the owner intends to go forward with the project or work if the necessary response actions are taken.

b. If the dam owner or other party with an interest in the dam provides this required documentation and EPA determines that it has satisfied the required conditions specified above and that response actions are necessary for the project or work to be conducted in a protective manner and/or to maintain the Performance Standards for the RoR Remedial Action under the Revised Permit and/or the effectiveness of the RoR Remedial Action, EPA will so notify GE.

c. Upon receiving such a notice, GE will evaluate whether it is obligated to implement response actions in connection with the project or work under the applicable provisions of the Revised Permit.6 If GE determines that it is not obligated to conduct response actions, GE will, within 30 days of receiving the notice from EPA, advise EPA of the reasons for that conclusion.7 If GE agrees that it is obligated to conduct response actions, GE will, within 30 days of receiving notice from EPA (or such other time as is approved by EPA), submit a work plan to EPA to conduct the necessary response actions to address PCBs (beyond those specified in the Revised Permit) that will allow the project or work to be conducted in a manner that is protective and/or maintains the Performance Standards for the RoR Remedial Action under the Revised Permit (including those pertaining to the subject dam and impoundment) and/or the effectiveness of the RoR Remedial Action. Such additional response actions include, as necessary, sampling and analysis, engineering controls during the project or work, and, if the project or work will involve the removal, handling, and/or excavation of sediments or soils, actions to ensure the proper excavation, management, and disposition of such sediments or soils (including off-site disposal if required) and the protection of workers and other individuals during such activities. Such response actions will be limited to those that are in accordance with and pursuant to the CD and are consistent with the scope of the response actions selected and specified in the Revised Permit. GE’s responsibility for the costs of such

6 In this case and in other portions this Plan stating that GE will evaluate whether it is obligated to implement response actions under the applicable provisions of the Revised Permit, that evaluation will include an assessment of whether the Revised Permit conditions for a Legally Permissible Project or Work have been met and whether response actions: (i) are necessary for the project or work to be conducted in a manner that will be protective of human health and the environment (as described in footnote 4) and/or to maintain the Performance Standards and/or the effectiveness of the RoR Remedial Action; (ii) are in accordance with and pursuant to the CD, including, but not limited to, Paragraph 39.a of the CD; and (iii) are consistent with the scope of the response actions already selected in the Revised Permit and whether the costs of such further response actions will be limited to those costs solely related to the presence of PCBs.

7 This determination (and other provisions of this Plan describing GE’s determination that it is not obligated to conduct response actions) will be subject to the CD, including, without limitation, the CD provisions on EPA disapproval, EPA enforcement of the CD, and dispute resolution.

A00803 - 26 response actions will be limited to those costs solely related to the presence of PCBs. The work plan will also include a schedule for performing the pertinent response actions.

d. Upon EPA’s approval of the work plan and schedule, GE will implement the response actions described in that work plan in accordance with EPA’s approval and with any modifications directed by EPA that are consistent with the limitations specified in the Revised Permit and stated in the prior paragraph, on the approved schedule.

e. As an alternative, in whole or in part, to conducting such additional response actions, GE may request EPA approval for the dam owner or other party performing the project or work to implement some or all of the required additional response actions. Any such request will identify the party proposed to conduct the response actions, describe the qualifications of such party, provide a description of the response actions to be conducted by that party, and include a proposed schedule. If EPA so approves, that party will conduct the additional response actions approved by EPA on the approved schedule. EPA may condition its approval on GE’s agreement (i) to perform oversight of such party to ensure that the project or work is conducted according to this Plan, and/or (ii) to provide to EPA a completion report documenting the actions taken, including, but not limited to, the following as applicable and as available to GE: the scope and timeline of the project, a summary of any sampling and analysis, engineering controls used, and actions taken to ensure the proper excavation, management, and disposition of any removed or disturbed sediments or soils (including off-site disposal if conducted).

f. Every five years, beginning five years after EPA’s approval of this Plan, GE will determine whether there has been a change in ownership of each non-GE-owned dam on the RoR in Massachusetts.8 Within 30 days after (i) GE has determined or has received information that there has been a change in ownership of such a dam, or (ii) GE has completed the remedial action required by the Revised Permit in the impoundment behind such dam, or (iii) GE has completed any other response action in that impoundment, as well as every five years after any of the foregoing events, GE will provide notice to the dam owner (and, for the initial notice, to the holders of any easements) of GE’s commitment to implement the requirements described in the preceding subsections.9 That notice will also include an identification of contact persons for GE, EPA, MassDEP, CT DEEP, and the Massachusetts Office of Dam Safety or FERC (whichever is the applicable dam regulatory authority); a request that the dam owner notify the contact persons at EPA and MassDEP prior to conducting work at the dam;

and a description of the PCB contamination behind the dam, based on the most up-to-date data, including the presence of an engineered cap if applicable. Copies of that notice will be

8 The current owners of these dams are listed in Table 1 (attached), 9 That notice will also include GE’s commitment to take response actions in the event of a catastrophic failure or material breach of the dam, as specified in the Revised Permit and GE’s plans relating to the non- GE-owned dams in Massachusetts.

A00803 - 27 sent to EPA, MassDEP, CT DEEP, and other applicable regulatory agencies, such as the MA Office of Dam Safety or FERC (as applicable).

2.2 Other River-Related Projects or Work in Massachusetts Portion of Rest of River

2.2.1 Applicable Requirements

Sections II.B.2.k.(1) and (2) of the Revised Permit (pages 41 and 42) require GE to conduct response actions to be protective of any Legally Permissible Future Project or Work affecting the river sediments, riverbanks, backwaters, or impoundments in the Massachusetts portion of the RoR (i.e., Reaches 5 through 9) other than the above-discussed projects or work involving non- GE-owned dams and associated impoundments. Those provisions provide more specifically that GE shall conduct such response actions to allow such Legally Permissible Future Project or Work to be conducted in a manner that maintains the Performance Standards and/or the effectiveness of the RoR Remedial Action, and that those response actions may include materials handling and off-site disposal, engineering controls, and repair of any aspect of the RoR Remedial Action that was disturbed by the project or work.

Revised Permit Section II.B.2.(k)(2)(a) establishes further specific requirements pertaining to GE’s obligations to conduct such response actions, and it also provides that GE may seek EPA approval for another party to implement some or all of these obligations. Like the dam-related provisions discussed above, Revised Permit Section II.B.2.k.(2)(a) provides further that any response actions conducted under these sections will be in accordance with and pursuant to the CD and consistent with the scope of the response actions selected in the Revised Permit, and that GE’s responsibility for the costs of such response actions will be limited to those costs solely related to the presence of PCBs. Finally, Revised Permit Section II.B.2.k.(2)(b) requires GE to provide certain annual notifications to the Conservation Commissions and Departments of Public Works (DPWs) for the municipalities along the RoR in Massachusetts and to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) regarding applications for Legally Permissible Future Projects or Work in the RoR in Massachusetts.

2.2.2 Implementation Plan

To implement the above provisions, GE will conduct the following activities:

a. GE’s obligation to conduct response actions under these sections will be triggered if a party that owns or has an interest in a property in the Massachusetts portion of the RoR plans to undertake a project or work at such property affecting the river sediments, riverbanks, backwaters, or impoundments in that portion of the RoR (other than the projects or work covered by Section 2.1) and such party meets the conditions for a Legally Permissible Future Project or Work (as specified in Sections 1 and 2.1.2.a.(i) and (ii) of this Plan).

A00803 - 28

b. If the party planning the project or work provides this required documentation and EPA determines that it has satisfied the required conditions and that response actions are necessary for project or work to be conducted in a protective manner and/or to maintain the Performance Standards for the RoR Remedial Action under the Revised Permit and/or the effectiveness of the RoR Remedial Action, EPA will so notify GE.

c. Upon receiving such a notice, GE will evaluate whether it is obligated to implement response actions in connection with the project or work under the applicable provisions of the Revised Permit. If GE determines that it is not obligated to conduct response actions, GE will, within 30 days of receiving the notice from EPA, advise EPA of the reasons for that conclusion.10 If GE agrees that it is obligated to conduct response actions, GE will, within 30 days of receiving the notice from EPA (or such other time as is approved by EPA), submit a work plan to EPA to conduct the necessary response actions to address PCBs (beyond those specified in the Revised Permit) that will allow the project or work to be conducted in a manner that is protective and/or maintains the Performance Standards for the RoR Remedial Action under the Revised…