<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Opposition to Natural Gas Pipelines Growing in West Virginia</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2015/06/24/opposition-to-natural-gas-pipelines-growing-in-west-virginia/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2015/06/24/opposition-to-natural-gas-pipelines-growing-in-west-virginia/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2024 02:06:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Friends of Blackwater 7/16/15</title>
		<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2015/06/24/opposition-to-natural-gas-pipelines-growing-in-west-virginia/#comment-174996</link>
		<dc:creator>Friends of Blackwater 7/16/15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2015 18:31:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frackcheckwv.net/?p=14878#comment-174996</guid>
		<description>Comments on &lt;strong&gt;Alternative Dominion Pipeline Route Survey&lt;/strong&gt; through the Monongahela National Forest --- Due July 20th to the US Forest Service ---

&lt;strong&gt;Alternate Route 5 would avoid impacts to Gaudineer Knob&lt;/strong&gt;.

Dominion Resources of Richmond Virginia is proposing to build a high pressure gas pipeline through the Monongahela National Forest (MON). They applied for a Special Use Permit in February to survey the route and are now looking at another route (see map) going south of Snowshoe and the Cass Scenic Railroad which will go through 5 miles of the National Forest as opposed to the original survey route which went across 22 miles of the MON and then on through the George Washington National Forest in Virginia.  This route avoids much of the red spruce northern hardwood ecosystem that is home to Ginny the flying squirrel but may still impact rare and endangered bats and the headwaters of the Elk River.
 
Please join us in requesting that the Forest Service require individual survey protocols be developed by the Forest and the Fish and Wildlife Service, to be implemented by the company, and that the protocols be subject to public comment before being implemented. In addition surveys for cultural resources should be overseen by the Forest Archeologist and the State Historic Preservation Office.
 
We are especially concerned that unless the public can have input on the survey protocols, and unless the Forest Service exercises active oversight during any survey process, surveys done by the company could be insufficient -- even cursory -- and not based on the best, independent scientific methodology. 
 
Click below for more information, a detailed map and to send your comments today!

http://www.saveblackwater.org/DominionPipeline.html
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Comments on <strong>Alternative Dominion Pipeline Route Survey</strong> through the Monongahela National Forest &#8212; Due July 20th to the US Forest Service &#8212;</p>
<p><strong>Alternate Route 5 would avoid impacts to Gaudineer Knob</strong>.</p>
<p>Dominion Resources of Richmond Virginia is proposing to build a high pressure gas pipeline through the Monongahela National Forest (MON). They applied for a Special Use Permit in February to survey the route and are now looking at another route (see map) going south of Snowshoe and the Cass Scenic Railroad which will go through 5 miles of the National Forest as opposed to the original survey route which went across 22 miles of the MON and then on through the George Washington National Forest in Virginia.  This route avoids much of the red spruce northern hardwood ecosystem that is home to Ginny the flying squirrel but may still impact rare and endangered bats and the headwaters of the Elk River.<br />
 <br />
Please join us in requesting that the Forest Service require individual survey protocols be developed by the Forest and the Fish and Wildlife Service, to be implemented by the company, and that the protocols be subject to public comment before being implemented. In addition surveys for cultural resources should be overseen by the Forest Archeologist and the State Historic Preservation Office.<br />
 <br />
We are especially concerned that unless the public can have input on the survey protocols, and unless the Forest Service exercises active oversight during any survey process, surveys done by the company could be insufficient &#8212; even cursory &#8212; and not based on the best, independent scientific methodology. <br />
 <br />
Click below for more information, a detailed map and to send your comments today!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saveblackwater.org/DominionPipeline.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.saveblackwater.org/DominionPipeline.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FERC News 6/23/15</title>
		<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2015/06/24/opposition-to-natural-gas-pipelines-growing-in-west-virginia/#comment-172872</link>
		<dc:creator>FERC News 6/23/15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2015 01:44:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frackcheckwv.net/?p=14878#comment-172872</guid>
		<description>FERC News from the Greenbrier Watershed Association

FERC won&#039;t extend comment period for W.Va.-Va. pipeline - Federal regulators have denied a request to give the public more time to comment on the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP).    See also:  www.MAREproject.org
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FERC News from the Greenbrier Watershed Association</p>
<p>FERC won&#8217;t extend comment period for W.Va.-Va. pipeline &#8211; Federal regulators have denied a request to give the public more time to comment on the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP).    See also:  <a href="http://www.MAREproject.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.MAREproject.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greenbrier Watershed 6/23/15</title>
		<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2015/06/24/opposition-to-natural-gas-pipelines-growing-in-west-virginia/#comment-172871</link>
		<dc:creator>Greenbrier Watershed 6/23/15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2015 01:42:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frackcheckwv.net/?p=14878#comment-172871</guid>
		<description>ACTION ALERT! Greenbrier Watershed Association

We found out this week that Dominion Resources is requesting that the U. S. Forest Service review their Alternative 5 for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. 

Read more here: The Charleston Gazette: Pipeline officials want more surveys in forest --  http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20150623/GZ01/150629673

There is only a two week comment period for this &quot;revision&quot; with comments due by July 6. This is a more southerly route through Slatyfork, crossing the mainstream of the Greenbrier River below the confluence with Deer Creek below Cass. it would, therefore, cross the Greenbrier River Trail also.

Comments may be made electronically to FERC Docket Number for the ACP is PF15-6 at --  https://ferconline.ferc.gov

It is critical that comments request a longer scoping period for this &quot;revision&quot; due to the holiday weekend and the fact that many families are away from home traveling this time of year and need more notice to adequately comment.

Please spread this alert as far and wide as possible... thank you! 

Elise Keaton Liegel, elise@greenbrier.org
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ACTION ALERT! Greenbrier Watershed Association</p>
<p>We found out this week that Dominion Resources is requesting that the U. S. Forest Service review their Alternative 5 for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. </p>
<p>Read more here: The Charleston Gazette: Pipeline officials want more surveys in forest &#8212;  <a href="http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20150623/GZ01/150629673" rel="nofollow">http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20150623/GZ01/150629673</a></p>
<p>There is only a two week comment period for this &#8220;revision&#8221; with comments due by July 6. This is a more southerly route through Slatyfork, crossing the mainstream of the Greenbrier River below the confluence with Deer Creek below Cass. it would, therefore, cross the Greenbrier River Trail also.</p>
<p>Comments may be made electronically to FERC Docket Number for the ACP is PF15-6 at &#8212;  <a href="https://ferconline.ferc.gov" rel="nofollow">https://ferconline.ferc.gov</a></p>
<p>It is critical that comments request a longer scoping period for this &#8220;revision&#8221; due to the holiday weekend and the fact that many families are away from home traveling this time of year and need more notice to adequately comment.</p>
<p>Please spread this alert as far and wide as possible&#8230; thank you! </p>
<p>Elise Keaton Liegel, <a href="mailto:elise@greenbrier.org">elise@greenbrier.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
