Comment EI-19431
Received or sent (printed as 1/6/2013)
I am deeply concerned about the potential impact on public health and the environment from the various proposals to transport coal from Montana and Wyoming to terminals on the Pacific Coast for export to Asia. The proposal to build a coal-hauling railroad line through the Tongue River Valley seems especially misguided for two main reasons: 1) it would have negative impacts on the residents, the quality of life, and the environment in the Tongue River Valley; and 2) it would contribute to similar negative impacts for the residents, the quality of life, and the environment in the Pacific Northwest in general. Regarding the Tongue River Valley rail proposal my concerns are as follows: Public convenience and necessity: This proposed railroad is not for the “public convenience and necessity” which is what is required in order for a body to get the power of eminent domain and condemnation authority. This railroad would serve only one coal company giant, Arch Coal, which intends to sell the coal to China and other Asian countries. Impacts on property values: The project would devalue property and infringes on property rights. This railroad will cause fires, spread weeds, devalue property (especially riverfront property), will make ranching and farming more difficult and expensive, will split ranch land in half and separate fields from the river and will shift the liability of train crossings to the landowner. 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 will seriously degrade this excellent sportsman resource. Flooding: The railroad bed will act as an earthen dam and potentially worsen the flooding problems now experienced in Miles City in the winter with ice jams. Noise: The loud trains will ruin the quiet enjoyment of nearby recreation areas near Miles City. Infrastructure and traffic: Taxes will go up for residents communities along the rail lines as the coal heads to coastal ports for shipment. This railroad will increase coal train traffic substantially causing traffic delays, noise, and diesel pollution. The only way to live with this increased traffic will require expensive over passes and safety crossing which are paid for primarily by local taxpayers. Because it is part of a larger project to export coal from the US to Asia through ports on the Pacific coast, the proposed Tongue River Valley railroad would have much more extensive impacts. I believe that a responsible EIS will take these impacts into account. I am very concerned about the effluent run-off from coal train cars and from the very coal pile itself. You spray water on the terminal pile to keep the dust down, but the water eventually joins the life-giving water of the Salish Sea. What heavy metals will flood into those waters, routinely, and constantly….. mercury, lead, cadmium, selenium, arsenic, just to name a few!? Then there is the run off from the coal train cars themselves. Yesterday we had a deluge and I thought about the amount of water cascading through the coal cars traversing my city and neighborhood. GPT has talked about using surfactants to mitigate the dust. Although surfactant does not truly do the job against dust, just what is this surfactant, and do we want it added to the coal car run-off along the tracks and from the terminal pile? I suggest the chemical stew added to our ground water and pouring into the Puget Sound will be harmful to all animals (humans included as well as all aquatic life). I ask that you study all the chemicals found in coal and determine just what exactly these substances will do to our water (therefore our health and health of all living organisms)? What will they do to our ground water, our drinking water, and ultimately, the Puget Sound? People used to say that cigarettes did no harm. Then the fraud, and corporate manipulation of the public came to forefront. We are smarter now, and can hope not to be deceived. The science is out there and most of the nasty chemicals found in coal are “old hat.” What we need is honest evaluation, with no bias given to money and power. We, the public look to you to safeguard our health and well-being and the well-being of our environment. Thank you for studying this foreseeable, significant, adverse Impact.
Submitted by: Lynne Oulman · Bellingham, Washington
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-19431 · back to the docket sheet