Submission Number: UBR-DEIS-00279
Received: 1/8/2021 11:04:26 AM
Commenter: Karen Dils
Initiative: Uinta Basin Railway EIS
Attachments: No Attachments
First the comment period should be extended. With the election and the pandemic and attempted coup in D.C., this issue has not been on the radar of very many citizens. People need to read, learn and comment intelligently.1-Because the goal of this is to increase profit to a company using a declining natural resource, AND a declining NEED for this resource, I am opposed at this point. 2 -It sounds like they think "making tribe a partner" will garner them the tribe's okay to go through their land. 3 - The Roadless Rules is present to PREVENT this type of development - no urgent need other than greed. 4 - Because ultimately this company wants to continue hauling this oil into MY community, along MY river, I am opposed because of several issues: a) potential devastating environmental damage to our Gold Medal Fishing river b) potential devastating damage to the quality of this water which is relied upon for drinking by municipalities. c) Disruption and delay at multiple crossings in our quiet town. We've had trains before and didn't like the impact and noise then and this could be MUCH worse. Safety issues at crossings. d) Loss of property values to adjacent property owners. e) Loss of wilderness values in Browns Canyon National Monument.5 - The dangerous mountain passes this train will have to negotiate year-round and potential for accidents, spills and fires. Previously sparks from trains ignited fires here and now the potential is even greater with the drought and increased development. The potential damage to our public lands, scenery, soundscape, waters, etc. is far greater than the need for more money for this company's owner who wants to more cheaply refine it in the Gulf to be shipped to other countries with less stringent pollution standards thus increasing climate impact. Please deny this.