VA Water Board gives approval to MVP & ACP

Over vigorous opposition from water experts and citizens, Virginia water board approves conditional permit for Atlantic Coast Pipeline, voting 4 to 3

CONTACTS: Cat McCue, Director of Communications, cat@appvoices.org
and Peter Anderson, Virginia Program Manager, peter@appvoices.org

The Virginia State Water Control Board today approved a heavily amended certification for the proposed fracked-gas Atlantic Coast Pipeline that is conditional on getting outstanding information from state regulators about the project’s impacts to water quality. The board voted 4-3 for the certification after a day of vigorous vocal opposition from citizens who have been fighting the pipeline for years. By some accounts, it was the most active, controversial water board meeting in decades.

Yesterday, some 100 people spoke against the project – mostly landowners and experts opposed to the pipeline based on its unprecedented impacts on streams, rivers, drinking water supplies, wetlands and groundwater in the commonwealth. In addition, the state received some 15,000 comments from citizens this summer, overwhelmingly in opposition to the pipeline.

The certificate approved today will apparently not be effective until the Department of Environmental Quality has provided all outstanding information and the board determines the project would not violate clean water standards. The move follows the board’s vote last week approving the equally controversial fracked-gas Mountain Valley Pipeline, but without the conditional approval.

Appalachian Voices along with other organizations and countless community groups and citizens along the routes of the proposed pipelines have been fighting the controversial projects since they were announced in 2014. Thousands have voiced their opposition to both these pipelines based on evidence that they cannot be built without violating the federal Clean Water Act and the board’s obligation under Virginia law. Appalachian Voices and many others highlighted repeatedly that DEQ failed to provide the board with critical information, including erosion and stormwater control plans and analysis of individual water crossings. This information is fundamental for the board to make a rational decision about the projects’ impacts to our waters.

Peter Anderson, Virginia Program Manager of Appalachian Voices, a leading nonprofit advocate for healthy communities and just economies in Appalachia:

“We are somewhat encouraged by the depth and scope of the board’s discussion about several critical issues today and their apparent recognition of the thousands of citizen voices they’ve heard from over the years, but we are disappointed they did not deny this deficient certification and remand it back to the Department of Environmental Quality for a thorough analysis.

“We are also very disappointed the board rejected a formal petition it received yesterday to reconsider its approval of the equally deficient Mountain Valley Pipeline last week.

“We applaud the efforts of several board members who expressed concern that the draft ACP certification would not provide reasonable assurance, as required by law, that water quality would be protected. We particularly commend members Roberta Kellam, Nissa Dean and Robert Wayland who cast the three dissenting votes.

“We are confident the record demonstrates construction of the pipelines would violate the law. On Friday, we filed a legal challenge to the Mountain Valley Pipeline, and we are considering all options for this project as well. If either pipeline company breaks ground, citizens along the routes are prepared to watchdog every action, along every mile, every day of construction and afterwards, and compel agencies to act when violations inevitably occur.”

###

Wild Virginia Sues Virginia State Water Control Board Over Approval of MVP Permit

Press Release from David Sligh, Wild Virginia, December 8, 2017

Today, Wild Virginia has joined allies in filing suit to challenge the legality of the State Water Control Board’s decision to issue a water quality certification for the Mountain Valley Pipeline.

The lawsuit, filed by attorneys with Appalachian Mountain Advocates in Richmond’s U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, asserts that the Board has failed base its decision on adequate and complete information and, therefore, lacks a rational basis for its action. All parties admit that vital information and analyses were missing at this time yet the Board endorsed DEQ’s recommendation to approve the rushed permit decision.

“The Board and DEQ cannot determine that the construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline will not violate Virginia’s water quality standards without doing detailed and cumulative water quality analyses,” said Misty Boos, Wild Virginia’s Director.

Members of the Board did express doubt that DEQ’s proposal to rely on the Army Corps of Engineers’ Nationwide 12 permit for protection of water quality at stream and wetland crossings would be adequate to meet state standards. However, the Board’s revised certification, which attempts to reserve its authority to address those concerns through another, separate certification process is inadequate. That decision still sidesteps the real issue – that the Board had a responsibility to protect our waters from the whole range of damages this pipeline would cause,” Boos stated.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline project would send fracked gas from West Virginia to southern Virginia through a 42-inch pipe and would involve blasting and excavating through hundreds of streams, including some of the most sensitive and high-value aquatic habitats in the region. It would slice through the headwaters of the Roanoke River watershed endangering water supplies for Roanoke City and Roanoke County and threatens to pollute and disrupt flows in wells and springs that thousands of rural residents rely on.

“The DEQ’s erosion and sediment control plans and stormwater control plans are incomplete and have not been presented to the Board,” said David Sligh, Wild Virginia’s Conservation Director. “Karst analyses are incomplete. Data related to specific waterbody crossings is non-existent. The Nationwide 12 permit has not yet been authorized and determined to be applicable. The procedure is not based on sound science and is legally flawed. We cannot accept this betrayal of our trust and our rights without challenge,” Sligh stated.

Appalachian Mountain Advocates is representing Wild Virginia in the lawsuit along with the Sierra Club, Appalachian Voices, the Center for Biological Diversity, Natural Resource Defense Council and Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

See the Petition to the U.S. Court of Appeals (Fourth Circuit) here.

Sincerely,

Misty Boos, Director
Wild Virginia, P.O. Box 1065
Charlottesville, VA 22902

misty@wildvirginia.org
www.wildvirginia.org

Politics can suppress environmental protection

CONTACTS: Cat McCue, Appalachian Voices, cat@appvoices.org, and Roberta Bondurant, Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights, bondurantlaw@aol.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – December 7, 2017

Today the Virginia Water Control Board approved the permit for the proposed fracked-gas Mountain Valley Pipeline that would run 300 miles from West Virginia through six counties of Virginia. The 5-2 vote came after a full day of public comment yesterday from about 85 people, almost all of them of landowners and experts arguing against the pipeline based on its unprecedented impacts on streams, rivers, drinking water supplies, wetlands and groundwater. Communities and organizations have been fighting the controversial project since it first was proposed in 2014.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Tom Cormons, Executive Director of Appalachian Voices, a leading nonprofit advocate for healthy communities and just economies in Appalachia.

“We are thoroughly disappointed by the board’s decision. Thousands voiced their opposition to this pipeline based on evidence that it cannot be built without violating the federal Clean Water Act and the board’s obligation under Virginia law. DEQ created a rushed, haphazard process, limited the scope of the board’s review, and abdicated the state’s authority to the Corps of Engineers for oversight of pipeline construction at almost 400 water crossings.

“We applaud the efforts of several members who expressed concern that the draft permit would not provide reasonable assurance, as required by law, that water quality would be protected, and particularly we applaud members Nissa Dean and Roberta Kellam who cast the two dissenting votes.

“The board should have rejected the permit today because they lacked enough information to make a reasoned decision. Instead, it approved an utterly deficient permit.

“The record demonstrates this project would ultimately violate the law. We are considering all options and expect the outcome will be determined in the courts.

If the company breaks ground on the project, citizens along the entire route are prepared to watchdog every action, along every mile, every day of construction and afterwards, and compel agencies to act when violations inevitably occur.

“Next week, the board will be presented with an equally deficient permit for the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline, and should exercise its full authority to reject the permit.”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Roberta Bondurant, steering council of Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights, a coalition of grassroots groups along the route of the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline:

“The board failed in declining to exercise its authority of review and supervision in pumping the brakes on this process, so as to allow ample time to gather more information on which to make a decision. The board’s inquiries today highlight the massive chasm of information and understanding lacking in its review process– which reaffirmed the imperative to deny the project or opt for further inquiry. Grave concerns persist regarding water sources and geography implicated by proposed construction, of the proper use, benefit and details of water monitoring programs, and of the shocking lack of financial protection and bonding options for communities and individuals in this proposed project.

“The people of Virginia will continue to fight what amounts to a huge experiment of industrial development and the impacts on land, water and people. No doubt the challenge to natural gas in Virginia is a marathon–there are other permits, legal challenges– a multitude of hurdles ahead for the MVP. For our great places, our clean water, our children and for generations after them–we will carry on.”

Secretary Caperton’s Letter to WVDEP Staff Regarding the Mountain Valley Pipeline (11/13/2017)

CHARLESTON, W.Va. – West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) Cabinet Secretary Austin Caperton sent the following letter to all staff this morning explaining the agency’s decision on the Mountain Valley Pipeline.

“Good morning:

“There’s been a lot of news coverage recently of the WVDEP’s decision regarding the Mountain Valley Pipeline. Many of you have been asked questions by friends or family about exactly what this agency did, what we didn’t do, and how we arrived at our decision.

“I’d like to explain how this agency is protecting water quality with its permits.

“First, it is important to understand Section 401 Certifications and Section 404 permits. Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act allows states an opportunity to ensure federal permitting actions will comply with a state’s water quality standards. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issues Clean Water Act Section 404 stream crossing and wetland permits, allowing fill to be placed in streams and wetlands. This permit is not for upland activities. The USACE can issue either an individual 404 permit for a particular activity or a general permit known as a Nationwide Permit. Nationwide Permits are used for common activities like highway construction or utility line construction. The USACE reissues Nationwide Permits every 5 years and likewise states are given an opportunity to issue 401 Certifications for these permits every 5 years.

“The timeline is important to understand WVDEP’s actions. WVDEP issued a 401 individual water quality certification for the Mountain Valley Pipeline project on March 23, 2017.

“That 401 Certification had several conditions to ensure that temporary impacts to West Virginia’s waters would be minimized, and mitigation would be provided for permanent impacts. Importantly, during the same period of time that the WVDEP was working on this MVP individual certification, it was also developing special conditions for the reissuance of the USACE nationwide permit. This permit is called the Nationwide 12 permit. It is typically used by the USACE for utility line construction (including pipeline stream crossings). The special conditions West Virginia included in it is certification on the newly reissued Nationwide 12 permit (in April 2017) largely mirrored the conditions that West Virginia had previously placed (in March 2017) on the MVP’s 401 Individual Certification.

“An appeal was filed on Aug. 15, 2017 against WVDEP in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, raising the issues of antidegradation, karst, and the response to public comments. The WVDEP vacated and remanded the 401 Certification to re-evaluate the complete application. During this re-evaluation it was determined that, while the agency could defend against the arguments raised in the appeal, some of the issues raised were better addressed in the state Oil and Gas Construction Stormwater Permit (WV0116815).

“This state permit was issued nearly five years ago to cover oil and gas construction activity. Those activities were otherwise exempt from needing a federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Based on West Virginia’s experiences, it had become obvious that oil and gas construction activity needed to be permitted to protect water quality in our state. West Virginia is unique among its surrounding states in that it has this specific state permit to cover oil and gas pipeline construction activity.

“Because the newly issued Nationwide 12 permit included updated state conditions that were similar to those contained in MVP’s previous individual 401 Certification, WVDEP determined it was unnecessary to repeat them in an Individual Certification. As a result, it waived the 401 Certification. Through its use of the Construction Stormwater Permit, WVDEP will now take full control of the inspection and enforcement of this entire project – in both upland areas and at stream and wetland crossings.

“To be clear – by waiving the 401 Individual Certification, we are not abandoning our duty to protect the water quality of West Virginia. In fact, the new Nationwide 12 permit is 401 certified by West Virginia and includes state specific conditions relative to pipelines. Combined with the state Construction Stormwater Permit, we are in a stronger position to effectively regulate all pipeline construction in West Virginia.

“I take our duty to protect the environment seriously, and will use all of our resources to make sure this project, and any other project, adheres to the conditions of its permit.”

>>> Signed, Austin Caperton, WVDEP Cabinet Secretary

Contact: Jake Glance, (304) 926-0499 ext. 1335, Jacob.P.Glance@wv.gov

WV-DEP vacates permit for Mountain Valley Pipeline

From an Article by Ken Ward Jr., Charleston Gazette-Mail, September 8, 2017

Faced with a deadline to defend their permit approval against a federal court challenge, West Virginia regulators moved this week to back off their certification that the Mountain Valley Pipeline would not violate the state’s water quality standards.

The state Department of Environmental Protection said in a Thursday letter to the pipeline developers and other state and federal agencies that it “hereby vacates and remands” its water quality certification for the controversial natural gas pipeline.

Scott Mandirola, director of the WV-DEP Division of Water and Waste Management, said in the letter that the move would allow WV-DEP “to reevaluate the complete application to determine whether the state’s certification is in compliance” with the federal Clean Water Act.

“We’ve been asking WV-DEP to take a closer look at the more than 600 streams affected by this massive project from the beginning, so WV-DEP’s letter is a positive step,” said Angie Rosser, executive director of the West Virginia Rivers Coalition.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline would run about 300 miles from Northwestern West Virginia to Southern Virginia. It is a joint project of EQT Midstream Partners LP; NextEra US Gas Assets LLC; WGL Midstream; and Vega Midstream MVP LLC. The pipeline originates in Wetzel County and goes though Harrison, Doddridge, Lewis, Braxton, Webster, Nicholas, Greenbrier, Fayette, Summers, and Monroe counties before entering Virginia.

Earlier this year, WV-DEP Secretary Austin Caperton refused a request by citizen groups for a hearing on their administrative appeal of his agency’s approval of the water quality permit for the MVP project. Caperton did not explain his reasons for that decision.

The Sierra Club, the West Virginia Rivers Coalition and other groups then filed a court challenge against Caperton and the WV-DEP. The state agency is due to file a response by next Thursday to the brief filed with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of the citizen groups by lawyers from Appalachian Mountain Advocates.

Among other things, the citizen groups specifically challenged the WV-DEP for not fully reviewing the potential for the MVP project to degrade streams.

More than 15 years ago, the WV-DEP had sought to exempt projects that receive certain types of permits — such as the Clean Water Act general dredge-and-fill permit that MVP obtained from the federal Army Corps of Engineers — from needing to be fully reviewed under the state’s water quality anti-degradation rule. But in a 2003 decision, U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin threw out the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s approval of that part of the WV-DEP’s water quality rules.

Citizen group lawyers noted that ruling by Goodwin in their brief to the 4th Circuit and commented that water quality standards that haven’t been approved by US EPA “are not operative,” meaning that WV-DEP could not use the rule Goodwin threw out to avoid anti-degradation review of MVP.

The MVP project is among a collection of pipelines that are proposed or under construction across the region that are meant to take advantage of the Marcellus Shale gas boom, but are drawing opposition from local citizens and from national environmental groups.

When it initially approved the pipeline’s 401 certification, the WV-DEP issued a news release about the action and pointed members of the media to the MVP developer’s website for “information about the potential economic benefit” of the project.

In that press release, WV-DEP described MVP as a project that would “transport West Virginia’s abundant natural gas to meet the growing need for power generation in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast regions.” The release also said that stream and wetland mitigation required of MVP under the permit would “put West Virginians to work improving streams and wetlands throughout the state.”

Jake Glance, WV-DEP’s communications director, said in an email late Friday that during the agency’s review of the legal challenge at the 4th Circuit, WV-DEP officials determined that “the information used to issue” the water quality certification “needs to be further evaluated and possibly enhanced.”

Glance said that DEP acted “out of an abundance of caution” and “to ensure that all aspects of the potential environmental impact” of the pipeline are considered. Glance also said that WV-DEP had suspended a second permit for MVP that had been issued under the agency’s program for stormwater pollution associated with oil and gas construction activities. He said that action was also “to allow for proper consideration and response to all comments received.”

“The fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline is dirty, dangerous and needlessly endangers West Virginia’s waterways, wilderness and communities and should be rejected,” said Justin Raines, gas committee chairman for the West Virginia Sierra Club. “This project never should have been approved in the first place and we hope this pipeline now receives the scrutiny it deserves.”

It was not immediately clear what impact the WV-DEP decision would have on the state agency’s mandate to meet a one-year deadline to review and act on a water quality certification like MVP’s or — by not acting one way or the other — waiving the state’s authority to do so.

Protect our public waters NOW!

The Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality (DEQ) recently held public hearings for people to express their concerns for both the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) and Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP).

Landowners and all those opposed to these unnecessary fracked gas pipelines that threaten waters in West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina have been petitioning the DEQ for a 60-day extension to the public comment deadlines for the MVP and ACP permits — which otherwise close on August 22nd.

Sign the letter to Gov. McAuliffe, Lt. Gov. Northam and Virginia DEQ Director David Paylor: Extend the public comment periods for ACP and MVP. And, please contact these people on your own.

Because many documents from both MVP and ACP have not even been released yet for public comment — citizens are being left in the dark, and are unable to give specific feedback on the numerous water bodies threatened by these pipelines — including the amount of sediment expected to be released into the six Virginia rivers; upland impacts; impacts on recreational lands; and the results of karst hazard assessments and dye-testing.

We’re taking Bold action and calling directly on Gov. McAuliffe, Lt. Gov. Northam and David Paylor — head of the Virginia DEQ — to perform their sworn duties, and hold fast to the DEQ’s mission to “protect and enhance Virginia’s environment, and promote the health and well-being of the citizens of the Commonwealth.”

The DEQ must grant a 60-day extension to the public comment period, and suspend this process until all the relevant studies and information can be reviewed by citizens.

Sign the letter: Extend the public comments periods for the proposed Mountain Valley and Atlantic Coast pipelines.

>>> Thanks for standing with us. Carolyn Reilly and the Bold Alliance team

P.S. Do you have some great photos of you and your family enjoying some of the many Virginia rivers and water bodies threatened by these risky fracked-gas pipelines? We can use them to help raise awareness of our fight to protect our water and land. Email your water photos to Carolyn Reilly: carolyn@boldalliance.org

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

How to comment on proposed 401 Water Quality Certifications for the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley pipelines

From Greenbrier River Watershed Association, August 10, 2017

You have the right to provide public comments on the proposed Section 401 Water Quality Certifications for construction related activities in upland areas that are located near state waters and that may affect state water along the proposed routes of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) and Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP).

What is the subject of the public comment period?
DEQ is seeking comments on the proposed conditions described in the draft certificates. Only comments related to the MVP or ACP additional conditions will be considered. Additional conditions address karst protection, unregulated surface water withdrawal, exceptional waters, water quality monitoring and activity on steep slopes and in slide prone areas to protect areas during and after construction activities. These conditions provide additional protections not already addressed by other regulations or requirements.

When is the public comment period? 
Comments will be accepted through 11:59 p.m. on August 22, 2017. The comment period is 50 days, 20 days longer than required by the State Water Control Board’s Procedural Rule No. 1 (9VAC25-230-130B).

((It also is important to note that DEQ has directed ACP and MVP to post their site-specific plans for erosion and sediment control and stormwater management so the public can have an opportunity to review them. That deadline is October 13, 2017.))
 
How do I submit a comment?
 
>>> Hand-deliver your comments to DEQ: Office of Wetlands & Stream Protection, 629 East Main St., Richmond, VA 23219 during business hours 8:15 a.m. to 5 p.m.
 
>>> Mail your comments to DEQ: Office of Wetlands & Stream
Protection, P.O. Box 1105, Richmond, VA 23218.
 
>>> Email your comments: For the ACP, the email address is
comment-acp@deq.virginia.gov

>>> For MVP, the email address is comment-mvp@deq.virginia.gov
 
>>> Comments are given the same consideration by the board whether they are made in writing or given orally.

What is required for a public comment to be considered?
Comments must be submitted before the end of the comment period by the 11:59 p.m., August 22, 2017 deadline. Comments should be factual and related to the merits or issues contained in the proposed certification document. When providing written comments, the person commenting must include his/her name and mailing address, and if representing a group of people, the person commenting must also include the names, mailing addresses, and telephone numbers of the persons being represented.
 
What happens after the public comment period?
DEQ staff will summarize all public oral and written comments received during the public comment period, and will provide this summary and responses to comments to the State Water Control Board before its Fall meeting.
 
Only persons who have submitted written or oral comments during the public comment period may respond to the public comment summary provided to the State Water Control Board in accordance with the Board’s Policy on Public Comment at State Water Control Board Meetings.

The State Water Control Board may grant as proposed, grant with amendments, or deny the proposed 401 certification. DEQ will publish additional information as it becomes available, and will send email updates through its news feeds. DEQ director hears residents’ fears about pipeline impacts to wells, springs and pristine streams. See also the information here:
 
http://www.roanoke.com/news/local/giles_county/deq-director-hears-residents-fears-about-pipeline-impacts-to-wells/article_35867e51-89e1-5aa4-9879-511022bd438f.html

St. Albans Arts Center, April 21 & 22

Law firm disputes W.Va. water quality permit for pipeline

From an Article by Duncan Adams, Roanoke Times, April 11, 2017

An environmental law firm contends that a West Virginia state agency acted prematurely, relied on incomplete information and otherwise erred last month when granting a water quality permit for the controversial Mountain Valley Pipeline.

Appalachian Mountain Advocates, headquartered in Lewisburg, West Virginia, last week notified the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection that the nonprofit law firm seeks a hearing to dispute the department’s issuance in March of an individual 401 water quality certification for the natural gas pipeline project.

The permit allows the pipeline and related access roads to cross streams and wetlands in the project area in West Virginia, where the pipeline would be about 195 miles long.

A nine-page letter from lawyer Derek Teaney to Scott Mandirola, director of the West Virginia agency’s division of water and waste management, detailed a host of objections about the department’s decision to grant the water quality permit.

Among other concerns, Appalachian Mountain Advocates alleged:

• The department had not established current water quality baseline data for streams that the pipeline would cross.
• The department had failed to adequately consider impacts to water quality from land disturbance and subsequent erosion and sediment unrelated to stream crossings.
• Because the pipeline’s route is not yet final and property surveys are incomplete, the “locations and effects of discharges associated with the construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline [are] ill-defined and impossible to fully evaluate.”
• The department had not adequately evaluated the effects on public drinking water supplies of the pipeline’s construction and operation.

The letter advised Mandirola that Appalachian Mountain Advocates requested the hearing on behalf of 14 individuals – whose properties are either on a current route of the 42-inch diameter buried pipeline or otherwise at risk of being directly affected by the project – and three organizations.

One of the organizations was the West Virginia Rivers Coalition. In an email, Angie Rosser, its executive director, described the outcome sought by the request for a hearing.

“First, WVDEP must go back and require the applicant to submit a complete application,” Rosser said. “That will make it even more obvious that a project of this scale cannot avoid causing or contributing to water quality standards violations.”

She said water quality certification for the pipeline cannot be justified.

“This pipeline threatens some of the most sensitive and ecologically valuable headwaters streams in the state,” Rosser said. “The WVDEP can’t get this wrong.”

Natalie Cox, a spokeswoman for Mountain Valley Pipeline, said the company’s project team and department of environmental protection staff worked diligently to develop comprehensive plans for constructing the pipeline with the least possible impact on streams and wetlands in West Virginia.

“We respect the various opinions of those who may not support the MVP project and remain confident that MVP construction plans, as submitted to the WVDEP for evaluation and public comment, will protect wetlands and streams and meet water quality standards as outlined in the 401 certification process,” Cox said in an email.

The letter from Teaney describes the concerns of three landowners whose two properties in Summers County, West Virginia, are adjacent to the Greenbrier River, which the pipeline will cross. The landowners worry that the project will increase sedimentation and be a source of other pollution in the river.

Separately, the letter reports that landowner Landcey Ragland in Monroe County worries the pipeline would pollute Slate Run, described as “the sole source of drinking water for his livestock.”

Maury Johnson, a Monroe County farmer, also fears the pipeline could affect Slate Run and, ultimately, the well for his home, the letter says.

Teaney declined to talk about the request for a hearing, citing Appalachian Mountain Advocates’ policy restricting comment about pending legal cases.

Under West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection regulations, the agency is not obligated to hold the administrative hearing sought by the organization and its clients. If the department declines the request, Appalachian Mountain Advocates could decide to file a lawsuit and ask a judge to weigh in.

See also:  Greenbrier River Watershed Association

See also:  Appalachian Mountain Advocates

Simulated View of MVP from Appalachian Trail

MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE – The 401 Permit Application for Construction has been filed with WV-DEP. Comments may be made any time.  The 401 Certification is required to permit the entry to or crossing of streams where stream flows may be interrupted and/or sediment, subsidence or dissolved chemicals may affect the stream.

  http://www.dep.wv.gov/news/Pages/Public-Comment-Period-on-Mountain-Valley-Pipeline-401-Water-Quality-Certification-Extended.aspx

 The 401 certification for the Mountain Valley Pipeline has not yet been issued or denied. Public comments are still being accepted and can be emailed to: DEP.comments@wv.gov.

They can also be mailed to the WV-DEP headquarters, the address is below. There may be a public hearing or hearings, but nothing has been scheduled yet.

Source: Kelley J. Gillenwater, Chief Communications Officer, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, 601 57^th St. SE, Charleston, WV  25304

Telephone: 304-926-0499, ext. 1331

 >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >

Two excellent sources of information on negative impacts of Mountain Valley Pipeline.

1. APPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY had a whole new web page, with easy to use letters and links. https://www.appalachiantrail.org/home/conservation/advocacy/conservation-current-issues-full-story/advocacy—current-issues/2016/11/18/mountain-valley-pipeline-project-threatens-ecosystems-and-landscape-of-virginia-and-west-virginia 

2. New blog on APPALACHIAN TRIALS (note spelling) a widely read online source among AT hikers has lots of details about negative impacts of MVP

http://appalachiantrials.com/a-modern-day-threat-to-the-at-the-proposed-mountain-valley-pipeline/

GREENBRIER RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION

Thanks for your support of the Greenbrier River Watershed Association over the past year, and for some of you, for many years.  You are receiving our email newsletters, which come out about twice a month. They contain information which we hope you have found useful.  Also, if you have not recently been to the website, www.greenbrier.org, please visit us there.  It has undergone changes that you will like.  We are also on Facebook at Greenbrier Watershed.

Send the following information with your check:  Name, Address & Email.  We do not share our mailing list with any outside source.  All contributions are tax deductible.  Please indicate if you need a return letter documenting your contribution for tax purposes.

Sincerely, John Walkup, President, Greenbrier River Watershed Association, P.O. Box 1419, Lewisburg, WV 24901         (304-647-4792)

The Greenbrier River Watershed Association would like to thank each and every one of you for your support in the past year. We wish you a very Happy New Year!!!!

 See also:  www.greenbrier.org

See also:  www.pipelineupdate.org