Thank you for recognizing the current administrative discussion regarding the possibility of phasing out the environmental engineering undergraduate program at Rensselaer. The discussion between students, alumni, industry and administration over the last two weeks has shown the passionate interest in keeping this program, and the intense confusion at the prospect of getting rid of it.

The majority of alumni from the undergraduate program enter directly into industry because of the depth and breadth of their undergraduate education. Many of our top-level companies have shown support for keeping the program. The Rensselaer alumni on our Boards of Directors have questioned the Institute’s path with this possible decision, and our CEOs have written letters expressing their support.

Although the article “Future of Degree Program Unclear” pointed out what’s currently going on, it insinuated that the program has always been solely connected with the civil engineering department, when in fact the history of the department includes involvement with the civil, chemical and mechanical engineering departments, and the biology and environmental science departments, among others. The connections between these departments and the environmental engineering department exist because of the importance of all these fields in the ultimate goal of the discipline—to preserve, protect and repair natural resources and protect human health.

Although the Institute is, in effect, a business and must be run as such, I ask that the administration evaluate the reasons for reviewing the environmental engineering program. As cited by the aforementioned article, Dean Alan Cramb noted that the department had “lost” three faculty members in recent years. Ted Shuster ’81, who was taken from us in an unfortunate accident in 2004, was a member of the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, not of environmental engineering. Many of us were fortunate enough to participate in Shuster’s classes as technical electives, further showing the coordination between various departments. As a professor and person, Shuster cannot be replaced. Shuster’s father, William Shuster ’39, was a founding member of the environmental engineering department. The Shusters and their peers were invaluable assets to both Rensselaer and the pioneering of the environmental field.

President Shirley Ann Jackson attempted to speak to the many ways Rensselaer is addressing environmental issues in her “President’s Corner” in the March 19 issue of The Polytechnic. The paper, in the same breath, released information about the Institute reviewing the environmental engineering program.

My question is this: How can a technical institution, prided by its rich history and unsurpassed education of knowledge-thirsty adults, even consider ridding itself of the best technical asset it has for addressing those same environmental issues? I hope the Institute finds from its review that the reasons for eliminating the program are easily fixed, and fixing them has the potential to lead to the continuation of the best and most cutting-edge program in the country.

Carrie DePetris