EIS Home > EIS Library > Scoping Report > Appendix G - All Scoping Comments > Businesses

Adrienne Battis (#11572)

Date Submitted: 01/22/2013
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Please see attached comments one through six.
Attached Files:

Ali Hakala (Garden Works LLC) (#4487)

Date Submitted: 12/10/12
Location: Sandpoint , ID
Comment:
see attached
Attached Image:

Allen Brown (#1703)

Date Submitted: 10/26/12
Location: Burlington, WA
Comment:
See attached.
Attached Image:

Beth Sutton (#11934)

Date Submitted: 01/22/2013
Comment:
Please find attached the public scoping comments of Peabody Energy Corporation.
Attached Files:

Bill McGown (#5001)

Date Submitted: 12/17/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Scoping Comment for the GPT/Custer Spur EIS
12/17/12
I operate a water taxi between the San Juan Islands and Bellingham WA. I am on the water every day between March 1st and the end of October each year. I travel throughout the all of the islands and I see the oil tanker ships coming and going to the Mobile Refinery all year. I have witnessed some issues which will impact the proposed coal terminal at Cherry Pt. Stated simply, we do not have room in the San Juan Islands for anchored coal ships. If we tried to anchor these ships in the small areas we do have, they will tear up the contaminated sediments in the bottom of the bays which will have a huge negative impact on shell fish, crab and nursery fish throughout the whole area.

The docks at the Mobile Refinery cannot be accessed in all weather and often there is a backup of ships that need to be staged for transfer of materials, this same situation will happen for the proposed coal terminal. They will not be able to have too many ships waiting in the wings and in a situation where there is a backup of coal delivery, either from weather or coal trains, the ships will have to wait somewhere to be loaded. I can see that this will be a big problem since the coal ships are much larger and deeper than the Oil Tankers. The Oil Tankers already impact the area by anchoring down off of Smith Island or in some cases when there are too many for that area they anchor in Bellingham Bay. The areas that are most protected for large ship anchoring is only about 100 feet deep. The Coal ships are almost 50 feet deep so this does not leave a large margin for error.

These ships, if they can find a place to anchor at all, they will put down huge anchors and chain. As the ships swing at anchor their anchor chains will dredge up the sediment in the bay in a wide swath. I estimate that this circle of damaged bottom sediment could be as large as 700-800 feet in diameter. Week after week these ships will come and go and new ships will be anchored again in the same general areas. Each time these ships will carve a 700-800 foot divot in the bottom of the bay. By the time you add the Oil tankers to the Coal ships we will have a massive displacement of the sea bottom. This can’t be good for the environment.

I see no mitigation for this problem. We have to face the fact we have the limited area available for transport ships and I feel that we are already maxed out with the Oil Tankers. We must not allow this marine traffic jam to happen in the first place. I think we need to study the impacts of the current Oil Tankers in order to understand what is going on and how this could change for the worse as you add the proposed volume of coal ships on top of this problem. We should study how this will impact fisheries throughout the anchoring areas as the sea floor is displaced over and over each week and this sediment is carried around in the currents. There are tons of polluted layers in these sediment from years of agricultural and industrial materials that were dumped into the rivers. These layers are best left undisturbed and I believe these ships will carve a huge swath into these sediments. We need to see a study that look into this possibility.

Check this out if you want to see what it could look like in the San Juan Islands

http://hamptonroads.com/2011/02/coal-ships-create-sight-hampton-roads-waters

Regards,

Bill McGown
Leap Frog Water Taxi
355 Harris Ave Suite 108
Bellingham, WA 98225
360-220-0538

Bob Green (Cloud Peak Energy Resources LLC) (#12185)

Date Submitted: 01/21/13
Location: Gillette, WY
Comment:
Mr. Perry,

Thank you for accepting the attached comment package into the administrative record for the Notice of Intent to Prepare a Joint Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Gateway Pacific Terminals Bulk Dry Goods Shipping Facility and the Custer Spur Rail Expansion Projects, 77 Fed. Reg. 58531.

If Cloud Peak Energy can provide any additional details about these comments please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely

Bob Green
GM Sustainable Development & External Relations
Cloud Peak Energy Resources LLC
505 South Gillette Avenue (zip code 82716)
or PO Box 3009 (zip code 82717-3009)
Gillette, Wyoming

Telephone: +1 307.687.6053
www.cloudpeakenergy.com
Bob.Green@cldpk.com
Attached Files:

Bob Watters (#11651)

Date Submitted: 01/22/2013
Comment:
Attached are scoping comments for the GPT/BNSF Custer Spur EIS, a copy of these comments have also been sent by mail.
Attached Files:

Brad Sauer (#12228)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Comment:
Find attached scoping comments. Thank you.

Brad Sauer
Attached Files:

Carolyn and Bill McGown (#591)

Date Submitted: 10/08/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Hi,

My husband and I would like to submit a comment expressing concerns we have about how the development of the Pacific Gateway Terminal and subsequent activity there from might adversely affect our small business.

We have recently launched a business called Leap Frog Water Taxi. It’s a passenger ferry that services Bellingham and the San Juan Islands. Our office and boat are located at the Bellingham Cruise Terminal in Fairhaven. There is one road in/out of the terminal facility property and drivers must cross the railroad tracks before entering and after departing the facility. We are greatly concerned that a substantial increase in train traffic will create an impediment for customers wishing to patronize our business. We have heard repeatedly from customers that when weighing their transportation options, convenience and efficiency are at the top of the list of considerations. Naturally we are concerned and would like to see the financial impact on small businesses located by key railroad crossings included in the scoping process.

Sincerely,
Carolyn and Bill McGown

Carolyn and Bill McGown (#1136)

Date Submitted: 10/22/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Hi,
My husband and I would like to submit a comment expressing concerns we have about how the development of the Pacific Gateway Terminal and subsequent activity there from might adversely affect our small business.

We have recently launched a business called Leap Frog Water Taxi. It’s a passenger ferry that services Bellingham and the San Juan Islands. Our office and boat are located at the Bellingham Cruise Terminal in Fairhaven. There is one road in/out of the terminal facility property and drivers must cross the railroad tracks before entering and after departing the facility. We are greatly concerned that a substantial increase in train traffic will create an impediment for customers wishing to patronize our business. We have heard repeatedly from customers that when weighing their transportation options, convenience and efficiency are at the top of the list of considerations. Naturally we are concerned and would like to see the financial impact on small businesses located by key railroad crossings included in the scoping process. PLEASE INCLUDE IN THE EIS A STUDY OF THE FINANCIAL IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESSES WHO RELY ON EASY CUSTOMER ACCESS, LOCATED BY RAILROAD CROSSINGS ALONG THE ROUTE OF THE COAL TRAINS.

Sincerely,
Carolyn and Bill McGown
631 Briar Rd.
Bellingham, WA 98225

Cedar Tree LLC (#3258)

Date Submitted: 11/20/2012
Comment:
Dear EIS scoping group,

We are concerned about the negative effects that the proposed terminal and increased coal train traffic may have on property values. We ask that you study this closely. Of course, there will be impacts on property values near the train tracks and near the port--but there could also be affects on broader property values as the desirability of this county wanes.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Warm regards, The Members of Cedar Tree LLC

Christopher Hagedorn (Peabody Energy) (#12158)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Location: St. Louis, MO
Comment:
Please find attached the public scoping comments of Peabody Energy Corporation in response to the invitation of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington Department of Ecology, and Whatcom County, in their capacity as Co-Lead Agencies responsible for completion of the Joint Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed construction and operation of the Gateway Pacific Terminal.
Attached Files:

Dan Penttila (Salish Sea Biological) (#13672)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Comment:
*********************

GPT EIS Scoping Co-Lead Agencies:

Please find attached my comment letter.


Dan Penttila
Salish Sea Biological
5108 Kingsway
Anacortes, WA 98221

*********************
Attached Files:

Eric Laschever (KL Gates) (#12238)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Location: Seattle, WA
Comment:
See Attached
Attached Files:

F.E. Kalb, Jr. (BNSF) (#12159)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Comment:
Please see attached scoping comments of BNSF Railway.
Attached Files:

Fay Mafnas (#10553)

Date Submitted: 01/21/2013
Location: stanwood, wa
Comment:
Dear Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Ecology and Whatcom County Council:

I am Fay Mafnas. I live on Camano Island and commute to Mountlake Terrace to work. After work and on weekends, I run a small business in East downtown Stanwood with my family. Our business is on 271st ST NW near the rail tracks, so I am well aware of the present impacts of the train.
I have been to the hearing in Mount Vernon, watched the live broadcast of comments at the Seattle hearing and read dozens of scoping comments submitted to the EIS website. Like thousands of others, I have many concerns about the increased train traffic if the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal receives its permits. I will limit my comments of this letter to the scope of doing business in Stanwood. I believe the increased rail traffic will negatively impact the future of our business, as well as other Stanwood businesses, when our customers choose to avoid the east downtown core of Stanwood. I have read the Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. Memorandum (GTC) submitted to Stanwood’s Mayor on Aug. 8, 2011. I have attached it as part of my submission and request that the co-lead agencies study all thirteen of the impacts documented in this report. Please take the time to read the GTC document to better understand my concerns. I have included a few of my own comments related to the report. I will refer to each by the number given on the GTC report.
1. It is clear that upgrades (item #2 – Cedar Home Drive) will be necessary to maintain the tracks and keep our citizens safe. How much will this cost the city? How will this affect traffic while the improvements are constructed? How will this impact those who work and live near each crossing?
2. How much will it cost the city to improve all the Stanwood crossings to keep people safe? According to the GTC report, there have been 3 accidents within the last 5 years at the Cedar Home Dr./ 271st crossing(item #6) This crossing is half a block from our business. Some 16,000 vehicles a day pass through our downtown core (item #7 & City’s comprehensive plan). How will these vehicles be re-routed during construction upgrades? When they are re-routed, how will this negatively impact our business? How will the loss of sales tax revenue impact Stanwood?
3. What will it cost to improve or even expand SR 532 and the overpass when more vehicles use it to avoid 271st ST (item #4)? How will this negatively impact traffic during “peak” times in the summer and during events like the Snow Goose Festival, the Mother’s Day Art Studio Tour, The Great Northwest Glass Quest and other events and attractions that bring visitors to our community?
4. How will our community effectively maintain its emergency services response times (item #5)? Will millions of dollars be set aside to “compensate” citizens who will be negatively affected by the loss of valuable minutes due to re-routing to avoid the mile and half long train?
5. What will happen to our recently built Amtrak Station when passenger rail schedules are compromised to allow for increased freight trains (item #9)? How will this affect our local commuters as well as future visitors? Will the money and commitments for the Stanwood Station be considered wasteful when people choose more reliable transportation than Amtrak? Will Amtrak be compensated for lost revenue due to declines in ridership?
6. “According to The Washington State 2010 – 2030 Freight Rail Plan published by WSDOT in December 2009, Stanwood’s rail line is already at capacity with the present 18 trains per day." Will the companies submitting the GPT proposal set aside millions of dollars to pay for every and all rail and traffic/road infrastructure costs? Will there be additional funding to expand the capacity to safely allow for the additional trains (item #11)? If so, will this money come from federal and/or state funding? If it comes from the state, please conduct a separate inquiry on how the state is expected to pay for this in every affected city when it is already having difficulty paying for vital services such fully funding public education. When expansion becomes necessary, how will landowners be compensated for eminent domain claims?
There are a few more areas of the GTC report that I haven’t covered, but I ask that you include each one in the EIS.
Stanwood is a great community and not the only one adversely affected by all of the coal export facility proposals. I must agree with Ronnie Mitchell’s comment from Jan. 17, 2013, “Because Cherry Point is part of a greater economy, I think it only fair and reasonable that a detailed and comprehensive study be made of the cumulative impacts of coal train traffic on all the communities and industries of Idaho, Washington, and Oregon that are affected by one and all of the proposed terminals. Therefore, I am specifically asking that the scope of the EIS for the coal terminal proposed for Cherry Point include a comprehensive economic and social analysis of the railroad impacts on the Northwest as if one or all the proposed terminals were to be approved.” Many other communities, small business owners and taxpayers from Montana to Washington will adversely be impacted by each of the proposed coal export terminals. The Co-lead agencies should refrain from making a decision on any permits until an area-wide EIS is completed to analyze the impacts of all five coal export proposals in the Pacific Northwest.
If the items detailed in this letter and in the attached GTC report cannot be mitigated for Stanwood and all parties affected, then the “no build” option must be selected because we can’t afford the costs related to the proposed coal export terminals.
Sincerely,
Fay Mafnas
Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow
271st ST NW Stanwood, WA 98292

Germaine Kornegay (Animal House Pet Grooming) (#12314)

Date Submitted: 01/18/13
Location: Burlington, WA
Comment:
Hi,

One of my concerns as a small business owner in the community of Burlington, WA is the effects on my existing business. I own Animal House Pet Grooming on Hwy 20. 228 Avon Ave to be exact. This has been my business for 18 years.

Over the past few years, my elderly clients have dwindled because of the drive times and traffic waits. I have heard this from them first hand. Other businesses in the community have been dealing with this growing crisis. My business has slowed lately as my clients get older. There is a problem with busy working families being late to work as they must wait behind coal trains to reach my business or reach work after leaving my business.

In the community of Burlington, businesses will be heavily impacted with the number of trains to be added and the length of these trains. This is a hindsight that we won't have until it is too late. I am already seeing it.

Please study these negative impacts on our businesses in Burlington and the radius surrounding the tracks. How many jobs will be ultimately lost, how much revenue will be lost before adding just a few jobs that will be gone within 16 years. Study how many jobs we will lose by not being inviting to businesses because of the train traffic. We are losing those jobs too!

Hello,

My name is Germaine Kornegay and I am a small business owner and home owner, both within 5 miles of the proposed route of the coal trains. I have been a resident here for 20 years and have owned this business for 18 years as a sole proprietor. Let me finally add, I am asthmatic.

My business is just 1 block away from the tracks, my home, 4 miles on the other side of the track. Not only do I see first hand (Hwy 20) the traffic that builds, I see the amount of emergency vehicles that are rerouted and the chaos that it brings. The amount of carbon monoxide, combined with the train's pollutants is a big concern for me (one of many) as an asthmatic.
My relatives, friends and neighbors are among some of the asthmatics that I am concerned about as well. It is a growing problem. The clean air that we breathe is in jeopardy. Coming from large cities such as Philadelphia and San Diego, I understand the impact of air quality on asthma. My mother visited here from Philadelphia and after just three days she stopped coughing up phlegm. After five months, she returned to Philadelphia and in three days, she was coughing up phlegm again. Air quality is important.

I would like to know what health impacts specific to asthma, emphysema and COPD that the 1.5 mile long trains at the proposed times per day will impact my community both coming and going, including the traffic pollution. I have three tracks within the radius of my business where I spend 10 hours per day at least. These are Avon Avenue, Burlington Boulevard and Cherry Street). Traffic has accumulated at all of these simultaneously.

Another important question that will impact my neighbors, due to the trains and winds that would carry coal dust is inevitable here. How many of us are reliant on inhalers and other medications and how much more will this cost us in medical expenses?

How will my neighbors on the west side of the tracks make it to the hospital in cases of injury or asthma attack? I am a dog groomer and accidents happen. Normally, I would be able to get to an emergency room within ten minutes. With traffic backed up at every possible intersection, how much longer will this take for me and my elderly neighbors and clients?

We do understand how far the coal dust carries at the proposed terminal site where the coal sits. We also know that this is inhaled by animals and humans, as well as absorbed by our ocean.

Thank you for studying this. I look forward to the results.

Thank you,
Germaine Kornegay (Animal House Pet Grooming, Burlington, WA)
360-755-2108

Holly Propst (Western Business Roundtable) (#12187)

Date Submitted: 01/21/13
Comment:
The Western Business Roundtable wishes to provide its comments in response to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers “Notice of Intent To Prepare a Joint Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Gateway Pacific Terminals Bulk Dry Goods Shipping Facility and the Custer Spur Rail Expansion Projects” (77 FR 58531, September 21, 2012).

We appreciate the opportunity to provide our input on this issue, which is of such importance to the West.

Sincerely,

Holly Propst
Executive Director
Western Business Roundtable
Attached Files:

Ivan Reiff (#10236)

Date Submitted: 01/21/2013
Comment:
I own and operate Western Prince Whale & Wildlife Tours out of Friday Harbor, WA. Our company has offered whale watching tours in the area for the last 27 years. We employ 10 local residents and are part of an industry that provides hundreds of jobs and takes over 500,000 tourists out every year. I personally live year round on San Juan Island were I am raising my family.

I am greatly concerned about a number of impacts this project would likely have on our environment.

The proposed location of the Gateway Pacific Terminal is near prime forage fish habitat, which are critical for the local ecosystem. Salmon depend on forage fish. Thousands of local people depend on Salmon and the Southern Resident Killer Whale (ESA listed) population depends on Salmon. It has been proven time and again that these type of projects destroy and degrade forage fish habitat.

Another issue of great concern is shipping safety in the area. Every year we observe Southern Resident Killer Whales foraging in the area near Cherry Point, often very close to shore. Just last year, an accident at a Vancouver, BC coal terminal spilled large amounts of coal into the local waters. No matter how many mitigating factors are in place accidents do and will happen. A single maritime accident could wipe out large parts of the local ecosystem and thousands of jobs.

The risks involved with going forward with the Gateway Pacific Terminal are too great. The potential environmental impacts created by daily operations alone far out way the benefits and the increased potential for a maritime accident is unacceptable.

Jane Jaehning (#7005)

Date Submitted: 01/12/2013
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Comment:
As a resident of the area (Whidbey Island), co-owner of a family salmon fishing business in Alaska, and concerned USA citizen, I am deeply concerned of the plan to promote more coal burning. Just how much are we willing to do to allow a few interests to extract big money for short term gains and long term harm? Exactly how many jobs will this create? Rep Rick Larsen recently stated that the jobs were the important factor, if so, how many jobs? How long will those jobs be for and how much will they be paid? Will those job benefits outweigh the environmental impact, the disruption of numerous communities with an overburden of daily trains, the impact on the Native American communities and the salmon fishing? And what about the noise? Native American communities have requested a comprehensive EIS. This only seems right.

As for jobs,I suggest it would be wiser to find those jobs in the alternative energy arena. It would seem the benefit of jobs, if that is the important benefit, is not worth the destruction and disruption. If we subsidize the renewable energy industry to the same extent as we do the coal industry (giveaways on federal lands), we would produce inoffensive jobs and inoffensive power production.

The following excerpt would seem to give enough credence to the argument against these coal terminals, trains, pollution and benefits.

"Critics of the export terminals say the long-term economic benefit of shipping coal and gas overseas isn’t going to be all that great. They say increased mining is especially offensive given that coal companies – including foreign ones – pay very little to extract coal on federal land. In June, for instance, Peabody leased the rights to 271 million tons of coal in Powder River Basin at $1.10 a ton; the market rate is closer to $2.79 a ton. A recent Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis report found that taxpayers are set to lose $28.9 billion over the next 30 years because of such deals. “US taxpayers are effectively subsidizing the expansion of other nations, including China, with underpriced coal that is being exported,” report author Tom Sanzillo, a former New York state deputy comptroller, said in a statement."

I urge you to make every effort to avoid the coal terminals, coal trains, disruption of Native American communities and the environment. Having foreign companies, let alone big American corporations, make profit from mining coal on federal land for less than half the going rate is in reality draining American taxpayers of their legacy.

There are so many aspects of this plan that are not right. I urge you to do the right thing, take the morally correct action and oppose the terminals and all that they entail.

Jeffrey Margolis (#8375)

Date Submitted: 01/11/13
Location: Deming, WA
Comment:
see attached
Attached Files:

Jill Johnson (#3895)

Date Submitted: 11/30/12
Location: Eastsound, WA
Comment:
see attached
Attached Image:

JJ Sato (#2786)

Date Submitted: 11/14/2012
Location: Bellevue, Wa
Comment:
To: SSA Marine, Inc. Seattle
Re: Gateway Pacific Terminal

I represent Dagmars Marina, a 800 boat Marina located at 1871 Ross Avenue, Everett, Washington. The Marina provides jobs and benefits to local businesses as many of the boats and boaters who utilize the facility come from all over the state, as well as Canada. The purpose of this letter is to voice a three fold concern regarding the proposed terminal including the impact on the waterway in the Everett-Marysville area, the highway traffic impact, and the coal dust airborne issue.

THE ADDITIONAL TRAINS WILL DISRUPT THE SNOHOMISH RIVER WATERWAY

The patrons of the Marina enjoy the easy access through the Snohomish water into the Puget Sound. When a train (such as the proposed coal trains) passes over the Snohomish River, the bridge closes and boats must wait for the bridge to reopen. The bridge located nearest to Dagmars Marina is the SR-529 Snohomish River Bridge #37. The additional openings of the bridge will create large delays and cripple the access through the Snohomish River. Dagmars Marina has managed to continue during the tough economic times, but the additional delays will negatively effect the business including the jobs, tax revenue, and additional benefits to the Everett and Marysville area from the various patrons who arrive from foreign locations to enjoy the benefit of easy access.

THE ADDITIONAL TRAINS WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL LAND/ROADWAY TRAFFIC

The additional train traffic will worsen an already existing traffic congestion problem in Marysville and Everett. Traffic accumulates due to the existing train crossing openings. Creating an additional burden will severely impact commerce in the area.

COAL DUST ACCUMULATING ON LOCAL BUILDINGS AND BOATS

Finally, a concern voiced by many interested parties locally is the possibility of the dark coal particles accumulating on boats, cars and buildings along its path. It is seen in other contexts such as sawdust, and some effort needs to be directed toward this issue as well.

Please determine realistic solutions to address the problems presented in our comment. Thank you.

Jon Lopez (#1809)

Date Submitted: 10/27/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
See attached.
Attached Image:

Kara Black (#2327)

Date Submitted: 11/05/2012
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear Scoping Team,

We would very much like to see you investigate the possible impacts of train accidents and spills en route to port--for the full length of the journeys--both on human health, human safety, the environment and on wildlife.

Thank you for your consideration.

Warm regards,
The staff of Cedar Tree LLC
--
Kara Black, Managing Member, Cedar Tree House, Cedar Tree LLC, 1733 Mount Baker Highway, Bellingham, WA 98226 www.cedartreellc.com 360-676-2300

Kara Black (#2558)

Date Submitted: 11/08/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear EIS Scoping Group,

We are writing to ask that you please closely study the impact of the proposed terminal on water and wetland wildlife and ecology. I understand that the terminal is proposed in an area where there are already sensitive wetlands, including fragile eelgrass and a variety of bird and animal life. In addition, the shipping terminal and shipping process may do harm to ocean wildlife, such as whales and other mammals, and fish. Please have these studies carefully and protect our beautiful bay, the Salish Sea, the Island channels and to wide ocean from any harm from this project.

Thank you Kurt, Kara and the staff of the Tree Frog Night Inn
--
Kara Black Tree Frog Night Inn 1727 Mt. Baker Highway Bellingham, WA 98226 360-676-2300 www.treefrognight.com

Kara Black (#2559)

Date Submitted: 11/08/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear Scoping Team,

We have a concern about the noise effects of additional train traffic along our coast and through our county. The trains are so loud currently, that we are even able to hear them from our property, six miles inland!

I know of several businesses along the water front that already suffer from the current train noise (and could increased noise actually put some types of businesses out of business?), and the noise is very unpleasant and startling (the rumbling engines and the loud horns) when we are down enjoying our waterfront area and down town.

We don't need any more of this noise in Bellingham! Please study how increased noise would affect residents quality of life and how it could further affect nearby businesses.

Thank you The staff of Cedar Tree House
--
Kara Black, Managing Member, Cedar Tree House, Cedar Tree LLC, 1733 Mount Baker Highway, Bellingham, WA 98226 www.cedartreellc.com 360-676-2300

Kara Black (#2956)

Date Submitted: 11/14/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear Scoping Team,

We would like to see you investigate the potential deleterious effects that the burning of the additional coal that could be shipped out of the proposed terminal could have in fostering global warming, with all its world-wide, deleterious impacts.

Thank you The members of Cedar Tree LLC
--
Cedar Tree LLC, 1733 Mount Baker Highway, Bellingham, WA 98226 www.cedartreellc.com 360-676-2300

Kara Black (#2957)

Date Submitted: 11/14/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear Scoping team,

As our business is directly dependent on tourism, and nature-based tourism specifically, as we are an eco-inn, the increased coal traffic could have a direct negative impact on our business.

I would like you to require a detailed examination of the impact of increased coal traffic on the tourism industry in Whatcom county, and businesses and employment affiliated with tourism here--which are many. Also, on the overall image of our county as a naturally beautiful location.

At the same time, could you please take a look at jobs that could be generated by putting that land to an alternative industrial or other use that is more in keeping with the natural, sustainable strengths of our County, such as alternative energy development.

Thank you Kurt, Kara and the Staff of Tree Frog Night Inn
--
Tree Frog Night Inn 1727 Mt. Baker Highway Bellingham, WA 98226 360-676-2300 www.treefrognight.com

Kara Black (#2958)

Date Submitted: 11/14/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear EIS Team,

I am writing to ask you to consider all added public expenses in the short-term and long term from permitting the terminal at Gateway. I suspect that there are many side effects and potential public tax consequences that might not be obvious at first look--and I hope you will require a detailed consideration and calculation of these possibilities for our community and the others impacted. These could range from bridges/overpasses/crossings to other expenses such as clean up, abatement, restoration, etc--I am sure there are many more I have not considered.

Thank you Kara Black 1727 Mt. Baker Highway

Kara Black (#6509)

Date Submitted: 01/06/13
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear Scoping Team,

We are concerned about the negative effects that the proposed terminal and increased coal train traffic may have on property values. We ask that you study this closely. Of course, there will be impacts on property values near the train tracks and near the port--but there could also be affects on broader property values as the desirability of this county wanes.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Warm regards, Kara Black and The Members of Cedar Tree LLC
--
Kara Black, Managing Member, Cedar Tree House, Cedar Tree LLC, 1733 Mount Baker Highway, Bellingham, WA 98226 www.cedartreellc.com 360-676-2300

Kate Pickett (#12227)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Location: Mount Vernon, WA
Comment:
I’m a small business owner in downtown Mount Vernon and I’m very worried about the continued viability of my business if the proposed coal trains are allowed to disrupt our region. I shudder at the prospect of the lengthy and frequent coal trains cutting the Mount Vernon downtown off from the residents of our own town as well as people from other cities who would be trying to access our downtown from the freeway.

How many potential shoppers would endure the half-hour train-crossing waits to shop in downtown Mount Vernon when they could so easily take the freeway to the nearest mall and arrive in minutes? And assuming some intrepid shoppers would make their way to our downtown, how would they feel about breathing in the coal dust that inevitably blows off the trains, as they pass by downtown Mount Vernon?

The economic downtown has many of us small business owners scrapping to just stay afloat, trying to hold on until the economy improves. A lack of access to our stores and coal dust in the air would be devastating.

Allowing these trains in order to garner some short-term construction jobs but at the risk of driving small, local businesses out of business makes no sense. It is known that a far larger percentage of the revenue of local business remains in the region than the revenue of the corporate mall stores, which electronically whisk the every day’s sales income out of state to their New York (or elsewhere) headquarters.

Helping to preserve, rather than threatening to destroy small business makes not only good economic sense but is also a quality of life issue. Have you been in a state where there are no downtown areas, only strip malls? Ugh.

Beyond the devastating impact for my business; I’m also extremely concerned about the negative effect on peoples’ health and the environment should the coal trains be allowed in our state.

But what is the greater good that would come from the sacrifices we are being asked to make in allowing these trains and is worth it? The bottom line? We would be helping China’s manufacturing industry so they can more easily crush us in the world marketplace?

Just say “no”! Please.


--
Kate Pickett, owner
EMBELLISH
NEW ADDRESS!
223 South First Street
Mount Vernon, WA 98273

360-336-3373 phone
360-336-3433 fax

www.ShopEmbellish.com

Katie Fleming (Friends of the San Juans) (#6802)

Date Submitted: 01/03/13
Location: Friday Harbor, WA
Comment:
See Attached

Signed by:
Ravenhill Construction Inc
Islanders Insurance
Be Chic Boutique
Golden Triangle Rest.
Arctic Raven Gallery
Waterworks Gallery
Island Bicycles
Funk & Junk
Cafe Demeter
The Market Chef
Star Surveying
Spa Bune Salon and Day Spa
Garden Path Cafe
Attached Files:
Attached Image:

Kurt Waldenberg (North Sound Energy Remodel, LLC) (#12643)

Date Submitted: 01/14/13
Location: Bellingham , WA
Comment:
Dear Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Ecology and Whatcom County Council:

As a local business owner and twenty-three year resident of Bellingham and Whatcom County, I know we can do better. After significant consideration, I have decided to publicly express my opposition to the construction of a coal export terminal at Cherry Point, Washington and transporting strip-mined coal from Montana and Wyoming on trains and ships throughout the Northwest. This proposal would negatively affect our community by increasing congestion and noise with more coal train traffic, polluting our air and local waterways, harming existing businesses, delaying emergency responders, damaging aquatic ecosystems and fishing grounds at the terminal site, increasing tanker traffic and the potential for serious shipping accidents and escalating climate change. I urge you to consider these impacts in the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement.

There are currently five coal export proposals that would transport as much as 150 million tons through the Northwest. I urge the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct an area wide Environmental Impact Statement to assess the cumulative impact of these proposals.

Thank you for reading my comment,

Kurt Waldenberg
North Sound Energy Remodel, LLC

Kurt & Kara Black (#2328)

Date Submitted: 11/05/2012
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Dear EIS Scoping Team,

We would like to request that you closely study the impact of the proposed terminal on the fishing industry (bay, rivers, creeks) in Whatcom and Island Counties, and also, more specifically, on native fishing and tribal fishing rights for all tribes that might possibly be impacted by the train transport and shipping of this product.

At our sustainably-built Inn, we particularly value both sustainable local industry and also Native culture, which is such a rich part of our heritage here--as well as a legal obligation for us to honor and protect.

Warm regards,

Kurt, Kara and the staff of the Tree Frog Night Inn

--
Tree Frog Night Inn 1727 Mt. Baker Highway Bellingham, WA 98226 360-676-2300 www.treefrognight.com

Linda Ballantine (Middle Way Acupuncture Institute) (#6632)

Date Submitted: 01/05/13
Location: Mount Vernon, WA
Comment:
Greetings,

As a concerned small business owner from downtown Mount Vernon, I am writing to request that you please scope the economic effect of up to eighteen additional trains per day through our city. This is the number cited in the Pacific International Terminal's Project Information Document (28 Feb 2011) which I find to be quite alarming.

Our school is located on the third floor of The Co-op Building in the heart of Mount Vernon's downtown. Our students and teachers as well as our clinic patients all stand to be adversely impacted by this increase in train traffic. Already I have had the experience of arriving late to work and/or appointments because of being delayed by a train crossing. I know I am not alone when I worry about what this delay could mean in a life or death emergency. Please study the economic impact the increased traffic may incur through people's reluctance to venture into areas of town where they know they may be held up for anywhere from five to forty-five minutes (as recently occurred here) for a single train, let alone an additional eighteen.

Further, please investigate who would bear brunt of the expense of mitigation, such as bridges or rerouting, if such were to occur.

Also, please include in your scope the effect on Amtrak service to Mount Vernon by the increase in coal trains. Would the increased coal-train traffic affect Amtrak schedules or safety? Would the additional heavy use of the tracks be a specific safety concern? One of the options available to students attending our weekend intensive program is traveling by train, so this issue is of concern to us.

Finally, in addition to the economic impact, please also consider the long-term adverse effects of the strong vibrations upon the many brick buildings in downtown Mount Vernon. In particular, having regularly felt the building rumble on the third floor as a train rolls by, I am concerned about the strength of the mortar holding all these bricks together, especially in the event of an earthquake, but also simply over the course of time. Please include the long-term effects of the buildings vibrating from an increased number of trains within the scope of your study. Please also include information about who would bear the cost of building repairs required by any vibrational damage. At the hearings in Mount Vernon I heard mention of at least two homes requiring substantial repair to their foundations as a result of the recent increase in coal-train traffic.

I thank you for your attention to the concerns raised in this letter. Please accept my electronic signature below, and feel free to call at the numbers there if you have any questions.

Sincerely,


Linda Ballantine
Middle Way Acupuncture Institute
Co-op Building #334
321 W Washington St
Mount Vernon WA 98273
360-336-6129
360-421-1796-C
888-217-7274-Fax
linda@middlewayacupuncture.com

Lynn Lennox (#7071)

Date Submitted: 01/13/2013
Location: Bow, WA
Comment:
Hello,
I live in a beautiful little corner of the world, Blanchard, founded in 1887. My great-great grandparents settled here in the late 1800’s. Journalist and cousin Edward R. Murrow knew Blanchard as home, and he left us his legacy to respect truth and to stand up for what is right. Today, Blanchard is a close-knit community with a friendly spirit; we enjoy our natural environment’s beauty, and hold a deep appreciation for our shared heritage. We have been just fine with the several trains per day that have passed us for decades. Our community has loved the railroad, as we have appreciated that the railroad originally helped build our communities. But now, the trains threaten every community between the Montana coal mines and Cherry Point in north Whatcom County.

Blanchard’s Community Hall is, in fact, an abandoned and restored railroad depot, and is of course very close to the tracks. The Hall is well-used and loved by about a hundred members. We share community generational dinners, monthly cooking classes, weekly yoga practice, history symposiums, and many diverse events in this peaceful, historic structure. Coal trains are known to be dirty; will our children sit at outdoor picnic tables covered with an oily black dust? Will we be able to afford necessary repairs to the foundation if the train vibrations cause damage to our community center? Or perhaps the noisy, near-constant train traffic alone will cause use of the community center to just fade away. Please consider the effects of increased coal train traffic to small community life along the rail corridor.

I have experienced coal trains at home too: my house shakes like never before. The vibrations make us fear for the safety of our homes. Two full coal trains per day have given me a glimpse into the GPT project’s future impacts. I cannot imagine eighteen daily trains, and that we could possibly live through them without obvious damage. If additional coal trains are permitted, it is reasonably foreseeable that our homes and foundations would suffer damage. Please give attention to this possibility in my community, and to the cumulative effects of this type to all along the corridor.

Some of our other neighbors in this rural community are not human. Please consider the impacts to water fowl that are adversely impacted every time they are startled and forced to expend energy fleeing to a safer location. Please study and consider the cumulative impacts to wildlife, water quality and marine life. Please consider the adverse impacts to bivalves, fish, and crab: these are dinner to some and livelihoods to others. A long-standing local business, Taylor Shellfish Farm, has offered local seafood and employment to this community for generations. Their history of tireless work with neighbors, the county, and with help from the state Centennial Clean Water Act has helped to preserve our water quality and water resources. Will the coal trains jeopardize the marine life and their related jobs?

The proposed coal train project could affect my own livelihood as well. My small business is Blanchard Chapel, a traditional little countryside chapel now used for weddings and receptions. The chapel was built in 1911; my grandfather was christened at the chapel and my grandparents were the first couple to be married there. I bought it several years ago, and have lovingly restored it ever since. It is irreplaceable to me. Will it stand the vibrations? Furthermore, as a small business, even if it stands, will the frequent, long, dirty coal trains keep people from choosing this location for their wedding? I cannot stay in business if the coal trains create an unattractive or inaccessible environment. Our community is cut off entirely when a train passes. Other businesses too would be affected by train traffic. I would definitely choose to shop at stores that aren’t often and regularly blocked by a train. No one has time to wait unnecessarily. Please consider the economic impacts to communities and small businesses along the train route that may suffer financial losses due to coal train traffic. Please determine cumulative financial effects that additional train traffic would have on small businesses in both rural areas and towns from Montana to Cherry Point.

It is reasonably foreseeable that the extreme vibration of recurring heavy coal train passage would be harmful to municipal structures, underground water pipes and septic systems (both private and commercial), bridges, roads, and more. Will we, the individuals and municipalities, be left with the burden of proof if/when our facilities fail? Would we then be expected to pay for the repair to damage caused by the additional coal trains and their widespread range of adverse effects? Please study possible damage to infrastructure and plan for this potential adverse impact. Please determine baseline/current structural information now, to have available for use in assessing future potential damage. Please determine seismic levels equivalent to a passing coal train and consider the structural effects thereof.

Nothing surpasses the importance of health and quality of life. Please consider the cumulative effects of coal dust on human beings and our natural environment. Please consider my little town that is cut off from the rest of the world by each passing train, including ambulance and all emergency services. Dr. Bob Nemerovski specializes in the phenomenon of “road rage” (his doctoral dissertation on road rage can be found at www.drnemerovski.com/roadragedissertation.pdf) and he writes that stress, anger, and frustration exacerbate road rage. Will we suffer increasing road rage incidents as frustrating congestion increases in rail-clogged towns? Please research the cumulative health and mental health effects along the corridor possible from the proposed GPT project’s increased rail traffic.

Thank you for doing your job to fully consider the impacts the proposed coal train would have on a very wide audience. Decisions regarding the project’s scope, and acknowledgement of the many valid impacts, could help prevent permanent, irrevocable damage.

Megan Westgate (Community Food Co-op) (#12208)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
Please see the attached scoping comments documents 1-6 for inclusion in the public comment period regarding the Gateway Pacific Coal project.

Adrienne Battis
Outreach Manager
Community Food Co-op
360.734.8158 x 273
www.communityfood.coop
Attached Files:

Mike Rust (#2816)

Date Submitted: 11/05/12
Comment:
See attached.
Attached Image:

Pamela Beason (#1866)

Date Submitted: 10/23/12
Location: Bellingham, WA
Comment:
I am a homeowner in Bellingham, Washington and I operate three businesses here: Beason Editorial Services, Sirius Investigations, and Pamela Beason, Author. These businesses could be operated from anywhere with internet connections, but I chose to locate here because of the unique physical beauty and recreational opportunities found in Whatcom County and adjacent areas. I am a hiker, a kayaker, and a scuba diver. Many of my books deal with ecological and conservation topics. And like most Bellingham residents, I spend a lot of time in all our waterfront parks, including Boulevard Park, Marine Park, Larrabee State Park, Chuckanut Bay Shorelands, Maritime Heritage, and Zuanich Parks. As you know, all these parks are adjacent to railroad tracks that would carry all the increased traffic from the proposed Gateway Coal Terminal.

I urge you to include in the EIS a study of all impacts on air quality and water quality from shipping to and from the proposed Gateway terminal. This study should include a nonbiased examination of negative impacts caused by:
• Air pollution that will be generated by increased railway traffic—not only coal dust escaping into the air from loaded cars but air pollution also generated by train locomotives
• Air pollution generated by escaping coal dust and other exhaust from machinery that will be involved in the loading and unloading processes
• Air pollution generated by increased ship traffic coming and going from the proposed terminal
• Water pollution generated by increased runoff into water sources adjacent to the railway, both saltwater bays and shorelines and freshwater creeks over which the railway passes
• Water pollution caused by the increased ship traffic coming and going from the proposed terminal
• Potential harm caused to fish populations by water pollution in both salt and fresh water
• Potential damage to commercial fishing opportunities due to reduction in fish population caused by water pollution from increased rail and ship traffic

I believe that approving the proposed Gateway terminal would violate the following U.S. Acts:
• Marine Mammal Protection Act – Orcas and other endangered marine mammals in our area will be threatened by noise, water pollution, and loss of their food supply.
• Coastal Zone Management Act – As the railway line to the proposed terminal is located along many miles of coastline, approval of the proposed terminal would endanger all these areas.
• Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act – Because the railway line to the proposed terminal passes over and through saltwater bays, freshwater estuaries, and freshwater creeks, there is great potential to harm fish spawning grounds.
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act - Because the railway line to the proposed terminal passes over and through saltwater bays, freshwater estuaries, and freshwater creeks, there is great potential to harm fish spawning grounds, and increased marine traffic to and from the proposed terminal will impact commercial and recreational fishing areas, which are of great economic importance to our region.
• Oceans Act – Increased runoff, air pollution, and increased shipping traffic will negatively impact our oceans.
• Clean Air Act – Increased air pollution from train locomotives, coal dust from traveling rail cars and from loading/unloading processes, air pollution generated by increased ship traffic, and additional air pollution from China fueled by this terminal’s exports will all conflict with the Clean Air Act.

In addition, the detrimental effects of increased burning of coal in China should be considered in the EIS, because air quality in Asia eventually affects the United States. The EIS should include a nonbiased study of:
• Air pollution generated by burning coal in China that is projected to affect our air quality and weather in the United States
• Global warming caused by burning of additional coal in China


Alternatives
If a terminal is to be built, there are many better places to build one than along a shoreline reached only by railways that disrupt traffic in hundreds of cities and impact many miles of pristine coastline. Whatcom County and adjacent Island, San Juan, and Skagit Counties are known for outdoor tourism, an industry that is likely to be severely damaged by the impacts of this proposed port.
Why not locate a terminal in an area that is already a large industrial port with shipping traffic and railway line that would not transport coal along miles of coastline? Everett, Washington would be a much better and more logical location for such a facility than rural Whatcom County.

Sincerely,

Pamela S. Beason
Attached Files:

Peter Carletti (#1615)

Date Submitted: 10/25/12
Comment:
To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to express my concern regarding approval of the above project. The impacts of the additional train traffic which result from this venture will be detrimental to the success of numerous small businesses such as mine. Our office is located near a main train crossing on Riverside Drive and Fir Street. We currently are stopped several times a day when going to or returning from client meetings or business at Skagit County, and surrounding cities and towns.

The additional traffic and noise generated from this proposal will harm our small business and result in lost productivity and an increase in costs to us and our Clients. In addition the noise generated from the additional trains will be distracting to our business and customers.

I also live above the train tracks in Bow off Ershig road in Sunset Creek. We purchased the property fully realizing there were train tracks below. We have become accustomed to the noise; however, the train whistles in the evening during sleeping hours particularly in the summer are a disturbance. The increased train traffic will make this situation much worse.

The noise from trains is already an issue and the additional noise from train whistles, track noise and pollution from the coal will be harmful to our rural lifestyle.

Please do not approve this proposal.

Thanks


Peter J. Carletti, LEED
Principal

www.carlettiarchitects.com
Ph: 360-424-0394 ext.101

Phil Kazen (#2776)

Date Submitted: 11/13/2012
Location: Marysville, WA
Comment:
Our business is located on 116th St in Marysville. Often the traffic is backed up for blocks waiting for the light at State and 116th as we wait for a train to go by. This blocks the entry to our business. More train traffic would adversely affect our business.

Phillip Holder (#1479)

Date Submitted: 10/18/12
Location: Mount Vernon, WA
Comment:
see attached
Attached Files:

Randall Schillinger (#2331)

Date Submitted: 11/05/2012
Location: Burlington, WA
Comment:
Pacific Woodtech Corporation is a wood products manufacturing company operating 24 x 7 located in an industrial park 2 blocks east of the BN railway as it goes north out of Burlington. The current rail traffic is already a notable hassle for both inbound and outbound trucking freight and employee arrival for work. We have approximately 50 semi trucks entering and leaving our site every day, and approximately 100 employee vehicles. Both employees and freight are on tight timelines. We also rely heavily on our rail spur for industrial rail freight. We are very concerned that the additional rail traffic for the coal trains may cause a significant hardship on our business due to congestion. We also believe our rail spur service will suffer due to less time to interrupt the main line for moving cars to/from the spur. The amount of hardship is directly correlated to the amount of increased rail traffic. The higher rail congestion may end up increasing our freight costs, and making us less competitive and less attractive of a business partner for our customers and suppliers. Thanks for considering our concerns.

Randy King (Northwest LED Lighting) (#14470)

Date Submitted: 01/15/13
Location: Mount Vernon, WA
Comment:
See attached.
Attached Image:

Richard Carter (#3222)

Date Submitted: 11/05/12
Comment:
See attched.
Attached Files:

Richard Jehn (Barlean’s Organic Oils) (#9094)

Date Submitted: 01/17/13
Comment:
Please find attached the scoping comment that Barlean’s Organic Oils has prepared for consideration regarding the Gateway Pacific Terminal. The primary contact for questions about the document is John Puckett, our CEO. I have also attached a copy of his business card for your reference.

Thank you very much for your consideration.

Richard Jehn, IT Support
Direct: 360-603-5655
Barlean's Organic Oils
Attached Files:

Steve McMinn (Pacific Rim Tonewoods & Willows Inn) (#12599)

Date Submitted: 01/21/13
Comment:
I'm Steve McMinn, from Bellingham.

I would like the Gateway EIS to study the costs to the tourism industry in Whatcom county and in the entire coal transport corridor.

A year ago, my wife and I, along with 3 other couples, bought the Willows Inn on Lummi Island, because it was going out of business and we believe that a healthy economy is integral to a healthy community. Tourism is the largest economic driver on the island. The Willows, which includes the Beach Store Cafe, employs 55 people in peak season. The Willows has been featured in outlets like the NY Times, the Boston Globe, the Wall Street Journal, and many others. People come here from around the world to visit, dine, and experience a slice of quintessential Northwest.

Tourism is a big business in Whatcom county, providing over 5000 jobs, and bringing in over $550 million in visitor spending. The Willows is just a drop in this bucket, but the impacts of the proposed coal port would have a direct effect on us. Unpredictable delays at the grade level crossing at Slater Rd. would make catching the ferry uncertain. Dust blown from the coal heaps, as at Westshore, in twassin, would coat the surrounding area. 900 yearly transits by vast, noisy ships just a mile offshore, each ship spewing diesel pollution equivalent to thousands of vehicles would do nothing to encourage tourism.

The whole NW is an increasingly popular tourist destination. Truly, it is one of the last best places on earth, and with climate change and its attendant droughts and superstorms upon us, it is also an oasis, one that people will be even keener to visit in the future.

We in Whatcom have good jobs now, in tourism, as well as in other industries, and we can make more. Let's not compromise these existing jobs, let's not cannibalize our robust and diverse economy to make a coal dump.

Please study in detail the costs that this proposal would would place upon the tourism industry, both in Whatcom County, and in the whole GPT rail corridor.

Thank you.



I'm Steve McMinn, I live in Bellingham.

I am concerned that the cost of delays at rail crossing on the GPT coal train route will negate any economic benefits that might be gained by building the port. I believe that this project, as proposed, would hurt existing businesses, leading to a net job loss in the region. My own business would certainly be hurt.
I own a small specialty sawmill, Pacific Rim Tonewoods, up the Skagit river. We make wooden parts for guitars; if you've played or listened to a Martin, Taylor or Gibson guitar built in the last 25 years, we've likely cut wood for it. We take a comparatively small amount of wood, and turn it into a part that is exactingly made, valuable, and is an integral component for US businesses downstream, who in turn provide thousands of jobs.
We have 26 employees, and pay family wages and benefits. If I were using SSA math, I might claim 150 jobs.
Half of our people commute across the tracks, from Bellingham, Mt. Vernon and elsewhere, at grade level crossings that are already subject to delays. When the trains come, everything stops; there's no way around.
All of our freight and all of our goods, both inbound and outbound move through the same crossings. Further, we purchase most of our logs in Alaska and barge them to Smith Island, near Everett, where they are transferred to land and loaded on log trucks. To access this port, log trucks must deal with another grade level crossing, one that is already very congested.
Pacific Rim Tonewoods is only one small business, 20 miles from the BN tracks. But the cost of additional delays due to GPT trains would be large. Multiply additional costs to my business by the thousands of other businesses from Whatcom county to the Columbia gorge to get an idea of the magnitude of harm to regional businesses.
Times are hard, but we in the Salish Sea region have many good jobs already; jobs that are innovative and creative, from airplanes to software, from timber to raspberries; with imagination and perseverance
we can make more. We should not allow GPT's trains to shear us off from our working water fronts nor to obstruct the East West flow of traffic in our several counties.
Let's not compromise the good jobs we have now, let's not cannibalize our robust and diverse economy to make a coal dump.
Please examine the economic impacts to existing regional businesses, caused by delays and congestion from the mines to the coal dump, and set these against the purported economic benefits of this project.

Thank you

Steve Neighbors (Terra Staffing Group) (#3962)

Date Submitted: 11/29/12
Comment:
see attached
Attached Image:

William Kovacs (US Chamber of Commerce) (#12236)

Date Submitted: 01/22/13
Location: Washington, DC
Comment:
See Attached
Attached Image: