Submission Number: MBTL-EIS-0000776 

Received: 9/14/2013 1:14:00 PM
Commenter: Richard Curtis
Organization: 
State: Washington

Agency: Cowlitz County, the Washington Department of Ecology, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Initiative: Millennium Bulk-Terminals Longview EIS
Attachments: No Attachments
Submission Text
From:Richard Curtis <dlc@myhome.net> Sent:Saturday, September 14, 2013 1:14 PM To:comments@millenniumbulkeiswa.gov Subject:Docket number 2013-19738: Comment on scope of EIS for Millennium Bulk Terminals Longview LLC Coal Export Terminal
Sep 14, 2013
MBTL Coal Export Terminal EIS
Dear U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and WA Dept of Ecology, EIS,
I am writing to express my opposition to the construction of a coal export terminal at Longview, WA for the transport of coal using trains traveling through our communities and ships in the Columbia River.
As a resident of Washington State, a fisherman, boater and a taxpayer, I know first hand the importance of the Columbia River to our way of life I also know the cost to U. S. taxpayers to maintain the waterway for fishing and tourism activities, as a transportation corridor for agriculture and transportation and for hydropower. Clearly the Columbia River is a critical part of our economy and our way of life and we must not sacrifice it to the demands of foreign or domestic industry to ship dirty and hazardous coal to foreign countries. The protection of our river for our industries and for all Americans must take priority. Many questions must be answered before approval of a coal export facility on our Columbia River. What is the probability of an accident polluting the waterway and destroying the fishing and recreational industry? What is the potential for creating another superfund site that a foreign or domestic company could just walk away from and leave for the American people to pay to cleanup? How much coal and coal dust would be spilled into the river and along the rail tracks every year and what would the impact be to the river, the fishery and the surrounding environment? What would be done to protect the Columbia River and the mouth of the river from accidents by additional large marine vessels entering and leaving carrying hazardous materials? What will the additional costs be to maintain and operate and control access throughout the river? What will the impacts be to existing American industries already using a crowded river and infrastructure? What are the impacts to recreational boaters and others using the river? What are the impacts to the river shoreline from the large transport ships creating erosion from waves and hazardous oils and coal from inevitable spills? Will additional facilities or personnel be required to accommodate the increased traffic and who will pay the costs?
In addition, the proposed facility at the Port of Longview on the Columbia River will generate huge quantities of global warming pollution when the coal is burned. As Washington voters have repeatedly called for action on climate change, with legislation to restrict coal plant development and operation and by passing I-937 to develop clean energy resources. Allowing millions of tons of coal to be exported from Washington shores would be a huge step backward for the health of our communities and the world.
Clearly the proposed terminal will adversely impact our community and our health and safety by increasing traffic tie-ups from additional single purpose train traffic, polluting our air and waterways, and most importantly delaying emergency vehicles. The development and operation of the terminal would also damage aquatic ecosystems and fishing areas on the Columbia River, harm human health, increase tanker traffic and the potential for shipping accidents and spills, expand strip-mining in Wyoming and Montana, and escalate climate change.
Thank you for considering my comments regarding the multitude of adverse impacts to our community. Please consider them in the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement.
Sincerely,
Richard Curtis
Ethel, WA 98542-0451