Irvington Tree Preservation Project

Update on Hydro-Fracking in NYS

2012-01-25T14:50:00.001-05:00

Shale Shocked: Fracking Gets Its Own Occupy MovementRead article about grassroots activism upstate - from TomDispatch.com: http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175492/tomgram%3A_ellen_cantarow%2C_an_environmental_occupy_fracks_corporate_america/

How Much Does Cornell Cooperative Extension Cost You?

2011-11-30T13:53:00.001-05:00

I thought that it would be interesting to look at the effective cost per household of some of the county budget items in question this year. I went to the county budget posted online and extracted relevant numbers for yearly operating costs (2010 actual vs. 2011 projected) for Cornell Cooperative Extension and for the 6 county nature centers scheduled to be closed.

If you look at actual property tax revenues in the proposed $1.6B budget (county tax revenue = $548 million), then CCE's desired budget of $990k = .18% of property taxes. If an typical household pays $4000 in county taxes (assuming an average local tax bill is $20k of which, according to the county budget report, 15-20% is county taxes), then the effective cost is $7.20 per household for support of CCE programs. If local tax averages are DOUBLE ($40k), the effective cost per household is still under $15 for CCE.

A similar calculation for operating costs (including personnel) for the 6 nature centers to be closed results in a net cost savings of 64 cents for an average household. (Effective cost per household = $2.16 for 2011 vs. $2.80 for 2010.) This is based upon total operating costs of $384,900 for 2010 and $297,400 for 2011.

These sample calculations do not include all of the proposed Parks & Rec cuts - specifically the Deer Management research program. At around $60k annual (field biologist's salary and misc expenses), this program works out to be 40 cents per household.

A similar cost analysis could be done to reveal the $/household impacts of other items in the budget. Roughly, every $30k in budget costs results in about 20 cents per household.

These are rough calcs, but with numbers such as these per household, the value equation of such environmental and educational services becomes obvious. The cuts are penny-wise and pound foolish.

---

Please contact the County Executive and the Board of Legislators about the importance of these services and your willingness as a county tax payer to support continuation of such services (all total - at a cost of under $20 per household).

Schedule of Public Meetings on the Budget:

Wednesday November 30 at 7pm
Somers High School
120 Primrose Street, Lincolndale

Tuesday December 6 at 7pm
*** NEW LOCATION ***
LITTLE THEATER
Westchester County Center
198 Central Ave, White Plains, NY 10606.

Come early and register to speak up!

Call or write to County Executive Astorino at ce@westchestergov.com
and let him know that the Nature Centers, Parks, and wildlife habitat are important to you.

Call or write to your County Legislator - here is a page which lists all of them and links to contact info (email, phone) for each of the legislators.

Spread the word by sharing this email!

DEER DEER DEER!

2011-11-10T14:20:00.001-05:00

Tips on Coping with Deer

with Ruth Rogers Clausen

author of 50 Beautiful Deer-Resistant Plants

A book-signing will follow the presentation

Tuesday November 29, 2011 from 10:00 AM to 12:00 noon

at Lasdon Park and Arboretum, Route 35, Katonah, NY 10536

Have you been frustrated by previous attempts at trying to grow an ornamental garden here in the heart of suburban deer country? Are you tired of having your hard work gobbled up by herds of hungry deer? Have you given up on trying to create an aesthetically pleasing garden with interesting plant combinations because you think it’s no longer possible? Invigorate your gardening enthusiasm with tips from well known garden writer, author and botanist Ruth Rogers Clausen through her years of experience with growing and knowing the “ins and outs” of perennial gardening right here in Westchester deer country!

Registration and light refreshments 10:00 AM to10:30 AM. Lecture begins promptly at 10:30 AM!

Sponsored by

Cornell University Cooperative Extension of Westchester County Westchester County Department of Parks, Recreation & Conservation The Friends of Lasdon Park and Arboretum

Program fee is $15.00 per person. Pre-registration is required and must be accompanied by a check payable to: Cornell Cooperative Extension of Westchester County and must be received by Tuesday, 11/22/11. MAIL FORM BELOW AND PAYMENT TO: Cornell Cooperative Extension of Westchester County, 26 Legion Drive, Valhalla, NY 10595. Sorry! No refunds! For further information call 914-285- 4640 or send email to: ggg3@cornell.edu . Space is limited, so don’t delay!

Riverkeeper Update on Hydro-Fracking - Take Action!

2011-11-10T12:34:00.002-05:00

Critical Public Comment Periods Open on Fracking New York’s Water

Riverkeeper’s attorneys are preparing detailed responses to regulators’ flawed draft environmental review and rules on fracking, and the public has only until Dec. 12 to join us by submitting their own comments on the state's fracking proposal. Not only does the proposal fail to protect water, but the state fails to seriously consider any socio-economic risks of fracking, from the costs of increased road construction to potential impacts on tourism and farming.

Join Us! Attend our presentation, “Understanding the Facts on Fracking,” Nov. 16 at the Town of Esopus Library.
Make a Difference! Attend New York State Department of Environmental Conservation public hearings on its draft environmental review and regulations; and/or the Delaware River Basin Commission’s public hearing on its draft regulations throughout November.
Do Your Part! Comment on the DEC’s draft environmental review and regulations.

Love 'Em and Leave 'Em Neighborhood Training Events

2011-11-01T13:21:00.001-04:00

Updated - Rescheduled Events Due to Last Weekend's Snow Storm

The Irvington Green Policy Task Force would like to invite you to attend one of our upcoming neighborhood training sessions for Irvington's "Love 'Em and Leave 'Em" leaf mulching-in-place initiative. We held our first training last Saturday (Oct 22) in the Jaffray Park neighborhood. The Rivertowns Enterprise attended and there was a nice write-up and editorial about the training in Friday's edition (Oct 28th) of the Enterprise.

Saturday

Nov 5, 10-11am Spiro Park - 12 Woodbine Rd. (off Station Road)

Nov 5, 11am-noon 65 W.Clinton Ave. (will include landscaper demo of commercial mower)

Nov 5, 2-3pm Main Street at the Rip Van Winkle Statue Park (between Village Hall and Main Street school)

Sunday

Nov 6, 3-4pm 10 North Eckar St. (off Main Street)

Please feel free to contact us at green@irvingtonny.gov for more information. Background information on the LELE initiative can be found on the village website at www.irvingtonny.gov/green

---

Mark Gilliland

Irvington Green Policy Task Force

Fracking, Water and You!

2011-09-28T12:37:00.002-04:00

Just received this Green Street Alert:

Fracking, Water and You!

The fracking debate continues to grow in New York with more disclosures about negative health effects and potential threats to drinking water. Join Patti and Doug this evening on Green Street as they welcome Al Appleton, former commissioner of the New York City DEP and international water expert, whose insights about how fracking will affect our drinking water are in stark contrast to the soothing assurances of the gas exploration companies.

Tuesday evening at 8:00 pm on WBAI-FM 99.5 in New York and streaming live at www.wbai.org.

This and all Green Street shows are archived at our program web site, GreenStreetRadio.com

Celebrating Trees in Our Communities

2011-09-24T11:17:00.000-04:00

This community oriented presentation by international arboricultural consultant, Frank Buddingh’ will explore the importance of trees and how they are intimately linked to our lives.

Attendees will be introduced to:

1. the elements within the community that impact the health of trees

2. conflicts within the areas of local environmental policy and social customs pertaining to the health of trees

3. health-promoting features of the tree population

4. the need for change within our communities in regard to the health of its trees and the future

“We owe some understanding to our trees, without them life on earth is simply impossible!”, says Frank who has worked with and consulted on trees for over forty years in many locations around the world. Franks clients have ranged from royal households and local governments to corporations and tree owners. He has a deep understanding of the needs of trees and the importance of balancing these needs with the needs of people.

Thursday, October 13th at 7:00, Larchmont Library. Free.

Utilities and Hurricane Irene

2011-09-13T11:59:00.002-04:00

LORAX's Patricia Podolak reports on Monday's WCBOL Committee on Environment & Energy Committee meeting:

FYI. This afternoon I took some time from my busy work schedule and attended the West. Co. Board of Legislators – Committee on Environment & Energy Meeting. The topic of today’s meeting was utility storm response. Representatives from Con Edison and NYSEG were present to discuss the recent electric outages and obstacles resulting from tropical Storm Irene. Leg. Kaplowitz was not present due to the recent, sudden passing of his father. Majority Leader Harckham chaired the meeting. Seven other legislators were in attendance. The meeting lasted 1.5 hours.

In brief overview:

· PSC was invited to attend and was not present. Harckham termed this “very disturbing” and “an abomination."

· Harckham raised the issue that no significant resources were available until Wednesday after the storm.

· NYSEG emphasized the extreme differences between its service territory and that of Con Edison. Con Edison 380 sq miles. NYSEG 11,000 sq miles, 26 counties, 270 municipalities. NYSEG heavily rural and spread out, covering 44% of upstate. 15% of NYSEG customers were without power.

· Con Ed said that they had 2 Incident Commanders (IC’s). NYSEG said that they had 1 IC and he came from a sister company in Maine and arrived on Wednesday.

· Con Ed said that most power was restored by Thursday evening---97% of West Co. NYSEG took longer.

· They both used first few days for clearing trees with help of DPWs. Then line outages addressed.

· Both brought in out of state crews.

· Con Ed sand bagged some substations due to the threat of flooding.

· NYSEG said they experienced the worst infrastructure damage in 30 years. Brewster division heavily wooded and difficult to access. 3,000 wires down and 300 poles down.

· NYSEG worked transmission segment first, then the distribution lines. Some substations were out.

· Both claimed that they had a problem getting dry ice. One legislator noted that there is an ice company in Mamaroneck that was selling it after the storm.

· Con Edison said that their approach has been having municipal liaisons and they plan to meet with municipal officials in the future and not the public

· NYSEG said that they have too many municipalities to cover and that is why they can not have municipal liaisons. However, for this storm they said that they did use municipal liaisons in West Co.

· Municipal officials were invited to speak. The Police Chief from Pound Ridge noted that their entire town was out and they only have NYSEG. He further noted that the municipal liaison approach was more of a problem than help for them because it introduced yet another layer in the process.

· Both utilities said that they will not cover the cost of lost food because the outage was storm related.

· There will be a follow-up meeting Sept 19 or 26. Issues were identified today. Plan of action to be addressed at next meeting.

In my opinion, both utilities should include the public in their meetings and not just select municipal officials.

With well organized emergency response and preparedness plans, everything should fall readily into place. There may be a few minor glitches which is all that a municipal liaison should have to become involved with. I agree with the Police Chief from Pound Ridge. Too many layers of bureaucracy can impede the restoration/recovery process and the municipal liaison should not play a major role.

NYSEG should use an in-state IC that is on staff.

It has been demonstrated repeatedly that the PSC is not in control where it should be. After years of dealing with this, it has become evident to me that the regulators are too close to the utilities. It is the PSC that should be investigated by our state elected officials. Reform is necessary at the level of the PSC. That is the only way to obtain significant change. Complaint letters to the PSC will only result in marginal actions.

It should be further noted that trees are not the only cause of electrical outages during major storms. It is a complex issue that includes (and is not limited to) flooding, winds, aged infrastructure, employee training, emergency response procedures, etc.

There are individuals who have and who continue to try to address distribution line vegetation management issues. A regulatory approach would be the most effective. There are sensible ways and standards that can be utilized if officials are serious about it. However, one cannot ignore the significant impact of aged distribution line infrastructure (lines, poles, transformers, etc.) and lack of routine infrastructure maintenance. In the case of Con Edison, rather than clear cutting their transmission line where the outages are not occurring, it would be more prudent for them to shift resources to the distribution lines.

These are complex issues, and it is doubtful under current circumstances that complaints filed with the PSC will bring about long term necessary change.

Thank you.

Dr. Patricia Podolak

Chair, Utilities Oversight Committee

Town of Yorktown

Support Cornell Cooperative Extension's 2012 Budget

2011-09-13T11:43:00.000-04:00

The time to start thinking about Westchester Cornell Cooperative Extension's 2012 budget is now. The Hay U Farm Friends have been working with Legislator Peter Harckham and the CCE staff to start a petition to keep CCE funded in 2012. The link to the petition is:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/westchesterccebudget/

Please get all of your members, families, friends, acquaintances and anyone else to go to the ipetitions website and sign the petition. In the fall, we will present the petition to County Supervisor Astorino and the entire Westchester Board of Legislators. If we have enough signatures, it will make a difference.

Thank you for all of your help,

Emory Nager

VP HAY U Farm Friends (North Salem 4-H Club)

Hydrofracking Report Out, Countdown Clock Begins

2011-09-12T14:23:00.000-04:00

From Eco Politics Daily

Submitted by Dan Hendrick on Thu, 2011-09-08 10:51.

With the release of a study of economic and community impacts, the Department of Environmental Conservation officially has officially started the countdown clock on its plan to allow hydrofracking in New York State.

DEC Commisioner Joe Martens has said his agency's goal is to protect the environment while creating economic opportunity.The public comment period for the revised draft environmental impact statement began Sept. 7 and concludes Dec. 12.

Running concurrently with that public comment period, the DEC will also accept input on its proposed regulations governing high-volume hydraulic fracturing.

The fact that these two public comment periods are running concurrently reflects the Cuomo administration's intention to move swiftly with its hydrofracking review.

The new studies conclude that hydrofracking will produce much-needed jobs: between 4,400 and 18,000 construction jobs and 1,800 and 7,200 long-term jobs. Estimated wages run between $621 million and $2.5 billion per year, while the state government is estimated to receive $24 million and $125 million in new personal tax revenues.

But many questions remain, including the possibility of imposing royalties on natural gas to help pay for the state's cost of regulating the industry.

Exactly how any gas produced from hydrofracking will fit into New York's energy future and needs also remains a serious question -- in addition to the well-documented environmental concerns.

For now, one thing is certain -- the upcoming four public meetings (dates and locations not yet announced) are guaranteed to be lively.

---

The nearest locale for hearings in our area will be NYC. -mg -

A Million Letters Against Fracking

2011-09-07T08:54:00.000-04:00

There are many reasons why New Yorkers are writing to Governor Andrew Cuomo and asking him to prohibit fracking in our state. Here are just a few good ones: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw2jZQfyYiM

Are Guidelines updated in Case 10-E-0155 Being Ignored??

2011-07-14T13:32:00.004-04:00

PRESS RELEASE

Contact:

Mark Gilliland

GEF LORAX Working Group

c/o Greenburgh Nature Center

99 Dromore Rd Scarsdale, NY 10583

(914) 714-3056

lorax@markg.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NYS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION’S NEW VEGETATION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES PUT TO THE TEST

Are Guidelines updated in Case 10-E-0155 Being Ignored??

GREENBURGH, NEW YORK – The GEF LORAX Working Group applauds the New York Public Service Commission’s (PSC) re-examination of its 2005 policy and guidelines for vegetation management along high voltage transmission line Rights-of-Way (ROWs). This review, known as Case 10-E-0155, has resulted in updated guidelines, effective July 2011, for management plans of Con Edison, O&R and other transmission utilities statewide. More information about this can be found on the LORAX blog: http://loraxwg.blogspot.com/2011/05/published-order-for-case-10-e-0155.html.

An important element of the new guidelines is the use of what is termed a modified "tiered" vegetation management approach - which states that vegetation which could never grow into the wire protection zone should be left standing in the ROWs, rather than the utility simply undertaking unconstrained clear cutting, thus helping to maintain visual/noise buffers in many instances. The outcome of tiered management should be better vegetation management decisions based upon actual site conditions, not “one-size-fits-all.”

In addition, the new guidelines introduce the notion of “high density” ROWs such as those found throughout Westchester, Rockland and parts of Orange County. These suburban areas with dense populations of homeowners along the ROW will now be required to have special transmission vegetation management plans (TVMPs) defined specifically for them in order to reduce negative environmental and property value impacts.

However, it has come to LORAX’s attention that Con Edison is effectively ignoring these new guidelines. Numerous complaints from homeowners and property owners along the Catskill Aqueduct transmission corridor in Westchester County, previously impacted in 2009 by the clear cutting of all vegetation across the width of the ROW, have been received concerning Con Edison personnel stating that they intend to “complete the cycle” of vegetation management (without further landowner notification) as previously approved until completion of work sometime in 2012. The work outlined involves going back into the ROW and cutting down any re-sprouting trees, thence applying herbicides to the stumps and to other undesirable vegetation which may have emerged. The work will be done across the entire ROW (up to 130 feet on either side of the transmission line) regardless of terrain or vegetative buffer needs of residents. This work cycle will begin in Yonkers and travel up the ROW into northern Westchester. Work will commence in the Sprain Road area soon.

None of the new PSC guideline requirements are being addressed by Con Edison. A field supervisor stated during an on-site meeting with a resident that there was no need to define “high density” plans for this area. Furthermore, there was no intention of saving any re-spouting trees to help restore natural, native buffers to reduce noise and views of the nearby Sprain Parkway.

The GEF LORAX Working Group believes that it is imperative for the PCS to demonstrate a commitment to the new guidelines by having Department of Public Service (DPS) utility regulators work through the pertinent details of the new requirements with Con Edison, and thence ensure Con Edison implements said adjustments to it’s ongoing TVMP immediately, not sometime after 2012.

LORAX has just released an analysis of the 2011 PSC guidelines which outlines “missing” regulations, loopholes, and other areas of procedural concern which should be addressed immediately by the PSC or by the state legislature in order to ensure a better balance of environmental, health and property value concerns with that of provision of safe, reliable electric power. Several of these outlined issues are already being brought to the forefront by the current actions of Con Edison (described above). The LORAX analysis can be found at: http://loraxwg.blogspot.com/2011/06/gef-analysis-of-psc-case-10-e-0155.html.

If you are a resident, landowner or municipal official who is experiencing similar difficulties or have concerns with ongoing transmission line vegetation management, you can submit complaints to the PSC (via phone, fax, website, mail or email): http://www.dps.state.ny.us/complaints.html

For more information and background documentation, visit http://loraxwg.blogspot.com.

###

Revised Con Ed Schedule for Pruning for 7/11 (Irvington)

2011-07-08T11:30:00.000-04:00

from the village:

Tree work is continuing through Monday 7/11 in the following areas:

N. Broadway
Strawberry La
High School Rd
Riverview Rd
Barbara La
Janet Terrace
Irving Pl

Please use this list as a guideline and not a guaranteed schedule. Con Edison’s tree contractor will need to adjust this schedule based on the actual work completed in the field. This, of course, is dependent on many factors including weather and other unforeseen circumstances. If you have specific questions or concerns, please contact Irvington Superintendent of Public Works, Greg Nilsson at 914-591-6044 or gnilsson@irvingtonny.gov. In addition, Con Edison can be reached directly at 1-800-75-CONED (1-800-752-6633).

State To Release Full Hydrofracking Study Today

2011-07-08T10:27:00.000-04:00

from EcoPolitics Daily:

Submitted by Colleen Elrod

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is scheduled to release its full review of hydraulic fracturing on Friday, July 8.

The study will be posted to this DEC Web page at some point that day.

Environmental groups including NYLCV are anxiously awaiting the full documentation for the state's proposal to allow limited hydrofracking in New York. Last week, DEC announced the outline of the study's proposals and agreed to ban hydrofracking in the watersheds of New York City and Syracuse, which are unfiltered drinking-water systems.

Some environmental groups are also questioning the wisdom of banning hydrofracking in some parts of the state, but allowing it in other areas.

DEC will start accepting public comments on its review in August.

Read full article.

Cuomo Administration Makes Its Move On Fracking

2011-07-01T12:14:00.003-04:00

from EcoPolitics Daily:

Submitted by Dan Hendrick on Thu, 2011-06-30 22:26.

After many months of study and contentious debate, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation will release its review of hydrofracking on Friday morning, July 1st.

DEC Commissioner Joe Martens will release the fracking study on Friday at 11 a.m.According to a brief summary produced by DEC, the Cuomo administration will recommend that hydrofracking be allowed in New York. However, the practice would be prohibited in the New York City and Syracuse watersheds and on state-owned land including forest areas and parks.

The goal, according to the summary, is to "protect the state’s environmentally sensitive areas while realizing the economic development and energy benefits of the state’s natural gas resources." Some 85 percent of the state's Marcellus Shale area would be open to drilling if the recommendations are adopted.

DEC Commissioner Joseph Martens said the report "strikes the right balance between protecting our environment, watersheds, and drinking water and promoting economic development.”

NYLCV President Marcia Bystryn said that while more details will be learned once the full 900 page study is released Friday, some facts are already clear. "The Department of Environmental Conservation's review is a marked improvement over the previous proposal, which would have allowed hydrofracking in New York City's watershed and risked contaminating the drinking water system that supplies nine million people. DEC has also dropped plans to allow hydrofracking on state-owned lands like parks," she said.

But as with all studies of this complexity - the devil is in the details. NYLCV will be watching closely to make sure that if hydrofracking is allowed in New York, our state has the most rigorous regulatory protocols and enforcement in place to make sure our drinking water and environment are protected.

Commissioner Martens will release the full report at 11 a.m. Friday.

For some preliminary coverage, check out the Times Union and the New York Times.

Revised (Again) Con Ed Schedule for Irvington

2011-06-30T18:34:00.001-04:00

Tree work is expected to begin Friday (7/1) and continue on Tuesday (7/5) in the following areas:

Day 1 (Friday 7/1)
Hermits Rd
East and West Sunnyside
Circle Dr
Hudson Ave
Center St
Park Ave
Fargo La
Meadowbrook Rd

Day 2 (Tuesday 7/5)
N. Broadway
Strawberry La
High School Rd
Riverview Rd
Barbara La
Janet Terrace
Irving Pl

GEF Analysis of PSC Case 10-E-0155 Guidelines

2011-06-28T16:22:00.002-04:00

The GEF LORAX Working Group has completed an initial review of the recent guidelines issued by the NYSPSC in Case 10-E-0155. The following concerns are raised - some of which may be resolved procedurally, but others of which may require updated or clarified guidelines, or perhaps legislative action:

General Comments
Guidelines do not address the full set of 9 Commission questions originally posed in Case 10-E-0155 last year. (Example, little discussion of “best practices” is provided.)

Guidelines are often vague and too much is left open for interpretation by individual utilities.

Integration with previous Order (04-E-0822) is weak at best. (Previous order is appended to new order. Is it clear how and where 10-E-0155 supersedes the previous 2005 order in all areas of potential interpretive conflict?) <-- Further study required to document apparent conflicts.

Notification
All utilities in NYS should be included in notification requirements.

Need to spell out more clearly what actions allow short term (30 day) and what actions need long term (up to 180 day) notification.

Utilities should be required to provide 90 day 'public notice' to municipalities when they plan to do VM work. This notice could then be read at board meetings, posted on municipal web sites, etc. Allows time for public meetings.

Missing requirement to ensure demarcation of ROW (easement, trees to be removed, danger trees) in advance of on-site meetings with landowners.

Better, more timely notification to abutting landowners is required for herbicide application cycles. Special exemptions from herbicide IVM required for agricultural lands, esp. those intended for "organic" production.

Mitigation
Needs more detail and criteria regarding replanting and other forms of mitigation. Must eliminate any utility "opt out" loop holes.

Lack of any science-based analysis (eg: bio survey) of ROW as a basis for determining areas of exclusion (buffers, habitat) and required mitigation.

Lack of discussion of tree valuation and ecosystem services (again as a basis for mitigation).

Lack of surety (performance) bonds for mitigation practices.

Rate payers, adjacent property owners and municipalities should not be expected to cover the costs for mitigation and repair. Other means of covering the costs need to be found (i.e. percentage of utility’s annual net profit).

Minimizing the need for mitigation (ie: minimizing negative impacts at the time of work) should be the focus - not extracting even higher rates from ratepayers.

No explicit requirement for arbitration in the case of landowner disagreement with proposed work.

High Density ROWs
All utilities in NYS should be included in development of special case ROW management programs for sensitive areas (e.g.: park lands and preserves), not only "high density" populated areas.

Need clear guidelines for TVMP alternatives concerning agricultural lands (to safeguard human health and the farmers’ ability to fully utilize their land), as well as for other "special use" areas (e.g.; parks and recreation areas), as well.

Previous Damages (2004-2010)
No mention of restitution and mitigation for those homeowners who suffered adverse impacts. Many areas still need repair. ("For most of us, the bulk of our equity is in our homes. Some of us have been rendered properties that can never be sold again because of what Con Edison did on their adjacent property.")

TVM Techniques
No specific recommendations on new VM practices such as "on demand" response (via LIDAR and GIS system mapping).

No discussion of urgency in managing invasive plants and animal populations (white tail deer).

No discussion of the need to monitor work sites for proper DEC stormwater and erosion controls. (Or in the case of DEP Aqueduct lands, the need to ensure water course and water body buffers are maintained and not compromised.)

Need to define alternative methods of IVM and need to ensure conformance to new guidelines supporting reduced vegetation removal in order to phase out reliance on the excessive use of herbicides.

Unfortunately, current level of DPS staffing does not allow for robust monitoring by PSC of any utility's work. This defaults to "self-monitoring" and "self-reporting" - which has not worked in the past.

Complaint Resolution & Arbitration
PSC complaint & arbitration has left a lot to be desired over the last few years. Most testimonial from both the public and municipal officials in Case 10-E-0155 hearings clearly indicated they they were not satisfied in the process. There needs to be improved accountability and responsiveness regarding complaint arbitration procedures.

There needs to be an "on the spot" dispute resolution process. Otherwise, extended delay is handling complaint may be "after the fact" and the damage will have been done. Related: what if utility strays from its stated plan? There should be a "stop work" order until such complications can be investigated and resolved.

Utility fines for non-compliance with TVMPs or these guidelines should be clearly indicated and implemented in a timely manner.

Updated TVMPs
Recommendation #4 needs particular attention due to the push back by the TOs against the publishing of their VM plans for security and proprietary concerns. Some NYS TOs publish TVMPs un-redacted (such as O&R), while others (Con Ed) make it difficult to even get hold of their heavily redacted TVMP without a FOIL.

There needs to be some sort of public comment / oversight on the new TVMPs. (LORAX would be willing to provide review and feedback of these so as to ensure landowner and municipal concerns were addressed.)

Currently approved (in process) TVMP cycles should not continue without review and conformance to new guidelines. The utilities should not be allowed to simply "finish the cycle" before addressing concerns such as modified wz/bz, high density ROWS, and preservation of buffers.

New Technologies
Need a NYSPSC or Federal directive and pilot project funding support for utilities to embrace new technologies which help to prevent widespread blackouts (e.g.; Smart Grid).

Federal Guidelines
PSC needs to work with NERC/FERC to try to renormalize fines dealing with vegetation encroachment so as to reduce pressure to simply "clear cut".

--

A pdf of this analysis can be downloaded here.

Revised Con Ed Pruning Start Date: Wednesday 6/29/11

2011-06-28T09:46:00.001-04:00

Tree work is expected to begin Wednesday (6/29) and continue to Thursday (6/30) in the following areas:

Day 1 (Wednesday 6/29)
Hermits Rd
East and West Sunnyside
Circle Dr
Hudson Ave
Center St
Park Ave

Day 2 (Thursday 6/30)
Fargo La
Meadowbrook Rd
N. Broadway
Strawberry La
High School Rd
Riverview Rd
Barbara La
Janet Terrace
Irving Pl

Con Edison To Begin Pruning In Irvington

2011-06-27T11:42:00.005-04:00

from today's Village of Irvington eblast:
Con Edison is scheduled to perform routine tree trimming and tree removal work in the Village of Irvington in the coming weeks. Irvington officials have met with Con Edison to review their plan for this work. We have asked Con Edison to provide us with a list of streets / areas on a daily basis where tree work is expected. This list will be published to the Village web site and sent to the Village-wide email list.

In addition to keeping you informed about the expected tree work locations, we are providing you with a link to helpful information about Con Edison’s Distribution Line clearing activities:

http://www.coned.com/publicissues/treeguide_intro.asp

Con Edison is legally required to provide all adjacent property owners with notification of tree maintenance activities. This notification likely took place with a letter some time ago. In addition, if a tree removal is planned for a tree located on private property, Con Edison is required to obtain the private property owner's permission to complete the removal. Also, in such cases, the private property owner can request a meeting with Con Edison to review the planned work.

Tree work is expected to begin Monday (6/27) and continue to Tuesday (6/28) in the following areas:

Day 1 (Monday 6/27)Hermits Rd
East and West Sunnyside
Circle Dr
Hudson Ave
Center St
Park Ave

Day 2 (Tuesday 6/28)Fargo La
Meadowbrook Rd
N. Broadway
Strawberry La
High School Rd
Riverview Rd
Barbara La
Janet Terrace
Irving Pl

Please use this list as a guideline and not a guaranteed schedule. Con Edison’s tree contractor will need to adjust this schedule based on the actual work completed in the field. This, of course, is dependent on many factors including weather and other unforeseen circumstances. If you have specific questions or concerns, please contact Irvington Superintendent of Public Works, Greg Nilsson at 914-591-6044 or gnilsson@irvingtonny.gov. In addition, Con Edison can be reached directly at 1-800-75-CONED (1-800-752-6633).
--
For ideas about what you might do as a homeowner to best protect your trees, please read this previous blog posting: Homeowner Checklist

Invasive Beetle Makes Further Inroads In New York

2011-06-24T14:56:00.001-04:00

Emerald Ash Borer is not in Westchester County yet, but will eventually arrive here. Public and private planing for this eventuality is urgently required.

from Eco Politics Daily:read original version

Submitted by Natalie Zises on Fri, 2011-06-17 11:42.

The emerald ash borer beetle that was first detected in New York State's Cattaraugus County in 2009 has now been detectedin Buffalo's South Park, a 155-acre park and arboretum that is part of the historic Olmsted Parks System. It marks the first time the ash borer beetle has been seen in Erie County.

Despite multi-state efforts to curtail its expansion, the emerald ash borer has spread across the Northeast.This small yet destructive beetle has metallic green wings and a coppery red or purple abdomen. The danger lies in its larvae, which feed in tunnels below the bark of the ash tree. By doing so, the ash borers make it difficult for water and nutrients to flow through, causing the death of branches eventually the entire tree.

New York has over 900 million ash trees, which make up 7 percent of our tree population. However, this may not be the case all too soon, due to this invasive insect.

The beetle has already decimated tens of millions of ash trees in the United States. In New York State, alone 16 counties are under quarantine -- and the invasion shows no signs of stopping.

The Department of Environmental Conservation has been implementing a strategy it calls SLAM, for "slow ash mortality." By training citizens and volunteers to spot the emerald ash borer, they are hoping to slow the beetle's take-down of the green, white, blue, and black ash. However, an effective method to fully stop the beetles has proven elusive so far.

Bill To Protect NY's Waters - Real Constraints on Hydro-fracking?

2011-06-24T12:45:00.003-04:00

from Eco Politics Daily:

Legislation to finally end large-scale, unregulated withdrawals of New York's water has passed both houses of the Legislature and now heads to Gov. Andrew Cuomo's desk.

Marking one of the most important environmental successes of the 2011 legislative session, the measure provides the Department of Environmental Conservation with new authority to regulate facilities with the capacity to withdraw more than 100,000 gallons of water per day.

Read more.

Tell State Senate to Protect Residents from Hydro-Fracking

2011-06-17T15:54:00.000-04:00

Susan Van Dolsen and Ellen Deixler of Westchester for Change/United for Action:

It is now up to the State Senate to pass there crucial bills to help protect New York from some of the problems that stem from hydrofracking and importantly to pass a moratorium to enable time for the all DEC study and comments to come in. It would be very helpful if you could please make calls to the Senators and the Majority leader tomorrow. It is the last chance this session.

S.5592 Carlucci -- One Year Moratorium on Hydrofracking: As reported last week, the New York State Assembly has already passed a bill that would suspend all permitting for hydraulic fracturing until June 1, 2012. But this bill will go nowhere unless the Senate passes their own version and the governor signs it.

Co-sponsored by our local Senators: Oppenheimer and Klein

S.4616 Avella -- Classifying Fracking Waste as Hazardous: Toxic drill cuttings and fluid wastes are coming over the border from Pennsylvanian gas wells into ill-equipped New York landfills and treatment centers, endangering the drinking water of millions. Even though fracking chemicals arrive at the drilling site as regulated hazardous materials, federal and state exemptions allow drillers to treat the same drilling wastes leaving the site as standard industrial waste. This bill will update current regulations so that all resulting waste from natural gas drilling meets the definition of hazardous waste under New York State law.

Co-Sponsored by our local Senators: Oppenheimer, Ball, Stewart-Cousins, Carlucci (Rockland)

S.3472 Oppenheimer -- Restoring Local Protections Over Natural Gas Development (Home Rule): This bill will clarify a local government’s right to enact and enforce zoning laws within their jurisdiction to protect them from the negative impacts of oil and gas development. The burden of oil and gas development is an unfunded mandate on upstate communities if they are not allowed to use the most basic land-use planning tools to protect unique local assets.

Co-Sponsored by local Senator: Klein

Please call your state senator to address these issues with these three bills before them. Our goal is to have as many people as possible to tell their legislators how important this is.

If you would like to do more, please call these members of the Senate Rules Committee:

Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos: (518) 455-3171Senator James Alesi: (518) 455-2015

Senator Hugh Farley: (518) 455-2181

Senator Kemp Hannon: (518) 455-2200

Senator William Larkin: (518) 455-2770

Senator Kenneth LaValle: (518) 455-3121

Senator Thomas Libous: (518) 455-2677

Senator Carl Marcellino: (518) 455-2390

Senator George Maziarz: (518) 455-2024

Senator Michael Nozzolio: (518) 455-2366

Senator Stephen Saland: (518) 455-2411

Senator James Seward: (518) 455-3131

Did you see The Colbert Report last night?

2011-06-10T17:48:00.000-04:00

If you missed it, Stephen Colbert had on Tom Ridge, the former Homeland Security chief who is now getting paid as a lobbyist for the oil and gas industry to push their fracking plan in Pennsylvania.

Stephen called out Tom Ridge and the oil industry for deceiving people about fracking -- and for poisoning America's drinking water. It's really worth seeing.

Click here to watch the video and share it with your friends.

---

reposted from:

Gregg Ross, Political Campaign Manager
Democracy for America

Assembly Passes One Year Ban on Hydrofracking

2011-06-06T21:34:00.002-04:00

The Assembly has passed a bill (A7400) that would protect New York’s drinking water by prohibiting the issuance of new permits for the controversial gas drilling practice known as hydraulic fracturing for another year until June 1, 2012, while both the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study the safety of this drilling process.

Now the Senate must pass their version (S5592) so it can be sent on to the Governor for his signature.

• Call Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos at (518) 455-3171 and email Leader Skelos at skelos@nysenate.gov and tell him to bring the hydrofracking moratorium bill S5592 to the Senate floor for a vote and pass this bill.

• Call your own Senator find at www.nysenate.gov and email your Senator, and tell your Senator to urge Leader Skelos to bring the hydrofracking moratorium bill S5592 to the Senate floor for a vote and then vote yes to pass this bill.

After calling the Senate, please call:

• Governor Cuomo at 518-474-8390 or email Governor Cuomo at www.governor.ny.gov/contact/GovernorContactForm.php and tell the Governor that he needs to support the hydrofracking moratorium bill and sign it into law.

Please don’t forget to call Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver at 518-455-3791 and your own Assembly Member (find at www.assembly.state.ny.us/mem/) and thank them for their leadership in passing the hydrofracking moratorium bill in the Assembly.

Cuomo Expands Hydrofracking Review

2011-06-03T18:45:00.004-04:00

Submitted by Natalie Zises on Tue, 2011-05-31 15:56.

Concerned by a leak of chemical-laden fracking fluid in Pennsylvania on April 19^th, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has decided he needs more reassurance before allowing the process of "hydrofracking" in New York.

Hydrofracking could unlock reserves of natural gas, but poses significant environmental risks.An internal memo obtained by several news outlets directs the state Department of Environmental Conservation to review and learn any lessons from the Pennsylvania mishap, which caused a well to gush salty, chemically tainted water for two days.

Hydrofracking is a controversial technique used to drill for natural gas, in which immense quantities of water are injected underground. Among the complications of hydrofracking are "leakoffs" -- where the water that is pumped is released into neighboring drinking water sources.

Leakoffs are of high concern to many citizens and environmental organizations because chemicals in fracturing fluid are known to cause cancer, and/or disrupt hormones that control development, reproduction, and behavior in both humans and animals.

The review Cuomo's administration is calling for, due July 1^st, will include an on-site inspection by New York officials of the Pennsylvania site.

In related news, Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman announced on May 31^st his intent to sue the federal governmentif it fails to initiate a study of the effects that hydraulic fracturing could have in the Delaware River basin within 30 days. The river provides over 15 million people -- about 5 percent of U.S. population -- with drinking water in parts of Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey and Delaware.

Distribution Line Clearing - Con Ed guidelines

2011-05-29T17:02:00.002-04:00

The distribution line vegetation management specification listed publicly is 10' on each side of pole and 15' over top of pole for clearance. (From Con Edison Tree Guide online - http://www.coned.com/publicissues/treeguide_intro.asp.)

Anything more is not to Con Ed spec.

Also, Con Ed states that pruning must conform to ANSI A300 Part 1 specifications - which disallows topping and is quite specific about the way a branch can be cut and the size of branches that can be cut vis-a-vis the size of the branch left in place. And no more than 25% of a crown removal should be done if tree is to be left standing.

Needless to say, for the last cycles in Irvington, these guidelines were often broken and we have lots of photographic evidence to the fact.

That said, there is a practical tradeoff as to allowing heavier pruning or simply deciding to remove the tree in question. In the case of evergreens too close to lines, we've seen entire sides of trees pruned bare (180 degrees of branches removed top to bottom). While this may be "proper" in terms of the arborcultural need to remove the branches of most evergreens fully, the net result is all too often one funky looking evergreen...

The best defense is to monitor work in progress on trees adjacent to your property. Work crews typically start around 8 AM and work till 4:30 PM M-F. Weekend work is typically not undertaken with distribution lines.

Published Order for Case 10-E-0155

2011-05-29T17:00:00.000-04:00

Here is the pdf of the Case order released late last week by the PSC.

While the guidelines, commentary and discussion are more detailed that that of the original Press Release, it must be noted that in many areas, these new guidelines fall short of what LORAX had hoped to achieve. The most apparent lack is that of public oversight / review / comments on new TVMPs and related procedures for high density ROWs, etc. Another area of lack relates to detailed environmental, bio-habitat and ecosystem services analysis. It is unclear how enhanced guidelines for ROW management and the now-required mitigation planning can be created without these science-based tools forming a baseline.

Finally, there is an extended discussion about a modified "tiered" vegetation management approach - essentially adopted in the DPS staff commentary on the guideline which states that preferred vegetation should be left in the ROWs, rather than simply undertaking clear cutting. In this discussion by DPS staff, the LORAX provided diagram outlining "tiered management" is dismissed as being too rigid and not reflecting the need for adoption of a variable approach based upon site specific ROW conditions due to tower type, terrain and wire placement. This is unnecessary obfuscation on the part of DPS staff - it as clear from LORAX materials that the diagram was an example of the possibility of using this technique without hazard, not a rigid "one-size-fits-all" mandate on heights and distances. In any case, the final outcome should be better vegetation management decisions based upon actual site conditions. Which is good.

Other good guideline updates include the requirement (of Con Ed and O&R) for proper and clear advanced notification, enhanced training of contractor work crews, as well as the requirement to provide contact information for VM complaints and questions - provided on notifications, on web sites and by in-field contractors when asked.

Video Archive of PCS Hearing on 10-E-0155

2011-05-23T16:49:00.000-04:00

Although the PSC Press Release release (posted below last week) provides only a schematic overview of the 8 recommendations provided by DPS staff to the PSC and thence unanimously adopted, the Q&A discussion which occurred during the hearing is quite illuminating.

Here is the link to the webcast archive:

http://nydps.onlinevideoservice.com/Archive/Event_051911.aspx

The pertinent section to view is between 79:00 and 101:00 minutes on the video.

What is most interesting is the language (the discourse) being used by both the DPS staff and the Commissioners in terms of the feedback from residents and communities along the ROWs. Although a few areas of the presentation do not clearly discuss the various nuances and still provide much of the "older" narrative (such as the implied requirements of FERC/NERC FAC-003-1), the general staff and Commission tone is very supportive of the public concern.

In the staff's Powerpoint on the proposed guidelines, a summary of issues that came up during public hearings is presented - this section is a nice bullet-list of public concerns as documented by LORAX and other commentators. Then, the actual proposed guidelines are summarized.

In both discussions, the concerns of homeowners, municipalities and environmentalists are taken as valid and important, along with the over-arching need for a "mid-course" revision of the 2005 guidelines to provide a better environmental balance, the need for clearer directions to the utilities (concerning notification and thoughtful more limited vegetation removal in lieu of clear-cutting), and the underlying need for better contractor training and supervision.

All of this is a good change in tone coming from both the DPS staff and the Commission itself.

Now let's see how the actual order is written - what details are included at what level of specificity. Unfortunately, there was no discussion of possible public review of said guidelines and of updated TVMPs.

But overall, from the discussion documented in the Commission webcast, we should all celebrate the impact we have had on this issue! Thanks to LORAX members, municipal officials, local residents, RiverKeeper, Sierra Club and others in our combined efforts to make a change.

Distribution Line Clearing Upcoming in Irvington!

2011-05-19T17:40:00.000-04:00

Con Ed is back to trim & remove trees that are interfering with their wires. They are planning to begin pruning in approximately 2-3 weeks. They will not take any street trees down without first consulting with the village. Under the current village tree code, pruning does not currently require any consultation with the village nor with the property owner. However, Con Ed's published policy is to notify homeowners at least 48 hours in advance of pruning work.

The following are the locations (streets) in the village:

Cyrus Field Road

Mountain Road
Hermits Road
East Sunnyside Lane
West Sunnyside Lane
Fargo Lane
Meadowbrook Road
North Broadway
Strawberry Lane (Private)
Riverview Road
Barbara Lane
Janet Terrace
Irving Place
Circle Drive
High School Road (Private)
Hudson Avenue
Center Street
Park Avenue

The same questions and issues will arise this time as the last few years. The village needs to proactively reach out to Con Ed distribution services management (Matt Glaser, et al) and reach some operational agreements (beyond simply supplying "OKs" for tree removals on public easements...)

How can we ensure that the work crews will not over prune, as in the past?

Are there special trees of interest to be protected from general pruning? For example, we should ensure that the reservoir area - Cyrus Field - gets specially protected as view shed, water shed, habitat and park land - all of which it is. There must be minimal pruning & removals in this area...

Who will be the Con Ed supervising arborist on the project? Will we have a complete contact / escalation phone list and "halt-work" process?

Can we get a walk through by street segment ahead of pruning so that any "controversial" trees can be individually addressed?

How can we ensure a consulting arborist to be available on call when needed? (Issue: current village budget limitations.)

How do we guarantee that Con Ed is contacting homeowners with advanced notification of pruning activities? And with clear descriptions of intended activities?

We need to ensure that Con Ed notifies the village a day or two in advance of specific target locations so that a current (updated) eblast alert can be sent out to residents.

I have probably forgot some stuff here, but this is the key set of objectives to protect our trees and the rights of our residents.

Here are two action item lists previously posted to the Irvington Tree Preservation blog (irvtrees.blogspot.com) last year concerning distribution line vegetation management. Please take time to check out the links and review the materials.

Community Action Plan

Homeowner Checklist

Please be sure to contact the VIllage Administrator and the Mayor with your concerns. The more voices that speak up, the more effective the village's response will be! We can't let this go as "business as usual" since we know what the results of that will be from the last cycle of vegetation management.

LORAX Comments on Today's PSC CASE 10-E-0155 Ruling

2011-05-19T16:53:00.001-04:00

LORAX is supportive of the goals outlined in the new transmission vegetation management regulations. However, as a public interest environmental lobbying group, we have some specific concerns with the guidelines as announced in today's Press Release. (Note: as the actual text of the Order has not yet been released, we have not seen the commentary by DPS Staff nor the discussion by the Commission itself. This commentary may provide additional insight into the intentions and context of each guideline.)

In general, the guidelines enhance notification requirements, provide for a TVMP complaint escalation process, create a distinction between rural ROWs and urban/suburban ROWs, call for more limited vegetation removals (modifying the original Case 04-E-0822 orders requiring clear-cutting of the entire ROW "to the floor"), and require utilities to describe when and what sort of replant mitigation they will provide along impacted ROWs.

All of this is good news when seen from a high level perspective. However, in most instances, the rules do not provide specific criterial or detailed requirements and are thus open to a possibly wide-ranging interpretation by each utility. Yes, the DPS staff must review and approve these updated TVMP documents, but nowhere is there a requirement for any public review of proposed changes to said TVMPs. Given the public outcry and concern about the appearance of DPS staff / utility cronyism, why shouldn't a public review phase be mandated?

The first new regulation concerning notification, in particular, is more expansive that originally proposed:

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. shall provide individual written notification to all easement encumbered and abutting landowners, local municipal elected officials, and affected state agencies, of cyclic ROW vegetation management work, not more than 180 days nor less than 30 days prior to the commencement of such work.

This requires notification not only of properties with ROW easements within them, but of all properties adjacent to ROWs. Good news. There are two weaknesses, herein, however. First, the notification window can be as short as 30 days - ok for individual landowners, but tougher for municipalities to hold public meetings. Secondly, this notification requirement applies specifically only to Con Ed and O&R, rather than to all state transmission utilities.

In regulation #3, special TVMPs for highly population areas are required:

Con Edison and Orange and Rockland shall develop, for staff review and acceptance, a section in their Long Range Right of Way Management Plans (Plan) specifically addressing how they will conduct their ROW management work on high density ROW areas.

Again, the issue here is that no prescriptive detail is provided as to what sort of changes should be made in dealing with high density population areas. Nor is there a specific criteria defining "high density" - which has previously been an issue in O&R territory.

In terms of mitigation, the new rules call out for public documentation about replanting:

All companies shall develop sections in their Commission approved ROW Management Plans, for staff review and acceptance, to address the circumstances and criteria pursuant to which replanting is warranted.

Once again, however, there are no detailed "base" requirements about when and how mitigation is to be performed. Could a utility simply take Con Ed's position that "We don't replant, period." Would this not fulfill the letter of requirement #6 (quoted above)?

So, over all the ruling is a mix blessing. It offers a lot of possibility for relief, but just how much there will be is based upon an ongoing (an not public) process. LORAX believes that there should be more robust (detailed) requirements as well as public oversight based upon the last 7 years of utility rampage along the ROWs in conjunction with the DPS/PCS's avoidance & justification of said actions.

PSC Issues Ruling on CASE 10-E-0155

2011-05-19T16:52:00.002-04:00

STATE OF NEW YORK

Public Service Commission

Garry A. Brown, Chairman

Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 Further Details: James Denn james_denn@dps.state.ny.us | 518.474.7080 http://www.dps.state.ny.us http://twitter.com/NYSDPS

11041/10-E-0155

COMMISSION IMPROVES VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RULES

— Utilities Required to Improve Public Notification When Maintaining Power Lines —

Albany, NY—5/19/11— The New York State Public Service Commission (Commission) today adopted eight recommendations to improve and clarify utility practices regarding high voltage transmission right-of-way vegetation management practices.

“Maintaining the highest degree of electric system reliability for the benefit of New York’s customers is among the most important of our responsibilities,” said Commission Chairman Garry Brown. “However, there is a real need to ensure that the public is kept fully informed regarding changes to be made to vegetation surrounding high-voltage power lines in the community. These comprehensive new rules will help significantly improve the notification process and will help avoid problems that have occurred in the past.”

The Commission’s earlier policy regarding right-of-way (ROW) management established requirements for utilities’ ROW maintenance programs and ensured adequate record keeping and reporting by the utilities. In addition, the federal Energy Policy Act called for the development and implementation of additional mandatory and enforceable reliability standards for utility ROW maintenance.

The Commission noted that reliability problems are commonly manifested when contact occurs between a tree and a transmission line during, for example, a storm which causes a fault in the transmission circuit which may cause widespread electric system outages. Because of this,effective management of transmission rights-of-way is an essential component of system reliability.

However, in recent months, members of the public and elected officials have expressed concern with respect to the ROW vegetation management practices used by utilities to implement the above described regulatory scheme along their transmission rights-of-way.

These concerns have largely focused on the trimming and removal of trees and other vegetation by utilities in their transmission rights-of-way. Those objecting to the utilities’ practices cite the unwanted aesthetic impacts associated with the utilities’ ROW work, as well as noise, erosion and decreased property value as potential results. Expressions of concern have taken many forms including individual complaints to this department, letters from public officials, municipal resolutions and proposed state legislation.

As part of the public review process, more than 200 written comments were received from interested parties and six public statement hearings were conducted throughout the state at which people who would rather comment orally were able to do so. Staff reviewed the written comments and those made at the public statement hearings, and developed for the Commission’s consideration eight recommendations to improve ROW management practices in the State. Staff also sought public comment on the first seven of its recommendations.

Upon review of the comments, the Commission accepted eight recommendations:

1. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. shall provide individual written notification to all easement encumbered and abutting landowners, local municipal elected officials, and affected state agencies, of cyclic ROW vegetation management work, not more than 180 days nor less than 30 days prior to the commencement of such work.

2. Con Edison and Orange and Rockland shall provide in their notification details of the type of vegetation management work to be performed, the physical boundaries of the work, the methods and extent of the proposed work, provisions for cleanup and ROW restoration and the expected dates of commencement and completion.

3. Con Edison and Orange and Rockland shall develop, for staff review and acceptance, a section in their Long Range Right of Way Management Plans (Plan) specifically addressing how they will conduct their ROW management work on high density ROW areas.

4. All companies shall submit, for staff review and acceptance, updates to their websites and any printed materials, detailing the rationales and practices governing their ROW management programs.

5. All companies shall establish a direct line of communication between the public and the companies’ vegetation management personnel for questions regarding ROW vegetation management work. Information advising of the opportunity for such communication and how such communication can be accessed shall be made available on the companies’ websites, on all required notifications, and provided by field personnel and contractors upon request.

6. All companies shall develop sections in their Commission approved ROW Management Plans, for staff review and acceptance, to address the circumstances and criteria pursuant to which replanting is warranted.

7. All companies shall develop, if one does not exist or enhance if one does, a section in their plans detailing when and where various types of vegetation will be allowed to remain on a ROW. The section shall incorporate, to the extent possible, a vegetation management approach that recognizes that removal of desirable species is neither required nor preferred. Commensurate training and oversight of field personnel shall also be addressed.

8. The Commission Order containing ROW management requirements issued in Case 04-E-0822 will be appended to this Order.

Staff believes its recommendations appropriately reflect the concerns that have been expressed, are cost-effective and sensitive to environmental, aesthetic and community values, and protect the continued provision of safe and reliable electric service and recommends their adoption.

The Commission’s decision today, when issued, may be obtained by going to the Commission Documents section of the Commission’s Web site at www.dps.state.ny.us and entering Case Number 10-E-0155 in the input box labeled "Search for Case/Matter Number". Many libraries offer free Internet access. Commission orders may also be obtained from the Commission’s Files Office, 14th floor, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 (518-474-2500).

FERC Actions regarding Transmission Vegetation Management

2011-05-06T20:44:00.002-04:00

A letter of inquiry sent today to the FERC re: Transmission Vegetation Management:

Dear Commissioners;

I am writing this as part of the GEF LORAX Working Group's ongoing follow-up to the Transmission Reliability Conference of last October 26, 2010 organized by Mr. Hegerle and staff.

As of this time, it appears that FERC staff have concluded that FERC does not have specific congressional regulatory authority to prescriptively define vegetation management practices beyond the statement of reliability-related clearance measures in FAC-003-1 (and as modified in FAC-003-2 r5 which is pending final approval).

This still leaves open and unresolved serious issues brought to the fore by landowners and Congressional representatives concerning clear-cutting along the ROW with the associated negative environmental, health and property value impacts. WIth the impact of global warming including stronger storms and extreme temperatures, the need to ensure electrical system reliability is even more apparent than ever. However, there is an growing nationwide awareness that methodological changes must be found by which to reduce the impacts of transmission line vegetation management practices (TVMPs) such as the current wide-spread reliance on clear cutting across the ROW; to find solutions that maintain visual and noise buffers, create less impact on property values, ensure air quality, reduce extensive flooding and erosion, slow the spread of invasive plants and animals, and engage in ecosystem/habitat restoration to help ensure species preservation (such as our song bird, amphibian, and butterfly populations).

What actions has FERC taken to date as a result of the Technical Conference?

The FERC web site has recently been updated to "better educate" the public (landowners) that the federal government (FERC) can not regulate TVMPs at the level of granularity which would allow exclusion of clear-cutting practices. Rather, the web site and associated FAQ clearly points out that the state PUCs / PSCs are responsible for management and oversight of utility's TVMPs. This information in now prominent on the FERC web site and on the downloadable TVM FAQ. But is this sufficient?

The goal here seems to be to deflect public outcry from FERC back to the state level. However, the pervasive motivation ("excuse") of NERC fine avoidance given for extreme clear-cutting by the Transmission Operators (TOs) has not been adequately addressed by FERC/NERC yet. Historical NERC fine data for the last couple of years shows a very small percentage of tree contact or R1/R2 incursion violations in the overall mix of fines. So something does not add up!

The Commission is reportedly planning to reach out to state regulators and TOs to let them know that clear-cutting is not a preferred or required method of TVM to meet Federal standards. What this outreach will consist of and how vigorous this attempt at industry "reeducation" might be is not clear yet. But time is of the essence as ROW clear-cutting continues nationwide.

Landowners and concerned groups such as LORAX need to better understand the position that FERC will be taking in this matter. If stronger guidelines are not possible based upon current congressional authorization, if NERC fine structures can not be made less onerous for simple safety zone incursions, if the industry and state regulators will not listen to the urgent need to balance their TVM methodologies so as to better reflect public (ratepayer) demands, then a robust grass roots effort to address this issue at both the Federal (additional Congressional legislation) and state levels (public utility commission guidelines) is our only recourse as concerned citizens. This would be a long and tenuous process.

As LORAX has pointed out to our own state regulatory body (NYS Public Service Commission) in PSC Case 10-E-0155, a major issue that is often avoided in this discussion concerns network reliability, capacity, equipment age, operator training, software reliability and inter-operator communications. As seen in the Joint US/Canada Report on the 2003 East Coast blackout, all of these factors conspired to make the grid system much less robust and unstable such that a couple of random tree contacts in Ohio could become significant factors in the cascade of human and machine failures leading to the breakdown of overall electric grid system integration and massive blackout.

Thus, the underlying issues are far greater than the current focus on TVMPs. Unfortunately, the issue of system reliability is a much larger problem requiring designing / upgrading the overall grid (newer more modern equipment, greater capacity in lines which run over existing ROWs, digital monitoring, simulation and "Smart Grid" technologies, and enhanced scenerio-based operator training). Again, a long term process.

Related to our call for use of new technology and systems, LORAX has also pointed out that current clear-cutting practices are actually a costly "solution" for a problem that could be best handled through the use of LIDAR, regular scans of transmission corridors, GIS-based computer modeling, and a "just in time" approach to spot vegetation management. ("Best" here means a less costly methodology which would also significantly reduce or eliminate the various negative impacts of current practices.) Such methodologies could be implemented in a relatively short period of time by each utility and TVMPs could be quickly updated and approved based upon such changes. Thus, LORAX believes that the option of this approach should be more widely disseminated by FERC through the utility industry and state regulatory framework.

We hope to continue our dialog with FERC so as to help ensure that these issues will be addressed to the satisfaction of all.

regards,

Mark Gilliland
GEF LORAX Working Group, chair

LORAX Reply Comments on Draft Guidelines

2011-02-23T12:34:00.004-05:00

Read the LORAX Reply Comments (.pdf) submitted to the PSC on 2/22/11 in reference to the draft guidelines for Case 10-E-0155 (proposed by DPS staff on 12/31/10). These comments address previous filings by various state transmission utilities in response to the proposed guidelines. They also provide a summary critique of what LORAX believes to be a lack of sufficient scope and depth in the draft guidelines. (See also previously posted LORAX Comments on guidelines - final version issued 2/2/11 - below).

LORAX Comments on PSC's Draft Guidelines for Case 10-E-0155

2011-01-27T18:30:00.004-05:00

THe following materials are being made available as part of LORAX Working Group outreach to local municipal officials and other interested parties:

1) Submission Comments (final draft) from LORAX on proposed guidelines. (Download .pdf)

2) Outline of LORAX comments and concerns (regarding proposed guidelines). (Download .pdf)

3) Generic Municipal letter of support for LORAX comment filing. (Download .doc)

For more details on the Draft Recommendations, see this link.

Recommendations to FERC on FAC-003 Transmission Line Reliability Regulation

2011-01-07T10:50:00.003-05:00

On Dec 27, 2010, Mark Hegerle of FERC wrote in an email:

The Commission’s chairman, Jon Wellinghoff, is very concerned about this issue [Transmission Line Vegetation Management practices resulting in the clear-cutting ROWs]. The October 26 technical conference was the first step in raising awareness of the issue, and we are currently considering how to proceed next. As you know, the Commission does not have the authority to mandate any particular form of vegetation management over another – that authority rests with the state and local authorities. Nevertheless, poor vegetation management practices are harmful to landowners, as you point out, and may not be the best method to protect reliability.

Staff is considering how best to advise the Chairman on what steps the Commission could or should take to address this issue. I hope to have a better response to your concern in the next few weeks.

Mark

Mark Hegerle
Director, Division of Compliance
Office of Electric Reliability
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

To which LORAX replied:

[The GEF LORAX Working Group wants] to comment upon the statement (in your email) that "the Commission does not have the authority to mandate any particular form of vegetation management over another – that authority rests with the state and local authorities."

We heard at the conference that the TVMP of each utility is reviewed and approved both at the state level and at the federal level (NERC). None of the TVMPs that I have reviewed call out clear-cutting as a preferred (or even applicable) approach to Row management. Nor does FAC-003-1 require or mention it. Thus there is a disconnect between approved methods and actual in-field methods applied by various utilities. Without on-going in-field review (monitoring by regulators at both state and federal levels), the main way TVMP performance evaluation has occurred has been by the cries and complaints of landowners who have experienced (or are threatened with) clear cutting implementations.

We have heard expert testimony at the conference from Dave Morrell of the NYSPSC that he believes the clear-cutting choice has been made by utilities not as on the basis of cost savings, but rather as a means to avoid FERC compliance fines. The discussion of changing FERC/NERC fine structures so as to clearly handle the difference in risk profiles of a Clearance 1 vs. a Clearance 2 infraction is key to stopping the recourse to clear-cut. Having a tree grow into an arbitrary Clearance 1 zone (which is based upon the utilities' own TVMP cycle definition) is clearly different than growing into the flash-over zone or having an actual line touch! (The spark-over Clearance 2 is science-based with IEEE provided tables giving required distances, unlike the arbitrary Clearance 1 value which is never provided in any formal specification.)

We also heard mention of advanced techniques such as LIDAR scanning of transmission corridors so that complete 3D mapping of vegetation can occur, allowing computerized analysis and detection of "problem areas". With such technology allowing the early and easy detection of infractions into Clearance 1 zones, the actual Clearance 1 distance established by a utility could be modified to be more "lenient". There would be a highly targeted TVM response to any such specifically detected incursions (not a broad-brush clearing of the entire ROW). This would also most likely result in significant annual TVM cost savings for the utilities.

Lack of environmental analysis and remediation is a major weak link in the current regulations. At both the state and federal levels, TVMP is considered to be a "maintenance" operation and thus is excused from any environmental quality review processes (unlike new line construction). However, actual in-field reports demonstrate that there are widespread and serious environmental, health, and property value impacts for landowners - both along and nearby the ROW - resulting from current TVMP practices. The basic FAC-003 regulations should emphasize environmental stewardship in conjunction with reliability: the "model TVMP" as outlined therein must include a requirement for planned and effective remediation for all TVM actions.

Finally, as discussed at the conference, the utilities' reliance on IVM - Integrated Vegetation Management - (as outlined in ANSI A300 Section 7) needs to be seriously questioned. The scientific findings relied upon by the IVM spec (based upon years-old studies in limited regions of the US) appears to be at odds with current studies reported by researchers in Pennsylvania and New York: in controlled studies of forest and woodland clear-cutting, natural regeneration of native species no longer occurs due to excessive deer herbivory. Deer populations are explosively rising in the Northeast and the expansion of deer-friendly feeding territory caused by clear cutting the ROWs will directly result in greater expansion of populations. Only non-native invasives will repopulate the ROW lands, unlike the IVM model of a naturally generated native ecosystem espoused by the utilities. Unfortunately, reliance on IVM methods including repeated manual herbicide applications will not provide a viable foundation for desired ecosystem recovery. Active mitigation / restoration will be required. (Again, this will require oversight monitoring...)

--

To summarize, changes to FERC/NERC fine structure and fine infraction types (esp. regarding Clearance 1) could be undertaken directly under existing regulation without requiring further legislative action. Such changes - and the reasons for them - should be clearly communicated to all state PSCs/PUCs as well as to the utilities themselves, along with a request to review and modify their current practices in light of these changes.

This needs to be coupled with enhanced federal In-field monitoring / inspections - as proven by events/complaints over the last couple of years, FERC/NERC cannot rely solely upon state public utility commissions to perform this oversight. The core issue is whether or not approved TVMPs are being followed "to the letter" of FAC-003-1 or are greater (more excessive) VM actions being undertaken unnecessarily? If so, these should be stopped with the threat of significant (new) FERC/NERC fines for non-compliance to regulations.

General TVM guidelines (similar to the technical advisory guidelines developed to accompany FAC-003-2 draft) should immediately be issued covering the recommended use of LIDAR techniques in TVM, as well as expanding the emphasis on use of the modified WZ/BZ (wire zone/ border zone) management approach which allows vegetative buffers to coexist along ROW edges and outer margins (allowed vegetation height based upon distance from centerlines of the transmission towers in conjunction with terrain, topography, species and climate/bio-zone.) In addition, the problems of relying upon IVM as defined by ANSI A300 Section 7 should be emphasized. A scientifically sound, updated approach to ecosystem restoration after TVM operations needs to be made part of any TVMP approval/review - and should be part of the FAC-003-2 draft.

FERC must also emphasize the need the need for effective and agreed-upon (with landowner) environmental remediation, planned at the outset and required to be part of any TVMP. Again, this is striking a balance between reliability and environmental concerns that should not require legislative action, but simply a re-emphasis within FAC-003 regulations and enforced via the TVMP review process.

These final points imply another significant change which FERC could undertake immediately: the regulatory specification process (as embodied by the current FAC-003-2 draft update) should be broadened to include the landowner's perspective within the creation/review/approval process. Allowing landowner input and feedback could only strengthen the resulting specifications.

Thank-you for including me in this discussion. I and my LORAX fellows (copied hereon) are available for further discussion, analysis and review.

Regards,

Mark Gilliland
GEF LORAX Working Group, chairperson

---

Download a PDF of our formal follow-up submission to the FERC.

As you will read, there are a handful of issues which relate to the NYS PSC's current review of its Transmission Vegetation Management guidelines (Case 10-E-0155) - and which will require the PSC to work "upwards" (to the FERC / NERC levels) to help resolve. Without such clarification and resolution at the federal level, TVMP regulatory issues may not be resolved at the state or local utility level.

Two major issues to watch out for:

1) The fine structures in place for FACA-003 compliance are interpreted by utilities to require elimination of all vegetation in the ROW (both wire zone & border zone) so as to avoid clearance zone incursion penalties. However, this "incursion zone" (Clearance 1) is not strictly defined in FAC-003 (unlike Clearance 2 spark-over safety zone values) and thus is left up to the discretion of each utility. The result in NYS and elsewhere at a national level has been extensive clear-cutting along the ROWs.

2) The current circulated draft of FAC-001-2 (and update to the existing federal reliability regulation under development by NERC) defines an explicit vegetation height restriction in the border zone. This 25' height restriction would force removal of many view buffers (for example) while simultaneously disallowing any modernized approach to vegetation management (such as the "tiered" wire zone-border zone methodology).

---

Draft PSC Recommendations for Changes in TVMP

2011-01-02T20:01:00.001-05:00

The NYS Department of Public Service staff has made a series of recommendations for changes in utility vegetation management programs after reviewing all of the written input and public hearing data.

Many of the recommended changes are specific to O&R and Con Edison (due to the excess of problems and issue reported in our region compared to state-wide), while others apply to all NYS PSC-controlled transmission utilities: Read the PDF document here.

The PSC is inviting comments on these recommendations, before they hold formal hearings to discuss these recommendations and make their decision on Case 10-E-0155. Comments are due by Feb 2 (details are within the PSC notice).

Paterson Vetoes Hydrofracking Bill, But Issues His Own Ban

2010-12-14T08:39:00.000-05:00

From the Rivertowns Patch.com (Read whole article here):

Gov. David Paterson has vetoed a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, a controversial natural gas drilling method, but replaced it with an executive order prohibiting the practice until July at the earliest.

At the heart of the issue is a specific method known as high-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing, or "hydrofracking," in which millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals are blasted into existing wells to release gas deposits far below the surface. Industry officials are eyeing the vast Marcellus Shale, which extends from New York's Southern Tier into West Virginia, as a prime site for this type of extraction.

The moratorium bill would have banned all types of gas drilling, not just horizontal hydrofracking, until May 15. Paterson said the bill was too broad and would have resulted in job losses and decreased revenue for the cash-strapped state.

"Enacting this legislation would put people out of work - work that is permitted by the Department of Environmental Conservation and causes no demonstrated environmental harm, in order to effectuate a moratorium that is principally symbolic," Paterson said. "Symbols can have great importance, but particularly in our current terrible economic straits, I cannot agree to put individuals out of work for a symbolic act."

Paterson replaced the vetoed bill with an executive order that narrows the scope of the moratorium to include only horizontal hydrofracking, and not its vertical counterpart of other extraction methods. The ban will stay in effect until at least July 1, when the Department of Environmental Conservation is set to release the results of a study into the effects of hydrofracking on water and air quality.

Acorn Glut Signals Lyme Risks in 2012

2010-12-02T18:49:00.002-05:00

From the Poughkeepsiejournal.com:

This fall, some of you might have noticed it's difficult to walk on sidewalks or hilly trails near oak trees. The acorns underfoot — nature's ball bearings — are so numerous that even sturdy shoes are no match. In our research sites at the Cary Institute and throughout the Hudson Valley, we are seeing acorn production of unprecedented proportions.

Oak trees, like many hardwoods, tend to drop few or no seeds in most years. Then episodically, they produce a bumper crop of acorns, known as a "mast year."

Each tree species has its own rhythm, so it's rare to see multiple species masting together. This year, though, our four most common oak species — red oak, black oak, white oak and chestnut oak —are all producing acorns at the same time. In the 20 years we've been monitoring tree seed production, this is the first time we've seen such an acorn glut.

Why do oaks behave this way? Acorns are among the biggest seeds produced by any of our eastern forest trees. Their large size allows newly germinating tap roots to penetrate thick layers of leaf litter to reach the soil below. It also provides plenty of resources to support seedling growth in the first year. So, large seed size gives oaks an advantage early in life over other species such as maples and birches.

But with these benefits come costs. Acorns are full of protein and fat and are a highly prized food for many wildlife species. You've undoubtedly seen squirrels and chipmunks scurrying around, cheeks bulging, in a frenzy to store as many seeds as possible before the weather turns cold and snowy. Other animals, including mice, deer, raccoons, turkeys, blue jays and bears also scour the forest floor eating or storing every acorn they find.

If oak trees produced a modest acorn crop each year, they'd run the risk of having every one consumed and leaving no descendants. But if they make few seeds in most years, then let loose with a bumper crop, it's likely some acorns will survive the onslaught of hungry consumers. This is called "predator satiation" and is exactly what we find in our northeastern forests. The carpet of oak seedlings we see every three or four springs is a vivid demonstration of safety in numbers.

Many acorns now covering the forest floor will wind up in the stomachs or burrows of white-footed mice. These mice are the most common mammal in our region. With big stores of acorns, mice don't need to move around very much during winter and can avoid predators such as owls, hawks and foxes.

Being so well-nourished, they can start their spring breeding season earlier than usual. Both factors lead to very large populations of white-footed mice the summer following a good acorn year. We expect the forests and fields to be teeming with mice in the summer of 2011.

Research we've conducted with Bard College biologist Felicia Keesing shows newly hatched blacklegged ticks that feed on white-footed mice are much more likely to survive than are ticks that feed on any other mammal or bird host. We've also established that about 90 percent of the larval ticks that feed on mice become infected with Lyme disease bacteria. So, we predict that in 2011 large mouse populations will lead to an increase in the survival and infection of ticks.

This is bad news for human health. Mouse-fed larval ticks from 2011 will sit quietly on the forest floor for almost a year until they emerge as nymphs — the stage responsible for transmitting the vast majority of Lyme disease cases. Our research predicts the acorn bumper crop of 2010 will cause a mouse population explosion in 2011, which in turn will result in abnormally large numbers of infected nymphal ticks in the summer of 2012.

We have been tracking acorn production by Hudson Valley oaks for 20 years and have consistently seen a spike in cases of Lyme disease in Dutchess County residents two years after large acorn mast years.

Risk of exposure to Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases is a constant part of life in the Hudson Valley. But acorns — an ecological leading indicator — provide an early warning of the years when the risk of these diseases will be particularly high.

NY Assembly Passes Hydro-Fracking Moratorium

2010-11-30T11:12:00.001-05:00

By a wide margin, the Assembly passed a bill that will suspend the issuance of permits to hydro-frack gas wells in New York State until May 15, 2011. The State Senate passed the bill earlier this year. It is now up to Governor Paterson to sign the timeout into law.

From an eblast received today:

Today the New York State Assembly approved a moratorium on gas drilling in New York State, a huge victory for those of us who have been fighting so hard to protect our drinking water from toxic chemicals.

Protecting New York’s environment is at the top of our agenda in the Assembly Majority and we will not let anything stand in the way of making sure all New Yorkers have clean, safe water. When it comes to keeping pollution and dangerous chemicals out of our water supply, there is simply no acceptable level of risk.

That is why my colleagues and I resisted pressure from the oil and gas industry and passed this crucial moratorium, which would prohibit the controversial process known as hydrofracking while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency conducts a safety review.

Our most important responsibility is to keep all New Yorkers safe. By preventing hydrofracking from moving ahead, we have not only protected our water supply today, we have served notice to the industry that we will always put the health and safety of New Yorkers first.

I want to thank everyone who expressed support for this bill and I want to assure you that the Assembly is committed to leaving a safer, greener, more sustainable world for future generations.

Sincerely,
Sheldon Silver

County Stormwater / Flood Management Legislation - Public Hearing

2010-11-29T23:07:00.001-05:00

Stormwater legislation has been approved for a public hearing on Mon., December 6 at 7:30 pm at Board of Legislators' offices in White Plains (148 Martine Avenue, 8th Floor).

The legislation is available for download here as a .pdf file. Select the link on the BOL page to the version marked "FINAL."

All interested persons are welcome to provide comment at the public hearing.

County Exec Astorino to Hold Budget Meeting Tonight

2010-11-29T14:16:00.002-05:00

2011 Budget meeting tonight - email alert from CCE:

County Executive Rob Astorino will be holding a meeting on Monday night, November 29 at 6:30 p.m. at 6:30 p.m in the Fellowship Hall at St. Matthews. The church is located at 382 Cantitoe St. in Bedford. The talk is being hosted by the Bedford/Armonk Rotary Club.

Mr. Astorino will be there to answer questions about the 2011 Budget. The meeting is open to the public and anyone can attend. This would be a good opportunity to make your thoughts known and to dispel misconceptions about Cornell University funding CCE Westchester. Cornell only provides in-kind services of faculty and staff; it does not provide cash to the county extension offices.

In County Law 224, the state established Cornell as the “agent for the state, for the cooperative management of said work of the county extension service association and the proper supervision of the professional staff employed therefor.” County Law 224 also says that in order to qualify for state funding, a county extension office must first have an appropriation from the county treasury.

It is important to go and confront Mr. Astorino on his budget cutbacks - especially to the Cooperative Extension program.

--

From a previous email - background info on CCE as a non-profit (or not):

Cornell Cooperative Extension is a public, "subordinate governmental agency" established by state statute and as such has requirements that are the same as any village, town, county, city, etc. in New York State including record-keeping and document retention, election of governing body members, open public meetings law, public agency purchasing, and many other limitations that government agencies must follow. Non-profits are private organizations, not publicly owned. CCE is a public organization intended to be supported by taxpayer dollars via government appropriations.

Because CCE is the only entity of its type in New York State, some people mistake CCE for a non-profit. While it is true that CCE does not make any profit, neither does any county, city, town, village, or other governmental agency.

Governor Says Hydro-Fracking Will Not Go Forward At This TIme

2010-11-25T15:04:00.001-05:00

From the Catskill Mountainkeeper group:

WE ALL HAVE SOMETHING TO BE THANKFUL FOR ON THIS THANKSGIVING DAY. GOVERNOR PATERSON HAS MADE A STUNNING ANNOUNCEMENT:

Governor Paterson
"At this point, I would say that the hydrofracking opponents have raised enough of an argument to thwart us going forward at this time." Governor David Paterson: Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Yesterday on WAMC Radio, Governor Paterson admitted that he is no longer convinced that fracking is safe and that as a result of all of our hard work - fracking will not go forward at this time.

Here is the full quote:
"This is a very good example of public participation. Our DEC...originally ruled that hydrofracking would not affect thewater quality in the area but we've received additional information and have not been able to come to a conclusion as to whether or not this is a good idea. Even with the tremendous revenues that will come in at this time...we're not going to risk public safety or water quality, which will be the next emerging global problem after the energy shortage. At this point, I would say that the hydrofracking opponents have raised enough of an argument to thwart us going forward at this time."

Listen the full interview at:
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wamc/news.newsmain/article/0/2706/1729657/WAMC.News/Governor.Paterson.Visits.WAMC

This is an amazing David vs. Goliath victory for all of the volunteer groups, environmental organizations, land owners, business owners, farmers and the many thousands of individuals who have taken action.

We still need to Speaker Sheldon Silver and the New York Assembly to pass the Moratorium Bill and the Water Withdrawal Bill on Monday during the Extraordinary Session called by Paterson. All indications are that Silver wants to move these bills but he needs to hear from you. Take action by contacting your Assemblyperson by clicking here and filling out this simple email form provided by our partner "Clean Water Not Dirty Drilling".

Thank you again from the Mountainkeeper team.
Ramsay, Wes, Aaron and Beth

5 Things to Do to Offer Wildlife Support This Winter

2010-11-18T13:09:00.000-05:00

1) Provide winter fuel for wildlife with native plants that offer nuts, berries and seeds or offer a feeder.

2) Anchor your old holiday tree in a secluded part of your yard for wildlife to use as shelter from harsh weather.

3) Start a compost pile of needles, pinecones and wreaths made from natural material from your holiday decorations to provide additional cover for wildlife.

4) Clean and fill your birdbath on a regular basis. If you live in an area where temperatures freeze water, use a birdbath heater as a simple way to keep water accessible.

5) Create a cozy winter home for birds. Clean out your spring nest boxes or provide a warm winter roosting box. Also, evidence shows roosting birds prefer winter homes placed up high — about 10 feet or more.

---

Got what it takes? Register your yard as a Wildlife Habitat™ site via National Wildlife Foundation. http://tinyurl.com/yf7sjwh

BOL 2011 Budget Hearings - Last Night in Yonkers

2010-11-18T10:03:00.000-05:00

Here is the statement (.pdf) I made last night at the BOL public hearing on the 2011 budget in support of environmental planning department staffing and in support of the Westchester CCE.

The auditorium was packed for most of the 3 1/2 hour session with 9 Legislators in attendance on stage and over 100 speakers scheduled to present 3 minute statements each. (Not all ended up speaking due to the lengthy wait times - but perhaps 60-70 folks did speak up.)

I am sad to report the overwhelming number of speakers describing first hand experiences with, and concerns for, the continuance of public and non-profit social, legal and health safety nets in the county. ("It's the economy, stupid.")

However, a few other topics were covered:

10 speakers in support of Hilltop Hanover (all staff and friends of).
8 speakers in support of the county forensics lab.
2 speakers in favor of the tax cuts.
2 speakers in favor of CCE.
1 speaker in favor of GNC (Greenburgh Nature Center).

I URGE YOU TO COME OUT TO THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING IN PLEASANTVILLE (Nov 23rd) or the FINAL ONE in the BOL chambers (White Plains - Dec 9th) - see below. Without a strong show of public support, it is not clear that the Legislators will feel compelled to restore the county's budget cuts of CCE or GNC programs. The impact on outreach and educational services will be drastic.

MASTER GARDENER should make a statement at these hearings about their own activities and the benefits of their outreach to the public, the schools, etc. Local ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISTS, ARBORISTS, or those involved in the GREEN INDUSTRY should also speak up about the real world benefits and the "multiplier effects" of CCE and/or GNC programs.

One word of advice from someone who has sat thru 3 1/2 hours of speakers - be ready to edit your statement "on the fly". It comes off best if statements in support of the same organization are not overly repetitive, rather taken together present a full picture - but one without excessive repetition!

This urgent message for support needs to be sent out in as many channels as possible - feel free to repost and share with your own lists. We need to make sure anyone associated with either CCE or GNC programs or who has made use of their services will speak up in support at one of the last two public hearings:

Northern County Public Hearing
Tuesday, November 23rd
Location: Pleasantville High School, 60 Romer Avenue (corner of Romer and Clinton Street), Pleasantville

Final Public Hearing
Thursday, December 9th
Location: County Board Legislative Chambers, 148 Martine Avenue, 8th Floor (corner of Martine and Court Street), White Plains

All hearings start at 7:00pm.

Community Services Provided by Westchester CCE Staff and Master Gardeners

2010-11-11T15:54:00.008-05:00

From the CCE:

Westchester County provides 34% of our budget, but receives 100% of our programming.

Highlights - Cornell Cooperative Extension of Westchester County

2010 Budget Revenue breakdown summary

Funding Source -	Dollar Amount	- Percentage of Funding
County	$1,187,825	51%
State via Cornell*	$616,779	27%
Federal	$337,148	15%
Other	$174,444	7%
TOTAL BUDGET	$2,316,396	100%

CCE Westchester did not receive $1.3 million in 2010; the County Executive only approved and released $1,187,825. That was a 10% cut which resulted in 4 layoffs.

* The above figures do not include $1,422,466 worth of services from Cornell faculty and staff, and do not include the value of volunteer hours: $1,788,696.

If their services had to be provided by others, the cost is estimated to be over $16 million.

In the last 5 years, CCE cut their staff from 36 employees to 18, but more than doubled their productivity. They are extremely efficient. Not one penny of the county funding ever goes toward fringe benefits (pensions, healthcare, etc.) at CCE.

We have 130 active Master Gardener Volunteers in Westchester County.
Master Gardeners have volunteered over 7000 hours so far in 2010. This is worth over $2,000,000.
CCE has trained nearly 200 teachers in school gardening.
Master Gardener Volunteers mentor 35 school gardens in Westchester County which makes school gardening more accessible to over 12,000 youth.
We responded to 1,636 requests for service (Hort Hotline, Diagnostics etc) last year.
Our nutrition department provided nutrition education to 721 adults representing 2382 family members in 2009. This service is bilingual.
Our incubation and embryology program (egg hatching) reaches over 11,000 youth.

Background info:

CCE has a $2.3 million dollar program, but it only costs Westchester government about $1.2 million a year. That comes to about $1.00 a year per resident.

CCE is a governmental agency, not a private non-profit. It must, by law, receive its core funding from county government appropriations. CCE was created by the NYS Legislature, not by Cornell University. It was created for the benefit of the respective counties and their residents and businesses. Cornell only administers the program. Cornell University funds do not directly support CCE. Cornell pays faculty and staff who provide in-kind services to county extension offices and the people we serve. Cornell University’s endowment is for Cornell students and cannot be spent on New York State’s cooperative extension system.

CCE provides training, technical expertise and economic development support to the “Billion Dollar Green Industry” in Westchester County. That includes the turf & landscape industry, the private and public golf course industry, the nurseries and greenhouses and the farms. CCE's education teaches them to use the most environmentally safe products and procedures. CCE also provide training, advice and assistance to municipalities in caring for their green spaces (parks, street trees, planting strips, etc.) and provide integrated pest management education so that people don’t use environmentally-unfriendly or dangerous methods of dealing with pests (insects, rodents, bedbugs, wild animals, etc.). CCE serves urban, suburban and rural parts of the county. This “green” industry employs tens of thousands of Westchester residents, so keeping these businesses viable in Westchester means keeping them employing a lot of local people and paying a lot of taxes.

CCE provides advice and guidance to homeowners about plant and pest problems. CCE's lab quickly analyzes and identifies problems brought to it by homeowners. CCE's 150 volunteer Master Gardeners provide thousands of hours of free assistance throughout the year all over the county. Without CCE, the Master Gardener program ceases to exist.

CCE's nutrition educators teach food-stamp eligible people how to stretch their food stamp dollars and make it to end of the month with nutritious and healthy foods. CCE teaches them how to buy, read labels, select, safely handle and store, and prepare food for their families. CCE reaches about 2,400 of Westchester’s poorest people each year with this program. CCE's programs are geared toward preventing youth obesity which leads to later life problems of hypertension, cardio-vascular disease and diabetes. Since this population lacks private health insurance, their healthcare becomes a taxpayer’s burden, so their work is designed to alleviate that tax dollar drain.

CCE's 4-H/Youth Development program teaches kids self-confidence, public speaking, self-discipline, good citizenship, and science. CCE provides the huge Incubation & Embryology program in the local schools that teaches 9,000 Westchester students each year about biology and the environment by having them incubate and hatch chick eggs in their classrooms. On their own, the schools could not afford to hire the expertise that CCE provides in doing these programs unless they increased their schools budgets and raised school taxes.

Call County Legislatos whom you know or who otherwise represent you to let them know how important CCE is to Westchester. Since no other entity in Westchester does what CCE does, if CCE disappears there won’t be anyone else to do this job. It just won’t get done.

You can also email your legislator: http://www.westchesterlegislators.com/legislators/index.htm
Also copy Pete Harckham, who is the majority leader.

County Budget Hearings - speak up!

2010-11-10T18:56:00.001-05:00

notice on hearings from Tom Abinanti's enews list:

November 10, 2010

Dear Neighbor:

I invite you to attend one of the public hearings which the Westchester County Board of Legislators will hold to take input on the proposed 2011 County Operating Budget submitted by County Executive Robert Astorino.

The schedule for the public hearings is:

Southern County Public Hearing
Wednesday, November 17th
Location: Riverfront Library, 1 Larkin Center (corner of River and Dock Streets), Yonkers

Northern County Public Hearing
Tuesday, November 23rd
Location: Pleasantville High School, 60 Romer Avenue (corner of Romer and Clinton Street), Pleasantville

After these two hearings the Board of Legislators may amend the proposed budget. A final public hearing will be held:

Final Public Hearing
Thursday, December 9th
Location: County Board Legislative Chambers, 148 Martine Avenue, 8th Floor (corner of Martine and Court Street), White Plains

All hearings start at 7:00pm and citizens are invited and encouraged to attend and comment.

If you cannot attend but would like to comment on the proposed budget, please contact me at (914) 995-2821 or Abinanti@westchesterlegislators.com.

For information on the 2011 proposed budget click here.

Sincerely,

Westchester CCE Threatened by new County Budget!

2010-11-10T15:31:00.000-05:00

From the Director of Westchester CCE:

You may have already read that the budget County Executive Astorino sent to the Board of Legislators cuts all county appropriations to Cornell Cooperative Extension. The way our funding works, the law requires the county to first make an appropriation. Then, after the county appropriates funding support to CCE, the state, federal and Cornell funds kick in as support to CCE. If the county does not make an appropriation to CCE, none of the other funds will flow, either and CCE will cease to exist in Westchester County.

The law was set up this way because cooperative extension is a cooperating agreement between the county, state, federal government and Cornell. If the county wants to have a cooperative extension office, it must show good faith by making its appropriation first. Since no appropriation is included in the County Executive’s 2011 proposed budget, CCE will cease to exist on January 1, 2011. If CCE does not exist, the Master Gardener program in Westchester County will cease to exist, also. All of the horticulture and pest management services, along with the nutrition education and 4-H program will also cease to exist in Westchester County.

The County Executive’s budget is now in the hands of the Board of Legislators. They can modify it and include CCE. If they are persuaded to do that and an appropriation is made to CCE, the County will continue to receive the state, federal and Cornell support . And – the Master Gardener program will continue.

Call County Executive Astorino's office to say "no way!" 914.995.2900

Email or call you County Legislator, as well!

Greenburgh-Based Eco Activists Go to Washington to Speak for the Trees

2010-11-09T12:21:00.002-05:00

From 11/9/10 Rivertown Patch.com:

Greenburgh-based environmentalists participate in FERC roundtable to argue against clear-cutting practices.
By Lizzie Hedrick

The Greenburgh Environmental Forum's LORAX Working Group chairperson Mark Gilliland appeared before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in Washington DC late last month to discuss the impact of federal regulations on state and regional electric utility companies' implementation of vegetation management plans surrounding active power lines.

"I am very pleased that LORAX had this opportunity to present landowner and environmental concerns at the FERC technical roundtable," said Gilliland, an Irvington resident. "It is imperative that community concerns about property value loss, environmental damage and health impacts of these TVMPs are discussed in the context of both State and Federal regulations and policies."

In reaction to utility companies'—predominantly Consolidated Edison's—practices of clear-cutting trees along power transmission lines in Westchester and the Hudson Valley, a group of concerned residents and officials have banded together to push for stronger regulations preventing deforestation they believe is unnecessary and detrimental to our natural environment.

Facing FERC in the nation's capitol, LORAX representatives argued that the current vegetation management programs followed by Transmission Operators—or companies responsible for transmitting energy within a given region—in New York have lead to "severe economic, aesthetic and environmental damage along the transmission rights-of-way due to excessive removal and clear-cutting of all trees and vegetation, lack of adequate storm-water and erosion controls, over-reliance on herbicides, as well as insufficient or inadequate follow-up mitigation."

They said this "scorched earth" approach has been extensively documented by LORAX, the Sierra Club and various municipalities in the region, as well as by both the Rockland and Westchester County Legislatures.

Appearing on the panel of the roundtable were representatives of the utility industry, state and federal regulatory agencies, utility arborists and landowner groups.

As expressed by Mark Hegerle, director of FERC's division of compliance for the Office of Electrical Reliability, the goal of the meeting was to uncover why utilities and state regulators claim "FERC made us do it" in response to public outcries about recent wide-spread tree removals. The discussion covered a wide range of topics including: Review of federal reliability standards, state approval and oversight of utility vegetation management plans, mandatory non-compliance fines, mitigation of environmental impacts and best practices for vegetation management in the rights of way.

"Viable solutions need to be found to prevent further damage—solutions ranging from revision of approved 'best practices' and reduction of non-compliance fines, to requiring detailed environmental reviews and responsible mitigation along the rights of way," Gilliland said.

Currently, utility companies are fined not only for allowing vegetation to exist within a certain spark zone of active power lines, but also for allowing plants to grow into a wider intermediate area further from the line. "We believe government agencies should reduce the penalty structure so that the utility companies don't feel the need to take such drastic measures," Gilliland said.

Though grateful for the opportunity to present his extensive research, Gilliland added that, in reality, changing the regulations will be difficult.

"Vegetation management plans for each utility company must be approved at both the state and federal levels," Gilliland said. "The second issue is oversight: Once the plans are approved, who is regulating their practices?"

According to Gilliland, nobody is.

He said the the state and government agencies responsible for overseeing the process are understaffed and have been "in reactive mode,"—spending all their time responding to community outrage over clear-cutting, rather that stopping it from happening.

"No vegetation implementation plan specifically mentions clear-cutting," Gilliland said. "But they all do it because it is cheaper to send someone in with a chainsaw than to have an arborist actively select which trees pose a real threat to power lines. It also means they have to come back less often to maintain the rights of way, which is also potentially cheaper."

Several other LORAX members, including Marvin Baum (Rockland County), Amy Kupferberg (Orange County) and Chris Crane, a member of the Westchester County Legislature, attended the FERC roundtable and lobbied strongly for changes to vegetation management regulations and policies. LORAX Working Group founding members include: Patricia Podolak (Yorktown), Susan Porcino (Ardsley), Anne Jaffe-Holmes (Irvington), David Bedell (Sleepy Hollow), and Walter Rodriquez (Yonkers).

"I certainly hope something was accomplished by attending the roundtable and presenting the home-owner and landowner's perspective so that FERC could have a more balanced picture of what's going on," Gilliland said. "What they will do with it, I'm not sure."

What To Do When You Get Noticed By Con Ed

2010-11-04T18:26:00.004-04:00

This post covers what to do if your tree is nearby or under a distribution line along the street and you have received notice that Con Ed will be pruning in your neighborhood - or specifically on your front street.

If the tree is on your property, then UNLESS Con Ed has an easement agreement with you, they can not cut or prune the tree. They have to get you sign a release document or else they would be trespassing and illegally "taking" your tree.

Con Ed is not supposed to prune beyond their specified 10'(side) x 15'(above) x 10'(side) line clearance window. They are supposed to prune / manage only distribution lines, not "last mile" connections between the pole and your house or building. (These are your responsibility.)

Before you agree to having a (private) tree pruned by signing off on the utility's worksheet, demand an on-site consultation with the Con Ed supervisor and the tree contractor's forester so as to be shown specifically the extent of the cutting / pruning. They should be able to show you with a laser pointer every branch to be removed or pruned and be able to tell you "why". (It would be a good idea if you are discussing "high-valued" trees to supply your own consulting arborist at this review meeting who will be able to negotiate better pruning decisions and alert you to major concerns.)

If the tree is on a town/village easement (along the street), then the town/village must agree to Con Ed's actions ahead of time. This would typically be the DPW department, but may be the town/village forester, Tree Commission, or sometimes even the town/village clerk. Depends on municipality.

If tree is on town easement (thus, they own the tree) and the town agrees that the tree can be topped (bad for tree!), you are out of luck. Conversely, they may request the tree be removed and mitigated for (replant in new location or replacement with something which will not grow into the wires over time.)

Finally, in some cases, the town/village can request that Con Ed keep the tree unpruned (for aesthetic, public or historic reasons - such as along a park side), and ask that the utility's Line Engineering department consider "appliances" such as yard arms to move the wires out of the tree's crown or into a safer position vis-a-vis the tree's branches/trunk. (This "card" can be played very infrequently by the municipality, so save it for where it makes a major difference for the local community!)

In terms of topping, this is strictly in violation of ANSI A300 part 1 standards of industry "best practice" tree pruning. Con Ed is well aware of this specification and all of their contractors are supposed to conform to it. Short of topping, the only other "solution" would be to heavily prune the tree on one side. In many cases (esp. of it's an evergreen), it would be better to simply remove the tree in exchange for an acceptable replant somewhere else on your property. This would have to be negotiated with Con Ed ahead of time, of course.

As the Con Ed line supervisor or tree contractor's forester may not be able to commit to a negotiated agreement, I suggest that you contact the division head of Con Ed for distribution lines - Matt Glasser. If you must, go higher up the executive chain to top management (whose contact info can be discovered via web search.)

Please take time now to photo document your tree BEFORE Con Ed comes around, as well as after their visit.

Organize with your neighbors and form a community watch group during pruning operations in you neighborhood or along your street. Get local media involved. Make sure your local municipal officials know about this issue, as well. Make noise and be visible!

Record (take notes) concerning all conversations with utility staff, crews or higher-up corporate managers, as well as with your local municipal officials. Get any agreements with the utility concerning pruning or mitigation replanting in writing.

And MOST IMPORTANT, when the day of vegetation management comes, BE THERE ONSITE WATCHING and/or have an arborist there representing you. Keep an eye out at all times! A lot of damage can be done with a chain saw in just a few minutes...

Be sure to have an "escalation" number (7x24 cell#) to contact the in-the-field supervising Con Ed person so as to "stop work" and force an on-the-site meeting if the workers are not following agreed upon plans.

Good Luck!

Be Prepared: Distribution Line Clearing Community Action Plan

2010-11-04T16:00:00.031-04:00

Ask your municipal officials to set up an action plan now before Con Ed pruning trucks are idling on your street. Some things you can do on your own within your local community / block. Please consider these action points (based upon our experiences in Irvington last year):

Have your elected reps meet with senior Con Ed management to let them know you mean business when it comes to tree conservation and urban forest protection.
Hold a high visibility public rally in support of tree conservation and minimal pruning. Get local media involved from the onset. Collect email addresses for community notification.
Get to know your crew supervisor for the Tree Contractor and project supervisor for Con Ed. Ensure the Con Ed supervisor is an experienced, certified arborist.
Trust but verify – meet, review & monitor every step of the way, every tree (on public easement or on private property)!
Have a qualified Consulting Arborist on contract and "on-call" for the duration of the project cycle. Have arborist meet and review pruning expectations with Con Ed and contractor on each new street segment (typically each morning).
Highlight areas of historic or specimen quality trees for special handling. Meet & review - walk the line - ahead of time, but especially on the day of actual pruning. Insist upon supervision oversight by a senior Con Ed arborist that you have met and are comfortable with.
Agree upon and publicly post the complaint resolution process. (Complaints should go to a specific project email address and to local officials such as DPW for tracking & forwarding "up the chain", and not to the generic 1-800-ConEd number.)
Have a Contact Escalation list (including Con Ed senior management) and a defined emergency “stop work” process to allow time-out for on-site consultations.
Keep the public informed (email, web, cable, clerk's office, police department) as to the daily work schedule, their rights as property owners, escalation contacts to use, etc.
Ensure that Con Ed and Tree Contractor are giving sufficient pre-notification to homeowners for all private tree pruning. There should be at least 48 hours and a contact number to set up a consultation with the Con Ed Notification Forester for the project.
Document your assets: take photos before and after pruning. Also get a written description from Notification Forester of what tree pruning you have agreed to.
Set up volunteer monitoring of line clearing operations. Establish neighborhood watches block by block. Observers should report (escalate) any unusual, unwanted, un-agreed, or excessive pruning immediately!
Report any rude language or behavior by pruning crews. Sure, dealing with public is difficult, especially when it comes to emotional issues such as trees. But the crews must remain civil and professional at all times.
Create and update daily a "Scrapbook of Shame" (using Flicker or similar photo posting site) documenting bad pruning and other problems reported.
Use Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites to keep everyone informed and to quickly organize an action response crowd, if and when required.

Longer Term Efforts:

Start a program of municipal street tree maintenance (eg: annual pruning, tree replacement with appropriate tree species, GPS-based street tree survey.)
Plan a public “Re-Leaf” Project to re-plant areas where street trees have been removed.

Yonkers Announces Upcoming Distribution Line Clearing Cycle by Con Edison

2010-11-04T15:59:00.000-04:00

From the Yonkers Green Policy Task Force enewsletter:

Con Edison's tree-trimming operation will soon hit in Yonkers again.

The public utilities company maintains that trimming trees along transmission (large high voltage towers) and distribution lines (street poles) minimizes storm damage to ensure reliable transmission. Opponents say Con Ed is going way overboard by cutting down far too many trees for neighborhood aesthetics. They argue that over-pruning can weaken the tree and/or create an imbalance in its distribution which causes an even greater likelihood of damage and power outages.

After its first round of cutting last spring, a group of concerned citizens formed a regional task force, with participation from the Yonkers GPTF, called the Lorax Working Group in an effort to watchdog the process. [...] After studying both sides of the issue, Yonkers responded in February 2010 by passing a moratorium on the clear cutting of trees along transmission lines until further study. The utilities company is, however, able to cut trees along its distribution lines and herein lies the rub.

They will start the process in the next few weeks on the streets listed below. Once Con Ed furnishes the GPTF with the exact times and dates, we will publish another eblast so residents can supervise the process on their properties if they so choose.

The following Yonkers streets will be affected:

Fort Hill Rd
Central Park Ave
Young Ave
Depew Ave
Morrow Ave
Brendon Hill Rd
Malverne Rd
Scardale Rd
Harney Rd
Beech Hill Rd
Old Army Rd
Weyburn Rd
Edgemont Rd
Lynwood Pl & Rd
Wyndham Rd
Overton Rd
Iverness Rd
Banbury Rd
Cotswold Way
Chalford La
E. Fort Hill Rd
Triangle
Halsey Rd
Simpson Pl
Eisenhower Pl
Crisfield St
Andover Rd
Patton Dr
Nimitz Rd
Nassau Rd
Shore View Dr
Beaumont Cir
Grange Ave
Canfield Ave
Armonk Ave
Helena Ave
Roxbury Dr E
Cleveland Pl
E. Fort Hill Rd
Bacon Pl
Eisenhower Dr
Nimitz Pl
Falmouth Rd
Deerhurst Rd
Woods Hole Dr
Dimsdale Rd
Marissa Dt
Chalford La
Wyndcliff Rd
Dorset Rd
Sulgrave Rd

Stay informed! Get on the Yonkers GPTF mailing list today!

Yonkers GPTF contact info:
email: gptf@cityofyonkers.com
phone: 914-377-6067

PRESS RELEASE: LORAX TESTIFIES IN WASHINGTON AT FERC

2010-10-29T17:04:00.004-04:00

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Mark Gilliland

GEF LORAX Working Group

c/o Greenburgh Nature Center

99 Dromore Rd

Scarsdale, NY 10583

(914) 714-3056

lorax@markg.org

October 26, 2010

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

LORAX TESTIFIES IN WASHINGTON AT FERC TRANSMISSION LINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL ROUNDTABLE

LORAX presents Landowner and environmental concerns with right-of-way clear-cutting.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The GEF LORAX Working Group chairperson, Mark Gilliland, appeared before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) Electrical Reliability Committee on Tuesday, October 26, 2010, to discuss the impacts of Federal regulations (FAC-003-1) on state and regional electric utilities’ implementation of Transmission Vegetation Management Plans (TVMPs).

“I am very pleased that LORAX had this opportunity to present landowner and environmental concerns at the FERC technical roundtable,” said Mark Gilliland, Chairman, GEF LORAX Working Group. “It is imperative that community concerns about property value loss, environmental damage and health impacts of these TVMPs are discussed in the context of both State and Federal regulations and policies.”

As reported to the FERC panel by LORAX, the current vegetation management programs defined by the various Transmission Operators (TOs) in New York have lead to severe economic, aesthetic and environmental damage along the transmission rights-of-way (ROWs) due to excessive removal and clear-cutting of all trees and vegetation, lack of adequate stormwater and erosion controls, over-reliance on herbicides, as well as insufficient or inadequate follow-up mitigation. This “scorched earth” approach has been extensively documented by LORAX, the Sierra Club and various municipalities in the region, as well as by both the Rockland and Westchester County Legislatures.

Appearing on the panel of the roundtable were representatives of the utility industry, state and federal regulatory agencies, utility arborists and landowner groups. As stated by Mark Hegerle, FERC’s Director, Division of Compliance, Office of Electrical Reliability, the goal of the meeting was to uncover why utilities and state regulators claim “FERC made us do it” in response to public outcries about recent wide-spread tree removals. The roundtable discussion covered a wide range of topics including: review of Federal reliability standards (FAC-003-1), state approval and oversight of utility TVMPs, mandatory non-compliance fines, mitigation of environmental impacts, utility ROW easement agreements, “best practices” vegetation management of the ROW.

A complete video archive of the roundtable as well as the meeting agenda can be viewed online at:

http://capitolconnection.net/capcon/ferc/102610/ferc102610.htm

“Viable solutions need to be found to prevent further damage – solutions ranging from revision of approved ‘best practices’ and reduction of non-compliance fines, to requiring detailed environmental reviews and responsible mitigation along the ROWs,” Gilliland noted.

Several other LORAX members, including Marvin Baum (Rockland County), Amy Kupferberg (Orange County) and Chris Crane (Westchester County Legislature), attended the FERC roundtable and lobbied strongly for needed changes to TVMP regulations and policies.

GEF LORAX Working Group founding members also include: Patricia Podolak (Yorktown), Susan Porcino (Ardsley), Anne Jaffe-Holmes (Greenburgh Environmental Center), David Bedell (Sleepy Hollow), and Walter Rodriquez (Yonkers).

For more information including LORAX submittals to recent NYSPSC proceedings on vegetation management, please visit the LORAX Working Group blog at: http://loraxwg.blogspot.com.

“Trees lost to date along the ROWs in Westchester Country provided an estimated $6 million dollars annually in clean air and stormwater benefits for our communities. To avoid similar financial and health impacts in the future, we must better balance electric reliability with the urgent need to protect our local environment,” Gilliland observed.

# # #

Photo attached by LORAX. Caption: “Members of GEF LORAX Working Group outside of the FERC building after the Technical Roundtable, October 26, 2010. From left to right: Mark Gilliland, Amy Kupferberg, Chris Crane, Marvin Baum.”

---

Download .pdf version of Press Release here.

Watch the FERC TVMP Roundtable from Oct 26, 2010

2010-10-27T15:47:00.000-04:00

Archived webcast here.

LORAX Submissions for FERC Roundtable

2010-10-25T17:47:00.005-04:00

Here are our LORAX submissions for the FERC Roundtable:

Westchester BOL Moratorium Resolution 26-2010 passed 3/1/10 (Download as .pdf)

Observations and Recommendations concerning TVMPs in Westchester and Rockland (Download as .pdf)

Short statement by LORAX chairperson to the Roundtable (Download as .pdf)

Follow-up statement of 10/28/10 by LORAX chairperson to FERC committee for inclusion in Docket No. AD11-2-000. (Download as .pdf)

---

Watch the Roundtable via web video streaming here (event page).

Irvington GPTF's "Your Leaves: Love 'Em and Leave 'Em" Environmentally-Friendly Cost-Saving Initiative

2010-10-24T11:07:00.001-04:00

PRESS RELEASE

Irvington GPTF's "Your Leaves: Love 'Em and Leave 'Em" Environmentally-Friendly Cost-Saving Initiative

On Wed., October 27 at 7:30 p.m., the Irvington Green Policy Task Force will be presenting "Your Leaves: Love 'Em and Leave 'Em", an environmentally-friendly cost-saving initiative to the Greenburgh Town Council during the Council meeting at Greenburgh Town Hall.

Fall leaves are a valuable resource that most homeowners let go to waste by having them blown into piles on the street, or raked into brown landscaping bags stacked curb-side, left for eventual town pickup. Leaf collection, hauling, and disposal is a huge annual cost to every municipality in our tree-lovely county! Too often these curbside leaf piles spread out, or the bags tip over, washing leaves into the street, clogging storm drains and making roads dangerous for driving. Additional cost is thus incurred because these storm drains must be cleared to avoid flooding.

As a homeowner, are there options? Is there a better way?

Whether you pay a lawn care service or do it yourself, the easy and cost-saving answer is: Leave 'em in place! Shredding your leaves where they are on the lawn, using shredded leaves as a winter mulch on landscape beds, collecting shredded leaves into compost piles, or simply leaving your leaves under the trees in wooded areas are all examples of using nature's own method of turning old leaves into new soil. In these stressful economic times, the "Love 'Em and Leave 'Em" Initiative is not only "green", it just makes Cents!

The public are welcome to come to the Town Hall for the presentation, or for more information and/or questions about mulching-in-place and composting of leaves, visit the Irvington Green Policy Task Force web-pages or write them at green@irvingtonny.gov.

Also contact:

Anne Jaffe Holmes
Coordinator of School Programs & Environmental Projects
Greenburgh Nature Center
99 Dromore Road
Scarsdale, NY 10583
P: 914-813-1812
F: 914-725-6599

LORAX to Attend FERC Meeting on Transmission Line Vegetative Management Issues - Docket No. AD11-2-000 - Tuesday, Oct 26th, Washington, DC.

2010-10-24T10:56:00.000-04:00

Overview of meeting (from invitation emails):

Staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is organizing a conference to discuss vegetation management practices and related topics. [...] We’d like to highlight the importance of good vegetation management, noting that we’ve generally seen good results with FAC-003 (reduced to zero vegetation contacts over a couple of quarters, but 3 recent touches are indicators of ongoing concern, as shown by a recently issued NERC Industry Advisory. We want to acknowledge landowner concerns over certain methods (e.g., clear cutting), address how such methods are established and approved, and discuss possible ways to mitigate the impact while ensuring reliability.

We propose to structure a panel discussion more like a guided discussion than a series of prepared statements read into the record. So we plan to invite NERC staff to discuss Reliability Standard FAC-003; a couple of utility representatives to discuss current practices, the TVMP, and ROW agreements; a landowner representative to discuss common complaints and concerns; one or two state commission/government representatives to discuss jurisdictional issues; and an arborist to speak to vegetation management issues and solutions from an arborists point of view.

[The conference will be held October 26 at the Commission’s offices from 1pm-5pm.]

Attached is the supplemental notice of the conference containing the list of panelists and the order in which we will address issues. As requested by some of you, following my opening remarks, each of you will have five minutes for introductory remarks. We will then move directly into a collegial discussion of the issues as outlined on the supplemental notice.

The conference will be Webcast. Anyone with Internet access who desires to listen to this event can do so by navigating to www.ferc.gov’s Calendar of Events and locating this event in the Calendar.

Westchester BOL: Flooding/Stormwater Management Legislation

2010-10-24T10:55:00.003-04:00

The Environment & Energy Committee will meet on Monday, October 25th at 3:00 PM, in the 8th floor McPoland Conference room. The committee will meet jointly with the Legislation Committee.

Flooding/Stormwater Management Legislation
The joint committees will continue review of proposed legislation on flooding/stormwater management. The proposed legislation would authorize the development of a stormwater management plan, the implementation of a county program to match funds for municipal stormwater projects, and the creation of watershed advisory boards.

The legislation is available here. [click on DRAFT #3]

Head of NYS DEC Fired By Governor

2010-10-24T10:54:00.003-04:00

The firing of the head of the DEC as he indicates the probably negative results of the continuing DEC staff cuts is a big blow to NYS's environmental protection and oversight. There are lots of news reports if you google, but here's one summary.

And another from the Eco Poliics Weekly eblast newsletter:

BREAKING NEWS: DEC Commish Fired

Memo leak earlier in the week triggers governor's action

- UPDATE -

Acting head of DEC appointed (Nov 4, 2010)

Within the past week, Governor David Paterson named Peter Iwanowicz acting commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Conservation. Read more from NYLCV's Eco Politics Daily.\

PSC Announces Public Hearing on the Proposed Champlain Hudson Power Express Transmission Line - Yonkers Riverfront Library, Monday Oct 25, 6pm

2010-10-24T10:45:00.000-04:00

Subject: Champlain Hudson Power Express Public Hearing; Mon. Oct. 25, 6pm Riverfront Library Yonkers

Everyone: Enclosed find notice of a Yonkers public hearing this Monday evening regarding the proposed Champlain Transmission line down the Hudson River. Please read attached documents. This is an extremely important matter for Yonkers as the project would mandate the use of a large area of open space behind the library for the 4 acre conversion plant that is necessary for convert the line from DC to AC current. And in terms of the Hudson Rver, there are environmental and ecological questions to be addressed, as the line would have to be submerged down the length of the riverbed until it reached the terminus point in Yonkers.

Those of you who do not live in Yonkers, but are concerned with the Hudson River and/or live in adjacent towns may want to attend this hearing as it may be the closest to you. Check the attachment for locations.

From PSC:
A public hearing on the proposed Champlain Hudson Power Express transmission line and converter station will be at the Yonkers Riverfront Library on Monday, October 25 at 6 pm. A notice is attached with further information. The converter station is proposed to be located at the parking lot on Wells Avenue, due north of the library. The transmission line cable would be mostly submerged in the Hudson River (in the downstate region). Further information on the proposed facilities is available at www.chpexpresseis.org. The NYSPSC proceeding associated with this project can be accessed here.

PSC Public Hearing announcement with hearings schedule can be downloaded as pdf file here.

Hydro-fracking: the Social, Moral and Political Imperatives.

2010-09-22T12:34:00.000-04:00

Followers of this blog may be wondering why it has recently been focusing on Hydro-fracking in addition to the core issues that originally formed the gestation of this blog: tree preservation, urban canopy renewal/restoration and lobbying for changes to vegetation management policies in our communities by our electric utilities & the NYSPSC.

It's simple, really. The concern for trees emerges from the recognition that they serve as our lungs in purifying air, provide needed cooling in the summer and wind protection in the winter, and are primary processors of stormwater - protecting and enhancing streams, habitats and watersheds thereby ensuring safe, clean drinking water.

And when it comes to our drinking water, protection of upstate watersheds and aquifers must be of immediate and on-going concern for everyone: without this source of fresh potable water, the greater NYC-Philadelphia metropolitan region of over 15 million souls can not be sustained.

But our very life-blood - the water we drink from unpolluted reservoirs and streams upstate is in imminent danger today! The search for oil has come to our (upstate) backdoor in the form of Hydro-fracking. Energy companies are engaged in a gold rush mentality to sign leases for drilling access throughout the upstate Marcellus Shale region (view map).

Recently, at Woodlands Community Temple in Greenburgh, the Cantor presented a Rosh Hashanah sermon about hydro-fracking, including the risks and apparent benefits (lease $) of the practice. This serves as a good introductory white paper on the issue, but also serves to more deeply delve into the social, moral and political imperatives which each concerned citizen needs to address. After reading this, please take action to let your voice be heard!

Read the full text of Saving the Delaware, the Rosh Hashanah 2010 sermon (pdf file).

--

For additional information, see this link or simply google "hydro-fracking Marcellus Shale".

On Requiring Carbon and Oxygen Impact Analysis for TVMPs

2010-09-21T17:08:00.001-04:00

Marvin Baum, a LORAX Utility Analyst had mentioned in his presentation at Ramapo Town Hall on August 23, 2010, that the PSC should consider mandating carbon and oxygen impact statements for its own proposed actions, such as in Case 04-E-0822, as well as for all proposed actions by utility companies.

Read the Proposal (as a pdf file).

Regarding Con Edison's Manipulation of Public Opinion Thru Misinformation

2010-09-21T16:57:00.003-04:00

Attached is a file that consolidates LORAX comments of September 20, 2010, with Con Edison’s Press Release of March 4, 2009, regarding its 2009 “tree trimming” plans for Westchester, into a single document. This file has been posted to PSC Case 10-E-0155 and distributed to the Commissioners and staff.

Read the analysis: Regarding Con Ed and O&R in Case 10-E-0155.pdf

Herbicide Use Kills Bees - Illegal Application During Clear Cut TVM?

2010-09-20T17:23:00.001-04:00

A recent email from a homeowner in Chester, N.Y. where the O&R subcontractor, Lewis Tree Service, has destroyed over 300 trees and killed off his honey bees:

I also have [at least] three of my honey bee hives that are dead, possibly from the spraying of herbicides. One of the men gave me a copy of the Herbicide pamphlet warnings. It is called Accord Concentrate made by Dow AgroSciences. It is labeled Hazardous to Humans & Animals ! It probably killed my bees. But I have no way of proving it. Other than the pamphlet and the pictures of the Herbicide spraying truck on my land! The pamphlet is pretty scary. The Inherent Risks of Use page is a statement that says "unintended consequences" may result because of unfavorable temperatures, humidity, wind direction and speed, over- application, etc...etc...
I can go on, but it boils down to Herbicides are poison and should not be used on this planet!

The LORAX response:

The issue about the herbicide application that killed your honeybees is potentially VERY SIGNIFICANT. First of all, does the deed granting the ROW even allow use of herbicides. (We are assuming for this discussion that the honeybees were on your property and you own the ROW. Is this correct?)

O&R does not use herbicides in Rockland and if your ROW agreement does not spell it out specifically, then they should have gotten your permission to use the herbicides before making the application. How did they apply the herbicides?

You must submit your story and evidence ASAP to the Secretary of the PSC (send to: secretary@dps.state.ny.us and jaclyn_brilling@dps.state.ny.us), as the related case 10-E-0155 will be closing next week (Sept 28). Indicate "CASE 10-E-0155" somewhere in the Subject line of the email.

FRACKTIVISTS KEEP THEIR COOL AT EPA HEARINGS

2010-09-20T12:53:00.000-04:00

From the The [Green] Capitol Insider - 9.20.2010 e-newsletter by Environmental Activists of NY (EANY.org):

After weeks of chatter, negotiations, venue changes, air conditioning challenges, and one much-discussed postponement, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency hearing on natural gas drilling by means of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” went off without any problems.

Over two days and 16 hours, hundreds of speakers voiced concerns about the controversial fracking process to EPA researchers. Some folks just welcomed the opportunity to have their say or recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Hundreds showed up to listen.

The hearing is the public comment portion of an EPA investigation into fracking. Hydraulic fracturing injects thousands of gallons of chemical-laced water and sand into gas wells, cracking the shale rock and releasing the natural gas. The oil and gas industry is eager to drill for gas trapped under the Marcellus and Utica Shale formations in New York State.

Environmental advocates, concerned citizens and public health groups from across the state and the country are calling for the highest standards and best protections for our natural resources, particularly dinking water. In New York, groups are calling on the State Legislature to enact strong laws and that regulations are on the books before any drilling is allowed. Just last month, the State Senate passed a “timeout” on fracking for gas that would give state leaders more time to study the process. The Assembly has yet to take up identical legislation but is expected to upon returning to Albany.

The EPA is holding the hearings, the last of four nationwide, to get public input on its study on the potential effect that fracking may have on groundwater. The agency is looking for insight on what the highest priority of the study should be, as well as where the gaps in public knowledge are, and suggested locations for a case study.

The 400 speakers, 300 of whom were held over from the original list of registrants for the Aug. 12 meeting at Binghamton University, include a variety of stakeholders, including Congressmen Maurice Hinchey and Binghamton Mayor Matthew T. Ryan.

Click here to check out Environmental Advocates of New York’s fracking primer.

Click here to learn more about the hearings.

And here.

Post O&R Clear Cut Video - Incursion into Delineated Wetlands

2010-09-17T17:34:00.004-04:00

View the following video documenting O&R's activity in Orange County:

See all O&R TVMP movie postings by kathr754 on YouTube.

Kathy, the homeowner emailed:

Nearly all the cutting was done within the delineated area. In fact, when I confronted the Lewis crew about the wetland flags, they said that if they had known before hand, they would have come through and done any tree trimming and cutting by hand. They only realized it was delineated wetland after they found one flag crumpled under some of the aftermath of the clearing. Even so, they made little effort to minimize further damage and kept right on using their big "chipper or mower". I called " Eric", the O&R rep, and he asked me what I would like done. I told him some sort of restoration but never heard back. Shortly after they sent a survey team out to survey all the properties. My neighbor , Mr. Bob Mason, had complained that they were reading the survey maps wrong and actually cutting more than was called for along the ROW.

--

Read her complete submission to the PSC Case 10-E-0155 filings here (pdf).

Actions to Take If Utility TVMP ROW Clear Cutting Hits Your Property or Neighborhood

2010-09-17T13:56:00.002-04:00

The most effective actions in "self-defense" you can take are as follows:

Document the name of the utility contractor at work. Try to speak with and get names of supervisors, if any, on-site.
Insist upon seeing the project work order documentation and ensure there are properly flagged survey markings.
Look at your easement agreement to ensure that the requirements were followed "to the letter" by the utility.
Create a concise narrative documentation (WORD .doc) with before, during & after photos of your property.
Make sure you local, county and state politicians know what is occurring/has occurred.
Insist upon on-site meetings with utility to discuss mitigation -- and include politicians, PSC, LORAX reps, if possible.
Report complaints to Public Service Commission (PSC) via consumer complaint web page or posted 1-800 complaint phone number.
File materials to PSC CASE 10-E-0155 (due before Sept 28?) regarding your situation including photos. This can be done via the PSC website or via email to secretary@dps.state.ny.us with doc, photos, etc.
Contact local newspapers, TV reporters, local or regional environmental groups, etc.
Start a letter writing campaign to media, environmental groups and to local and regional politicians.
Contact the NYSDEC is you believe environmental infractions occurred on state-monitored land (eg: wetlands and water courses). This includes lack of proper erosion and sediment controls.
Meet and consult with neighbors. Share stories, facts and ideas. Act together. Don't be isolated!

All of this helps to increase visibility of the events as well as to apply broader pressure on the utility and its contractor to come to some sort of mitigation agreement that makes sense.

Report: Fracking Chemicals In NE Pa. Water Wells

2010-09-17T12:49:00.002-04:00

It's started in our region! Solvents used in hydro-fracking operations such as toluene and ethylbenzene were found in "virtually every sample" taken from water wells in Dimock Township, Susquehanna County.

From NPR web posting of AP news article:

"It doesn't take me or any scientist to see some of the impacts on the drinking water," he said. "Your drinking water goes from clear and fine, to a week later being yellow-colored, sediment on the bottom, foam on the top and an oily smell to it. It's not a figment of anybody's imagination."

Read the whole disturbing article here.

UPDATED: Disposal of Unwanted Medicines - Sept. 25th

2010-09-15T14:59:00.005-04:00

-- more info on Sept 25 local collection --

Westchester location: County recycling center at the Material Recovery Facility on Stew Leonard Drive (exit 6A off Interstate 87) from 9am-3pm.

Keep in bottles with labels. no questions asked.

Don't flush it! Keep the estrogenic analogs out of the waste water stream.

Don't trash it! Keep the estrogenic analogs out of landfills and aquifers.

Keep our children and our frogs, amphibians & fish single-sexed and properly formed!

--

For a complete and detailed list of what to bring and what’s not accepted, visit www.westchestergov.com/HRD or call 813-5425.

From the webpage:

Any prescription or over-the-counter pills, liquids, ointments and lotions can be brought in for proper disposal. Pet medications will be accepted too. Keep them in the original container or, if it's not available, put them in a sealable plastic bag. Liquid medications should be in their containers and inside sealable plastic bags. County staff will be on hand to accept expired and unused medications for disposal.

RiverKeeper Posts Its Submission to Case 10-E-0155

2010-09-13T18:21:00.003-04:00

Clear-cutting detrimental to watershed and property values

Last month, Riverkeeper testified at the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) hearing about comments we submitted concerning Con Edison’s right-of-way vegetation management plan. Riverkeeper viewed problematic maintenance work in Yorktown, New York, where the company clear-cut excessive trees and other vegetation, and we received reports of Con Ed’s failure to notify property owners of the extent of its proposed vegetation management activities.

See full details at RiverKeeper site:

http://www.riverkeeper.org/news-events/news/safeguard-drinking-water/rvk-testifies-at-ny-state-psc-hearing-on-con-edison’s-right-of-way-practices/

Letter from LORAX to the PSC

2010-09-12T14:23:00.002-04:00

An email sent earlier this week to the PSC:

Dear Secretary Brilling,

I know that you have been receiving a lot of letters and complaints concerning recent activity by O&R (Orange and Rockland) in the Chester, NY area of Orange County. I won't take time to go into details of the various specific concerns and impacts caused by the work (seemingly targeted at lines in the 69kV to 138kV range).

But what does concern me and the members of LORAX is that such activity can continue in light of the history over the last 3 or 4 years of O&R's (and its contractor's) pattern of behavior executing its TVMP in Rockland and Orange Counties.

It is sad and totally unnecessary that this destruction continues unabated even as the PSC has an open review case 10-E-0155 on the matter.

The pattern of misinformation, lack of training and oversight, disregard for state environmental regulations, and the over-zealous and wanton destruction of our valuable natural resources has been commented upon in public meetings and by municipal and county resolutions since at least 2008 (for O&R) and 2009 (for Con Edison).

The fact that Federal regulations do not require the level of destruction (wide-swath clear cutting) being undertaken has been discussed and agreed upon - even by your own DPS staff who oversee the transmission utilities.

The fact is that there is no statistical or scientific proof that such over-clearing of transmission line "air gap" safety zones is actually required based upon the outage history (or lack thereof) in our lower NY state region.

The fact is that in our densely populated counties many property owners now face major environmental problems which they must mitigate at great expense to themselves, often ranging into the thousands of dollars.

The impacts and costs of mitigation continue to grow as these TVMPs continue unchecked and under-supervised by PSC DPS staff. As Legislator Abinanti remarked at the recent PSC Case meeting in Greenburgh, [I paraphrase roughly:] "The clear cut destruction along the transmission ROWS in Westchester alone has done more to undermine all of the county's hard-fought environmental regulations and progress. The negative impact literally swamps any benefits from any of these green / sustainability initiatives."

It is not enough to merely listen -- having heard all of the reports and seen the documentation, action must be taken to minimize further impacts!

It is time that the PSC step forward and explain to the public exactly what reasoning prevents a moratorium from being implemented NOW.

Why won't the PSC simply stop the on-going activity via an immediate stop-work moratorium (excluding "emergency actions") while the case review continues??

The fact that the PSC will not take such action in the face of wide-spread public and governmental outrage is why our state legislators need to take action in the next session to force the PSC into being a public oversight commission, not just a "shill" for the utility companies.

Remember: it only takes 10 minutes to fell a mature Oak, but it takes 100 years to grow one back. Its time for the PSC to do the right thing for the residents of NYS and for our shared environment.

Regards,

-mg-

---

Mark Gilliland
GEF LORAX Working Group, Chairperson

cc: PSC Members

PSC CASE 10-E-0155 Hearing Tomorrow in Albany

2010-09-12T12:54:00.003-04:00

PSC Hearing tomorrow:

5:30 pm – 7:30 pm
September 13, 2010
Albany Public Library
Main Library
161 Washington Avenue, 2nd Floor
Albany, NY 12210

Image of Ridge Road / Sprain Parkway clear cut area from Google Earth - shows attempted remediation along Parkway.

Warwick Passes LORAX's TVMP Cessation Resolution

2010-09-09T20:59:00.003-04:00

The Town of Warwick rapidly followed the lead of the Chester Town Board who passed a Cessation Moratorium resolution last night.

From Amy K., who attended tonight's Warwick town council meeting:

They drafted the Resolution and passed it tonight.

I actually stood up and thanked them. Supervisor Sweeten thanked us [LORAX] for making him aware of the situation and supplying the Resolution.

---

Read more in the article from the 9/10/10 issue of the Warkwick Advertiser (local paper).

---

Read the Warwick resolution (pdf file).

--

Eyewitness Account: Letter from Chester Homeowner to PSC

2010-09-09T10:32:00.001-04:00

Dear Secretary Brilling,

My name is John DeRosso, my family and I reside in Chester, N.Y. In the last two and one half weeks my family has been put through a nightmare I wouldn't wish on anyone. Lewis tree company which I understand is contracted by Orange and Rockland literally clear cut a swath of land in front of my house 135' wide by 600' long.

There was not a tree left standing.

What took us 17 years to build and nurture was literally destroyed in two days, and now resembles a dirt parking lot. Trees that were 90' away were left standing but their branches which hung into the easment were cut off. I still have 30' and 40' tree trunks standing in parts of the ROW.

We were told over and over if they failed to comply they (Orange and Rockland) could be fined anywhere from $1,000 to $1,000,000 per day. That seems very hard to argue with.

Originally when my wife was given notice by a representitive from Lewis tree company that they would be coming in to do "trimming and clearing", she asked if "anything would change." She was told "no". She told me that evening, and given that we were told the same thing in previous years, we assumed they would be doing the same maintanance they had done before. We were totally unaware, nor were we informed of the changes we were later told came about in 2005...

I later found out that many of my neighbors that were having far less done on thier property were given literature as well as contact numbers. We received neither. Three days after the clear cutting when I asked the Lewis representitive who spoke to my wife why we didn't get any of the paper work, I was told he "didn't have anything on him at the time."

To add insult to injury I found out last week that the night before they clear cut my property there was a meeting scheduled in Montgomery in Orange county to open this issue to public comment. At a meeting today with Orange and Rockland representitives I asked why noone was informed of this meeting and I was told it was in the paper.

Today's meeting which was held at our house included concerned neighbors, representitives of Orange and Rockland (which included Mike Grant, Mark Beamish, and Keith Still), Senator Larkin, Assemblywoman Calhoun, Legislator Dan Casticone, and town supervisor Steve Neuhaus. Two members of LORAX were also there as observers. I have to say without the guidance, help, and support form the members of LORAX, I don't know what we would have done.

Most of the people attending the meeting were very taken back by what they had seen and had a hard time comprehending why it was done. The Orange and Rockland representatives characterized what happened as a "miscommunication". Unfortunately that answer doesn't give us our property or our lives back. After the meeting I have to say I was probably more confused and angry then I was before.

There will be a town meeting tomorrow evening in Chester, N.Y. to adress the issue of passing a resolution similar to those passed in both Rockland and Westchester counties to have Orange and Rockland cease it's clear cutting activities. I also spoke to the town supervisor in Warwick today and will be forwarding him information I have accumulated over the past week.

I've spent the last few days speaking to people in the area and informing them of what happened to us and may happen to them. I have also brought this to the attention of local and county newspapers and will also be talking to any other available media outlets. I personally feel that Orange and Rockland needs to greatly improve thier interaction with the public as well as take a hard look at their policies and practices when it comes to dealing with these type of issues which can have such a drastic effect on people's lives. As I understand it Marvin Baum has already sent you pictures of our property, so I won't bother to do the same. I would like to thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,
John DeRosso
Chester,N.Y.

More Lame-o Excuses - O&R Tries to Duck and Cover

2010-09-08T18:30:00.001-04:00

As reported by LORAX member and utility activist Amy K. who attended the on-site meeting this morning (Wednesday 9/8/10):

They [O&R Reps] started with the blackout of 2003.

We negated that....I told [O&R] that there is a published time line [from the federal incident analysis study of what occurred] that [they] should read [to get the full facts of the chain of events leading up to the blackout. This has been discussed extensively elsewhere in PSC submissions by LORAX.]

Then they [O&R] shifted to the 2005 mandate from the PSC. I reminded them that at the Yonkers meeting in March, Dave Morrell [of the PSC staff] stated that the Utilities were not mandated to clear cut. When Nancy Calhoun [elected official] asked again why they would cut so much, I said "because they could" and everyone repeated it.

They did not look good, and of course they are blaming Lewis [tree service contractors who also did the work in Westchester] for everything.

There is a town hall meeting in Chester [tonight (Wednesday)], and Warwick on Thursday.

It was fun... the local elected officials were good.

--

Amy added more unbelievably lame-o O&R interchange in a later message:

Michael Grant the PR guy [O&R] mentioned the 2005 Order, and I said that I was glad he brought it up because although it is very aggressive, it does make mention of property owners and [inventorying] buffers. Michael first replied by saying that he wasn't a lawyer and really couldn't discuss specifics. I answered him by saying that he didn't have to be a lawyer, he just needed to know how to read. I had read it, it is just 32 pages. He than said that this property would not qualify as a buffer. I asked him why not?? - no answer. He was not very pleased with me.

Marvin brought up the O&R modified TVMP for residential areas and Mark Beamish [O&R] said this area wasn't really considered residential. I asked the town Supervisor if the area was zoned for residential and he said yes. Then Beamish said it wasn't really a front yard because there wasn't a swing set.

I plan to discuss this episode in Albany.

--

Follow-on report by Amy K. from the Chester Town board meeting:

We swooped in and took O&R out.

The Town of Chester passed their resolution tonight.

At the town hall meeting residents were also given an opportunity to speak. I also spoke.
I encouraged participation in case #10-E-0155.

Channel 12 was there.

Supervisor Neuhaus also stated that O&R has agreed to stop the cuttings. Neuhaus and Warwick Supervisor are meeting tomorrow and they are also reaching out to other neighboring [towns].

Supervisor Neuhaus was definitely impressed by the LORAX work!!

Clear Cutting Transmission ROW Again - this time its O&R in Orange County!

2010-09-08T12:52:00.000-04:00

A resident of Chester, NY reported:

In the last week I have seen my property go from a picturesque country scene to the aftermath of a bombing courtesy of Orange and Rockland utilities. They are clear cutting Rights of Way on privately owned easments with no regard for the property owners or the environment. Fortunately they met with stiff resistance slowing them down only for the time being. They literaly cut a swath 135' by 600' right across the front of my property destroying mature, oak, maple, and walnut trees. The aftermath is nothing short of a war zone. I have been speaking to state politicians as well as newspapers but my fear is without more public awareness this will be fruitless. Any assistance or attention you could bring to this would be greatly appreciated. Most people being affected are not even aware of the extent until it is too late. I would be more then happy to speak to someone in your organization to fill them in on the details as well as pictures of what has transpired.

Thank you,

John DeRosso

Chester, N.Y.

This email was forwarded to the LORAX working group, whose members responded with advice and additional information. For example, one email provides the following advice:

it is critical to check your legal documents (utility ROW easement agreement) to ensure that O&R followed everything to the letter. The fact that they did not provide adequate notification, nor did they explain clearly the extent of the VM action and receive your "ok" indicates strongly that their TVMP (approved by PSC) procedures were violated. The other point I made in previous email concerns trying to get DEC involved (based upon photos) concerning what appears to be violations of stormwater and erosion control regulations.

And other email, this advice:

By the way, if you can start to generate public outcry and get in the face of your local town board, you can have them pass a version of the resolution (which I forwarded to you earlier). By getting folks in your community organized and in the face of the town council (town board), the local politicians begin to sweat enough to take action. Of course, lots of press coverage, letters to editor, even public demonstrations can help to get the right amount of attention.

Early Tuesday morning, Sept 7 at 7:30am, there was an on-site meeting with representatives of O&R, local residents and local politicians. From a LORAX participant's report:

The meeting went very well from everyone’s perspective… except, of course, O&R. People were really angry about this. Senator Larkin and Assemblywoman Calhoun were there, as were local officials. Some of the stuff they did was ridiculous and it was an absolute repeat of “Blauvelt 2008” in every way.

O&R admitting failing to give proper notification, but they argued that they didn’t need to follow the modified guidelines because this residential subdivision with about 30-50 homes with hundreds of residents, underground utilities, curbing, cul-de-sacs, etc., was actually not a “residential area” by O&R’s unwritten definition of a “residential area” and therefore not subject to O&R’s Transmission Vegetation Management Plan approved by the PSC in 2008, which allowed tree trimming in areas outside the wire zone for transmission lines of under 200kV. In this particular case, the transmission line that O&R claimed required complete tree removal as far as 85’ away was only 69kV.

Please take a look at the results of tree removal operations in Chester, NY:

Orange and Rockland clear cutting easment

According to the homeowner, the transmission line adjoining his home is a 69kV. He also indicated: “Not one tree was directly under the wires. The closest tree was around 30' away. They used the 85' on one side to get the majority of the trees. I think at best maybe one tree could hit a wire if it completely fell over.”

Finally, here is a pdf of a letter sent by Marvin Baum, utility analysis for the LORAX working group, to the Secretary of the PSC concerning this matter.

We are all waiting to see what, if anything, the PSC will do in response to this continued egregious tree demolition by O&R (a subsidiary of Con Edison). Both utilities have proven to be recidivist in their TVMP behaviors, regardless of the degree and volume of public outcry. As County Legislator Tom Abinanti said at the recent Greenburgh PSC meeting concerning Case 10-E-0155, "Either the PSC has to take action to correct these problems, or the State Legislature will take action [to compel the PSC to act as a responsible public oversight agency]."

EPA Reschedules Hydrofracking Public Hearings in Binghamton

2010-09-02T21:17:00.001-04:00

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has selected a new venue and dates for the public meeting on its proposed study on the potential adverse impacts that hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” may have on drinking water. The meeting was originally scheduled for August 12, 2010. If you pre-registered for the August 12 meetings, you retain your registration for the new hearings.

The new meeting dates and times are as follows:

Date: Monday, September 13, 2010
Location: Broome County Forum Theater, 236 Washington St., Binghamton
Time:
• 12:00 – 4:00pm (pre-registration begins at 10:30am)
• 6:00 – 10:00pm (pre-registration begins at 4:30pm)

Date: Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Location: Broome County Forum Theater, 236 Washington St., Binghamton
Time:
• 12:00 – 4:00pm (pre-registration begins at 10:30am)
• 6:00 – 10:00pm (pre-registration begins at 4:30pm)

Click here to register or call 1-866-477-3635 (toll free). Online and telephone registration will remain open through 5:00 pm, September 10, 2010.

If you can’t make it to Binghamton, click here to submit your own comments.

Click here to find out more about the EPA’s study on fracking.

PSC Public Hearings: Important Lobbying Notes, Schedule Info & Alternative Submission Methods

2010-08-22T20:29:00.000-04:00

There are three important changes in vegetation management which all of us can lobby the PSC to include in any updated guidelines based upon findings from the current case (Case 10-E-0155):

1) environmental analysis – wetlands, water courses, habitats, impact of loss of tree buffers on air, noise, visual pollution, etc. Like any SEQRA review, the goal should be towards minimizing detrimental impacts. (Analysis should be segment-by-segment, not state-wide.)

2) notification – a minimum of 60 days verified notification for homeowners/property owners, a minimum of 30 days for a town-hall like public meeting to review and receive feedback on planned vegetation management. (During clearing operations, a dedicated 7/24 emergency complaint hotline should be available for property owners and municipal officials.)

3) mitigation – mandatory replanting, stomwater and erosion controls, etc. must be built into the vegetation management plans from the start. Mitigation costs should not be borne by individual residents or property owners for impacts caused by utility line clearing. (Full mitigation for past clearing activities during 2007 thru 2010 in Rockland and Westchester must be mandated by PSC, as well!)

Another change in PSC guidelines that the LORAX Working Group has been advocating is the adoption of an eco-friendly "tiered management" approach to vegetation management along transmission lines:

This means that the farther from the centerline of the transmission towers one goes towards the edges of the right-of-way (ROW), the taller the vegetation that can safely remain standing. So, at a distance of 50 feet from the centerline, a tree perhaps 35ft tall is "safe". At 100 feet from the centerline, a tree 80ft tall is "safe".

Thus, rather than mindlessly clear cutting the entire ROW corridor (resulting in significant environmental, health and property value impacts), a more natural "tiered" landscape remains that does not compromise line safety. Tiered management reduces habitat loss, erosion, air quality impacts, etc. It also reduces the foothold for invasive plants and expanding deer populations.

Finally, with a focus on the need for greater environmental awareness, vegetative buffers must be maintained. The PSC guidelines from 2005 (Case 04-E-0822) should be modified to require that riparian & wetland buffers, view-shed buffers and road-crossing buffers (to name a few) must be maintained and enhanced, not clear cut.

Plan to come out and make your voice heard by the PSC!

Scheduled local hearings:

• Monday, August 23 - 1:30 to 3:30 p.m., Ramapo Town Hall, 237 Route 59, Airmont.

• Monday, August 23 - 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., Yonkers Public Library, Riverfront branch, 1 Larkin Center.

• Tuesday, August 24 - 1:30 to 3:30 p.m., Greenburgh Public Library, 300 Tarrytown Road, Elmsford.

Other ways to comment:

• 800-335-2120, press "1" and refer to case 10-E-0155.

• www.dps.state.ny.us/comment.html. In the search box, enter case number 10-E-0155.

• Write to Jaclyn A. Brilling, secretary, Public Service Commission, 3 Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223-1350 and refer to case 10-E-0155.

PSC - NOTICE OF PUBLIC STATEMENT HEARINGS CASE 10-E-0155

2010-08-11T07:44:00.000-04:00

NYSPSC has scheduled public hearings on Case 10-E-0155, Electric Utility Transmission Line Right-of-Way Management Practices. Hearings in Westchester County are on August 23 & August 24. See below and full PSC notice released 8/10/10.

Case 10-E-0155, Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to New York State's Electric Utility Transmission Right-of-Way Vegetation Management Practices.

Public statement hearings are scheduled as follows:

Rockland County
August 23, 2010
1:30 pm – 3:30 pm
Ramapo Town Hall
237 Route 59 Suffern, NY 10901

Westchester County
August 23, 2010
5:30 pm – 7:30 pm
Yonkers Public Library
Riverfront Library Branch
1 Larkin Center
Yonkers, NY 10701

August 24, 2010
1:30 pm – 3:30 pm
Greenburgh Public Library
300 Tarrytown Road
Elmsford, NY 10523

Orange County
August 24, 2010
5:30 pm – 7:30 pm
Village of Montgomery Senior Center
36 Bridge Street Montgomery, NY 12549

Onondaga County
September 7, 2010
5:30 pm – 7:30 pm
Syracuse City Hall
Common Council Chambers
233 East Washington St., 3rd Floor
Syracuse, NY 13210

Albany County
September 13, 2010
5:30 pm – 7:30 pm
Albany Public Library
Main Library
161 Washington Avenue, 2nd Floor
Albany, NY 12210

EPA POSTPONES SYRACUSE MEETING ON HYDRAULIC FRACTURING STUDY, NEW DATES COMING SOON

2010-08-10T15:28:00.001-04:00

from EPA news release today:

Contact: John Senn (212) 637-3667, senn.john@epa.gov

NEW YORK, NY – After months of work organizing the New York Hydraulic Fracturing public meetings, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced that the Syracuse meeting, originally scheduled for this Thursday, August 12^th at the Oncenter Complex Convention Center, has been cancelled. The Agency now intends to hold a new public meeting on the study in upstate New York in September and will announce the location as soon as it is confirmed.

EPA was forced to cancel this meeting following a conversation this morning with the Onondaga County Executive’s office, during which they expressed concerns about the ability to complete preparations for the meeting on such short notice. The last minute change to Syracuse was caused by Binghamton University taking several actions to dissuade EPA from holding the meetings at their campus including increasing the cost from $6,000 to almost $40,000. The Agency also reached out to Broome County officials in Binghamton to hold the meeting at the Arena and they pulled out of negotiations with EPA. The Agency searched a 40 mile radius from Corning to Ithaca to Courtland to Oneonta but no options were available for Thursday. Onondaga County officials did not feel they could arrange the necessary security for the potential protests and rallies outside the meeting itself, and EPA respects and understands their decision.

From the beginning, EPA has been committed to ensuring that the public has an opportunity to express their opinions on the study. There are serious concerns about whether the process of hydraulic fracturing impacts drinking water, human health and the environment. To address those concerns and strengthen our clean energy future, EPA announced in March that it will study the potential adverse impact that hydraulic fracturing may have on drinking water and would be seeking input from people across the country. EPA has held had three successful meetings in Fort Worth, Texas, Denver, Colorado and Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, where more than 1200 participants attended, and the Agency is committed to holding a similar meeting in upstate New York.

--

from EANY's latest eblast today:

We just received word that the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) public information meeting on the proposed hydraulic fracturing study has been postponed until September. The hearing was originally scheduled for this Thursday, August 12, 2010 but will be moved to a future date.

Click here to read more.

You can still submit comments on the proposed study, if you'd like to do so, click here.

Stay tuned and we'll let you know as soon as we find out about the future date and location.

IMPORTANT UPDATE ON EPA HYDRO-FRACKING HEARING - Attend or Submit Comments

2010-08-10T11:26:00.002-04:00

From Environmental Advocates of NY eblast:

In March 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it will study the potential adverse impacts that hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” may have on drinking water.

As part of the study, the EPA is hosting four public information meetings on the proposed study.New York’s meeting is Thursday, August 12, at the Oncenter Complex Convention Center in Syracuse, New York. Please note the location change.The meeting is no longer in Binghamton.

The public is encouraged to attend and submit comments. Click here to register.

Join us at the hearing as Katherine Nadeau, our water & natural resources program director, submits comments voicing concerns about the harmful effects of fracking.

If you can’t be in Syracuse on the 12^th, click here to submit your own comments. The deadline for written comments is August 26.

WHAT: Public Hearing on the EPA’s proposed study of Fracking

WHERE: Oncenter Complex Convention Center in Syracuse, New York. Click here for directions.

WHEN: Morning Session: 8:00 a.m.- 12:00 p.m.
Afternoon Session: 1:00- 5:00 p.m
Evening Session: 6:00 – 10:00 p.m.

REGISTER: http://hfmeeting.cadmusweb.com/RegistrationForm.aspx or by calling 1-866-477-3635 (toll free). Online and telephone registration remains open until 10:00am on August 11, 2010, and walk-in attendees the day of the meeting are welcome. Due to significant interest by the public, all of the public speaking spots are currently filled. Speaking slots are expected to open up and EPA intends to open registration for these speaking slots via phone and the Web on Wednesday, August 11 beginning at 10:00am and ending when the slots are filled.

MORE INFORMATION: Admission requires registration, even to just observe the hearing. A photo ID is required for speakers and perhaps for people in the audience as well. A rally (more details to come) is also being planned.

For additional questions on the change in meeting location, please call EPA toll free at 1-800-426-4791. The line is operational Monday through Friday, 10:00 am to 4:00 pm eastern time.

For additional questions on registration, please call the registration hotline 1-866-477-3635.

Click here to find out more about the EPA’s study on fracking.

HYDRO-FRACKING UPDATE

2010-08-09T11:58:00.001-04:00

from the [Green] Capitol Insider, Environmental Advocates of New York’s online newsletter from the State Capital - August 9, 2010

STATE SENATE CALLS FOR A "TIMEOUT" ON FRACKING

At long last, everyone who cares about New York’s drinking water has something to celebrate.

It was way past our usual bedtime last week when the New York State Senate voted to protect New York’s drinking water by passing legislation that will enact a one-year moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” for natural gas.

By passing the bill, S.8129B, sponsored by Senator Antoine Thompson (D-Buffalo), the Senate put New Yorkers and our natural resources ahead of the oil and gas industry and their big bags of money (click here for details from Common Cause/NY ). Because in states such as Pennsylvania, Colorado and Wyoming where the gas industry routinely uses hydraulic fracturing to drill for natural gas, drinking and groundwater sources have been contaminated.

The bill passed by a comfortable and bipartisan margin of 49 to 9.

The legislation will suspend the issuance of permits to hydraulically fracture wells in New York State until May 15, 2011. This “timeout” will give the State’s Department of Environmental Conservation time to finish its review of hydraulic fracturing without political pressure. It will also give our next governor the chance to look at the issue with a critical eye.

All eyes are now on the Assembly and we encourage these lawmakers to take up identical legislation, A.11443B, sponsored by Assemblyman Robert Sweeney (D-Lindenhurst), when the house returns to Albany in the weeks ahead.

And then, of course, the bill goes to Governor Paterson’s desk.

HAVE YOUR SAY AT EPA HEARING ON FRACKING

We encourage you to attend the EPA’s only New York hearing on hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” this Thursday in Binghamton. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is hosting four public information meetings on the agency’s study of hydraulic fracturing and its potential impacts on drinking water. The meetings will also provide public information about the proposed study scope and design and the EPA will solicit public comments on its draft study plan.

Location: TBD, Binghamton, NY. Date & Time: August 12, 2010; three sessions: 8am to 12pm, 1 to 5pm, and 6 to 10pm. For more information or to pre-register, visit http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/wells_hydrofrac.html.

PSC Submission Documents from LORAX working group - Reply Comments

2010-07-07T14:48:00.000-04:00

The following documents were submitted to the PSC on July 6, 2010 by LORAX Working Group as part of the Reply Comments phase of Case 10-E-0155. Original filings referred to herein can be found at the online Document Matters database for the PSC Case. The original Case filings by LORAX (June 16,2010) can be found at this posting.

LORAX Reply Comments for PSC Case 10-E-0155 - Con Edison.pdf

Additional LORAX Response to CE-OR Comments 7-6-10.pdf

hLORAX Reply Comments for PSC Case 10-E-0155 - CN Utilities.pdf

LORAX Reply Comments for PSC Case 10-E-0155 - EEANY.pdf

Here are original Case filings (June 16,2010) and Reply Commnets (July 6,2010) filed for the Weschester Board of Legislators:

WCBOL Comments, Case 10-E-0155.pdf

Appendix A - Preface, Photographs.pdf

Appendix B - WCBOL Res'n. 26-2010.pdf

Appendix C - Petitions to Save Our Woodlands.pdf (large file! 8.5Mb)

Appendix D - Previous Regulations Review.pdf

WCBOL Reply Comments for PSC Case 10-E-0155.pdf

PSC Submission Documents from LORAX working group

2010-06-15T12:04:00.001-04:00

Here are the documents being submitted by LORAX to the PSC in regards to Case 10-E-0155 (linked to pdf versions of submissions):

1) Response to the 9 Case Questions

2) Gap Analysis of Con Edison TVMP

3) Analysis of SEQR Process for original Guidelines (Case 04-E-0822).

Also available is a letter of support (Word .doc) for, and agreement with, the LORAX filings which may be sent by municipalities or other interested groups to the PSC in response to this Case. (Deadline is Wednesday June 16th, 2010.)

Submission to PSC may be by email (see address below) or uploaded via the PCS/DPS website.

PSC Contact info:

Hon. Jaclyn A. Brilling
Secretary to the Commission
New York State Public Service Commission
Agency Building 3
Albany, NY 12223-1350
Phone: (518) 474-6530
Fax: (518) 486-6081
Email: secretary@dps.state.ny.us

Garden Club of America Citation

2010-06-13T22:19:00.000-04:00

Thanks to all of you in the local community for supporting my work with our trees and our landscape heritage. I am honored to have been given an award by the Garden Club of America!

Club Horticulture Commendation

For your outstanding work at The McVickar House, your dedication to protecting Irvington’s trees, and your leadership in promoting and protecting urban forests.

The original letter from the local Irvington Chapter reads as follows:

Mrs. Ellen Peterson
Garden Club of America
14 East 60th Street, 3rd Floor
New York NY 10022

Dear Ellen:

On behalf of the Garden Club of Irvington-on-Hudson, it is my pleasure to nominate Mark Gilliland for the Club Horticulture Commendation. Mark is an Irvington resident and landscape designer who has donated a great deal of time over the last several years working for the protection of Irvington’s trees, pesticide free gardening, and beautification of our downtown area.

In 2002, when the Irvington Historical Society was restoring and renovating our village’s second oldest surviving structure (the McVickar house, built on Main Street in 1853) Mark volunteered to design the gardens. He researched landscape design of the period, the particular features of that property, and the plants used in that era. The eco-friendly gardens he created and implemented helped the McVickar House to receive a 2008 AIA Citation Award in the category of Historic Restoration/Adaptive Reuse.

Mark has also been very active in preserving and protecting Irvington’s trees. He has been on the village Tree Commission for several years, and as Chairman has lead a restructuring and reframing of the tree statute and its implementation. Club members on the Commission say he has been an inspiring leader.

Mark has also been a leader in fighting our power company’s poor pruning practices as they work to keep electric lines free from falling trees and limbs. In particular, he organized - overnight - a protest of their planned pruning of an allee of Sycamore trees at the south entrance to the village, on Route 9/Broadway. When the Con Ed and tree company trucks arrived, there was a crowd of people to greet them. The upshot of this was that they came back another day, with better crews and supervision, and Mark on hand, to do a much less intrusive job. Mark has carried this last endeavor beyond Irvington, to our town and county, and is working hard to revise Con Ed’s practices in the entire region.

For all these reasons, and more, we sincerely hope you will approve Mark Gilliland for the Club Horticulture Commendation. The citation should read:

For your outstanding work at The McVickar House, your dedication to protecting Irvington’s trees, and your leadership in promoting and protecting urban forests.

A copy of the Club Award Form accompanies this letter. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Gerry Gilmartin
Awards Chairman
Garden Club of Irvington

PSC Eyes New Rules For Trees Around Power Lines

2010-06-10T23:02:00.003-04:00

Read the full posting at NYLCV EcoPolitics Daily blog here.

Submission Deadline to PSC CASE 10-E-0155 - IMPORTANT!

2010-06-09T14:29:00.003-04:00

Submissions for Case 10-E-0155 must be posted or received by 4:30pm June 16th, 2010. For electronic postings, maximum document size is 25MB. Documents can be emailed to: secretary@dps.state.ny.us.

"Pursuant to the Public Service Commission Guidelines for filing with the Secretary, all items posted must be in searchable PDF format."

Here is the link to the submission guidelines:
http://www.dps.state.ny.us/filingguidelines.html

NYLCV Event of Interest!

2010-06-07T11:06:00.002-04:00

Please join the Westchester Chapter of the New York League of Conservation Voters for a salon featuring NY TImes environmental reporter Peter Applebome!

All the News That's Fit to Blog: Environmental Coverage in the Media Din

Applebome will discuss his coverage of hot-button topics such as natural gas drilling, nuclear energy, the local deer population and above/underground power lines.

Thursday, June 24, 2010 7 - 9 p.m.
At the Home of Linda Viertel, Tarrytown, NY

Dinner and Drinks Provided

Guests are encouraged to make a suggested contribution of $50 to NYLCV.

Please RSVP to Hilary Wilkes at (212) 361-6350 ext. 204, or hwilkes@nylcv.org for more information.

The New York League of Conservation Voters (NYLCV) was established in 1989 as the nonpartisan political arm of New York’s environmental community. For more information visit www.nylcv.org.

LORAX TVMP Cessation draft - now draft legislation in Albany

2010-06-03T15:33:00.000-04:00

Download a legislative draft (pdf) of the Clear Cut Cessation legislation which LORAX supplied to Assemblymen Spano and Ball as a draft.

We are now looking for co-sponsors...

This should be circulated widely, targeting your local and regional State-level Assemblymen and Senators.

June 11th - Right Tree for the Right Place Municipal Tree Seminar

2010-06-01T11:34:00.001-04:00

Dear Friend of Municipal Trees,

Please register to join us for this cutting-edge seminar sponsored by Con Edison, and forward this notice to interested colleagues:

Right Tree for the Right Place
Municipal Tree Seminar

Friday June 11, 2010, 8:30 am-Noon
at the Greenburgh Nature Center

Download program details, speaker list, and registration form.

Please call me if you have any questions about the program or registration.

Looking forward to seeing you on June 11 at the Greenburgh Nature Center!

Best wishes,

Anne Jaffe Holmes
Coordinator of School Programs & Environmental Projects
Greenburgh Nature Center
99 Dromore Road
Scarsdale, NY 10583
P: 914-813-1812
F: 914-725-6599

Online presentations (ppt or pdf) linked by speaker:

Mark Gilliland
Jerry Bond
Rick Harper
Frank Buddingh'

LORAX support materials for Case 10-E-0155 responses

2010-05-25T15:28:00.002-04:00

The LORAX working group has put together three documents to help citizens, environmental groups and municipalities formulate responses concerning the PSC's review of transmission line vegetation management opened in Case 10-E-0155. These PDF documents are being periodically updated, but the latest versions can be found at these links:

Response Topics for Case 10-E-0155

LORAX Comments on the PSC's 9 Case Questions

Mind Map: Tripod Diagram of Changing Transmission Vegetation Management Guidelines