Cheatham County Generation Site EIS Scoping Report
Appendix C Summary of Scoping Comments
Tennessee Valley Authority
I am writing to plead with you to consider alternate locations for the proposed methane plant in Cheatham County. I understand that the extreme growth in population of Tennessee compounded with the phasing out of coal has created a distinct need for energy in our area. I am not writing to ask you to reconsider your decision for a methane plant. However, due to various reasons, I believe there are better alternatives for all parties than the proposed site. The first party I believe will benefit is yourself, TVA. If you were to relocate this proposed site to the Ashland City Industrial Park area, you would reclaim a significant portion of your infrastructure budget. First, there is already a pipeline in that area, so there would not be a need for 12 miles of pipeline to be built. Aside from building costs, this also lowers the long term cost of maintenance and the shorter term costs of buying property or utilizing lawyers and legal battles involving eminent domain cases. Second, the transportation infrastructure that is in place in the Industrial Park area would mean a lower cost to you by eliminating the need to reinforce bridges and widen roads during your construction period. Thirdly, the Ashland City industrial park is located closer to Nashville and other construction centers. This would lead to lower freight costs during your construction period. Lastly, you purchased this land in 2020 for roughly $5,250 per acre. Land in the same area is now selling for double that or more. As you do not need near all 286 acres, you could sell the land, double your investment, and purchase a lot closer to the size you need- putting the profit towards this project in other areas or a project that is currently running over-budget (as construction tends to do). The second party I believe would benefit is our wildlife in Ashland City. As the industrial park is already an industrialized zone, the wildlife would only be marginally affected. The impact in the proposed site would be astronomical in comparison. The proposed pipeline route runs through multiple waterways, which the current residents dutifully tend. As one of those residents, I can testify that I have spent at least two decades out of the three I’ve lived carefully rebuilding natural dams, fortifying banks, and keeping shore vegetative growth healthy so that the beavers and other animals are protected in their habitat. Although they are no longer listed as endangered or even protected, our Bald Eagle population greatly relies on the area you propose to build upon. In fact, your proposed site is roughly 3 miles from one of their favorite roosts. As Bald Eagles have a hunting range of up to 15 square miles, it is not uncommon to see them flying overhead as we drive to work in the morning. There are also multiple species that are on the vulnerable or endangered list that inhabit that land, including the little brown bat, the common box turtle, and the four toed salamander. The third party is the current residents of the area. My family has been on the same land for 200 years. Our farm is less than a half mile from your proposed site. My grandmother still lives in our “old house” which is over 100 years old. The area you are planning to build upon is surrounded by generational farmland. There’s over 600 years of familial history in that direct area. That’s the history of our country three times over. Personally, I’m the eleventh generation on our farmland, my son is the twelfth. He should be the twelfth generation of children playing in Spring Creek, camping next to Sycamore Creek, and running around Binkley Hill. Unfortunately, your plans to build there not only threaten my son’s ability to do so, but also threatens the ability for the other 8 children in my son’s generation - and those are just my nieces and nephews. Sentimentality and familial culture aside, your proposed build site lies in an area not covered by a fire department. Your proposed route for construction vehicles will require a bridge be reinforced, that bridge is on a road that our emergency services vehicles rely on to access Lockertsville and adjacent roads. That road is also the route taken by residents during heavy rains and tornadoes to access shelter. This may seem like a strange notion, but when a tornado watch is called in our area, it is typically done so mid storm. The area around us has already begun to flood at that point. For six different households in my family, 5 of which are on Lockertsville, their point of shelter is my mom’s house. Saddle Tree (where the bridge lays) is the route they can take without having to pass a flooded street. It is the only route they can take to get to safety. If heavy rains or tornadoes occur during your construction or a fire occurs at the plant post-construction, your plans actively endanger the surrounding residents. These are not hypothetical situations outside of the realm of possibility I am voicing. Houston and Haven (Kansas) both had methane explosions last year, so a fire would not be impossible. Our county is in a temperate rainforest, averaging over 65 inches of precipitation a year. We are also located in the new tornado alley as it has migrated east. All of these safety factors are of significant concern, and they still don’t touch on our fear of the proposed pipeline in relation to flooding. After the 2010 flood, these concerns should be evident. The residents in the immediate vicinity of your proposed site vividly remember being flooded in. We remember going to the very hill you’re planning to build on, and only being able to see the top most branches of the 100+ year old trees. I implore you, please consider these various reasons to relocate your build site to the Ashland City Industrial Park area. The relocation would benefit your budget, our wildlife, and our livelihoods. The move would protect our legacy and allow us to pass down a vibrant and beautiful childhood to our children. If everyone would benefit, why would you not opt to relocate? negative Jessica Eason
Cheatham County Generation Site_#217
7/7/2023
Cheatham County Generation Site_#216 Cheatham County Generation Site_#214
7/7/2023
PLEASE, as a community member with young children, I am terrified of having unhealthy drinking water for my family. Please, listen to the citizens of Pleasant View. We do not want this to be built.
negative
Margaret
Betts
Please do not destroy our local ecosystems, home to so many species, and more than likely, endangered ones. Please preserve our ability to grow food: there are so many organic farms around here that not only feed our families, but families in Nashville too. Please consider solar power. Better yet, please build the plant closer to West Nashville, which is where you want the power to go. There are swaths of land much closer to West Nashville that you could build this plant on. Thank you negative Onyx Hartwell
7/7/2023
I am sending my comments to state my opposition to the proposed Cheatham County Generation Site on Sycamore Creek. I think this project would be detrimental to the community because of the
Cheatham County Generation Site_#213
7/7/2023
potential negative impact that it could have on Sycamore Creek, the source of the drinking water for the town of Pleasant View. Also, it would spoil a beautiful piece of property on Sycamore Creek. This would have a negative effect on the surrounding land owners and anyone who uses and enjoys Sycamore Creek. Please locate this project on another property which is owned by TVA. Respectfully submitted, Melissa Dowdy negative Melissa Dowdy
I am writing this to document with you my firm opposition to your "proposed" Natural Gas electrical generating project on Lockertsville Road in Cheatham County Tennessee. I reside within a mile or less of the site, and have grave concerns about the blasting which may well affect our water source (springs), as well as the inherent dangers of a 3 0" high pressure pipeline so close to us.Furthermore, until the last week or so the majority of residents here were (and many still are) unaware of the project and it's impact on them, our wetlands streams air quality, wildlife etc. I Understand that the publication in the Federal Register satisfies the legal notice requirement, but it certainly does not satisfy the "spirit" of lhonest intent to notify and inform. I further understand that
Cheatham County Generation Site_#212
you have granted a minor extention to the comment period...which is insufficient to honestly inform residents, as well as being insufficient for them to assess in a reasoned and logical way the abundance of information necessary to either allay their fears, or justify them. We do not know what other generation methodologies were intensely studied, what other sites were investigated, supporting infrastructure (roads bridges, etc.) for the necessary construction equipment was evaluated for feasibility and cost and permanent disruption of the community. THis is to request at least an additional month to permit an honestly transparent response and information dissemination to the affected residents. Thank you, George Wade
7/7/2023
negative
George
Wade
Page 22 of 133
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker