Comment EI-17579
Received or sent (printed as 5/2/2009)
I live in Jersey City, near the Harsimus Branch. I believe the Environmental Assessment (EA) is not the objective, independent assessment it is supposed to be. It accepts Conrail's version of status completely, suggesting that the City of Jersey City is responsible for Conrail's failure to follow federal abandonment law before selling the right of way. This is an absurd position to take, because ordinary citizens with not much knowledge of railroad law had determined through fairly simple research that the line, which everyone locally knew to be the main freight line of the PRR into Harsimus Cove, had not been abandoned, and had so advised Conrail representatives. Yet Conrail, a rail company that should be very familiar with rail law, sold the right of way after the City said it wanted to acquire it. The EA further (incredibly!) quotes Conrail representations of City actions, rather than the City's own representations, even those in the very extensive record available at the STB. Without knowing what local or state regulations exist to protect the environment, the EA just assumes any environmental impacts will be appropriately treated by local control, and absolves the STB itself and Conrail of any responsibility, even that of providing an objective record. The EA discounts the environmental impacts of abandonment, though NEPA requires all federal agencies to look at both direct and indirect impacts of their actions, both immediate and cumulative. It compartmentalizes abandonment from what will be the immediate results of this federal action. The EA says that what will ultimately happen to the branch is unknown." To the contrary, the results of abandonment ARE known, to the extent that the future is at all knowable. Either of two alternatives will occur: (1) demolition and residential development for private profit (2) rail, trail, and habitat-oriented open space, all public uses and needs. The details of each of these alternatives may be "unknown," and the implementation of each may be either immediate or phased, but there is no doubt that these are the broad outlines of what will result from this federal abandonment action. An Environmental Impact Statement would explore these alternatives and make it clear to decisionmakers what the likely impacts of each alternative would be. Regarding salvage: The EA says "all track and track structures have been removed," completely ignoring the elephant in the room. How can this statement be made when the Embankment itself, the largest stone structure in Jersey City, remains, and Conrail and its partner have co-applied for permits to demolish and presumably salvage it? The scope of the EA does not cover the full Branch. It focuses on the area of the Harsimus Branch that contains the National-Register-eligible Embankment. This is the area that preservationists have been working for 11 years to preserve. That doesn't mean the community is interested only in historic preservation of this particular segment. We are also concerned about the general environment along the entire length of the Branch. The EA completely ignores the rest of the Harsimus Branch Conrail is abandoning. To the immediate west of the Embankment the right of way goes between parking lots and service stations and other structures, some of which seem to encroach on the ROW. It is quite likely that toxins from these sites from decades of use have entered the soil of the Branch, even if the railroad itself released no toxic substances. The one study that is available to the public, which the EA cites as reporting "nonhazardous" infill, actually found four heavy metals and PAH's in soil samples, and does not give residents any assurance that they will be unharmed by Embankment removal. Furhter, this study applies only to the Embankment, not to other segments of the Branch. Conrail also reveals the existence of a more recent study, in 2005. The public is entitled to see that study, which has not been made publicly available. The next Branch segment, which has free-standing stanchions on it, abuts a historic park. Farther to the west, the Branch is a boundary of the historic Jersey City and Harsimus Cemetery. To my knowledge, no soil sampling for contaminants or studies of wildlife has been done in this area, which is now overgrown and provides habitat. The users of this park and the volunteers who are now restoring the historic cemetery should know what toxins, if any, the railroad is leaving behind, and what development of this area will mean to wildlife that uses the area now. The residents of Jersey City are owed a full environmental impact statement that will look at these subjects - not just the historical, which is very important, but also the broader environmental and cultural impacts of abandonment. STB must not so narrowly construe its obligations under federal law as to make them meaningless. It must not just accept the word of Conrail, ignoring all evidence that does not fit Conrail's preferred story. Please authorize a full Environmental Impact Statement. The thousands of residents along this ROW require no less."
Submitted by: John Crowley-Delman
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/AB-167/sub/1189X/comment/EI-17579 · back to the docket sheet