Secondary Source Material

NEWSPAPER ARTICLES

1962

“Con Ed Stepping Up Cornwall Plans.” The Middletown Times Herald Record 3 Dec. 1962: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports the steps Con Edison is taking in order to be ready to apply to the Federal Power Commission (FPC) for a license to build the plant, such as aerial surveys of the area and negotiations to buy the land needed for the project.

“Con Edison in Orange.” Editorial. The Middletown Times Herald Record 4 Oct. 1962: 58.

This Times Herald Record editorial comments on Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plant, saying it would be an overall benefit to the Hudson Valley and holds great promise for progress in the area.

“Cornwall-on-Hudson Officials Deny Plant May Pollute.” The Middletown Times Herald Record
11 Oct. 1962: 65.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Mayor Donahue of Cornwall denies implications that the plant will pollute the village’s water supply with Hudson river water seeping into the ground because the two reservoirs are a mile apart, the natural course of seepage is higher reservoir to lower gully away from the reservoirs, and Con Edison plans a leak-proof dam and will compensate for any overflow.

“Cornwall Power Plant.” Editorial. The Evening News 27 Sep. 1962: 6A.

This Evening Times editorial comments on the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant and believes that some questions need to be answered, such as the effect on the Cornwall water supply, whether the Hudson river water would be treated before its pumped into Cornwall, and the effect of tunneling upon underground water sources.

“Giant Power Project Slated for Cornwall.” The Evening News 26 Sep. 1962: 1.

This Evening News article announces Con Edison’s plans to build a $115 million dollar hydroelectric plant in the Town of Cornwall in order to provide more electricity to New York City, scheduled to be completed by 1966.

“Huge Power Plant Planned on Hudson .” New York Times 27 Sep. 1962 : 1.

This article in the New York Times announces Consolidated Edison's plans to construct a pumped storage power plant on the Hudson River . The article is strictly factual, describing what the plant will do, how it will work, and how much it will cost. Some statements from the chairman of Con Ed reveals that the company plans on requesting a license from the FPC very soon, and that Con Ed does not anticipate any problems in the process.

McManus, Michael J. “Cornwall Opposition Expected on Con-Edison Reservoir
Plan.” The Middletown Times Herald Record 1 Oct. 1962: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the mayor of Cornwall expects some opposition to Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plant because of some people’s concern that the natural beauty of the area will be ruined, but doesn’t believe this will occur. The article also lists the reasons why the plant would be good for the area.

“Objections Raised on Con Ed Location.” The Evening News 12 Dec. 1962: 2A. 

This Evening News article reports on a Village of Cornwall meeting where objections were raised by a Cornwall resident named George Brooks, who questioned Con Edison about the transmission lines and the test boring Con Edison wanted to do on his property.

Poche, Ward. “Con Edison Aims at May 1 Starting Date.” The Evening News 12 Dec. 1962: 2A.

This Evening News article discusses the announcement of Con Edison plans thus far in a public meeting. In the meeting officials discussed water supply plans, results of the first meeting with the consulting engineering firm on the water supply, and answered questions and concerns people had with the project.

Poche, Ward. “Con Edison Held Without Right to Condemn Supply.” The Evening News
13 Oct. 1962: 1B.

This Times Herald Record article reports that a Cornwall town attorney filed an opinion with the Town Board stating that he felt that Con Edison did not have the power to condemn the Cornwall Village reservoir for its proposed hydroelectric plant and they would have to negotiate for the use of the reservoir with the Town of Cornwall. The article discusses whether or not Con Edison has the legal right to take property for the use of a utility.

Poche, Ward. “Official Cornwall Reaction Favors Con Edison Project.” The Evening News
28 Sep. 1962: 9A.

This Evening News article reports on the reaction to the hydroelectric plant by Cornwall officials. The majority of Cornwall officials seem to favor the project on the condition the water supply is met, as well as feel the project would lower taxes in the area and bring more business to Cornwall.

“Power Project Due in Cornwall.” The Evening News 26 Sep. 1962: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Consolidated Edison Co. of New York plans to build a multi-million dollar project involving pumping water from the Hudson River into an artificial reservoir high in the Cornwall mountain area and releasing it during peak energy needs through turbines that would harness the energy. The plant, if built, would be the biggest hydroelectric plant in the world, exceeded only by the Niagara and Grand Coulee systems.

Rhoades, Al. “Cornwall’s Con Edison Plant Awaits Federal Approval.” The Evening News
29 Sep. 1962: 2A.

This Evening News article talks about the hydroelectric plant at Storm King Mountain, the benefits of the plant, Con Edison’s cooperation with Cornwall and Central Hudson, and the effects on the Cornwall water supply. The article also mentions that there will be opposition to the hydroelectric plant since there was strong opposition to the Air Force when they wanted to build an underground super combat installation under White Horse Mountain in 1959.  Residents of Cornwall thought the project would threaten their water supply because the blasting would cause the reservoir to leak and this opposition ultimately forced the Air Force to abandon the idea.

Rhoades, Al. “Suitable Water Supply Seen by Cornwall Mayor.” The Evening News
27 Sep. 1962: 1.

This Evening News article discusses Con Edison’s plans for the hydroelectric plant in Cornwall, such as how the plant will function and the impact on Cornwall’s water supply. The article notes that Con Edison will provide and pay for a suitable substitution for water supply for the Village of Cornwall.

Smith, Gene. “Old Idea Revived For Hydro Power/ Technique Dating From ’28 Is Back In Vogue Again.” New York Times 21 Oct. 1962: 157.

This article in the New York Times discusses how some electric companies are utilizing older technology to provide cheaper power to their customers. The article focuses on hydroelectric plants, using as an example the pumped storage power plant that Consolidated Edison is planning to build on the Hudson River. The author describes in detail how a pumped storage power plant works, the advantages that it has over the traditional plants being used, and the new technology that has been developed to make these plants more efficient.

“Town’s Con Edison Request Filed by Cornwall Board.” The Evening News 18 Dec. 1962: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the Town of Cornwall wishes to be included in future discussions with Con Edison about the Village’s water supply, as they feel they have a beneficial interest in the supply. The article also reports on letters received by the board from Cornwall residents regarding the fate of the village’s reservoirs.

“U. S. Agency May Call Hearing on Cornwall Power Plant Plan.” The Middletown Times Herald Record 4 Oct. 1962: 19.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Federal Power Commission (FPC) may request a public hearing before it gives its permission to Con Edison to build the hydroelectric plant, which may delay the start of the project. However, Con Edison is still planning to complete the project by 1968. The Village of Cornwall has not approved the plan and is hiring an engineering consulting firm to determine if there is another water source for Cornwall.

 

1963

Booth, Malcolm A. “Cornwall Studies New Water Supply.” The Times Herald Record
16 Jul. 1963: 12.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Harvard University’s board of trustees would have to rule on the Village’s request to raise the water level at Arthur’s Pond, since as a result portions of Black Rock Forest would be flooded.

“Catskill Aqueduct Possible Source of Cornwall Water.” The Evening News 24 Jan 1963: 3A.

Part four of the Hazen and Sawyer report reprinted by the Evening News. This portion of the report discusses the use of the Catskill Aqueduct as a supplemental source of water to the Village of Cornwall.

“Con Ed May Give Rock to Cornwall Yacht Club.” The Middletown Times Herald Record
9 Mar. 1963: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports what Con Edison might do with the extra rock that will be blasted from Storm King Mountain where the plant and tunnel is to go. The Cornwall Yacht club has expressed interest in the rock for their breakwater, but has put in no formal request to Con Edison for the rock.

“Con Ed Lines to Go Under River; Cornwallites Pleased.” The Evening News 24 Jan. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison will be submerging the power cables under the Hudson River as to avoid spoiling the natural beauty of the Hudson Valley. Con Edison also announced that it would be increasing the capacity of the plant from six machines to eight in order to generate two million kilowatts of power. Residents of Cornwall, including the Cornwall Garden Club, seemed pleased with the Con Ed announcement.

“Con-Ed Plan to Affect Harvard Forest Tests.” The Middletown Times Herald Record
23 Feb. 1963: 3.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the manager of Black Rock Forest believes that the experiments that have taken place at Black Rock for over 30 years would be flooded and destroyed by Con Edison when they took over the Upper Reservoir and these studies are priceless and irreplaceable. Harvard cannot back the plans for Con Edison unless they know the extent of flooding there will be when they take over the reservoir.

“Con Ed Reports on Cornwall plan.” The Times Herald Record 5 Apr. 1963: 29.

This Times Herald Record article reports on Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plan, which was motivated by the release of the artist’s drawing of the proposed plant.

“Con Ed’s New Plant Will Up Valuation, Cut Taxes.” The Middletown Times Herald Record
26 Feb. 1963: 56a.

This Times Herald Record article reports on the benefits the hydroelectric plant will bring to the area and also addresses some of the concerns of residents and conservationists.  According to Con Edison, the plant will be quiet, have no smell, and appears to present no adverse threat to the conservation or wildlife in the area.  The plant will also boost property values and reduce taxes for residents.

“Con Ed’s Offer.” Editorial. The Middletown Times Herald Record 18 Jan. 1963: 26.

This Times Herald Record editorial makes comments on the Hazen and Sawyer report and urges the village officials to read over carefully the report. It also questions whether the report is geared towards answering Con Edison’s concern (which is devising a solution to the water supply) or to the Village of Cornwall’s concern, (which is deciding whether the project would be detrimental to the village or not). The writer believes the report is most likely to be in favor of Con Edison, since they are the ones ultimately paying for the study.

“Con Edison Agrees to Pay Costs in Cornwall Pact.” The Evening News 5 Mar. 1963: 8A.

This Evening News article is a reprint of the agreement reached between Con Edison and the Village of Cornwall regarding the testing and study fees for finding an alternate water supply.

“Con Edison Awaits Hearing By FPC on Cornwall Plant.” The Evening News 29 Aug. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has not set a date for the hearings on Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plant, and that the demolition team from Montgomery hired by Con Edison reported that his work of demolishing homes in the plant area is about 95% complete.  The article also mentions that the test boring in the Village of Cornwall was showing promise for an alternate water supply.

“Con Edison Defends Survey.” The Evening News 22 Jan. 1963: 3A.

This Evening News article reports that an editorial in the Cornwall Local suggested to the Village that they should conduct their own water survey and not just rely on Con Edison’s, to which Con Edison recommended the firm Hazen and Sawyer of New York to the Village for them to conduct another water survey for a replacement water supply.

“Con Edison Pays It All.” Editorial. The Middletown Times Herald Record 8 Mar. 1963: 26.

This Times Herald Record editorial comments that by asking Con Edison to pay for extra legal fees and therefore reimbursing the village attorney, places the village attorney in a possible conflict of interest. The editors feel that this is just another mistake the village has made, along with asking Con Edison to pay for the engineer’s costs, and that the village cannot expect to retain independence when Con Edison is paying for everything in the negotiations.

“C-on-Hudson engineers doubt Con Edison Plant Will Hurt Wells.” The Times Herald Record
3 Apr. 1963: 45.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Hazen and Sawyer has stated that it doesn’t believe that proposed hydroelectric plant will affect water wells in the area, but that this could not be proven until after the plant was in operation.

“Conservation Groups Organize to Oppose Hydroelectric Plants.” The Cornwall Local
21 Nov. 1963: 10.

This Cornwall Local article reports on the formation of a conservation society that calls themselves the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference.  Scenic Hudson was formed in order to fight the utilities and their plans to build hydroelectric plants along the beautiful and scenic Hudson River. The article describes Carl Carmer, honorary chairman, and Leo Rothschild, chairman, of Scenic Hudson.

“Cornwall and Con Edison.” Editorial. The Middletown Times Herald Record 20 Feb. 1963: 38.

This Times Herald Record editorial agrees with the suggestions made by two Cornwall residents that the Village of Cornwall needs to hire its own team of experts to negotiate with Con Edison, since there still has been no written agreement between the Village of Cornwall, Con Edison, and Hazen and Sawyer.

“Cornwall, Con Edison Sign Secret Contract.” The Middletown Times Herald Record
1 Mar. 1963: 12.

This Times Herald Record article reports that a contract was signed between the Village of Cornwall and Con Edison, but the text of the agreement is a secret.  Mayor Donahue made a written contract stating that Con Edison agrees to pay for all expenses dealing with the engineering firm hired to find an alternate water supply for the village.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has filed its application with the Federal Power Commission (FPC) and has made several changes to the application as requested by the FPC. The changes were made in order to preserve the natural beauty of the area, and Con Edison does not expect any difficulty in getting the application approved by the FPC.

“Cornwall Power Plant Hodgepodge.” Editorial. The Middletown Times Herald Record
27 Feb. 1963: 34.

This Times Herald Record editorial warns the Village of Cornwall that they are heading towards the sale of the village’s priceless water supply under the terms and conditions set by the buyer, Con Edison, and/or the buyer’s agent, Hazen and Sawyer, water engineers, and advises them to seek an independent appraisal of the reservoir.

“Cornwall Seeking New Source for Water Supply in Village.” The Middletown Times Herald Record 7 Jan. 1963: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Hazen and Sawyer, the engineering firm the Village of Cornwall hired to asses their water supply, has recommended two alternative water supply options: Tapping the Catskill Aqueduct, or drilling a deep high-powered well into Cornwall soil.

“Cornwall Water Study Engineers Offer 6 Recommendations to Follow.” The Evening News
25 Jan. 1963: 3A.

Part five is the final installment of the Hazen and Sawyer report reprinted by the Evening News.  The report finds that the Upper Reservoir can be replaced with alternate water supplies for the Village of Cornwall. The engineers recommended Cornwall improve existing reservoirs, ask permission to use Black Rock Forest for more water, and if necessary tap into the Catskill Aqueduct. The report also provides estimates in cost for the project and recommends the village get Con Edison to pay for all of the changes.

“Defacing the Hudson .” New York Times 29 May 1963 : 22.

This article in the New York Times is written in protest to the Storm King Power Plant. The scenic value of Storm King Mountain is discussed. The author compares putting a power plant on Storm King Mountain to putting one in the center of Central Park .

Devine, Jack. “Cornwall Board to Analyze Suggestions on Con Edison.” The Evening News
20 Feb 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the Village Board is meeting to decide whether or not to take the suggestions of Stephen Duggan and Lee Mailler on whether or not to hire specialized outside legal and engineering services for its negotiations with Con Edison. 

Devlin, John C. “Power Plan Stirs Battle On Hudson/ Conservation Groups Rally to Protest Construction of Hydroelectric Projects/ Governor Gets Plea/ Storm King Mountain Area in Highlands Said to Be in Danger of Defacement.” New York Times 22 May 1963 : 39.

This article in the New York Times discusses the opposition that is beginning to build against the pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain. According to the article the leading group of opponents is the New York – New Jersey Trail Conference. The article mentions the concerns that the opposition has, including some from the Army Corps of Engineers about the safety of boats and canoes on the river. The article also briefly describes how the power plant would operate.

“Dual Systems Proposed at Cornwall.” The Evening News 22 Jan. 1963: 2A.

Part two of the Hazen and Sawyer report reprinted by the Evening News. This segment of the report discusses the use of a portion of Black Rock Forest as part of a replacement for the loss of the Upper Reservoir to Con Edison.

“Engineering Firm Makes Survey of Water in Cornwall Area.” The Evening News 21 Jan. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article is the first article in a series of five articles that discusses the possible effects of the loss of the Cornwall reservoir on the community. The article (and remaining four articles) is a reprint of the report done by the Hazen and Sawyer engineering firm from New York, who were specialists in water and sewer works. The report includes recommendations of replacement of the upper reservoir losses to the Village of Cornwall.

“Fight Is Widened On Hudson Plants/ Conservationists Push Drive Against Power Companies.” New York Times 17 Nov. 1963 : 59.

This article in the New York Times discusses the fight over Storm King Mountain . A very brief description of what the fight is over is mentioned, and then the author goes into how the opposition has been stepping up its game against the power companies. The Governor and other authority figures have been continually contacted, seeking support, and although nothing has come of these petitions yet, the opposition feels that the increased pressure will have an effect.

“Full Impact of Con Ed Plant Would Not Be Felt for 5 Years.” The Times Herald Record
2 Apr. 1963: 9. 

This Times Herald Record article reports that the planned hydroelectric plant would not fully affect the Cornwall Central School district tax structure for at least five years, presuming the plant goes through and is approved by state and federal agencies.

“Inspection Basis Approved for Con Edison Project.” The Evening News 19 Nov. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the Cornwall Village Board has decided to rely on Con Edison and state reports for determining satisfactory construction of the plant. The Mayor met with the Mayor of Buchanan, where Con Edison built the nuclear plant at Indian Point, and was advised to use Con Edison and state inspectors as it would cost them much more to hire their own.

“Mayor Expects Swift Action.” The Evening News 16 Jan. 1963: 6D.

This Evening News article reports that the Mayor of Cornwall expects the Con Edison project to move quickly once the Cornwall Village Board reviews the report done by a water engineering firm from New York. It also mentions the progress Con Edison has made with property owners regarding land.

Ottaway, Jim Jr. “Con Ed to Pay Village Attorney’s Extra Costs.” The Middletown Times Herald Record 5 Mar. 1963: 4. 

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has agreed to reimburse the Village of Cornwall for the additional legal expenses of village attorney Raymond Bradford. The mayor commented that the agreement included payment for any extra expenses and the cost of any legal assistance the lawyer may ask for during negotiations with Con Edison.

Ottaway, Jim Jr. “Utility Allocates $650,000 for Cornwall Lands.” The Middletown Times Herald Record 18 Feb. 1963: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that in Con Edison’s application to the FPC, they expect to spend $650,000 for purchasing land needed for their hydroelectric plant. The article also includes cost estimates for the entire project, land and land rights, powerhouse structure, etc.

Ottaway, Jim Jr. “Utility Won’t Pay for Private Cornwall Experts.” The Middletown Times Herald Record 20 Feb. 1963: 3.

This Times Herald Record article reports that despite concerns made by Stephen Duggan and Lee Mailler, Con Edison is not likely to pay for the same study to be done again unless something was wrong with the Hazen and Sawyer one. The article reports on the comments made by Con Edison’s George Delaney of their public information office in regards to the suggestion of a second opinion.

Poche, Ward. “Con Edison Awards Pact for Cornwall Demolition.” The Evening News
16 Jul. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has hired a local demolition crew from Montgomery to begin demolishing buildings along the waterfront to make room for the hydroelectric plant. However, construction will not start until Con Edison gets approval from the FPC and no hearing date has been set yet.

Poche, Ward. “Con Edison Delays Starting Date of Its Cornwall Project.” The Evening News
15 Apr. 1963: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison had to delay their target May 1 start date of construction because they have not received approval from the FPC.  The article also mentions that Con Ed has been obtaining waterfront property for the plant but has yet to negotiate the terms for the Upper Reservoir in Cornwall.

Poche, Ward. “Cornwall Approves Pay for Engineers.” The Evening News 2 Apr. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the Village of Cornwall has authorized payment to Hazen and Sawyer for the studies done on the water supply and expects to be reimbursed by Con Edison. There also is discussion of how the village is making arrangements with property owners to have test boring for wells in and out of the village. The article includes the text of the resolution passed dealing the payment and future drilling.

Poche, Ward. “Cornwall, Con Ed Sign Agreement.” The Evening News 1 Mar. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that a formal agreement has been reached between Con Edison and the Village of Cornwall.  Con Edison agreed to pay the expenses for the studies and tests needed to determine an alternate water supply for the village, even if the project does not go through.  The water systems itself is still in negotiations between the parties.

Poche, Ward. “Cornwall Would Get 2-Million Gallon Water System Under Con Ed Proposal.” The Evening News 16 Jan. 1963: 6D.

This Evening News article discusses the report done by a water engineering firm from New York that was presented to the Village Board to study and make a decision based upon it regarding its course of action.  In the report the Hazen and Sawyer engineering firm of New York recommended that Cornwall should continue to use part of the Black Rock Forest system and develop a supplementary water supply, all of which should be paid for by Con Edison.

Poche, Ward. “Mailler, Duggan Suggest Outside Advice on Con Ed.” The Evening News
19 Feb. 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that Stephen Duggan, a Cornwall resident and New York City lawyer, and Lee Mailler, a former chairman of the water committee for the Village, both recommended to the Village Board that they should seek an outside opinion on the water supply, one that would be in the interest of the residents of Cornwall. They both feel Hazen and Sawyer is a fine engineering company, but that it is working for Con Edison and not the Village and is therefore biased in its recommendations.

Poche, Ward. “Reservoir Acquisition Discussed At Cornwall, Con Edison Meeting.” The Evening News 9 Feb. 1963: 3A.

This Evening News article reports on the meeting held between Cornwall officials, Con Edison, and Hazen and Sawyer (the water engineering firm) regarding the village’s water supply. Con Edison promised there would be no interruption in the village’s water supply while under construction, and they are still hoping to begin construction by May 1st.

“Resident Suggests Con Edison Conditions.” The Evening News 19 Mar. 1963: 2A. 

This Evening News article describes a letter that was sent to the Village Board from a resident of Cornwall. This resident stated that she was opposed to the project unless a good water supply was provided, there was written assurance that the beauty of the land wouldn’t be destroyed, and all contracts were handled openly. 

Rockefeller, Laurance S. “Letters to The Times/ Power Plants on the Hudson/ Laurance Rockefeller Reports on Steps Taken to Preserve Area.” New York Times 26 Jun. 1963: 38.

This letter to the editor in the New York Times was written by Laurance Rockefeller, Vice-President of the Palisades Interstate Park Commission (PIPC). He addresses a previous article that was written entitled “Defacing the Hudson.” Mr. Rockefeller defends the PIPC’s decision to not interfere with Consolidated Edison’s plan to build a power plant on Storm King Mountain, stating that the Commission had to face the fact that the power plant is needed for the good of the general public. He mentions the changes Consolidated Edison has made to make the power plant less obtrusive, at great cost to themselves, and how the PIPC has been working closely with the power company to ensure that all practical measure to protect the beauty of the area are taken.

“Site of Con Edison Hydro Project at Cornwall.” The Middletown Times Herald Record
7 Mar. 1963: 4.

This Times Herald Record photo and caption shows a close-up map of the Con Edison hydroelectric power project at Cornwall. The map shows the Upper Reservoir, which would be taken over by Con Edison, as well as where the power tunnels would be drilled into the mountain.

“Test Drilling for Wells Authorized at Cornwall.” The Evening News 22 Jan 1963: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the Village of Cornwall has authorized Hazen and Sawyer to begin test drilling for supplementary water supplies from wells. The article also has additional comments on the report that the Evening News is reprinting in five parts.

“Village and Con Ed ‘Not Far Apart’ On Reservoir Price; Seek Appraisal By Expert Before Setting Final Value.” The Cornwall Local 14 Feb. 1963: 1.

This Cornwall Local article reports on a closed session between Cornwall officials, Hazen and Sawyer, and Con Edison that dealt with negotiating the price of the Upper Reservoir which Con Edison wishes to purchase from Cornwall.  The Mayor of Cornwall feels confident in their lawyers and Con Ed’s and relayed that the Village Attorney is confident Con Ed will accept most of his proposals.

“Wells Considered in Survey of Cornwall Water Needs; Hazen, Sawyer Cite New Windsor’s Moodna Creek Source” The Evening News 23 Jan. 1963: 2A.

Part three of the Hazen and Sawyer report reprinted by the Evening News. This part of the report discusses the use of a ground water supply (or wells) as a supplement to the remaining Cornwall water supply. The report also includes estimates of how much it would cost Con Edison to use this alternate source of water.

“Who Is Guarding Cornwall’s Interests?” Editorial. The Middletown Times Herald Record
12 Feb. 1963: 32.

This Times Herald Record editorial raises the question of whether or not the Village Board is doing its duty to protect the citizens of Cornwall. Its main point is the fact that there is no written agreement between the Village of Cornwall and Hazen and Sawyer, the engineering firm the village hired to get an opinion of the water supply situation.  The author believes that any oral agreement shrouded in secrecy cannot be in the interest of the people, especially when the village is ultimately not the one paying for the study, and that the Village Board mishandled the whole affair. It also states that while the interests of Cornwall and Con Ed overlap, they are not and can never be identical.

 

1964

“50-Boat Flotilla Pickets Con-Ed’s Storm King Site.” The Times Herald Record 8 Sep. 1964: 15.

This Times Herald Record article reports that an armada of yachts, kayaks, and sailboats sailed up the Hudson River with signs protesting Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plant. Two members dressed as Continental Army soldiers went ashore and planted a sign that said, “Dig You Must Not,” a play on the Con Edison slogan “Dig We Must.”

“Assemblyman Urges Power Plant Delay.” New York Times 1 Oct. 1964: 26.

This article in the New York Times announces that Senator Pomeroy, a known conservationist, has been urging the Federal Power Commission to delay licensing Consolidated Edison to build their hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. He stated that his committee would conduct a thorough study of the project, and may hold public hearings.

“Beauty of the Hudson.” Editorial. The Evening News 5 May 1964: 6A.

This Evening News editorial discusses the opposition and progress of Con Edison.  The editorial notes that the utility companies need to consider the beauty of the Hudson in their projects, but those who love the beauty of the Hudson need to be reasonable in their acceptance of progress.

“Beauty on the River.” Letters. The Herald Tribune 19 May 1964: 22.

These Herald Tribune letters to the editor are in response to the editorial titled “Beauty over Electricity” and all the letters support the arguments the editorial made that Hudson River beauty should be fought for and preserved.

“Beauty over Electricity.” Editorial. The Herald Tribune 10 May 1964: 22.

This Herald Tribune editorial remarks that an unharmed Storm King Mountain is worth more than cheap electricity and urges the FPC to take its time and listen to all the arguments at the Con Ed hearings. The editorial also states, “This newspaper believes that the Hudson landscape is too valuable for tampering that can’t be undone.”

Blair, William M. “Con Ed Gives View On Hudson Plant/ Offers at F.P.C. Hearing to Work Out Solution With Foes of Construction.” New York Times 18 Nov. 1964: 49.

This article in the New York Times discusses Consolidated Edison’s willingness to sit down with the opponents to the plant and try to work out a way to find a solution to the esthetic problem that will satisfy anyone. Con Ed recognizes the determination of the opposition to take this matter to the courts if necessary and they want to avoid that if at all possible.

Blair, William M. “Con Edison Plant On Hudson Backed/ F.P.C. Staff Proposes That Company Be Licensed to Build $130 Million Unit/ Cable Line Rerouted/ Alternative Would Avoid Any Congested Areas to Quell Westchester Protests.” New York Times 17 Jun. 1964: 45.

This article in the New York Times reports that the Federal Power Commission is going to recommend that Consolidated Edison be granted their license to build the pumped storage plant in Cornwall, New York. The Commission also recommended an alternate route for the overhead power lines that need to be built.

Blair, William M. “F.P.C. Asks Con Ed To Remap Its Line/ Calls Its Own Hudson Route Shorter and Less Costly.” New York Times 18 Jun. 1964: 70.

This article in the New York Times discusses how the F.P.C. is planning on granting Consolidated Edison their license to build the pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain, provided that they build the transmission lines on the route that the F.P.C. recommended. The alternate route suggested by the F.P.C. will cost about a million dollars less than the route that Con Ed wanted to use.

Budelman, Richard J. “Conservationists Seek to Reopen Con Ed Hearing.” The Times Herald Record 29 Dec. 1964: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Cortlandt Conservation Association, Inc. of Croton-on-Hudson has filed a letter of intervention with the FPC requesting that the hearings be reopened to permit the introduction of important testimony dealing with the effect the plant would have on the striped bass and shad commercial fish hatcheries along the Hudson.

“Cameron Optimistic About Con Edison Project.” The Evening News 9 May 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that Supervisor Gordon Cameron feels that the F.P.C. will grant Con Edison a temporary permit to begin construction on the hydroelectric plant at Cornwall.

“Cameron to Attend Hearings.” The Evening News 14 Nov. 1964: 2A. 

This Evening News article reports that Supervisor Gordon Cameron will attend the hearing called by the Joint Legislation Committee on Natural Resources at the Bear Mountain Inn.

“Con Ed Asks Fast Decision.”  The Evening News 16 Mar. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reveals that Con Edison asked the Federal Power Commission to make a quick decision, as they are urgent to begin construction on the plant, and asked the commission not to hold more hearings regarding the effects of the plant on the aesthetic quality of the Hudson Valley.

“Con Ed Asks Swift Ruling On Hudson River Project.” New York Times 17 Mar. 1964: 27.

This article in the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison has asked the Federal Power Commission to make a swift decision on whether they will license Con Ed to build the power plant on Storm King Mountain because construction needs to get underway so electricity can be supplied as soon as possible.

“Con Ed Brief Answers Claims of Opponents.” The Evening News 8 Dec. 1964: 4A.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has filed a brief with the Joint Legislative Committee to rebuke all of the claims made by their opponents at the Bear Mountain hearings. The article describes the claims made by the opponents and Con Edison’s reactions to those claims.

“Con Ed, Central Hudson Programs Draw Protests.” The Evening News 23 Jan. 1964: 3A.

This Evening News article reports on some of the opposition to the Con Edison hydroelectric plant at Cornwall. Complaints against the plant consist of: destruction of beautiful and old homes, damage to the scenery of the Hudson Valley, damage to West Point Reservation, disfiguring the mountains, unnecessary loss of Hudson River fish, and fear that the plant would set a precedent for more plants to be built along the Hudson. Con Edison states that it is doing all that it can to meet and/or overcome the objections. Protestors include the New York-New Jersey Trail Conference, the Audubon Society, and the New York Water Resources Commission.

“Con Ed Chairman Calls Scenery Fears Groundless.” The Times Herald Record
19 May 1964: 16.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Harland C. Forbes, Con Edison’s board chairman, made the remark at the utility’s annual stockholder meeting, that the fears of the opponents were groundless. The article also discusses other Con Ed matters held at the meeting.

“Con Ed Contest PSC Role in Cornwall Project.” The Times Herald Record 25 Sep. 1964: 47.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has stated that the project is ultimately up to the FPC, despite the request from the Westchester Public Service Commission (PSC) that further action from the FPC should be held in abeyance until “proper state authorities have held full and complete hearings, which has not been done.”

“Con Ed Counsel Says Company’s Plans Not Issue Before WRC.” The Times Herald Record
24 Apr. 1964: 16.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison filed a brief with the Water Resource Committee (WRC) that supports the proposed alternate water plan, and includes a rebuttal statement to the chief opposition to the plan from the well site’s owner.

“Con Ed Hearing.” Editorial. The Times Herald Record 26 Feb. 1964: 26.

In this Times Herald Record editorial the editors believe the integrity of the private engineering firm hired to recommend an alternate water supply has been compromised by the village of Cornwall when they made an agreement with Con Edison that Con Ed pays the bills. The editors then comment that if the questions of the alternate water supply really being equal or better to the existing one are answered affirmatively, and due care is being taken to preserve the natural scenic beauty of the Hudson River Valley by the FPC, then the editors will then support the project despite their reservations with the Village of Cornwall’s procedural weaknesses.

“Con Ed Hearing Set on Feb. 25.” The Evening News 23 Jan. 1964: 3A.

This Evening News article reports that the Federal Power Commission has received questions about the effects of the project on the natural beauty of the area, local water supplies, and fish and wildlife services.

“Con Ed Hearings to Resume Apr. 20.” The Evening News 3 Apr. 1964: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has denied Con Edison’s motion to close the hearings and grant them a license based on the evidence already presented in the hearings and the support shown from the Town and Village of Cornwall.

“Con Ed Line Opposed.” The Evening News 6 May 1964: 12D.

This Evening News article reports that Richard Ottinger demanded that the F.P.C. either disapprove Con Edison’s power plant or require the lines be underground through Putnam and Westchester counties.

“Con Ed Offers No Rebuttal.” The Evening News 12 Nov. 1964: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that the Town of Yorktown has claimed the power lines from the hydroelectric plant would lower property values and raise taxes, a claim which Con Edison does not refute. The article also comments on the upcoming F.P.C. decision and the fact that Con Edison is behind schedule in their plans to build the plant.

“Con Ed-on-the-Hudson.” Editorial. The Times Herald Record 11 May 1964: 26.

This Times Herald Record editorial states that it cannot see how the FPC can require the utility to provide all the conservationists demand when Con Edison has already made many concessions already that will cost them millions.  The editors comment that perhaps the FPC could require Con Ed to bury the transmission lines, but either pass the cost off to customers or let the public as a whole underwrite the cost of preserving the Hudson’s beauty.  This editorial was in response to those written in the New York Times and Herald Tribune.

“Con Ed Opponents Scored By Warden.” The Evening News 19 May 1964: 9B.

This Evening News article describes the opinions of a former Newburgh mayor, Herbert Warden. Warden calls Scenic Hudson’s opposition to Con Edison’s hydroelectric plant “asinine” and feels there are other things Scenic Hudson can do besides “trying to impede progress.”

“Con Ed Opponents to Convene Saturday.” The Evening News 5 Nov. 1964: 12B.

This Evening News article reports that a mass meeting of Hudson Valley residents opposing Con Edison’s hydroelectric plant was held at Boscobel, Garrison.  Carl Carmer stated the group will organize to present its case in Washington to the FPC.

“Con Ed Project Opposed.” The Evening News 22 Oct. 1964: 13B.

This Evening News article reports that the New York State Garden Club has voted to send a letter to the Hudson River Conservation Society for support in opposing Con Edison’s hydroelectric power plant.

“Con Ed Projects Worries Highland; Board Asks Care in Development.” The Times Herald Record 9 Apr. 1964: 14.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Highland Falls Village Board requests from Con Edison written assurance that recreational uses of Black Rock Forest can be continued and that the village of Highland Falls’ water supply isn’t contaminated by salt water from the plant.

“Con Ed’s New Plan Opposed.” The Evening News 1 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports on more opposition to Con Edison because of the company’s proposed power lines going through Philipstown. Residents of Philipstown want the power lines to be buried underground per an ordinance passed by the town board.

“Con Edison, Cornwall Terms Reported.” The Evening News 24 Oct. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the mayor of Cornwall has released the terms of the agreement by which Con Edison will take over the Upper Reservoir in exchange for a $2.5 million water system for the village. The article reprints the terms as they are stated.

“Con Edison Hearings Postponed to May 4.” The Times Herald Record 8 Apr. 1964: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC has approved Scenic Hudson’s motion to delay the hearings and that the commission’s chief examiner met with counsel for Con Edison, Raymond Bradford representing Village of Cornwall, and counsel for Scenic Hudson and the Phillipstown Citizen Association in order to lay the ground rules for the next set of hearings. The article also discusses what will be brought up in the next round of hearings and the witnesses that will testify.

“Con Edison Plan Is Called Fatal to 2 Fish Industries.” New York Times 30 Dec. 1964: 34.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Cortlandt Conservation Association has claimed that if the power plant is built on Storm King Mountain, the striped bass and shad industries for the entire Atlantic will be wiped out. The Association is attempting to put together a petition to reopen the Federal Power Commission hearings on the power plant.

“Con Edison Scores Opposing Brief.” The Evening News 9 Oct. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison stated that Scenic Hudson has resorted to pure speculation and hypothetical situations that this project would lead to the ultimate commercialization of the Hudson River. Con Ed noted in their brief that FPC Examiner Marsh had correctly concluded that the advantages outweigh any alleged adverse effect on the environment.

“Con Edison Situation.” The Times Herald Record 4 May 1964: 5.

This Times Herald Record article discusses the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant and all of the details surrounding the case as a way to bring readers up to date on the situation as it currently stands. It includes the time element, the proponents, the opponents, and the question marks dealing with the case.

“Con Edison’s Final Briefs Filed Monday with FPC.” The Times Herald Record 16 Jun. 1964: 16.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Raymond Bradford, Cornwall village attorney, has reported to the Cornwall trustees that all briefs have been filed with the FPC and both sides have until June 30 to write reply briefs. The article describes the brief submitted by Bradford to the FPC as well as other village matters.

“Conservationists Widen Objection to Con-Ed Plan.” New York Times 11 Jul. 1964: 27.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Hudson River Conservation Society has officially declared that it is against Consolidated Edison’s pumped storage plant. The organization had only given passive objections to the plant in the past, however after the F.P.C. announced to Con Ed that they should consider building an even bigger plant, the society decided to officially oppose it.

“Cornwall Argues for Water Plan.” The Times Herald 25 Apr. 1964: 4.

This Times Herald Record discusses the brief filed by the Village of Cornwall with the Water Resources Committee that supports its alternate water supply plan in place of the Upper Reservoir it wants to turn over to Con Edison for their hydroelectric plant.

“Cornwall Awards Water Line Contract for Con Ed Project.” The Evening News 16 Oct. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has agreed to pay $764,035 to a contractor to begin installing transmission lines from the Upper Reservoir and the New York aqueduct, even though Con Edison has not gotten the go ahead from the FPC.

“Cornwall Committee Opposes Con Ed.” The Evening News 6 Oct. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that a group called the Citizens Information Committee has formed in Cornwall in order to take a better and closer look at the proposed Con Edison hydroelectric plant. The Committee is concerned about the safety of dams in the reservoir Con Edison would use for its pumped storage plant.

“Cornwall, Con Ed Agree on Water.” The Evening News 20 Oct. 1964: 12B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison and Cornwall have reached an agreement on the Upper Reservoir and the village’s water supply. The village agrees to turn over the Upper Reservoir to Con Edison in exchange for a new water supply system that is to be built before the expansion of the reservoir so that the village has a potable water system in place when Con Edison begins expanding the reservoir.

“Cornwall Eyes Condemnation on Water Site.” The Evening News 13 Nov. 1964: 1B. 

This Evening News article reports that the Village of Cornwall will go into condemnation proceedings to acquire the Ogden well site for an alternate water supply, since Mr. Ogden has refused to give the village an asking price for the well.

“Cornwall Industrialist Notes Opposition to Con Edison.” The Evening News 1 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article gives the statement from the head of a chemical research company in New Jersey, who says the Cornwall hydroelectric plant would be bad for both the scenic quality of the Hudson River and the people of Cornwall as their water supply could become contaminated from leaks of Hudson River water into the ground water supply.

“Cornwall Lions Endorse Con Edison Construction.” The Evening News 5 Feb. 1964: 6B.

This Evening News article reports that the Cornwall Lions Club has authorized open backing of Con Edison and their hydroelectric plant, and the club noted others could offer it their individual support.

“Cornwall Officials Hopeful of Con Ed Approval.” The Evening News 15 Dec. 1964: 11A.

This Evening News article reports that Cornwall officials are hopeful the FPC will approve the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant since Gov. Nelson Rockefeller has given his support to the project.  Rockefeller believes Con Edison has shown the need for more power and stated that the Conservation Department and State Council of Parks are working together to preserve the scenic quality of the Hudson Valley.

“Cornwall Officials Urge Favorable Vote.” The Evening News 17 Mar. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article provides details on the vote Cornwall Village held for getting a contract with New York and allowing Cornwall to tap into the Catskill Aqueduct for an alternate water supply.

“Cornwall Plans Three Water Supply Sources.” The Evening News 6 Feb. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article describes the Village of Cornwall’s proposal for getting alternate water supplies. The proposal plans for the Village to obtain water from Arthur’s Pond, the Catskill Aqueduct, and existing ground water.

“Cornwall Residents Take Exception to Con Edison Story.” The Evening News 18 Feb. 1965: 8B.

This Evening News article reports that residents of Cornwall and the Mayor of Cornwall have taken offense to an article written in the New York World Telegram entitled “Cornwall: Feud on the Mountain.”  The Mayor states that the article is misleading and inaccurate, as there is no feud in Cornwall, and that some of the statements were never given by those who reportedly said them.  He also says that while there is disagreement among residents in Cornwall, there is no divided village.

“Dow Explains Stand on Con Ed.” The Evening News 18 Nov. 1964: 8B.

This Evening News article reports on Congressman-elect John G. Dow’s favorable position on the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant.  Dow explains that the human factors outweigh the preservation factors and that he has to look out for the people in his district’s interests.  He feels this project will bring jobs and tax benefits to the area, and that he cannot ask thousands of people to sacrifice in order to prevent a scar on the highlands.

“Dow May Attend Con Ed Hearings.” The Evening News 11 Nov. 1964: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Congressman-elect John Dow may attend the Con Ed hearings in Washington and at Bear Mountain, and mentions that the Congressman-elect will not officially state his position on the project until he has studied the matter more closely.

“Engineers Feel Wells at Cornwall Unaffected in Con Edison Project.” The Evening News 22 Feb. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article discusses the concerns Cornwall locals have about the proposed alternate water supply of using ground water.  Hazen and Sawyer, Cornwall village water engineers, do not think there will be any problems with using this water and attempts to alleviate any of the community’s concerns.

“FPC Aides Support Con Edison.” The Evening News 16 Jun. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC staff has recommended that Con Edison be granted a license for a $130 million hydroelectric project at Cornwall, NY.

“F.P.C. Report Backs Hudson Power Plan.” New York Times 12 Mar. 1964: 16.

This article in the New York Times reports that Edward B. Marsh, Chief Examiner to the Federal Power Commission, has stated that the hydroelectric plant in Cornwall would not have any adverse effects on the scenic beauty of the Hudson River Valley. A two-day hearing was held on the matter, and Marsh reported that no evidence was given to prove that the scenic beauty of the landscape would be ruined.

“FPC Sets Date in Con Ed Case.” The Evening News 2 Oct. 1964: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has set Nov. 17th as the last day for all arguments against granting Con Edison the license to build their hydroelectric plant.  The FPC reopened the record on the case to allow the Town of Yorktown to put in evidence on the overhead transmission line scheduled to cross the town.

“FPC Staff Questions Vital in Hydro Plan.” The Times Herald Record 10 Apr. 1964: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Federal Power Commission’s (FPC) engineering and legal staffs will have an important influence on the May 4 hearings on Con Ed’s proposed hydroelectric plant and it notes that the FPC is concerned about Con Edison’s intent to grow once the plant is built.

“FPC Upholds Power Lines.” The Evening News 11 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports on the testimony of an F.P.C. official that believes Con Edison could put the new power lines above the existing routes between Carmel and Millwood, which would save Con Edison money and help appease the residents of these towns.

Fischer, James S. “Burning Dump Commended to Scenic Group.” Letter. The Evening News
20 May 1964: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor recommends to the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference that their time would be better spent addressing issues such as the Beacon Dump.

Folsom, Merrill. “Con Ed Project On Hudson Gains/ State Approves Plan to Sell Reservoir in Mountains for a Power Plant/ Dikes Called A Peril/ Landowners Study Action-Cornwall Mayor Sees Benefit to Village.” New York Times 20 May 1964: 45.

This article in the New York Times announces that the State Water Resources Commission approved the plans for the Village of Cornwall to sell their reservoir to Con Ed, and receive new water by digging new wells and tapping the New York City aqueduct. The article also mentions that opponents to the project met to discuss what legal actions they could take to try and stop the power plant. The F.P.C. expects to have a decision on the license for Con Ed to build the power plant in the summer.

Folsom, Merrill. “Project By Con Ed Debated Upstate/ Plant at Cornwall Would Be Offensive, Inquiry is Told.” New York Times 20 Mar. 1964 : 65.

This article in the New York Times reports that a public hearing was held for the Water Resources Commission of the State Department of Commerce and the Storm King pumped storage plant project was debated. Alexander Saunders made a statement on behalf of Scenic Hudson, but the Village of Cornwall overwhelmingly approved tapping the Catskill Aqueduct so that Consolidated Edison could build its power plant and use their current fresh water source as a holding pond. The secretary of the commission stated that all aspects of the case would be considered to see if the Village of Cornwall should be allowed to tap into the Aqueduct. The rest of the article gives an overview of what the power plant will do and how.

Folsom, Merrill. “Storm King Plant Moves Step Nearer.” New York Times 17 Dec. 1964: 43.

This article in the New York Times announces that one of the obstacles blocking the Storm King Power Plant has been removed. Mr. Ralph Ogden withdrew his suit from the State Supreme Court that was attempting to block Cornwall from digging wells on his property. Consequently, Cornwall withdrew their suit that would condemn his property. Cornwall needs to dig wells on Mr. Ogden’s property because the power plant would be using their current water supply as a holding reservoir.

Garrett, Bill. “Area Unionists Favor Project By Con Edison.” The Evening News 5
May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports how the local unionists from Newburgh and other surrounding areas testified at the FPC hearing in support of the Con Edison hydroelectric plant. The members of the union support the project because of the jobs that would be brought to the area and believe there will be no lasting effects detrimental to the scenery.

This Evening News article reports that a witness for Con Edison has testified at the FPC hearing in Washington that it would cost about $8.2 million to bury the transmission lines under the Hudson River from the plant at Cornwall.

Garrett, Bill. “Con Ed Would Rather Quit Than Bury Lines.” The Evening News 4 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison’s board chairman (Forbes) does not see a point in burying the power lines over Phillipstown and that Con Edison is willing to work with the town in creating a better waterfront if the town is willing. The article also talks about Richard Ottinger’s opposition to the hydroelectric plant and describes it as politically motivated.

Garrett, Bill. “Scenic Hudson, Con Ed Lawyers Argue at Session.” The Evening News
7 Apr. 1964: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that an argument was touched off between Con Edison and Scenic Hudson when the FPC hearing examiner asked Scenic Hudson to clarify its position on the case. Con Edison believes Scenic Hudson’s participation in the proceedings should be limited to those dealing with the scenic beauty of the Hudson and not the river itself.

Garrett, William. “Briefs Filed in Con Ed Controversy; FPC Aide Favors Utility’s Proposal.”
The Evening News 17 Jun. 1964: 7D.

This Evening News article describes the briefs filed with the FPC from Con Edison and Scenic Hudson and reports that counsel for the FPC has recommended Con Edison be rewarded the license to build the hydroelectric plant.

Garret, William. “Con Ed Foes Plan to Appeal in Court.” The Evening News 9 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson and the Phillipstown Citizen Association would appeal the case if they were to lose in the hearings.  The article also describes some of the reasons why these groups and others are opposed to the hydroelectric plant and Con Edison, such as power lines and destroying the scenery of the Hudson Valley.

Garrett, William. “Con Ed Hearing Rules Set.” The Evening News 13 Nov. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports the time limits set by the FPC for both sides to present their closing arguments at the hearing.

Garrett, William. “Con Edison Testimony in 9th Day.” The Evening News 11 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson completed its case against Con Edison in the hearings. Con Edison’s counsel has referred to the group as “crusaders” as the group gave last testimony on alternatives to the hydroelectric plant. Scenic Hudson argued that gas-turbine plants would be more beneficial for Con Edison, whereas Con Edison argued that they would be too expensive and difficult to soundproof.

Garrett, William. “Cornwall Seepage Seen No Problem.” The Evening News 12 May 1964: 1. 

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison brought forth two witnesses that claimed there would be minimal seepage of Hudson River water into the bedrock and consequently into the Cornwall water supply and any that did would not be of “grave importance.”

Garrett, William. “Decision Seen in July on Con Edison Project.” The Evening News
13 May 1964: 16A.

This Evening News article reports that the decision made by the F.P.C. will be delayed until July in order to allow time for filing briefs by opposing and commission attorneys. Con Edison had wanted to begin construction on May 15, but now will not be able to until the end of summer at the earliest. Opposing groups are determined to appeal any decision that is adverse to them. The article also sums up the final testimonies in the hearing.

Garrett, William. “FPC Could Set Precedent If Con Ed Must Bury Lines.” The Evening News
12 May 1964: 12B.

This Evening News article reports that the F.P.C. could set a precedent if they order Con Edison to bury the power lines underground, something that Con Edison has said it would rather abandon the project than have to do. The article also recounts several of the last testimonies given at the F.P.C. hearing – those dealing with river water seeping into the ground water supply and alternate solutions to building a hydroelectric plant.

Garrett, William. “FPC Hears Con Ed Arguments.” The Evening News 17 Nov. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has declared to the FPC that no other project could replace the one they have proposed at Storm King Mountain and have asked to be granted the license to begin construction. Richard Ottinger, on the other hand, feels the FPC should delay their decision until more information can be gathered about the lasting effects the plant will have on the surrounding communities and the land itself.

Garrett, William. “FPC Hears of Central Hudson Plans.” The Evening News 8 May 1964: 3B.

This Evening News article reports that Leo Rothschild of the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference informed the F.P.C. that Central Hudson also has plans to build a hydroelectric plant in the future.

Garrett, William. “FPC Pledges ‘Right Decision’ In Con Ed Case.” The Evening News
18 Nov. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has stated that it will not let power cost alone decide whether they grant Con Edison a license to build their proposed hydroelectric plant; it will consider the other arguments and make sure the overall public benefits are the controlling factor. The article discusses the arguments for the project from Con Ed and some of the opposing arguments from Phillipstown and Scenic Hudson.

Garrett, William. “Historian Scores Con Ed’s Project.” The Evening News 8 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article describes historian Carl Carmer’s opposition to the Con Edison hydroelectric plant and his testimony in defense of the history of the Hudson Valley during the F.P.C. hearings. Carmer believes that the conservation movement is important to all citizens, as there is no other part of the country that is more historically important than the Hudson Valley.

Garrett, William. “Month Delay Seen for Con Edison Project.” The Evening News 6 May 1964: 12D.

This Evening News reports that Con Edison’s target start date of May 15th will not be plausible, and the project will be delayed pending the approval of the F.P.C.  Con Edison wanted to start construction then in order to be able to have the plant available for the summer of 1967.

Garrett, William. “Most of Con Ed Plant Due Underground.” The Evening News 7 May 1964: 2B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison testified that the plant itself will be below sea level and buried into Storm King Mountain itself. Con Ed also testified that it would not use Aleck Meadow as another source of water for the pumped storage plant. These statements were met with approval from both mayors of Newburgh and Cornwall.

Garrett, William. “Mullin Supports Con Ed.” The Evening News 6 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the mayor of Newburgh, Joseph Mullin, gives his full support to Con Edison and urges the F.P.C. to quickly approve the project. The mayor feels the project will improve Newburgh’s economy and the Hudson Valley. The article also discusses the opposition to the project and the mayor’s disapproval of this opposition, as he feels the economy and its people are more important than scenic beauty.

Garrett, William. “Overhead Con Ed Lines Draw More Opposition.” The Evening News
8 May 1864: 1.

This Evening News article reports that more opposition from Phillipstown was presented at the FPC hearings from the town supervisor.  The power lines would violate Phillipstown zoning laws and would scar the landscape.

Garrett, William. “Scenic Group Cold to FPC Plan for New Con Ed Route.” The Evening News
19 Jun. 1964: 8D.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson is against the whole Con Edison project and that relocating the transmission lines is not enough. The article also discusses the different routes proposed for the transmission lines.

Garrett, William. “Scenic Group Plans to Fight Central Hudson.” The Evening News
15 May 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson plans to oppose Central Hudson if they too decide to build a hydroelectric plant across from Storm King Mountain on Breakneck Ridge. The article describes Scenic Hudson and one of its cofounders, Leo Rothschild, and lists the groups that support Scenic Hudson’s fight to save Storm King Mountain.

Garrett, William. “Scenic Hudson Continues Fight In Con Edison Case.” The Evening News
8 Apr. 1964: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Dale Doty, lawyer for Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference will more than likely appeal the FPC hearing if his client lost.

Garrett, William. “Second Cornwall Reservoir Denied by Con Edison Aide.” The Evening News
16 Apr. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has denied planning to acquire a second reservoir for expansion of the hydroelectric plant, despite having earlier submitted plans to the FPC for future expansion that included a second reservoir.  Daly Doty, counsel for Scenic Hudson, believes Con Edison’s position now is completely inconsistent with its earlier position.

Garrett, William. “Water Expert Testifies at Con Edison Hearing.” The Evening News
7 May 1964: 1. 

This Evening News article reports that a water expert for Scenic Hudson testified that water pumped up from the Hudson River would eventually seep into the bedrock and into the streams and ponds in the area, including the Black Rock Meadow and into a tributary that would be used for part of Cornwall’s water supply.

Garrett, William A. “Barry Sees Con Edison Project Costly to Putnam, Westchester.” The Evening News 5 May 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports on Congressman Robert Barry’s opposition to the Con Edison hydroelectric plant in the F.P.C. hearings. Barry feels that Putnam and Westchester residents have a right to be upset with Con Edison putting power lines overhead since he thinks that burying the power lines all the way to Millwood would be cheaper for Con Edison than keeping them overhead.

Garrett, William A. “Con Edison Not Counting Yet on Labrador Power.” The Evening News
19 Feb. 1965: 8A.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison is still awaiting approval on their Cornwall project while their Canadian project is still up in the air, which would be a much bigger undertaking that the one in Cornwall (the largest in the world if ever built).

Garrett, William A. “Mayor Cites Cornwall Benefits from Con Ed.” The Evening News
26 Feb. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports on the benefits the Con Edison hydroelectric plant will have on Cornwall and the surrounding area as told by Mayor Donahue of Cornwall. The Mayor foresees major tax breaks for the residents of Cornwall, and since Con Edison will be the largest taxpayer of Cornwall, their money will go towards updating Cornwall public services and facilities. There also will be a recreational park donated to the Town by Con Edison located along the waterfront.

“Governor Backs Storm King Plant/ Says Con Ed Project’s Value Outweighs Objections.” New York Times 12 Dec. 1964: 1.

This article from the New York Times announces that Governor Rockefeller is supporting Consolidated Edison and their hydroelectric plant in Cornwall. The Governor had remained silent up until this point, but in response to pleas from Senator Pomeroy to delay construction of the plant, the Governor announced that the power plant had his support. The conservationists were shocked, angry, and extremely disappointed at this announcement.

Hesse, Rayburn. “$153 Million Con Ed Project Hinges on Hearings.” The Times Herald Record
6 Apr. 1964: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Con Edison project will be determined by a Federal Power Commission hearing in the next month. The article outlines the issues, the Village of Cornwall’s role in the issues, the considerations, and the opposition.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Con Ed Details Opposition to Cornwall Changes.” The Times Herald Record 6 May 1964: 14.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has shown opposition to project changes suggested by the FPC, saying their plan is the most feasible and practical method of meeting its power needs. Con Ed rejected suggestions for alternate transmission routes, changes in design, enlargement of the project, and burying transmission lines.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Con Ed Hearings Ended; July Decision Probable.” The Times Herald Record 13 May 1964: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports on the last testimonies and closing arguments in the FPC hearings. The article describes the opposition’s claims and Con Edison’s refutation of those claims, and reports that a decision cannot be made until July after briefs and reply briefs are filed.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Con Ed Project Faces Intense FPC Probing.” The Times Herald Record
26 Feb. 1964: 11.

This Times Herald Record article reports on the issues presented at the FPC hearings from both the supporters and the opposition. The article states that the FPC has six major considerations to take into account when finally deciding on the fate of the project, and it also includes a listing of many of the participants in the FPC hearings.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Con Ed Sets May 15 as Starting Date at Cornwall.” The Times Herald Record 27 Feb. 1964: 15.

This Times Herald Record reports that Con Edison has set May 15 as their target start date in order to have construction completed in time in order to supply New York City with power for the summer of 1967. The article also discusses Scenic Hudson’s counsel Dale Doty’s intentions to stall the FPC decision for at least a year, Con Edison and supporters’ optimism for a quick decision, and the proceedings of the FPC hearings to date.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Con Ed’s Cornwall Plan Faces Heavy Opposition.” The Times Herald Record 11 Nov. 1964: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison faces strong opposition in two upcoming meetings, one with the Cornwall Town Board and the appellate division of the State Supreme Court, as well as in Washington at the FPC hearings.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Con Ed’s Cornwall Project Wins FPC Staff Approval.” The Times Herald Record 17 Jun. 1964: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC staff has made the recommendation that the license be granted to Con Edison with the condition that they agree to move the transmission lines to the existing right of way. The staff noted that it believes Con Edison has done his utmost to preserve the scenic beauty of the Hudson.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Con Edison Opponents Seek Hearing Delay.” The Times Herald Record
4 Apr. 1964: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Dale Doty, counsel for Scenic Hudson, has asked the FPC to delay the second set of hearings scheduled for April 20th in order for them to obtain expert witnesses on the economics of the project and on alternative sources of energy Scenic Hudson believes Con Edison could use in place of the Cornwall Project.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Cornwall Waits State Ruling on Water Project.” The Times Herald Record
7 May 1964: 19.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison does not know what it will do should the Water Resources Commission render an unfavorable decision on the village of Cornwall’s water redevelopment program, as it is a vital part of Con Edison’s project. Con Ed has stated it would deal with it when it comes to it.  The article also discusses the FPC hearings, the opposition’s case, Nelson Rockefeller’s support of Con Edison, and Con Edison’s need to build the plant.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Cornwall Water Plan OK Boosts Con Ed Hopes.” The Times Herald Record
8 May 1964: 14.

This Times Herald Record article reports Con Edison and the Village of Cornwall has received informal notice that the Water Resources Commission has approved all three aspects of the Village of Cornwall’s water redevelopment program. The article also reports on the FPC hearings and Con Edison’s denial of a need for a second project, the discussion on the rerouting of power lines, and the status of the project itself with the FPC.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Cornwall Water Question to be Decided May 7.” The Times Herald Record
23 Apr. 1964: 19.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the State Water Resources Commission will decide whether the Village of Cornwall will be permitted to release the upper reservoir and replace it with the recommended three alternate water sources. The article also discusses the opponents’ case against the proposed alternate water plan, led by Stephen Duggan, counsel for Richard Ogden, owner of property where the well will be located.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “FPC Gets 19 Objections to Cornwall hydro plant.” The Times Herald Record 25 Feb. 1964: 12.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC has received at least 19 objections against the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant from people in Cornwall, New York City, New Jersey, Delaware, and West Virginia and from groups such as the Audubon Society, Scenic Hudson, the Boscobel Restoration Committee, and the New York-New Jersey Trail Conference. The FPC stated it was not necessary to make the protests orally at the hearings; it would give just as much considerations to the letters as it would a delegation.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “FPC Re-opens Con Edison Hearings.” The Times Herald Record
28 Mar. 1964: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC has ordered hearings to resume on April 20 for the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant on the basis that the commission deemed it important in the public interest that the hearings resume for additional evidence on issues raised by Con Ed and its opponents. The FPC denied Con Edison’s motion to terminate hearings and make a decision now in order for them to begin construction by their target date of May 15th.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “FPC Resumes Con Ed Hearing Today.” The Times Herald Record
4 May 1964: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports on the second round of FPC hearings resuming in Washington, including who will be testifying and some of the arguments that should be presented by Con Edison and its opponents.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Key Senator Opposes Con Ed’s Cornwall Project.” The Times Herald Record 21 Nov. 1964: 3.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Senator Thomas J. Markell has announced his opposition to Con Edison’s Cornwall Project “as it is presently constituted.” The Senator stated he is not satisfied that Con Edison cannot find an alternative source of peaking power. The article also discusses Scenic Hudson’s role in the Con Edison case.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Scenic Group Battles to Stop Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record
9 May 1964: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference offered testimony from their expert witness Ellery R. Fosdick, a consulting engineer, on three different power plants that could be located in New York City: a gas operated, jet powered complex, a steam turbine reserve, and another jet operation that could be built at comparable prices to the Cornwall project.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “This Is Week of Decision For Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record
24 Feb. 1964: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that there will be two separate meetings held in order to determine the sufficiency of the alternate water supply proposed for Cornwall. The hearing with the FPC will include all details of the project, while the State Water Resources Commission will only focus on the three part alternate water supply proposal that deals with flooding one of their current ponds, tapping into the Catskill Aqueduct, and drilling a well in the area.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Utility Rejects Demands Hydro Lines Be Buried.” The Times Herald Record
5 May 1964: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has stated to the FPC that the company will abandon its Cornwall hydroelectric project before agreeing to bury the transmission lines through Westchester and Putnam counties. The article includes Con Edison’s testimony on how the project would benefit the area; improve conditions along the waterfront, and how the project would make power available to neighboring utilities.

“Hudson Group Plans Con Ed Opposition.” New York Times 24 Jun. 1964: 37

This article in the New York Times announces that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has a new full-time Secretary, Mr. Richard Alden. Mr. Alden ws to put all his effort into fighting Con Ed, and saving the beauty of the highlands.as briefly interviewed by the New York Times and he declared his intention

“Jaycees Support Con Ed.” The Evening News 16 Oct. 1964: 3B.

This Evening News article reports that the Newburgh Jaycees have given their vote of support to the Con Edison hydroelectric plant and feels that any more delays in the license would jeopardize the project.

Kihss, Peter. “Con Ed Seeks Emergency Power, It Says Hudson Plant Could Help Avert Blackouts, Terms Hydroelectric Generators Surer Than Steam.” New York Times 21 May 1964: 40.

This article in the New York Times describes how Con Ed’s power system currently works, and what they hope the hydroelectric pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain will do to their system. The article also touches on how the Storm King power plant will help reduce air pollution by allowing Con Ed to close down old plants in the city that are generating a lot of air pollution. The article finishes by talking briefly about Con Ed’s next project, receiving power from Grand Falls on the Hamilton River.

“Lions Back Con Ed Hydroplant.” The Evening News 19 May 1964: 9B.

This Evening News article reports that The Newburgh Lions Club supports Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plant at Cornwall. The Lions Club believes the plant would begin a new industrial boom that would benefit the entire Hudson Valley.

“Mayor Donahue Endorses Water Plan Resolution; Points to Advantages.” The Cornwall Local
12 Mar. 1964: 2.

This Cornwall Local article reports that Mayor Donahue has stated that if the Con Edison project goes through it will be the best thing to ever happen to Cornwall. The article reprints the resolution passed by the Village Board that discusses many of the highlights the area will receive, such as a waterfront park and a rise in employment.

“Mayor Views Con Ed Project as Big Bonanza for Cornwall.” The Times Herald Record
26 Feb. 1964: 11.

This Times Herald Record article describes the testimony of Mayor Donahue at the FPC hearings. The Mayor stated the Con Edison project would increase revenue, lower taxes, and would encourage general municipal development.

“Mr. Rockefeller’s Wrong Move.” New York Times 14 Dec. 1964: 34.

This article in the New York Times reports that Governor Rockefeller has officially declared his support to Consolidated Edison and their hydroelectric power plant. The Governor declared that the benefits of the plant far outweighed any scenic damage that may be done to the area. Conservationists are shocked and dismayed by this turn of events, especially considering the Rockefeller family’s long history of protecting the environment.

Norsen, Irene Ward. “Irene Ward Norsen Offers Fight Against Con Edison Project.” Letter.
The Evening News 18 Nov. 1964: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor offers advice to Con Edison on alternatives for power sources other than the proposed hydroelectric plant. The author provides excerpts of a letter she wrote to Chairman Forbes, and asks them to consider coal-burning generators as an alternative source to hydroelectric. She also states that she believes no hydroelectric plant will be built on her beautiful Hudson River.

“Only Paper Work Continuing as Con Ed Awaits Go Signal.” The Evening News 25 Jun. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison’s plans are only on paper at the moment, but crews at GE and on site are waiting for the go ahead signal from the FPC to begin construction on the plant.

“Palisades Park Chief Favors Con Ed Plan.” The Times Herald Record 15 May 1964: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the general manager of the Palisades Interstate Park Commission, A. K. Morgan, has said that it would be unreasonable to oppose the Con Ed project when they have done so much to compromise with conservationists.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Con Ed Defends Dam At Cornwall/ Surging Demand for Power Cited in Plan’s Defense.” New York Times 26 Dec. 1964: 23.

This article in the New York Times discusses Consolidated Edison’s reasons for wanting to build a hydroelectric plant on Storm King Mountain. The article describes the growing electricity demand, how the power plant would work, how it would be superior to their current power plants, and why the alternatives that have been suggested in place of the power plant will simply not meet the demand.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Con Ed-on-Hudson Hearings On/ Conflict Shaping Up Between State and U.S. on the Project.” New York Times 20 Nov. 1964: 39.

This article from the New York Times discusses the Pomeroy committee hearings that were held at Bear Mountain Inn. The hearings were debating whether a hydroelectric power plant should be built on Storm King Mountain. Both sides had representatives present, and the debates were very heated. The Pomeroy committee has no power over the F.P.C., so the most the hearings can do is bring to light evidence that the F.P.C. refused to listen to.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Con Ed’s Project On Hudson Fought/ But Utility Insists Highlands Program Is Necessary.” New York Times 26 Jul. 1964: 47.

In this article from the New York Times Mr. McCandlish compares the two sides of the Storm King controversy as engineers and poets. He briefly describes each side’s point of view in the case, and he gives a brief description of what the power plant will do. Although the author does present both sides of the case, the majority of the article discusses the worries of the conservationists, and how they feel the future will unfold if this power plant is allowed to be built.

Phillips, McCandlish. “River Buff Laments Desecration of Hudson’s Grandeur/ Ex-Park Official, 72, Decries ‘Industrial Cancer’ on Banks.” New York Times 15 Jun. 1964: 31.

In this article from the New York Times McCandlish Phillips interviews John J. Tamsen, a 72 year old passionate environmentalist who loves the Hudson River Valley. They visit several places along the river that have been taken over by industry and compare those eyesores to the beauty of the untouched Hudson River.

Poche, Ward. “Cornwall Project to Acquire Water Moves Ahead Rapidly, Board Learns.”
The Evening News 18 Feb. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports on the rapid progress made towards acquiring a supplementary water supply for the Village of Cornwall as reported to the Village Board members at their last meeting. According to the article, the FPC will hold a hearing on the Con Edison project on Feb. 25th. The article also mentions that the Village of Cornwall’s attorney reported the only opposition filed in Washington against the Con Edison project itself is from a conservation group and he could not recall the name of the organization.

Poche, Ward. “Dow Studies Con Edison Project.” The Evening News 13 Nov. 1964: 3B.

This Evening News article reports that Congressman-elect John G. Dow wants to complete a study of the proposed Con Edison hydroelectric project before stating his position on the case.

Poche, Ward. “First Phase of Cornwall Water Project Underway.” The Evening News
14 Nov.1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that construction has begun on the first phase of implementing the new Cornwall water system, beginning with laying the water mains connecting the current village water system and the Catskill Aqueduct.

Poche, Ward. “Proposed Water System Described; Public Hearing to Be Held Feb.
27.” The Evening News 10 Feb. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article describes the Hazen and Sawyer proposed water system as told by the Village of Cornwall attorney, Raymond Bradford, and also reports that there will be a public hearing held to discuss the plan.

Poche, Ward. “State Approves Cornwall Water Plan for Consolidated Edison Project.” The Evening News 8 May 1964: 11A.

This Evening News article reports that the State Water Resources Commission approved the plan for an alternate water supply for Cornwall to replace the Upper Reservoir that Con Edison will use for their hydroelectric plant.

“Pomeroy Asks FPC Delay.” The Evening News 1 Oct. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Assemblyman Watson Pomeroy asked the Federal Power Commission (FPC) to delay action on the proposal pending further investigation by the Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources, as he stated in a letter there has been growing concern in the area from local residents with regard to the plant and other possible projects.

“Pomeroy Hearing Due on Con Ed.” The Evening News 22 Oct. 1964: 13B.

This Evening News article reports that Assemblyman Pomeroy is arranging public hearings in early November on the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant, as he believes there is an increasing concern about the plant within the community.

“Preserving the Hudson Highlands.” New York Times 23 May 1964: 22.

This article in the New York Times announces that the FPC hearings have finished and the participants are now awaiting the answer. The remainder gives a very brief description of what the project is about, why Con Ed says it’s needed, and why conservationists want to block it. The paper also states that they believe the mountain should be protected for future generations.

“Proposed Mountainvillle Well Site Defended By Cornwall Engineers.” The Times
            Herald Record 25 Feb. 1964: 12.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Hazen and Sawyer has stated that the proposed well site in Mountainville will not affect existing wells in the area, and Cornwall lawyer Raymond Bradford has explained the “hold harmless” clause the village has with Con Edison.

“Protecting the Highlands.” New York Times 8 Sep. 1964: 28.

This article from the New York Times asks the question, should the F.P.C. consider scenic quality and values a determining factor in granting Consolidated Edison a license to build a pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain. According to the article, it is part of the F.P.C.’s job to preserve the beauty of the environment, and therefore it should be a determining factor.

“Protest Hearings Set.” New York Times 6 Nov. 1964: 28.

This article in the New York Times announces that Senator Pomeroy has decided that November 19th and 20th will be the dates that his hearings protesting the Consolidated Edison’s Storm King Mountain power plant and Central Hudson’s Breakneck Mountain power plant will be held.

“Putnam Towns Fighting New Con Ed Power Line/ Northern Westchester Also Combats Plan to Widen Route in Woodlands.” New York Times 27 Nov. 1964: 37.

This article from the New York Times discusses the outrage of towns and villages in Putnam county over the overhead transmission lines that Consolidated Edison is planning to build if the Federal Power Commission approves their pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain. If the plant, as well as the route for the overhead lines is approved the towns are prepared to bring the matter to court. They are demanding that the lines all be put underground, but Con Ed is saying that is impossible because it will make the price of the project soar to a ridiculous figure.

“Rep. Barry Proposes River Study.” The Evening News 1 Oct. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Congressman Barry has introduced a bill in Congress to establish the Hudson River Conservation and Preservation Committee, which would create a group to study and evaluate in order to maintain the scenic and historic value of the Hudson River.

Rothschild, L. O. “Scenic Hudson Chief Notes Con-Ed Peril.” Letter. The Evening News
6 Oct. 1964: 6A.

This Evening News editorial written by Leo Rothschild, president of Scenic Hudson, comments that should the hydroelectric plant be built, billions of gallons of Hudson River water will be dumped into a reservoir that is not lined and there is no assurance that the contaminated water will not seep into the ground water.

Russell, James. “FPC Says ‘No’ to Pomeroy Request to Delay Con Ed Case. ” The Evening News 20 Nov. 1964: 5A.

This Evening News article reports that Pomeroy’s request that the FPC delay its decision on the Con Edison hydroelectric plant until the Joint Legislative Committee has completed their investigation has been denied. However, Pomeroy has stated that he is still hopeful the FPC will accept his second request that the decision be postponed until May 10th, which will give the committee time to report to the state on their findings.

Russell, James. “Future of Hudson River Discussed.” The Evening News 19 Nov. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports on the Bear Mountain hearing held by the Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources that is meeting to further discuss the proposed Con Edison Hydroelectric plant. The article describes the main question of the hearings as who should have control of the Hudson River – the Federal Power Commission or New York State.

Russell, James. “Safety Standards Urges for Con Edison Project.” The Evening News
20 Nov. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports on the hearings held at Bear Mountain and discusses the testimony of a Scenic Hudson expert on hydroelectric plants who stated that there are no safety regulations in New York State for building a reservoir 1000 feet above a village.

Russell, Jim. “Con Ed Ruling Up to FPC, Keating Says in Newburgh.” The Evening News
7 Oct. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Senator Kenneth Keating has stated that he will not reveal whether or not he is in favor of the Con Edison hydroelectric plant and that he will leave the decision up to the FPC. Sen. Keating is running against Robert F. Kennedy for his seat in the senate.

Russell, Jim. “Many Shades of Opinion Expressed at Con Ed Hearings.” The Evening News
10 Dec. 1964: 6B.

This Evening News article discusses the controversy surrounding the Con Edison proposed hydroelectric plant and includes many direct quotes from residents, officials, Con Edison attorneys, village attorneys, and politicians stating their views and opinions on the case. The article includes opinions and views from all aspects of the case.

“Save Storm King.” Letters. The Herald Tribune 10 May 1964: 22.

These Herald Tribune letters to the editor are in response to the series of articles written by William Wing, and all write that they believe the Hudson River is too beautiful to destroy and urge people to speak out in favor of the environment

“Saving the Hudson Highlands.” New York Times 17 Nov. 1964: 40.

This article in the New York Times discusses the last attempt the conservationists have at stopping the Federal Power Commission from issuing a license for the Storm King Mountain pumped storage plant. There will be hearings held at Bear Mountain, but hope is slim seeing as the F.P.C. has not only expressed approval for the plant but has recommended to Consolidated Edison that they could build an even bigger plant and increase the potential of the plant by fifty percent.

“Savings Noted by Con Ed.” The Evening News 6 May 1964: 1B. 

This Evening News article reports on how Con Edison reports that the hydroelectric plant will save money for Con Ed in operating and building costs over the long run.

Scanzano, Madeline. “Mrs. Scanzano Says Con Edison Project Necessary.” Letter. The Evening News 13 May 1964: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor clearly supports the Con Edison hydroelectric plant and describes it as necessary for dealing with unemployment in the area and that it will allow Cornwall to grow in the future. The author believes that while scenic beauty is nice, it does not put food on the table and support a family. She also predicts that power lines will become as natural to the landscape as TV antennas and utility poles have become.

“Scenic Preservation Group to Oppose Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record
24 Feb. 1964: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Leo Rothschild and Carl Carmer of Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference have hired Dale Doty to represent the organization in Washington at the FPC hearings. The article includes quotes from a letter written by Carmer and Rothschild that was sent to the New York Times.

Shanahan Eileen. “Con Ed Is Upheld On Hudson Plant/ Power Commission Official Sees No Scenic Damage to Cornwall Region/ Conservationists Lose/ Examiner Backs Contention That Project Is Consistent With Values of Valley.” New York Times 1 Aug. 1964: 23.

This article in the New York Times announces that Edward B. Marsh, an examiner for the Federal Power Commission has approved construction of the largest hydroelectric power plant in the world to be built on Storm King Mountain. The examiner feels that the scenic damage to the area will be minimal, and the increased recreational values of the new park, and the cleaned up shoreline would more than make up for the slight scenic damage. The final decision, however, has to be made by the Federal Power Commission.

Sibley, John. “Waterborne Pickets Protest Hydroelectric Project That Might Mar the Beauty of the Hudson River Valley/ Armada of Foes Invades Site Of Con Ed Project on Hudson/ Beachhead Established and Sign Planted Before Fleet Retires Downstream.” New York Times 7 Sep. 1964: 21.

This article from the New York Times talks about a flotilla of boats that sailed up the Hudson to Storm King Mountain in protest of the pumped storage plant that Consolidated Edison is planning to build there. Fifty boats were in the procession, and they were led by the 79 foot flagship of the New York Yacht Club, the Westerly. When they reached Storm King Mountain, three teenagers, dressed in period colonial uniforms rowed to shore and planted a sign that read “Dig You Must Not.”

Siegler, Pauline. “Mrs. Siegler Says Con Edison Distorted Portrayal of Damage.” Letter. The Evening News 4 Dec. 1964: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor discusses some discrepancies with Con Edison’s representations of what the proposed hydroelectric plant will look like in relation to the scenery. Mrs. Siegler points out in her letter that Con Edison took artistic liberty with their models and showed the size of the plant installation to be one third to one half the size of the actual size as compared to the surrounding topographical features.

Simmons, R. J. “Steel Towers Held No Defect in Hudson Valley’s Beauty.” Letter. The Evening News 11 Apr. 1964: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor comes from a Newburgh homeowner who calls himself a nature lover but does not see anything wrong with having towers for power lines and does not believe they would do anything to hurt the natural beauty of the Hudson.

“Slow Decision Needed.” New York Times 20 Mar. 1964 : 32.

This article in the New York Times gives a very brief explanation of the objections against the Storm King power plant. It is reported that Con Ed has asked the Federal Power Commission for a quick decision in approving the license, however the author of the article believes that a slow decision is needed so the F.P.C. can completely weigh the consequences of what this plant will do to the scenic beauty of the region.

Smith, Gene. “Con Ed Envisions A Shift In Power/ By 1968 One-Third of its Output May Be Coming From Hydro Sources/ Canadian Plan Is Cited/ Advances for Technology Make the Change in Plans Possible.” New York Times 12 Jan. 1964 : F1.

This article in the New York Times discusses the shift to hydroelectric power that Consolidated Edison was going to be making in the future. Two of the big projects mentioned were a hydro-electric plant in Canada and the Storm King Mountain power plant. The article deals strictly with the technical benefits of hydro-electric power and why Con Ed is choosing to have plants in Cornwall and Canada .

“Stillman Feels Con Edison to Benefit Area.” The Evening News 17 Jun. 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that John S. Stillman, of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce believes that the Con Edison project would be a benefit to the area, and he does not understand why conservationists are opposing the plan when they did not oppose the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge.

“Stillman Opposes Con Ed Project.” The Evening News 19 Mar. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article relays opposition from Calvin Stillman, son of Dr. Ernest Stillman, who feels the land his father donated to the village should be preserved for its natural beauty and not taken over by Con Edison.

“Supervisors Back Con Ed Project.” The Evening News 9 May 1964: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the Orange County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution that urged the FPC to support Con Edison and their plans to build the hydroelectric plant.

“The Future of the Hudson Valley.” New York Times 23 Nov. 1964: 36.

This article from the New York Times discusses the need to form a state agency whose main objective is to protect the beauty of the Hudson Highlands. Such an agency would be more apt to get the attention of federal agencies such as the Federal Power Commission rather than local conservation societies.

“The Governor’s Responsibility.” New York Times 4 Dec. 1964: 38.

This article in the New York Times mentions how Governor Rockefeller has remained silent for the entire length of the Storm King Mountain power plant controversy. Senator Pomeroy is calling upon the Governor to delay the Federal Power Commission’s ruling on the case until the new evidence that was discovered at his hearings has been further looked into. The senator, and the New York Times, believes that it is the Governor’s responsibility to speak on behalf of New York State in front of the F.P.C.

“Town of Cornwall Clears Way for Con Edison Construction.” The Times Herald Record 17 Nov. 1964: 4.

This Times Herald Record reports that the Town of Cornwall Board has approved a zoning amendment that provides for construction of public utility structures, and the Village of Cornwall has begun construction on the water transmission system.

“Town of Cornwall Water Plan Opposed.” The Evening News 22 Dec. 1964: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that residents of the Town of Cornwall are opposed to the new water plan because they fear it will prove to be inadequate and unreliable to fulfill the town’s water needs.

Townsend, Herbert F. “Opposition to Con Edison Job Feared as Socialist Movement.” Letter.
The Evening News 8 Oct. 1964: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor questions whether the Con Edison hydroelectric plant is another attempt to construct a non taxable government-owned power project.

“Transmission Cost Figures Reported.” The Evening News 6 May 1964: 12D.

This Evening News article gives the costs and figures of the hydroelectric plant presented at the FPC hearing.

“Two Congressmen Object to Con Ed Project Plans.” The Times Herald Record 5 May 1964: 16.

This Times Herald Record article describes the opposition to the Con Edison hydroelectric plant from Congressman Robert R Barry from Westchester and his opponent Richard L. Ottinger’s. Barry was allowed into the FPC hearings and stated the residents of Westchester have justification to demand the power lines be placed underground. Ottinger was not allowed into the hearings but stated that Con Edison only wants a fast decision so to avoid answering the questions that would be asked when the public reviewed the project.

“U.S. Urged To Block Con Ed Power Plant.” New York Times 9 Oct. 1964: 36.

This article in the New York Times briefly mentions that several different parties are trying to get the Federal Power Commission to not approve a license for Consolidated Edison’s pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain. Despite these pleas, the commission examiner is recommending that the plant be licensed. The article contains several quotes from Dale E. Doty, the attorney for Scenic Hudson, speaking against the Storm King plant.

“Watch on the Hudson .” New York Times 3 Apr. 1964 : 32.

This article in the New York Times reports that despite the fact that Con Ed wanted a quick decision in licensing the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain the F.P.C has decided that they will hold hearings on the matter and get a complete report before they make their decision.

“Water Vote Wins at Cornwall, 499-25.” The Evening News 18 Mar. 1964: 1.

This Evening News article reports the overwhelming support for the Village to authorize a contract with New York City for tapping into the Catskill Aqueduct.

Weaver Jr., Warren. “Con Edison Eases Plans For Hudson/ Offers to Put 1.7 Miles of Lines Underground Near Plant at Storm King.” New York Times 5 May 1964: 45.

            This article in the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison has agreed to place the first 1.7 miles of transmission lines underground, adding $8.1 million dollars to the project. This will still leave 23.5 miles of transmission lines above ground, however Con Ed has said that they will abandon the project rather than place all the lines underground.

Whalen, George. “Where Was Scenic Protest Earlier?” Letter. The Evening News
12 May 1964: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor was sent to Dale Doty, counsel for Scenic Hudson.  The author wishes to know where Scenic Hudson was when a ski slope was carved into Mt. Beacon, since Scenic Hudson is putting up such a fight about a power plant that will go at the bottom of Storm King Mountain.

Wing, William G. “The Conservationists’ Storm over Storm King.” The Herald Tribune
4 May 1964: 2.

This Herald Tribune article is the second part in a four part series and explains how the hydroelectric pumped storage plant would work and why people are so opposed to the concept when it is so practical for Con Edison. It also discussed the reason why this issue did not instantly turn into a nature-vs.-power struggle from its onset. Laurence Rockefeller and William H. Osborn of the Hudson River Conservation Society negotiated with Con Edison and agreed to approve of the project if Con Ed made some concessions, which they did.

Wing, William G. “Con Ed Victory Near, Hudson Fight Goes On.” The Herald Tribune 13 Dec. 1964: 45.

This Herald Tribune article reports that Assemblyman Pomeroy has asked Gov. Rockefeller to delay the FPC decision because Pomeroy would like to make a recommendation based on the testimony he heard at the Bear Mountain Hearings.  Pomeroy was rejected by the Governor who said the values of the project outweigh any threat to the scenery.

Wing, William G.  “Hudson River: Rhine or Ruin? Scenery Vs. Power Projects.” The Herald Tribune 3 May 1964: 26.

This Herald Tribune article is the first in a four part series and describes the battle between power and scenery in the Hudson River Valley and describes some of the opponent’s arguments for the beauty of the Hudson River.

Wing, William G. “It All Began With a Sound like Cannons.” The Herald Tribune 5 May 1964: 13.

This Herald Tribune article is the third part in a four part series and describes the history of those who have challenged the beauty of the Palisades along the Hudson River and discusses the formation of the Palisades Interstate Park Commission and its impact up to the present.

Wing, William G. “A Way to Use without Abusing the Hudson.” The Herald Tribune 6 May 1964: 12.

This Herald Tribune article is the final article of a four part series and discusses what should be done to preserve the scenic beauty of the Hudson River valley, as it is a valuable asset to New York state. The article questions how the future of an irreplaceable asset should be left up to five men in Washington (the FPC) who are not required by law to consider the scenery.

“WRC Hearing Today on Cornwall Project.” The Times Herald Record 27 Feb. 1964: 15.

This Times Herald Record article discusses the Water Resources Commission hearing in the Village of Cornwall and includes a list of points from opposition to parts of the proposed alternate water plan.

1965

“Ailing Witness Delays Cornwall Water Hearing.” The Evening News 12 Jan. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the “star” witness for the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association, a ground water engineering expert, fell ill and was unable to attend the Water Resources Commission hearing for the Town of Cornwall’s application for forming a water district, and the hearing was adjourned until the witness is able to appear.

“Albany OKs Cornwall’s Water District Request.” The Times Herald Record 5 Mar. 1965: 9.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Water Resource Commission granted permission to the Town of Cornwall to create their own water district so they can tap into the Catskill Aqueduct.

“Appeals Court to Rule on Con Ed Power Project.” The Times Herald Record 9 Oct. 1965: 7.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the U.S. Court of Appeals reserved decision on a move by conservationists to reverse the license granted to Con Edison by the FPC.

Atkinson, Brooks. “Critic at Large/ The F.P.C. Action on Storm King Mountain Disregards Strong Public Opinion.” New York Times 19 Mar. 1965: 32.

In this article from the New York Times the author expresses his opinion that by licensing the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain the Federal Power Commission is showing that it has no regard for public opinion. The author claims that no one wants the power plant to be built, except those who believe they will benefit from it. The author also feels that this example is a wake-up call to the country that they have to start protecting and preserving the Hudson River, which they have neglected and abused for so long.

“Bad Day for Beauty.” Editorial. The Herald Tribune 10 Mar. 1965: 28.

This Herald Tribune editorial remarks that it disagrees with the decision made by the FPC and feels Storm King Mountain will never be the same when the plant is in operation. The editors urge the opposition to keep up the fight and prevent Con Ed from building the plant that would destroy the beauty of the Hudson Highlands.

Bell, Mary Harris. “Water Shortage Cited in Con Ed Case.” Letter. The Evening News
10 May 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that the water shortage is exactly why the people of Cornwall disapprove selling their largest reservoir to Con Edison.

Bell, Raymond. “Hog Wash to Say Pump Station Could Have Foiled Blackout.” Letter.
The Evening News 22 Nov. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that the Cornwall station would not have even been online to use for the blackout, and that what Con Edison needs are gas turbines in New York City which would supply a reliable power reserve as required.

Bell, Raymond E. “Bell Hails Value of Reservoir Even If for Only Two Minutes.” Letter.
The Evening News 11 May 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that even if the Upper Reservoir is only needed for two months or two days out of the year, it’s still needed and always will be by future generations.

Bell, Raymond E. “Bell Predicts Con Edison Will Control Local Politics.” Letter.
The Evening News 11 Dec. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that Con Edison intends to take control of local politicians through generous gifts and is brainwashing the public with its increased propaganda with justifications for their hydroelectric plant.

Bell, Raymond R. “Con Edison Project Can Grind to a Screeching Halt: Bell.” Letter.
The Evening News 27 Dec. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that Con Edison has still not answered the questions who the 1,000 will be and where will they come from, and the project has come to a halt because Con Ed is scared and has a bad image since the blackout.

Bigart, Homer. “Governor Scored On Scenic Hudson/ Witnesses at Hearing Say He Resists U.S. Role.” New York Times 30 Jul. 1965: 26.

This article in the New York Times relates how Governor Rockefeller was heavily criticized for being against federal involvement in the Hudson River. Conservationists believe that nothing can be done to protect the Hudson River without the Federal Government’s help. They also criticized the Governor’s Hudson River Expressway that he is attempting to have built. The highway will stretch for 50 miles along the east shore of the Hudson River.

“Bill Unlikely to Stay Decision on Con Ed.” The Evening News 20 Jan. 1965: 11B.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC is unlikely to delay their decision until Congress has decided on the bill introduced into the House of Representatives by Richard Ottinger, since the FPC does not make its decisions on pending legislation, only on existing laws.

“Biologist Urges Fish Study Before Power Project Starts.” The Times Herald Record
8 May 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that marine biologist Charles Walburg stated that the Con Edison project presents “many possible complications” as the plant is located right by striped bass spawning grounds and their eggs are likely to be destroyed.

Blair, William M. “U.S. Hudson Plant ‘Not Ruled Out’/ President Has Not Barred Federal Action on River, Spokesmen Explain.” New York Times 10 Feb. 1965: 43.

This article in the New York Times announces that President Johnson is not opposing the proposed Hudson Highlands National Scenic Riverway, and intends to try to pass it. On the other hand, the Governor is not planning on backing down from opposing the formation of the agency. Complicating the matter further is possible construction of the Storm King Mountain power plant. It is expected that the Federal Power Commission will soon rule on whether the plant will be constructed or not.

Bloom, Helen. “NYC to Tap Con Ed’s Cornwall Reservoir.” The Times Herald Record
13 Dec. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the NYC Mayor has reached an agreement with Con Edison that during off peak demands the city would be able to tap into the reservoir and use the water to supplement their water supply.

Brener, Daniel A. “Bury the Power Lines.” Letter. The Herald Tribune 6 Mar. 1965: 12.

This Herald Tribune letter to the editor writes that power companies should be required by the Federal Power Commission to bury the power lines and stop desecrating the landscapes and therefore lowering property values.

Budelman, Richard J. “Con Ed Fish Protection Plan Seen Inadequate.” The Times Herald Record 5 May 1965: 3.

This Times Herald Record article reports that a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist testified that the fish screening devices designed for Con Ed’s hydroelectric plant are “insufficient and inadequate” because the location of the plant is right in the spawning grounds of striped bass and a large percentage of fish eggs could be killed.

Budelman, Richard J. “Con Ed Foes Condemn FPC, Vow to Renew Fight.” The Times Herald Record 10 Mar. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that opponents of Con Edison, such as the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, intend to bring the case to the Circuit Court of Appeals if petitions for a rehearing are denied by the FPC. The article also comments on some of the reactions of conservationists and opponents to the FPC decision.

Budelman, Richard J. “Con Ed Foes Plan Court Action Today.” The Times Herald Record
6 Apr. 1965: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Agency has announced that it will bring court action in order to prevent the transfer of the Upper Reservoir to Con Edison.

Budelman, Richard J. “Con Ed Opponents Set to Begin Action.” The Times Herald Record
5 Apr. 1965: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that opponents of Con Edison’s hydroelectric plant are planning to take legal action to stop construction of the plant and reverse the FPC decision to grant Con Edison a license. One source of opposition comes from the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association who is determined to stop the Village from turning over the Upper Reservoir to Con Edison.

Budelman, Richard J. “Con Edison Opponents to File Second Court Action in Albany.” The Times Herald Record 26 Apr. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Agency will bring an appeal filed with the state Water Resources Commission (WRC) to the Supreme Court in Albany County.

Budelman, Richard J. “Conservationists: Con Ed Plots to Get Even.” The Times Herald Record
8 May 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that conservationists believe Con Edison is proposing a new transmission route that would have the power lines run right through conservationists’ properties in Westchester County, to which a Con Edison representative denied.

Budelman, Richard J. “Conservationists Hits Bid to Slow Federal Law.” The Times Herald Record 17 Apr. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record reports that Leo Rothschild of Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has stated that although help from Laurence Rockefeller and New York State is welcome, it is not nearly enough to stop Con Edison’s hydroelectric plant.

Budelman, Richard J. “Cornwall Board Told Upper Reservoir Little Used.” The Times Herald Record 20 Apr. 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Cornwall water superintendent stated that the village consistently used Aleck Meadow for its water supply and the Upper Reservoir had not been used since last July.

Budelman, Richard J. “Cornwall Group Pledges to Fight Con Edison Plan.” The Times Herald Record 11 Mar. 1965: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association has pledged a court fight to prevent the Village of Cornwall from releasing its Upper Reservoir to Con Edison for their Storm King power project, and that their announcement of their fight is coincidental to the FPC’s announcement of their decision.

Budelman, Richard J. “Dow Pledges Support to Hudson Riverway Bills.” The Times Herald Record 15 Mar. 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Rep. John Dow has stated that he would support legislation to create a Hudson Highlands National Scenic Riverway but only if the Con Edison project is not blocked in the process.

Budelman, Richard J. “Dow Says Scenic Hudson Bill Could Be Unconstitutional.” The Times Herald Record 30 Apr. 1965: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Senator John Dow has questioned that if the federal government created a National Scenic Hudson Riverway in New York, is the federal government allowed to exert control over natural resources in areas that are heavily settled.

Budelman, Richard J. “FPC Unlikely to Delay Con Edison Decision.” The Times Herald Record 20 Jan. 1965: 52.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC is unlikely to delay their decision on the Con Ed project because of pending legislation and discusses the bill introduced by Richard Ottinger.

Budelman, Richard J. “Legislative Unit Seeks Con Ed Decision Delay.” The Times Herald Record 18 Feb. 1965: 11.

This Times Herald Record reports that the New York Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources asked the FPC to delay its decision on the Con Edison hydroelectric plant on the grounds that there are alternative methods of providing power to New York City that should be looked into before approving the Cornwall project.

Budelman, Richard J. “Power Line Bills Could Block Con Ed Route from Cornwall.” The Times Herald Record 25 Mar. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports and discusses two new bills introduced into the New York legislature by New York City Democrats that may require Con Edison to place all transmission cables to be buried underground.

Budelman, Richard J. “Senators Oppose Last Stand by Con Ed Foes.” The Times Herald Record 5 Feb. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record reports that some state legislators are against the federal legislation that would block the Con Ed project because they would rather push through legislation that would only block future projects that have potential of marring the scenic qualities of the river.

Budelman, Richard J. “State Hudson Control Bill Favored By Ottinger.” The Times Herald Record 4 Feb. 1965: 10.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Congressman Richard Ottinger has given his support to the bill introduced into the state legislature by State Sen. Watson Pomeroy and Fred W. Eggert that would create a Lower Hudson Valley Heritage Commission to help preserve the natural beauty of the Hudson Valley, promote industry, establish parklands, and have ruling commissions. This bill closely relates to a bill Ottinger introduced into Congress.

Budelman, Richard J. “State Says It Can Force Con Ed to Protect Fish.” The Times Herald Record 27 Apr. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that a State Conservation Department official stated that it has the power to require Con Edison to have and alter protective fish devices if there seems to be a need. The article also discusses the article published in Sports Illustrated by Robert Boyle that described the fish kills at Indian Point.

Budelman, Richard J. “State Unit Outlines Conflict on Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record 23 Feb. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article discusses the report released from the New York Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources that officially went on record as being opposed to the Con Edison hydroelectric plant.  According to the article there are eleven areas outlined in the report and numerous questions that need to be addressed before the committee can approve the project.

“Cameron Outlines Benefits of Con Ed.” The Evening News 22 Mar. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article describes the benefits Cornwall Supervisor Gordon Cameron believes the Con Ed project will bring to the area, such as tax benefits and the waterfront park.

“Commission Gets Appeal to Block Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record 1 Apr. 1965: 46.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has asked the newly formed River Commission to do its own independent research on the Con Edison hydroelectric plant.

“Con Ed & Conservation.” Editorial. The Times Herald Record 8 Mar. 1965: 34.

This Times Herald Record editorial remarks that the major point of controversy surrounding the Con Edison hydroelectric plant is the issue of transmission routes.  The editors suggested the utility should pass the cost of burying them underground to customers or let the public as a whole underwrite it, and they report that Richard Ottinger is planning to create a bill that follows their suggestion.

“Con Ed Accused of Using Blackout for Politics.” The Times Herald Record 12 Nov. 1965: 12.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has accused Con Ed of trying to create the impression that the blackout would not have happened if Con Ed had the hydroelectric plant at Storm King Mountain.

“Con Ed Aide Quizzed on Plan.” The Evening News 15 Dec. 1965: 12C.

This Evening News article reports that public relations staff member George Delaney answered questions about Con Edison’s plant, dealing with the possibility the plant could pollute the surrounding fresh water sources. Many of the questions came from the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association.

“Con Ed Applies for Cable to Cross Hudson Bottom.” The Times Herald Record 26 May 1965: 69.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison made public its application to install a pipe-type electrical cable in the Hudson River between Cornwall and Phillipstown in Putnam County.

“Con Ed Denies Land Grab Plans.” The Times Herald Record 6 May 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison executive Mowton L. Waring denied the hydroelectric plant is just the first step in a land grab for additional power lines.

“Con Ed Experts Say Hudson Wouldn’t Yield Saline Water.” New York Times 21 Dec. 1965: 34.

This article from the New York Times reports that engineers from Consolidated Edison are claiming that the Hudson River can produce drinkable water. Conservationists have been saying that the water will be totally saline and therefore undrinkable. Con Ed engineers, however, report that in late winter and spring the Hudson is flowing from upstream, which results in an abundance of fresh water, and that is when the city would be tapping the reservoir for additional water.

“Con Ed Faces Action in Court.” The Evening News 6 Apr. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association has begun court action to have the Upper Reservoir returned to the Village of Cornwall until all state mandated specifications have been met.

“Con Ed Foes Plan Appeal.” The Times Herald Record 18 May 1965: 9.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Dale Doty, counsel for Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, has stated that they will file an appeal with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals but not until the deadline is near.

“Con Ed Gets Report on Salinity of River.” The Evening News 22 Dec. 1965: 13B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison made public a report done by a water resources engineers firm that stated water taken from the river during the late winter and spring is fresh enough to use for potable drinking water.

“Con Ed Hearing Concluded.” The Evening News 22 May 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC hearings on transmission lines and protective devices for fish have been adjourned and the FPC commissioner must review the testimony and make a decision.

“Con Ed Hearing Transfer Sought.” The Evening News 29 Apr. 1965: 7B.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson has requested the FPC hearings be transferred to New York City after Con Ed has made its statements to make it easier for witnesses who wouldn’t have to travel as far to New York.

“Con Ed Hudson Plan Stirs New Dissent.” New York Times 23 Feb. 1965: 33.

This article in the New York Times reconfirms that the Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources is against the Storm King hydroelectric power plant in Cornwall, New York.

“Con Ed Job Held Threat to Fish.” The Evening News 5 Jan. 1965: 7B.

This Evening News article reports that the Cortlandt Conservation Society has filed a petition to reopen the hearings filed with the Federal Power Commission (FPC) on the grounds that the testimony from Dr. Alfred Perlmutter, Con Edison’s witness on fisheries in the Hudson, was incorrect.  The petition offered testimony from two New York State marine biologists who stated the striped bass eggs are held buoyant and are carried by the currents and states that it believes the Con Edison hydroelectric plant will destroy shad and striped bass industries.

“Con Ed Official Denies Hushing Up Fish Kills.” The Times Herald Record 11 May 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Richard Ottinger has stated that officials were pressured into covering up the fish kills at Indian Point, which was denied by a Con Edison representative.

“Con Ed Park to Beautify Waterfront at Cornwall.” The Evening News 15 Mar. 1965: 2B.

This Evening News article discusses the Con Edison plans to build a waterfront park using the landfill debris from Storm King Mountain. The park would clean up the riverfront and possibly have rock breakwater for the Cornwall Yacht Club.

“Con Ed Plant at Cornwall May Help NYC on Water.” The Evening News 11 Dec. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that New York City is making tentative plans to use Hudson River water as an alternate source of water during the first four months of the year in order to supplement that which comes from the Catskill Aqueduct.

“Con Ed Project to Employ 1,000.” The Evening News 8 Dec. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison stated they intend to use 1,000 men for the construction of their hydroelectric plant, and did not give a date when construction was to begin.

“Con Ed Proposes Storm King Barrier To Safeguard Fish.” New York Times 5 May 1965: 49.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Vice President of Consolidated Edison believes the wire mesh screen originally planned will be sufficient to protect the fish, however if the Federal Power Commission rules that it is not, they are prepared to build another barrier, which will cost them 1.5 million dollars.

“Con Ed River Plan Scored In Albany/ Legislative Group Supports Protest on Storm King.” New York Times 18 Feb. 1965: 33.

This article in the New York Times confirms that the bipartisan committee of the State Legislature, known as the Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources, has officially stated that they are opposed to the power plant that Consolidated Edison wants to build on Storm King Mountain.

“Con Ed Statement Challenged.” The Evening News 12 Nov. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson pointed out that testimony from Alexander Lurkis at the Bear Mountain hearings was right on in that a hydroelectric plant is not as efficient as a gas turbine plant would be in a situation such as the massive blackout.

“Con Ed to Pay for Fish Study.” The Times Herald Record 2 Apr. 1965: 9.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has agreed to finance a three year study of the Hudson River fish life in connection to its hydroelectric plant.

“Con Ed Will Build 2d Nuclear Plant.” New York Times 24 Nov. 1965: 48.

This article from the New York Times reveals that Consolidated Edison is making plans to build another nuclear power plant at Indian Point. The chairman of the board of directors for Con Ed commented in an interview that the delays in construction of the proposed hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain was making it necessary to build other power stations to meet New York City’s growing need for electricity.

“Con Ed Won’t Mar Hudson, Says Rocky.” The Times Herald Record 13 Jan. 1965: 3.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Gov. Rockefeller has stated after a boat trip up the Hudson River that he does not believe the Con Edison plant will mar Storm King Mountain.

“Con Edison & Conservation.” Editorial. The Times Herald Record 8 Mar. 1965: 34.

This Times Herald Record editorial believes that if the FPC were to require utilities to place their power lines underground and in return provide incentives for the utilities to comply, then it would help resolve some of the public issues surrounding the Con Edison proposal.

“Con Edison Aide Supports Plan.” The Times Herald Record 2 Mar. 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the public information director poke on behalf of the Cornwall project at a meeting of the Lions Club. The article also discusses the FPC and their likely decision on the Con Edison application.

“Con Edison Case Due in Court.” The Evening News 31 Aug. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the Second Court of Appeals in New York has set a hearing date for Oct. 8th for argument and reconsideration of the license granted to Con Edison by the FPC.

“Con Edison Could Follow RR Tracks, Says Putnam Aide.” The Evening News 15 May 1965: 8B.

This Evening News article reports that the New York Railroad would grant permission to Con Ed to string transmission lines along the railroad, but that they would prefer they follow the Catskill Aqueduct.

“Con Edison Excavation Reviewed.” The Evening News 6 Jan. 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that the Cornwall Planning Board reviewed site plans for earth excavation at Jones farm and no decision was made as they are awaiting more information from the Jones Farm Corp. Con Edison noted that they would not begin construction until they had FPC approval. 

“Con Edison Hearing Under Way.” The Evening News 4 May 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports the FPC hearing has begun in Washington and outlines the facts of the case thus far.

“Con Edison Hearings See Turning into Slugging Match.” The Evening News 10 May 1965: 7A.

This Evening News article reports that there is an ongoing battle between Con Edison and those towns who are in the path of one or more of the five potential transmission routes.

“Con Edison Land Offer Rejected.” The Evening News 14 May 1965: 6A.

This Evening News article reports that the Taconic State Park Commission has refused the land Con Edison offered in exchange for stringing transmission lines across park lands, and the commission agreed to conditionally string lines across the western tip of park lands.

“Con Edison Opponents Map Strategy.” The Times Herald Record; 11 Mar. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference met to decide what legal course of action they would be taking.  Alexander Saunders, vice-chairman of Scenic Hudson, stated they would wait while their legal counsel in Washington reviewed the FPC decision and made their recommendation.

“Con Edison’s Round.” Editorial. The Times Herald Record 11 Mar. 1965: 48.

This Times Herald Record article remarks that although conservationists have lost this battle with Con Ed, they have raised public and government awareness that the FPC does not adequately consider preservation of natural resources and may have set the ball in motion to win future battles against industry.

Connolly, Vincent J. “Con Ed Aide Lists Target Date on Project.” The Evening News
23 Jul. 1965: 8B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Ed representative George Delaney stated that construction on the project could possibly begin sometime in the next year, and the article discusses Delaney’s belief the project will benefit the area.

Connolly, Vincent J. “Cornwall Gets Water Plan Okay.” The Evening News 5 Mar. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the Town of Cornwall has gotten approval from the State Water Resources Commission to form their own water district and the town will be able to tap the Catskill Aqueduct as a water source.

“Conservationists Blast FPC’s Con Ed Decision.” The Times Herald Record 7 May 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that conservationists blame the FPC for not reopening hearings and that they plan to take the case to the US Court of Appeals.  The conservationists describe the FPC decision as a lack of disregard for the will of the people and for local and state authorities.

“Conservationists Carry Con Ed Fight into Court.” The Evening News 17 Jul. 1965: 2A.

This Evening News article discusses the oppositions fight to prevent Con Edison from building their hydroelectric plant, such as Scenic Hudson’s appeal to the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Conservationists May Bring NYC, State Agency Into Con Ed Battle.” The Times Herald Record
4 May 1965: 61.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association is hoping to call New York City’s water commissioner to testify, since they believe he can deny Cornwall the right to tap the Catskill Aqueduct.

“Conservationists Raps Con Ed.” The Times Herald Record 15 Mar. 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Leo Rothschild, president of Scenic Hudson, has accused Con Edison of using biased and misleading information to gain support for its Cornwall project.

“Cornwall Action Due in Court.” The Evening News 24 Apr. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association will have to show proof why it believes the Upper Reservoir should not be transferred to Con Edison based on the terms of the Water Resources Commission.

“Cornwall: Feud on a Mountain.” The New York World-Telegram 11 Feb. 1965: 25.

This World-Telegram article describes the division of the people in Cornwall over the proposed Con Edison hydroelectric plant. The article refers to those opposed to the plant as “Mountain Folk” – meaning those who have money and are established families. Those in favor of the plant belong to the working class and are referred to as the “Villagers.” The article comments that the plant proposal has already hurt the community by dividing it, and no matter what happens one side will be left unhappy and resentful.

“Cornwall Group to Fight Project.” The Evening News 11 Mar. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association is planning a Supreme Court action in order to prevent any additional transfer of land from the Village to Con Edison until all conditions of the Water Resources Council are met.

“Cornwall Prepared to Answer in Court.” The Evening News 12 Mar. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the Village of Cornwall will be prepared to answer the questions brought up by the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Association at court dealing with the transfer of land to Con Edison.

“Cornwall Project Nears Completion.” The Evening News 19 Jan. 1965: 12A.

This Evening News article reports that only 5,000 feet of pipe remains to be laid as part of the Village of Cornwall’s new water transmission system and discusses the disappointment of a Cornwall resident when the Village of Cornwall sold the land she had given to the village to Con Ed.

“Cornwall Taxpayers Association Seeks Delay on Con Edison Plan.” The Times Herald Record 23 Feb. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Association is seeking a delay on the Town of Cornwall’s application for becoming its own water district on the grounds that testimony was not heard at the January hearings.

“Cornwall Water Plans Advance.” The Evening News 21 Jan. 1965: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that as part of an alternate water supply for the Village of Cornwall, the tap of the New York Aqueduct will involve a cut into an existing aqueduct blow off valve.

“Cornwall Water Case Adjourned.” The Evening News 26 Apr. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports and discusses the legal action of the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association that was adjourned and the arguments of the case.

“Cornwall Water Project 700 Feet from Completion.” The Times Herald Record 16 Mar. 1965: 11.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the water distribution project for the Village of Cornwall is nearing completion as there is only 700 more feet of pipeline left to be laid.

“Court Asked to Dismiss Complaints against Con Ed’s Cornwall Project.” The Times Herald Record 2 Jun. 1965: 61.

This Times Herald Record article reports that attorneys for the State Water Resources Commission, Con Edison, and the Town and Village of Cornwall appeared in Supreme Court to ask that complaints against Con Edison’s proposed project be dismissed. The complaints mainly come from the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association.

“Court Bars Con Ed’s Storm King Project.” The Evening News 30 Dec. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the U.S. Court of Appeals has ruled to set aside the FPC’s license to Con Edison and ordered the FPC to hold new hearings and consider all the issues, such as alternate sources of power and conservation.

“’Coverup’ Denied on Fish Kills.” The Evening News 20 May 1965: 12B.

This Evening News article reports that a representative of the New York State Conservation Commission has denied any cover up of fish kills at Indian Point by Con Edison and the commission and stated the problem was “about eliminated now.”

“Decision Disappoints Legislators.” The Times Herald Record 10 Mar. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports on the reactions of three prominent legislatures who have fought to block Con Edison’s Storm King power plant. Richard Ottinger, Jonathan Bingham, and Watson Pomeroy all agree that the decision should not have been made as there are still issues that need to be addressed with the plant.

“Dissenting FPC Commissioner Protests Con Ed Power Line Plan.” The Times Herald Record 11 Mar. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article describes the arguments dissenting FPC Commissioner Charles Ross had against approving Con Edison’s license.

“Dr. Donahue Discounts Reservoir.” The Evening News 21 Apr. 1965: 4A.

This Evening News article reports that Cornwall Mayor Donahue has stated the Upper Reservoir that Con Edison will use for its power plant is not vital to Cornwall’s water supply. The transfer of the reservoir is currently being opposed by the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association.

Dwyer, Thomas. “Con Edison Project Held Benefit to Community with Few Risks.” Letter.
The Evening News 12 Mar. 1965: 8A.

This Evening News letter to the editor describes the benefits the Con Edison hydroelectric plant will have to the community, including removing land from Storm King which children could study, and the vast amount of construction workers needed to help build the plant.

“Editor Defends Story.” The Evening News 11 Mar. 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that the editor of the New York World Telegram has taken exception to a letter from Mayor Donahue of Cornwall and stated that he has full confidence that their article entitled “Cornwall: Feud on the Mountain”  was reported accurately by their reporter.

“FPC Approves Con Edison Project.” The Evening News 9 Mar. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the Federal Power Commission (FPC) has approved Con Edison’s application to build the hydroelectric plant at Cornwall and granted them a 50-year license. The commission commented that had Storm King already been declared a national park they would have probably listened and denied the license. Hearings are scheduled for May 4th on the route of overhead transmission lines connecting the project to Con Ed’s main system.

“FPC Con Ed Hearings Continue.” The Times Herald Record 4 May 1965: 61.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC hearings have begun again to discuss fish protective devices and transmission routes for the Con Ed hydroelectric plant.

“FPC Held Breaching Law in Con Ed Plant Order.” The Evening News 9 Oct. 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals that the FPC breached its obligations under the Federal Power Act because it failed to consider aesthetic qualities and preservation of natural resources.

“F.P.C. Is Urged to Reopen Con Ed Storm King Case.” New York Times 9 Apr. 1965: 17.

This article in the New York Times announces that the towns of Cortland, Putnam Valley, and Yorktown have joined Scenic Hudson in protesting the construction of the pumped storage power plant in Cornwall, New York.

“FPC OKs $161 Million Cornwall Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record 10 Mar. 1965: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Federal Power Commission (FPC) has granted Con Edison a 50 year license to build and operate their proposed hydroelectric plant at Cornwall.

“F.P.C. Refuses Rehearing On Plant at Storm King.” New York Times 7 May 1965: 43.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Federal Power Commission decided by a three to one vote not to reopen the hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant case. The only avenue for Scenic Hudson and other conservation groups now is the courts.

“FPC Refuses to Delay Con Ed License Decision.” The Times Herald Record 2 Feb. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record reports that the FPC has denied Richard Ottinger’s request to delay the Con Edison decision. Ottinger requested the delay in order to give Congress time to approve the bill that would create a Hudson Highlands national scenic Riverway.

“FPC Refuses to Reopen Con Edison Hearings.” The Times Herald Record 15 Jan 1965: 9.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC has rejected four petitions to reopen hearings on the Con Edison hydroelectric plant because the petitions were not received before the November deadline. Three of the petitions raised alarm about the danger to the fish life through the intake and turbines of the plant.

“FPC Rejects Attempts to Kill Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record 7 May 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the FPC has denied all applications filed to reverse their decision on approving Con Edison’s license to build a hydroelectric plant on the grounds that there were no facts or legal principles which warranted a change in their decision.

Farlekas, Chris. “Cornwall Officials Elated; Man on the Street Pleased.” The Times Herald Record 10 Mar. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports on the reactions of Cornwall officials, who are elated about the FPC decision, and Cornwall residents. Some Cornwall residents are happy with the decision, while others are still doubtful the project will bring jobs to the area.

Farlekas, Chris. “Cornwall Water District OK Called Probable.” The Times Herald Record
26 Jan 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that permission will probably be given to the Town of Cornwall to form its own water district, unless the Village of Cornwall keeps the Upper Reservoir it is currently negotiating with Con Edison for them to purchase for their hydroelectric plant.

“Fish Breeding Study under Way.” The Times Herald Record 30 Dec 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has agreed to spend $150,000 to conduct a study on Hudson River fisheries, specifically the spawning grounds of the striped bass.

“Fish Study Begun by Con Ed.” The Evening News 31 Dec. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison is conducting a study on the breeding habits of fishes in the Hudson River.

“Flying of U.S. Flag To Attack Con Ed Upsets Community.” New York Times 10 Apr. 1965: 31.

This article from the New York Times reports that some unknown protestors raised a United States flag on Storm King Mountain to protest construction of the hydroelectric power plant, and they are receiving a lot of criticism. Members of the Village of Cornwall, as well as Veteran organizations are denouncing the use of the flag, and claiming that using the flag as a message of scorn dishonors it. The flag is believed to be in the Palisades Interstate Park, and park policemen have been instructed to take the flag down if they can find it.

Folsom, Merrill. “2d Atom Generator Planned by Con Ed.” New York Times 30 Oct. 1965: 1.

This article in the New York Times reports that Consolidated Edison is planning on building another nuclear powered electric power plant on Indian Point. In addition to this new plant they are researching new areas to build plants to meet the growing electrical needs that they will not be able to meet because of the delays in the construction of Storm King Mountain.

“Garrett, William A. “Con Ed Challenges Rerouting Proposals.” The Evening News
22 Jun. 1965: 3B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has challenged a FPC staff proposal and claims the Pleasant Valley route would be “impractical, unnecessary and not in the public interest.”

Garrett, William A. “Con Ed Opponents Plan for Appeal.” The Evening News 17 Jun. 1965: 10B.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference will file an appeal with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in early July, even before the FPC chooses which route the transmission lines will follow.

Garrett, William A. “Con Ed Opposes Intervention Plea.” The Evening News 19 Apr. 1965: 9B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison opposed a petition from another group wishing to have a say in the transmission route and discusses the transmission routes being proposed at the upcoming FPC hearing.

Garrett, William A. “Con Ed Rehearing Rejected.” The Evening News 1 Mar. 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that another petition for a rehearing has been denied by the FPC and the power committee of the Community Council of Hilltop Village Cooperative No. 4 has entered the possibilities of those who will seek an appeal if the FPC decision is unfavorable to opponents of Con Edison.

Garrett, William A. “Con Ed Seeks New Line Route.” The Evening News 26 Mar. 1965: 8B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison is working on finding a new route, as is the FPC staff, but the two entities are supposedly not combining their efforts to come up with a joint solution. Con Ed and the FPC staff disagreed on transmission routes at the previous hearings.

Garrett, William A. “Con Ed to Face Several Court Challenges.” The Evening News
17 May 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Ed faces challenges from communities the power lines would cross at FPC hearings such as Putnam Valley, and the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference plans to file an appeal with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Garrett, William A. “Con Edison Overhead Lines Defended.” The Evening News 25 May 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Chairman Joseph Swindler of the Federal Power Commission (FPC) has stated that although the power lines are “ugly,” underground lines are too expensive and a gas turbine alternative plant is not an option since it hasn’t been proven and it pollutes the air.

Garrett, William A. “FPC Hearings Set in Capital.” The Evening News 1 May 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has dismissed requests that the hearings be held in New York City and are scheduled to begin in Washington DC, although the hearings can be moved after they have begun in Washington at the discretion of FPC Examiner Simpson.

Garrett, William A. “FPC Hears Views on Utility Lines.” The Evening News 12 Jun. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article describes all of the arguments dealing with the Con Edison transmission lines, discusses the intentions of the opposition and their feelings on the treatment they have received at the FPC hearings, and talks about Scenic Hudson’s argument for protecting the fisheries of the Hudson River.

Garrett, William A. “FPC Opposes Power Corridor for Con Ed.” The Evening News
22 Jun. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC opposes Con Edison’s desire to have a new overhead right-of-way for power for its Cornwall hydroelectric plant, and the commission staff looks to be favoring the plan that would use an un-widened Pleasant Valley corridor.

Garrett, William A. “FPC Sets Route for Con Ed Power Lines from Cornwall.” The Evening News
5 Oct. 1965: 3A.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC ordered Con Edison to place the overhead transmission lines underground from Cornwall to Nelsonville, then 45 miles of new right-of-way to Pleasant Valley, where the lines will then follow the existing ones to New York. The article discusses in more detail the issue of the transmission routes.

Garrett, William A.  “FPC to Withhold Route Decision.” The Evening News 10 May 1965: 7A.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has chosen to withhold its recommendation on the transmission routes for Con Edison until after the hearing is completed.

Garrett, William A. “Four Potential Con Ed Power Routes Outlined.” The Evening News
5 May 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports and describes four transmission routes that were proposed at the FPC hearing by a commission surveyor, and Con Ed was prepared to propose some modifications to one of the commission’s routes.

Garrett, William A. “Modified Route Sought by Con Ed.” The Evening News 7 May 1965: 8B.

This Evening News article describes the route for transmission lines Con Edison is seeking to get approved by the FPC.  Con Ed believes this route is the best looking and the least likely to interfere with the public.

Garrett, William A. “New Power Line Route Suggested.” The Evening News 18 May 1965: 8B.

This Evening News reports another power line route was brought up in the FPC hearings and describes the routes proposed in court.

Garrett, William A. “Planner Comments on Con Ed Lines; Underground Route Study Scheduled.” The Evening News 19 May 1965: 14B.

This Evening News article discusses the transmission routes and the intent of the towns to appeal the decision if the lines cross their boundaries, while the FPC appointed a new committee to study the issue of underground transmission routes.

Garrett, William A. “Pleasant Valley Line Plan Gives Con Ed Chief Shivers.” The Evening News
25 May 1965: 9A.

This Evening News article reports that some Con Edison executives were shocked when an FPC staff member proposed a plan that would have the transmission lines going over existing ones in Pleasant Valley.  However, the plan was said to be theoretical and based on studies and not to be taken as a staff recommendation.

Garrett, William A. “Power Line Block Scored by Utility.” The Evening News 2 Jul. 1965: 8B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison asked the FPC to deny motions by Phillipstown and have their town “ordinances” disregarded, since the ordinances are not at issue at the hearings and any enforcement of the ordinance would “frustrate the entire purpose” of the FPC hearings and negate the license.

Garrett, William A. “Power Line Route Hearing Continues.” The Evening News 20 May 1965: 12B.

This Evening News article discusses the FPC hearings and reports that Con Edison favors a modified transmission route designed by the FPC commission and the Yorktown town planner favors a different modification of the same route.

Garrett, William A. “Safety of Con Ed Project Assured, Says FPC.” The Evening News
10 May 1965: 3A.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has stated that the design characteristics of the Cornwall plant “substantially exceed minimum standards” and that danger to fish life, water supplies, plant life, people and property below the dikes, and scenic beauty were all fully considered by Con Edison.

Garrett, William A. “Scenic Hudson to Delay Appeal.” The Evening News 15 May 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference will withhold its court appeal of the Federal Power Commission’s (FPC) licensing of Con Edison’s hydroelectric plant. They intend to file an appeal with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Garrett, William A. “Veto Power Over Con Ed Job Contained in Resources Bill.” The Evening News 15 Jan. 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that Richard Ottinger is developing a bill that would give the Interior Secretary power to veto any project that had substantial interstate conservation interest, and Ottinger has admitted the bill is being written to oppose Con Edison and their hydroelectric plant.

Gesner, John M III. “Ugliness on the Hudson.” Letter. The Herald Tribune 1 Mar. 1965: 18.

This Herald Tribune letter to the editor questions why there is so much excitement now over a much needed power plant when rape of the Hudson was started years ago when railroads tore up the landscape and industrial plants were built.

“Governor Bids Project Foes Buy Land at Storm King.” New York Times 13 Jan. 1965: 30.

This article in the New York Times reports that Governor Rockefeller made the suggestion that the opposition should ban together and buy the land that the hydroelectric power plant is supposed to be built on if they are so passionate about it not being built. This statement was made in response to a question of why the Governor is not fighting the power plant.

“Hempstead Opposes Con Ed.” The Evening News 14 Jan 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that the Town of Hempstead on Long Island joined with other Long Island organizations in opposition to Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plant at Storm King Mountain, saying the plant would have an adverse affect on the striped bass in the Hudson and therefore affect Nassau recreation fishing.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Aide Denies President Opposes Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record 11 Feb. 1965: 11.

This Times Herald Record reports that a White House spokesperson discounted rumors that President Johnson opposes the Con Edison project and would intervene in the deliberations of the Federal Power Commission (FPC).

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Court Dismisses Petition to Block Con Edison.”The Times Herald Record
22 Jul. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Supreme Court Justice Clair Hoyt has dismissed the petitions of the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association that would stop the sale of the Upper Reservoir to Con Edison.

“House to Study Impact of Plant on Fish.” The Times Herald Record 2 Apr. 1965: 9.

This Times Herald Record article reports that a separate house sub-committee will hold hearings later this month to investigate if fish will be killed by Con Edison’s hydroelectric plant.

“The Hudson River Is for Keeping.” Editorial. The Herald Tribune 20 Feb. 1965: 12.

This Herald Tribune editorial states that it agrees with the New York Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources which has stated in reference to Con Edison’s proposed hydroelectric plant that this violation of the Hudson River is contrary to the best interests of the people. The editorial states that the Hudson River belongs to the people to be kept as an unspoiled natural resource.

“Hudson Riverway Plan.” Editorial.The Evening News 21 Jan. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News editorial comments on the bill that has been introduced into the House of Representatives by Richard Ottinger as another method of stalling the FPC from making a decision, and remarks that the FPC should make its decision known as soon as it has been able to give fair consideration to the plant.

Hudson Riverway Plan Opposed by Cornwall Supervisor.” The Times Herald Record
20 Jan 1965: 52.

This Times Herald Record article describes the reactions of people to the federal bill introduced by Richard Ottinger, specifically the negative reaction of Cornwall supervisor Gordon Cameron.

Jones, William H. Con Edison Project on Hudson Praised by Man from Warwick.” Letter.
The Evening News 31 Dec. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor gives its support to Con Edison and remarks that if all the scientific advantages of the plant were printed in the papers there would be less critics of the project.

“Kennedy Sees No Danger To Fish at Hudson Con Ed.” New York Times 12 May 1965: 13.

This article in the New York Times announces that New York Senator Robert Kennedy does not believe there is danger to the fish of the Hudson River by the Storm King Mountain power plant. He believes that any problems that may arise can easily be solved by marine biologists.

Kimpel, Helmut. “Con Ed, FPC Weigh Appeal to Supreme Court.” The Times Herald Record 31 Dec. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison and the FPC have 60 days to request a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court decides not to grant a hearing then the FPC must hold further hearings in accordance with the remand of the Court of Appeals.

Kimpel, Helmut. “Con Ed Loses Cornwall Permit.” The Times Herald Record 30 Dec. 1965: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the U.S. Court of Appeals has set aside an order of the FPC allowing Con Edison to build its hydroelectric plant on Storm King Mountain on the grounds that the FPC has to take further testimony on alternatives to the project and the practicality of underground transmission lines.

La Voie, Donald. “County Needs Con Ed Project.” Letter. The Times Herald Record
17 Apr. 1965: 16.

This Times Herald Record letter to the editor remarks that the opposition to the Con Edison project comes from well-to-do white collar people and luckily those people do not get their way all the time – the area could benefit from such a large project such as the Con Edison one.

Lawson, William F. “Lawson Claims Con Edison Releases are Self-Serving.” Letter. The Evening News 3 Dec. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that Con Edison created confusion by relating the blackout to the Storm King Controversy and comments that the Evening News should be more fair in presenting both sides of the case.

Lawson, William F. “Storm King Project Employment Only Temporary, Writes Lawson.” Letter. The Evening News 19 Mar. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor describes the belief that the Con Ed project will bring hundreds of jobs to locals as a cruel distortion of the facts. The writer notes that Con Ed will be needing skilled workers in blasting, tunnel construction, surveying, and operation of earth moving equipment, and that Con Ed is behind schedule already and will not want to take the time to train local people to do the job.

“Lawyer To Ask Adjournment of Cornwall Water Hearing.” The Times Herald Record
9 Jan. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the lawyer for Cornwall Taxpayers Water Association will ask for an adjournment as his expert witness on ground water is released from the hospital.

“Legislator Asks President To Ban Storm King Plant.” New York Times 3 Mar. 1965: 41.

This article in the New York Times announces that Senator Pomeroy, chairman of the Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources, has asked President Johnson for his help in blocking the pumped storage power plant in Cornwall, New York.

Leitner, George J. “Peekskill Man Urges Support for Hudson River Legislation.” Letter The Evening News 13 May 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor offers suggestions on what can be done to fight Con Edison and the FPC in order to protect Storm King Mountain, such as supporting Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference and enacting legislation that would block the hydroelectric plant.

Lewis, Sherman R. “Lewis Urges Udall Not to Delay Con Edison Project.” Letter. The Evening News 17 Feb. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor describes a letter written to Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall. In the letter the author expresses his support for the Con Edison hydroelectric plant and the benefits it would bring to the area.

“Liberals Ask State To Bar Con Ed Plant.” New York Times 14 Mar. 1965: 70.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Liberal party has requested the State Legislature to block the power plant on Storm King Mountain.

Lown, Edward. “Con Ed Official Declares Project Gains Acceptance.” The Evening News
2 Mar. 1965: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that the information director for Con Edison stated that he thought a lot of the talk against the project was misguided.  According to the information director, the area can have the project and still have protection of the area.  He also stated that the plant will bring a beautiful park to the Cornwall waterfront and the plant will bring jobs to the area.

Lown, Edward. “Ottinger Bill Opponents Heard at Sunday Meeting.” The Evening News
26 Jul. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Mayor Joseph Mullin submitted a statement stating residents of communities along the west side of the Hudson were strongly opposed to Ottinger’s bill.  Leo Rothschild also presented his five suggestions regarding federal legislation in the matter.

McClung, Elliott. “McClung Urges Realism on Plant Planned for Storm King.” Letter. The Evening News 15 Mar. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that Storm King Mountain is already defaced by the highway and he perceives no further desecration from what he has seen of the plans Con Edison has for the hydroelectric plant.

McDonal, E. E. Jr. “Reflection on Cornwall Village Assailed by E. E. McDonal, Jr.” Letter. The Evening News 19 Mar. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor is in reply to a New York Times article describing the conditions in Cornwall and why the people would be in favor of the Con Edison project. The letter describes the New York Times article as a severe blow to the pride and dignity of Cornwall residents and states that the article was an artistic distortion of the truth of what Cornwall is really like.

McNally, John. “Babbling Brooks, Sparkling Lakes Grace Area for Con Ed Reservoir.”
The Evening News 23 Feb. 1965: 3B.

This Evening News article describes the Black Rock Forest area and the surrounding area where Con Edison hopes to build its hydroelectric plant. The article goes into detail about the reservoirs and their history, how and why Con Edison would be using them, and how the remaining waters would fit in as part of the new water supply for Cornwall.

“New Group Meets On Hudson Valley.” New York Times 23 Jan. 1965: 11.

This article in the New York Times announces that a newly formed State Council of Parks whose purpose is to maintain the beauty of the lower Hudson River Valley had its first meeting today.

“New Hope for the Hudson.” New York Times 27 Feb. 1965: 24.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources, led by Senator Pomeroy, has wrote to the Federal Power Commission urging them to not license the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain.

“Ottinger Critical of FPC Decision.” The Evening News 10 Mar. 1965: 6B.

This Evening News article reports that Congressman Richard Ottinger has stated that the FPC has made a grave mistake in granting the license “at this time” and is intending to propose legislation that will force Con Edison to bury the transmission lines underground.

“Ottinger Scores City-Con Ed Plan on Hudson Water.” New York Times 13 Dec. 1965: 28.

This article in the New York Times reports that Representative Richard Ottinger criticized Mayor Wagner, and his newly announced plan to use the reservoir that will be created if Consolidated Edison builds their proposed hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain to provide more water to New York City. The Mayor defended himself, claiming that he was not supporting the power plant, but that if it was built that it was his responsibility to use all available resources for the good of the city.

“Ottinger’s Riverway Bill Would Bar Con Ed Project.” The Evening News 19 Jan. 1965: 10A.

This Evening News article reports that Richard Ottinger has introduced his bill, entitled the Hudson Highlands National Scenic Riverway, into the House of Representatives. The bill would give the Interior Secretary authorization to spend up to $20 million to protect, rehabilitate, and develop the Hudson’s shores and would also create a nine-man commission to supervise the Riverway.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Fishermen Score Storm King Plan/ Power Plant Proposal Called Threat to Livelihood.” New York Times 8 Jan. 1965: 10.

This article in the New York Times explains the concerns of fishermen, which is that the pumped storage plant at Cornwall, N.Y. will destroy the striped bass population of the Hudson River, and consequently the eastern seaboard. Several fishermen groups have petitioned the Federal Power Commission to reopen the case because they feel that the issue of the fish was not looked into deeply enough the first time around. It is doubtful, however, that the F.P.C. will reopen the case.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Nation and State Clash Over River/ Fight Over Which Is Better Able to Curb Its Pollution and Eyesores on Banks.” New York Times 26 Jul. 1965: 14.

This article in the New York Times discusses the nationwide interest in cleaning and preserving the Hudson River. The Federal Government and the State of New York are practically competing in their efforts to be the one to save the river. The article attributes this new-found desire to preserve the river to the Storm King Mountain case, which has drawn the nation’s attention to not only the Hudson Highlands, but the entire Hudson River. The river’s heritage and beauty are discussed at some length.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Response Mixed To Con Ed Ruling/ Cornwall Is Happy, but Foes Vow to Continue Fight.” New York Times 10 Mar. 1965: 28.

This article in the New York Times relates the reactions about the Federal Power Commission’s decision to license Consolidated Edison to build a hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. The article focuses mainly on the reaction of the citizens of Cornwall-on-the-Hudson who were jubilant over their victory. Consolidated Edison was also pleased, although they commented that they were not ready to start construction just yet. The opponents of the plant merely said that for them the fight was not yet over.

Phillips, McCandlish. “State Spurs Plan To Guard Hudson/ Effort to Preserve Its Beauty Seeks to Deter U.S. Action.” New York Times 25 Apr. 1965:70.

This article in the New York Times reveals that the State of New York hopes to protect the Hudson River Valley so effectively that there will be no need for the Federal Government to form a commission or organization to protect the Hudson River. The State of New York will do almost anything to prevent the Federal Government from gaining control over the Hudson. Some conservation groups, however, believe that despite the steps forward taken by the state, the Federal Government still needs to intervene.

“Philipstown Continues Opposition.” The Evening News 21 Apr. 1965: 13B.

This Evening News article reports that Philipstown supervisor has stated in a letter to the FPC that there is still strong opposition to all four of the proposed transmission routes because the town does not think the FPC should be allowed to approve the lines without an application or request to the town.

“Plan for the Hudson.” New York Times 26 Jul. 1965: 22.

This article in the New York Times relates how the Storm King Mountain controversy has brought the Nation’s attention to the Hudson River and its problems. The Federal Government is attempting to pass several bills to govern the preservation of the Hudson River. Governor Rockefeller and the newly formed Hudson River Valley Commission are opposed to the bills; they do not want the government to have control over what they consider to be a state matter.

Poche, Ward. “Both Sides in Con Ed Case Prepare for Route Hearing.” The Evening News
13 Mar. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports the preparations being made on both sides of the argument for the FPC hearings on the route of transmission lines for Con Edison, so to determine that the lines do not cross through state parks.

Poche, Ward. “Con Ed Asked to Present Best Route in Public Interest for Power Lines.” The Evening News 19 Mar. 1965: 8C.

This Evening News article reports that the Federal Power Commission (FPC) has asked that Con Edison use the time before the scheduled hearing in May to come up with an alternate transmission lines route that does not cross state parks and minimizes scenic impairment and economic losses.

Poche, Ward. “Hearing Meaningless, Says Magazine Opposing Con Ed.” The Evening News 29 Apr. 1965: 20A.

This Evening News article reports on a Sports Illustrated article that stated the upcoming May 4th FPC hearing is meaningless in so far as it concerns the Hudson River fish and discusses the fish kills at Indian Point and Con Ed’s reactions to the article.

Poche, Ward. “Proponents, Opponents Comments on Con Ed Decision.” The Evening News 10 Mar. 1965: 6B.

This Evening News article reports on some of the reactions of Cornwall residents and officials to the license granted to Con Edison by the FPC. Mayor Donahue is excited, as is the town supervisor Cameron. The Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association considers the license granting a setback but they will continue the fight.

Poche, Ward. “Scenic Hudson to Appeal FPC Decision.” The Evening News 10 Mar. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Scenic Hudson intends to file an application for a rehearing with the FPC, which would delay the project for 30-60 days. Dale Doty, representative for Scenic Hudson, stated that it would be up to Scenic Hudson to decide whether or not it will take the matter into court to have the project delayed further.

“Pomeroy Committee Asks for Delay on Con Ed Project.” The Evening News 23 Feb. 1965: 8B.

This Evening News article reports that the Joint Legislative Committee has stated their opposition to Con Edison and believes the decision should be delayed to consider issues such as the effect of the plant on fish life, water supply, and zoning laws.

“Protecting the Hudson Valley.” New York Times 10 Feb. 1965: 40.

This article in the New York Times applauds the creation of two new agencies, both a direct result of the fight that is going on to protect the Hudson River Valley’s natural beauty. The first is the Hudson Highlands National Scenic Riverway, which has not been established but is being debated, and the New York Times believes that it’s essential. The other organization is a Lower Hudson Valley Conservation Commission.

“Railroad Would Give Right-of-Way to Con Ed Transmission Route.” The Times Herald Record 17 May 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the New York Central Railroad has agreed to give Con Edison a right-of-way along the railroad tracks, but that they would prefer the transmission lines to follow a different route.

Ranzal, Edward. “Storm King Plant Blocked By Court/ F.P.C. Is Ordered to Hear in Full the Alternatives for Con Ed Complex.” New York Times 30 Dec. 1965: 1.

This article in the New York Times announces that the United States Court of Appeals has set aside the Federal Power Commission’s license for Consolidated Edison to build their pumped storage power plant. The court ordered the F.P.C. to reopen the hearings and give careful consideration to all possible power alternatives. In addition, they also must consider the fisheries issue. Consolidated Edison thought the decision was very unfortunate, but didn’t think they would have a problem getting the license approved again since they believed they presented the case fully before the F.P.C. the time before and had the license approved.

Raskin, R. H. “Con Ed Opponent Held Guilty of Distorting Mayor’s Meaning.” Letter. The Evening News 12 Aug. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that opponents of Con Ed distort the meaning, and that natural resources are there for man to take advantage of and use to advance the human race.

“Remaining Obstacles Prevent Immediate Start of Construction.” The Times Herald Record 10 Mar. 1965: 5.

This Times Herald Record article discusses the obstacles Con Edison must overcome before they can begin construction on the hydroelectric plant itself, such as the next FPC hearing on the transmission routes and fish studies, finishing Cornwall’s water supply before they can take over the Upper Reservoir, and obtaining easement from the Palisades Interstate Park Commission.

“Reports From the Nation.” New York Times 14 Mar. 1965: E4.

This excerpt from the New York Times reports what events of note are going on across the country and Cornwall is mentioned. An extremely brief history of the controversy of the power plant on Storm King Mountain is given.

“Resnick Lauds Ottinger on Hudson Fish.” The Times Herald Record 14 May 1965: 52.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Rep. Joseph Resnick of Ellenville has commended Richard Ottinger for “blowing the lid off” the story on Hudson River fish kills.

Rhodes, Al. “Con Edison Still Planning To Build Cornwall Project.” The Evening News 30 Dec. 1965: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has been given a setback but that they still intend to build the hydroelectric plant at Cornwall. The article also discusses the results of the U.S. Court of Appeals hearing.

Rhodes, Al. “Cornwall Plant Could Have Eased Crisis, Says Con Ed.” The Evening News 11 Nov. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has stated that its hydroelectric plant could have been able to deal with the massive blackout were it available, and is intended to deal with such crisis.

Robinson, Douglas. “Mayor Says City May Tap Hudson With Con Ed Aid/ Planned Storm King Facility Would Pipe a Supply to Upstate Reservoirs/ Agreement Is Attacked/ Conservationists Opposed – Wagner Says Plan Could Keep Capacity at 100%.” New York Times 12 Dec. 1965: 1.

This article from the New York Times announces that Mayor Wagner has made a tentative deal with Consolidated Edison to use water from the proposed hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain to help supply New York City with water. Conservationists are upset over the deal that the mayor is making, especially since this will make him a guaranteed supporter of the Storm King power plant. Supposedly this deal will allow New York City to have very cheap water. There are a few issues to overcome, such as pumping the high pressured water into New York City, as well as ensuring that the water is sanitary, however the crucial first few steps have been taken.

“Rockefeller Right.” Editorial. The Evening News 19 Jan. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News editorial remarks that those who deplore the refusal of Gov. Rockefeller to intervene against Con Edison should stop and considers the idea that perhaps the Governor made his decision after careful consideration.

“Rocky Lauds Con Ed on Fish Study.” The Evening News 17 Jun. 1965: 10B.

This Evening News article reports that Gov. Rockefeller praised Con Edison for conducting a thorough fish study on the effect the plant would have on Hudson River fisheries.

Rosa, Boehm. “Rockefeller Commission Hears Suggestions for Hudson Valley.” The Evening News 28 Jul. 1965: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Rockefeller’s Hudson River Valley Commission heard recommendations for the historical preservation of the Hudson River with an emphasis on pollution control.

“Saunders Disputes Con Ed On Cornwall Blackout Aid.” The Evening News 28 Dec. 1965: 11B.

This Evening News article reports that Alexander Saunders, vice chairman for Scenic Hudson, stated that even if Con Edison had the Cornwall project built and available to generate power the blackout would have still continued because the fault of the blackout lay with Con Ed’s distribution system and not its generating system.

“Scenic Hudson Bill Introduced in Senate.” The Times Herald Record 5 Mar. 1965: 9.

This Times Herald Record article reports and discusses a bill introduced to Congress by Senator Robert F. Kennedy that would create a Hudson Highlands National Scenic Riverway to protect the area from industry.

“Scenic Hudson Vows Long Con Ed Battle.” The Times Herald Record 15 Mar. 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Alexander Saunders has stated that conservationists will “fight to the death” against Con Edison and their Cornwall project.

Scenic, Recreation Committee Formed.” The Evening News 25 Jan. 1965: 7B.

This Evening News article reports that a special joint committee of the Palisades and Taconic State Park Commissions was created at Bear Mountain, in order to protect the historic, scenic, archeological, and wildlife resources. However, this group has already stated that it will not get involved with the Con Edison hydroelectric plant.

Sibley, John. “Governor Scored On Hudson Plans/ Conservationists Call New Commission ‘Too Little’.” New York Times 22 Mar 1965: 23.

This article in the New York Times announces that Governor Rockefeller has appointed a Hudson River Valley Commission, with his brother as leader, to plan how to best preserve the scenic values of the Hudson River Valley. The Commission is thought of as a great step forward by the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, however they also consider it to be “too little too late,” when it comes to the Storm King Mountain power plant. Scenic Hudson still fully intends to fight the power plant’s construction.

Siegler, Pauline. “Mrs. Siegler Doubts Jobs from Con Ed.” Letter. The Evening News 26 Mar. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that Cornwall Supervisor Cameron failed to mention that the jobs brought to the area would be shared throughout five counties, so the amount of jobs brought to Orange County would be few.  She also comments that the park is a fantasy that can never be realized because of the nature of the river.

Siegler, Pauline. “Mrs. Siegler Sums up Reasons to Block Con Ed.” Letter. The Evening News
6 Mar. 1965: 4A.

This Evening News letter to the editor discusses the reasons why the Con Edison project should not be supported, such as killing striped bass, the park being an excuse to dump the waste from building the tunnel, and the alternate water supply. The letter includes text from a letter Mrs. Siegler sent to Senator Clinton Dominick and Assemblyman Daniel Becker.

“State River Study.” Editorial. The Evening News 3 Aug. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News editorial remarks that a realistic study on what can be done to improve the Hudson should come from the state and without the help of the Federal Government.

“State Senate Debates Con Ed Project.” The Times Herald Record 24 Feb. 1965: 1.

This Times Herald Record article reports and discusses the debate held at the State Senate in which senators argue the pros and cons of the Con Edison project.

“State to Oppose Federal Pressure On Lower Hudson.” New York Times 7 Feb. 1965: 79.

This article in the New York Times reports that the Governor and other members of the New York State legislature are planning on fighting the Government’s plan to create a Hudson Highlands National Scenic Riverway. They are not opposed to such an organization being formed, but they are opposed to it being under federal control. They maintain that New York is fully capable of handling such an organization within its own jurisdiction.

“Steady Service Foreseen By Con Ed Cornwall Plant.” The Evening News 20 May 1965: 12B.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison stockholders were told that with the Cornwall hydroelectric plant New York City can be assured with reliable electricity and reduces the number and length of blackouts.

“Storm King Changes.” Editorial. The Evening News 6 Mar. 1965: 4A.

This Evening News editorial questions the motives of those opposed to the Con Edison hydroelectric plant, saying that it would be understandable if the conservationists had objected previously when the Storm King Highway was built and railroad cuts, or if they were objecting to thwart and frustrate private enterprise, but how could they ignore the present condition of the waterfront and the plans of Con Edison to beautify the area for park purposes, or tolerate more extensive changes to the scenery through bridge, hotel and highway construction.

“Storm King Outlook.” Editorial. The Evening News 12 Mar. 1965: 8A.

This Evening News editorial predicts a good outcome of the Con Edison project at Storm King despite the possibility of recovering economically from a huge drop in employment once the plant is built.

Talbot, L. R. “Sees Con Edison Improving Cornwall Waterfront” Letter. The Evening News 20 Mar. 1965: 4A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that the opposition’s time could be better spent if they would work to correct pollution in the Hudson and its tributaries rather than parroting arguments that are not grounded in facts.

“The F.P.C. Decision.” New York Times 10 Mar. 1965: 40.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Federal Power Commission has decided to grant Consolidated Edison their license to build a pumped storage power plant at the base of Storm King Mountain. The only comfort to conservationists is that the F.P.C. has requested that additional hearings be held on creating better protection for the fish, as well as alternate routes for the above ground power lines.

Torrey, Reginald. “Fish Protection Adequate; Plant Closing Unnecessary.” The Evening News
12 May 1965: 7A.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison does not think it would have to shut down the plant during spawning season as their fish protections would be enough, and they also argued that they would need that peak power in reserve and it would be too expensive to shut the plant down.

Torrey, Reginald. “Spawning Time Eyed by Con Ed.” The Evening News 11 May 1965: 9B.

This Evening News article reports that a proposal has been made that Con Edison shut down the Cornwall plant during spring and the striped bass spawning season, and Con Edison is considering the proposal.

“Trade Council backs Con Ed Cornwall Plant.” The Times Herald Record 5 Feb. 1965: 8.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Building and Construction Trades Council has unanimously voted to endorse the Con Ed hydroelectric plant on the grounds that it will be an enormous boost to the economy.

“Two Civic Groups Join Forces to Oppose Con Edison Project.” The Times Herald Record
4 Feb. 1965: 10.

This Times Herald Record article reports that two civic organizations representing about a million Spanish-speaking residents of Brooklyn, Manhattan and the Bronx have filed petitions with the FPC opposing Con Ed’s Cornwall project saying Con Edison should invest in power plants in the city, where Con Ed customers would be used for thousands of jobs, rather than build a plant on the Hudson River when Cornwall does not even use Con Ed power.

This Evening News article reports that Interior Secretary Steward Udall has stated that the senators and congressmen who are interested in the Hudson from an overall resources view should be considered by the FPC and he urges the FPC not to make that decision too quickly and without making those considerations.

Vandivert, Rod. “Scenic Hudson Director Still Thinks Dow Bill Would Check Con Edison Job.” Letter. The Evening News 27 Jul. 1965: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor describes correspondence between Rep John Dow and the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference regarding John Dow’s bill. Vandivert approves of the bill with the intent that it would block Con Edison’s hydroelectric plant.

Walsh, William. “Planners Approve Fill Project for Con Edison.” The Evening News 2
Mar. 1965: 2A.

This Evening News article reports that the Town of Cornwall Planning Board has approved a special exception zoning petition to allow Con Edison to use land fill from Jones Farm to raise the height of the present dam at the Upper Reservoir to raise the capacity for the required harness power.

Wang, Sam. “Views Plumbed on Riverway.” The Evening News 9 Jul. 1965: 3B.

This Evening News article describes different opinions and reactions to the proposed Hudson Highlands Scenic Riverway Bill.”

Weaver, Jr., Warren. “Con Ed Proposes 5th Hudson Route/ Tells F.P.C. It is Least Costly of Plans for Linking of New Plant With City.” New York Times 6 May 1965: 41.

This article in the New York Times reports that Consolidated Edison has presented another potential route for the overhead power lines between Cornwall and New York City. This makes the fifth plan the company has presented before the Federal Power Commission. The company claims this route is the shortest, cheapest, and interferes the least with peoples’ homes. There is no word on whether the F.P.C. will approve this route or not.

Weaver, Jr., Warren. “F.P.C., 3-1, Grants Con Ed A License For Hudson Plant/ Damage to Scenic Values Is Discounted – Rep. Ottinger Sees a Court Challenge.” New York Times 10 Mar. 1965: 1.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Federal Power Commission has decided to license the Storm King Mountain hydroelectric power plant by a three to one vote. The dissenter, Commissioner Ross wanted more hearings to be conducted. The F.P.C. decided that the impact on the scenic beauty of the Hudson Highlands would be minimal, and the benefits far outweighed the drawbacks. Some Senators are trying to pass legislation that will prevent more utilities being built along the Hudson River. The conservationists are not done fighting, however, and it is expected that they will take the matter to court.

Weaver, Jr., Warren. “Ottinger Losing On Con Ed Plant/ State Delegation In Capitol Opposes Ban of Project on Banks of Hudson/ Change In Bill Sought/ Elimination of Storm King Issue From Measure on Scenic Beauty Is Seen.” New York Times 4 Feb. 1965: 33.

This article in the New York Times announces that there is growing opposition to the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain in the United States Senate. Many senators are working to introduce bills that will help to block, not only the Storm King power plant, but other potential threats to the beauty of the Hudson River as well. It is thought unlikely; however, that any bill will be passed in time to stop the Storm King power plant, which already has preliminary approval from the Federal Power Commission.

“Who’s to Save Our Natural Resources?” Editorial. The Times Herald Record 11 Feb. 1965: 58.

This Times Herald Record editorial reprints and discusses briefly two other editorials that talk about beautifying America’s treasures, one from the New York Times the other from the Syracuse Herald Journal.

Wing, William G. “Con Ed Wins on Storm King.” The Herald Tribune 10 Mar. 1965: 1.

This Herald Tribune article reports that the FPC has approved Con Edison’s application to build their hydroelectric plant at Storm King Mountain and will have one more hearing on the routes of the transmission power lines. The article describes the immediate reactions and comments on what can be done to reverse the decision.

1966

“7 Towns On Hudson Fighting Park Plans.” New York Times 23 Feb. 1966: 32.

This article in the New York Times announces that a group of seven towns along the Hudson River are banning together to block Governor Rockefeller’s plan to build a park along the Hudson River. They towns are afraid of their local recreational areas being overrun, as well as private land being taken over by the Government which will not be good for local taxes.

“Bad Bargain on Air Pollution.” New York Times 19 May 1966: 46.

This article from the New York Times criticizes the deal that Mayor Lindsay made with Consolidated Edison concerning air pollution in New York City and the power plant on Storm King Mountain.

Blumenthal, Ralph. “New Phase Due In Hudson Valley/ Interior Unit Gets Control of Conservation Task.” New York Times 18 Sep. 1966: 70.

This article in the New York Times announces that the Hudson River has now been put under the authority of the Federal Government and the Secretary of the Interior. While conservationists are applauding the decision, others feel that this is a power play move by the Federal Government. It is unknown if this decision will have any effect on the Storm King Mountain power plant case.

Booth, Malcolm A. and Farlekas, Chris. “Con Ed Spotlighted at Natural Beauty Parley.” The Times Herald Record 26 Feb. 1966: 3.

This Times Herald Record article reports that both pros and cons surrounding the Con Edison hydroelectric plant dominated several sections of Gov. Rockefeller’s conference on natural beauty. Cornwall’s Supervisor was upset because the HRVC report had not consulted with the communities involved, while Alexander Saunders called for the approval of the HRVC’s recommendations.

Carroll, Maurice. “A 2D Hudson Site Noted By Con Ed/ Utility Chief Admits It Would Save About $15-Million.” New York Times 10 Dec. 1966: 28.

This New York Times article reveals that Consolidated Edison is considering moving the location of the hydroelectric power plant they want to build on Storm King Mountain “around the bend” of the Hudson River. This would place the power plant within the boundaries of the Palisades Interstate Park Commission. Con Ed is claiming that by moving the structure to this area, they will be saving 15 million dollars. They did not pursue this avenue before, however, because they were concerned about the reaction from the PIPC.

Carroll, Maurice. “Ryan Says Con Ed Faces Tax Check/ Asked Study of Deductions for Storm King Publicity.” New York Times 18 Dec. 1966: 56.

This article from the New York Times reveals that the IRS in planning on taking a close look at Consolidated Edison’s income tax deductions for publicity about the Storm King Mountain power plant case. The Treasury Department is also considering no longer having contributions to the Sierra Club be tax deductible. The reason for this change is that the club is using some of the contributions to pay for lobbying, and lobbying is not tax deductible.

Carroll, Maurice. “Sierra Club Irks Lawyer For F.P.C./ Conservationists Accused of Intimidating Utilities.” New York Times 9 Dec. 1966: 36.

This New York Times article reveals that some people are accusing the Sierra Club lawyers of intimidating the Utilities and their witnesses. This remark was made after there were several outbursts during the Federal Power Commission hearings by David Sive, the lawyer for the Sierra Club.

“Con Ed Fish Study Goes on Despite Setback in Court.” 5 Jan. 1966: 21.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison is planning a study of Hudson River striped bass and their spawning habitats.

“Con Ed Group Formed.” The Evening News 18 Feb. 1966: 3B.

This Evening News article reports that the Hudson Valley Progress Committee has formed in Cornwall at the home of George Dempsey in order to bring together Cornwall residents in favor of Con Edison’s projects and these names will be presented at the FPC hearings in the spring.

“Con Ed May Build Plant Underground.” The Evening News 24 Feb. 1966: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison is considering building its hydroelectric plant underground as studies are being conducted to determine if this is a feasible option. If so, Con Edison will likely propose the idea to the FPC at the next set of hearings.

“Con Ed Will Appeal Storm King Rebuff.” New York Times 23 Mar. 1966: 38.

This article from the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison is planning on asking the United States Supreme Court to overturn the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit which denied their building license that the Federal Power Commission had granted them, and ordered further and more in depth hearings.

“Con Edison Eager to Restate Case.” The Evening News 26 Jan. 1966: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison Chairman Harlan C. Forbes has stated that although he regrets the delays to start construction, he is eager for Con Edison to restate its case before the FPC commission.

“Cornwall Taxpayers Pursue Con Ed Fight.” The Evening News 5 Jan. 1966: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the Cornwall Taxpayers Water Protection Association plans to continue their fight against the transfer of the Upper Reservoir to Con Edison through the courts, despite the fact the license has been nullified.

Denton, Larry. “Con Ed Denies Abandoning Fight.” The Evening News 7 Jan. 1966: 1.

This Evening News article reports that Con Ed has vowed to fight for their hydroelectric plant “until the bitter end.”

“Dig He Must: John Vincent Cleary.” New York Times 10 Dec. 1966: 28.

This article in the New York Times gives a brief biography of John Vincent Cleary, who is the President of Consolidated Edison. The article also briefly mentions how he is handling the hearing case concerning the pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain.

Dwyer, Thomas E. “Benefits of Con Edison Project Cited by Man from Cornwall.” Letter. The Evening News 5 Jan. 1966: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor is in rebuttal to a letter written by Raymond Bell about Con Ed’s project coming to a ‘screeching halt’.

“F.P.C. Hears Expert On Storm King Lines.” New York Times 1 Dec. 1966: 36.

This New York Times article reports that a witness at the Federal Power Commission hearings regarding the power plant on Storm King Mountain reported that it would cost Consolidated Edison five times as much to bury the overhead transmission lines that would go through Putnam County underground.

“FPC Sets Con Edison Hearing.” The Evening News 25 Jan. 1966: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has set the pre-hearing conference for March 22 and a hearing will be held in the state at a time and place to be named later.

“Fill Permit Sought by Con Edison.” The Evening News 27 Jan. 1966: 12A.

This Evening News article reports that Con Edison has filed an application for a Department of the Army permit to place fill in the Hudson River at Cornwall-on-Hudson for a recreation park.

“Future of the Hudson Valley.” New York Times 2 Feb. 1966: 34.

This article from the New York Times discusses how Governor Rockefeller has improved his position in regards to the future of the Hudson River in two main areas. One area is by promoting the formation of a commission made up of New York State, New Jersey, and the Federal Government to watch the Hudson River and make sure that its beauty is protected. The other area is the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain, which the Governor previously supported. He now claims that an alternative measure should be pursued if one can be found.

Garrett, William A. “Con Edison Hearing Protested.” The Evening News 26 Jan. 1966: 11B.

This Evening News article reports that Richard Ottinger has asked the FPC to give 90 days rather than 60 days to prepare for the upcoming hearings.

Garrett, William A. “New Con Ed Hearings Set.” The Evening News 14 Jan. 1966: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC has decided to obey the Court of Appeals and call more hearings in the spring, as it let the time to ask the Court of Appeals for a more “complete record” lapse.

Garrett, William A. “New Con Edison Hearings Expected.” The Evening News 8 Jan. 1966: 1.

This Evening News article reports that the FPC is expected to call new hearings for Con Edison at the end of March, when Con Ed is expected to call new testimony on how the project could have helped during the November blackout.

Garrett, William H. “Power Men Press for Hydro Sites.” The Evening News 27 Jan. 1966: 5B.

This Evening News article reports that the American Public Power Association recommended that northeastern hydroelectric sites be developed to counter future power failures.

Graham, Fred P. “Supreme Court Paves Way For New Storm King Test.” New York Times
17 May 1966: 1.

This article from the New York Times announces that the Supreme Court has refused to review the decision that the United States Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit has made regarding the license for the Storm King Mountain power plant. This means that the new hearings before the Federal Power Commission will begin on October 17th as planned.

“Hearings on Storm King Ordered to Begin Oct. 17.” New York Times 24 Mar. 1966: 28.

This article in the New York Times announces that the new hearings before the Federal Power Commission concerning the power plant on Storm King Mountain will begin on October 17th.

Hesse, Rayburn F. “Rocky: Con Ed Far From Scuttled.” The Times Herald Record 4 Feb. 1966: 4.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Gov. Rockefeller stated the fears caused by the Hudson River Valley Commission (HVRC) report are unfounded because the HRVC “has no authority, is only advisory, lacks condemnations powers, and cannot bind the legislators to its recommendations.”

Hofmann, Paul. “Storm King Project Would Compel City To Cut Water Flow.” New York Times 20 Nov. 1966: 1.

This New York Times article reveals that in order for Consolidated Edison to build a hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain, they would have to shut down the Catskill Aqueduct for four months. The Catskill Aqueduct is one of the major water suppliers for New York City. The company has assured that they will only shut down the Aqueduct in the winter when the city can receive all the water it needs from the Delaware Aqueduct. James Marcus, the Commissioner of Water Supply, Gas and Electricity has commented that he has a lot of questions for Consolidated Edison, and if he feels that the project will damage the Aqueduct in any way that he will not allow the plant to be built.

Johnston, Richard J. H. “Con Edison Refueling Nuclear Reactor at Indian Point/ Replenishment of Plant Is the First in 3 ½ Years.” New York Times 16 Mar. 1966: 47.

This New York Times article discusses the refueling of the Indian Point nuclear power plant. It also mentions the second nuclear power plant that Consolidated Edison is planning to build on Indian Point. Finally it mentions that the building construction industry from the counties of Westchester and Putnam are supporting the Storm King Mountain pumped storage power plant that Consolidated Edison is attempting to build.

Jones, William H. “Con Edison Plant Held Cost Factor.” Letter. The Evening News
27 Jan. 1966: 6A.

This Evening News letter to the editor remarks that the Con Edison plant would be the areas first short-range supply plant and will keep the costs of electric power down over a period of years.

Kihss, Peter. “Alternatives to Con Ed’s Cornwall Plant Sought/ But Utility Defends Project – Denies Threat to Life of Plants and Animals.” New York Times 18 Oct. 1966: 35.

This New York Times article mentions that opponents to the proposed pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain are once again searching for alternative ways to generate electricity. Consolidated Edison claims, however, that all alternatives would be costlier than the hydroelectric power plant. The favorite alternative of conservationists are turbines fueled by natural gas, and according to Con Ed, this would be the costliest method of all.

Kihss, Peter. “City and Con Edison Agree on Air Pollution Plan/ Utility to Close 3 Plants Here in Exchange for Backing of Cornwall Project.” New York Times 18 May 1966: 48.

This New York Times article reveals that Mayor Lindsay of New York City and Consolidated Edison have agreed upon a plan in which to reduce the air pollution in New York City, which has been of major concern to many people. Consolidated Edison will build plants outside of the city that do not pollute the air as heavily, and will shut down three of the older plants within New York City. In return, the City of New York will support Consolidated Edison in their fight to build a pumped storage power plant on Storm King Mountain, as long as the company makes every attempt to preserve the natural beauty of the area.

Kimpel, Helmut. “70 Parties to Argue in Con Ed Case.” The Times Herald Record
21 Mar. 1966: 4.

This Times Herald Record article discusses the arguments and describes the major questions to be addressed in the upcoming round of FPC hearings.  The FPC was ordered by the Court of Appeals to hold the hearings again based on the evidence that they did not consider all of the arguments against the power plant.

Kimpel, Helmut. “Con Ed Cancels Contract but not its Cornwall Plans.” The Times Herald Record 8 Jan. 1966: 33.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison cancelled its contract with the Utah Mining Company, the general contractor for its Cornwall Project, but it has not changed the company’s determination to build the plant.

Kimpel, Helmut. ‘Con Ed Still Banking on Storm King Plant.” The Times Herald Record 4 Jan. 1966: 9.

This Times Herald Record article reports that Con Edison has no plans to abandon its plans for building its hydroelectric plant at Cornwall despite the recent setbacks.

Kimpel, Helmut. “Con Ed Weighs Next Cornwall Move.” The Times Herald Record
10 Jan. 1966: 9.

This Times Herald Record article describes the current controversy surrounding the Con Edison hydroelectric plant and Con Edison’s options in making its next move.

Kimpel, Helmut. “Court Based Reversal on Rehearing Denial.” The Evening News
5 Jan. 1966: 21.

This Times Herald Record article reports that the Court of Appeals was able to revoke Con Ed’s license based on the FPC’s refusal to hold new hearings for opposing conservation groups.

Lissner, Will. “Con Ed Studying A Clean-Air Plan/ May Generate City’s Power at Plant in Trenton.” New York Times 17 Jun. 1966: 35.

This New York Times article discusses the new power plants that Consolidated Edison is planning to build to clean up the air, as well as generate the increasing amount of electricity that the city demands. The company maintains, however, that no matter how many power plants they build they will still need the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain because no other plant can provide immediate power in case of a blackout.

“Moderation on the Hudson.” Editorial. The Evening News 2 Feb. 1966: 10A.

The Evening News editorial comments on the moderate viewpoint expressed by the Hudson River Valley Commission created by Nelson Rockefeller. Although the Committee urges Con Edison to find an alternative to Storm King, if they cannot find an alternative then they should go ahead and build the plant but minimize the affect it would have on the scenery.

“New York/ For Hudson: Plan for Beauty.” New York Times 6 Feb. 1966: E2.

This article from the New York Times discusses the Hudson River Valley Commission, and its plans to preserve the natural beauty of the Hudson River. One of the plans mentioned is the creation of what could be the longest and narrowest park in the world, which would include purchasing endangered land along its edges. This would mean that Storm King Mountain would also be purchased, which is the site where Consolidated Edison has been trying to build a power plant.

O’Toole, Thomas. “Con Ed May Shift Storm King Plan/ Utility Studies Possibility of an Underground Plant at Its Cornwall Site/ Change May Cut Delays/ Modifications in Proposal Seen as a Means to End Lengthy Court Fight.” New York 24 Feb. 1966: 39.

This article from the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison may be thinking of putting the power plant they want to build on Storm King Mountain underground to try and appease the conservationists that are trying to keep the plant from being built.

“Ottinger Hails Con Ed Rebuff.” The Evening News 3 Jan. 1966: 9B.

This Evening News article describes Ottinger’s praise for the U.S. Court of Appeals decision to force the FPC to hold the hearings again and consider all the issues rather than only the ones the FPC wanted to hear.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Con Ed and Conservationists Find Storm King Fight Costly.” New York Times 24 Nov. 1966: 86.

This article in the New York Times discusses the cost that each side is dealing with fighting the battle over whether the power plant on Storm King Mountain will be built or not. Consolidated Edison alone has spent about 14 million dollars, and they have not done a single thing to actually start building the plant yet.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Con Ed Defends Cornwall Plan/ Says Alternative Is More Coal-Burning Plants, Thus More Pollution, in City.” New York Times 3 Feb. 1966: 33.

This article in the New York Times reports that Consolidated Edison is claiming that if they cannot build the power plant on Storm King Mountain, their only other alternative will be to build more coal-burning power plants, which will add to the pollution of New York City’s air which many people are very concerned about. Mr. Forbes, chairman of the company’s board of directors also commented on the pains that Con Ed is going through to make sure that the power plant is not obtrusive. He discusses the landscaping that the company is planning on doing, and the park that they intend to build which will improve the landscape and the riverfront.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Dispute Over Effect on Water Supplies Flares at Storm King Hydroelectric Power Project Hearing.” New York Times 22 Nov. 1966: 48.

This article from the New York Times reports that there was a very heated dispute that interrupted the Federal Power Commission hearing on the Storm King Mountain power plant. The debate was over whether shutting off the Catskill Aqueduct will have any negative effects or not. One side was adamant that it would not, while the other side was just as adamant that some communities would be left without water because the source would run dry.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Expert Witness for Storm King Plant Assailed on Way in Which He Prepared His Report.” New York Times 18 Nov. 1966: 46.

This article from the New York Times reveals that Consolidated Edison’s expert witness, Peter Garrison, is being heavily criticized for his report on the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. Mr. Garrison admitted that all the data on which he based his report was taken from the material that Consolidated Edison produced.

Phillips, McCandlish. “F.P.C. Begins New Storm King Hearing Under Court Order.” New York Times 15 Nov. 1966: 39.

This article from the New York Times announces that the new hearings before the Federal Power Commission concerning the issuance of a license to Consolidated Edison so they can build a power plant on Storm King Mountain have begun. A brief review of how the case opened is given.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Foes of Storm King Plant Assail Con Ed at Federal Hearings Here.” New York Times 16 Nov. 1966: 56.

This article from the New York Times gives a brief outline of how the second day of hearings before the Federal Power Commission proceeded.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Moses Assailed Over Storm King/ Conservationists Score His Support of Con Ed Project.” New York Times 8 Mar. 1966: 25.

This New York Times article describes the attacks that Robert Moses has received from conservationists after harshly criticizing their efforts to save Storm King Mountain. Mr. Moses fully supports the Consolidated Edison hydroelectric power plant, and considers its opponents to be “fanatics” and “birdwatchers”. Many conservatives, including congressmen, have returned just as harsh criticism to Mr. Moses.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Neighbors Favor Storm King Plant/ Call It Scenic and Economic Boon at Con Ed Hearing.” New York Times 17 Nov. 1966: 52.

This article from the New York Times reveals that people who live in neighboring towns to Storm King Mountain and the location of the proposed hydroelectric power plant testified in favor of the plant. They feel that the plans that Consolidated Edison have made for the plant will not harm the scenery, and in fact it will benefit it, as well as benefit recreational opportunities.

Phillips, McCandlish. “Rockefeller Seeks Start Of New Era In Hudson Valley/ Asks U.S. and Jersey to Join State in Pact to Preserve the Beauty of the Area/ Broad Plan Is Outlined/ Temporary Agency Suggests Parks and Trails System and Cleanup of Blight.” New York Times 1 Feb. 1966: 1.

This article in the New York Times announces that Governor Rockefeller is asking New Jersey and the Federal Government to join New York in forming a commission that would protect the beauty of the Hudson River. Many suggestions of how the commission could protect the Hudson River are listed. In addition, the Governor reversed his previous stance on supporting Consolidated Edison’s proposed pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain and claimed that if there were any possible alternatives other than the power plant, than that alternative should be pursued.

Poche, Ward. “Dow Reaffirms Con Ed Support: Says New Bill Would Be No Bar.” The Evening News 12 Feb 1966: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Congressman John Dow has introduced a bill that would provide a joint local, state and federal study on the river and all of its phases. The Congressman remarked that the bill would not prohibit the Con Edison project but would place a ban on all other power project for at least eighteen months until the study was completed.

Poche, Ward. “HRVC Counsel Asks Considerations for Local Interests.” The Evening News 28 Feb. 1966: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that counsel for the Hudson River Valley Commission stated at a panel discussion on federal-state-local relations that the interests of the local communities should be taken into consideration, since local opinions were not taken into the HRVC’s report.

Rhodes, Al. “TV Film on Hudson Pollution Called ‘Depressing’.” The Evening News
24 Jan. 1966: 1B.

This Evening News article discusses the CBS documentary entitled “The Majestic Polluted Hudson” and describes it as a depressing disjointed documentary that only showed the bad side of Newburgh and the Hudson River.

“Scenic Hudson Group Says Dow Bill Would Bar Con Ed.” The Evening News 12 Feb. 1966: 1B.

This Evening News article reports that Rod Vandivert, executive director of Scenic Hudson, stated that he believes the Dow bill would bar the Con Edison project because the bill states for 18 months after the date of the act the FPC cannot authorize any construction of power plants. Since the Con Edison license has been voided by the courts and new hearings have been scheduled.

“Storm King Setback.” Editorial. The Evening News 4 Jan. 1966: 4A.

This Evening News editorial remarks that although Con Edison’s plans to build a hydroelectric plant have been given a setback through their loss in the appeals case, the editors believe testimony of the experts who claim there are no other alternatives to the Storm King plant should stand up in court and outweigh the opposition.

“The Storm King Struggle.” New York Times 27 Nov. 1966: E12.

This article in the New York Times gives a very brief description of what has been happening in the Storm King Mountain case, ending with the latest issue of shutting down the Catskill Aqueduct for four months.

“Victory at Storm King.” New York Times 3 Jan. 1966: 26.

This article from the New York Times announces that the United States Court of Appeals has instructed the Federal Power Commission to reopen the Storm King Mountain power plant hearings, which is a huge victory for conservationists. The article outlines the reasons why the Court of Appeals believed that the previous court case was not a complete and accurate record.

Wang, Sam. “Cornwall Invests Con Edison Funds.” The Evening News 14 Jan. 1966: 7B.

This Evening News article discusses and describes the monies turned over to the Village of Cornwall by Con Edison has been invested into various parts of the Con Edison project.

Weaver, Jr. Warren. “Con Ed Sifts Storm King Move; May Shun Appeal for Rehearing.” New York Times 9 Jan. 1966: 56.

This article in the New York Times reveals that Consolidated Edison is not going to appeal the decision that the United States Court of Appeals made regarding the license for the hydroelectric power plant case. A new case will be rescheduled, and it is expected that in order to avoid this situation happening again, the Federal Power Commission will hold a very broad hearing where a wide variety of topics will be covered. The article also covers what topics the author feels the F.P.C. should look into during the new hearing.

Weaver, Jr. Warren. “Con Edison Shifts Storm King Plans/ Entire Power Plant Will Be Put Under the Ground, Company Tells F.P.C./ Hearings Next October/ Utility Acts to Preserve the Beauty of Hudson Valley, as U.S. Court Demanded.” New York Times 1 Jun. 1966: 49.

This article from the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison has altered their plans for the power plant on Storm King Mountain by proposing to put the power plant underground. They are hopeful that this will get the conservationists to stop their fight, and convince the Federal Power Commission to award them a license to build. The new plans will not cost that much more because the company will save by not having to build an actual building. While Scenic Hudson applauds this step forward by Consolidated Edison they say they will still fight the plant because this new plan only addresses one of the concerns.

Weinraub, Bernard. “Step-by-Step Check of Storm King May Give Item-by-Item Answers/ F.P.C. Aide Visits Storm King Area/ Tour Gives Him a First-Hand Look at Proposed Site of Con Edison Plant.” New York Times 13 Dec. 1966: 49.

This New York Times article announces that Ewing G. Simpson, a Federal Power Commission examiner visited the actual location where the proposed hydroelectric power plant would be built. Engineers for the project went over the blueprints with the examiner, showing him exactly where things would be located. The examiner was joined by a dozen other opponents and proponents of the power plant.

 

1967

Bird, David. “Con Ed Shifting Site Of Plant on Hudson.” New York Times 28 Sep. 1967: 1.

This New York Times article announces that Consolidated Edison is willing to accept a new location a mile and a half south of where they originally planned to build their plant, as long as it will end the controversy and opposition to the plant. The director of Scenic Hudson, Rod Vandivert, announced that moving the plant a mile and a half will not end the opposition. It was also announced that Central Hudson is planning on abandoning their plans to build a hydroelectric power plant across the river from Storm King.

“Breakneck Ridge To Become A Park/ Ottinger Discloses Plans of a Rockefeller Group.”
New York Times 16 Nov. 1967: 68.

This New York Times article announces that the State is planning on purchasing Breakneck Ridge and turning it into a State Park. Central Hudson was originally planning on building a hydroelectric power plant at Breakneck Ridge. Due to the large amounts of opposition to Consolidated Edison’s plant on Storm King Mountain, Central Hudson have abandoned those plans and are going to sell it to the state.

Burks, Edward C. “Shift in Site Fails to Placate Foes of Con Ed Plant.” New York Times 29 Sep. 1967: 39.

This New York Times article announces that Consolidated Edison’s proposal to move the location of the hydroelectric power plant a mile and a half downstream has not alleviated any of the opposition to the plant.

Callahan, John P. “Kennedy Urges Con Ed Inquiries/ Asks Two Investigations of Payments to Cornwall.” New York Times 26 Aug. 1967: 15.

This article from the New York Times mentions that Senator Robert F. Kennedy is asking for two separate investigations into the $2.7 million that Consolidated Edison has paid to the Village of Cornwall.

Folsom, Merrill. “Power Expanding In Hudson Valley/ New Plant Due in Tomkins Cove, but Con Ed is Still Blocked on Storm King.” New York Times 2 Jan. 1967: 21.

This New York Times article discusses the expanding utility business in the Hudson Valley. An increasing amount of power plants are continuing to be built. The proposed hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain, however, is still being blocked by conservationists. Central Hudson Gas & Electric has announced that it has postponed its plan to build a pumped storage power plant across the river from where the Storm King power plant would be built.

“Gateway to Hudson Highlands.” New York Times 18 Nov. 1967: 36.

This New York Times article applauds the creation of a 3,000-acre state park at Breakneck Ridge.

Lissner, Will. “Con Ed Defends Storm King Plan/ Cheapest Alternative Would Cost $119-Million Extra Over 20 Years, It Says.” New York Times 14 Aug. 1967: 1.

This article in the New York Times reports that Consolidated Edison is claiming in a brief that has been filed with the Federal Power Commission, that the most economically feasible way to generate electricity, next to the Storm King Mountain power plant, would cost $119 million more than the hydroelectric power plant would. They also claimed that using gas turbines, which the conservationists have used as a feasible alternative multiple times, would cost $137 million more.

Maiorana, Ronald. “Con Ed Defends Storm King Plans/ Utility Answers Critics in a Brief for
F.P.C.” New York Times 5 Sep. 1967: 48.

This New York Times article reports on a brief that Consolidated Edison submitted in reply to criticisms from opponents of the Storm King Mountain Hydroelectric Power Plant. Opponents are claiming that the power plant will destroy the scenic beauty of the area, but the company claims that it will improve the scenic beauty because they will be constructing a waterfront park in place of decaying buildings.

Maiorana, Ronald. “Storm King’s Foes Dispute Cost Data/ Nuclear – Gas Turbine Less Costly Than Hydro Power, Conservationists Say.” New York Times 15 Aug. 1967: 1.

This article published in the New York Times reports that conservationists are challenging Consolidated Edison’s figures for how expensive alternatives to Storm King Mountain will be. In a brief filed to the Federal Power Commission conservationists claimed that the most economic power plant would cost $27 million less than the hydroelectric power plant, rather than $119 million more, as Con Ed has claimed.

Millones, Peter. “Con Ed Is Striving To Improve Image.” New York Times 12 Feb. 1967: 1.

This article from the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison is trying to change its public image. As it stands right now, Con Ed is widely known as “the company you love to hate.”

Millones, Peter. “Ottinger Decries Con Ed Payment/ Double Propriety of Giving Cornwall $2.7-Million.” New York Times 25 Aug. 1967: 24.

This article from the New York Times reveals that Representative Ottinger is questioning Consolidated Edison paying the Village of Cornwall $2.7 million over the last four years. The payments have been to cover the water supply expenses, and the legal battles that the Village of Cornwall has had to deal with.

 

1968

Bird, David. “City Asks F.P.C. to Block Con Ed at Storm King.” New York Times 28 Oct. 1968: 95.

This New York Times article announces that the City of New York has written a petition, and is officially against the pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain. The city is afraid that the blasting for the power plant will damage the Catskill Aqueduct, which is the city’s main water supply. Consolidated Edison is claiming that the blasting will not have any effect on the Aqueduct.

Bryant, Nelson. “Wood, Field and Stream/ Conservationists Pressing Their Fight Against Storm King Power Plant.” New York Times 17 Oct. 1968: 64.

This New York Times article briefly discusses the opposition to the Storm King Mountain power plant. It also announces the first of a series of seminars that will be discussing the Storm King Mountain controversy.

L. O. Rothschild Con Ed Foe, Dies/ Helped to Save Palisades – In Fight for Storm King.”
New York Times 4 Dec. 1968: 47.

This article from the New York Times announces that L. O. Rothschild has passed away. Mr. Rothschild was a well-known conservationist. Through the years he has been involved in many fights to save the beauty of nature, including the most recent Storm King Mountain hydroelectric power plant.

“Report on Storm King.” New York Times 8 Aug. 1968: 32.

This article from the New York Times announces that the hearing examiner for the Federal Power Commission has recommended to the Commission that Consolidated Edison should be granted their license to build the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain.

Shanahan, Eileen. “Storm King Plan By Con Ed Gains In F.P.C. Report/ Examiner Supports Building of Power Plant on Hudson – No Peril to Fish Found.” New York Times 7 Aug. 1968: 1.

This article from the New York Times announces that the hearing examiner for the Federal Power Commission is recommending that Consolidated Edison be granted their license to build the pumped storage power plant on Storm King Mountain. The examiner, Mr. Simpson, feels that the power plant will not destroy the natural beauty of the area, because the area has already had highways and railroads built on it. People are still waiting for the Commission to make it’s decision.

“The Storm King Reopening.” New York Times 22 Nov. 1968: 46.

This New York Times article announces that the Federal Power Commission has decided to reopen the hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant due to the city’s concern that the blasting for the plant will damage the Catskill Aqueduct, which is the city’s main water supply.

1969

Bird, David. “Con Ed Is Backed By Hudson Study/ Report Says Proposed Plant Would Kill Few Fish.” New York Times 14 Dec. 1969: 84.

This New York Times article reveals that a Hudson River study group has announced that the Storm King Mountain power plant will only kill 6.2 percent of the striped bass in the Hudson River, which the group feels is an inconsequential amount. The danger to the fish comes from being sucked up the pumps and then blasted back down again when the water was released. However, they fear that combined with the fish kills from other plants it will do damage to the overall population.

Bird, David. “Cornwall  Split Over Storm King Plan.” New York Times 22 Jun. 1969: 68.

This article from the New York Times discusses the different reactions to the Storm King Mountain power plant. Conservationists are completely against the plant, but members of the Village of Cornwall are completely supporting it. They believe that the plant will clean up the waterfront, and will bring many other benefits to the town.

“City Fights Ruling For Con Ed Plant.” New York Times 29 Dec. 1969: 59.

This article in the New York Times announces that the city is planning on fighting the decision of the examiner for the Federal Power Commission, who recommended that the hydroelectric plant on Storm King Mountain be built. They city is afraid that blasting for the plant will damage the Catskill Aqueduct, which is the cities main water supply.

“Con Edison’s Dilemma.” New York Times 26 Jul. 1969: 24.

This New York Times article reports that Consolidated Edison’s decision to enlarge the Astoria plant is violating their promise not to build any more power plants that are run on fossil fuels, however the New York Times believes that this is preferable to building the power plant on Storm King Mountain.

“Decision by P.S.C. On Con Ed Scored By Conservationists.” New York Times 6 Dec. 1969: 39.

This New York Times article reports that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference is criticizing the Public Service Commission because they are not putting any blame on Consolidated Edison for New York’s power shortage. They are attributing the lack of sufficient power to the opposition of the Storm King Mountain power plant.

Farrell, William E. “Con Ed Confident On Power Supply/ Calls Chance of Failure This Summer ‘Reasonably Thin’.” New York Times 22 Jul. 1969: 80.

This New York Times article reports on Consolidated Edison’s power supply, and it makes a side note that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has taken offense to a comment that Mr. Luce made, that the opposition to their plants were “undermining company efforts to meet increasing demands.”

Fowler, Glenn. “Almost Any Policy Has Its Drawbacks.” New York Times 27 Jul. 1969: R1.

This New York Times article discusses the difficultly with building plants to increase the power needs. Consolidated Edison needs to create more power, but opponents do not want them to build a plant on Storm King Mountain because it will destroy the scenic beauty. Other people do not want them to expand the Astoria plant because that will increase the air pollution. Somehow, if more power is going to be generated, some sacrifices are going to have to be made.

Fox, Sylvan. “Con Ed Generator Resumes Service, Ending City Crisis/ Repair Work Is Completed Week Early – Luce Hints of Bid for Rate Rise.” New York Times 18 Aug. 1969: 1.

This article from the New York Times discusses the power issues that Consolidated Edison has been having. It gives a brief description of the Storm King Mountain project.

Fox, Sylvan. “Con Ed Power Cut 20% By Mishaps; Long Crisis Ahead/ Generator Repair May Take Up to Month – Consumers Help Save Electricity.” New York Times 5 Aug. 1969: 1.

This article in the New York Times discusses the problems that Consolidated Edison is having with power lately. The article also briefly mentions the Storm King Power Plant that the company is trying to build, and the main objections to it.

Madden, Richard L. “Con Ed’s Storm King Project Is Called Peril to City Aqueduct.” New York Times 5 Mar. 1969: 30.

This article from the New York Times reports that a witness at the Federal Power Commission hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant has reported that the construction for the power plant will damage the Catskill Aqueduct that supplies New York City with water.

Madden, Richard L. “F.P.C. Aide Backs Con Edison Plant/ Storm King Site Preferable, Examiner Rules – Verdict Is Subject to Review.” New York Times 24 Dec. 1969: 1.

This article from the New York Times announces that Mr. Simpson, the examiner of the Federal Power Commission has recommended yet again that Consolidated Edison should be granted their license to build the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. He has decided the project will not be a danger to the Catskill Aqueduct as the city has feared.

“Pressuring the F.P.C.” New York Times 11 Oct. 1969: 36.

This New York Times article reveals that Representative John Murphy is pressuring the Federal Power Commission to come to a decision on the Storm King Mountain case, which the newspaper feels is inappropriate.

“Storm King Dangers.” New York Times 26 Dec. 1969: 28.

This article from the New York Times announces that the hearing examiner for the Federal Power Commission has rejected the cities concerns about the Catskill Aqueduct and recommended that Consolidated Edison be granted their license to build the power plant on Storm King Mountain.

 

1970

“3 Groups Seek Rehearing On Storm King Project.” New York Times 18 Sep. 1970: 16.

This New York Times article announces that three opponents have submitted an application to the Federal Power Commission to reopen the hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant case. The three applicants were the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, the Sierra Club, and the Sierra Club’s Atlantic Chapter.

Brownmiller, Susan. “All Power (Sometimes) To the People.” New York Times 12 Apr. 1970: SM118.

This New York Times article is a condensed biography of the history of Consolidated Edison, as well as the history of Charles Luce, the new chairman and chief executive officer for the power company. A good portion of the article covers the Storm King Mountain controversy, the opposition to it, and the effects the struggle has had on Consolidated Edison.

Bryant, Nelson. “Wood, Field and Stream/ Conservation Group Lodges Objection to Fishery Study of Hudson Pollution.” New York Times 11 Jan. 1970: 192.

This New York Times article discusses Rod Vandivert’s objections to the Hudson River Fisheries Study. He feels the report was not well conducted and is inaccurate.

Carmer, Carl. “The Hudson River/ A Natural and Unnatural History. By Robert H. Boyle. 304 pp. New York: W. W. Norton & Co. $6.95.” New York Times 15 Feb. 1970: 266.

This article in the New York Times is a book review written by Carl Carmer about Robert Boyle’s book The Hudson River: A Natural and Unnatural History. Mr. Carmer praises the book for it’s style as well as for bringing attention to the abuses that the Hudson River has taken through the years and continues to take.

“City Seeks to Bar Con Ed Plant; Charges Water Supply Threat.” New York Times
13 Feb. 1970: 22.

This article in the New York Times announces that New York City still intends to try and block the construction of the hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. The city fears the blasting for the plant will damage the Catskill Aqueduct which is the cities main water supply.

“F.P.C. Schedules Hearing On Con Ed Storm King Plan.” New York Times 10 Mar. 1970: 51.

This New York Times article announces that the Federal Power Commission has scheduled another set of hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant case. The City of New York has renewed its claim that blasting for the power plant will harm their water supply, the Catskill Aqueduct. The hearings will deal with this issue again.

“Light and Heat.” New York Times 21 Aug. 1970: 31.

This article from the New York Times announces that the Federal Power Commission has granted Consolidated Edison a license to build a hydroelectric plant on Storm King Mountain. The New York Times, however, still believes that the power plant should not be built, and they are glad that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has vowed to continue the fight.

Madden, Richard L. “F.P.C. Authorizes Con Ed To Build Storm King Plant/ Project Near Cornwall Wins Approval of Commission for 2d Time in 5 Years/ Opinion Is Unanimous/ But Further Court Action Appears Likely as Group Vows to Fight Decision.” New York Times 20 Aug. 1970: 1.

This New York Times article announces that the Federal Power Commission has granted a license to Consolidated Edison to build a hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. This is the second time the F.P.C. has granted a license to Con Ed. The F.P.C. has determined that there are no other good alternatives to build in place of the pumped storage plant.

“Rehearing Refused On Cornwall Plant.” New York Times 13 Oct. 1970: 29.

This article from the New York Times announces that the Federal Power Commission has refused to reopen the hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant case.

 

1971

“Appeals Court Approves Con Ed Storm King Plant.” New York Times 24 Oct. 1971: 1.

This New York Times article reveals that the United State Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has upheld the license the Federal Power Commission granted to Consolidated Edison to build a hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. They feel the F.P.C. has thoroughly reviewed all the facts, and have adequately protected the interest of the public. Opponents to the power plant are planning on appealing the decision to the United States Supreme Court.

Bird, David. “Storm King Plant Given Clearance By State Agency/ Con Edison Plans Certified as No Peril to Hudson – Power Is Cut in City.” 19 Aug. 1971: 1.

This article from the New York Times announces that the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation has certified that the Storm King Mountain hydroelectric power plant project will not damage the water quality. Environmentalists have claimed that the project will make the fresh water supplies undrinkable, but the Commissioner disagrees. Conservationists are very disappointed and plan on appealing the decision.

“Environmental Hedging.” New York Times 21 Aug. 1971: 26.

This New York Times article criticizes the decision that the State Department of Environmental Conservation made concerning how the proposed Storm King Mountain power plant would affect the water. The decision stated that Consolidated Edison could build the plant because they believed the water would not be affected, however if it was affected than construction should stop immediately. The newspaper finds it amazing that the Government would choose to sanction the building of a power plant that would cost $234 million when they were not certain that it would be harmless.

Kihss, Peter. “City Faces Power Crises For at Least 3 Months.” New York Times 8 Feb. 1971: 42.

This New York Times article discusses the power crises that the City of New York is expected to be in for the next few months. The Storm King Mountain power plant is briefly discussed.

Kihss, Peter. “New Moves Are Planned to Bar Con Edison’s Storm King Plant.” New York Times 25 Oct. 1971: 66.

This New York Times article reveals the next moves for the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, who is still determined to block the Storm King Mountain power plant from being built. Right now Scenic Hudson is planning on appealing the Court of Appeals decision to the Supreme Court, and at the same time challenge the water quality certificate that Commissioner Diamond of Environmental Conservation granted Consolidated Edison.

Kihss, Peter. “A Power Squeeze To ’74 or ’75 Seen/ Official Defends Con Ed – Kretchmer for Priorities.” New York Times 15 Feb. 1971: 27.

This New York Times article discusses the power problems that Consolidate Edison has been having, and how they expect this to continue until 1974 or ’75. The Storm King Mountain power plant is briefly discussed as part of Consolidated Edison’s plan to provide sufficient power, and why it being held up.

Kihss, Peter. “State Is Planning to Build Power Plant to Assist City.” New York Times
6 May 1971: 1.

This New York Times article reveals that the State of New York is planning on building a pumped storage power plant to help Consolidated Edison, who is struggling to meet the cities power needs. The article mentions Consolidated Edison’s plan to build their own pumped storage power plant on Storm King Mountain, which is held up in the courts because it is being protested by conservationists.

Lubasch, Arnold H. “Conservationists Ask New Hearing on Con Ed Plant.” New York Times 7 Nov. 1971: 81.

This article from the New York Times announces that conservationists, led by Scenic Hudson, and including the City of New York, have filed to have new hearings in front of the United States Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals recently upheld the license that the Federal Power Commission granted to Consolidated Edison to build their power plant on Storm King Mountain.

Stern, Michael. “10-Year Power Outlook Is Held Bleak.” New York Times 17 Mar. 1971: 1.

This New York Times article discusses the serious problems that Consolidated Edison is having with generating power and meeting the city’s growing power needs. Storm King Mountain is briefly discussed as an example of part of the problem finding locations for power plants to be built.

“Suit Filed To Block Con Edison’s Plant.” New York Times 16 Dec. 1971: 42.

This New York Times article announces that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, as well as other parties, has filed a suit with the state Supreme Court to protest the ruling that the hydroelectric power plant would not damage the fresh water supply.

1972

Bird, David. “Barriers Remain.” New York Times 20 Jun. 1972: 22.

This New York Times article discusses that although some hurdles have been cleared out of the way for Consolidated Edison, they are not near to building their pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain yet. One of the major barriers that still remain is the suit that environmentalists brought to court, challenging the Water Quality certificate that the Department of Conservation gave to Consolidated Edison.

Bird, David. “Diamond Unsure About Storm King/ State Official Says Project Might Mar Hudson View.” New York Times 19 Mar. 1972: 27.

This New York Times article reveals that Mr. Diamond, the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation has “grave concerns” about the Storm King Mountain power plant project, despite the fact that he approved its construction last year. He said that his concerns were about the scenic quality, and he had no choice but to approve the power plant because his business was the quality of the water and he didn’t feel that the power plant would harm it.

Bird, David. “Environmentalists Hail A.E.C. Ruling on Con Ed.” New York Times 4 Oct. 1972: 49.

This New York Times article reports that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference is praising the Atomic Energy Commission for asking Consolidated Edison to build expensive cooling systems on their nuclear power plants to protect fish life. Scenic Hudson also feels that this same type of thinking should be applied to the proposed hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain.

Bird, David. “Gas Turbines Get Credit For Keeping City Aglow.” New York Times 4 Sep. 1972: 31.

This New York Times article describes how Consolidated Edison has installed and used gas turbines to avert the power crisis, and they managed to get through the summer without any brownouts or power shortages. They still claim that they would not have had to install the turbines if environmentalists were not blocking the Storm King Mountain power plant from being built.

Bird, David. “New Batteries May Obviate Pumped-Storage Power.” New York Times
30 May 1972: 38.

This New York Times article reveals that new batteries that power researchers have been working on may make the controversial pumped storage power plants unnecessary. These molten-salt batteries would store electricity until it was needed, and they wouldn’t scar the landscape.

Bird, David. “Storm King Plant Backed By Court/ Appellate Division Upholds Commissioner’s Ruling.” New York Times 1 Jul. 1972: 50.

This New York Times article reveals that Consolidated Edison won another victory in the courts. The Appellate Division of the State Supreme Court overturned a ruling from one of their lower courts that had rejected the Water Quality certificate that Con Ed had been granted. The Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has stated that they will not give up the fight.

Farrell, William E. “Governor Offers Power-Plant Bill/ Measure Would Expedite Siting of New Facilities.” New York Times 9 Apr. 1972: 53.

This New York Times article announces that Governor Rockefeller has sent to the Legislature an important bill that, if passed, would create a five-man Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment to try and speed up the process of selecting sites to build power plant. The Governor is exasperated with all the delays in building new power plants because suitable sites cannot be agreed upon.

Glueck, Grace. “Artist-in-Residence for Mother Earth.” New York Times 12 Mar. 1972: D21.

This New York Times article announces the publication of “A Sense of Place: Artists and the American Land,” by Alan Gussow. Mr. Gussow is an artist-in-residence, who promotes painting scenes of nature to encourage people to enjoy the beauty of Mother Nature, and to try to conserve that beauty. Mr. Gussow was inspired to this calling by the Storm King Mountain case. When he heard about the case he quit his teaching job and devoted himself to saving the environment.

“High Court Bars Storm King Plea/ Conservationists Rejected in Challenge of Approval for Con Edison Plant.” New York Times 20 Jun. 1972: 1.

This New York Times article announces that the Supreme Court has decided to reject the plea from conservationists to block the construction of the hydroelectric plant on Storm King Mountain.

Knight, Michael. “State to Investigate Ways To Limit Electricity Use.” New York Times
17 Jul. 1972: 1.

This New York Times article announces that the Public Service Commission plans on investigating how Consolidated Edison plans on producing electricity for the next ten years, as well as how the people will use that electricity. They will focus particularly on the use of heaters and air conditioners. They also plan on looking at the proposed Storm King Mountain power plant.

Macbeth, Norman. “Letters to the Editor/ Electrical Power for the People.” New York Times
27 Jul. 1972: 30.

This “Letter to the Editor” in the New York Times is written in support of the pumped storage plant. The author thinks it is a shame that it will still be awhile before the plant is built because the added power is needed. He believes the hydroelectric power plant will cause the least amount of pollution, and the amount of fish that will be lost will be worth the added power that will be gained.

Saunders, Alexander. “Letters to the Editor/ Storm King Project Opposed.” New York Times
7 Aug. 1972: 26.

This New York Times “Letter to the Editor” article is in reply to the “Letter to the Editor” written by Norman Macbeth. The author replies to every point that Mr. Macbeth made.

“Supreme Court Actions.” New York Times 20 Jun. 1972: 22.

This New York Times article announces that the Supreme Court has decided by an eight to one vote to not block construction of the Storm King Mountain power plant that Consolidated Edison is planning to build on Storm King Mountain.

“View From Storm King.” New York Times 29 Jun. 1972: 38.

This New York Times article discusses how construction of Storm King Mountain will not begin for quite some time, despite the fact that the Supreme Court refused to block it.

1973

Bird, David. “Court Backs Con Ed On Storm King Plan.” New York Times 15 Mar. 1973: 89.

This article from the New York Times announces that the State Court of Appeals has upheld the decision that the power plant on Storm King Mountain will not violate water quality standards. This is a big hurdle that Consolidated Edison has overcome, however environmentalists still continue to fight, and they plan to bring new challenges before the Federal Power Commission, mainly that there are more efficient ways to get the peaking power that the city needs.

Bryant, Nelson. “Wood, Field, and Stream: Striped Bass Endangered.” New York Times
16 Dec. 1973: 254.

This New York Times article discusses how some people believe that the striped bass is becoming endangered. The article mentions how studies show that 25 to 75 percent of the production of striped bass in the Hudson River will be destroyed by the power plant on Storm King Mountain, and that the Hudson River is the principle supplier of the striped bass population for New York and New England.

Hudson, Edward. “Blumenthal Assails Storm King Plans.” New York Times 12 Oct. 1973: 49.

This New York Times article announces that assemblyman Albert Blumenthal was criticizing Consolidated Edison for their plan to build a pumped storage plant on Storm King Mountain. Mr. Blumenthal believes the city does have power problems, but the problem is in the transmission lines, and not the generation of power, therefore the plan to build on Storm King Mountain is completely unnecessary.

“More Power To The People.” New York Times 30 Jul. 1973: 15.

This New York Times article announces that Consolidated Edison is finally planning on beginning construction for their hydroelectric power plant on Storm King Mountain. The remainder of the article answers the important questions that people may have about the plant, why it is needed, how it will work, why this solution is better than others, etc.

“Report Says Storm King Plant May Peril 75% of Bass in River.” New York Times
16 Dec. 1973: 76.

This article in the New York Times reveals that a preliminary report from the Atomic Energy Commission is claiming that the Storm King Mountain plant may harm 75% of the bass in the Hudson River.

Saunders, Alexander. “The Con Ed Example.” New York Times 7 Nov. 1973: 46.

This Letter to the Editor in the New York Times discusses the irony in Charles Luce’s statement about how people who work to use less electricity are “worthy of a ‘mark of distinction.’ ” The author feels this statement is ironic because Consolidated Edison is not practicing what it preaches, since their Storm King Mountain plant will end up using more energy than it produces, so they will be wasting the most energy of all.

“When Con Edison starts dynamiting Storm King Mountain, keep your fingers crossed. 40% of your water supply may go down the drain.” New York Times 10 Oct. 1973: 28.

This New York Times article discusses the risks that Scenic Hudson sees with Consolidated Edison dynamiting into Storm King Mountain, so close to the Catskill Aqueduct which is the main water supply for the city of New York.

Wren, Christopher S. “Con Edison Vows Storm King Start/ Says It Will Break Ground for Project in November After 10-Year Fight.” New York Times 26 Jul. 1973: 41.

This article in the New York Times reveals that Consolidated Edison has announced that it will break ground for their Storm King Mountain power plant project in November. It has been ten years since the power company first tried to build the plant. Environmentalists, however, have vowed to continue the fight.

1974

Andelman, David A. “Storm King Action Delayed By P.S.C./ Ratification of Pact Refused Pending Contract Study.” New York Times 15 Feb. 1974: 71.

This New York Times article announces that the Public Service Commission refused to ratify the contract that Consolidated Edison had arranged with three construction companies who were to begin working on the Storm King Mountain power plant. The Commission wanted to know why the company had not made contracts with New York construction companies, and why the jobs had not been made available to competitive bidding. Con Ed was very surprised at the refusal.

Bird, David. “New Storm King Hearings Ordered; Aid for Con Edison Stalled in Albany.” New York Times 9 May 1974: 89.

This article from the New York Times announces that the Federal Court of Appeals has ordered the Federal Power Commission to reopen hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant because they do not believe that the issues of the dangers to fish life have been adequately looked into.

“City Loses Appeal On Tap of Aqueduct.” New York Times 9 Jul. 1974: 38.

This New York Times article announces that the State Supreme Court Appellate Division has granted Cornwall the right to tap into the Catskill’s Aqueduct. The town needed to do this because of their plan to sell their reservoir, and current water supply, to Consolidated Edison. The City of New York lost their appeal that Cornwall should not have the right to tap into the Aqueduct.

“Con Edison May Halt Storm King Job.” New York Times 16 Jul. 1974: 39.

This article in the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison may have to suspend construction on the Storm King Mountain plant due to budget problems. The company is now involved in yet another legal battle against the environmentalists.

“F.P.C. Petitioned to Block Con Ed’s Storm King Plant.” New York Times 11 May 1974: 34.

This New York Times article reveals that the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference has petitioned the F.P.C. to stop Consolidated Edison’s construction of the Storm King Mountain plant because the court had just ordered the Commission to hold new hearings on the fish kills issue.

Hill, Gladwin. “Ecological Suits Reported Eased/ Seminar Cites Law Changes That Aid Court Access.” New York Times 19 Feb. 1974: 9.

This article from the New York Times discusses the evolution of environmental law, and cites the Storm King Mountain power plant case as the birth of environmental law, and the ability of citizen groups to challenge environmental issues on behalf of the public.

 

1975

“Follow-Up on The News/ Storm King.” New York Times 5 Jan 1975: 29.

This New York Times article gives the highlights of the Storm King Mountain controversy over the past 12 years, as well as gives the latest update, which is that Consolidated Edison has requested that any further hearings in front of the Federal Power Commission be delayed until October, 1976.

Lissner, Will. “P.S.C. Study Tells Why Con Ed’s Rates Are High.” New York Times 30 Aug. 1975: 23.

This article in the New York Times reviews a report given by the Public Service Commission that looked into why Consolidated Edison’s rates were among the highest in the country. One of the points the Commissioner noted was the companies’ over-reliance on outdated power plants due to the delays in construction on the hydroelectric power plant at Storm King Mountain.

 

1976

“Alexander Saunders, 67, Dead; Hudson River Conservationist.” New York Times 16 Feb. 1976: 18.

This New York Times article announces that Alexander Saunders, chairman of the Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, has died. The short article gives a brief explanation of Storm King Mountain case that Mr. Saunders was fighting for.

“Con Ed Files A Plan For Storm King Unit.” New York Times 6 Mar. 1976: 52.

This article in the New York Times announces that Consolidated Edison has submitted a report to the New York Public Service Commission which they feel shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Storm King Mountain power plant is needed, and is a necessary component of the future of New York’s energy plan.

Severo, Richard. “Hearings Sought on Storm King By F.P.C. Aide.” New York Times
31 Oct. 1976: 55.

This article from the New York Times reveals that the Federal Power Commission has decided to reopen the hearings on the Storm King Mountain power plant to decide if it is actually needed and if it economically possible to build the plant for Consolidated Edison and the citizens of New York.

 

1977

Coburn, Warren B. “Con Edison Official Replies to Ottinger.” Letter. New York Times 10 Apr. 1977: WC16. 

In this New York Times Letter to the Editor, a Vice President from Con Edison responds to Congressman Dick Ottigner’s opposition to Con Edison projects that would reduce the cost of power, as well as the Congressman’s inconsistency on supporting and/or not supporting tax-exempt bonds that would fund a municipal power agency to replace Con Edison.

“Cool Man in a Hot Spot: Charles Franklin Luce.” New York Times 15 July 1977: 2.

This New York Times article examines Charles Luce, Chief Executive Officer for Con Edison and his ability to remain positive about a company that has had serious troubles since he took over in 1967.  The article discusses Luce’s long term goal from 1967 of fostering good customer relations despite power outages in New York City, high prices for electricity, and opposition to building the hydroelectric plant at Storm King Mountain and other nuclear power plants Con Edison had plans to build at that time.

Kifner, John. “Mayor’s Panel Urges Cut in Con Ed’s Rates When Service Is Bad.” New York Times
2 Dec. 1977: A1. 

This New York Times article discusses the findings of the Mayor’s Commission on the causes of the July 1977 blackout and their recommendations to Con Edison.  The Commission stated that the blackout was caused mostly by Con Edison’s poor management, ill-preparedness for emergencies, failure to act promptly and outdated equipment, which led to the recommendation that Con Edison should cut its rates when the company provides inadequate service.  Con Edison maintained that the blackout and future blackouts could still be avoided if the City stopped its opposition to the hydroelectric plant at Cornwall.

McElheny, Victor K. “Con Ed Maps Antiblackout Steps In a Five-Year, $65 Million Plan.” New York Times 29 Dec. 1977: 1.

This New York Times article describes Con Edison’s technical plan to help prevent any future blackouts in New York City.  The plan calls for a shift in always keeping connected with neighboring power grids, reducing power from the north during electrical storms, and the construction of new power lines and plants such as the hydroelectric plant at Cornwall.

Sive, David. “Seabrook, Concorde, and the Law.” New York Times 16 July 1977: 21.

David Sive reveals his thoughts on the environment, the law, and his responsibility to the environment as a lawyer in this New York Times article.  He also discusses the events of an environmental case dealing with protestors who were arrested and fined for unlawfully occupying property where a nuclear plant was to be built. Sive compares their fight for the environment to that of the fights for civil rights by Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

1979

“Clouds Over Storm King.” New York Times 25 Feb. 1979: E16.

This New York Times article discusses the need for Con Ed to still build the hydroelectric plant at Storm King Mountain when the costs keep building and their projections and reports have been unreliable in the past. The author of the article believes the opponents have argued persuasively that the need for the plant has diminished, and that the license for the plant should be terminated.

Goldman, Ari L. “Con Edison Program Meets New Setbacks.” New York Times 18 Feb. 1979: 33.

This New York Times article reports that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation asked the Federal Government to revoke the license granted to Con Edison by the F.P.C. to build the hydroelectric plant at Storm King Mountain. The article comments that to build the plant at this stage does not seem to economically make sense.

Rubin, Nancy. “Fish Mortality Hearings to Pit Utilities vs. Environmentalists.” New York Times 3 June 1979: WC1.

This New York Times article deals with the hearings on fish mortalities in the Hudson River due to nuclear plans and other utility actions. According to the article, there seems to be a problem with whose data to believe about the rate of fish kills and the possible effects the nuclear and other plants have on the river.  Environmentalists believe that the plants take too many fish out of the river and want the utilities to use another cooling method for their plants. The utilities feel that there isn’t enough fish being harmed to warrant the costs of changing their systems. However, the data that has been collected has come from biological companies paid for by the utilities and the data is complicated and difficult to interpret, which adds to problems of determining an accurate number of actual fish kills due to utility plants.

 

1980

“A Peace Treaty for the Hudson.” New York Times 20 Dec. 1980: 24.

This New York Times article praises the settlement, otherwise known as the “Hudson River Peace Treaty,” that finally was reached between Con Edison and Scenic Hudson and states that the settlement and the process by which it was reached benefits all New Yorkers. Both parties gave up certain arguments and an agreement was finally reached thanks to the help of mediator Russell Train, a former administrator of the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. The article points out that this is the case that proves that negotiation is better than litigation.

Smolowe, Jill. “Con Ed to Drop Storm King Plant as Part of Pact to Protect Hudson.” New York Times 20 Dec. 1980: 1. 

This New York Times article recounts the settlement that finally was reached between Con Edison and Scenic Hudson.  Scenic Hudson relented on demanding the six cooling towers on the grounds that protective screens are installed and shutdowns scheduled for spawning. Con Edison gave up the plant at Storm King Mountain and finally agreed that biological concerns are important when considering and/or operating plants.

 

1981

DeChillo, Suzanne. “Battler for a Cleaner Hudson.” New York Times 15 Feb. 1981: WC1.

This New York Times article discusses Robert H. Boyle and how he dedicated himself to protecting the fish in the Hudson River and fighting to keep the river clean. Boyle also comments on the settlement between the environmentalists and Con Edison, saying it was a good settlement for both sides.

Khiss, Peter. “A Longtime Critic of Con Edison Publishes Book of his Views.” New York Times 20 Dec. 1981: 64.

This New York Times article reports on the publishing of “The Power Brink,” written by Alexander Lurkis and includes a few of his observations of Con Edison.

 

1982

Bryant, Nelson. ”The Striped Bass and Westway.” The New York Times 11 July 1982: S4.

This New York Times article discusses the striped bass: its hatcheries, the effects of utilities on the fish (including the Storm King case and the proposed studies as a result of the settlement), and the history and current migration patterns of the fish.

DeChillo, Suzanne. “Verplanck Hatchery to Add Thousands of Bass to River.” New York Times 5 Sep. 1982: WC1.

This New York Times article discusses the striped bass hatchery program at Verplanck. This program is the result of the Storm King Case settlement and its purpose is to help offset the effects of the power plants on the striped bass population.

Florman, Samuel C. “The Environmental Elite.” Rev. of Progress and Privilege: America in the Age of Environmentalism, by William Tucker. New York Times 8 Aug. 1982: 1.

This New York Times article reviews William Tucker’s book, which attempts to define the environmental movement in terms of a coherent social theory. Tucker believes that the upper middle class joined forces with the old elite in order to stop growth using the environmental effects as their argument, which helps to maintain their position of privilege. The reviewer comments that this is an interesting theory but there is more to the environmental movement than just social causes.

Teltsch, Kathleen. “Hudson Group Seeking River Study Proposals.” New York Times 19 Dec. 1982: 79.

This New York Times article reports that the Hudson River Foundation for Science and Environmental Research is ready to receive proposals and begin funding studies along the Hudson River. The Foundation was established as a result of the Storm King case in order to determine the impact of large power plants on the Hudson and will be used to gather high quality data and make decisions based on that data about the future use of the Hudson’s resources.

 

1983

Bryant, Nelson. “New Riverkeeper to Patrol Hudson.” New York Times 27 Feb. 1983: S8.

This New York Times article reports on the launching of the Hudson River Fisherman’s Association river-keeper program, which sponsors the Riverkeeper boat. The boat’s purpose is to patrol the river from Albany to Manhattan and keep track of the human use of the river. It was designed in order to give those people who use and enjoy the Hudson a common voice and learn some of the river’s secrets.