Twenty-four organizations are urging New York to broaden its review of AI data centers, warning that the state’s proposed approach could leave critical questions about electric bills, water supplies, pollution and neighborhood impacts inadequately examined.
The coalition, which includes Earthjustice, Seneca Lake Guardian and other Finger Lakes organizations, submitted comments Nov. 4 challenging the scope of an environmental study tied to Gov. Kathy Hochul’s data center moratorium.
Their argument centers on how the review is framed: Studying how massive electricity users connect to the grid, they say, does not fully answer whether—and under what conditions—New York should accommodate the industry’s growth.
The Public Service Commission has said its draft already includes water, air quality, public health and community impacts. The advocates contend that listing those subjects is not enough without a broader framework, clearer agency responsibilities and specific protections.
“Her administration’s plans to review data centers’ impacts on New Yorkers are too narrow and miss the mark,” Earthjustice New York Policy Advocate Liz Moran said in a Nov. 5 statement.
What the state is reviewing
The dispute concerns the scope of a generic environmental impact statement, a study intended to examine broad impacts associated with data center development and other large electricity users.
The scope establishes what the eventual study will investigate. It is an early step in the review, rather than a completed assessment or approval of a particular project.
Hochul’s July 14 executive order directed the Department of Public Service to evaluate data center impacts and paused certain Department of Environmental Conservation permits while that work proceeds.
The order covers qualifying facilities capable of consuming at least 50 megawatts, with specified exemptions. Its permitting pause applies to discretionary DEC applications for construction or expansion that had not already been deemed complete when the order was issued. It does not apply to local government permits.
In its September announcement of the draft scope, the PSC said the study would evaluate construction and operation of data centers, along with proposed changes to grid connections and the allocation of costs.
The commission identified potential effects on air, surface water, groundwater, human health, disadvantaged communities, agriculture, wildlife, open space and community character, as well as noise, odor and light.
The coalition wants those issues examined as part of a comprehensive review of the industry itself. Its joint letter argues that framing the proposed action around grid connection reforms could limit how thoroughly the state considers impacts unrelated to those reforms.
Electric bills and water supplies drive concerns
For residents, one of the central questions is who pays for the infrastructure and electricity needed to serve enormous new customers.
The coalition says the draft does not explain proposed safeguards in enough detail for the public to evaluate them. General references to cost allocation or new charges, it argues, leave unanswered which expenses developers would bear and how other customers would be protected.
Those questions include whether data centers would pay for the additional infrastructure they require, how existing system costs would be divided and whether new power requirements would be met with clean energy or fossil fuels.
Hochul’s order identifies risks when utilities invest in infrastructure for projects that are delayed, reduced or never built. It directs state officials to consider financial protections and mechanisms that could require developers to contribute toward grid improvements and new energy supply.
The advocates also want clearer roles for DEC and the state Department of Health. Their letter argues that water use, air pollution, toxic exposure, land use and noise require expertise beyond electricity regulation.
Those concerns already have a local audience. As FL1 reported Nov. 2, Seneca Lake Pure Waters Association has separately requested stronger examination of water consumption, wastewater, stormwater, temperature changes and effects on aquatic life.
Pure Waters cited proposed AI and high-performance computing development at Greenidge in Dresden as an example of the issue’s relevance to the Finger Lakes.
The latest coalition includes Seneca Lake Guardian, Committee to Preserve the Finger Lakes, Fossil Free Tompkins and Climate Solutions Accelerator of the Genesee-Finger Lakes Region.
Coalition wants a no-growth alternative and stronger permitting
The groups are also asking the state to compare continued development with a scenario allowing no new or expanded data centers.
The distinction matters because the draft’s “no action” alternative would examine development continuing under existing rules, without additional protections. The coalition wants a second baseline showing the potential impacts avoided if expansion did not proceed.
Examining that scenario would not itself impose a permanent ban. It would add another alternative for comparison in the environmental study.
The coalition also argues that the review must spell out how data center development would comply with New York’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act and Environmental Justice Siting Law.
The groups say climate compliance should be treated as a legal requirement, with close attention to cumulative burdens on disadvantaged communities.
Another recommendation is a mandatory permitting mechanism for new or expanding data centers. The coalition warns that some projects may avoid discretionary DEC permits depending on how and where they are developed, potentially limiting opportunities for state review.
Earthjustice’s separate detailed comments also raise concerns about facilities powered by on-site generation rather than a conventional grid connection.
New York City raises questions, too
New York City submitted its own comments Nov. 4 calling for clarification of the review.
The city acknowledged that the draft recognizes a range of environmental impacts, but sought a stronger assessment of cumulative and indirect effects, reliability, water resources, environmental justice and climate considerations.
That submission does not amount to endorsement of every coalition demand. It adds another government’s concerns about whether the final study will provide enough information to evaluate impacts and reasonable alternatives.
Public participation has also been debated. As FL1 previously reported, state Sen. Liz Krueger and Assemblymember Anna Kelles, joined by 54 other legislators, requested more time for comments and public hearings.
The next major step is for the commission to consider submissions and establish a final scope directing the environmental study. The coalition’s recommendations are requests for changes, not adopted state requirements.
Residents can follow the filings through the Department of Public Service’s record for case 26-E-0045.
FingerLakes1.com is the region’s leading all-digital news publication. The company was founded in 1998 and has been keeping residents informed for more than two decades. Have a lead? Send it to news@fingerlakes1.com.