We are facing a time crunch the DOE period for public comment will close of June 14, 2012.
The NYS PSC period for public comment will close on June 29, 2012.
The most concerning aspects of this project-
1- Rockland County seems not to know about this project.
2- Most of the studies were done in 2010
3- Most of the studies were done as a "Hudson River Installation"
4- Where are the studies that were done SPECIFICALLY for a land installation?
Attached is the DOE 2010 SCOPING document- with the project to be installed in the Hudson River from Canada to NYC.
- What I have tried to do is to is an outline of the Proposal –so that the information is readily accessible-
1- Department of Energy (DOE) Presidential Permit
- 2- Article VII
- 3- Presidential Permit
- 4- Description of Proposal, who are the entities
- 5- Parties List (NYS PSC) for CHPE
- 6- Main web-site to Champlain Hudson Power Express
a. Website to maps of the Route for CHPE through Rockland County
- 7- April 12, 2012 -CHPE held a Public Comm
- 8- CSX Right of way through Rockland County- no information available
- 9- The UNANSWERED Questions
- 10- Replacement for Indian Point – this issue needs to be addressed ASAP
- 11- What CHPE does not do for Rockland County
- 12- Deregulation- does the CHPE Proposal meet NYS Deregulation Law?
- 13- Links to Newspaper Articles-
Department of Energy – DOE, Presidential Permit
EIS-0447: Champlain Hudson Power Express Transmission Line Project, New York
This EIS evaluates the environmental impacts of a DOE proposal to grant a Presidential permit to Champlain Hudson Power Express, Inc., to construct, operate, maintain, and connect a new 1000-megawatt (MW) electric transmission system across the U.S.-Canada border in northeastern New York State. The proposed transmission line will run from the Canadian Province of Quebec to New York City.
Public Comment Opportunities
DOE is accepting public comments on the revised scope of the Champlain Hudson Project EIS until June 14, 2012. DOE will consider comments submitted after this date to the extent practicable. Written comments on the revised scope of the EIS may be mailed to: Brian Mills, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE–20), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585; faxed to 202–586–8008; or emailed to Brian.Mills@hq.doe.gov.
Documents Available for Download
· APRIL 30, 2012
EIS-0447: Amended Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
Champlain Hudson Power Express Transmission Line Project, New York
· MARCH 30, 2012
Information Notice -- Champlain Hudson Project, March 30, 2012
Champlain Hudson Project, March 30, 2012
· JUNE 18, 2010
EIS-0447: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct
Public Scoping Meetings
Champlain Hudson Power Express Transmission Line Project, New York
2- Article VII, Major Electric and Gas Transmission Facilities
Guide to Article VII and a Flowchart showing the progression of the applications
Website for - Article VII
Certified Article VII Cases -APPROVED
Filed Article VII Cases PENDING
08-T-0034 - Hudson Project 345 kV
08-T-1388 - LIPA - Riverhead to South Hampton 138kV
09-T-0049 - Upstate NY Power Corp., Galloo Island Project Transmission line 230kV
09-T-0870 - National Grid - Lockport to Mortimer 115 kV
10-T-0080 - National Grid - Spier Falls to Rotterdam 115 kV
10-T-0139 - Champlain Hudson Power Express 300kV
10-T-0154 - St Lawrence Gas
11-T-0068 - National Grid - Mohican to Battenkill 115kV
This organization could be a great resource to Rockland County, we should belong to it.
The reliability of the transmission system in New York is the responsibility of the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO). An interconnection application has been filed with the NYISO in connection with the Project, and technical studies will continue to be performed in the months ahead.
4- Description of Proposal
The Champaign Hudson Power Express-
- Origination is Lake Champlain
- Is a 300 to 400 mile transmission line from Canada to NYC
- 1,000 megawatt DC transmission line (enough to power appox 1 million homes)
· To be installed in the Hudson River - coming out at two points,
§ bypassing the PCB's contamination, and then going back into the Hudson.
§ The CHPE will come out again north of the Stony Point Lighthouse traveling 7 -8 miles through Stony Point, Haverstraw, Clarkstown and traveling under Rockland Lake back out into the Hudson.
Who is CHPE
Blackstone Group LP- owns 100% of CHPE (attached cooperate ownership).
- This company negotiated Mirant's bankruptcy-(filed on 2003 they emerged on 2006), the Bowline and Lovett plants.
- Dedicated power to be delivered to New York City ONLY – due to utility deregulation
- CSX will give CHPE a right of way on railroad property to install the transmission line through Rockland County
- Blackstone Group owns both
- Transmission Developers, Inc. they will build the infrastructure - transmission line to move the electric from Canada to NYC AND
- Champlain Hudson Power Express the will purchase and or perhaps own -supply of electric
Chief Executive Officer
Albany, NY, 12207
5- Attached is the Party List for the CHPE Project-
The parties representing Rockland County
#4- Allen R. Beers #45- Linda Grant
Coordinator of Environmental Resources Senior Assistant County Attorney
Ph- 845-364-2670 Ph- 845-638-5181
7- April 12, 2012 -CHPE held a Public Comment session in Haverstraw NY at the Town Hall,
When I attended the April 12, 2012 meeting in Haverstraw there were about 5 people present. Including Supervisor Phillips. I pointed out to the Administrative Law Judge Michelle Phillips, that the public notice that is mandatory for this type of meeting was not very well done. I could not find a notice in any of the local papers for this meeting. I knew because I monitor the PSC main page
There are 2 Administrative Law Judges
1- Michelle Phillips
2- Kevin Casutto
NYS PSC web site Library for the CHPE Proposal
NYS PSC web site for Public Comment
8- CSX Right of Way through Rockland County
At this point in time I cannot find any information for this ROW
April 30,2012 –Federal Register- Notice of CHPE Route Change
9- The UNANSWERED questions
- 1. Who is Rockland County Government knew of the CHPE Proposal and the impacts on Rockland County and at what point did they know?
2. SEQR – was this done for Rockland County for the CHPE Proposal to determine the environmental impact on Rockland?
- a. SEQR- In New York State, most projects or activities proposed by a state agency or unit of local government, and all discretionary approvals (permits) from a NYS agency or unit of local government, require an environmental impact assessment as prescribed by SEQR. [Statutory authority: Environmental Conservation Law Sections 3-0301(1)(b), 3-0301(2)(m) and 8-0113]. done on LAND for impact to Rockland County?
- b. What is the impact to the residents whose property will back up to the transmission line, is there an electric fallout?
- c. Is there any property in Rockland County that will be taken by "Eminent Domain"?
- d. In Stony Point we have wells and septic- what is the potential construction impact to Stony Point home owners?
- e. In Haverstraw "The Mills" a condominium/townhouse neighborhood is built right up to the CSX Railroad- what is the impact of the proximity of the transmission line to the homes?
- f. What is the effect of the CHPE transmission line on real estate values of the property it crosses, remember this installation will take place on the last of the Hudson River water front?
- g. The transmission line will travel under Rockland Lake to return to the Hudson River- what are the consequences of this type of installation to Rockland Lake?
- 3. Is this proposed electricity an "Critical" supply or only in addition to what is currently available?
- 4. CHPE should not be considered an attempt to replace Indian Point! Indian Point needs a solution but not one that makes Rockland the scapegoat or the dumping ground for Westchester.
- 5. We do not need additional utility giants, to be given carte blanch by the PSC to build utility infrastructure that can be abandoned at a moment's notice. Leaving the host Towns the responsibility of the environmental cleanup, which we cannot afford.
10- REPLACEMENT FOR INDIAN POINT
Several groups have already said that the see the CHPE Proposal as a way to shut down Indian Point. Id that is the case then the installation is much bigger than is being currently proposed.
My biggest fear is that if this line is approved, then a year from now, we are told that instead of 1,000 megawatts CHPE has been given permission to install 3,000 , 4,000, 5,000 megawatts and the Towns of Stony Point Haverstraw and Clarkstown become a highway for HIGH VOLTAGE DC CURRENT DEDICATED TO NYC. Once this transmission line is installed it sets a precedent of installation here in Rockland, and that is something I do not believe we can afford.
11- What CHPE does not do for Rockland County/NYS
This will be Stony Point's and Haverstraw's second go round with Blackstone- they are not good corporate neighbors as can be seen by June 2, 2012, article in the Rockland County Journal News, where GenOn is insisting on yet another tax reduction on property (Bow Line) they stripped and sold piecemeal.
- The CHPE transmission line does nothing to improve Rockland County transmission distribution.
The CHPE transmission line does nothing to improve electric reliability within Rockland.
The CHPE transmission line does nothing to improve NYS transmission distribution.
The CHPE transmission line does not do anything to improve the delivery of upstate (cheap power) electric generation to downstate(NYC).
·The CHPE transmission line does not bring jobs to ROCKLAND COUNTY
·The CHPE transmission line does not bring jobs to NYS. (short term jobs in the construction of the converter station in Queens) The plants will be built in Canada
·The CHPE transmission line does not have confirmed dedicated hydro power purchased for this transmission line – the plant will need to be built- who will pay for the plant.
·The CHPE transmission line does nothing for long term stability in the NYS electric Grid.
12- Deregulation – does the CHPE Proposal meet and adhere to NYS Law?
The final point I would make is that there is a question of NYS Deregulation Law– does CHPE's application as a "Merchant" pipeline violate NYS Deregulation law? In its simplest definition "Merchant" means that the owner of the transmission line is also the owner of the electric generation, and that they are allowed to roll the costs of building the Generating Plants into the cost of the transmission line. Deregulation within NYS separated those two functions and created law to prevent NYS utilities from being both the owner of generation and the owner of the pipes and wires.
Blackstone Group owns both Transmission Developers, Inc.(they will build the infrastructure - transmission line to move the electric from Canada to NYC) and Champlain Hudson Power Express(the will purchase and or perhaps own -supply of electric
Who will regulate this transmission line that originates in Canada, NYS or Canada?
14- Links to Newspaper Articles
Conservation Law Foundation
Posts Tagged 'Champlain Hudson Power Express' May 24, 2012 by Christophe Courchesne | Leave a Comment
Champlain Hudson Power Express faces resistance, exe sites jobs and cheaper electricity
Coming Wednesday on Editorial Spotlight: Energy line under Hudson, along CSX tracks
Green Law, PACE Law School
Rockland County Times
Champlain Hudson Power Express Project Will be Discussed June 26 in Stony Point Posted May 24th, 2012
Sierra Club- No to the Champlain Hudson Power Express
Lake Champlain Life, - what is the Champlain Hudson Power Express
...And these documents:
Blackstone owns Champlain Hudson Power Express
Party List for CHPE
NYS Article VII Guide
Federal Register - Notice of Route Change
Route through Rockland
CHPE Scoping Summary Report