Punxsutawney Phil has relatives in West Virginia who care!

>>> Received on January 31 at 8:41 AM

Make sure you join us Thursday, February 2nd, for a special #GroundhogsDay webinar on the Mountain Valley Pipeline. Right now, there are two permits from federal agencies pending approval and you have the opportunity to comment!

Learn how you can send your comments. This webinar is set for 12:00 Noon! (See the recording below.)

#######+++++++#######+++++++########

RECORDING ~ Mountain Valley Pipeline Lunch and Learn February 2, 2023 – WV Rivers Coalition

ACCESS WINDOW~ https://wvrivers.org/2023/02/mvpfeb2023/

YouTube Recording ~ https://youtu.be/42d-68a1-tc

Two permits from federal agencies are pending approval and you have the opportunity to comment on them. This February 2nd webinar discussed how you can craft and submit your comments.

1. You can comment on the US Forest Service permit approval until February 6, through this webform.

2. You can comment on the Army Corp of Engineers permit until February 10, through this webform.

Thank you for your participation at this important time!

There is no environmental justice in such a large diameter pipeline on extremely steep mountain terrain

Update from the Southern Environmental Law Center, June 15, 2020

Washington, D.C. — Today, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a lower court decision that limited the U.S. Forest Service’s authority to issue a permit to the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP). The original ruling by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals stated the Forest Service lacked authority to grant approval for Dominion and Duke Energy’s pipeline to cross the Appalachian Trail on federal land. The Fourth Circuit also vacated the Forest Service permit on other grounds not addressed by today’s decision, and the pipeline still lacks that permit in addition to several other approvals required for construction.

“While today’s decision was not what we hoped for, it addresses only one of the many problems faced by the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. This is not a viable project. It is still missing many required authorizations, including the Forest Service permit at issue in today’s case, and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will soon consider the mounting evidence that we never needed this pipeline to supply power. It’s time for these developers to move on and reinvest the billions of dollars planned for this boondoggle into the renewable energy that Virginia and North Carolina customers want and deserve,” said DJ Gerken, Southern Environmental Law Center Program Director.

The Supreme Court’s decision comes at the same time that the purported need for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, proposed in 2014, is receiving renewed scrutiny, as states are steering their energy economies away from fossil fuels. In March, Dominion Energy told Virginia regulators that the build out of new gas-fired power plants is no longer “viable” in the state, and the Virginia Clean Economy Act signed into law in April requires that the utility shut down all of its existing gas plants by 2045. North Carolina’s Clean Energy Plan calls for a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from power plants of 70% over 2005 levels by 2030 and total carbon neutrality by 2050.

“It’s been six years since this pipeline was proposed, we didn’t need it then and we certainly don’t need it now,” said Dick Brooks of the Cowpasture River Preservation. “Today’s decision doesn’t change the fact that Dominion chose a risky route through protected federal lands, steep mountains, and vulnerable communities.”

“This pipeline is putting our farmlands, our water and the livelihood of Virginians in jeopardy,” said Nancy Sorrells with Alliance for the Shenandoah Valley, “And all for a pipeline that isn’t even in the public interest of Virginians.”

Meanwhile, the exorbitant price tag for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline continues to climb because of Dominion’s insistence on a harmful and risky route. Under these circumstances and at a time when the region is moving rapidly to 100% renewable energy, it’s unreasonable to expect customers to pay for this obsolete $8 billion fracked gas pipeline.

“With the ACP still lacking 8 permits, this decision is just plugging just one hole on a sinking ship,” said Kelly Martin, Director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign. “Nothing in today’s ruling changes the fact that the fracked gas Atlantic Coast Pipeline is a dirty, dangerous threat to our health, climate and communities, and nothing about the ruling changes our intention to fight it. From the day the ACP was proposed, the smart investment for Dominion and Duke would have been clean, renewable energy sources, and with the project billions of dollars over budget, that’s even more true today. Despite this ruling on one narrow question, economics, common sense, and public opinion are still squarely against the ACP.”

Among the permits in question for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline are:

@ — Endangered Species Act permit (Biological Opinion) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

@ — Special use permit and right-of-way grant from the U.S. Forest Service

@ — Right-of-way permit from the National Park Service

@ — Virginia air pollution permit for the Union Hill compressor station

@ — Four Clean Water Act authorizations from the Army Corps of Engineers for Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina

@ — The Atlantic Coast Pipeline’s central permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is under review in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and arguments are expected later this year. The case will determine if FERC correctly determined that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline was needed to fuel gas-fired power plants when it approved the project in 2017.

###########################

About the Southern Environmental Law Center

For more than 30 years, the Southern Environmental Law Center has used the power of the law to champion the environment of the Southeast. With more than 80 attorneys and nine offices across the region, SELC is widely recognized as the Southeast’s foremost environmental organization and regional leader. SELC works on a full range of environmental issues to protect our natural resources and the health and well-being of all the people in our region. For more info see the following: www.SouthernEnvironment.org

About the Sierra Club of the United States

The Sierra Club is America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with more than 3.8 million members and supporters. In addition to protecting every person’s right to get outdoors and access the healing power of nature, the Sierra Club works to promote clean energy, safeguard the health of our communities, protect wildlife, and preserve our remaining wild places through grassroots activism, public education, lobbying, and legal action. For more information, visit www.sierraclub.org.

ACP extends from WV to VA & NC, may not be needed

From an Article by Maya Weber, S & P Global — Platts, June 1, 2020

Washington — A coalition of environmental groups opened June 1 a new front in their legal war against the 600-mile, 1.5 Bcf/d Atlantic Coast Pipeline project, contending that a supplemental environmental impact statement is needed.

The action comes as lead developer Dominion Energy already is laboring to get the project back into construction after a series of legal setbacks. For instance, it is hoping for a positive US Supreme Court decision soon to help reinstate permission vacated by a federal circuit court for the pipeline to cross the Appalachian Trail.

The project is intended to move Appalachian natural gas to mid-Atlantic markets.

Should the developer prevail in the Supreme Court, it faces a possible new avenue of litigation in the form of a roughly 4,000-page filing posted on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s website June 1 by Southern Environmental Law Center, Appalachian Mountain Advocates and Chesapeake Bay Foundation on behalf of a coalition of conservation groups.

The groups argued in the filing that a supplemental EIS is needed in light of new information that has come to light since FERC issued an EIS for the pipeline project in 2017, and given upcoming FERC decisions on key matters such as whether to extend certificate authorization for the project beyond the October expiration date and whether to lift FERC’s existing stop-work order on construction.

Part of the groups’ rationale for a new review is that the region’s energy infrastructure has undergone a dramatic shift away from gas-fired power, while the cost of the pipeline has ballooned.

“In January 2020, Virginia — the site of over half of the ACP’s proposed route — told the Supreme Court that in light of the mounting evidence that the pipeline is not needed, the ACP threatens Virginia’s natural resources without clear corresponding benefits,” they wrote.

New data for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Commission (FERC)

And they said new information has come to light that they contended must be considered under the National Environmental Policy Act, involving endangered species along the pipeline route, expanded scientific information about climate change, and changing circumstances related to cumulative impacts from projects in the area.

In addition, they argued there have been substantial erosion, sedimentation and slope failures since 2017 along the ACP route and other pipelines in mountainous terrain, undermining FERC’s conclusions about effectiveness of mitigation in its documents. In light of the recently narrowed definition of waters of the US, some water bodies crossed by the project, including wetlands, may be at greater risk if permitting authorities no longer consider them within the purview of the Clean Water Act, they said.

Large long pipelines in steep terrain cause sediment & water pollution

Dominion Energy response to filings

In response to the filing, Dominion spokeswoman Ann Nallo said many of the concerns raised by the environmental groups already have been addressed publicly and others are being addressed through ongoing permitting processes with the agencies.

For example, ACP is working with the US Fish and Wildlife Service on a new biological opinion that will include the most up-to-date information on the impacted species.

The project is needed more than ever for the region’s economy and path to clean energy, she argued.

“The ACP will also support our region’s transition from coal and the rapid expansion of renewables, both of which are essential to Dominion Energy’s and Duke Energy’s plans to achieve net zero emissions by 2050,” she said.

ClearView Energy Partners, in a research note, said it expects the Supreme Court to remove one obstacle to the Appalachian Trail crossing but emphasized that others remained for the project. ClearView suggested the environmental groups may be preparing to ask the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to stay FERC’s certificate authorization when the court brings a legal challenge related to the FERC authorization out of abeyance.

“Given the strong consensus that the Supreme Court may reverse the 4th Circuit, we see this call to issue a supplemental EIS as another avenue through which the project’s opponents intend to delay, if not try to halt, the project altogether.”

ACP is a private for-profit project pretending to be in the public interest

From an Article by Sarah Vogelsong, Virginia Mercury, February 24, 2020

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Where does a trail end and the land beneath it begin?

That’s just one of the thorny questions the Supreme Court grappled with Monday morning during a one-hour hearing on a U.S. Forest Service permit for the controversial Atlantic Coast Pipeline that has been hotly anticipated by both the gas and oil industry supporting the pipeline and the environmentalists opposing the project.

Since its inception, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a 600-mile conduit that would bring natural gas from West Virginia, through Virginia and into North Carolina, has been challenged on multiple fronts. The project, 53 percent of which is owned by Dominion Energy, currently has eight outstanding permits that have been revoked as a result of legal resistance.

The issue before the U.S. Supreme Court Monday concerned a permit granted by the U.S. Forest Service giving the pipeline the right-of-way to cross federal lands beneath the Appalachian Trail.

A December 2018 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit stripped the pipeline of that permit on the grounds that the Forest Service had acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” and didn’t have the authority to grant rights-of-way for pipelines to cross federal lands under the Mineral Leasing Act.

It was the latter determination that the Supreme Court took up Monday in a narrow, complicated case that pushed environmental concerns to the back-burner to focus on exactly what authority Congress has given to what agency to manage federal lands in the National Park System.

The Mineral Leasing Act says that “rights-of-way through any federal lands may be granted by the secretary of the interior or appropriate agency head for pipeline purposes,” but defines federal lands as “all lands owned by the United States except lands in the National Park System.”

Whether the Appalachian Trail is just a trail that runs over the surface of the land or includes all the land beneath it — “down to the center of the earth,” as Justice Stephen Breyer put it — was a point of contention during arguments.

“The central flaw in the court’s logic lies in the fact that the Appalachian Trail is a ‘trail,’ not ‘land,’” the federal government’s brief argued. “Congress’s charge to the secretary of the interior to provide ‘overall administration of a trail’ does not transfer any administrative jurisdiction over the federal land that the trail traverses. Those lands remain under the administrative jurisdiction of their relevant federal land-management agencies. As such, National Forest lands crossed by the Appalachian Trail remain under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service.”

Several of the court’s more liberal-leaning justices, including Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, appeared skeptical of that stance. “You’re saying that the trail is distinct from the trail,” said Justice Kagan early in the hearing. “Nobody makes that distinction in real life.”

But Paul Clement, an attorney for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, argued that “multiple provisions” of the National Trails System Act draw a distinction between the two, and that conflating them would have “untenable consequences,” including the conversion of the Appalachian Trail into a 2,200-mile barrier to all pipeline development that would deprive eastern states of natural gas.

That argument seemed to strike a chord with several justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who both questioned Michael Kellogg, the attorney representing the consortium of five Virginia conservation groups opposing the Forest Service permit, about the potential outcome of creating what Roberts called “an impermeable barrier” to gas transportation.

Kellogg, however, contended that argument was misleading, because the Mineral Leasing Act only applies to federal lands and does not prohibit the granting of rights-of-way for pipelines beneath the trail on state, local and private lands. “Congress drew a bright line,” he said.

About 50 pipelines currently cross the Appalachian Trail, either on state, local or private land, or on federal lands under rights-of-way established prior to the passage of the Mineral Leasing Act.

Greg Buppert, an attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, a law firm that has been heavily involved in fighting both the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and the Mountain Valley Pipeline, said after the hearing that it was the “unprecedented” nature of the request for a right-of-way to construct a pipeline across federal lands that had brought the case to the Supreme Court.

The statutes, he said, “make it clear that this part of the Appalachian Trail gets its highest protections.” A decision in the case is not expected until late spring.

PHOTO in ARTICLE: Greg Buppert of the Southern Environmental Law Center offers comments about the hearing on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. Feb. 24, 2020.

ALSO, NOW is the time to cut greenhouse gases not in 30 years

From the Allegheny — Blue Ridge Alliance, Update #261, January 30, 2020

“Continued efforts to complete the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) are fraught with risks” to investors, ratepayers and those who live along the route of the ACP, according to a new paper released January 30 by ABRA. “Why Support for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline Adds Risks to Shareholders and Ratepayers” is authored by Thomas Hadwin, a former utility executive who is a member of ABRA’s Steering Committee.

Hadwin points out that since 2014, when the ACP was proposed, existing pipelines serving Virginia and the Carolinas have increased in capacity more than the ACP would provide. The paper explains that the cost for Dominion subsidiaries to use gas from the ACP would be over four times as expensive as gas transported by the Transco system, where sufficient capacity exists. The same would be true for Duke Energy’s subsidiaries.

Describing the environmental risks associated with the project, the paper notes that over 150-miles of the ACP route – one-fourth its length – would traverse terrain that is landslide prone. ABRA will be releasing next month a study on the landslide threat to pipelines built through the central Appalachian region.

The paper concludes: “We have an overabundance of gas-fired generating capacity and gas transmission pipeline capacity. The Atlantic Coast Pipeline is not a solution. It is part of the problem.

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

Ex-Heads of Park Service & Appalachian Trail Oppose ACP Crossing Trail

From the Allegheny — Blue Ridge Alliance (ABRA) Update #261, January 30, 2020

Among the amicus briefs filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on January 22 in support of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision to vacate the U.S. Forest Service permit for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to cross the Appalachian Trail (see ABRA Update #250 article on this) was one jointly filed by: John Jarvis, former Director of the U.S. Park Service; Pam Underhill, former Superintendent of the Appalachian Trail; and the National Parks Conservation Association. The Jarvis/Underhill/NPCA brief sets forth three-principal arguments:

1. Federal agencies may not issue pipeline rights-of-way through federal lands in units of the National Park System, including the Appalachian Trail, without express authorization from Congress;

2. There exist other well-established means of obtaining authorization for pipeline rights- of-way in or through National Park System lands; and

3. Congress’s delegation to the Park Service of administrative jurisdiction over the Appalachian Trail also ensures the Trail’s long-term conservation in the manner Congress intended.

In concluding its brief, the joint petitioners stated:

While the Forest Service and its staff members are critically important partners in cooperatively managing the Appalachian Trail on Forest Service lands, Congress recognized that the Park Service was best situated to play a special role in administering the entire stretch of this unique national treasure and assuring that its purposes are fulfilled in perpetuity. As such, it is imperative that this Court affirm the Fourth Circuit’s ruling, which will ensure that this foundational national scenic trail continues to be overseen and conserved as a crown jewel of the National Park System, in the manner that Congress envisioned when it deliberately charged the Park Service with administering the Appalachian Trail.

Appalachian Trail parallels the Blue Ridge Parkway here

From the Update #260, Allegheny – Blue Ridge Alliance (ABRA), January 23, 2020

A new request to halt construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) was made to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in a January 14 filing by the Southern Environmental Law Center, Appalachian Mountain Advocates and Chesapeake Bay Foundation on behalf of their respective client groups.

While construction on the ACP ceased more than a year ago in the wake of the project losing its Biological Opinion and Take Statement, as required by the Endangered Species Act, the project’s managing partner, Dominion Energy, has indicated its intention to resume construction as soon as a new Biological Opinion and Take Statement is issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The FWS has not announced plans for reissuing a revised permit.

The request to FERC points out that with the recent loss of the Buckingham compressor station air permit – struck down January 7 by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (see ABRA Update #259, January 9 for details) – there are 8 missing permits for the project:

1. Nationwide Permit 12 Verification, Pittsburgh District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: suspended by Pittsburgh District, Nov. 20, 2018.
2. Nationwide Permit 12 Verification, Norfolk District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: suspended by Norfolk District, Nov. 20, 2018.
3. Nationwide Permit 12 Verification, Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: suspended by Wilmington District, Nov. 20, 2018.
4. Special Use Permit and Record of Decision, U.S. Forest Service: vacated by Fourth Circuit, Dec. 13, 2018 Cowpasture River Pres. Ass’n v. Forest Serv., 911 F.3d 150 (4th Cir. 2018).
5. Right-of-Way and Construction Permits, National Park Service: remanded by Fourth Circuit, Jan. 23, 2019, to be vacated by Park Service. Order (Dkt. 51), Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, No. 18-2095 (4th Cir. Jan. 23, 2019).
6. Nationwide Permit 12 Verification, Huntington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: vacated by Fourth Circuit, Jan. 25, 2019. Order (Dkt. 67), Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, No. 18-1743 (4th Cir. Jan. 25, 2019).
7. Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: vacated by Fourth Circuit, July 26, 2019. Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Dep’t of
the Interior, 931 F.3d 339 (4th Cir. 2019).
8. Article 6 Permit, Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board (implementing federal Clean Air Act requirements): vacated by Fourth Circuit, January 7, 2020. Friends
of Buckingham, 2019 WL 63295 (4th Cir. Jan. 7, 2020).

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

State AGs File Briefs Backing 4th Circuit on Forest Service Permit Case

From the Update #260, Allegheny – Blue Ridge Alliance (ABRA), January 23, 2020

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline “threatens Virginia’s resources without clear corresponding benefits,” so stated a brief filed January 22 with the U.S. Supreme Court by Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring.

The amicus brief was filed as part of the appeal brought by Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC and the U.S. Forest Service of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in the Cowpasture River Preservation Association, et. al. v. U.S. Forest Service case. The Fourth Circuit’s decision vacated the Forest Service’s permit issued for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP).

The permit was rejected by the Court on several grounds, including holding that the agency did not have the proper legal authority to authorize the ACP to cross the Appalachian National Scenic Trail.

In addition to the Virginia AG brief, the Attorneys General of 13 states and the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief in support of upholding the Fourth Circuit’s decision.

Attorney General Herring was unequivocal in his criticism of the ACP project:
………. The pipeline company (Atlantic) claims the project is necessary to address an unmet and growing demand for natural gas in Virginia and North Carolina. But that claim does not withstand scrutiny. Indeed, recent analyses indicate that the demand for natural gas will remain flat or decrease for the foreseeable future and can be met with existing infrastructure.
………. Beyond offering dubious benefits, the pipeline unquestionably threatens some of Virginia’s most valued natural sites. The George Washington National Forest, the Blue Ridge Parkway, and the Appalachian Trail are woven into the fabric of Virginia’s history, offering solitude and recreation to Virginians and visitors for generations, bringing tourism and its corresponding benefits to the neighboring communities.
…………..the United States Forest Service failed to conduct the meticulous review of Atlantic’s permit application called for by the Service’s governing statutes and regulations. Instead, the permitting process was rushed and slipshod and driven by Atlantic’s arbitrary deadlines. Given the chaotic nature of the agency proceedings, it is unsurprising that the Fourth Circuit invalidated the permit on three separate grounds that are entirely independent of the question whether the Forest Service has authority to grant Atlantic permission to cross the Appalachian Trail.

The amicus brief filed by Vermont Attorney General Thomas Donovan, on behalf of his state and 12 other states and the District of Columbia, stressed that the Appalachian Trail is a vital part of the National Park System and that “existing Appalachian Trail pipeline crossings and utility easements will be unaffected” by the Fourth Circuit’s decision.

The AGs’ brief also notes that the “availability of adequate energy sources or even this particular pipeline project” are not imperiled by the Fourth Circuit decision, noting that the project could be built on non-federal land to cross the Trail.

Seven of the 13 states filing amici briefs in support of the Fourth Circuit decision encompass 58% of the total length of the Appalachian Trail. Of the 18 states whose Attorneys General filed briefs in support of the Forest Service/ACP appeal, only 2 are states traversed by the Trail – Georgia and West Virginia – and their total of 80 Trail miles represents less than 4% of the Trail’s 2200-mile length.

Other amici briefs filed this week in support of the Fourth Circuit decision include those by: John Jarvis, former Superintendent of the National Park Service; Natural Resources Defense Council; Wintergreen Property Owners Association; and a joint brief by Nelson County, VA and the City of Staunton. A link to all of the briefs filed is available here.

The Supreme Court is scheduled here arguments on the case on February 24.

Map from the Richmond Times-Dispatch, May 18, 2015

From the Allegheny – Blue Ridge Alliance, ABRA Update #257, December 19, 2019

Efforts by Dominion Energy to convince Congress to approve having the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) cross the Appalachian National Scenic Trail have not yielded results.

For most of the past year Dominion has been seeking to have a rider added to other legislation that would, in effect, overturn the decision of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that vacated the permit for the ACP issued by the U.S. Forest Service.

Within the past week, two prominent bills that were believed to be possible vehicles for the Dominion amendment – the National Defense Authorization Act and the continuing resolution funding the Federal Government –passed without language addressing the AT issue.

For now, the issue remains pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, which is scheduled to hear arguments on an appeal of the Fourth Circuit decision on the case (U.S. Forest Service v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association, et. al.) on February 24. A decision on the case is anticipated to be announced in June.

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

Dominion still sees U.S. Atlantic Coast natgas pipe online in 2022 despite Morgan Stanley’s doubts

From an Article by Scott DiSavino, Reuters News Service, December 16, 2019

(Reuters) – Dominion Energy Inc said on Monday it was confident it will complete the proposed $7.3-$7.8 billion Atlantic Coast natural gas pipeline from West Virginia to North Carolina by early 2022, in response to a prediction by investment bank Morgan Stanley that a court decision would likely scuttle the project.

“We remain committed to completing the project for the good of our economy and the environment,” Dominion spokesman Aaron Ruby said, noting the company expected to complete construction in late 2021 with final in-service in early 2022.

Dominion made its comments after Morgan Stanley said in a report that “Atlantic Coast will likely not be completed given the Fourth Circuit’s likely (in the bank’s view) rejection, for the third time, of a newly issued Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement that we expect to come by the first quarter of 2020.”

In July, the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) second Biological Opinion because the court found the agency’s decisions were arbitrary and would jeopardize the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee and other endangered species.

Federal agencies use Biological Opinions when authorizing projects that could adversely affect threatened or endangered species or critical habitats, and issue take statements to limit the number of those species that could be harmed. Ruby said Dominion expects the FWS will issue a new Biological Opinion in the first half of 2020.

Dominion suspended construction of the 600-mile (966-kilometer) project in December 2018 after the Fourth Circuit stayed the FWS’ second Biological Opinion.

Dominion and its partners, Duke Energy Corp and Southern Co., are also working through a dispute over where the pipeline can cross the Appalachian Trail. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take up the Appalachian Trail case, which is also important for the construction of EQM Midstream Partners LP’s Mountain Valley gas pipe from West Virginia to Virginia.

The Supreme Court may issue a ruling in May or June 2020. So, the Appalachian Trail dispute may be resolved by a Supreme Court decision or an administrative or legislative solution.

A route revision was the likely compromise for the endangered species dispute but noted that could boost the project’s costs to around $8 billion and push completion into 2022.

When Dominion started work on the 1.5 billion cubic feet per day pipe in the spring of 2018, the company estimated it would cost $6.0-$6.5 billion and be completed in late 2019.

Are you gonna stand up for justice and the earth?

From an Article by Noah Sachs, American Prospect, August 14, 2019

The question of the trail’s ownership looms large in a case that may be headed to the Supreme Court. The answer could determine the fate of natural gas megaprojects on the East Coast.

Protesters gather at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Harrisonburg office to speak out against the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines.

Hiking north on the Appalachian Trail from Reeds Gap in Virginia, my teenage daughter and I come to a clearing. We’re at the Three Ridges Overlook, taking in the view of the Rockfish River Valley undulating to the east. Piney Mountain, blanketed in a green canopy of oaks and poplars, stares back at us from across the divide. This tranquil section of the iconic trail is the subject of a four-year legal battle that landed in June at the Supreme Court. It’s the spot where Dominion Energy wants to route the controversial Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP), a $7.5 billion, 600-mile, 42-inch-diameter pipe that will carry fracked natural gas from the depths of the Marcellus Shale in West Virginia. The pipeline would run up and over several mountain ranges to the Virginia coast and to eastern North Carolina.

The stakes are high. The lawsuit over this section of the Appalachian Trail could determine the fate of some of the largest natural gas deposits in North America. In a landmark decision last December, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond axed the project—for now. That court found that the entire Appalachian Trail from Georgia to Maine is part of the National Park System, blocking federal agencies from authorizing a pipeline crossing. The astonishing decision upended the U.S. natural gas industry and also jeopardizes other pipeline projects with proposed routes across the trail.

Whether the pipeline construction ever goes forward ultimately hinges on the question of who has authority over the Appalachian Trail. If the Supreme Court declines to hear Cowpasture River Preservation Association v. U.S. Forest Service (an announcement is expected this fall), then the Fourth Circuit decision will stand, and the ACP will likely be doomed unless it gets a congressional exemption or Dominion chooses a costly new route. Both Dominion and the Trump administration petitioned the high court to hear the case, with Dominion charging that the Fourth Circuit turned the trail into “an impregnable barrier” that locks up abundant natural gas in the Midwest. (Full disclosure: I’m on the board of an environmental group, Virginia Conservation Network, that has opposed the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, but VCN is not a party to any of the pipeline litigation.)

Yet an even more fundamental problem posed by this latest generation of pipeline projects is not the exact point where they cross the Appalachian Trail, but whether they should be built at all. Once these investments in fossil fuel infrastructure are made, developers have every incentive to use the pipelines for their whole useful life (about 80 years), which would throw greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and exacerbate the climate crisis.

See the complete article here:

Can the Appalachian Trail Block a Natural Gas Pipeline? - The American Prospect, August 14, 2019

Holden Dometrius arrested on Little Mountain near Lindside, WV

From an Article by Laurence Hammack, Roanoke Times, April 24, 2019

A state regulation that delayed a key part of work on the Mountain Valley Pipeline — the crossings of more than 1,000 streams and wetlands in the two Virginias — has been revised in a way likely to benefit the project.

The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection wrote in a letter Wednesday to federal regulators that it has modified about 50 conditions to permits issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

One of the conditions was that the pipeline needed to be built across four major rivers in West Virginia within 72 hours. The Army Corps improperly bypassed that rule when it issued what’s called a Nationwide Permit 12 to the natural gas project, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in throwing out the authorization in October.

Although several more steps need to be taken before water body crossings can resume, a revised condition doing away with the time restriction in certain cases was seen as a victory for Mountain Valley.

However, complications from another court challenge involving a different pipeline in Virginia led one of the five partners in the joint Mountain Valley venture to say this week that completion of the project by the end of this year now “appears unlikely.”

Rebecca Kujawa, chief financial officer of NextEra Energy Inc., made her comments in a report on first quarter results posted to the company’s website.

Construction of Mountain Valley, which began last year, is expected to ramp up in the coming months following a winter lull, Kujawa said. But she expressed concerns about a 4th Circuit decision last year that prohibited the Atlantic Coast Pipeline from crossing the Appalachian Trail.

The Mountain Valley pipeline would also cross the scenic footpath, and backers worry that the project could be jeopardized by the Atlantic Coast ruling. “We are continuing to work through options with our partners and will provide a further update in the near future,” Kujawa said.

Natalie Cox, a spokeswoman for Mountain Valley, said Thursday that there have been no announced changes to the company’s most recent goal of a late 2019 completion date.

“However, in light of the ongoing permit challenges, the window to achieve these targets is becoming more narrow,” she wrote in an email. “The team has been pursuing options and alternatives that would address the outstanding issues and, if realized within the next few months, would allow for” completion late this year.

When work on the 303-mile pipeline began a year ago, plans were to have it done by late 2018. As for the Nationwide Permit process, Cox said, the next step will be for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to review the modified conditions from West Virginia. Then the Army Corps will do the same.

Pipeline opponents were quick to react to the move, staging a protest early Thursday morning in which a man chained himself to equipment along the pipeline’s construction right of way in Lindside, West Virginia.

“To hell with your permits,” read a banner attached to a piece of welding equipment to which 22-year-old Holden Dometrius had locked himself, according to a news release from Appalachians Against Pipelines. After several hours of blocking work, Dometrius was removed by law enforcement officials.

The organization, which has been affiliated with more than dozen such blockades in West Virginia and Southwest Virginia, said the pipeline “endangers water, ecosystems, and communities along its route, contributes to climate change, increases demand for natural gas (and therefore fracking), and is entrenched in corrupt political processes.”

A clerk in the Monroe County Magistrate’s Court said Dometrius faces a felony charge of threatening terrorism and three misdemeanors: trespassing, obstruction and tampering with equipment. Dometrius, of Winston-Salem, North Carolina, was being held in jail in lieu of an $8,000 cash bond Thursday afternoon, the clerk said.

In October, the 4th Circuit vacated a Nationwide Permit 12 issued for a portion of the pipeline running through West Virginia. A legal challenge brought by the Sierra Club and other environmental organizations asserted that the Army Corps overlooked a requirement, imposed by the state’s environmental agency, that work on four major river crossings be completed within 72 hours to limit potential environmental harm.

Mountain Valley has said that digging trenches across the river bottoms for its 42-inch diameter pipe would take four to six weeks.

Two similar stream-crossing permits — one for Southwest Virginia and another for a second part of West Virginia — were suspended by the Army Corps days after the court ruling.

But by the time of the court’s opinion, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection had already initiated changes to address the court’s concerns. The department invited public comments in August — after the court had issued a stay to stream crossings in response to the Sierra Club’s lawsuit, which was later lifted — on a number of revisions to state conditions to the Army Corps’ permits, including one that removed the 72-hour time restriction in certain cases.

Concerns by regulators date back to Mountain Valley’s original plan to use a so-called “wet open cut” process to run the pipeline across streams and wetlands. That entails digging a ditch along the bottom of a flowing stream, and can lead to large amounts of sediment and other forms of pollution being washed downstream.

The company has since changed plans. It now proposes to use a dry-cut method, in which a temporary dam diverts the water from half of the river’s width while construction crews dig a trench for the pipe along the exposed river bed. The process is then repeated on the other half of the river.

While the dry-cut method takes longer than 72 hours, it poses less of an environmental risk, the Department of Environmental Protection said in explaining why it was removing the time restriction.

Appalachian Mountain Advocates, a nonprofit law firm that represented the Sierra Club in the 4th Circuit case, objected to the department’s plans during the written public comment period. In the past, a Sierra Club representative did not rule out the possibility of additional litigation if the Army Corps reissues its Nationwide Permit 12.

For Mountain Valley to get the $4.6 billion project fully back on track, it must still win approval from a second federal agency. The U.S. Forest Service had approved the pipeline to pass through about 3.5 miles of the Jefferson National Forest. That authorization was struck down last year by the 4th Circuit, which ruled that the agency failed to take into account expected problems with erosion and sedimentation.

The appeals court ruling sent the permit back to the Forest Service for reconsideration in July. Since then, the agency has said little about the process, other than it was “developing its response” to the issues identified by the court.

The Forest Service has also not responded to a Freedom of Information Act request seeking more information, which was filed in January by The Roanoke Times.

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

“Hell With Your Permits — Work Stopped At MVP Site In WV, Protester Charged with Felony” | Blue Virginia, April 25, 2019

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

Three (3) Protesters Arrested After Binding to MVP Equipment, WSET, June 5, 2018

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

Workshop off I-64 west of Charlottesville

From an Article by Erin Conway, Nelson News Advance, April 10, 2019

Pipeline opponents are gearing up for a nine-hour workshop in Nelson County on April 13 to discuss the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, and where they are in the fight to stop it.

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC is a 600-mile-long natural-gas pipeline proposed to be built through parts of Nelson County. Different groups in Virginia and other states like West Virginia and North Carolina have been protesting the ACP since it was proposed four years ago. To continue the fight, Friends of Nelson, an anti-pipeline organization, is holding its third all day workshop on April 13 from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. The purpose of the event is “to update interested citizens on the current status of the fight against the Atlantic Coast Pipeline,” according to a news release. The event is free to the public, but registration is required.

Jill and Richard Averitt, active pipeline opponents, are hosting the event on April 13 on land they own in the county, which a portion of the ACP is proposed to go through. “We are confident it won’t get built through here,” Jill Averitt said. “In general, Friends of Nelson thinks it looks bad for Dominion.”

Still, pipeline opponents aren’t letting up the fight. The all-day workshop will consist of discussions on specific legal and environmental issues, tours of the proposed path of the ACP, exercises on how to protest safely, and what happens next in the fight to stop the ACP.

“The goal is to get as many people as possible. Really, we love to get people involved who don’t know much about this pipeline, but have been hearing about it,” Jill Averitt said.

The day will also consist of guest speakers covering an array of topics on the pipeline and issues it brings to light. William Limpert, an affected landowner from Bath County, will be discussing how outside, long term storage of gas pipes deteriorates the coatings and increases the risk of failure.

Limpert said the safety and public health issues with the coating of the pipeline are both important and he feels the topics haven’t been fully investigated. Overall, Limpert said the workshop on April 13 is about learning about the industry and the government agencies involved as well as energizing the attendees.

“Besides the learning experience, it’s really an energizing experience too. If you are working for good minded folks and working together it’s an incentive to keep on going,” Limpert said.

Jennifer Lewis, 20th district delegate candidate, will be discussing why Augusta County’s water supply is at risk due to its Karst topography and the pipeline route’s proximity to the Staunton Reservoir. Lewis said although stopping the ACP is the number one priority for her race, she has been fighting the pipeline as a citizen for the past five years.

“It’s natural for me to be involved in these anti-pipeline events because I have been such a loud voice in Augusta for the last five years,” Lewis said. The topic she will be discussing is important for everyone in the state because the water from Augusta serves millions in Virginia.

“We are called the head waters because our water goes all over the state. Everyone should be protecting their water, but we have unique responsibility,” Lewis said. She hopes people realize the fight isn’t over and the reason the ACP project is behind schedule is because of neighbors uniting together to keep it from happening. “People from all different backgrounds are coming together to fight this and it’s been the silver lining of this horrible proposed project,” Lewis said.

Other speakers include Richard Averitt, discussing eminent domain and how ‘Quick Take’ violates due process and should be ruled unconstitutional; Lakshmi Fjord discussing the proposed Compressor Station in Buckingham County and the plight of the Union Hill Community; Attorney Rick Cornelius discussing the legal case against the pipeline and where it stands today; and Tom Hadwin discussing why there is no public necessity for the ACP, particularly in the Hampton Roads area.

For Richard Averitt, speaking at the workshop is important to him because he understands how confusing some of the legal terms can be and he believes educating affected landowners and non-affected landowners alike is important. “I am personally upset I didn’t know more sooner. Once you know it you can’t un-know it,” Richard Averitt said.

Over all, Richard Averitt said this workshop and fighting the ACP is a “David and Goliath fight,” but important because it’s about addressing the laws and ordinances that make things like “eminent domain” and “quick take” possible. Quick take in this case is when Dominion Energy takes possession of land for the purpose of building the ACP before compensation is given to the landowner. Eminent domain, on the other hand, is when Dominion Energy takes the land, but an agreed upon compensation is given beforehand.

“It’s not just about beating Atlantic Coast Pipeline, but changing the system that allows this. We need to create allies to change the system that makes this possible,” Richard Averitt said.

Attendees are encouraged to bring something to sit on throughout the day and lunch, although a lunch can be provided with a fee upon registration according to the news release. “We are just super pleased we are able to partner with Friends of Nelson and grateful for anyone who comes out to listen,” Jill Averitt said.