Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

July 1, 2013 – Opponents of the plan by Global Partners to transport ethanol via high-volume trains through Cambridge, Somerville, and other towns east of Worcester to a planned blending facility in Revere scored major victories today. The "Ethanol Amendment" in the state’s annual budget that would effectively have prohibited the planned terminal in Revere was passed by the State Senate Conference Committee and sent to the Governor’s Office for ratification into law.

Roseann Bongiovanni of Chelsea, a principal citizen opponent of the plan, said, "A big thank you goes out to our legislative champions Senator Sal DiDomenico and Senator Anthony Petrucelli! Without their leadership and support, and that of their great staff (Ingrid and Anthony G.), this would not be possible. Representatives Reinstein and O’Flaherty should also be recognized for their advocacy in favor of this amendment. A special thank you also goes out to Attorney Rubin who drafted the amendment language."

The amendment was H.3538 which read as follows:

"SECTION 81. Section 14 of chapter 91 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2010 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph:
An ethanol storage or blending facility that stores or blends or is intended to store or blend more than an average of 5,000 gallons of ethanol per day and is located within 1 mile of a census block that has a population density of greater than 4,000 people per square mile shall not be granted a license under this chapter. For the purposes of this section, ethanol shall be defined as any mixture composed of not less than 30 percent ethanol.

Upon final passage, many people believed that even with the Governor’s signature, a legal challenge would be sure to follow. For example, U.S. Congressman Michael Capuano wrote several months ago in a letter to the Cambridge City Council:

Therefore, I am compelled to inform the Council it is my understanding that neither federal nor state law seems to provide ways to prevent ethanol from being transported through any community. There are laws and regulations available to ensure safety, but bans on the transport of hazardous materials have not been upheld in court. The Council may know that the Washington DC City Council enacted a ban on hazmat transportation through the city, but it was struck down in federal court. As far as I know, no other city has passed legislation banning the transit of hazardous materials and had the ban stand up in court. Of course, if others can identify alternative paths to judicial success, I stand ready to support them.

With this view as backdrop, opponents of the ethanol transport plan were thrilled to receive word that Global Partners has decided to cancel their plans. Noting significant opposition from local groups such as the Chelsea Creek Action Group, Global Partners stated that they are "a good company that doesn’t want to go against the wishes of the local community."

———