Rutland Herald

Court upholds limits on OMYA's highway usage

March 20, 2001
By BRUCE EDWARDS Herald Staff

For the second time in less than a year, a court has upheld a state Environmental Board decision that limits Proctor-based OMYA's use of a public highway.

U.S. District Judge William K. Sessions III has dismissed a lawsuit filed by OMYA Inc. that alleged the state Environmental Board violated the company's constitutional rights when it restricted the number of trucks it uses to haul marble ore along Route 7.

In a 32-page decision written last week, Sessions ruled the board was within its rights under Act 250, the state's land use law, when it limited the number of trucks from the company's Middlebury quarry to its calcium carbonate plant in Florence to 115 roundtrips a day.

Sessions turned aside each of the company's arguments that the state violated its rights under the supremacy, commerce, equal protection and due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution.

OMYA's legal route to federal court began when it appealed a 1998 decision of the District 1 Environmental Commission that limited the number of roundtrips to 113 a day. The company had sought to double the number of roundtrips from 85 to 170 a day. But the commission ruled that such an increase would have an adverse impact on aesthetics in downtown Brandon.

The company appealed that decision to the Environmental Board, which upheld the district commission and also noted that the increase sought by the company would cause unreasonable traffic congestion under Act 250. In its ruling, the board increased the number of roundtrips by two to 115 a day.

In June 1999, OMYA appealed the board's decision to the Vermont Supreme Court. At the same time, the company filed a separate lawsuit in federal court alleging its constitutional rights were violated. The state Supreme Court rejected the company's appeal last year.

Sessions noted in his decision that the Environmental Board based its decision "on evidence of unreasonable traffic congestion and undue adverse effect on historic sites and aesthetics."

"The amelioration of traffic congestion and the protection of historic sites and scenic resources are legitimate exercises of a state's police power, as the Vermont Supreme Court recognized," Sessions wrote.

And while states are limited in their power to limit interstate commerce, the federal court ruled that OMYA failed to prove that the state exceeded its authority and discriminated against the company.

In that regard, Sessions said, "The application of Act 250 in OMYA's case does not affirmatively discriminate against interstate commerce."

Sessions also rejected OMYA's arguments that the state violated the equal protection and due process clauses under the 14th Amendment.

Two Brandon inn owners had raised objections to OMYA's plans to double truck traffic through their town. When informed of the decision Monday night, Lilac Inn owner Michael Shane said he was gratified by the decision.

"I hope this will help move OMYA and Vermont Railway and the state of Vermont forward into the area of rail from the Middlebury quarry to the Florence plant," Shane said.

OMYA Executive Vice President James Reddy could not be reached for comment Monday night.