A federal agency has given the go-ahead on Great Lakes Basin Transportation’s request for a later deadline to file an alternative route for its proposed freight train line.
The deadline was Monday, the same day GLBT filed for an extension; the alternative route is now due in the office of Surface Transportation Board on Sept. 20, as GLBT requested.
The letter from Victoria Rutson, director of the Office of Environmental Analysis, to one of GLBT’s attorneys was dated Wednesday and appeared on the STB’s website Thursday morning.
The Office of Environmental Analysis, part of the STB, had asked GLBT to provide an alternative route in early July, and questioned GLBT then about why it hadn’t offered any alternatives or explained why other routes had been rejected.
GLBT proposes a 278-mile freight train line from Milton, Wis., into LaPorte County. Founder and managing partner Frank Patton has said the $8 billion project would be privately funded, provide a bypass around Chicago’s congested rail yards, and would have the capacity for up to 110 freight trains a day.
The proposed freight train line, which would cut through southern Lake and Porter counties, drew hundreds of people to each of several meetings in three states in the spring, and has generated more than 3,900 comments on the STB’s website.
All of that information, as well as alternative routes already suggested by the opposition group Residents Against Invasion of Land by Eminent Domain, among others, will go into an environmental impact statement prepared by the STB. A draft of that document will be available for public comment as well.
Patton said earlier this week that the alternative routes already filed would be evaluated by GLBT.
Patton, who has not disclosed who would fund the railroad, has yet to file a formal application with the STB. Patton and Jim Wilson, the freight line’s president, have said they would file their application later this year after getting feedback from the STB on the comments and concerns submitted to that agency.
Patton said in June he expected the application to be filed three to six months after the public comment period ended on July 15, and would include the formal route and other details, including the freight line’s business case.
The STB will make the final determination on whether the freight line will proceed on GLBT’s preferred route, an alternate route or not at all.
In addition to the environmental impact statement, the process includes a merit review, in which the applicant must demonstrate the project is consistent with public convenience and necessity.
Opponents of the rail line in all three states banded together in mid-July to file a federal motion asking the STB to adopt a “no-build alternative,” and asked the federal agency to find the proposed rail line “inconsistent with the public convenience and necessity.”
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.
Amy Lavalley is a freelance reporter for the Post-Tribune.
