Comment EI-4491
Received or sent (printed as 1/27/2008)
The environmental impacts of nearly 20 miles of new railway and increased operations will be significant! As such, I hope that the Board does not rush the review process. I have heard that the timeline for the Environmental Impact Statement process has been determined by the scheduled Canadian National (CN) stockholders’ meeting. Surely, this must be a rumor…the lives of millions will be affected by this acquisition. My concerns are numerous and include construction, noise, air quality and traffic impacts. However, safety remains at the top of my list. • Will our children be safe in their classrooms and schoolyards with hazardous material rolling by? • If the soil is contaminated along the alignment, will construction be safe? • Will the probability of accidents at grade crossings increase with an increase in train traffic? • How can CN ensure that their tanks will withstand an accident or derailment? • Are derailments more likely with the double tracks? Will switching be allowed? • Will storage tracks be allowed near residences or schools? • Are terrorist activities considered due to the dangerous chemicals transported? I had hoped to review CN’s Safety Integration Plan; according to their Application, this should be available. This document was not available at the Public Scoping Meeting that I attended. In fact, when I asked to review it, the EIS Team was not able to locate it and they were unsure if it exists. I believe that the public should be able to review this document in order to fully comment on the impacts of this acquisition. I respectfully request an extension of the review period for the following reasons: • The Safety Integration Plan should be available for review before the comment period ends. • The Public Scoping Meetings were announced for acquisition only and most residents do not understand that the full scope of the EIS is for construction and increased operations. Based on the deceptive title, they chose not to attend. I believe that additional Public Scoping Meetings should be scheduled and properly titled. • CN’s Application is not correct – it states no construction or operations above threshold for environmental review. Again, this adds to the confusion of scope of the environmental review. • The City of Naperville is a high impact area due to the double-tracking; the nearest Public Scoping Meetings were a minimum of 30 minutes away – making it difficult to attend for many. Thank you for your consideration.
Submitted by: Meg Swartz · Naperville, IL
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/FD-35087/comment/EI-4491 · back to the docket sheet