DOCSLIB.ORG

Looking Back, Forgingahead Riverkeeper Celebrates 40 Years

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Looking Back, Forgingahead Riverkeeper Celebrates 40 Years SPRING 2006 Looking Back, Forging Ahead Riverkeeper Celebrates 40 Years Board of Directors DEAR FRIENDS OF RIVERKEEPER, George Hornig, Chair 2006 marks 40 years since a group of blue-collar men and women Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Vice Chair Dr. Howard A. Rubin, Treasurer gathered in Crotonville and launched what was to become one of the Peggy Cullen, Secretary Richard R. Knabel, Executive Committee most effective models of environmental advocacy in the history of the John McEnroe, Executive Committee John Abplanalp movement. In leading the fight to reclaim the storied Hudson, Riverkeeper Doni Belau Lorraine Bracco has inspired the addition of 154 other “waterkeepers” patrolling their Ann Colley Hamilton Fish local rivers, lakes and coasts across the globe. Robert Gabrielson Anne Hearst Here at home, Riverkeeper is going strong, waging epic battles against Karen Kelly Klopp Alex Matthiessen giants like Entergy, GE and ExxonMobil who share a common strategy Dennis Rivera of spending more money trying to deceive the public than on redressing Seymour Schwartz Ronald A. DeSilva, Emeritus their assaults on the environment. We’re tackling dozens of other cases where more modest polluters Arthur Glowka, Emeritus Henry Lewis Kingsley, Emeritus are taking a serious collective toll on our environment and health. Recently, we learned that as much Staff as 36% of private drinking water wells in Putnam, Dutchess, and Columbia counties are contaminated ALEX MATTHIESSEN Hudson Riverkeeper with pollutants that exceed EPA federal standards! & President In this issue, we highlight some of the work we’re doing to protect our drinking water supply – ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR. Chief Prosecuting Attorney in this case not by confronting polluters, but by working with legislators, municipalities, community DARCY CASTELEIRO Indian Point Associate groups, and even developers to try to promote positive approaches to protecting water quality. This is ALLISON CHAMBERLAIN a natural consequence of our partnerships with citizen activists who in many instances have been Development Assistant GWENDOLYN CHAMBERS blazing the trail in addressing local threats to the watershed. Membership Communications Officer Riverkeeper is gearing up for the brewing regional debate over the future of the Tappan Zee Bridge. TARA D’ANDREA Grants Officer We recently announced our support for rehabilitating the existing bridge as opposed to replacing the MARIANNE GARDINER Director of Development current 7-lane structure with a 12-lane behemoth that would destroy striped bass and short-nosed LEILA GOLDMARK sturgeon habitat, exacerbate air quality problems, induce rampant sprawl in the Valley, and create Staff Attorney ROBERT GOLDSTEIN traffic jams from Suffern to New York City. To shuttle commuters to New York City from points west Senior Attorney/ Hudson River Program Director of the River, we support the Hudson River tunnel project which would allow a one-seat ride for ROSE MARIE GRANDE Orange and Rockland county residents. We are identifying proponents of the “bridge rehab” Administrative Assistant JOHN LIPSCOMB alternative and organizing a coalition to push aggressively for it. Boat Captain On the Indian Point front, there is a great deal of positive news. Entergy, the plant’s owner and STELLA LIROSI Operations Manager operator, has joined the foul ranks of a number of U.S. nuclear companies who have known about – PHILLIP MUSEGAAS Indian Point Policy Analyst and tried to hide – the discovery of tritiated (radioactive) water leaking from their aging spent fuel MARY BETH POSTMAN storage systems. In this case, tritium and the more dangerous Strontium 90 are leaking into the site’s Executive Assistant to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. groundwater and into the Hudson, sparking ever more outrage from local elected officials. LISA RAINWATER VAN SUNTUM Indian Point Campaign Director We are pleased to report that, as of this writing, Senator Clinton and U.S. Representatives Maurice LAURA SEDLAK Hinchey and Sue Kelly are leading a bi-partisan effort to secure a commitment from the Nuclear Assistant to the President BASIL SEGGOS Regulatory Commission to conduct an independent comprehensive review of Indian Point’s safety Chief Investigator systems and emergency plans. A similar review, known as an Independent Safety Assessment (ISA), led VICTOR TAFUR Staff Attorney to the shutdown of the Maine Yankee plant in 1996. Whatever one’s views about Indian Point’s ulti- TERESA WALSH Events Coordinator mate fate, there is universal agreement that we should have a clear idea of the plant’s actual condition BILL WEGNER before the NRC considers whether it makes sense to grant the facility a license to operate for another Watershed Analyst SABRINA WELLS 20 years. A truly honest look can only lead to Indian Point’s early retirement. Watchdog Program Coordinator We close this issue with a week-in-the-life of Riverkeeper’s intrepid boat captain, John Lipscomb CHRISTOPHER M. WILDE Staff Attorney/Watershed Program Director and a profile of Riverkeeper’s Unsung Hero, an anonymous EPA staffer who blew the whistle on the EPA’s collusion with General Electric to try to avoid a comprehensive PCB cleanup. We are especially ® proud to tell her/his story for we all know that without the courage of whistleblowers the republic KIM BARRON Graphic Designer may have gone down in flames long ago. © RIVERKEEPER 2006. READERS’ LETTERS & COMMENTS WELCOME. As always, I am grateful and indebted to you, our members, who sustain us . RIVERKEEPER IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK AND SERVICE MARK OF RIVERKEEPER, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. — Alex Matthiessen, Hudson Riverkeeper & President PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER, NATURALLY Riverkeeper is the official publication of Riverkeeper, Inc., an independent, member-supported environmental organization. Founded in 1966 by fishermen and community members to confront polluters for control of the Hudson River, Riverkeeper has investigated and successfully prosecuted more than 300 environmental lawbreakers and has guided the establishment of 153 Waterkeeper programs across the nation and beyond. Riverkeeper is a registered trademark and service mark of Riverkeeper, Inc. All rights reserved. 2 Letter from The Hudson Riverkeeper. 4 > Watershed News. Proactive Policy Leads Source Water Protection. Watershed Development Projects Update. Expanding the New York City Watershed Leaf Pack Network. < 9 Looking Back, Forging Ahead. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. recounts our beginnings and interviews Hudson Riverkeeper Alex Matthiessen about our future. 15 < Watchdog Program. Get on Board. E 17 Indian Point Features. E Radioactive Leak Mystery Continues. New Emergency Sirens by January 2007. Wind Energy. Remembering Chornobyl. Grassroots Activism. Federal Indian Point Legislation. F 25 Currents. Patrol Boat Log: December Patrol. > Hotline Calls. 28 The Docket. 29 A Bridge to Nowhere. > 30 Member News. F 31 Unsung Hero. < Proactive Policies Protect Water At It’s Source BY LEILA GOLDMARK Efforts to expand wetland life in the East-of-Hudson Riverkeeper has built its buffer widths in local ordi- watershed and throughout the reputation on being a strong nances have met with success Hudson Valley. Here, our over- s enforcer of environmental laws in several East-of-Hudson arching solution to sprawl is to and winning precedent-setting municipalities, and similar achieve a large-scale shift in w litigation to protect the Hudson expansions currently are being the development paradigm in River and the New York City considered in several more. the watershed. We want to e watershed. While the Watershed For the third year, New York’s promote and invite the type Team will always bring hard- Clean Water Protection/Flood of planning and growth that n hitting lawsuits when necessary, Prevention Act has passed in enhances communities and we are focusing increasing ener- the State Assembly but awaits local economies while protect- d gy on proactive programs that action in the Senate. The federal ing critical natural resources. will achieve systemic, long-term Clean Water Authority Restor- Our first step involved an e protection of NYC watershed ation Act gains support in education campaign highlight- h drinking water supplies at their Congress (with strong support ing the variety of impacts of source. We are working cre- from New York representatives), sprawl. Last year, we published s atively, crafting new partner- but lacks the numbers needed Pave It?... Or Save It? r ships, and increasing outreach for passage. Volume 1: The Environmental, e and education to local and A complex legislative cam- Economic and Social Impacts t regional officials, town planners, paign involves drafting strong of Sprawl. Designed in a fact- business owners, environmental legislation, enlisting bill spon- sheet style, our aim was to a organizations, and citizens. By sors, and persistent lobbying. educate the public and local working together to implement To move legislators, strategic decisionmakers and arm them w proactive policies we can prevent grassroots campaigns – includ- with the data and references pollution before it becomes a ing letter writing, petitions, they need to better understand problem we can’t ignore. demonstrations, and media the growing threats that nega- A variety of tools can be coverage – must demonstrate tively impact our lives. We Watershed news used to achieve different policy the overwhelming and wide- gave numerous presentations is an update of Riverkeeper’s objectives, from passing legisla- spread support of the public. to town boards,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Total Economic Costs of the War Beyond the Federal Budget
    S. HRG. 110–703 WAR AT ANY COST? THE TOTAL ECONOMIC COSTS OF THE WAR BEYOND THE FEDERAL BUDGET HEARING BEFORE THE JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION FEBRUARY 28, 2008 Printed for the use of the Joint Economic Committee ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 42–773 PDF WASHINGTON : 2009 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:44 Jan 30, 2009 Jkt 042773 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 C:\DOCS\42773.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE [Created pursuant to Sec. 5(a) of Public Law 304, 79th Congress] SENATE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York, Chairman CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Vice Chair EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico BARON P. HILL, Indiana AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota LORETTA SANCHEZ, California ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania ELIJAH CUMMINGS, Maryland JIM WEBB, Virginia LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas JIM SAXTON, New Jersey, Ranking Minority JOHN SUNUNU, New Hampshire KEVIN BRADY, Texas JIM DEMINT, South Carolina PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah RON PAUL, Texas MICHAEL LASKAWY, Executive Director CHRISTOPHER J. FRENZE, Minority Staff Director (II) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:44 Jan 30, 2009 Jkt 042773 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 C:\DOCS\42773.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA C O N T E N T S MEMBERS Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashokan Reservoir: Stop the Mud Fact Sheet
    Ashokan Reservoir: Stop the mud Fact Sheet NYC is dumping billions of gallons of muddy water into the Lower Esopus The New York City Department of Environmental Protection is at it again, dumping millions of gallons each day of turbid water from the Ashokan Reservoir into the Lower Esopus Creek. High volume, turbid releases, such as those following the 2020 Christmas storm, have left the Lower Esopus Creek a muddy mess. These releases have such a negative impact that the Lower Esopus Creek has been placed on the New York State List of Impaired Waters for excessive silt and sediment. Why is this happening? The Esopus Creek is dammed to create the Ashokan Reservoir, one of the most important parts of New York City’s unfiltered drinking water supply, which serves over 9.5 million people in New York City and the Hudson Valley. Erosion from severe storms – which will become more common as the climate changes – causes excessive turbidity in the reservoir. One of the ways New York City manages this challenge is to dump high volumes of muddy water from the reservoir into the Lower Esopus Creek, which flows 32 miles to the Hudson River. These releases are the least ​ expensive way for the DEP to preserve the quality of NYC drinking water. However, this “solution” only shifts the costs and consequences onto the farmers, businesses and residents along the Lower Esopus from these releases. What is the impact? The turbid water severely affects water quality, wildlife habitat, recreation, and quality of life throughout seven Ulster County communities along the Lower Esopus.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Documents
    Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Monday, October 30, 2000 Volume 36ÐNumber 43 Pages 2529±2650 Contents Addresses and Remarks Addresses and RemarksÐContinued BudgetÐ2616, 2638 New YorkÐContinued Congressional candidate Donald Dunn, Representative Maurice Hinchey, reception receptionÐ2613 in KingstonÐ2582 Drunk driving standard, establishment of Westchester County Democratic Party nationalÐ2578 dinner in New RochelleÐ2595 Indiana North Carolina Gov. James B. Hunt, Jr., Hillary Clinton, reception in IndianapolisÐ tributeÐ2599 2545 People for the American Way receptionÐ Representative Julia Carson, rally in 2610 IndianapolisÐ2550 Radio addressÐ2549 Jordan-U.S. trade agreement, signingÐ2608 School construction and education, legislative Legislative agendaÐ2616, 2638 agendaÐ2603 Massachusetts, Democratic Senate Campaign Committee Bill Signings dinner in BostonÐ2541 Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Representative Martin Meehan, reception Treatment Act of 2000, statementÐ2607 in LowellÐ2534 New York Department of Transportation and Related Democratic Assembly Campaign Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, Committee reception in New York CityÐ statementÐ2580 2623 Ryan White CARE Act Amendments of 2000, Departure for New York CityÐ2616 statementsÐ2531, 2532 Hillary Clinton Communications to Congress Birthday tribute in New York CityÐ2632 Brunch in Johnson CityÐ2555 Bipartisan tax cut legislation, lettersÐ2631, Dinner in HempsteadÐ2564 2636 Reception in Alexandria BayÐ2559 Colombia and neighboring countries, letter Reception in
    [Show full text]
  • Qui Tam Suits Under the Refuse Act (Connecticut Action Now, Inc
    St. John's Law Review Volume 47 Number 2 Volume 47, December 1972, Number Article 17 2 Qui Tam Suits Under the Refuse Act (Connecticut Action Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co.) St. John's Law Review Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in St. John's Law Review by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ST. JOHN'S LAW REVIEW [Vol. 47:313 Qui Tam SUITS UNDER THE REFUSE ACT Connecticut Action Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co. As the preceding cases indicate, the Second Circuit, like courts all over the country, has been besieged in recent years by citizens seek- ing to enforce environmental laws. The enactment of new statutes, such as NEPA, has not deterred environmental plaintiffs from testing the possibilities presented by other statutes, both old and new. Clearly, a threshold question in a suit brought to enforce statutory provisions is whether the plaintiff has standing to bring the action. Although recent decisions have taken a liberal view of requirements,100 a plain- tiff must still show that he has been or may be injured in fact, eco- nomically or otherwise, and that the "interest sought to be protected ... [is] ... arguably within the zone of interests to be protected... by the statute . in question. 1' 01 The case to be discussed in this comment demonstrates that, even where these requirements appear to be met the prospective plaintiff may find his action blocked by the nature of the statute under which he attempts to protect environ- mental interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Pubhclaw95-87 , : : : ' ; -'
    PUBLIC LAW 95-87—AUG. 3, 1977 91 STAT. 445 PubHcLaw95-87 ,:::'; -' ' ^ 95th Congress An Act To provide for the cooperation between the Secretary of the Interior ano the Aug. 3, 1977 States with respect to the regulation of surface coal mining operations, and [H.R. 2] the acquisition and reclamation of abandoned mines, and for other purposes. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assemhled^ That this Act Surface Mining may be cited as the "Surface Mining Control and Eeclamation Act Control and of 1977". Reclamation Act TABLE OF CONTENTS ^} 1977. 30 use 1201 TITLE I—STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND POLICY note. Sec. 101. Findings. Sec. 102. Purposes. TITLE II—OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT Sec. 201. Creation of the Office. >- TITLE III—STATE MINING AND MINERAL RESOURCES AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES Sec. 301. Authorization of State allotments to institutes. Sec. 302. Research funds to institutes. Sec. 303. Funding criteria. Sec. 304. Duties of the Secretary. Sec. 305. Autonomy. " '•-'•• Sec. 306. Miscellaneous provisions. Sec. 307. Center for cataloging. Sec. 308. Interagency cooperation. Sec. 309. Advisory committee. TITLE IV—ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION Sec. 401. Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund and purposes. Sec. 402. Reclamation fee. Sec. 403. Objectives of fund. Sec. 404. Eligible lands and water. Sec. 405. State reclamation programs. Sec. 406. Reclamation of rural lands. Sec. 407. Acquisition and reclamation of land adversely affected by past coal mining practices. Sec. 408. Liens. Sec. 409. Filling voids and sealing tunnels. Sec. 410. Emergency powers. Sec. 411. Fund report.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting America's Wetlands Under Rapanos: Defining "The Waters of the United States"
    Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development Volume 23 Issue 1 Volume 23, Spring 2008, Issue 1 Article 8 Protecting America's Wetlands Under Rapanos: Defining "the Waters of the United States" Adam Redder Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROTECTING AMERICA'S WETLANDS UNDER RAPANOS: DEFINING "THE WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES" ADAM REDDER* INTRODUCTION When can a landowner dredge and fill wetlands on his or her property without fear of intervention by the federal government? If one wants to build a structure on his or her property, should he or she be concerned about the small stream or wetland in the backyard? Does the size of the stream or wetland matter? Does it matter if the stream flows continuously throughout the year? What if there is a lake nearby? What if one receives a nod from state authorities to go forward with a development project-can one initiate such a project without authorization from the federal government? The answer to these questions is unclear even in light of a recent United States Supreme Court case specifically addressing the matter.1 The scope of federal jurisdiction over wetlands and other land features exhibiting saturated soil conditions in the United States is defined by the Clean Water Act (hereinafter CWA).2 The Supreme Court has attempted to appropriately define the * J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Refuse Act of 1899: Key to Clean Water Ross Sandler New York Law School
    digitalcommons.nyls.edu Faculty Scholarship Articles & Chapters 1972 The Refuse Act of 1899: Key to Clean Water Ross Sandler New York Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_articles_chapters Part of the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation American Bar Association Journal, Vol. 58, Issue 5 (May 1972), pp. 468-471 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles & Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. The Refuse Act of 1899: Key to Clean Water by Ross Sandier The Refuse Act of 1899, although Enforcement means no more than approaching its diamond anniversary, F ORin thePERSONS environment genuinely and theinterested abate- ordering the polluter to conform to the is alive and well and providing the ment of water pollution, the last year desired standard and, on his failing to best legal framework for cleaning or two must surely look like the dawn- meet that standard, imposing sanc- up the nation's navigable streams ing of a new age. The distinction be- tions. Under the Refuse Act of 1899 and their tributaries. Its absolute tween today's relatively optimistic pic- the Federal Government has been standard of no pollution, which is ture and the past rests on the emerging doing precisely this. As many legisla- ameliorated through practical use its tures and the Congress contemplate application, is to be preferred over consensus that government must attempts to provide elaborate enforcement powers to bring a halt to pollution abatement legislation, it is statutory standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of Tfjc Untteb States
    wltAKY *> ' ',ARY ~fvi: 3 COURT- U- S-RECF.VEO SCllDCfurufp^ COURT,» - U._ :t. u. s. MAR^t *s DFFJCE In the flf» 3 4 22 PM *73 Supreme Court of tfjc Untteb States UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) Petitioner, } ) vs, ) No. 72-624 ) PENNSYLVANIA INDUSTRIAL ) CHEMICAL CORPORATION, ) ) Respondent, ) Washington, D. C. March 27, 1973 Pages 1 thru 50 Duplication or copying of this transcript by photographic, electrostatic or other facsimile means is prohibited under the order form agreement. HOOVER REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Official 'Reporters Washington, D. C. 546-6666 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TIIE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, Vo No . 72-624 PENNSYLVANIA INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Respondent» Washington,, D„ C, f Tuesday, March 27, 1973,, The above-entitled matter came on for argument at 11:14 o'clock, a»rn„ BEFORE: WARREN E. BURGER, Chief Justice of the United States WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS, Associate Justice WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, JR„, Associate Justice POTTER STEWART, Associate Justice BYRON R. WHITE, Associate Justice THURGOOD MARSHALL, Associate Justice HARRY A. BLACKMUN, Associate Justice LEWIS F. POWELL, JR„, Associate Justice WILLIAM II. REIINQUIST, Associate Justice APPEARANCESi WILLIAM BRADFORD REYNOLDS, ESQ», Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D„ C» 20530; for the Petitioner» HAROLD GONDELMAN, ESQ», Baskin, Boreman, Wilner, Sachs, Gondelman & Craig, 1018 Frick Building, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219; for the Respondents ORAL ARGUMENT OF: PAGE William Bradford Reynolds, Esq,, for the Petitioner 3 In rebuttal 48 Harold Gondelman, Esq», for the Respondent 22 3 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGERs We will hear arguments next in No.
    [Show full text]
  • HUDSON RIVER RISING Riverkeeper Leads a Growing Movement to Protect the Hudson
    Confronting climate | Restoring nature | Building resilience annual journal HUDSON RIVER RISING Riverkeeper leads a growing movement to protect the Hudson. Its power is unstoppable. RIVERKEEPER JOURNAL 01 Time and again, the public rises to speak for a voiceless Hudson. While challenges mount, our voices grow stronger. 02 RIVERKEEPER JOURNAL PRESIDENT'S LETTER Faith and action It’s all too easy to feel hopeless these days, lish over forty new tanker and barge anchorages allowing storage of crude when you think about the threat posed by climate oil right on the Hudson, Riverkeeper is working with local partners to stop disruption and the federal government’s all-out another potentially disastrous plan to build enormous storm surge barriers war on basic clean water and habitat protection at the entrance to the Hudson Estuary. Instead, we and our partners are laws. Yet, Riverkeeper believes that a better fighting for real-world, comprehensive and community-driven solutions future remains ours for the taking. to coastal flooding risks. We think it makes perfect sense to feel hope- History was made, here on the Hudson. Groundbreaking legal pro- ful, given New York’s new best-in-the-nation tections were born here, over half a century ago, when earlier waves of climate legislation and its record levels of spend- activists rose to protect the Adirondacks, the Palisades and Storm King ing on clean water (which increased by another Mountain and restore our imperiled fish and wildlife. These founders had $500 million in April). This year, The Empire State also banned river-foul- no playbook and certainly no guarantee of success.
    [Show full text]
  • Hinchey, Maurice; Papers Apap335
    Hinchey, Maurice; Papers This finding aid was produced using ArchivesSpace on September 28, 2021. M.E. Grenander Department of Special Collections & Archives Hinchey, Maurice; Papers Table of Contents Summary Information .................................................................................................................................... 3 Historical Note ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Scope and Contents ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Arrangement of the Collection ...................................................................................................................... 4 Administrative Information ............................................................................................................................ 4 Controlled Access Headings .......................................................................................................................... 5 - Page 2 - Hinchey, Maurice; Papers Summary Information Repository: M.E. Grenander Department of Special Collections & Archives Title: Maurice Hinchey Papers ID: apap335 Date [inclusive]: 1974-2012 Physical Description: 212 cubic ft. Physical Location: The materials are located onsite in the department. Language of the English . Material: Mixed Materials X [Collection]: Abstract: This collection documents Maurice Hinchey's service
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Point Draft Letter
    April 26, 2007 The Honorable Dale Klein Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Dear Chairman Klein: I write to express my strong support for H.R. 994 and S. 649, and to call on you to direct the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to conduct an Independent Safety Assessment of the Indian Point nuclear power plant in Westchester County, New York. I commend Congressman John Hall for his leadership in sponsoring H.R. 994, and the dedication of the bill’s co-sponsors from the New York Hudson Valley—Congressman Eliot Engel, Congressman Maurice Hinchey, and Congresswoman Nita Lowey. I also applaud Senators Clinton and Schumer for leading the charge in the Senate by co-sponsoring S. 649. These bills direct the NRC to conduct an ISA of Indian Point before the plant can be relicensed. Never has the need for this type of evaluation been greater. Indian Point’s two commercial nuclear reactors are located in a densely populated area of New York, on the east bank of the Hudson River 24 miles north of New York City. According to a 2003 study by James Lee Witt Associates, 298,000 people live within the ten-mile circular area surrounding the plant. Bear Mountain State Park, Harriman State Park and the U.S. Military Academy at West Point are also located within the emergency planning zone. Given Indian Point’s close proximity to New York City, a serious accident could threaten millions of people in the greater metropolitan area. Indian Point has been plagued with significant operational difficulties.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Crimes Monthly Bulletin September 2007
    ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES MONTHLY BULLETIN September 2007 EDITOR’S NOTE: Please continue to submit information on relevant case developments in federal prosecutions for inclusion in the Bulletin. If you have a significant photograph from the case, you may email this, along with your submission, to Elizabeth Janes: MaterialAT alsoA GmaLy beA faxedNC Eto Elizabeth at (202) 305-0396. If you have information to submit on state-level cases, please send this to the Regional Environmental Enforcement Associations’ website: http://www.regionalassociations.org. You may quickly navigate through this document using electronic links for Significant Opinions, Active Cases, and Quick Links. ECS Monthly Bulletin September 2007 AT A GLANCE SIGNIFICANT OPINIONS Northern California River Watch v. City of Healdsburg, ___ F.3d___, 2007 WL 2230186 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2007) . United States v. Moses, ___ F.3d ___, 2007 WL 2215954 (9th Cir. Aug. 3, 2007). United States v. Citgo Petroleum Corp., ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, 2007 WL 1125792 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 16, 2007). United States v. Hylton, ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, 2007 WL 1674183 (W.D. Okla. June 7, 2007). 2 ECS Monthly Bulletin September 2007 Districts Active Cases Case Type / Statutes United States v. James Jairell Bear Hunting/ Lacey Act, Conspiracy D. Alaska United States v. IMC Shipping Vessel/ Refuse Act, Migratory Bird Co. Pte. Ltd. Treaty Act United States v. David Bachtel Vessel Scuttled/ Clean Water Act, Obstruction, False Statement, Sinking C.D. Calif. Boat in Navigation Channel United States v. Robert Robertson Waste Recycler/ False Statement C. Colo. United States v. Jan Swart Leopard Hunting/ Smuggling United States v.
    [Show full text]