 |
|
|
|
|
SUMMER QUARTERLY MEETING - TUESDAY, JULY 31, 2001 - 10:30 A.M. PLACE: Stony Point Battlefield State Historic Site, off Route 9W, Stony Point. 10:30 A.M. Meeting at the Museum · Welcome - Julia Warger, Site Manager Stony Point Battlefield State Historic Site · Presentation of the Rockland County Conservation Association Eleanor Burlingham Award to Hallie Lehrman, Clarkstown High School South Faith Leigh and Jeanne Nelson, Go-Chairs, RCCA Award
11:15 A.M. Program: WHAT'S NEW THIS YEAR? Carol Ash, Executive Director Palisades Interstate Park Commission All are welcome. Please bring a picnic lunch. a blade of grass - the circle it makes in the sand
2001 ELEANOR BURLINGHAM AWARD
Sterling Forest State Park Draft Master Plan The Palisades Interstate Park Commission and the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation have recently completed a Draft Master Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Sterling Forest State Park. The Draft Master Plan emphasizes that the integrity of parkland, flora, fauna and scenic vistas in these areas must be maintained, while providing for passive recreational uses that are compatible with the long-term protection of the park's ecological and historical resources. The Draft Master Plan establishes the Sterling Forest State Park (SFSP) as a "Scenic Park" with 95% of the park designated as both a Park Preservation and a Bird Conservation Area. Park Preservation Areas are established to conserve portions of the park that possess outstanding ecological values, including flora and fauna that are unique or rare in the State. The Bird Conservation Areas are created to safeguard and enhance native New York bird populations and their habitats. The remaining 5% of the park, located predominately at the northern end of Greenwood Lake, the southern end of Sterling Lake and Indian Hill, will be used for active recreation. -From a report in The Sterling Messenger, June 2001
A Plethora of Power Plant Proposals for Rockland-At What Cost? Article X
-Issues of Concern Rockland County Conservation Association, Inc. June 6, 2001 We believe that the process of siting major electric generating facilities through the New York State Public Service Law- Article X places an undue burden on local communities. The following elucidates areas of concern and suggestions that may encourage more equitable use of land and natural resources, without the degradation of local community values and assets. We believe that there should be a preliminary standard that considers appropriate sites prior to engaging in the siting procedure. This could be attained through a two-fold analysis. First, New York State should set a guideline of standards that qualify locations by what defines an appropriate site, as part of an overall/master energy plan. Next, a committee of all interested stakeholders, to include industry, environmental groups, government, and healthcare should determine where appropriate sites are within the State and earmark them for power plant development. Use of existing brownfields should be considered over greenflelds. Also, the State must safeguard watershed protection. As a result of not defining standards, private industry can now choose any site that sets in motion a complex proceeding. This engages the applicant and community in protracted litigation, even when the site is environmentally inappropriate. As suggested by a justice during the Athens Appeal, there is nothing to prevent power plant proposals from being submitted for siting every ten miles along the Hudson River. Surely, lining the beautiful Hudson River with power plants is not a desirable result of the current process. And yet, each would have to be considered on its own merit, enacted through Article X requirements. A community may be faced with multiple proposals, each requiring a cumbersome review process and possible litigation. Certainly, that is the case in Rockland County. Local communities bear the burden of high legal expenses, personal time from the citizens schedule, also, municipalities must dedicate workflow to the tasks of preparing for the proceedings. Personnel of the various State departments should also be factored into the cost of the proceedings. The review time given once an application is deemed complete needs to be extended. Currently, the clock runs against the local communities. The process is more favorable to the applicant, in that, through the pre-application process there is time to adjust and fine-tune their proposal. However, local groups are given insufficient time to review the final application. In the case of ANP-Ramapo Energy the application was deemed complete January 2, 2001 with the date of January 19, 2001 given as the last day for submission of intervenor funding. Clearly, seventeen days is not ample time to understand the application and submit funding requests that meet statutory requirements. The PSC judge suggested that the intervenors had the pre-application process to study the application. It is one thing to ask local groups to meet with the applicant and raise general concerns; it is another matter to ask the community to conduct a critical analysis of an incomplete application. Particularly when there is no additional funding available for such a review. Given their limited time and resources, community groups and local government should not be prejudiced because they did not review an incomplete and/or deficient application. Indeed, as in the case of Sithe, an application may be completely withdrawn and replaced with an entirely new proposal. Further putting the local community at a disadvantage is the process of convening the siting board. The process should not commence until all stakeholders are notified that a complete board is duly constituted. In the ANP-Ramapo Energy proceeding an appeal was made to the siting board on February 14, 2001. As there was not a complete siting board in place to rule in a timely manner, a decision was not made until May 1, 2001. This appeal was critical to intervenor funding. The clock pressed on and intervenors were limited in funding, which certainly influenced the preparation of expert testimony. During the Public Hearings both administrative law judges should be mandated to be present. That was not the situation during the ANP-Ramapo Energy hearings. Also, at least one local siting board member should be present at the Public Hearings. While transcripts are available, these members are charged with understanding local concerns. As such, their input is a result of reading historical documents rather than the members bearing witness to expressed concerns of all present. The title of the Article X indicates that the process considers the siting of major electric generating facilities, We are concerned that the breadth of the Bill allows for consideration of nuclear generated facilities. By obviating home-rule local communities are limited in their ability to rebuke the idea of a nuclear facility being built. Demanding that dirty facilities be de-commissioned could more readily attain improved air quality, when cleaner facilities are sited. The integration of renewable energy sources and conservation through energy efficiency should be incorporated in the siting process. The issues raised are a result of working with the process. While it is not a finite review, we would hope that input from local groups is to be considered in the process. The influences of industry directed concerns should not lead the State standards. We encourage a revision that encompasses greater equity to all stakeholders.
Newsletter - Betty Hedges (bhbettyhedges@aol.com)
ROCKLAND COUNTY WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE Held on May 5, 2001, at Cornell Cooperative Extension of Rockland, the event was co-sponsored by the Professional Landscape Contractors Association of Rockland County. Presenters were Toivo Kisalu, Cornell Cooperative Extension Educator and Mark Russo, Cornell, Cooperative Extension Program Director for Environmental issues. Participants learned how to we Integrated Pest Management in order to produce a green lawn that is water and earth friendly without polluting watersheds with pesticides, metals, nutrients and petroleum. The information followed the WATER QUALITY ALMANAC, which provides lawn care information January through December.
The WATER QUALITY ALMANAC can be purchased at Cornell Cooperative Extension (845)429-7085. The Rockland County Water Quality Committee started in 1992 through funding made available by the New York State Soil and Water Conservation Committee and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Its mission it to: The Committee cooperates with the County of Rockland through the auspices of the Rockland County Division of Environmental Resources. WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE OFFICERS: WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS: - Diane Gruskin, Executive Director Rockland County Environmental Management Council Distribution: - Faith Leigh, Cynthia Brown, Diane Gruskin, Robert Nelson Return to TOP of page |
|
Last Updated: September 09, 2003 |
