Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm

Reporter – News Analyst

Clamshell bucket emptying ship hold Photo credit:www.krupprobins.com
Clamshell bucket emptying ship hold (www.krupprobins.com)

Kinder Morgan Operating L. P. “C”, Nassau Terminal LLC is proposing to re-purpose the Fernandina Port facility to also allow the handling and transporting of coal.  This operation will consist of trans-loading inbound coal from vessels, via ship mounted clamshell, up to possibly three hoppers and then to truck(s) for offsite delivery, and also trans-loading of coal via clamshell to a barge for temporary storage.  The coal would then be transferred from the barge via clamshell to the hopper(s) and then truck(s) for offsite delivery.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has given notice of its intent to issue an air construction permit to Kinder Morgan for this project.  According to their public notice, “The applicant has provided reasonable assurance that operation of proposed equipment will not adversely impact air quality and that the project will comply with all appropriate provisions of Chapters 62-4, 62-204, 62-210, 62-212, 62-296 and 62-297 F.A.C.  The permitting authority will issue a Final Permit in accordance with the conditions of the proposed Draft unless public comment received in accordance with this notice results in a different decision or a significant change of terms or conditions.”

The Permitting Authority responsible for making a permit determination for this project is the Department of Environmental Protection’s Waste and Air Resource Management in the Northeast District Office. 8800 Baymeadows Way, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32256-7590. The Permitting Authority’s mailing address is: 8800 Baymeadows Way, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32256-7590. The Permitting Authority’s telephone number is 904/256-1700.

A complete project file is available for public inspection during the normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday (except legal holidays), at the physical address indicated above for the Permitting Authority. The complete project file includes the Draft Permit, the Technical Evaluation and Preliminary Determination, the application and information submitted by the applicant (exclusive of confidential records under Section 403.111, F.S.). Interested persons may contact the Permitting Authority’s project engineer for additional information at the address and phone number listed above. In addition, electronic copies of these documents are available on the following web site: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/air/emission/apds/default.asp.

The Permitting Authority will accept written comments concerning the proposed Draft Permit for a period of 14 days from the initial date of publication of this Public Notice. Written comments must be received by the Permitting Authority by close of business (5:00 p.m.) on or before the end of the 14-day period. If written comments received result in a significant change to the Draft Permit, the Permitting Authority shall revise the Draft Permit and require, if applicable, another Public Notice. All comments filed will be made available for public inspection.

As of this writing, the deadline for receipt of comments appears to be September 10, 2014.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

69 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21323)
8 years ago

The link in the release only takes you to the document search site. The permit number is 0890440-001-AC which you have to enter to get to the .zip file that contains the details. The draft and tepd documents appear to be the most pertinant.
Any mention of this in the Master Plan as I can’t recall?

Alex
Alex (@guest_39398)
7 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

Apparently this proposal is alive and kicking, with KM planning to push it forward. Please contact me.

Faith Ross
Faith Ross (@guest_21324)
8 years ago

There is no mention of coal in the Appendix D of the OHPA’s Master Plan Update specifically. However, you will note that OHPA is not the party requesting the permit. This is Kinder Morgan Terminals.
MOST interesting is the use of an address for the site of the project: 501 N 3rd St., Fernandina Beach, FL. According to the Nassau Property Appraiser’s website there is NO owner of record for the property. Fernandina Port Development, Inc or Fernandina Port Development listed on the property, is an inactive/withdrawn entity according to the State of Florida Business Entity Search.

tony crawford
tony crawford (@guest_21330)
8 years ago

Dave,
Can any of this happen without the consent of the City Commission? Is it something that has to be voted on?

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21336)
8 years ago
Reply to  tony crawford

Tony,
As far as I know, since this is a permit issued by the State, it can be done without the consent of the City as long as there is no direct conflict with a City ordinance of which I don’t believe there is. That being said, should the City raise objections to the permit, I am sure the DEP will, at a minimum, hold an administrative hearing allowing more input. Given the short window of time before the end of the comment period the only way the City could formally object would be for a special meeting of the Commission to be called, properly noticed, etc. but I have not heard of any efforts to do so. I would think the best action to delay the formal approval of the permit and get an administrative hearing would be for there to be a concerted letter writing campaign to request such a hearing. As Faith noted, the applicant is Kinder Morgan but it is difficult for me to believe that they are pursuing this unilaterally with no knowledge by OHPA.

Robert Warner
Robert Warner (@guest_21335)
8 years ago

This video of the coal piers in what is left of Newport News, VA might be informative as to where this may lead. Newport New – coal terminal. Norfolk and Portsmouth – container terminals (as well as Navy Base and Shpyard). Newport News was turned into dust. My father was a chief mate on the “Consolidation Coal” carrying coal into the port – and I remember…… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP-DP-2hti8

Rick Scott has gutted the Florida DEP. Guess what happens next.

Karen Thompson
Karen Thompson (@guest_21337)
8 years ago

Is the city commission asleep at the wheel again?

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21338)
8 years ago
Reply to  Karen Thompson

Karen,
Based on Suanne’s report of the 9/2 Commission meeting, neither City Manager Gerrity nor any of the Commissioners indicated that they were aware of this request. I am sure the proper public notices were filed but we know those are often buried in the fine legal print that are rarely read by the average citizen. Given the other Port issues that have drawn so much attention the last several months, one can only assume that Kinder Morgan was trying to keep this one under the radar. Certainly not the actions of a good community partner if a proactive advisement effort wasn’t made.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21340)
8 years ago

Some very quick back of the napkin analysis based on information in the application and the OHPA master plan document and quick research. Max of 500,000 tons/year to be handled (btw, a “short ton” is US standard of 2,000 lbs = ton). Open hopper rail cars (used for bulk products like coal) hold between 100 – 125 tons/car, so will assume 115 tons/car. Car is 60′ in length and one locomotive minimum for every 20 cars. OHPA Master Plan claims 1,600′ of rail siding so assume a 20 car train with 2 locomotives can be handled (1,360′). Not sure what tonnage an incoming ship can hold but obviously more than a train can handle at one time since they are making provisions for extra coal to be loaded to a moored barge and then loaded at a later time to hopper cars. So that is 217 outbound train trips/year to handle the 500 thousand tons but empty train has to come back so an increased total of 434 train journeys through downtown. The increased rail traffic at slow speeds will not be a positive for pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the downtown area.
The environmental side is probably the greater concern with good reason. Although Kinder Morgan is committed to following best practices with regards to the loading process with water sprays, there is no mention about containment of coal dust in the loaded rail cars or on the barges. Numerous studies have shown that the largest concentration of coal dust escapes near the loading point and the first few miles of the transport. The use of surficants over the loaded coal can sharply diminish the coal dust loss but there is no mention of this requirement in the permit documentation. The environmental studies have shown that the amount of coal dust loss is more a nuisance than a real health hazard; although it is noted that railways are damaged by accumulations of coal dust. KM should be asked to provide more details on how they will mitigate these risks.
So, more trucks and more trains impacting the downtown. Understand the Port’s need to seek business where the demand is to remain economically viable, but at what point does the community’s quality of life decline cry out enough is enough?

Tony Crawford
Tony Crawford (@guest_21342)
8 years ago

Dave, Thanks for the input about the City not having to vote on such an issue. Their is an old saying ” we’re toast “, why does that seem fitting in this case. You mentioned that this stuff is usually buried in the fine print, and rarely read by the average citizens. I would only hope our City Government doesn’t fall under the umbrella of “average Citizens”

Lynne Anderson
Lynne Anderson (@guest_21347)
8 years ago

I live on the south (Rayonnier) side of town and as it is, we suffer from soot/dirt on our porches and coming in our windows 24/7/365. The prospect of further contamination in our homes and in our lungs is not a pleasant one, to say the least. This should be of concern to all of us.

Charlene Todd
Charlene Todd (@guest_21350)
8 years ago

With all the proposed increase in truck volume, most likely traveling Eighth St. , I guess we no longer have to worry about cleaning and beautifying that area of town.

Many people probably will not want to travel that route.

Charlene Todd
Charlene Todd (@guest_21351)
8 years ago

It should be a concern to us that there is a probability of increased truck traffic on Eighth Street. We have been concerned about making it a more visually attractive area. With the proposed increase in traffic, many people may opt for a different route.
This may negatively impact those businesses on Eighth as well as surrounding areas.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21352)
8 years ago

Charlene, just to clarify, increased truck traffic would be related to the Port’s container expansion detailed in the Master Plan and not this coal transfer operation since the coal being brought in would be sent out via rail in coal hopper cars. No mention of this operation in the OHPA Master Plan although it is noted that the rail capacity is way underutilized but also points out some inefficiences in the rail routing options.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21353)
8 years ago

YIKES! I don’t know where my brain was on this but the plan calls for the coal to be transported out of the Port by TRUCKS, not rail as I had mistakenly thought for some reason. Why truck I have no idea since the mills would bring coal in via rail. Sorry for not paying attention!!!

Steve Crounse
Steve Crounse (@guest_21383)
8 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

Dave,
Reading the charter of the OHPA commission, it states that they have the capabilities of building a Barge system to support our Port. They also have a charter to construct a highway from Fernandina Beach fl. to Brunswick Ga. Why is this not being looked at by OHPA and our politicians . Seems to me since we only have one route onto this small island. That the priority of these five elected commissioner would be to elevate the traffic congestion in our community. After all three of these commissioners live in our community. Dave you seem to be the go to guy on this issue. How do we get our elected officials involved to protect our community and our tourist economy, Hell, our way of life?

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21399)
8 years ago
Reply to  Steve Crounse

Steve,
thanks for the compliment but others have been carrying the water on this issue and thanks to Roy Smith for raising this issue from the depths of obscurity. Yes, the OHPA charter gives them a wide range of authority but having the authority and then having an economically viable implementation is a different story. I would imagine the construction of a bridge (thought it was to St. Mary’s and not Brunswick) would be soooooooo expensive as well as the environmental impact/outcry. Comm. Johnny Miller is not afraid to confront these issues and I hope he does so.

Denise
Denise (@guest_21356)
8 years ago

The point person for the air permit at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) is Russell Simpson. He is looking for public comment and concerns in writing. He provided this email address: russell.simpson@dep.state.fl.us

He said that he will be taking public input on this issue until September 9th.

Tony Crawford
Tony Crawford (@guest_21359)
8 years ago

Dave,
My guess would be transporting the coal is cheaper by truck than by rail. Depending on where the coal is going, if it not accessible by rail it has to be off loaded on to trucks to reach it’s destination. Common denominator is always the same–PROFIT. If is cheaper by rail, they would use rail. Cheaper by truck, they will use trucks. There is no doubt when ( not if ) this goes through there will be a heavy increase in truck traffic. That is just plain old common sense. I think a lot of questions as to route once on the Island and hours of operation need to be answered. I have read that 14th street could be a parallel route used in conjunction with 8th Street. Not sure if that is true, but it seems to be a reasonable question. Can you image trucks coming over the bridge making a right onto Sadler than a left onto 14th. The question is “what” can the City do to influence these things? Can they do anything? Will they do anything? I honestly don’t know the answers. I do know there are a lot of questions. It is my hope the City figures out the questions, gets the answers, then communicates them to the public. I know, bad word,— communication, —-sorry. If they can’t stop it, they need to be the middle man and act in our behalf to let the port know officially where they stand as our Ciy Government and try to work out the best solutions possible for the Island.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21360)
8 years ago

Still beating myself up over going so far down the rail conveyance option and not realizing they were planning to haul out by truck. I still don’t understand the economics there for that quantity of coal. Coal weight per cubic yard varies so much depending on type of coal and where it was mined, but using an average of 1,400 lbs. per cubic yard, a double-axled commercial dump truck can typically carry 10 cubic yards so that would be 14,000 lbs. per load or 7 tons. So 500,000 tons would be 71,400 loads or 143,000 trips in and out each year – averages about 400 additional truck trips in and out of the city DAILY (assuming they are running 360 days/year). Then coal dust deposited on the area roads. WOW!

Faith Ross
Faith Ross (@guest_21366)
8 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

Please send your comments to the
Florida Department of the Environment
russell.simpson@dep.state.fl.us
before Wednesday, Sept. 10th!

Rich
Rich (@guest_21385)
8 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

Dave, I’m very much against this, but I think you overestimated the truck traffic. Check your yardage number – a truck bed measuring 7 ft wide by 5 feet high by 15 ft long is smallish for a coal truck, and holds 19.4 cubic yards. I would assume that end-dump trailers with a 20-ton payload would be used. That would result in about 70 loads/day (140 daily truck passes).

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21398)
8 years ago
Reply to  Rich

Rich,
You probably are correct. i just did some rough calculations and found a reference that said that the typical dually commercial dump truck carried about 10 cubic yards but I am sure there are larger specialty trucks. The only other limitation is the weight limit on the roads and bridges if a 20 ton truck would exceed that. More specifics from KM would definately be of benefit.

Steve Crounse
Steve Crounse (@guest_21447)
8 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

To All
This morning, driving on Center Street, there’s a sign “Weight Limit 7,000 lb” What would it take to put up a sign on 8th st’ next to St. Peters church?? Historic building, vibrations from truck traffic, a 7,000 lb. limit would make impractical to haul coal. also the charter for our OHPA commission was written in 1941, What would it take to amend this document, so the people can take back control of our Port.? Anybody?

Tony Crawford
Tony Crawford (@guest_21365)
8 years ago

Dave, Don’t beat yourself up on this one. Hey what’s an additional 400 trucks a day with a little coal dust thrown in among friends. Just hoping the City gets involved and addresses the many issues that are expressed here and communicates them to the port. We all makes mistakes. Many of us have x wife’s and husbands right.

Faith Ross
Faith Ross (@guest_21367)
8 years ago
Reply to  Tony Crawford

Please send your comments to the
Florida Department of the Environment
russell.simpson@dep.state.fl.us
before Wednesday, Sept. 10th!

Mac Morriss
Mac Morriss(@macmorrisshotmail-com)
8 years ago

While the DEP seems to be concerned about coal dust in the air, is there any concern about the coal and coal dust being released into the water? Any pollutants in that area will eventually flow into Eagans Creek on the tidal exchanges. Coal and coal dust pollutants in the water will eventually kill off the entire ecosystem of Eagans from Tiger Island up into Eagans Creek and the entire marsh from the lighthouse to Fort Clinch and to Atlantic Avenue. Possibly continuing through the gates into the middle section of The Greenway. Goodbye fish, goodbye shrimp, goodbye birds, goodbye alligators, goodbye tourists And their dollars.

janet walter
janet walter (@guest_21375)
8 years ago

DON’T EVEN OPEN THE DOOR, YOU’LL NEVER BE ABLE TO SHUT IT AGAIN?

Robert Warner
Robert Warner (@guest_21376)
8 years ago

My comments just submitted by e-mail. Couldn’t get attached documents to load here.

“To: “Simpson, Russell” , jeff.koerner@dep.state.fl.us, kgibson@fbfl.org, “dmccrary@fbfl.org”
Cc: jgerrity@fbfl.org, tbach@fbfl.org, dleeper@nassaucountyfl.com, skelley@nassaucountyfl.com, eboner@fbfl.org, spelican@fbfl.org, ccorbett@fbfl.org, Pat Gass , jmiller@fbfl.org

Operations contemplated by the Port Expansion Master Plan do not address or integrate operations contemplated by the Port’s Project No. 0890440-001-AC. Development of intermodel rail transfer facilities in a proper industrial park — off Amelia Island and use of trucks for both container drayage and coal rail or barge hauling have not been integrated in either the air permitting determination or the Port’s Master Plan. Comments from local citizens are found in the link below.

http://fernandinaobserver.org/2014/09/03/dep-intent-to-issue-air-permit-to-fernandina-beach-port-operator/#more-43484

A brief video of the coal terminals in Newport News, Va is also linked to visualize the nature of a coal handling facility – although larger than that contemplated here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP-DP-2hti8

Anne Oman
Anne Oman (@guest_21379)
8 years ago

Questions: Where is the coal coming from? Where is it going to? Third question: Why are we jeopardizing a thriving tourism industry by supporting the last gasps of a dinosaur industry? According to county statistics and the Amelia Island Tourism Development Council, the tourism and hospitality industry generates more than $330 million a year in revenues, accounts for 34 percent of the local economy and one quarter of the non-farm jobs. Travel and Leisure magazine recently named Amelia Island the third best beach town in the US, and this is only one example of the many accolades bestowed on our home turf. Coal dust, a river of black sludge and runaway truck traffic would put this at risk. What would come next — a nuclear waste dump, a maximum security prison?
On a personal note, when my husband and I looked for a retirement home in 2009, we didn’t consider Pennsylvania, Kentucky, West Virginia or other venues in the Black Lung Belt. Instead, we chose a lovely city by the sea. Please somebody stop this shortsighted, nightmare-inducing scheme.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21384)
8 years ago
Reply to  Anne Oman

Anne,
Great questions and for which information has not been provided. Only know the coal is coming in via ship but whether from a domestic port or South America (Colombia is a major exporter) up to 500,000 tons a year. Some say that RockTenn will be major consumption point but I question that given their major investment in the conversion to natural gas and they have a rail line just beyond the Port. Clearly more detailed information is necessary including how KM plans to mitigate against coal dust should the permit be approved. I have noted that at some other coal transfer stations they have made the hopper transfer building be enclosed to minimize the transfer to the outside air.

chip ross
chip ross (@guest_21387)
8 years ago

5 September 2014
Richard S. Bruce – Commissioner Ocean Highway & Port Authority
Thank you for the insights you provided in your post in the Fernandina Beach Observer on 2 September 2014.
It has come to my attention that Kinder Morgan has filed for a Non-Title V Air Permit Construction Application. I have reviewed the entire permit application. In pertinent part the application states under oath:
● Filed: July 2014
● Description of Proposed Project or Alteration:
The Kinder Morgan Terminal currently stores and transports break bulk type materials and does not require an air permit. Kinder Morgan is in the process of re-purposing the facility and has an immediate business opportunity to handle and transport coal. The operation would consist of transporting inbound coal from vessels, via a ship-mounted clamshell, to up to three hoppers and then to truck(s) for offsite deliver. The proposed operation also includes transloading, which would consist of loading coal via a clamshell to a barge for temporary storage. The coal would then be transferred from the barge via clamshell to the hopper(s) and then to truck(s) for offsite delivery.
●Project Date of Completion of Construction: September 2014
●Requested Maximum Operating Schedule: 24 hours / day – 52 weeks per year
●Maximum Process or Throughput Rate: 500,000 tons/year

You ended your Observer article saying” Look for another article about the port soon.” Perhaps you would write an article commenting on the above re-purposing of the port as a coal transfer station. The proposed Port Master Plan failed to mention this activity.
Perhaps you would comment on:
– Why this was not in the Port Master Plan?
– How big will the barge(s) be that the coal is “transloaded” too?
– Where will the barge(s) be moored?
– How will you keep coal out of the water?
– How will you keep coal dust out of the air?
– How many trucks are anticipated?
– How big are the trucks?
– What route will the trucks follow leaving the port?
Perhaps you would also comment on Kinder Morgan’s operational record in preventing environmental degradation at other coal transloading facilities they have operated.

I look forward to reading your comments.

chip ross

Roy G. Smith
Roy G. Smith (@guest_21388)
8 years ago

I am the person who presented this information to the Commission at their meeting on September 2nd. I found it in the legal notices section of the News Leader. The Commissioners nor the City Manager had any knowledge of this issue. They said they would research it. At that time I told them they had to respond to the FDEP before September 10th if they wanted to object to the permit approval. I believed is was important that the City should have jumped on this, but I don’t think they did so. Remember this on November 4th when voting for Commission Groups 2 and 3.

Denise
Denise (@guest_21392)
8 years ago
Reply to  Roy G. Smith

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21397)
8 years ago
Reply to  Roy G. Smith

Roy,
You are indeed “da man” for bringing this matter to the attention of the City and the citizens. If in fact the only notice was the legal notice, the lack of transparency on this matter is quite disturbing. It is unlikely for the City Commission to take any action given the short amount of time although a Commissioner or the City Manager can request a Special Meeting with 24 hour notice. Given the Sept. 9 deadline for comments to be received, time is running out.
Thank you for your diligence.

tony crawford
tony crawford (@guest_21393)
8 years ago

I have never read such well worded and fact full reply’s on here in a long time. It’s great so many are on top of this.
My question still is—does anyone know what the City is doing about this?
This effects everyone in the city and will have a profound impact on so may issues.
What are their plans on addressing it? They may already be right on top of this and are actively working on these questions? Does anyone know

Rose Bennett
Rose Bennett (@guest_21394)
8 years ago

Here is a copy/paste of the email I just sent to Russell Simpson at his above given email address:
I live in Fernandina Beach and am 100% AGAINST having trucks carrying coal driving up and down 8th Street! This street is a two way, two lane road with a turn lane in the middle! Adding approximately 400 truck trips a day driving on this street, which is already congested with log trucks, local and tourist traffic and businesses is UNSAFE, UNHEALTHY, with coal dust floating/dropping and an UNSOUND IDEA! Please help our little town stay safe, clean and livable! Thank you. Rose S. Bennett, 1584 Park Ln. Fernandina Beach, FL 32034.

Stephen Coe
Stephen Coe (@guest_21395)
8 years ago

Daddy, won’t you take me back to Muhlenberg County,
Down by the Green River where paradise lay?
Well, I’m sorry, my son, but you’re too late in askin’;
Mr. Peabody’s coal train done hauled it away.
John Prine

Whether by truck or train, Amelia Island’s paradise will be hauled away without a fierce, concerted opposition to the shenanigans proposed at the port.

John P. Megna
John P. Megna (@guest_21406)
8 years ago

All the above are good – thanks Dave, Rose, Tony Crawford, and the rest. The in depth of research is great, plus the individual who reported this to the City. That is where I wondered if the City let this get by and held back the information to our citizens because they knew it would cause much concern. Fernandina can not stand anymore traffic, let our tourism business go backward, and keep our City clean and alive. As one stated, we need to look at our Commissioners in the eye and try and get some answers – fast. One has to remember the challenge is ours and we need to go to the Polls and vote November 4th. The issue needs to be cancelled by the Coal Transportation & Port Authority.

Betsie Huben
Betsie Huben (@guest_21411)
8 years ago

Has anyone been in touch with Aaron Bean or Janet Adkins about all of this? As this is a DEP issued permit, perhaps we need to hear from them PDQ???

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21415)
8 years ago
Reply to  Betsie Huben

Sure couldn’t hurt.
Aaron Bean bean.aaron.web@flsenate.gov
Janet Adkins janet.adkins@myfloridahouse.gov

Steve Crounse
Steve Crounse (@guest_21437)
8 years ago
Reply to  Betsie Huben

Betsie, Last night I sent E-mails to Janet, Aaron, Ed Boner, and Russell Simpson of DEP concerning the heavy handed way this whole mess is being handled by the OHPA commissioners and Kinder Morgan. How this whole expansion and Permitting is being handled is unbelievable, Steven King could not come up with a Horror plot, this bazaar for our island community. If this whole mess transpires it would be catastrophic to our community. The phrase ( Tar and feathered and run out of town on a Rail) comes to mind for this whole gang. Is that legal ? probable not.

Robert Warner
Robert Warner (@guest_21430)
8 years ago

Just e-mailed both Aaron Bean and Janet Adkins with links to both the Port Master Plan and Coal Permitting issues. Hope what comes back are more than platitudes.

Sam Lane
Sam Lane(@samlaneaol-com)
8 years ago

An April 2012 report by the environmental think tank Sightline Institute, “The Facts about Kinder Morgan,” , lists a series of legal violations and pollution incidents at various Kinder Morgan terminals. The report includes the following:[18]
–“In Louisiana, Kinder Morgan’s coal export facilities are so dirty that satellite photos clearly show coal dust pollution spewing into the Mississippi River.”
–“In South Carolina, coal dust from Kinder Morgan’s terminal contaminates oysters, pilings, and boats. Locals have even caught the company on video washing coal directly into sensitive waterways.”
–“In Virginia, Kinder Morgan’s coal export terminal is an open sore on the neighborhood, coating nearby homes in dust so frequently that even the mayor is speaking out about the problem.”
“In Portland, Kinder Morgan officials bribed a ship captain to illegally dump contaminated material at sea, and their operations have repeatedly polluted the Willamette River.”
–“Kinder Morgan has been fined by the US government for stealing coal from customer’s stockpiles, lying to air pollution regulators, illegally mixing hazardous waste into gasoline, and many other crimes.”
–“Kinder Morgan’s pipelines are plagued by leaks and explosions, including two large dangerous spills in residential neighborhoods in British Columbia.”

There’s a lot more in the study. Read it at http://www.sightline.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/02/Coal-Kinder-Morgan-April-12_final.pdf

The City of Fernandina Beach cannot afford Kinder Morgan and shipping coal.

• Kinder Morgan is not known for best practices. We cannot take them at their word when they promise clean, safe coal-handling operations.
• Once authorized, coal shipments can only be stopped by lawsuits. Lawsuits can cost millions of dollars in legal expenses and take years to be settled—and meanwhile the pollution continues.
• We cannot afford to jeopardize our local shrimp and fish nurseries so that Kinder Morgan can make huge profits.
• We cannot afford to cover our fair city in coal dust, spoiling the attractiveness of our natural and man-made beauty and driving away both the future retirees and tourists that fuel our economic engine.
• Many other cities on both coasts of the Unites States regret having allowed Kinder Morgan to ship coal through their ports. Do we want Fernandina Beach to join them?

Only citizens can stop Kinder Morgan’s plan.

Lynne Anderson
Lynne Anderson (@guest_21436)
8 years ago
Reply to  Sam Lane

OMG — this is scary beyond words. Islanders unite! This MUST be stopped!!

Steve Crounse
Steve Crounse (@guest_21438)
8 years ago
Reply to  Sam Lane

Sam, Can you make sure Russell Simpson,DEP , our commissions all get your E-Mail I’d pass it on but i’m not that Tech savvy. That’s so to the issue of this whole mess. This grass roots movement has to stop this Horror. Thanks Sam

Debra Branton
Debra Branton(@debrabrantongmail-com)
8 years ago

Our quality of life, community, health, access, safety and property values will all be compromised if a permit is issued for the transport of coal from the Fernandina Port.
Disruption to downtown business, adverse impact on tourism, shrimping industry and marine life and water quality as well as the ecosystem and recreational activities. Increased traffic causing vibration to historic sites and noise pollution adversely affects our community and results in loss of revenues and taxes upon which our community relies.
According to Alaska Community Action on Toxins a geographic area that has already studied the issue of health affects of the transport of coal and coal dust from. Trucks and trains the following health affects have been noted: ischemic disease, congestive heart failure, disturbance of heart rhythm , stunted development in children, asthma, respritory illness,wheezing and coughing. Let’s use the history of others and protect our community.
Citizens of Fernandina, please respond to the address below before September 10, 2014 to express your concern.
The Permitting Authority responsible for making a permit determination for this project is the Department of Environmental Protection’s Waste and Air Resource Management in the Northeast District Office. 8800 Baymeadows Way, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32256-7590. The Permitting Authority’s mailing address is: 8800 Baymeadows Way, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32256-7590. The Permitting Authority’s telephone number is 904/256-1700.

Debra Branton

Robert Prager
Robert Prager (@guest_21443)
8 years ago

I want to thank everyone for your analyses and comments. Please remember in your comments to russell.simpson@dep.state.fl.us that he is evaluating an air quality permit. Your comments should directly address your concern over air quality. Congestion of Eighth Street and other issues are not part of this application. Based on the application, it appears to only address air quality at the port. In the application in Appendix E the Annual Miles Traveled by truck is only 6000 miles. If Dave Lott’s and Rich’s estimate of 70 or so truckloads a day is correct and the trucks travel 360 days per year that would be 25,000 trips. Each truck trip is only a quarter of a mile so it must be within the port. The number of trucks or what happens outside the port does not appear to be addressed.

Comments should address the handling of the coal, thew effect on air quality and if Kinder Morgan will actually use best management practices. I refer you to Sam Lane’s comment this morning. The final air construction permit lists use of water sprays, curtailing operations during high winds, limiting drops to typically 10 feet and sweeping roadways. The permit states that operational controls will be used as necessary. Operational controls include among other things minimizing drop heights, shrouding hoppers, and shielding from the wind. Each of these protective measures slows the transloading of the coal. All of these cost money.

Congestion of Eight Street and other concerns should be addressed to the OHPA at their meeting on Wednesday, September 10.

Robert Prager
Robert Prager (@guest_21444)
8 years ago
Reply to  Robert Prager

One other thing, as a courtesy please include the permit number, Air Permit No. 0890440-001-AC, in your correspondence to Mr. Simpson.

tony crawford
tony crawford (@guest_21448)
8 years ago

There has been a wealth of information posted here. A question—How many have e mailed or called our City Commissioners and asked what their thoughts are and how they plan no moving forward with this and how they plan on communication their plan to everyone, and when are they going to do it? There have been lots of questions but not much info coming out of City Hall. Hopefully a special meeting will be held and public input will be heard and the Commission can decide a course of action with relation to the port, its effect on the island and what compromises need to me made. If anyone has had responses to previous e mails sent to the City, please post them. I know Commissioner Miller has been active in getting out as much information as possible. Should anyone have any information from other officials please post. They may be on top of this as we discuss this, but would like some confirmation of that.

Steve Crounse
Steve Crounse (@guest_21449)
8 years ago
Reply to  tony crawford

To All
Just thinking, Kinder Morgan will not use there own money, this is to small a Port not enough land. But they will utilize federal and state grants. Is there a way to dry up state monies that Gov. Scott is handing out for Port Expansions through the State.?

Deborah Powers
Deborah Powers (@guest_21450)
8 years ago
Reply to  tony crawford

I have written to all the Commissioners — and the City Manager. Only Commissioner Gass chose to respond. Her response indicated that the Commission, itself, has no role to play regarding this issue because they have no control over the DEP. She also said that letters to the DEP from individual citizens, as some are doing before the September 10 deadline, is how the process works.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21469)
8 years ago
Reply to  Deborah Powers

While Comm. Gass is correct in that the City has no legal authority in the actual granting decision of anyh FDEP permit, if it is her position that the City has no influence in the decision making process is totally naive or self-serving in abdicating any action as a representative of the City. I can assure you that the DEP will give considerable weight to the City’s government’s position since they are politically representing the City’s electorate. I recognize the difficult position this puts City officials in as they want to be supportive of the Port, but at the same time, such proposals as the Master Plan and this coal transfer operation can so significantly impact the future of the City, to stand by and wash your hands of the matter is an abdication of their elected responsibilty. Great questions for the candidate forum although the timing will probably be too late.

tony crawford
tony crawford (@guest_21453)
8 years ago

I applaud Commissioner Gass for responding. The City Commission does not have any control over the DEP. True enough. That being said,— your divorce lawyer has no control over the outcome of your divorce, but he is your mouth piece. You pay them to represent your best interests and they don’t tell you to go to court by yourself . The City Commission is ” our mouth piece “. They should be involved and stand up for what is best for the City. They are “our Government”. This is going to effect the City they Govern over. I agree with Pat that each should get involved, but also it doesn’t hurt for the City Government to get involved. I could be 100 % wrong on this. Maybe This isn’t the Cities responsibility to get involved with issues of this scale that will have a pretty big impact on the City. Maybe they are just a paper tiger on this—but even a paper tiger can cause pesty paper cuts

Macelhenney
Macelhenney (@guest_21458)
8 years ago

Email sent to Mr. Simpson:

The Fernandina Observer published the following:

Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has given notice of its intent to issue an air construction permit to Kinder Morgan for this project. According to their public notice, “The applicant has provided reasonable assurance that operation of proposed equipment will not adversely impact air quality and that the project will comply with all appropriate provisions of Chapters 62-4, 62-204, 62-210, 62-212, 62-296 and 62-297 F.A.C. The permitting authority will issue a Final Permit in accordance with the conditions of the proposed Draft unless public comment received in accordance with this notice results in a different decision or a significant change of terms or conditions.”

Please note that there is no way Kinder Morgan can provide REASONABLE notice of anything. They have a long track record of dirty dealing and inexcusable environmental practices. The tide is changing and it is time to step up to the plate and do the ethical thing.

“Energy giant Kinder Morgan is planning to export millions of tons of coal to Asia from an Oregon port on the Columbia River. Many community members are deeply concerned about the pollution, noise, and economic risk entailed by the plans. Yet the company seems unconcerned.

“It’s just a location.”1 That’s what a Kinder Morgan spokesperson told the Portland Business Journal.

In public, Kinder Morgan likes to point out that the firm already operates coal export facilities in Virginia, South Carolina, and Louisiana. Or as the company’s spokesperson said in the same interview, “What we’re proposing is not something we don’t already do.”

And that’s exactly the problem.

The truth is that Kinder Morgan’s existing coal export operations are well known for blighting neighborhoods and fouling rivers. In fact, the company’s track record in the Northwest and beyond is one of pollution, law-breaking, and cover-ups.

yyIn Louisiana, Kinder Morgan’s coal export facilities are so dirty that satellite photos clearly show coal dust pollution spewing into the Mississippi River.

yyIn South Carolina, coal dust from Kinder Morgan’s terminal contaminates oysters, pilings, and boats. Locals have even caught the company on video washing coal directly into sensitive waterways.

yyIn Virginia, Kinder Morgan’s coal export terminal is an open sore on the neighborhood, coating nearby homes in dust so frequently that even the mayor is speaking out about the problem.

yyIn Portland, Kinder Morgan officials bribed a ship captain to illegally dump contaminated material at sea, and their operations have repeatedly polluted the Willamette River.

yyKinder Morgan has been fined by the US government for stealing coal from customer’s stockpiles, lying to air pollution regulators, illegally mixing hazardous waste into gasoline, and many other crimes.

yyKinder Morgan’s pipelines are plagued by leaks and explosions, including two large dangerous spills in residential neighborhoods in British Columbia.

In “The Facts about Kinder Morgan,” Sightline Institute explores the company’s misbehavior so that Northwest residents can decide for themselves whether Kinder Morgan’s coal export plans have a place in the region. ”

Reference link:

http://www.sightline.org/download/2171/

I realize it can be incredibly difficult to stand up to do the right thing, the ethical thing, but the folks who reside in this community have made their voices heard loud and clear that they do not agree with the issuance of this permit, especially to this applicant with a CLEAR disregard for social and environmental responsibility.

If you have not already seen the comments posted in the Observer, I invite your attention to them at the link below:

http://fernandinaobserver.org/2014/09/03/dep-intent-to-issue-air-permit-to-fernandina-beach-port-operator/?utm_source=+5+September+2014&utm_campaign=E-mail+blast+08%2F22%2F14&utm_medium=email

The fact that there is so much opposition suggests that AT A MINIMUM, the time for comment needs to be extended. Citizens are tired of permits that are at odds with the community wishes being rushed through I appropriately, tired of environmental agencies being gutted and appointees who are merely political cronies.

Issuing this permit is WRONG on so many levels and we all already know it.

I sincerely hope the decision makers will step back, take a breath and do the right thing in this instance, especially in the face of so much corporate and political pressure from the powers that be. The citizens need a hero.

I respectfully request any permit be denied to this entity.

This is your chance, be a hero.

Steve Crounse
Steve Crounse (@guest_21459)
8 years ago

To All, I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer. But i keep coming back to this same thought. We contracted Kinder Morgan to run our Port. Am i wrong in my assumption that we the Town of Fernandina or the county of Nassau owns the 23.5 acres that the Port sits on. I would assume that we also own the buildings and equipment that’s on the property. there are some outstanding loans on equipment. The point is Kinder Morgan runs the Port of Fernandina with a commission call The ocean highway and Port Authority of Nassau county. Now if i contracted a company to build a House for me and i wanted a three bedroom, two bath house and he insisted on building me a five bedroom, six bath house. I would fire his ass. What am i missing? Wasn’t are Port run with are own personal only a few years ago.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott (@guest_21470)
8 years ago
Reply to  Steve Crounse

Steve, I’m not 100% on this but neither the City nor the County owns or controls the Port property as it was acquired as a commercial transaction when the Port was created. I am assuming that the assets of the Port are liened on the financing bonds that were issued to raise the capital necessary to develop the Port’s infrastructure. As noted in an earlier post I made, the Port is exempt from property taxes but as part of its agreement with the City makes an annual contribution to the City in an amount that closely approximates what the city’s tax bill would be for a comparable business. Being inside the City limits, the Port must comply with the City’s Land Development and Zoning regulations. The Port Authority has contracted with Kinder Morgan operating as Nassau Terminals to run the port. I have not seen that contract so I can’t comment on the power of KM within that contract to change its business operation (i.e. the air permit request) without the approval of the Port Authority.

Macelhenney
Macelhenney (@guest_21461)
8 years ago

Link follows:
Respiratory and cardiovascular system effects from exposure to air pollutants:
Trains and trucks hauling coal release toxic air pollutants, including over 600,000 tons of nitrogen oxide (NOx) and 50,000 tons of particulate matter (PM) into the air every year,10 primarily through diesel exhaust. Health effects of NOx and PM include:
 Nitrogen oxides and PM2.5 are linked to stunted lung development11 and hospital admissions for potentially fatal cardiac rhythm disturbances12
 PM2.5 concentrations in ambient air also increase the probability of hospital admission for heart attacks,13 ischemic heart diseases, disturbances of heart rhythm, and congestive heart failure.14
 Death rates in cities with high nitrogen dioxide concentrations were found to be 4 times higher than in cities with low nitrogen dioxide concentrations15
 Nitrogen oxides and PM are linked to worsening of asthma,16,17,18
COPD,19,20,21 infant mortality,22,23 and ischemic stroke24,25,26,27
 PM is associated with lung cancer28,29,30
Coal dust covers snow in Seward, 2010
Coal trains and trucks also release coal dust into the air, which degrades air quality and exposes nearby communities to dust inhalation.31 Health effects of coal dust exposure include:
 Increased asthma, wheezing & cough in children.32
 Wide range of health problems associated with exposure to heavy metals designated as hazardous air pollutants, such
as lead, selenium and mercury.
 Coal dust may be carcinogenic, depending on its chemical composition. There is evidence linking coal dust to
lymphomas in laboratory animals.33
 Inhalation of respirable coal dust causes pneumoconiosis, or black lung disease (permanent scarring of lung tissues) in
coal mine workers.3,34

http://www.akaction.org/Publications/Coal_Development/Coal_Mining_Transportation_and_Health.pdf

Roy G. Smith
Roy G. Smith (@guest_21471)
8 years ago
Reply to  Macelhenney

I have no idea why the Commission did not direct the City Manager to send a letter to the FDEP at their meeting last week. They represent the taxpayers and should have sent a letter. I told them at the meeting it was important and time was of the essence. We know they do not control the FDEP. However, a letter to the FDEP would have shown they at least
had an interest in not processing the air permit. Remember this when you vote on November 4th.

Gordon Dressler
Gordon Dressler (@guest_21476)
8 years ago

Here’s a copy of an email I sent today to FDEP:

Dear Mr. Simpson,

I, together with my two brothers and one sister, are co-owners of a fourth-generation family home located on North 6th Street in the historic district of Fernandina Beach, FL. I am writing to formally protest any proposed changes to air quality permits for the Port of Fernandina operations, and specifically regarding the subject permit 0890440-001-AC for Kinder-Morgan, that would allow increases in gaseous and particulate emissions from this site.

My understanding is that Kinder-Morgan is proposing to transport large quantities of pulverized coal through the Port of Fernandina using marine vessels for incoming product, with railroad and trucking to be used for subsequent distribution out of the port. I understand that Kinder-Morgan is also proposing the possible use of marine barges for bulk storage of coal inventory. I further understand that Kinder-Morgan has estimated they may transport 500,000 tons per year through the port, but that this is not specified to be a “not-to-exceed” amount and hence could be higher.

As you are undoubtedly aware, the movement of bulk quantities of pulverized coal is inherently environmentally dirty due to the incidental release of particulates, especially with open-air transfer operations involving clamshell loaders, open conveyor belts and open storage as would be utilized at the port. Such operations also increase the release of gaseous products from the coal, in particular methane and hydrogen sulfide.

Because of the above, I want to register the following specific items of concern for you and FDEP consideration regarding the subject permit:

1) The handling and transport of raw pulverized coal results in a certain proportion of that coal fracturing into fine dust and becoming airborne. Coal dust can become airborne in particle sizes smaller than 500 microns, with the fraction smaller than 10 microns (PM10) being particularly important, as particles in this size range can be inhaled into the respiratory alveoli of humans and wildlife. Respirable coal dust can exacerbate asthma and COPD, and cause chronic bronchitis even in non-smokers at rates which approximate heavy smokers [Marine et al, 1988)]. Coal dust in all size fractions contains varying amounts of heavy metal contaminants such as mercury, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and selenium and lead [http://www.sourcewatch.org, 2014] . . . the degree to which this heavy metal contamination can lead to a substantial health impact has not yet been established, in the form of a formal assessment by the US Department of Health, but is a particular on-going safety concern.

2) Terminal processing, storage and shipping of coal, such as is proposed for the Port of Fernandina, can lead to high “fugitive” (escaping) emissions, approximating those of an open pit coal mine [Ghose and Majee, 2007]. In this study of airborne monitoring around an open pit mine in India, and in the attendant transport corridor, PM10 episodically approached levels that would be considered in violation of OSHA standards in the United States, and the residential areas up to 2.5 km (1.6 miles) away from the mine boundary showed PM10 above baseline for the region. A 1993 study on a West Virginia rail line, transporting bituminous coal, showed loss of coal dust of up to a pound of coal per mile per car [Simpson Weather Associates, 1993]. This loss occurs throughout the entire transport, as the mechanical fracturing of the coal continuously produces fugitive dust as the coal settles. There are even substantial coal dust emissions on the return trip, as the “empty” cars actually contain a significant quantity of fine particles known as “carry back” [Cornell Hatch, 2008].

3) As indicated above, numerous studies show that the largest concentration of coal dust is released near a loading/trans-shipping terminal site and within the first few miles along the transport route(s) leaving that site. Considering the possibility of strong sustained winds that may occur during operations, the adverse impact zone from a site of the size proposed by the subject permit will realistically extend at least two miles in all directions. The following environmentally-sensitive and/or historically significant areas are all within two miles of the Port of Fernandina: Florida Intercostal Waterway (immediately adjacent W), City of Fernandina Beach Historic District (0.3 miles SSE), City of Fernandina Beach downtown district and waterfront (0.5 miles SSE to SSW), Egan’s Creek watershed and wildlife estuary (1.0 mile NNE to 1.2 miles NE), Ft. Clinch State Park (1.3 miles NE), and marsh areas, estuaries and uplands on the western side of the Intercostal Waterway (“Little Tiger Island” beginning 0.3 miles WNW and others). Amelia Island’s public beaches are just 2 miles to the east, Tiger Island nature preserve-Florida DEP/Parks and Recreation 2.2 miles NW, and Cumberland Island National Seashore-Georgia just 2.6 miles north, of the port.

4) Apart from the respirable fraction, fugitive coal dust emissions are an undeniable and costly nuisance pollutant to businesses and residences near a coal terminal and along a transportation railway or roadway, with substantial adverse economic impact simply due to the need for frequent cleaning of buildings, streets and signs [Cope et. al., 1994]. Such coal dust emissions are sure to have severe negative consequences within the Fernandina Beach historic district, where many Victorian-style homes retain their classic pure white external paint and many homes as well as churches incorporate beautiful stained glass windows. Likewise, coal dust settling on boats berthed at the city docks is sure to be unwelcome. Moreover, within the City of Fernandina, there are private residences within 0.2 miles SE of the port and the historic community of Old Towne (Fernandina) is just 0.8 miles NNE.

5) Beyond the impact zone surrounding the Port of Fernandina, there are environmentally sensitive marshlands, watersheds and forested areas along the transport pathways that would be used for rail and truck distribution of the coal through and off Amelia Island . . . all of these would be impacted by fugitive coal dust emissions. Frequent rainstorms, characteristic of this region of the country, will guarantee that coal particulates are transported into land surface waters as well as marine waters.

6) With the above-noted significant health and environmental concerns, I would think that an Environmental Assessment and attendant Environmental Impact Statement, both specific to the subject permit, would be required but I do not believe such as been performed or made public. If necessary, I hereby formally request such. Of special concern regarding the subject permit, exactly how much coal dust is Kinder-Morgan requesting it be allowed to release into the environment each year of operation?

7) My understanding of this matter is that the Kinder-Morgan permit proposal to FDEP was little publicized in the City of Fernandina or within Nassau County, and that the public comment period regarding this permit ends on September 9 at 5 pm. Therefore, I do not believe that there has been sufficient time for a full, open and transparent discussion on this important matter that may—if the requested permit is granted—have lasting, adverse and severe impacts on the health, economy and environment of those in the affected areas. Of particular wildlife concern, the marshlands and estuaries along the Intercostal waterway bordering Amelia Island are recognized as critical areas for shrimp egg, larva and post-larval life stages and I question if the impact of coal dust on this aquatic species or on filter feeders such as oysters (common in the area) has been addressed anywhere.

In summary, I request that the subject permit not be granted at this time. As a minimum, I request that the public comment period be extended by an additional 60 days so that this critical matter can be subjected to full discussion from concerned residents and community leaders in the potentially affected areas, which should include those along the proposed rail and road distribution routes within Nassau county.

Sincerely,
s/ Gordon A. Dressler
310-560-1797 (cell)

List of References:
– Marine WM, Gurr D, Jacobsen M 1988. Clinically important respiratory effects of dust exposure and smoking in British coal miners. Am Rev Resp Dis. 137:106-112.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Heavy_metals_and_coal, accessed Sept 8, 2014. Coal Ash and List of Heavy Metals in Coal
– Ghose MK, Majee SR. 2007. Characteristics of hazardous airborne dust around an Indian surface coal mining area. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 130:17- 25.
– Simpson Weather Associates 1993. Norfolk southern rail emission study: consulting report prepared for Norfolk Southern Corporation. Charlottesville, VA
– Connell Hatch and Co. Final Report & Queensland Government Environmental Protection Agency Report. 2008. Environmental evaluation of fugitive coal dust emissions from coal trains Goonyella, Blackwater, and Moura coal rail systems, Queensland rail limited.
– Cope D, Wituschek W, Poon D et al. 1994. Report on the emission and control of fugitive coal dust from coal trains. Regional Program Report 86 – 11. Environmental Protection Service, Pacific Region British Columbia Canada.

Lynne Anderson
Lynne Anderson (@guest_21487)
8 years ago

Great comprehensive letter Gordon. Thank you for capturing all the facts so eloquently. I was heartened by the number of emails Mr. Simpson apparently received as of this morning (approx. 135 by my count). I just wish I had a warmer feeling that they will not have been in vain.

Steven Crounse
Steven Crounse (@guest_21491)
8 years ago
Reply to  Lynne Anderson

Lynne, Please read below, It helps to have a Congress Woman and a Senator in your Neighborhood. Keep Smiling.

Wolfgang Linke
Wolfgang Linke (@guest_21506)
8 years ago

Gordon, Very comprehensive summary. However it is wrong to refer to “pulverized” coal in the write up. Pulverized coal is a powder as it comes out of a coal pulverizer. The Kinder Morgan permit refers to raw coal and the emissions are commonly called “coal dust emissions”. Raw coal is processed with a coal pulverizer into a dust like consistency and then blown as fuel into a furnace. I believe it is important not to refer to pulverized coal in your very good write up because that is a totally different animal.

Gordon Dressler
Gordon Dressler (@guest_21534)
8 years ago
Reply to  Wolfgang Linke

Wolfgang, thank you for catching this mistake. Your are correct. I was using the generic sense of “pulverize”, but this is not technically correct as you point out. A proper technical classification term for the raw coal planned to be handled by Kinder-Morgan would be “crushed coal”.

Gordon Dressler
Gordon Dressler (@guest_21488)
8 years ago

Updates:
1) Based on a blanket form response email from FDEP this morning, at least 133 separate email addresses have provided inputs to them regarding the Kinder-Morgan air quality permit.
2) A personal response from Senator Bean’s office states that he has received “a large number of e-mails on this topic” and that Ms Tarsitano, his Communications Director, will be attending tomorrows OHPA meeting because Senator Bean is currently out of town.
3) Yesterday, due to “the amount of citizen comment received”, the Mayor and City Manager sent in a request to the DEP district office to have a public hearing so that the public may weigh in and learn more.
4) I fired off a letter-to-the-editor of FBNL that was an improved version of my letter to FDEP posted above. I’m hoping it gets published in its entirety in Friday’s edition.
5) The (coal free) tide may be turning . . . at least a little . . . but keep fighting!

Steven Crounse
Steven Crounse (@guest_21490)
8 years ago

To All, Just got a call from Janet Atkins office, Joe Zimmerman just informed me. The permit that Kinder Morgan submitted to DEP is on HOLD.!!! Janet and Aaron will be Hosting a Town Hall meeting in Oct. [TBA] discussion will be Permit on air quality from DEP at are Port and Expansion of the Port of Fernandina. All parties will be there. Lets make sure everyone who loves this Island, it’s environment, It’s business model and our way of life turns out for this Town Hall meeting. Lets make them have it out on Center Street,because of so many folks show up. Go team

Berta Arias
Berta Arias(@berta)
8 years ago

As so many concerned citizen have stated in the last few days, not only a resounding NO to harming this fragile island environment with coal dust, truck traffic, and toxic waste products, but also a call for a real dialog among all interested parties re port improvement/expansion that takes into consideration the total economic picture for an improve, not diminished, Amelia Island future.

Adrienne Burke
Adrienne Burke(@aburkefbfl-org)
8 years ago

Press release sent out moments ago:

City Requests FDEP Host Public Hearing for Port Air Permit

On Monday, September 8, 2014, the City Manager’s Office formally requested that Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) consider holding a public hearing or community forum to field questions and inform the public about activities proposed in Air Permit No. 0890440-001-AC. Kinder Morgan Operating, L.P. “C” (Port of Fernandina Operator) made an application to receive an Air Permit which “authorizes the re-purposing of the existing (Port) facility to also allow for the handling and transporting of coal.” The permit states operations will “consist of trans-loading inbound coal from vessels, via ship-mounted clamshell, up to possibly three hoppers and then to truck(s) for offsite delivery; and from the barge via clamshell to the hopper(s) and then truck(s) for offsite delivery.” The request is a direct result of the number of inquiries, concerns, and comments received from the public by City Staff over the past week.

If you are interested in commenting on the requested Air Permit, please contact Mr. Russell Simpson with the FDEP, Citizen Services at Russell.Simpson@dep.state.fl.us or 904-256-1653.

Andrew Curtin
Andrew Curtin(@bkdriverajcgmail-com)
8 years ago

Glad Sen.Bean and Rep. Adkins are involved,but still need a good turnout at the
OHPA meeting on Wed.,Sep.10 at 6:00 at the Page Center. That body needs to know
where the community stands

69
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x