Comment EI-19728
Received or sent (printed as 1/9/2013)
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: 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. 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. For example the proposed coal trains and export terminal(s) on the Pacific Coast would impact human health, access to standard emergency medical care (crossing in Northwest Washington are often blocked for many long minutes while trains pass), and the fragile marine environment of the Northern most edge of Puget Sound, an already highly impacted body of water. For the sake of our future and the future of our children's children, please do not approve this project."
Submitted by: Mark A. Hicks
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-19728 · back to the docket sheet