Locals, Kinzinger buck contentious railway

 

 

 

Locals, Kinzinger buck contentious railway

May 10, 2017

By Jim Hagerty
Contributor 

Those behind the contentious 261-mile railroad extension that would meander through parts of Winnebago County took another step toward federal approval, as partners on behalf of Great Lakes Basin Railroad on May 2, filed an application to go ahead with the project.

“This is a historic day for Great Lakes Basin Transportation to file its formal application to construct the Great Lakes Basin Railroad,” Chairman Frank Patton said in a statement. “Our application explains the need for this vital project to the STB (United States Surface Transportation Board) and the public.”

But, it may take a lot to sell the public, which so far has chided the $2.8 billion project aimed at taking freight cars off of Chicago’s tracks, making them better suited for passenger service. The new line would run through LaSalle, Lee and Ogle counties, and pass through Winnebago County west of Rockford. The company would likely utilize eminent domain laws to obtain farmland for the project, something that has spurred significant debate.

“This is the largest rail project this country has seen in 125 years, and they’re using eminent domain laws from 125 years ago to force this through,” Susan Sack told The Times in an earlier report.

Sack helped organize the group, Block GLB, which hasn’t relented since last fall.

“Private toll roads have been sold to the public as a surefire something-for-nothing bargain – new infrastructure with no taxes,” Block GLB posted on its Facebook page. “But it turns out that the risk for taxpayers is actually substantial. The firms performing traffic projections have strong incentives to inflate the numbers. And the new breed of private finance deals are structured so that when the forecasts turn out wrong, the public incurs major losses.”

The project does not sit well with U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Illinois, who says not only would it be inappropriate for Great Lakes to seize land through eminent domain, there is no demand.

“I am skeptical of the demand and need for the proposed project,” Kinzinger said in a letter to the transportation board. “Decades of investment by six Class I railroads have made Chicago a national rail hub and with it comes congestion. These rail companies are working in concert with U.S. Department of Transportation, the State of Illinois, the City of Chicago and other stakeholders to improve efficiency within the existing network.”

Kinzinger said the GLBT line will not serve two of the six Class I railroads, calling into question the viability of the project and whether it makes sense economically.

“The proposed line will be detrimental to the prime farm land in northern Illinois,” Kinzinger continued. “According to some estimates, the rail line would require tens of thousands of acres of farm land to be bought or seized. Nearly all of this farmland is considered prime, is some of the best quality soil in the country, and is often the most productive in the country. Furthermore, the project would sever tracts of farmland making it more difficult farm. These are just some of the costs of this project and I do not believe the project’s benefits outweigh them.”

If approved, the privately funded rail project could be finished and up and running within the next 10 years.

Above is from:  http://rockrivertimes.com/2017/05/10/locals-kinzinger-buck-contentious-railway/

WNIJ: In Depth Series on Great Lakes Basis RR

 

 

Listen to NPR Morning Edition every morning next week when the WNIJ news team brings you a new, in-depth series on the Great Lakes Basin Railroad.
The team examines its environmental impact on the region, the land acquisition process and the potential economic effects for "hub" cities near the proposed route from the perspective of concerned citizens and supporters of the line.
Tune in Monday morning for the first of five parts in the series entitled Down the Line: Great Lakes Basin Railroad. Our stories will air at 6:50 and 8:50 a.m. and will also be available at wnij.org. #GLBR

Are GLBRR’s traffic projections correct?

 

Norfolk Southern view on proposed line unchanged

Amy LavalleyPost-Tribune

Privacy Policy

An official with Norfolk Southern railroad calls projections for train traffic on the proposed Great Lakes Basin Transportation freight train line "in error" and reiterates it won't participate in the proposed project in a Friday filing with the federal Surface Transportation Board.

GLBT said in a Nov. 10 filing with the federal agency that its proposed three-state freight train route between Milton, Wis., and LaPorte County could see up to 85 trains a day in some spots once the line is fully up and running.

An official with Norfolk Southern is calling those projects inaccurate if they include the railroad's participating.

"Norfolk Southern reiterates its prior message to the STB that it has no plans to use the proposed route," wrote Aarthy Thamodoran, an attorney for the railroad. "Rather, Norfolk Southern anticipates that it will continue to use either the direct routes that Norfolk Southern currently operates or, for that matter, any of the numerous alternatives currently available to it.

Proposed Great Lakes rail line details train times, connections in filing

"Therefore, to the extent the projections that Great Lakes Basin Transportation made in its Nov. 10 response include Norfolk Southern traffic, those projections are in error."

Thamodoran also notes that Norfolk Southern did not provide any input into the rail traffic projections made by GLBT.

Norfolk Southern submitted a letter in late May to the STB stating it already has bypasses around Chicago and was not inclined to use the proposed route.

GLBT's projections were based on the freight train line capturing a percentage of the rail shipments that now move through Chicago, Mike Blaszak, an attorney for GLBT, said in an email.

"Ultimately, the companies that ship freight on the railroads determine how their traffic is routed. Our train frequency projections were based on the assumption that the new railroad would carry a certain percentage of the rail shipments that currently move through Chicago to other destinations, and that the volume of rail traffic would grow with the U.S. economy," he said.

"We are working to demonstrate to the railroads and shippers how our project will make the rail network more efficient and competitive, to everyone's benefit."

GLBT proposes an $8 billion, privately funded freight train line to serve as a bypass for six Class 1 railroads around Chicago's congested rail yards.

Proposed freight line wants environmental review suspended

In addition to Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific also has said it would not participate in the project. In a March 21 Chicago Tribune article, a Union Pacific official said the railroad determined in July 2014 that it was not interested in moving forward with a discussion on GLBT.

"We have repeatedly communicated this position to Great Lakes Basin's leadership team," Union Pacific spokeswoman Calli Hite said at the time. "Union Pacific is focused on several major public-private partnerships, including CREATE, which will benefit the region and enhance efficiency for Chicago-area and regional railroad operations."

In June, officials with the remaining four Class 1 railroads that would be served by the project told the Post-Tribune they were not involved in GLBT's proposal or had no comment, though one of those railroads acquired a rail line that already provides a bypass around Chicago and the other furloughed 4,600 employees in the spring because of a drop in cargo traffic.

Amy Lavalley is a freelance reporter for the Post-Tribune.

Above is from:  http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/news/ct-ptb-porter-rail-plan-st-1206-20161205-story.html

Proposed Great Lakes rail line details train times, connections in filing

 

Amy LavalleyPost-Tribune

 

Great Lakes Basin Transportation details train times, the importance of a connection from Kingsbury to South Shore Freight, and other matters in its most recent filing with the Surface Transportation Board.

The filing, made Wednesday, was in response to a request by the federal agency for additional information on GLBT's plans for a privately funded rail line from southern Wisconsin into LaPorte County.

The filing, written by Jim Wilson, GLBT's president and chief executive officer, notes that the estimated end-to-end time between Pinola in LaPorte County and Milton, Wisconsin, would vary depending on traffic and train type, among other factors, but would range from about 5 1/2 hours to just under 8 hours.

"The key is that the travel times should be reliable. That's the most important part," said Frank Patton, GLBT's founder and managing partner.

GLBT proposes an $8 billion freight train line to provide a bypass for Class 1 railroads going through Chicago's congested rail yard and take trucks off the road.

"Given the current average time to traverse the Chicago rail network of 33 hours, the anticipated GLBT average transit time of 8 hours is one of the critical value elements justifying the investment in this project," Wilson wrote. "The proposed investment still makes sense if the end-to-end time is up to 12 hours."

The filing was in response to one of three requests for information made by the STB, which will make the final determination on whether the freight line will proceed on GLBT's preferred route, an alternate route or not at all. GLBT officials submitted an alternate route, also at the behest of the STB, in late September, which they prefer over their original proposal.

INDOT rail session leaves unanswered questions

Either of the proposed routes would cut through southern Lake and Porter counties, raising concerns by residents there and elsewhere about loss of farmland, drainage issues and delayed response times by first responders stopped at rail crossings.

The preferred route offers some changes in LaPorte County and three options for going around Lowell, though it is virtually unchanged in Porter County. It also offers significant changes through Wisconsin and Illinois.

The most recent filing includes information on what's called the "Kingsbury Branch connection" to South Shore Freight, which Wilson said would give South Shore customers access to the improved service offered by GLBT and provide GLBT with a connection to CSX's subdivision in Michigan City.

"A connection with South Shore Freight was in our initial plans to give its customers neutral market access to all the Class 1 carriers connecting with GLBT," Wilson wrote. "South Shore Freight shippers will benefit from the improved velocity, reliability, capacity, and new revenue opportunities that our project would provide."

Freight line plan predicts up to 85 daily trains

The Post-Tribune has reported that two of the six Class I railroads expected to be served by the freight line have publicly stated they will not participate, and the remaining four appear uncommitted to the project.

"I remain completely opposed to this project," said Porter County Commissioner Laura Blaney, D-South, whose Porter Township property would be bisected by the rail line. "There is no benefit to Porter County and I think if the potential customers, Class I railroads, needed it, they would be clamoring to help put this through."

The filing also details a series of "anchor points" along the route, including two in LaPorte County, in Pinola and Alida.

"There's huge economic development opportunities at these intersections with current or future rail operations, intermodal, whatever," Patton said, adding that with development at Kingsbury, "we could have a huge economic impact."

The newest route is again generating comments on the STB's website for the proposal. A growing number of people and organizations, including an attorney representing several groups opposed to GLBT's plans that includes groups in Lake, Porter and LaPorte counties, are calling for the STB to hold public meetings on the most recent route, as the federal agency did in the spring, since new areas would be impacted.

"That is entirely within the STB's discretion and it's up to them," said Mike Blaszak, one of the attorneys for GLBT.

Officials with the STB have not yet said whether they will hold additional scoping meetings, part of the process in putting together an environmental impact statement.

In the meantime, GLBT officials are moving forward with their plans.

"We need to prepare our application for construction of the railroad. It's a separate procedure from the environmental impact statement and we're working on that," Blaszak said, adding there's no timeline for the application but it will be filed sometime next year, "sooner than later."

Amy Lavalley is a freelance reporter for the Post-Tribune.

Above is from:  http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/news/ct-ptb-great-lakes-rail-filing-st-1202-20161202-story.html

Burritt Township farmer helps rally community against Great Lakes Basin railroad

By Susan Vela
Staff writer

BURRITT TOWNSHIP — Farmer Lana Daly couldn’t sit, wait and watch for the Great Lakes Basin Transportation Inc. railroad to come through her property.

She became an activist soon after she learned train tracks might impose upon her family’s centennial farm of about 280 acres.

Daly, 56, helped organize an Oct. 18 informational meeting that drew hundreds of concerned residents to Winnebago High School.

They were upset with Great Lakes. It had announced that a section of its proposed railroad through Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin would switch to Winnebago County from Boone County.

Daly urged them to stay informed and, if they opposed the plan, to write protest letters to the U.S. Surface Transportation Board, which must approve the project.

Her activism remains energetic. By day, she is an Auburn High School reading teacher with Rockford Public Schools. After hours, she connects with her fellow protesters, studies Great Lakes and tries to be as knowledgeable as she can to stop the railroad.

The activist has helped build a database of about 1,800 people who want to stay connected with the railroad protesters.

Whenever she can, she tells people the fight isn’t over even though the Winnebago County Board passed an ordinance opposing the railroad.

“It’s really heartwarming,” she said. “There are people in Boone County who are like, ‘No, we are going to help you fight this.’

“I’ve never been involved in this kind of a grassroots effort. I'm still responding emotionally. I guess the prospect of losing four generations of hard, honest work, regardless of how it's discussed, is disturbing. Multiply that by hundreds of farmers and it's purely disgusting."

She urges observers to like Facebook accounts created by Rock Against the Rail, which states “A Letter A Day Keeps Great Lakes Basin Away.” Daly wants followers to also like Facebook accounts created by BLOCK GLB Railroad and Winnebago County Against GLB Railroad.

“You have to be patient. There are so many people involved," Daly said. "We’ve got everybody engaged and ready to go forward. We have the ability to contact people and keep them informed."

Susan Vela: 815-987-1392; svela@rrstar.com; @susanvela

Above is from:  http://www.rrstar.com/news/20161130/slice-burritt-township-farmer-helps-rally-community-against-great-lakes-basin-railroad

Ogle County Board says no to proposed railroad project

County Board says no to proposed railroad project

Posted: Friday, Nov 18th, 2016
BY: JENNIFER SIMMONS

 

OREGON — In a 23-1 vote Tuesday night, Ogle County Board members voted to pass a resolution that urges the Surface Transportation Board to pursue a "no-action alternative" of denying the petition or application of the proposed Great Lakes Basin Railroad project.

The resolution passed highlights the effects the proposed railroad project would have on Ogle County – including specific negative effects to townships of Scott, White Rock, Lynnville, Dement and Flagg.
Village of Davis Junction Trustee William Luchsinger spoke to the board about his concern over the proposed railroad project and its impact on his community.
“Due to the change in the route, the railroad will now go ¼-mile of the current north/south railroad [in the village] and would be detrimental to our entire village,” Luchsinger said. “The effects on a proposed subdivision and plans for a restaurant/gas station already in place would be detrimental.”
The village has had to put all development plans on hold because of the proposed re-route of the railroad.
Luchsinger added that the proposal would bring an estimated 85 to 100 trains per day with 100 or more cars using the new tracks.
“[We’d see] a train every 13 minutes…. It’s a detriment to our village,” he said.
The negative impacts would include environmental, agricultural and safety to members of the community.
In a report prepared by the Ogle County Planning and Zoning Department and presented to county board members, details of the proposed railroad were outlined, including impacts on communities throughout Ogle County.
Impact on Natural Resources
• Floodplains
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has designated and mapped floodplains, or Special Flood Hazard Areas within Ogle County. Encroachment on floodplains by development, such as structures and fill, reduces the flood-carrying capacity, increases the flood heights and velocities, and increases flood hazards in areas beyond the encroachment itself.
The proposed GLBRR will cross several mapped Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA), including the following:
> Ryly Ditch SFHA in Section 28 Dement Township (Flood zone AE);
> Creston Ditch SFHA in Section 21 Dement Township (Flood zone AE);
> Kilbuck Creek tributary in Section 5, 8 and 9 Dement Township (Flood zoned A).
In addition, the proposed GLBRR will cross seven other small streams that have not been mapped as having a SFHA, but may experience occasional flood events
• Wetlands
Wetlands are important features in the landscape that provide numerous beneficial services for people and for fish and wildlife. Some of these services, or functions, include protecting and improving water quality, providing fish and wildlife habitats, storing floodwaters and maintaining surface water flow during dry periods. These valuable functions are the result of the unique natural characteristics of wetlands.
The proposed GLBRR crosses two mapped wetlands in Ogle County:
> Freshwater emergent wetland in Section 36 White Rock Township;
> Freshwater emergent wetland in Section 2 White Rock Township.
• Impact on Transportation Systems
The new preferred route for the GLBRR will cross 18 public roadways and one private roadway in Ogle County. The letter from Frank Patton, Chairman of Great Lakes Basin
Transportation, Inc. (GLBT) to Kim Gouker dated Nov. 4, states that GLBT is planning multiple overpasses for major roads as well as utilizing quiet zone at-grade crossings where possible. However, it is uncertain at this time what type of crossing (if any) is proposed for the various locations.
The following is a listing of the roadways currently planned to be crossed in Ogle County (in order from south to north).
1) Ritchie Road (Dement Township) - Serves as an access point to the south end of the Rochelle Dual Rail Industrial Park. High probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
2) Interstate 88 (Illinois Tollway) - Mandatory grade separation (bridge).
3) Creston Road (City of Rochelle) - Serves as connection between Rochelle and Creston. Also access to Rochelle landfill with a high probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
4) IL Route 38 - East/West running state route from Dixon to Chicago suburbs. This location is likely to have a grade separation (bridge) but may be an at-grade crossing.
5) Twombly Road (Dement Township) - Rural road with access to both sides of I-39 with a high probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
6) Interstate 39 - Mandatory grade separation (bridge).
7) Lind Road (Dement Township) - Rural road connecting IL Route 251 to Lynnville Road. This site could have an at-grade crossing or may be petitioned for closure.
8) IL Route 251 (IDOT) - North/South running state route connecting Mendota to Beloit, Wis. This location is likely to have a grade separation (bridge) but may be an at-grade crossing.
9) Bethel Road (Village of Hillcrest) - Rural village road that access both sides of I-39. There is a high probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
10) Kent Road (White Rock Township) - Rural north/south road approximately 1.5 miles long. At-grade crossing, or may be petitioned for road closure.
11) IL Route 64 (IDOT) - East/West running state route connecting Savanna to Chicago. Likely to have a grade separation (bridge), but may be an at-grade crossing.
12) Mowers Road (White Rock Township) - East/West running rural road connecting White Rock Road to Malta Road in DeKalb County with access to both sides of I-39 and adjacent to and parallel to Illinois Railnet tracks. An at-grade crossing, or may be petitioned for road closure.
13) Dutch Road (White Rock Township) - East/West running rural road connecting Church Road to IL Route 251 that runs adjacent to and parallel to Illinois Railnet tracks. At-grade crossing, or may be petitioned for road closure.
14) Lindenwood Road (White Rock Township) - East/West running rural road connecting Stillman Road to DeKalb County with access to both sides of I-39 and adjacent to and parallel to Illinois Railnet tracks. High probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
15) Holcomb Road (Ogle County) - East/West running rural road connecting German Church Road to Lindenwood with a proposed crossing located 0.5 miles east of Illinois Railnet. High probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
16) Big Mound Road (Scott Township) - East/West running rural road connecting Meridian Road to Mulford Road with access to both sides of I-39. High probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
17) IL Route 72 (IDOT) - East/West running state route connecting Lake Carroll to O’Hare. Likely to have a grade separation (bridge), but may be an at-grade crossing.
18) Scott Road (Private) - Private dirt road that connects Junction Road to Orchard Hills Landfill. Likely to be closed to through traffic.
19) Edson Road (Rockford Township) - East/West running rural road passing between two landfills with a high probability of at-grade crossing at this location.
There are currently approximately 150 railroad crossings of roads and highways in Ogle County.
The proposed GLBRR would add up to 19 new crossings – an increase of 12.7 percent. The majority of these new crossings will likely be at-grade crossings rather than grade-separated crossings (bridges).
James Milligan, an Ogle County farmer, voiced his concerns over the project stating the track would intersect through his cattle farm.
“The track would run 3/10 of a mile from my main farm and I would have to go nearly 5-miles around to feed my cattle,” Milligan said. “There’s an awful lot of good farm land not being farmed.”
Lauren Hintzsche – a resident in Lynnville Township – also had concerns of the project, specifically reminding county board members how others have voted against the project.
“On June 13 the Rochelle City Council did pass a resolution against the railroad even though the city could benefit from the project,” she said.
Following public comment, county board members voiced their concerns as well.
“I don’t see any advantage to this in our county,” Bill Welty (Dist. 2) said. “Trains could be carrying hazardous materials close to our schools [in some instances].”
“This project is effecting neighbors, roads, townships and cutting off several roads [in our county],” Nick Bolin (Dist. 1) said. “I find this unacceptable and am voting no.”
“There are so many unknowns and they want us in the dark,” Tom Smith, White Rock Township supervisor said.
Smith added that school buses, emergency services and law enforcement would all be slowed or re-routed by trains passing through the township on new tracks.
Board member Ron Colson cast the only vote against the resolution.
“We really don’t know what we’re dealing with,” Colson said. “There’s already been two plans –there could be four or five. We don’t know.”
For the complete article see the 11-21-2016 issue.

Above is from:  http://www.oglecountylife.com/v2_news_articles.php?heading=0&story_id=4463&page=72

No public hearing set yet for railroad route

 

No public hearing set yet for railroad route

Posted: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 4:00 pm

By HILLARY GAVAN Senior staff writer beloitdailynews.com | 0 comments

BELOIT — Although opposition to the Great Lakes Basin Transportation (GLBT)’s proposed rail route remains high in Rock and Winnebago counties, it’s unknown if that opposition will be taken into account by the Surface Transportation Board (STB) in the form of a public hearing. As of Wednesday morning, no date had been set for a new hearing and public comment period.

According to an email from STB spokesperson Dennis Watson: “The Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) will update the public once a range of reasonable alternatives has been defined and will invite comment from the public on those alternatives prior to issuance of the Final Scope of Study. OEA will then prepare and issue a Final Scope of Study for the preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, taking into consideration all comments received.”

However, Wisconsin Rep. Amy Loudenbeck, R-Clinton, said she’s concerned the opportunity to which the STB is referring will be a brief period for submittal of written comment and not public hearings.

“It is my contention that this new preferred route is so dramatically different from the route that was previously shared with the public, that in the interest of fairness to individuals and landowners who will be directly impacted, the STB must open a new public comment period, including a public hearing in or near the affected communities.”

However, Loudenbeck said she had some good news — the nine pages of written comments she submitted during the initial public comment period in June 2016 outlined potential impacts not just along the proposed route, but within all of eastern Rock and western Walworth counties.

“I think the STB will take those comments into consideration for the new route,” Loudenbeck said.

The letter is available at the following link: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/eupdates/asm31/GLB%20letter.pdf

Loudenbeck also wrote to the Surface Transportation Board requesting it re-open the public comment period on the new route on Sept. 28 along with Rep. Mark Spreitzer, D-Beloit, and Sen. Janis Ringhand, D-Evansville.

An anti-rail meeting held at Winnebago, Illinois, High School Tuesday attracted more than 200 people, according to Winnebago County Board member Jim Webster.

Webster said a number of people spoke including those from Boone and Ogle counties about the potential problems of the proposed rail line. Richard Beuth, president of the Winnebago/Boone County Farm Bureau, was in attendance as well as Winnebago County board member Faye Lion and Winnebago County Supervisor of Assessments Tom Walsh.

On Oct. 27, Webster said he pressed for a resolution against the railroad running through Winnebago County at the upcoming Winnebago County Board meeting to be sent to the President, federal legislators and state representatives.

“The STB is made up of three people from Washington, D.C. and are appointed by the President with the consent of the Congress,” Webster said. “Three people make a decision that can affect millions of people.”

The latest plan is for the GLBT rail line to run west of Beloit and not go through Boone County in Illinois as was originally planned. The line is proposed to extend from La Porte, Indiana, through Illinois to Milton, Wisconsin. The privately-funded $8 billion rail line is hoped relieve congestion and to allow railroads to better handle traffic from Chicago. Modern signaling and controls would allow for the movement of up to 110 trains daily, and transit times through the Chicago area would be reduced to under eight hours, as they can currently can take up to 30 hours to complete.

According to information from Great Lakes Basin, the route through Boone County was not "defeated." The railroad voluntarily found a different route to avoid some of the impacts identified by public comments in the scoping meeting and is expected to be more efficient. The amount of traffic going through Winnebago County is expected to be 8-12 trains a day, which averages out to less than one train every two hours, according to the company. Traffic impacts resulting from new crossings of low-traffic roads would be offset by reduced train frequency at roads crossing existing rail lines.

Above is from:  http://www.beloitdailynews.com/news/no-public-hearing-set-yet-for-railroad-route/article_e14602e2-9606-11e6-8069-372183dac295.html

Letter to Editor of Beloit Daily News—GLB RR

 

 

Featured letter: The not-so-great Great Basin Railroad

Posted: Saturday, October 15, 2016 10:00 am

The privately funded railroad that is projected to run from Indiana, through Illinois, and up to Milton, Wisconsin is still being considered even though the proposed path up through Boone County was defeated. The newly proposed path is shown to go west of Rockford and Rockton and into Wisconsin. A map of the new route can be accessed at http://www.winnebagoboonefarmbureau.org/great-lakes-basin-rail.html.

The rail line is to be privately owned by big investors, (as yet unnamed), and can best be described as a toll road for trains. The managing partner, Frank Patton, states that it will save time in getting trains through the Chicago bottleneck. It is highly likely and believed by many to be routing oil and hazardous material through the countryside. It should be noted that Mr. Patton, the chief promoter has no experience with the most complex transportation system in the world, America’s rail network, according to Great Lakes Basin Rail: News and Views newspaper; One has to question the probability of success if the promoters have no experience in the rail business.

The rail corridor is to be 200 feet wide and includes a 50 foot wide area for future use for pipe lines, utility company use, or other profit generating means for the rail line investors. The length of the corridor has been quoted as being 244 miles, 278 miles and 260 miles. Every mile taken represents 24 acres of land taken from current owners and about 6,000 acres in total, gone. Kankakee County is opposing this venture in part because a rail port or yard taking up 15,000 acres is proposed by the promoters.

Up to 110 trains per day are projected to run on this line. This means that a train will pass by every 15 minutes. Planned speed is 70 miles per hour on a one percent grade and 1 to 3 degree turns. This means filling in wetlands near rivers and impounding water. To achieve the 70 mile per hour speed, many roads will have to be terminated at the rail line. Some of our farmland floods frequently and this will slow receding water and delay field work. Farm fields will be bisected, homes and buildings will have to be moved and some fields will be too small for present day equipment to farm.

Our farm is located less than a mile from the proposed route which would have 3 road crossings: Meridian road, Moody Road and Rockton Road, all within approximately one half mile.

My understanding is that a Federal Quick Take eminent domain action does not allow or require any local government approval. It has been requested that a new comment period to the Surface Transportation Board be opened since a new route has been proposed. If granted, property owners and concerned citizens need to provide written comments to this board.

Promoters claim that they will pay $20,000 per acre for land and grant free electricity to affected houses adjacent to the purchased land. If Federal eminent domain laws are used, you must sell your land and by law they can only pay fair market value.

Illinois has some of the most productive farmland in the United States. We can’t afford to continually remove this land from agricultural production if we expect to feed an ever growing population. Various groups lament the near extinction of snail darter fish, a desert rat, spotted owl, and other fauna. Where are they when it comes to protecting farmland?

By what logic can billionaire investors be granted approval by our Federal Government for this privately owned rail line that takes land owned for generations of families and creates financial and emotional hardship for them.

The online comment appears to be still active. Please submit comments either online at http://www.stb.dot.gov/Ect1/ecorrespondence.nsf/incoming?OpenForm or mail to: Dave Navecky, Surface Transportation Board Docket No. FD 35952, 95 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20423-0001.

Last week, over four hundred people attended an informational meeting at the Rockton Township offices to hear speakers and pick up information on this project.

Dean G. Mohring

Farm owner

Rockton Township Trustee

Above is from:   http://www.beloitdailynews.com/opinion/featured-letter-the-not-so-great-great-basin-railroad/article_3db97496-927e-11e6-b580-3f294e36b74a.html

Government asks questions regarding GLB’s new preferred route

 

Anti rail rally planned in Winnebago County

 

Anti rail rally planned in Winnebago County

Posted: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 7:49 am

 

WINNEBAGO - Those opposed to the Great Lakes Basin Transportation (GLBT)’s proposed rail route through Winnebago County have two upcoming events including a rally across the road.

RALLY@ROWLEY Farm will be held Thursday, Oct. 13 at 11 a.m. in the 8500 block of Cunningham Road east of Winnebago, Ill. It is located a half-mile east of Falconer Road and a half-mile west of Weldon Road.

 

Winnebago County Against Great Lakes Basin Railroad will also hold an informational meeting at Winnebago High School gymnasium, 200 E McNair Road, Winnebago, on Oct.18 at 7 p.m. The doors open at 6:30 p.m. for check in, according to Lana Daly, event organizer.

Public should have a say on new Great Lakes Basin rail plan

 

Gazette Editorial board’s Views: Public should have a say on new Great Lakes Basin rail plan

 

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

A substantial change in the proposed rail line route through Rock County should prompt the federal Surface Transportation Board to reopen the public comment period for this project.

The new route is almost 15 miles west of the original route and now affects a different set of residents and property owners. They deserve an opportunity to submit comments to the governing body conducting the environmental review of the proposal.

We support Rep. Mark Spreitzer, D-Beloit, and Sen. Janis Ringhand, D-Evansville, in their call for both reopening the comment period and holding an additional public informational meeting during the comment period.

During the previous comment period, which ended July 15, the Surface Transportation Board received more than 3,500 comments. The original route would have started east of Milton, traveled south through Rock County and headed east of Clinton on its way into Illinois.

“Clearly, the public has serious concerns about the project,” Spreitzer and Ringhand wrote in a Sept. 29 letter to the Surface Transportation Board. “We believe more will voice their opinions if given the opportunity.”

Regardless of economic justifications for a new rail line, the route itself will encounter opposition wherever it lands. Few people want a railroad going near their backyards, and anyone living along the proposed new route will feel unfairly treated if not given a formal venue to voice their concerns.

The new route starts east of Milton, goes south but then jogs to the west, cutting between Janesville and Beloit before heading south into Illinois. It crosses County D, Highway 213 and Highway 81.

Rock Against the Rail has mounted a legal challenge locally, while groups along the proposed route from Wisconsin to Indiana are fighting similar battles. The developer, Great Lakes Basin Transportation, touts the project as way to bypass Chicago’s congested rail lines and efficiently move goods through the Midwest.

Many communities in Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana are trying to make sense of the amended route submitted last month by Great Lakes Basin Transportation. The old route was 281 miles. The new one is 260 miles.

Nearly 300 residents of Winnebago County, just south of Rock County’s border, attended a meeting Monday to express their anger with the amended route, according to news reports. The original proposal sent the rail line to Winnebago’s east, through Boone County, but the new route misses Boone County entirely.

With its new plan, Great Lakes Basin Transportation appears to have swapped one set of angry residents for another. Whether its new plan is better or worse than the original, that’s difficult to immediately say.

But we know many people are upset with the new proposal, and ignoring their complaints would only add to the pile of ill will already being directed at this project.

Above is from:  http://www.gazettextra.com/20161005/our_views_public_should_have_a_say_on_new_great_lakes_basin_rail_plan

Rail opposition builds in Winnebago County

 

Hillary Gavan/Beloit Daily News

Against the new route

Jerri Noller feeds some of her Angus cattle. The newly-amended proposed route for the Great Lakes Basin Transportation (GLBT) rail line would cut through her property at 5892 Shirland Road. Noller is planning a meeting for Oct. 3 in Rockton to organize people to oppose the rail.

Posted: Friday, September 30, 2016 4:00 pm

By HILLARY GAVAN Senior staff writer |

ROCKTON — With the Great Lakes Basin Transportation (GLBT)’s proposed rail route now planned to go through Winnebago County, residents are clamoring to organize and find a way to stop it.

Jerri Noller said she will be hosting a meeting at 7 p.m. on Monday, Oct. 3 at the Rockton Township Municipal Building, 1315 N. Blackhawk Boulevard.

“We are trying to get ourselves organized and figure out what direction we are going to go and how we are going to do this,” Noller said.

Noller said she’s reached out to the Boone County group in hopes of getting advice on how to proceed.

Noller said the newly-amended route would cut through her cattle field on Shirland Road. The land purchased in the late 1980s has been a bit of a paradise for the Nollers, which they would be sad to let go through eminent domain if the rail is approved.

“We worked hard for what we have,” she said. “We moved out here for the peace and serenity.”

Noller said the peace in the scenic countryside would come to an end as she wouldn’t be able to raise cattle anymore and her neighbors would see their property values plummet.

“Land values will go in the toilet,” she said.

With high-speed rail, Noller explained there will be trains coming through almost constantly with intervals of only 15 minutes between trains. With Nygren wetlands nearby, she worries the area could be vulnerable to any potential chemical spills. Because of a film of oil and residue which forms near railways, she said it could make farming difficult.

She also noted Meridian Road is home to the largest aquifer in Winnebago County which could be susceptible to contamination in the event of a toxic spill.

Brock McWilliams, group leader for the newly formed Winnebago County Against GLB, said the upcoming meeting will feature petitions and is hoped to create a base which will disseminate signage.

McWilliams said he’s hoping the other anti-rail groups will attend and advise the newest group how to move forward. McWilliams said he posted a Facebook group on Tuesday evening to distribute information on opposing the rail in Winnebago County.

In Winnebago County, McWilliams said the rail will cut through wetlands, multiple farms, wildlife sanctuaries and be within a quarter mile of public lands and forest preserves.

“We have an area that has been unblighted by the economy. Why would you sacrifice an area which maintained its value and put a railroad through it?” McWilliams asked.

Above is from:  http://www.beloitdailynews.com/news/rail-opposition-builds-in-winnebago-county/article_63304cae-871b-11e6-8369-5f1852087b0a.html

Size, Speed and Number of GLB trains requested by Government

 

Below is from:  https://www.stb.gov/ect1/ecorrespondence.nsf/PublicOutgoingByDocketNumber/81054FA67A25833D85258029004DBA88/$File/EO-2846.pdf?OpenElement

Deadline for railroad alternative routes extended until Sept. 20

By Adam Poulisse
Staff writer

Posted Aug. 31, 2016 at 9:32 PM
Updated Aug 31, 2016 at 9:54 PM

BELVIDERE — The federal Surface Transportation Board today granted Great Lakes Basin Transportation a deadline extension to submit alternative routes to the proposed 278-mile cargo rail line that would cut through prime farmland in Boone County and other communities across the Midwest.

The extension request, submitted Monday by the law firm Venable, LLP, states the rail transportation company's engineering drawings "are to be finalized the week of August 29th, and thereafter presentation maps and a narrative will be developed to accompany those materials."

The new deadline for the railroad company to submit alternative routes is Sept. 20.

The proposed route stretches 278 miles across Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana to avoid Chicago and would provide quicker transportation of goods coast to coast. It has been met with staunch opposition; in Boone County, grassroots organizations such as Citizens Against the Great Lakes Basin Railroad Project have sprung up to provide unified opposition.

Laurie Bozeman, who lives on Edson Road in Capron and is a member of the citizen organization, said prolonging a final decision by the federal transportation agency on the route is "like ripping off a Band-Aid slowly."

"Part of me wishes they would just make a decision," she said. "I'm a little hopeful by them saying they need to have alternate route, it's them saying (Great Lakes Basin Transportation) can't put it here."

The federal agency asked for alternative routes in a letter drafted July 5. It was sent after a series of scoping meetings took place in potentially affected areas. Members of the federal Surface Transportation Board attended the meetings to hear residents speak out. On April 19, hundreds of citizens packed into the Community Building Complex of Boone County to share concerns.

More than 3,500 scoping comments were collected across the region, many suggesting other alternative alignments that should be considered. Feedback will help build an environmental impact study that won't be ready for a few years.

"According to commenters, these alternative alignments could minimize some of the potential environmental impacts of GLBT's proposed rail line construction," the July 5 Surface Transportation Board letter reads. "The alternatives include using underutilized rail routes and existing transportation corridors that, in the commenters' view, could minimize impacts to farms, homes and businesses that would result from the construction of the GLBT's proposed route."

Frank Patton, CEO of Great Lakes Basin Transportation Corp., did not return calls seeking comment.

A specific number of provided alternative routes is not required, but a reasonable range of alternatives must be analyzed per the National Environmental Policy Act.

Adam Poulisse: 815-987-1344;

Above is from:  http://www.rrstar.com/news/20160831/deadline-for-railroad-alternative-routes-extended-until-sept-20

Status of Great Lakes Basin RR

Great Lakes Basin Transportation will not meet a Monday deadline for filing an alternate route for its proposed freight train line from Milton, Wis., into LaPorte County.

"We are going to file a request for an extension on Monday," said Frank Patton, founder and managing partner of GLBT, on Friday, declining to provide further details. "It should be public shortly thereafter."

In related news, a local lawmaker said he will spearhead updating the state's eminent domain laws related to railroads to make it more difficult for business interests to take privately owned land for their own profit.

The federal Surface Transportation Board, which held public meetings on the 278-mile proposal in the spring, set an Aug. 29 deadline for GLBT to offer an alternate route to the one that cuts through southern Lake and Porter counties.

"There is no explanation in the information GLBT has provided to date to explain whether GLBT considered other potential alignments and variations and why they might have been rejected," Victoria Rutson, director of the Office of Environmental Analysis, wrote in a July 5 letter to one of GLBT's attorneys.

The Office of Environmental Analysis will compile the more than 3,900 comments submitted online, as well as those made during the spring meetings, for an environmental impact statement on the proposal. That is expected to take a few years.

Earlier in the week, Patton indicated via email that GLBT planned to meet the Monday deadline. It was not immediately clear Friday what might have changed.

A proposal to build the Great Lakes Basin Transportation's freight rail line through south Lake and Porter counties is creating uncertainty for government, schools and real estate professionals.

"For us it's kind of a really large guessing game as far as forward planning," Lowell Town Council president...

A proposal to build the Great Lakes Basin Transportation's freight rail line through south Lake and Porter counties is creating uncertainty for government, schools and real estate professionals.

"For us it's kind of a really large guessing game as far as forward planning," Lowell Town Council president...

(Amy Lavalley and Carrie Napoleon)

GLBT's $8 billion privately funded proposal, would be the largest new rail line in recent times and is meant to provide a bypass for Chicago's congested rail yard and take trucks off the road. The route will have the capacity for up to 110 trains a day.

Two of the six Class I railroads expected to be served by the freight line have publicly stated they will not participate; the remaining four appear uncommitted to the project.

Several people, including a representative with the opposition group Residents Against the Invasion of Land by Eminent Domain, or RAILED, have submitted alternate routes for consideration to the STB.

"There have already been some good alternative routes submitted," said Kathleen Honl, one of RAILED's organizers, adding she wasn't surprised Patton would not meet the deadline. "Though I would doubt he would kill the project altogether, maybe he is realizing that his original route isn't the best choice. Of course, this is speculation."

Federal agency begins look at proposed freight line

Amy Lavalley

The fate of a proposed freight train line with a route that would cut through southern Lake and Porter counties is in the hands of the three-person Surface Transportation Board.

The federal agency will determine whether Great Lakes Basin Transportation's proposal for a 278-mile rail line from Milton,...

The fate of a proposed freight train line with a route that would cut through southern Lake and Porter counties is in the hands of the three-person Surface Transportation Board.

The federal agency will determine whether Great Lakes Basin Transportation's proposal for a 278-mile rail line from Milton,...

(Amy Lavalley)

A document on the STB website outlines what was discussed in an Aug. 5 teleconference between GLBT representatives, their attorneys, and representatives from the Office of Environmental Analysis.

"GLBT indicated that the general location of their proposed route was designed as a balance between the closer and more distant routes (from Chicago)… (and) included design objectives to avoid population centers, connect with other railroads, and avoid wetlands."

The document notes that the group discussed submissions on the STB website that identify alternate route, and "GLBT indicated that it is reviewing scoping comments and considering them."

GLBT indicated during the teleconference "that it will prepare a robust narrative" on how it screened route alternatives and variations. According to the document, the OEA will independently review the information GLBT submits.

Meanwhile, State Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, chairman of the House of Representative's Roads and Transportation Committee, said he will work to update the statutes on railroad eminent domain, some of which date back to the late 1800s and early 1900s.

"It's the days when railroads were just beginning to have an impact on the nation. It appears to be quite liberal by modern standards," he said.

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling several years ago on an eminent domain case on the East Coast led many states to update their related statutes, he said, but not those regarding railroads.

"We should not take people's land or property unless there's a compelling public interest, and a compelling public interest is not that someone makes a profit," he said.

The move was prompted by media reports about GLBT's plans to take land through eminent domain if its proposal were to move forward, he said, as well as requests by the Porter County Board of Commissioners to take a look at the statutes.

"This is an issue whether (the GLBT plan) exists or not. It needs to be done. I've been talking to the big railroads and they see the need," he said.

Amy Lavalley is a freelance reporter for the Post-Tribune.

Above is from:  http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/news/ct-ptb-glbt-route-deadline-st-0827-20160826-story.html

NWI Times’ Editorial on GLB RR

 

 

EDITORIAL

EDITORIAL: Where's support for rail?

• The Times Editorial Board

  The Times Editorial Board

• Updated Jul 22, 2016

 

 

After months of public comment on the proposed $8 billion railroad that would ring the Chicago metro area, the U.S. Surface Transportation Board has its work cut out for it.

There were more than 3,000 comments from property owners, railroads, elected officials, schools, advocacy groups, opposition groups and communities through which the 278-mile Great Lakes Basin Transportation rail line would run.

Frank Patton, chairman of GLBT, has promised sweeteners to the public, including free electricity to homes along the route and a promise to pick up farmers’ rail cars of grain, if the farmers build a rail spur. That doesn’t seem to have resonated with the public.

Nor has the acknowledgement that with the volume of freight increasing, and the Borman Expressway unable to be expanded, there must be another way to keep that freight moving through the Chicago freight bottleneck.

We have seen before the recalcitrance of major railroads in accepting new routes, including the free tracks skirting the newly expanded Gary/Chicago International Airport runway. Getting that new route to be accepted, at no cost to the railroads, took nearly a decade. And unlike the runway project, Patton’s GLBT would change the competitive landscape by, in effect, building a toll road for trains.

To many, this project brings to mind the idea of a third airport for the Chicago area. That concept, put forth by the Federal Aviation Administration, has been talked about for years, with airport plans put forward in Peotone, Gary and elsewhere, but airlines haven’t committed to serving a third airport.

Which railroads want this new rail line built? Which shippers want it?

And what long-term benefits, after the initial construction, would this railroad bring to Northwest Indiana and the rest of the route?

We have heard of alternate routes, including one that would avoid Porter County with the addition of new track near Wanatah and using existing rail routes south of the county.

What we haven’t heard much of is support for the rail project.

Above is from:  http://www.nwitimes.com/news/opinion/editorial/editorial-where-s-support-for-rail/article_99cf06f0-e1e8-55fb-809c-abef02316d45.html

New interesting fact regarding GLB RR’s main railyard

 

 

SOAPBOX: 'A profit-making scheme at the expense of taxpayers and landowners'

• Jason Kokos
• Updated 13 hrs ago
• 0

There is a looming threat to our county that many are unaware of. It would mean the destruction of the community of Sumner Township in Kankakee County.

Residents would be forced from their homes and their land. A church, two cemeteries, and 15,056 acres of farmland and homes would be taken, and we aren't even being told what that 15,056 acres would be used for.

The Great Lakes Basin Railroad is a private speculative project that has no proven need or benefit to Illinois. Frank Patton, GLB spokesman, Frank Patton says the group will take land through quick take eminent domain and they want more than 15,000 acres in Sumner Township.

The proposal to build a railway from Janesville, Wis., to LaPorte, Ind. is a profit-making scheme at the expense of taxpayers and landowners. Various Chicago rail groups say it is not needed.

Patton, the voice of the project, says the proposed rail line would take a nearly 5- by 4.5-mile rail yard but refuses to explain why the project would need that much land. Something is being kept secret, considering the largest railyard in this country is fewer than 3,000 acres. This would make GLB's railyard more than five times the size of the largest yard in all of North America.

What are they planning to put in Kankakee County? We cannot afford to let a private group of investors take a major part of our county and use it for their profit at our expense. This time it is Sumner Township, but the next private group of investors may choose your township for a scheme.

One thing is for certain — they have dollars in their eyes, not the best interest of our community.

More than 2,750 petition signatures of concerned citizens have been given to Kankakee County Board members and our state and federal representatives. They also have been provided with research regarding GLB and a copy of *Great Lakes Basin Rail: News and Views."

A second edition of News and Views is available and was published sharing GLB project information in

a newspaper format. The website blockglb.com also contains information as well as the "Kankakee County Block GLB" Facebook page.

The GLB is trying to rush this project through so it won't be scrutinized at the state and local levels. We must educate and protect ourselves and the people who represent us must work to educate themselves and stop this pillaging of private land.

Above is from:  http://www.mywebtimes.com/news/editorial/soapbox-a-profit-making-scheme-at-the-expense-of-taxpayers/article_d1b5b590-bbb7-5b8a-aec4-18bb60408ea0.html

GLB RR needs more alternatives

 

The federal agency charged with regulating railroads has told Great Lakes Basin Transportation that it needs to detail alternatives to its preferred alignment for a proposed freight railroad around Chicago.

The Surface Transportation Board’s Office of Environmental Analysis instructed the company in a July 5 letter to submit alternative alignments — or explain why there aren’t any — along its 278-mile route from LaPorte to Milton, Wisconsin.

“We are proceeding to respond to the board’s inquiries,” railroad counsel Michael Blaszak said Thursday.

The Great Lakes Basin Rail Line would serve as a bypass around Chicago, where congestion can cause a freight-rail trip through the city to take as long as 30 hours, according to the company.

The letter, signed by agency Director Victoria Rutson, said that more than 3,500 comments have been submitted regarding the proposed project since scoping meetings were held this spring. Comments will continue to be received through Friday.

Many of the comments suggest alternative alignments, according to Rutson’s letter.

“The alternatives include using underutilized rail routes and existing transportation corridors that, in the commenters’ view, could minimize impacts to farms, homes, and businesses that would result from construction of the GLBT’s proposed route,” Rutson wrote.

The Porter County Commissioners, who have registered their opposition to the railroad, are scheduled to discuss an alternate route at their 1 p.m. meeting Tuesday. The agenda includes a presentation by Bob Cauffman, a member of a citizens group fighting the railroad.

Railroad Chairman Frank Patton and President Jim Wilson have said throughout the early stages of the planning process that Great Lakes Basin Transportation’s intent is to minimize the railroads impact on property owners along its route.

“We definitely want to be good neighbors,” Wilson told The Times Editorial Board in May.

The alternatives GLBT will submit to the Surface Transportation Board will be included in a draft Environmental Impact Statement, the next step in the planning process.

Environmental impact statements generally include several alternatives — including a “no build” option — as required by the National Environmental Policy Act.

The environmental study can’t move forward without detailed alternatives, according to Rutson: “(I)t appears that consideration of one alignment may not allow the Board to meet its obligations under NEPA in this case.”

The Office of Environmental Analysis has given GLBT an Aug. 29 deadline to submit its study of alternatives

Above is from:  http://www.nwitimes.com/business/transportation/regulators-want-more-alternatives-for-great-lakes-railroad-alignment/article_74396673-303e-5c05-842c-1471affa6884.html

Will the county board finally pass the resolution?

•  

• Boone County Board expected to pass a resolution against railroad project

 

 

• By Chris Green
  Staff writer

   

• Posted Jun. 16, 2016 at 8:52 PM

• BELVIDERE — The Boone County Board is expected to vote and pass a resolution opposed to the construction of the proposed $8 billion Great Lakes Basin Railroad project at a June 29 special board meeting.

  The special meeting was necessitated after the board failed to vote Wednesday on an existing resolution, said board member Cathy Ward.

  She described the new resolution as an "abbreviated" resolution that will be forwarded to the federal Surface Transportation Board, which has the authority to approve or reject the project, or approve it with conditions.

  The 275-mile rail line would cut directly through Boone County and several other communities in Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana in order to provide quicker freight rail service that bypasses Chicago.

  Many Boone County residents are opposed to the project fearing damage to farmland and lower property values.

  The special meeting will start at 6 p.m. at 1212 Logan Ave.

  Chris Green: 815-987-1241; cgreen@rrstar.com; @chrisfgreen

Above is from:  http://www.rrstar.com/news/20160616/boone-county-board-expected-to-pass-resolution-against-railroad-project

Kankakee River concerned about spills from GLB RR

 

 

Proposed railway would cause problems for Camp Shaw

• Robert Themer
  rthemer@daily-journal.com
  815-937-3369

 

For the 71st summer, 4-H members and others will be enjoying outings at Camp Shaw-wa-nas-see on Rock Creek, adjacent to Kankakee River State Park.

It's just one facility to grow from a campaign launched in 1945 to establish youth camps in memory of those who served in World War II.

Now, the proposal by Great Lakes Basin Transportation to build a railroad loop around the Chicago metropolitan area would run freight trains "about every 20 minutes right next to Camp Shaw," Greg LaPlante, the camp's executive director, told the Kankakee River Round Table on Friday.

"That would be devastating to Camp Shaw," he said. "The Rock Creek watershed would be particularly vulnerable to spills. ... We hear a lot about oil trains."

Chad Miller, manager of the Kankakee County Farm Bureau, repeated the organization's opposition to the project, which would claim 16,000 acres of Kankakee County farmland — about 1,000 acres for rail line and utility right-of-way and 15,000 acres for a switching and maintenance yard between Manteno and Grant Park.

Miller emphasized concerns about economic impact in reducing farm income and its impact through the community, plus direct loss of farm jobs, impact on local road patterns and drainage systems and potential spills from hazardous materials handing.

"A big sticking point for our organization is that eminent domain could be used for private gain," he said.

"My hope is that one morning, we will wake up and it will be off the drawing board, like the Illiana expressway."

Comment period extended

The U.S. Transportation Board's office of environmental analysis has extended the comment period on the Great Lakes Basin Transportation's proposal until July 15. It had been set to end Wednesday.

The office also announced that no further extension will be granted and that comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted.

Comments may be sent electronically on the board's here. Refer to Docket No. FD 35952 in all correspondence, including e-filings.

Project-specific information can be found on the board's website at stb.dot.gov under "Environmental Matters," then click on the "Key Cases" button in the drop down menu and then select "Great Lakes Basin."

For additional information, visit the board-sponsored project website at GreatLakesBasinRailEIS.com

Above is from:  http://www.daily-journal.com/news/local/proposed-railway-would-cause-problems-for-camp-shaw/article_020ed186-3c2a-55ee-a54f-097f96126312.html