ALBANY – Lawmakers in Albany passed legislation last week that would once again streamline New York state’s authority to permit the construction of power generation facilities.
If the Senate and Assembly can agree on one version of the bill and get it inked by Gov. Eliot Spitzer later this month, the law could potentially bring the need for cross-state power lines such as New York Regional Interconnect’s into question, a spokesman for at least one state official said.
The generation siting law, known as Article X, has been expired since Jan. 1, 2003. Since then, any newly proposed projects have had to undergo both local and state reviews, and be subject to environmental review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. The currently defunct Article X would consolidate that process under one agency; the New York state Public Service Commission.
State Energy Committee Chair Paul Tonko (D-Amsterdam) praised the Assembly’s version of the law, which calls for more public involvement in the review process and holds new projects – no matter what fuel source they will use – to more rigorous environmental standards.
“Our power plant siting bill will establish a thorough process for reviewing new power plants,” Tonko said in a press release Wednesday. “For years, our state has experienced record demands for electricity. We need the energy from new power plants, but they must be built in a responsible way.”
NYRI, a Canadian-backed company, is proposing to transport upstate electricity downstate by way of a 190-mile-long power line. Company officials say the $1.6 billion project will help relieve an energy bottleneck in southeastern New York. They attribute the constraint to an ongoing lack of generation and transmission investment. However, opponents of the power line believe building generations facilities closer to where they’re needed in Metropolitan New York makes more sense than NYRI’s proposal, which would run through eight counties, including 44 miles of Chenango.
“Now we can all put the pressure on to get generation facilities sited downstate. It prohibits NYRI from using the answer that there’s no way to site generation closer to the city,” said Duncan Davie, spokesman for state Senator Jim Seward (R-Milford). “They (downstate) will have to produce the power to meet their electrical needs.”
The lack of an Article X process has been a deterent to new generation investment, electricity experts and state officials have said. According to New York Independent System Operator, the regulated agency in charge of overseeing the state’s wholesale energy markets, new generation facilities will be a key to insuring energy reliability in the next five to ten years.
When asked if Article X would be good or bad for NYRI’s project, power line spokesman David Kalson said the law would have “no effect at all” on his company’s proposal.
“It’s good news if you’re now being able to sight a generator if you know there’s transmission available or possibly to be available,” Kalson said. “There is a relationship, but it’s pretty indirect in terms of the way the technical aspects of the law are being written. There’s not a direct connection to transmission.”
Assemblyman Cliff Crouch (R-Guilford) believes Article X is a necessary step in relieving energy constraints, but voted against the Assembly version, believing it will only force generation plants to be built upstate, a prospect he said isn’t fair.
“They want the power, they just don’t want it in their backyard,” Crouch said. “You can’t have it both ways.”
Crouch explained that small generation facilities – which weren’t subject to the Article X review when it was active prior to 2003 – would now have to undergo the same review process as large projects. He contends this will deter investors from proposing smaller facilities, meaning the frequency of large-scale projects would increase and most likely be sent upstate because there is less people and more space.
Here’s how the Assembly bill looks:
• Requires the analysis of a new power facility’s health impact on an affected community and mandates that siting boards consider “environmental justice” – the siting of energy generation facilities in primarily minority communities – before deciding on a siting application;
• Looks to enhance the voice of a community where the location of an energy plant is under consideration by requiring that local representatives be appointed to the siting board and that affected neighborhoods be notified about the plant’s proposed construction through area newspapers in languages found in the community.
• Lowers the size of the power plants subject to Article X standards from the previous law’s 80 megawatts to 30 megawatts.
• Provides protections against respiratory conditions caused by power plant emissions by mandating that all applications provide water and air emission profiles down to micro particulate levels of 2.5 microns or smaller.
The bill would also authorize up to $650,000 per application in intervenor funding to help off-set costs of expert witnesses and consultants, as well as administrative and legal fees.