Comment EI-1640
Received or sent (printed as 5/3/2006)
In the Historic Review section of the Environmental Assessment it is stated that the Monaghan Mill is located adjacent to the Southern Segment when in fact the Monaghan Mill as well as the Woodside Mill village are both located adjacent to the Northern Segment. The Woodside Mill village is located between MP 1.0 and MP 2.0 also the Monaghan Mill is located at approximate MP 2.0. See attachments. The SHPO states The railroad lines provided transportation of goods and services to the mills and this railroad could be a contributing factor to the historic integrity of the mills." and that a discontinuance of service (not abandonment and salvage of tracks) would have "no adverse effect on the Monaghan Mill and the Woodside Village." The GCEDC states that after review of the report and the information provided they concur with the SHPO’s comments. Because the Historic Properties clearly lie on the Northern Segment the GCEDC should not be allowed to alter existing fixtures, perform salvage operations or dispose of the right-of-way. The Traffic Subsection of the Environmental Review section states that no traffic has moved over the line during GCEDC’s ownership, while this is true, it is misleading. Traffic has not moved on the line due to lack of demand for service but because the GCEDC has not performed its common carrier obligation to provide service to the shippers on the line. They state that using the truck traffic figure from 1998 no truck traffic will be added to area road ways per year. The figures from 1997 should be used because the railroad operated in that year and up until the abandonment is granted the railroad could continue to operate (with necessary repairs). Thus using the figures from 1997 (when approximately 1000 cars were shipped) and the conversion factor cited by GCEDC in their filing, approximately 4000 truck trips will be added to area roads per year."
Submitted by: James Groome · Greenville, South Carolina
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/AB-490/sub/1X/comment/EI-1640
File docketyard.org/document/ad4cbb28cf92c7ede7e74f9ea2b8d36b0ee46bafcd8856f6f3171ed336ad5870.pdf · back to the docket sheet