This page contains references and links to all electronic communications among City staff, and between City staff, Norfolk Southern, and the community regarding the establishment and operation of the Ethanol Transloading Facility. The communications, furnished in response to requests made under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, cover the period from June 20, 2006 at 8 a.m. to May 29, 2008, at 5 p.m.
E-mail addresses and telephone numbers have been redacted to protect the privacy of residents and of City staff whose home and mobile phone numbers were included on the communications. To contact City officials or staff, please use the links on the left side of this page, or Contact Us.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FW: interesting call
- Subject: Re: FW: interesting call
- From: "Ingrid Sanden" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:59:46 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=thGDHuJ0F1t6ZqmLUjwBDtMneJsFNH9n8M1RQKtUO0o=; b=est937HyLo9bi2piADya0FM5e0jocW4c6wmpiryikh+v/sI0XoCefl7M7K0sI9z93X9xqtBb5/Lteig0Nemn1uklWJ2m3xHRrWqSJckrCTGiDl0UXE2W9BzJMO6iRDnoYVxK8viNrEqkukNWUcIo6KcBP3kwmP+KxbxC8ehTWAk=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=n5ANwGJDn5RIF2R/L+hwe012Y6MaiB6UMGJ3h7nt6ccXKcJZ5yN4J78CTAVBnSfvVlZpOrZl6/ahoPDZ+Vm24woftxCxuEDkiiNQ21Rqm76tGMLkP4l5hKOAT9Wdt8oG2iGqslXOAZL95AYd4PcuvOBYq5zqFSdCDkVss8Dan9Y=
- In-reply-to: <OF7B717155.A4C6B42A-ON85257458.00505A19email@example.com>
- References: <008e01c8c198$8cd04bb0$0200a8c0@MindyLyle> <OF7B717155.A4C6B42A-ON85257458.00505A19firstname.lastname@example.org>
If this statute (49 USC 10501(b)) was adopted in 1995, why did the
city think in June 2006 that Norfolk Southern had to go through the
SUP process? What changed? And what is the "federal regulation"
adopted in early 2008 (which Mr. Hartmann referred to in his memo)?
Why is it of note in this case?
Some of Mr. Aiken's points remain valid - like the fact that the STB
has jurisdiction over this issue and with political pressure, they can
change the regulation. I'm also still interested in the environmental
impact and if any study was done, especially because of the proximity
to Backlick Run.
I need some clarification. Our residents, myself included, are angry
and disillusioned and are anxious to hear how the city plans to
proceed with this case. I apologize for not being able to call - for
two reasons I prefer email. 1) I have it in writing to refer to later
and 2) I have small kids at home and can't talk on the phone without
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 10:50 AM, <> wrote:
> Mindy, Tim and Ingrid:
> There is some misunderstanding here. The legislation to which you
> refer below is not the law which preempts the ethanol facility from local
> zoning regulation. That statute, adopted in its current form in 1995, is
> 49 USC 10501(b).
> The legislation referred to below was part of the Consolidated
> Appropriations Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-161, Section 193. What that
> recent legislation accomplishes is a partial carve out from federal
> preemption for solid waste transloading operations. Justin mentioned this
> sold waste legislation during the meeting, but this was only as an example
> of what the City might seek from Congress. It has no application to the
> ethanol facility here.
> Give me a call if you want to discuss this. xxx-xxx-xxxx, or cell
> t.net> To
> 05/29/2008 10:30 cc
> FW: interesting call
> Please see the email below
> Mindy Lyle
> 5235 Tancreti Lane
> Alexandria, VA 22304
> This email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only and is not for
> distribution or publication. If you have received this email in error,
> please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you must not keep, use, disclose, copy or distribute
> this email without the author's prior permission. The information
> in this communication may be confidential.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ingrid Sanden [email@example.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 9:57 AM
> To: Justin Wilson; Rob Krupicka; Tim Lovain; Del Pepper; Paul Smedberg;
> Ludwig Gaines; Bill Euille
> Cc: J Bennett; mindylyle; Impastato, Arthur; Miller Jonathan
> Subject: interesting call
> I just got off of an interesting phone call with Mr. Moran's
> environmental staffer (Hill office), Tim Aiken, who was incredibly
> helpful. I sent him the legislation that the city attorney presented
> as reasons for Norfolk Southern's preemption and also presented
> questions to him about that legislation. He is going to investigate
> this issue and get back to me.
> The legislation the city attorney cited includes a section stating
> that NS must comply with state and local public health, safety and
> environmental standards. Perhaps there is some opportunity to stop
> them on those grounds. Did they get the Governor's OK to build this
> station? Where is the documentation proving that? Is NS complying with
> Virginia and Alexandria health, safety, and environmental standards?
> If there was no environmental evaluation done - and clearly no
> emergency plan in place - I would think there would be serious
> questions about whether they are, as our health and safety are at risk
> at this very moment.
> It also appears that the STB has the power to prohibit this activity
> and that is where efforts should be focused as well (with help from
> the congressional delegation). I would think the STB would be
> interested to know the location of this facility is a stone's throw
> from CSX, VRE, the Metro blue line, and the Beltway. Isn't there some
> consideration for nearby transportation routes, should there be an
> accidental or intentional spill, leak, or fire? (as an aside, if there
> were to be an accident at the station during rush hour, there would be
> no conceivable way to get the trailer and a pumper truck to the site -
> Van Dorn is a total parking lot).
> Mr. Aiken mentioned that when the federal government built the Wilson
> bridge, it had to go through an environmental assessment (I'm sure
> you're all familiar with that process, issue, etc.). He said, though
> he's not an expert on local law, that it sounds to him like NS should
> have had to go through a similar environmental assessment (based on
> the law cited - not a federal environmental assessment), even if NS
> owned the land they were building on. Did that happen? If so, where is
> the documentation and who completed the assessment? If that didn't
> happen on a local level, how can we be sure that NS's activities fall
> within Alexandria's public health, safety, and environmental
> In closing, I believe there are lots of ways to investigate this
> matter. One call to Mr. Moran's environmental staffer supplied me with
> a wealth of information. What is the city doing on it's end to push
> some of these issues forward? I have two kids at home, I'm running my
> own business, I had surgery this week, and I'm not getting paid for
> any of this. None of us on the civic association are getting paid for
> this and our day jobs are suffering.
> If the city is moving on some of these issues and asking some of these
> same questions, please let me know. Duplication of efforts is a waste
> of everyone's time.
> Ingrid Sanden
> Ingrid Sanden
> This email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only and is not
> for distribution or publication. If you have received this email in
> error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you
> are not the intended recipient, you must not keep, use, disclose, copy
> or distribute this email without the author's prior permission. The
> information contained in this communication may be confidential.
This email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only and is not
for distribution or publication. If you have received this email in
error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you
are not the intended recipient, you must not keep, use, disclose, copy
or distribute this email without the author's prior permission. The
information contained in this communication may be confidential.