Comment EI-19386
Received or sent (printed as 1/6/2013)
The environmental impact statement for the proposed Tongue River Railroad should analyze the following: Public convenience and necessity: This proposed railroad is not for the “public convenience and necessity” which is required for eminent domain and condemnation authority. It is in fact a public inconvenience, and benefits not the public for the long term, but only one entity for the short term, Arch Coal. Impacts on property values: The project would devalue property and infringes on property rights. This railroad would spread weeds, devalue property (especially riverfront property) by making ranching and farming more difficult and expensive, dividing ranch lands, separating fields from the river and would leave train-crossing liability to landowners. It would destroy the peace and tranquility of every property it passes through. Wildlife: The Tongue River Valley is rich in wildlife habitat and home to outstanding elk and mule deer populations as well as upland birds. Industrializing this valley with a railroad and the coal strip mine it serves would degrade this valuable resource. Flooding: The railroad bed would dam natural drainages and worsen the flooding problems now experienced in Miles City in the winter with ice jams. Noise: Trains will ruin the quiet enjoyment of all residents and wildlife, as well as nearby recreation areas near Miles City. Infrastructure and traffic: Taxes would go up for residents communities along the rail lines as the coal heads to coastal ports for shipment. This railroad would increase coal train traffic substantially causing traffic delays, noise, and diesel pollution. Accommodating this traffic will require expensive traffic and safety infrastructure paid for primarily by local taxpayers. The Tongue River Railroad would allow US coal to be burned in Asia, where the benefits will accrue, but we will all bear the costs of its global environmental footprint.
Submitted by: Charlie Weiss · Portland, Oregon
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/FD-30186/comment/EI-19386 · back to the docket sheet