Cheatham County Generation Site EIS Scoping Report
Appendix C Summary of Scoping Comments
Tennessee Valley Authority
My property is located approximately one mile from the proposed/opposed site. While I am not a life long resident of the area, I married my late husband and moved here in 1989. My husband’s family and our farm property is some of the first deeds registered in Cheatham County in 1856.
My concern is not only what happens to our environment, our creeks and our ponds, our wildlife, but also what happens to the value of our property? My husband passed away in 2017, leaving the farm to his family. In return we chose to sell a good portion of it and by doing so created some beautiful high dollar homesites, some close to $1,000,000 in value. While I’m concerned with my property value, I can’t imagine what will happen to the value of these new homesites. Why does it have to come here? What are your plans for the site that you apparently are replacing in Cumberland City? I grew up in that area, I was there when that plant became active back in the 60’s. And I know for multiple families in that area, you are threatening or destroying their financial future. How many people will lose their jobs and their livelihood when you shut that place down? Why can’t that property be converted to your new methane site? And how many jobs will be available at the proposed/opposed plant in Lockertsville? It is inconceivable why you feel the need to bring it into a very small rural area where creating road access alone for large vehicle transport will destroy century old farmland and countryside. I’ve been told the pipeline will cross multiple streams and destroy property values. Surely, in all your property search/research, a more viable location could be considered. During the first “meeting” in Ashland City, even your project manager, during his discussion with us,said if it was in his backyard, he’d fight it too. Most of us are smart enough to understand that individually we can’t fight you and win, however together I pray we make our voices heard. negative Lorie Walker
Cheatham County Generation Site_#174
7/7/2023
Cheatham County Generation Site_#173 I am strongly in favor of TVA building a more carbon neutral energy generation system than a natural gas plant. This is demanded by the onslaught of climate change at an alarming pace. I am in favor of a solar generation facility being built, along with a facility for battery storage of the energy produced. These are green solutions that will both produce needed electricity and help stem climate change. Thank you neutral Patricia Miller Cheatham County Generation Site_#172 I am strongly in favor of TVA building a more carbon neutral energy generation system than a natural gas plant. This is demanded by the onslaught of climate change at an alarming pace. I am in favor of a solar generation facility being built, along with a facility for battery storage of the energy produced. These are green solutions that will both produce needed electricity and help stem climate change. Thank you! neutral Brant Miller
7/7/2023
7/7/2023
Thank you for allowing the community to submit comments that will affect their everyday life, now and in the future. TVA please reconsider to build a methane gas plant on Sycamore Creek. Reasons: 1. It is the water source for Pleasant View Utility that supply the water for Pleasant View, Ashland City, and part of Joelton Tennessee. 2. It is on the Nationwide Rivers Inventory that list it as an excellent recreational stream with many scenic bluffs and forested banks with abundance of wildlife. It has historic locations, recreational opportunities and just the cultural makes it worth not to have a methane gas plant build on its banks or near it. TVA with Kinder Morgan needs to have a pipeline from the northern states to Texas or the Gulf. You already have the compressor station (CS563) in Joelton, Tennessee. There are better direct routes with less homeowners being affected by the pipeline and a methane gas plant that needs to product electricity for Nashville, Tennessee. Locations that TVA/Kinder Morgan should consider is along Highway 12 from Ashland City to Nashville. Highway 12 runs along the Cumberland River it already has an established industrial business area. In the area of highway 12 and state route 155 there is a large area of undeveloped land that cannot be developed residential. TVA please look for a better, safer, and healthier ways to supply electricity to the people now and for future generations. This effects our environment which includes from the smallest organisms to largest organisms. negative Robin Johnson A methane gas plant and pipeline is a poor solution based on cost and polluting factors as well as other safety concerns. Please consider other geographic areas and other less disruptive and polluting energy sources. TVA should be a leader in energy efficiency and renewable energy. The people of Cheatham County and all areas served by TVA deserve more forward thinking solutions negative Bonnie Jerdon 37015
Cheatham County Generation Site_#171
7/6/2023
Cheatham County Generation Site_#171 Cheatham County Generation Site_#170
7/3/2023
7/6/2023
I want to express opposition to the proposed power plant on Sycamore Creek. It will disrupt the land and ecosystem.
negative
Kristie
Schleicher
Dear Secretary Bose, I am writing to express my opposition to Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company’s application for constructing a 32-mile pipeline across Dickson, Houston and Stewart counties in Tennessee, under docket number CP22-493-000.
The proposed pipeline poses a major threat to public safety and local habitat in communities that have already been overburdened with fossil fuel infrastructure. For instance, the Cumberland
Pipeline would cross over 130 streams and 6 wetlands, threatening to destroy habitat for plants and wildlife. The land through which the pipeline would cross is also full of karsts, which increases the risks of water pollution and reduced air quality associated with methane gas leaks. People along the proposed pipeline route were confronted with the dangers of methane gas in 1992 when a pipeline in Dickson, owned by Kinder Morgan, Inc., exploded and burned hundreds of acres and injured multiple people. Closer to Cumberland City, community members have endured decades of coal ash pollution in their air and water from one of the dirtiest coal plants in the country. Historic cultural centers in the path of the proposed pipeline also make this project a major threat to environmental justice. For instance, the pipeline would cut through land that was was established and settled by former slaves during the Reconstruction Period (1870-1875) in what is known as the Promise Land community in Charlotte, Tennessee. This site still contains a historic church and schoolhouse that could be threatened by the pipeline, which would also cross the road that provides access to the community. Importantly, landowners along the 32-mile route are also at risk of major property loss and damage because of this proposal. For some landowners, this pipeline will cut through the middle of farms more than a century old, or be placed as close as thirty feet next to their houses. Ultimately, this pipeline is unnecessary. If TVA does not invest ratepayer funds in a new gas-burning power plant the pipeline won’t be built. The final decision for how to replace the Cumberland City Fossil Plant has not been made. In fact, the Environmental Protection Agency reviewed TVA’s draft Environmental Impact Statement for replacing the Cumberland plant and found the analysis inadequate. In that 19-page comment, EPA also recommended that TVA NOT choose its current preferred gas option at all or without making modifications to the option. EPA pointed out that there are cleaner alternatives like energy efficiency, wind, solar, and battery storage that are not subject to the same price volatility as gas and that TVA should consider thoroughly for replacing the plant. The gas buildout would also leave rate payers subject to volatile gas prices. Replacing the Cumberland with a gas-burning plant would only create 25-30 permanent jobs. A recent study showed that investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency would create 739 long-term jobs and more than 4,000 temporary jobs. Given the risks to the community and local environment posed by this project, FERC should issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review and also conduct a full Environmental Impact Statement. I also request that FERC extend the intervention and comment period by at least 30 days for this project so that more impacted residents have a chance to preserve their rights and provide input. Thank you for considering my comments.
Cheatham County Generation Site_#168
7/6/2023
negative
Susannah
Felts
Cheatham County Generation Site_#167
I do not want the methane plant in Cheatham county. It is right next to our towns water source and this is very dangerous!! Please, I BEG YOU, do not put this in our town. We are humble community who don’t have much. At least let us have safe drinking water. negative Sara Rodwell
7/6/2023
Page 28 of 133
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker