|
August 15, 2013
Will 12 NY Power Plants Get Permits
this Year for 111% of NY's Total Fresh Water Usage?
Under the permitting schedule adopted by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) for issuing water withdrawal permits pursuant to the DEC's new
water withdrawal regulations, water users that withdraw or are designed to withdraw
100 million gallons per day (MPD) or more are required to apply for permits this year.
See Table 1 below. Twenty water users in the state have a maximum
daily usage above this threshold. See Table 2 below. Two of these
top 20 users are hydropower facilities that are exempt from the permitting requirements.
Two other top 20 users are public water supplies that are grandfathered under existing
permits. In addition, four of the top 20 users are using a combined 3.2 billion gallons
per day (BGD) of water from New York harbor which is not fresh water.
The total freshwater maximum usage of the remaining 12 facilities required to obtain
permits this year, each of which is a power generating station, is almost 7.9 BGD.
(The amount was determined by adding the maximum daily usages of the facilities shown
in bold in Table 2 below.) A comparison
of this amount with New York State's total fresh water usage of 7.1 BGD as
determined by USGS for 2000,
the last year for which I could find data, shows that the maximum daily usage of these
facilities is 111% of New York's total daily freshwater usage.
The pie-chart above is a portion of Figure 3. Total freshwater withdrawals, fresh
surface water withdrawals and fresh groundwater withdrawals in New York in 2000, by
water-use category, New
York Water Use Program and Data, USGS Open-File Report 2005-1352, September 2005.
What will be the consequence of issuing permits for water withdrawals in these huge
amounts? How will water usage be allocated among competing water users? Will any sort
of priority be conferred on those who receive the first permits? Judging by the notice
filed last week of the first water withdrawal application, the DEC is not going to
give the public time to research and consider the issues raised by these permit applications.
The first notice of a water withdrawal application was given last week in the
DEC's August 7, 2013, Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB). Notice was given of the
application of the Ravenswood Generating Facility in Queens County for a permit
to withdraw up to 1.5 bgd from the East River. See DEC
Gives Two Weeks to Comment on First Water Withdrawal Application for 1.5 Billion
GPD. Probably it is not a coincidence that the Ravenswood Facility, the sixth
largest water user in the state, is the only registered water user in the state that
must apply for a permit this year and is withdrawing water from a salt water
body rather than a fresh water body. The DEC may calculate that the public will
have less concern about saltwater withdrawals. But this permitting procedure is establishing
the precedent by which all other water withdrawal permits will be issued. And most
permits will be freshwater permits.
As I noted last week, no hearings are
scheduled on the Ravenswood application and the entire comment period
is only two
weeks long until August 22, 2013. It was days into the comment period before anyone
I know was able to reach anyone at the DEC to discuss the permit by telephone. My own
telephone messages were not returned. Out of frustration, I resorted to filing a
Freedom of Information
Law request to obtain the documents I thought would be relevant, such as Ravenswood's
SPDES permit and the environmental reviews conducted in connection with the issuance
and renewal of the Ravenswood SPDES permit. I have been informed that it will take
at least 20 days before the documents I requested can
be provided.
That
means
that
I
won't have
them to review until after the comment period
has expired.
Furthermore, the
notice of application states that the DEC determined
that the project is not subject to SEQRA
because "it
is a Type II action." This is despite the fact that projects that "would use
ground or surface water in excess of 2,000,000 gallons per day," are explicitly
defined as Type I actions in Section
617.4(6)(ii) of
the SEQRA regulations. Finally, the notice of application states that "the project
is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization
and Coastal Resources Act." I am not an expert on the Waterfront Revitalization
and Coastal Resources Act, but I note that the
DEC webpage on Coastal Management states, "The
coastlines along Lake Erie and Lake Ontario, Long Island Sound, and the Atlantic Ocean
coastline of NYC and Long Island are at risk to coastal erosion from natural and human
activities and are regulated." The East
River is listed on this webpage as one of New York's
coastal waters, together with "All connecting water bodies, bays, harbors,
shallows, and wetlands." It would seem that taking up to
1.5 billion gallons of water a day from the East River could have an effect on
the coasts along the tidal strait as well as on connecting water bodies, bays, harbors,
shallows, and wetlands.
The question as to whether users withdrawing less than 100 MGD may submit applications
in advance of the schedule shown in Table 1 has been answered
by the
announcement in yesterday's ENB that the Sunningdale
Country Club Club in Scarsdale has applied for a water usage permit for a total
of 572,000 gallons per day (GPD). Under the schedule,
Sunningdale is not required to apply until 2015.
The ability to have a water use permit
application
considered ahead of schedule may offer an advantage to smaller water users. Other
smaller water users may want to consider making their applications soon, now that
we know that early
applications are being accepted by the DEC.
Table 1. Dates by which Application for Initial
Permit Must Be Completed
June 1, 2013 |
Systems that withdraw or are designed to withdraw a volume of 100 million gallons
per day (mgd) or more |
Feb. 15, 2014 |
Systems that withdraw or are designed to withdraw a volume equal to or greater
than 10 mgd but less than 100 mgd |
Feb. 15, 2015 |
Systems that withdraw or are designed to withdraw a volume equal to or greater
than 2 mgd but less than 10 mgd |
Feb. 15, 2016 |
Systems that withdraw or are designed to withdraw a volume equal to or greater
than 0.5 mgd but less than 2 mgd |
Feb. 15, 2017 |
Systems that withdraw or are designed to withdraw a volume equal to or greater
than 0.1 but less than 0.5 mgd |
Source: 6 NYCRR 601.7(2) lists the dates by which a complete application for
an initial permit must be submitted.
Table 2. 2012 Registered Water Users with Maximum
Usage over 100 MGD
Facility Name |
Town/City |
County |
Ave. Daily Use |
Units |
Max. Daily Use |
Units |
St. Lawrence/ FDR Power Project* |
Massena |
St.Lawrence |
79278 |
MGD |
108686 |
MGD |
Niagara Power Project* |
Lewiston |
Niagara |
47463 |
MGD |
62164 |
MGD |
Indian Point 2&3 |
Cortlandt |
Westchester |
2024 |
MGD |
2489 |
MGD |
New York City DEP** |
Neversink |
Sullivan |
1078 |
MGD |
1418 |
MGD |
Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant |
Scriba |
Oswego |
543 |
MGD |
596 |
MGD |
Ravenswood Generating Station*** |
Queens |
Queens |
513 |
MGD |
1390 |
MGD |
Arthur Kill Generating Station*** |
Richmond |
Richmond |
480 |
MGD |
713 |
MGD |
Astoria Generating Station*** |
Queens |
Queens |
456 |
MGD |
724 |
MGD |
RE Ginna Nuclear Power Plant |
Ontario |
Wayne |
427 |
MGD |
511 |
MGD |
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station |
Scriba |
Oswego |
401 |
MGD |
457 |
MGD |
Roseton Generating Station |
Newburgh |
Orange |
341 |
MGD |
794 |
MGD |
Dunkirk Generating Station |
Dunkirk |
Chautauqua |
304 |
MGD |
|
|
Danskammer Generating |
Newburgh |
Orange |
279 |
MGD |
455 |
MGD |
East River Generating Station*** |
New York |
New York |
264 |
MGD |
372 |
MGD |
Somerset**** |
Somerset |
Niagara |
239 |
MGD |
274 |
MGD |
Cayuga |
Lansing |
Tompkins |
214 |
MGD |
243 |
MGD |
Huntley Generating Station |
Tonawanda |
Erie |
200 |
MGD |
406 |
MGD |
Oswego Harbor Power |
Oswego |
Oswego |
168 |
MGD |
364 |
MGD |
Genon Bowline |
Haverstraw |
Rockland |
75 |
MGD |
989 |
MGD |
Monroe County Water Authority-Shoremont** |
Greece |
Monroe |
55 |
MGD |
109 |
MGD |
Source: Response to FOIL request to DEC, received March 27, 2013. Users that are
not exempt or grandfathered are required to submit applications in 2013. Facilities
in bold are required to apply for withdrawal permits this year and are using fresh
water.
* Hydropower facilities are exempt from the water permitting requirements.
**Public water suppliers with existing permits are grandfathered under the regulations.
***Facilities that use water from New York harbor, including three using the East
River, a tidal strait. The usage of these facilities has been excluded from the calculation
of fresh
water
usage.
****Wikipedia reports that this plant was closed in 2010, although it appears on
the list of currently registered water users provided by the DEC in March 2013.
Posted by Rachel Treichler on 08/15/13
4:30 PM. Updated 08/16/13.
|
|
|
About NY Water Law
New York Water
Law covers legal developments relating to water usage in New York
and elsewhere. The
author, Rachel Treichler, practices law in the Finger Lakes region. .
Search NY Water Law
Enter search terms:
Index of Posts
Index
of Posts by Month
Recommended Reading
|
|