Cheatham County Generation Site EIS Scoping Report
Appendix C Summary of Scoping Comments
Tennessee Valley Authority
Ms. Johnson, Please consider this letter and all comments within my formal submittal of items I believe should be included in the Scoping Report and objectively considered during the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process for the proposed Cheatham County Generation Site. Comment 1: The EIS should address and discuss the entire project, to include the Combustion Turbines (CT), the Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), and the 12-mile natural gas pipeline. By excluding the pipeline in the EIS, you are segmenting the project and excluding connected actions. All connected actions are required to be considered in the same EIS. The actions are connected based on the CTs reliance on natural gas as its primary fuel source, which is not currently available at the proposed location. Comment 2: Explain why TVA chose to do an EIS instead of an Environmental Assessment (EA). TVA conducted EAs for similar projects (CTs, combined turbines, BESS sites) to meet NEPA requirements – why did the proposed Cheatham County site warrant an EIS? The only reasons EISs are prepared instead of EAs is if significant environmental impacts appear likely or the project is anticipated to generate controversy. Based on conversations with TVA’s NEPA representatives at the June 21st meeting, TVA chose to do an EIS because initial screening of the site indicated environmental features, specifically streams and bat habitat. Neither of these environmental feature’s presence warrant an EIS. Especially since further conversation revealed that TVA doesn’t anticipate stream impacts and plans only minimal tree removal. What is the real reason TVA chose to do an EIS? Comment 3: What is TVA and/or its NEPA contractor planning to do differently in this EIS to properly assess all areas required since the last two TVA site EAs/EISs have resulted in lawsuits for 1) not properly considering other energy options, 2) not correctly factoring climate impacts, 3) not correctly factoring economic impacts, and 4) failure to properly assess environmental impacts.
Cheatham County Generation Site [#60]_001
6/26/2023
negative
stephanie
henry
37402
I am DEEPLY concerned about and opposed to the TVAs proposed methane plant and pipeline for several reasons. 1. The use of eminent domain to take private property for the pipeline. 2. The impact of pollution on the humans (including children) living in the vicinity of the plant and pipeline. 3. The environmental impact on the natural area including the disruption of water sources that will impact wildlife and human life. 4. The TVAs track record of destructive projects including the Coal Ash spill in East TN was downplayed by TVA and demonstrated a significant lack of accountability. It's just a matter of time before the volatile gas plant and pipeline result in a disaster that could have long-term impacts and lives lost. 5. Natural gas fossil fuel is a step in the wrong direction toward more renewable energy sources. This is a step backward, not forward. I am pleading with the TVA to reconsider its plan. Consider other ways you can use this land for renewable energy sources that create long-term positive environmental and economic impacts. You can do better than this plan. negative Kelli Garrett 37015 To whom it may concern, My name is Nick Waynick. I am writing you today in opposition of the proposed gas plant and battery storage facility on Lockertsville Rd. in Ashland City. My family farm is across Sycamore creek from the proposed site. My family has been farming in the Lockertsville road area for many generations and the potential impact is very concerning. Primarily, the environmental impact to Sycamore creek that boarders the property is of utmost importance. Adjacent to the TVA property is the pumping station that supplies drinking water for north Cheatham County. Additionally, the aquatic species in sycamore creek, including the endangered hellbender salamander, and wild life in the near by wooded areas could be negatively affected in several different ways including water quality, air quality, and noise pollution. Furthermore the farming operations in the area, including my own, could be suffer negative consequences for may of the same reasons, further diminishing the rural culture of the local community. Increased industrial traffic and operations would make the already difficult job of farming, that much more difficult. Thank you for your time and consideration and please feel free to contact me if you would like any further explanation for my concern. negative Nick Waynick 37015
Cheatham County Generation Site [#6]
6/21/2023
Cheatham County Generation Site [#5]
6/27/2023
My residence and farm are located on the opposite side of Sycamore creek from the proposed site for the Cheatham County generation facility. Following are some of my concerns should this facility be built: !. Noise pollution. 2. Air pollution including odors. 3. Light pollution. 4. Environnmental impact of constructing a 12-mile gas pipeline. 5. Potential destruction of Indian burial sites. There are numerous burial mounds along Sycamore creek. Pleasant View Utility encountered such mounds when constructing a pumping station at the end of Chandler Road. It would make more sense to either: 6. Construct a facility of this type in an existing industrial park that already has the required infrastructure such as natural gas. 7. Upgrade the existing Cumberland Fossil Plant rather than shutting it down. Residents in this rural area mainly live here to enjoy a quiet country life including farming. I believe items 6 and 7 above offer better solutions to address peak power needs
Cheatham County Generation Site [#4]
6/19/2023
negative
Joseph
Malinoski
37015
I do not support the proposal of constructing a methane plant and pipeline in Ashland City (or anywhere, frankly). The methods used to obtain methane are destructive to our environment and community both in the immediate effects and long term consequences. Methane is already an outdated, environmentally damaging, and costly resource to obtain. With the TVA already behind on renewable resources, why are we spending budget on projects that area already obsolete instead of investing in the future? How is that us being fiscally responsible? I believe that this methane plant would not only Not Help, but would actively be damaging to Tennessee - in the neighboring communities, it's undeniable harm to Tennessee's ecology, and it's weakening of our infrastructure in the long term sustainability both as an inherently finite resource and fiscal responsibility. I also think the comment period should be extended given that the open house was not even 6 days ago. That's not nearly enough time for an informed community to provide feedback about something that will impact us for generations. negative Jacob
Cheatham County Generation Site [#39]
6/26/2023
Best-Wittenberg 37015
Cheatham County Generation Site [#37]
Stop ruining our world for the sake of wealth and personal gain. The countryside my family has lived in for my whole life has already been destroyed by so much, this is going to wreck Cheatham county. Not to mention the amount of probable water contamination that will come with this project. DO NOT DO THIS
6/26/2023
negative Sam Jonathan Wittenberg
37015
Page 37 of 133
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker