Comment EI-19426
Received or sent (printed as 1/6/2013)
I am writing in opposition to the proposed permit for the Tongue River railroad. As a Montanan, I feel that it is unfair to other Montanans, especially the ranchers and farmers whose property this proposal will impact. Hopefully the environmental impact statement will demonstrate the various harms that will likely affect people living or owning property along the railroad, such as: increased taxes, loud noise, flooding, devaluation of property, traffic delays, diesel fumes, degradation of wildlife habitat, fires, shifting of liability to landowners, and infringement on property rights, to name a few. Montanans as well as other United States citizens who are sportsmen use the resources of this area, and the industrialization of this area with a strip mine and a railroad to carry dirty coal will undoubtedly be of negative effect to the area and to the wildlife therin. I understand that the power of eminent domain will have to be used in order to condemn the land necessary for this railroad to be built to begin the long shipment of this dirty coal to China. My hope is that when the environmental impact statement addresses this and brings forth the requirement of public convenience and necessity" in order to condemn, the Surface Transportation Board will realize that this is an unfair and bad deal for Montana and in fact would be un-American to permit this for one coal company when it is hardly a necessity and certainly not a convenience to the public! Please act responsibly and fairly in your decision-making, and take into strong consideration the best interests of Montana and our country, rather than the interests of one coal company and those of China. Thank you."
Submitted by: Marilyn Hill
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-19426 · back to the docket sheet