Hudson River
North of the Bear Mountain Bridge Rolf Müller
Why Is United Water
Ducking an Environmental Impact Study
for its Pilot Water Treatment Plant?
July 15, 2008 The Haverstraw Town Board met last night to consider a special permit for United Water’s proposed pilot treatment plant on the banks of the Hudson River. The board had assumed no environmental impact study (SEQR) would be needed and United Water’s attorney agreed. But the DEC, the Riverkeeper’s attorney, a nine-member Rockland Coalition for Sustainable Water, and a hall filled with residents, local and from around the county, showed up to express strong disagreement with the board’s position and the application in general.
United Water’s proposed desalination/filtration plant on the Hudson is the company’s answer to the resource shortage caused by irresponsible over-development. A point raised by a number of those who spoke in the public session part of the meeting was that we are now subsidizing developers by paying for new resources so they can increase their profitable, destructive expansion. Martin Ryan (Piermont) said, "It’s a stealth tax, which should not be tolerated." Others worried about the health threats from drinking water that continues to kill off and drive away any number of fish species that used to thrive in the River’s waters.
Questions that Went Unanswered
Michael Palko (Pearl River) pointed out that the upriver dredging by GE of 1.3 million pounds of PCBs will not begin until after United Water has run its tests to see if it can sufficiently filter out the sewage and legacy pollutants, like the GE spills. Isn’t that like taking pollen readings in February? Palko also wanted to know what would happen to the toxic waste filtered out of the water. How would that be disposed of, and how much is that going to cost?
Speaking of cost, Robert Rhodes (Chairman of Preserve Ramapo) asked the following: "Over a year ago United Water filed a twenty-year plan with the New York Public Service Commission. At that time, it estimated that Hudson River water would cost significantly more than water from the Ambrey Pond Reservoir, but it argued that the extra cost was worthwhile because the supply of water would be much greater and many environmental issues and permits would be avoided by using the Hudson River water. More recently, the head PR flack for United Water has been going around telling everyone that Hudson River water will be cheaper than water from Ambrey. Which statement is true?"
Rhodes continued, "The need for the construction of an experimental treatment plant suggests to me that United Water is not confident that it knows what technologies will be required to adequately filter Hudson River water. And if United Water does not know how it will treat this water, then the clear inference is that it does not know how much this water will actually cost."
Rhodes’s estimate of how much this new water will cost is somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 times our standard winter rate. (Read his complete statement here.)
A number of people asked the same question: Who owns the water? This is a very sensitive issue considering the recent United Water violations regarding the amount of Rockland water shipped to New Jersey. The fact that the company is owned by a powerful French corporation does not help claims made by UW that "we are stewards of the environment." The corporation’s bottom line is a financial bottom line, reported back to a home office in Europe.
Jeff Gessner (Suffern) wanted to know who owned the water in the Haverstraw Bay, "And why is United Water allowed to take an unlimited supply of that water for profit?" Gessner also pointed out that the pilot station would be along a fault line and across the river from Indian Point.
Ann Brennan (Blauvelt), along with several others, talked about the leaks of radioactive water from the nuclear plant. She referenced a Lamont Doherty/RPI study that identified three elements in the river water—plutonium, neptunium, and cesium. Are there filters that can effectively remove these, and, if so, won’t filtering increase concentrations? How will these deposits be disposed of?
And if there’s an earthquake along the fault, or a terrorist attack, or catastrophic spill at the nuclear plant? With the river water pumped into our system, how would you then eliminate the contamination to the water supply and to the system’s pipes, pumps and filters? How long would that take, and what is the plan B for the interim?
A letter was read by Susan Filgueras, a member of the Stony Point Action Committee for the Environment. She also pointed out that there are sewage spills into the river in the area, and there are two Super Fund cleanup sites in the area. The speaker reminded all that unlimited water leads to unlimited growth.
Rebecca Troutman, staff attorney for Riverkeeper (
