Residents Seek Answers, Details From PSEG Over Proposed Cable Project

GREENPORT, NY — It was a standing room only crowd at the Little Red Schoolhouse in Greenport Tuesday night, as residents came out seeking answers about a proposed PSEG electric cable project — with many echoing a similar question: "Why Greenport?"

The project's detractors voiced concerns about quality of life issues and potential health and environmental risks, and asked why the project couldn't be sited on Shelter Island or elsewhere on Long Island, rather than smack in the middle of Fifth Street, a densely populated residential area with a popular park.

Greenport Village Trustee Doug Roberts attended the session and explained that other village board members were not in attendance due to the fact that it an informal gathering, not a regular or special scheduled meeting of trustees, which would have required proper advance notification.

Chris Hahn, director of external affairs for PSEG Long Island, began with a presentation outlining the specifics of the proposed project, with a cable that will run from Greenport to Shelter Island.

Greenport, he explained, is outside PSEG's service territory but receives its power from the New York Power Authority through the Long Island Power Authority owned grid via an interconnect between the two systems.

Increased load growth across the region requires additional capacity across the East End. Shelter Island, Hahn said is served by two feeders, one from the South Fork and one from the North Fork, and the second cable, from Southold, failed, leaving an additional feeder needed for Shelter Island.

Project specifics

The project calls for installation of a 13kv feeder to Shelter Island from the Southold substation. The plan for Front/Fifth streets is to install a new 1,000 KCM cu PR JCN cable in a six-inch conduit at 13.2 KV from the Southold substation to the beach at the end of Fifth Street; 13.2 KV is the same voltage as overhead lines through much of the LIPA system.

Cable is to be located at a minimum five feet from the sidewalk and buried at a minimum depth of 2.5 feet below asphalt roadway, in a duct and manhole system with two spare conduits, Kahn said.

Work hours are expected to take place 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., with an hour of prep beginning at 6 a.m. and one hour of cleanup, to 6 p.m., he said. Work will take place six days per week, he added.

The estimated time of that portion of the project is expected to last three weeks.

For the beach to Shelter Island portion of the project, horizontal directional drilling will be used to tunnel to Shelter Island, to install a conduit to carry the cable below water.

The conduit, Hahn said, will be 20 feet below the sea bed at a minimum with three individual bores, 10 inches in diameter, each containing eight conduits. The project will yield "minimal noise and vibration," he said, with the same hours of operation and a proposed length of 90 working days to completion.

Hahn said it should take about 10 days to bore under the Shelter Island Sound and one day to pull back the conduit; since PSEG is installing three conduits, the process will be repeated three times. It will take an additional three days to pull the electrical cable through one of the conduits, he said; the remaining two spare conduits will remain empty.

Hahn said residents are concerned largely due to an earlier failed project by National Grid at Island View Lane and said there are differences: National Grid, he said, used one 36 inch bore, which requires an "enormous amount of cutting." The new, proposed project will utilize the same drilling techniques successfully used in the Verizon/Cablevision project from North Haven to Shelter Island, which also consisted of three, 10 inch bores, a smaller drill producing less noise, Hahn said.

For the new project, with roughly 200 feet of work done per day, no one homeowner will be affected for too long, Hahn said.

Hahn also said both LIPA and the village of Greenport have declared lead agency in the environmental review, adding that that issue would not be discussed at the meeting.

In order to mitigate impacts, Hahn said cables will be underground and the drilling area will be fenced off, a drill rig will utilize a "Quiet-Pak" to minimize noise. All drilling will be fenced off at the end of Fifth Street and will have no impact on traffic, with minimal traffic and parking disruptions; all work is temporary and grounds will be restored, Hahn said. And, he added, recycling allows for reduced bentonite, polymer and water usage for drilling in environmentally sensitive areas.

The electromagnetic field, or EMF, from a buried 13kv falls "well below" the EMF of a household appliances, he said: An electric shaver, for example, uses 15,000 mG, compared to 12 mG for a 13KV buried cable, 2.5 feet below road surface and five feet from the sidewalk.

Residents demand answers

Hahn said PSEG was there to answer questions. "There's been a lot of talk and not a lot of fact," he said, adding that "it's partially our fault. We should have gotten out here sooner."

As it stands, Hahn said, there is currently no contract and no definite plans to move forward.

Of the project, he said, "This doesn't mean that there will be no impact on your life, but it will be short lived," with benefits for the village.

Resident Jane Ratsey Williams, who lives on Fifth Street, asked why the drills would be positioned on Fifth Street and not on Shelter Island.

Engineer Emmanuel Lilimpakis said the angle of approach makes it more efficient to proceed as planned; after extensive evaluation of the sea bottom, he said the current approach was deemed the preferable way to proceed.

"We need to have a successful project," he said.

Chris Biemiller of Greenport echoed a question many have voiced in recent days: "Why Greenport? We don't need this. We like to be good neighbors," he said, but added that many wanted to know why another location wasn't considered.

"Obviously, if we can't come to a mutually agreeable situation we won't wind up doing it here," Hahn said. "But the level of angle and approach and distance is very efficient."

Hahn said 11 other alternative sites were considered across Long Island. "The bottom line was, for one reason or another, this location makes more sense," he said. "It comes down to the shortest distance between two points, with the least obstacles."

"It confounds us," Biemiller said.

Oyster farmer Mike Oskinski said Conkling Point in Southold was "without a doubt," the shortest distance and the discussion was "totally disingenuous."

"I understand your concern, your need to provide power to Shelter Island, you are required to, by law. What do we get out of it? How does it come to benefit Greenport?" Biemiller asked.

Hahn said while he could not discuss the benefits package, if the village decided not to move forward, the project would not proceed.

"I've had many conversations with the mayor over the last six or seven months," Hahn said, adding that he's spoken with trustees in recent weeks and nothing can be done without a green light from the village board.

Chris McShea, who has young children and has voiced strong opposition to the project, said, "This is the first meeting but it almost seems like a done deal."

"It's not," Hahn said. "If the village is not happy we probably won't have the project."

Bill Swiskey asked if the village would get the benefits package upfront and be able to keep it, even if the project fails.

"I don't know the answer to that," Hahn said, adding that while he couldn't say for sure, "You might want to tell your village to negotiate for that."

John Winkler said he was concerned about a manhole by the park; Lilimpakis said the system was designed and built to withstand water, with isolators to ensure no contact between electricity and water.

Ratsey Williams asked if further digging would need to be done on Front Street to connect the project to the Southold substation; Lilimpakis said a trench would be dug on Front Street heading west to Chapel Lane.

Ratsey William asked if this would be done during the same proposed 90-day time period; Lilimpakis said no, it would comprise a different segment of work. Ratsey Williams suggested the village board be compensated in a different contract for that work.

McShea voiced his "absolute discontent" with the plan, adding that he did not believe PSEG examined enough potential spots to site the project.

Possible site on Fouth Street

Biemiller asked what other sites PSEG had looked at; PSEG officials met earlier in the day with village and looked at a spot on Fourth Street, where no one, he said, would be disturbed by the work. "It gives us a certain kind of disbelief, that you didn't look at it before," he said.

Hahn said PSEG had just learned of the Fourth Street spot. "We'll take a look at it," he said, adding it would be considered moving forward.

Others asked why the work was not being planned for Southold Town, where there is an easement and PSEG could do the work for free.

Lilimpakis said the decision was made before his time, and besides, "We want to utilize this approach because there are some other design benefits."

Hahn said PSEG wants to see what it could do to make this project, in its current configuration, a success.

One man shouted out, "Fifty million."

Hahn added that the goal was to find a "willing partner. We had a failed project. We want a solid project with a good location, a safe job. You guys know what you've read in the paper. I'm not here to try and sugarcoat it. I know I'm going to have issues in other parts of the island. But we're trying to do this in a place where there might be some benefit, and there are some needs here that might not exist in other areas of Long Island."

When asked by a resident why not do the work in Southold, where PSEG would not have to pay for the work due to an easement, with the project in Greenport more expensive, Hahn said, "I don't want to go too far down that road, but you're not far off. I don't want to discuss other municipalities with you."

At last week's village board meeting, Osinksi asked why the work could not take place in Southold Town, where PSEG has an easement.

In an email after the meeting, Southold Town Supervisor Scott Russell said, of the previous project, "We were a more than gracious host. We granted them use of town roads and a town beach. The community in the surrounding area was impacted greatly ,yet we let it proceed. The project went on for months and it apparently wasn't successful. We did our part. Their plan didn't work. They need to look elsewhere."

Others expressed concerns about trucks carrying soil on Fifth street.

Osinski asked what would happen if there was a rupture and local waters were affected; he asked if he'd be notified. "What if I'm shut down?" he said.

Hahn said local residents would be notified in such a case and said Osinski could file a claim and be compensated.

Another resident asked why the temporary generating station on Shelter Island could not be made permanent, adding that it "has to be cheaper than what you're doing here."

Hahn said it was not less expensive, and LIPA has to take a 50-year view; paying $850,000 over 50 years would be far more costly, he said. "It's not economically viable in the long view. We have to come up with a permanent solution."

McShea said LIPA should withdraw its request for lead agency status. "This is bogus," he said.

Hahn said a person would be chosen and paid for by PSEG to act as a conduit for residents' concerns during the project, adding that the current proposal was nothing like the failed project in the past.

"Most of the concerns you have are about that project, and I totally get that. Most of the concerns people have about Long Island are because of things that have happened for years and years. We are not that company." PSEG, he said, is a new company, with stricter rules.

He added, "I get it. You should be scared. You should be terrified. I get it, and we are going to do everything we can to alleviate that," he said.

"We don't 'get it,'" Biemiller said. "We don't know why you are in Greenport."

Maritza Winkler asked if the agency was self policing; Hahn said no.

"Who has the authority to shut you down, if there's a problem?" she asked.

"I would think the DEC," Hahn said.

"If you violate your contract, the village will shut you down," Roberts said.

Roberts added that the village board meeting will be held Thursday at 7 p.m. at the Third Street Firehouse; no vote will be taken on the project then, but residents can voice concerns.

Former Greenport Mayor David Kapell said he is a resident of Fourth Street and would welcome the work being done on Fourth Street. "If, through what you're proposing, we end up with a substantially improved street, I'm for it. I'm talking about a rebuilt street." After the meeting, he said residents needed to see the "forest through the trees," and recognize the benefits Greenport could reap from the project.

The meeting followed a heated discussion on the proposed project Thursday at the Greenport village board work session; a group of residents also met to air concerns earlier in September at Fifth Street Beach.