Comment EI-24912
Received or sent (printed as 7/14/2016)
Dear Mr. Navecky, I ask that STB records reflect my opposition to the GLBT rail line and request that it not be authorized. I am baffled that this project was considered, and Scoping hearings held, without GLBT providing a detailed and solid business plan and a firm route, and that notification and communication with stakeholders was not done. Your office has received oral testimony at the April Seneca Scoping hearing from my organization (SOAR-Save Our American Raptors - see page 25 on STB comments site). Your office has also received thousands of comments and resolutions from other organizations, individuals, government entities, county boards, members of Congress, state representatives, etc. opposing this project. (Ms. Ruston was quoted saying the proposal has generated a greater response than any she's seen in her 30 years with the agency.) I do not feel it's necessary for me to repeat their sound reasons and documentation for their opposition. I agree with and share their concerns. I can not offer 'alternative route' suggestions, as I have no expertise in that field. Nor would I offer any. In my opinion, alternative routes only serve to pass on the same (or more or different) problems with this proposed project to other stakeholders. GLBT should have done their own environmental impact study rather than rely on stakeholders and the STB to do it for them. Alternative routes that may be considered would necessitate that those new stakeholders along the route be promptly notified, given the opportunity to comment, and the process repeated. Where and when does it end? Your office has asked GLBT to update their proposal, clarify their route, provide route alternatives for every 10-mile section of the proposed line by August 29, 2016. The public should be given ample time to review GLBT's updated proposal, and be allowed to comment on the revisions and alternatives. I ask for an extension on the comment period for this purpose. Thank you for your time and consideration, Bernadette Richter
Submitted by: Bernadette Richter · Earlville, 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-35952/comment/EI-24912 · back to the docket sheet