Grafton & Upton Railroad (G&U) Discussion

I can no longer tell if this is elaborate performance art or not. I'm invoking Poe's Law.

From the Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute's page:

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure › TITLE III. PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS › Rule 11. Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions
Rule 11. Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions

(a) Signature. Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's name—or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented. The paper must state the signer's address, e-mail address, and telephone number. Unless a rule or statute specifically states otherwise, a pleading need not be verified or accompanied by an affidavit. The court must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after being called to the attorney's or party's attention.

(b) Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper—whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it—an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:

(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;

(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;

(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and

(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.

Hmmmmmmmm....

Once again, Senator Moore plays on both sides of the fence....

http://www.telegram.com/article/2014102 ... 19503/1246" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh lordy, here we go again... (Note to mods: this site REALLY needs a "roleyes" smiley!)

CRail wrote:

How you do dat?

Img (Image tag).



For those interested, more info on using phpBB BB codes (such as the tags generated by the buttons above in the editor) see the phpBB BBCode guide. Note that some of these may implemented at the site administrator's discretion and/or may be dependent on the version of phpBB in use. In short, Your Mileage Will Vary.

Got it, thanks!

Also, the moderators have no control over that aspect of the site's functionality. We can edit posts, rename topics, move posts to other forums, but not much else. All the other stuff has to be done by the site administrator/webmaster.

Gotcha. But I still got what I wanted. Thanks!

OK, just didn't want you to think I was ignoring your request.

frrc wrote:Once again, Senator Moore plays on both sides of the fence....

http://www.telegram.com/article/2014102 ... 19503/1246" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From the above linked Telegram.com article:

Mr. Moore said he wanted to give abutters a chance to talk with environmental officials about possible Clean Air Act noise violations from the pellet operation. "I'm trying to give the abutters an opportunity to talk to DEP in an informal atmosphere without feeling intimidated by having the railroad there."

I've the feeling the "Gang Of Seven" is now not so sure they will prevail with the STB.

I did some looking around and found the following on Wikipedia:
(Bolding and italics done by me).

The Noise Pollution and Abatement Act of 1972 is a statute of the United States initiating a federal program of regulating noise pollution with the intent of protecting human health and minimizing annoyance of noise to the general public.[1]

The Act established mechanisms of setting emission standards for virtually every source of noise, including motor vehicles, aircraft, certain types of heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment and major appliances. It also put local governments on notice as to their responsibilities in land use planning to address noise mitigation. This noise regulation framework comprised a broad data base detailing the extent of noise health effects.

Congress ended funding of the federal noise control program in 1981, which curtailed development of further national regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) retains authority to conduct research and publish information on noise and its effects on the public.[2] The initial EPA regulations and programs provided a basis for development of many state and local government noise control laws across the United States.

When I searched for "clean air act & noise" I came up with:

Cornell University Law School - Legal Information Institute wrote:
42 U.S. Code § 7641 - Noise abatement

(a) Office of Noise Abatement and Control
The Administrator shall establish within the Environmental Protection Agency an Office of Noise Abatement and Control, and shall carry out through such Office a full and complete investigation and study of noise and its effect on the public health and welfare in order to
(1) identify and classify causes and sources of noise, and
(2) determine—
(A) effects at various levels;
(B) projected growth of noise levels in urban areas through the year 2000;
(C) the psychological and physiological effect on humans;
(D) effects of sporadic extreme noise (such as jet noise near airports) as compared with constant noise;
(E) effect on wildlife and property (including values);
(F) effect of sonic booms on property (including values); and
(G) such other matters as may be of interest in the public welfare.
(b) Investigation techniques; report and recommendations
In conducting such investigation, the Administrator shall hold public hearings, conduct research, experiments, demonstrations, and studies. The Administrator shall report the results of such investigation and study, together with his recommendations for legislation or other action, to the President and the Congress not later than one year after December 31, 1970.
(c) Abatement of noise from Federal activities
In any case where any Federal department or agency is carrying out or sponsoring any activity resulting in noise which the Administrator determines amounts to a public nuisance or is otherwise objectionable, such department or agency shall consult with the Administrator to determine possible means of abating such noise.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/ ... _noupdates

So, if there really is no Federal "Clean Air Act" statute to violate, where are Moore and the "Gang Of Seven" going with this? Will it devolve into yet another preemption fight this time with Mass DEP?? Tune in again next week, same time, same station..

But the injunction has been lifted, right? Meaning the G&U can proceed with construction regardless?

Ridgefielder wrote:But the injunction has been lifted, right? Meaning the G&U can proceed with construction regardless?

That is the Grafton propane transload. In this episode of The NIMBY Chronicles, Senator Moore and the "Gang Of Seven" (petitioners in STB docket FD 35652) all have their gitchies in a knot over the wood pellet transload in Upton.

Ok, let me see if I can clarify...
The meeting in Upton was Re: the PELLET bagging operation, not the gas loading/transfer/storage facility.
AFAIK or can see, there is nothing currently blocking constriction of the latter.
The former is already in operation.
ALSO: it appears that none of the hostile litigants in either of the above cases have a legal leg upon which to stand, (not that that's stopped them before.)