Hot on the heels of Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine’s demand that a Battery Energy Storage System in Wainscott be closed after nearby wells were found to be contaminated, East Hampton Town is also making a series of demands of the owners of the BESS.
The facility, on Cove Hollow Road in Wainscott, was the site of a May 2023 fire, and the perfluorinated compound PFPrA, often the product of the breakdown of lithium ion batteries, was later found in the Suffolk County Water Authority’s Bridgehampton Road Wellfield nearby.
Pictured Above: Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine (right) with Suffolk County Legislator Anthony Piccirillo (left) at the July 28 press conference. |. County Executive Ed Romaine photo
Mr. Romaine demanded the facility be closed in a July 20 letter to its owenrs, NextEra Energy and National Grid, and on July 28 visited Wainscott for a press conference in which he said there was “no question in my mind” that the source of the contamination was the BESS facility.
On Aug. 4, East Hampton Town demanded East Hampton Energy Storage Center, NextEra Energy and National Grid take six safety measures, “at their sole expense, to address fire-water containment and other safety concerns” at the site.
The demands include new engineering controls capable of containing all fire water and runoff, a revised emergency and safety plan, complete and certified technical information, a hazardous-waste management plan and an independent study of whether the facility remains necessary for the East End electric grid, according to the town.
“These demands come with firm deadlines,” said East Hampton Town Supervisor Kathee Burke-Gonzalez. “The town has reserved every enforcement option available to ensure the companies meet their obligations and put the necessary safeguards in place.”
Earlier this year, the Suffolk County Water Authority detected PFPrA at the wellfield, removing three wells from service and limiting a fourth to emergency use. The Water Authority filed a federal lawsuit against the BESS owners in June, alleging that 2.2 million gallons of firefighting water ran off from the site during the fire, seeping into the groundwater near its wellfield.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is currently sampling the battery storage property, though Mr. Romaine was critical of the DEC during his visit, saying the state agency “refused to point to a source” of the contamination.
The Suffolk County Department of Health Services is also conducting groundwater sampling and testing private drinking-water wells in the area. The county has identified 26 homes in the area that are not connected to public water. Results of testing of all of those are not yet available and several have not yet been sampled, but Suffolk County Department of Health Commissioner Gregson Pigott said at Mr. Romaine’s press conference that nine private wells tested did not have PFPrA levels higher than the New York State screening standard of 3 parts per billion.
The EPA has set a separate standard of 4 parts per trillion for several perfluorinated compounds, not including PFPrA, in public drinking water supplies — far lower than the PFPrA screening standard. The EPA standard goes into effect in 2031, though the Water Authority says it is keeping its network of public wells within that standard already.
When the facility was reviewed by the East Hampton Town Planning Board in 2017, said Ms. Burke-Gonzalez, “the town relied on technical information provided by the applicant stating that no liquid within the battery cells could spill and that the only hazardous spillable liquid at the site was oil contained in the transformers and inverters. The approved plans therefore included containment for that oil, but not a permanent system capable of capturing the fire-suppression water generated during the May 2023 battery fire, which the Water Authority alleges exceeded 2.2 million gallons.”
“The town is not suggesting that anyone should have predicted PFPrA contamination in 2017 or that DEC has concluded that the facility is the source,” she added. “The failure is that the applicant knew, or should have known, that a fire would be fought with water and that containment built for oil alone would be insufficient. That was knowable in 2017, and the applicant did not address it when it applied.”
Ms. Burke-Gonzalez said the town is now requiring the companies to:
- Submit a revised emergency and safety plan for Town approval explaining how the facility would respond to a worst-case battery fire, contain all fire-suppression water and promptly notify the Town and emergency agencies within 30 days.
- Provide stamped engineering plans and install physical containment systems capable of capturing and holding all fire water and runoff on the property within 60 days.
- Prepare a comprehensive hazardous-waste management plan addressing damaged batteries, contaminated water and soil, routine battery replacement and the eventual decommissioning of the facility with the revised emergency and safety plan.
- Correct and certify the facility’s technical record, including complete information about the batteries and the materials they contain, environmental testing conducted since the 2023 fire and changes made to the facility since it was approved within 30 days
- Provide an independent study examining whether the facility remains necessary for the reliability of the East End electric grid, and whether safer alternatives or another location could meet that need within 60 days.
- Provide full access and cooperation to the Town and its consultants for inspections and environmental sampling, and reimburse the Town for the reasonable legal and technical costs of the review “on reasonable notice.”
Keep Independent News on the East End
The Beacon is able to provide all of our content online free of charge thanks to support from our readers. Be a vital part of keeping our community informed!
Advertisement
