Storm Over Storm King

The storm over Consolidated Edison's proposed power project at Storm King swirled faster on several fronts this week, as forces in and out of Cambridge stepped up their opposition.

The Crimson learned Monday that members of the family that donated Black Rock Forest--part of which is needed for the project--to the University had met with Administration representatives, reportedly to express opposition to the special committee report on the forest released last month.

Sources close to the controversy indicated that three of the four descendants of Ernest G. Stillman '08, who bequeathed the land, strongly opposed the committee's recommendation that "Harvard take no active steps to attempt to prevent construction...such as refusing to sell Con Ed the 240 acres of Black Rock" it needs for the plant.

Reflecting the opposition of the family and the nation's environmental groups, Environment Action Bulletin, a national environmental newsletter, criticized the committee report in its current issue and urged its readers to write to President Bok and propose that he reject the committee recommendations. The newsletter reached most subscribers on Wednesday; by yesterday afternoon, the Administration had received between 15 and 20 letters as a result.

Still pending are several other actions by environmental groups:

* The Hudson River Fishermen's Association petitioned the Federal Power Commission to revoke licensing for the Storm King plant on the grounds that it could result in the destruction of 35 per cent of the annual striped bass brood in the Hudson River.

* The Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, most active opponent to the project, and the Sierra Club have written the Army Corps of Engineers informing them that all construction permits for the project must be reissued, meeting the guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

* New York State's highest court is considering a petition to revoke the project's water quality certification, previously revoked and reinstated by lower courts. The decision is expected within the next three weeks.