The URL can be used to link to this page

Trang chủ My WebLink Giới thiệu10-15-2018 WRC Water Withdrawals CommitteeeWATER WITHDRAWAL Tompkins County Water Resource Council WRC Water Withdrawal Committee Members Interest in water withdrawal issue Liz Cameron: Dept. of Health charge to oversee the water supply. Cynthia Brock: Agricultural over use, particularly in CAFOS. Roxy Johnston: Protecting the drinking water supply. John Mawdsley: Have protection processes in place in advance of pressures. Ecological health of the stream should be a consideration as well as downstream users. Mara Alper : Long-range view of potential water quantity issues. Protect resource in advance from large users who overuse local water such as the Nestle in MI. Hypothetical question: If Nestle or another company came to TC tomorrow and wanted to lease/buy land to extract large volumes of water, what is the process now in place? What say do we have in this? WRC Water Withdrawal Committee Draft Purpose and Goals as of 9/24/18 Committee Members: Liz Cameron, Roxy Johnston, John Mawdsley, Mara Alper (Chair) PURPOSE Have water withdrawal protection processes in place in advance of pressures on the system. GOALS 1)Determine base line information: current DEC private industry and agriculture water withdrawal permits for surface and groundwater; aquifer study highlights; water usage. a) Canvas local municipalities to see how they are using their aquifer studies. 2) Gather and compare information on water withdrawal policies and regulations that effect Tompkins County. a) Include existing local, NYS DEC, Great Lakes Compact Council and Susquehanna River Basin Commission. 3) Review, compare and summarize current water withdrawal perspectives in order to raise awareness of potential future water withdrawal scenarios. 4) Recommend guidelines to the Tompkins County Water Resource Council for water withdrawal that protects surface and groundwater in our watersheds. 5) Present final TC WRC recommendations to the Tompkins County Legislature about assuring the integrity of flows and levels for surface and groundwater within our watersheds and county. Nestle in Michigan Fortune Magazine article: Nestle Michigan Bottled Water Nestlé Pays Only $200 to Take 130 Million Gallons of Michigan's Water By Julia Zorthian June 1, 2017 Nestlé is making waves in Michigan as it applies to draw 60% more water from a single well it owns without paying any more money. The Swiss company pays $200 annually for a permit to pump water from its own wells, including its well outside of Evart, Michigan, from which it already pumps 130 million gallons of water each year. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality will decide upon Nestlé’s application to increase the amount it takes, but opposition is rising in the meantime, the New York Times reports. With multiple plants in the U.S. and the current success of bottled water on the market, Nestlé Waters North America is a major part of Nestlé’s business —it created more than $4.5 billion in U.S. and Canada sales during Fiscal Year 2016, according to Nestlé’s annual report. http://fortune.com/2017/06/01/nestle -michigan-well-bottled-water/ https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/about/live -healthy/tap-water-vs-bottled-water Business Insider.com Bottled Water Costs 2000x More Than Tap “Residents and companies in the U.S. do not have to pay for water by volume if they extract it themselves, the New York Times reports. Bottled water costs 2000 times the cost of tap water. Yet it’s paid for at tap water prices or less. Wholesale bottled water sales hit a total of $16.4 billion in 2016.” https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-02-04/tiny-michigan-town-water-fight-nestle Nestle -water-deal-bad-economics-and-bad-policy-michigan Phone discussion 7/20 with James Olson, Environmental Lawyer Advocate for Michigan vs. Nestle and water as a public trust. Created FLOW, For Love of Water non-profit organization flowforwater.org Mission statement: To protect the common waters of the Great Lakes Basin through public trust solutions. Olson’s recommendations to us for regional water protection: --Include water quantity in all planning --No large water withdrawal allowed that is not used immediately in the local watershed. --Zoning rules that regulate land use that interferes with other lands users and/or streams. --Land use regulations that protect the water quantity planning . --Assure the integrity of flows and levels for surface and groundwater within our watersheds and county. He is willing to come from MI to talk with us. We would consider a budget request to compensate for his travel and time. He could come as an environmental attorney or from non-profit Blue Water. Water Withdrawal Committee discussion of status of protections of local control --Scott Doyle on TC Legislature will include quantity in water planning materials --We don’t know of any local protections on water withdrawals. --“No large water withdrawal allowed that is not used immediately in the local watershed.” We want an exception that allows for providing assistance during emergencies in local areas This is meant to restrict bottled water companies but would also restrict local vintners and brewers. We suggest an approach that allows for local review and permitting of such uses. Currently DEC regulates without local input. DEC Thumbs Its Nose at Appeals Court in Reissuing Ravenswood Permit 10/18 The Banner, Vol. 4, No. 41 10/9/18 Nine months after a state appeals court in Brooklyn invalidated the water withdrawal permit issued by the New York State Department of Environmental Correction (“DEC”) to a subsidiary of Helix Partners for operation of the Ravenswood electric generating station in Queens, DEC announced last week that it plans to reissue exactly the same permit. The permit authorizes Ravenswood to take up to 1,500,000,000 gallons per day from the East River. Public Comments are currently scheduled to close at 5:00PM October 18, after only two weeks. DEC's plans to reissue the same permit are not made clear in the announcement of the Ravenswood permit application in DEC’s Environmental Notice Bulletin on October 3, 2018. When a representative of the Sierra Club contacted DEC for a copy of the draft permit, however, she was told that “the Department is not proposing changes to the previously issued permit.” Reissuance of the same permit directly contradicts the ruling of the Appellate Division Second Department in Sierra Club v. Martens,158 A.D.3d 169 (2nd Dep’t 2018) on January 10, 2018. In that decision, the court annulled the Ravenswood permit issued in 2014, which was a modification of the first permit issued under the New York’s 2011 Water Withdrawal Protection Act (“WRPA”). The court annulled the permit on the ground that DEC was incorrect in classifying its action in issuing the permit as a Type II action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”). DEC based its claim that issuance of the permit was a Type II action, and thus exempt from review under SEQRA. on its claim that under WRPA DEC did not have any discretion in setting the terms and conditions of an initial water withdrawal permit. The court determined that issuance of an initial water withdrawal permit is not a Type II action because DEC does in fact have discretion in setting the terms and conditions of an initial water withdrawal permit DEPPermitting@dec.ny.gov or call Mr. Sanders at DEC Headquarters, (518) 402-9167. Tug Hill and Nestles WRC Water Withdrawal Committee Draft Purpose and Goals as of 9/24/18 Committee Members: Liz Cameron, Roxy Johnston, John Mawdsley, Mara Alper (Chair) PURPOSE Have water withdrawal protection processes in place in advance of pressures on the system. GOALS 1)Determine base line information: current DEC private industry and agriculture water withdrawal permits for surface and groundwater; aquifer study highlights; water usage. a) Canvas local municipalities to see how they are using their aquifer studies. 2) Gather and compare information on water withdrawal policies and regulations that effect Tompkins County. a) Include existing local, NYS DEC, Great Lakes Compact Council and Susquehanna River Basin Commission. 3) Review, compare and summarize current water withdrawal perspectives in order to raise awareness of potential future water withdrawal scenarios. 4) Recommend guidelines to the Tompkins County Water Resource Council for water withdrawal that protects surface and groundwater in our watersheds. 5) Present final TC WRC recommendations to the Tompkins County Legislature about assuring the integrity of flows and levels for surface and groundwater within our watersheds and county. https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/about/live -healthy/tap-water-vs-bottled-water