United Water sticks by its Hudson plan

United Water New York Vice President and General Manager Michael Pointing says his company's controversial plan to tap, treat and desalinate the Hudson River addresses a real, long-term need for a county that lacks water sources beyond its own tiny borders.

Opponents of the plant, though, say the idea of drawing brackish water from the Hudson for potable use doesn't fit the county's current or future needs, and will saddle residents with high water costs, because the desalination process saps electricity.

Pointing, during an Editorial Spotlight interview Thursday, discounted such concerns. "There are people who are taking a really short-term view on things," Pointing said, while the water supply business is a long-term game, and takes long-term planning. Pointing was joined in Thursday's interview by United Water's Sameet Master and Rockland Business Association CEO Al Samuels.

Samuels was more blunt. "At the very core of this issue is a desire to block expansion ... a desire to block further development" in the county, especially in dense eastern Ramapo, Samuels said. He has called information provided by opponents "lies" and called them "obstructionists."

The tension and distrust cuts both ways. In a March 11 Editorial Spotlight, Rockland Legislator Harriett Cornell called United Water's earlier information about Rockland's long-term water supply as "so deficient and so misleading." She was joined by Rockland Water Coalition founder George Potanovic and Scenic Hudson environmental advocacy attorney Hayley Carlock.

Need questioned

United Water proposed the plant in 2007, after the Public Service Commission ordered Rockland's major water supplier to come up with a long-term supply source for the county. Now, PSC is reviewing the need for a new water supply; the plant also needs key environmental approvals from the state Department of Environmental Conservation.

Opponents pushed for the PSC review that is now underway. They cited a U.S. Geological Survey study that demonstrated that Rockland's aquifers are recharging at a greater rate than earlier believed, and United Water's loss of Lake DeForest water through an undetected valve. Opponents also said Rockland's water use is down, due to the recession, and more efficient use of water.

Pointing interpreted the PSC review and the water data differently. He said that much time had passed, and "PSC said it's probably time to recheck things." As for the USGS study, Pointing and Master said that the study took place over several years, but longer data would be needed for a thorough examination. Pointing also said the broken valve sent excess water to New Jersey for three months – the company by law must send a certain amount downstream, to compensate for the damming of the Hackensack to feed Lake DeForest – but that water was recouped after repairs.

Samuels denied that Rockland needs less water now. Rockland' population is increasing, and so is the county's commitment to industrial development. "Rockland is very heavily committed to biopharma, and data centers," both of which are water-intensive industries. If Rockland wants to position itself to broaden its tax base and attract high-paying jobs, he said, "we must have another supply."

Pointing said while some customer demand is down, others, like the new Shops at Nanuet, have dramatically increased demand. "There's going to be peaks and troughs," he said, "you have to look at (water) demands on a much longer basis."

Cost to customers

The Hudson River in our area is brackish, that is, containing salty sea water and river water. Desalination is an expensive energy intensive process, opponents of the plant point out. Master said that the desalination studies have shown a much lower concentration than sea water, the number cited by some critics, and treatment and energy needs decrease as salinity decreases.

While PSC reviews the plan, United Water is also seeking the commission's permission to add a surcharge to customers' water bills to recoup some of the $53 million, and counting, the company has already invested. Pointing said that paying some costs now is fiscally prudent for customers, because it addresses accruing interest.

Meanwhile, Pointing said, the DEC approvals are overdue. "We had 1,200 questions," that the company needed to address during the hearing process, which Pointing said have been answered. "I'm not sure why it's not been issued," he said of the final environmental impact statement, a key document for plant to move forward.

What happens, Pointing was asked, if the PSC review determines that Rockland doesn't need another water supply project after all?

"Then I think the PSC is owning the issue," Pointing said, " and that problem."

Meanwhile, United Water and the Hudson project's opponents eagerly anticipate the PSC rulings on Rockland's water needs.

MORE

View the Editorial Spotlight interview, and others, at lohud.com/opinion.