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.

Welding operation on 40 inch MVP in WV

From an Article by Jessica Farrish, Beckley Register Herald, December 3, 2019

A Texas corporation that has put down roots in Raleigh County is no longer working on a controversial natural gas pipeline in West Virginia, after the pipeline’s major stakeholder unexpectedly cancelled the Texas company’s contract last month.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline is a joint project of EQM Midstream Partners LP, Con Edison Transmissions Inc., NextEra US Gas Assets LLC, WGL Midstream and RGC Midstream.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in October halted construction of the 303-mile interstate pipeline pending the outcome of a series of court challenges launched by environmental groups.

In the last week of November, EQM Midstream Partners LP cancelled a work contract for Trinity Energy Services of Argyle, Texas, Trinity spokesman Bob McKibbon verified Monday. “We’ve all been kind of in the dark with it, as far as not much detail,” McKibbon said Monday. “There’s nobody else talking to us about it.”

Mountain Valley began work on the pipeline in February 2018, with partners anticipating the project would be completed by the end of 2019, at a cost of $3.7 billion. In October, Mountain Valley announced plans to have the pipeline operational by mid-2020, at a cost of $5.3 to $5.5 billion.

The company owns a hangar at Raleigh County Memorial Airport and leases a second one, airport manager Tom Cochran. The company also purchases plane fuel locally.

Cochran said Monday that he is hopeful Trinity will stay in Raleigh County. “We appreciate the business that they have offered to us and not only the airport but our community,” said Cochran. “This is going to be felt across the county.

The pipeline is set to cut across 600 streams and more than 400 wetlands along its proposed path from northwestern West Virginia to southern Virginia.

The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) had cited Trinity for water safety violation rules in May 2018, according to a report by The Gazette-Mail.

According to the WVDEP complaint, Trinity was cited for unsatisfactory perimeter control and failure to install devices in a timely manner at four sites (Slate Run Road, Route 219 Crossing, “Mr Law’s field” and War Ridge Road) in Wetzel County. Receiving streams were the Ohio River, Fishing Creek, North Fork and Mobley Run, according to the WVDEP complaint.

Investors had planned for Mountain Valley to be finished by the fourth quarter of 2019, but work was temporarily ceased in October by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), due to federal agencies suspending three key sets of permits that is necessary for the project.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is currently considering whether to re-issue permits that would allow the pipeline to cross more than 1,000 streams in West Virginia and Virginia. Overseen by FERC, the interstate pipeline cuts through 11 state counties, including Fayette, Greenbrier, Nicholas, Summers and Monroe counties, and six Virginia counties. Citizens along its route, including environmental groups, have opposed construction.

In October, FERC ordered all construction to stop immediately while legal challenges are being decided by judges. The pipeline’s developers in October said that it is 90 percent complete but has work ahead in sensitive areas.

Diana Charletta, president and chief operating officer of EQM Midstream Partners, the operator of MVP, acknowledged schedule delays and cost overruns. “We have encountered unforeseen development challenges; however, we continue to make progress towards ultimate completion,” Charletta stated in October.

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

MVP pipeline opponents say erosion controls are inadequate

By Joe Dashiell, WSHV, Harrisonburg, VA, November 20, 2019

ROANOKE, Va. (WDBJ) — Opponents of the Mountain Valley Pipeline say sediment and erosion controls approved by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality are not protecting water and endangered species.

During a Roanoke news conference they cited conditions near Yellow Finch Lane in Montgomery County. They said citizen monitors documented problems there in the days after the VA-DEQ approved the controls.

“This kind of a project cannot be built without causing both acute and chronic long-term harm to our water resources,” said pipeline opponent Tammy Belinsky.

Pipelines, compressors, flares, leaks, fires, natural gas are issues

From an Opinion Article by Adam Carlesco, The Hill, October 24, 2019

As the agency responsible for permitting interstate natural gas pipelines and electric transmission, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is the gatekeeper of America’s transition to a carbon-free future — a future desperately needed, given the dire warnings the global scientific community has issued concerning climate change. Which is why it is so astonishing that the agency does not even consider the climate impacts of the projects that it approves.

Right now, FERC has two unfilled seats, following the passing of former Chairman Kevin McIntyre and the departure of Obama nominee Cheryl LaFleur. But the Trump administration appears determined to transform the historically bipartisan commission into a partisan vehicle to serve the interests of fossil fuel companies. With the nomination of James Danly, FERC will be made up of three Republican appointees and an intentionally empty seat, bucking a decades-long trend of appointing Republican and Democratic commissioners together.

Given this partisan reality, it is perhaps no surprise that FERC has begun to refuse to abide by binding judicial decrees requiring the agency to adequately assess the climate impacts of its permitting before approval. It goes without saying that the next FERC commissioner must be someone who will comply with these judicial directives.

The courts are very clear. In its 2017 decision, Sierra Club v. FERC (Sabal Trail), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit stated that since downstream emissions are indirect effects of permitting, the commission must assess all reasonably foreseeable emissions and climate impacts resulting from its approval of expanded natural gas pipeline infrastructure. By refusing to review the effects of these emissions, FERC failed to adequately balance “the public benefits against the adverse effects” of natural gas pipelines — effectively putting a finger on the scale in favor of locking America into decades of fossil fuel dependence.

Despite this, FERC continues to turn a blind eye to the looming climate crisis. This disregard was on display in recent litigation, dismissed on procedural grounds by the D.C. Circuit, brought about because FERC, in an order on a single project, introduced a sweeping new policy that would no longer evaluate greenhouse gas emissions upstream (that is, methane emissions from increased fracking facilitated by expanded pipeline capacity) or downstream (the combustion of natural gas for electric generation) from pipeline projects.

That lawsuit explained that FERC violated several federal laws by shirking its responsibility to consider emissions facilitated by expanded pipeline capacity during its environmental review, and that the agency decreed that its entire environmental review policy has changed — an action in clear violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires such significant policies to be changed through a transparent notice and comment rulemaking that includes public participation.

FERC has continued this radical policy shift by refusing to assess upstream and downstream emissions in subsequent environmental reviews, and segmenting larger infrastructure buildouts so that each smaller section appears as though they result in no environmental impact.

This is a dangerous path. Not only does it show a flagrant violation of federal law by the commission, it demonstrates a willful disregard of the grave repercussions of continued fossil fuel extraction and combustion outlined in the federal government’s own research — including severe threats to the food system, increased scarcity of fresh water, and potential disruptions of the very fossil fuel supply chain that FERC seeks to expand through its faulty project review process.

It is vitally important that the Senate refuse the Trump administration’s partisan nomination of Danly, and instead confirm a commissioner who will uphold statutory environmental review requirements and the directives of the federal judiciary. The stakes could not be higher, and the wrong choice to fill out this commission could have wide-reaching detrimental impacts.

Now is the time to begin a just transition to a carbon neutral society; intelligent FERC policy must foster that transition.

>>> Adam Carlesco is a climate and energy attorney with Food & Water Justice, the legal division of Food & Water Watch, which works for corporate and government accountability.

Pipelines disturb neighborhoods, families, farms & forests

Residents look to township codes to block Sunoco pipeline

Photo: Workers install 20-inch epoxy-coated pipes on the Mariner East 2 pipeline in the rolling hills of Washington County, Pa., February 16, 2017. They can lay 2,000 to 3,000 feet per day.

DPMC at http://pipelineupdate.org

Roanoke Times Op-Ed: Governor’s Role in Pipeline Review

David Sligh says Virginia’s governor can and must protect us from bad pipeline projects

From the Opinion-Editorial by David Sligh, Roanoke Times, February 23, 2017

David Sligh is conservation director for Wild Virginia, an investigator for the Dominion Pipeline Monitoring Coalition, an environmental attorney, and a former senior engineer at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. He lives in Charlottesville.

Contrary to assertions in a February 13th Roanoke Times editorial (“Showmanship”), Virginia’s governor will play a decisive role in determining whether major interstate natural gas pipelines can be built across our state. To play that role correctly, the governor must do two things: make certain the regulatory process for state environmental review is complete and open to the public and empower environmental regulators to reject the projects unless they can ensure full protection of Virginia’s waters. The evidence currently in the public record makes approval impossible for both pipelines.

An overriding problem with the Times’ editorial is the assertion that “[t]he agency that will determine whether the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and Mountain Valley Pipeline go forward is a federal one, not a state one.” This claim, in that it denies Virginia’s authority to reject these pipelines and the governor’s legitimate role, is patently false. Congress explicitly reserved states’ authorities to veto federally-permitted projects, to protect state waters. That authority comes from section 401 of the Clean Water Act, which empowers states to grant or deny a “water quality certification” and forbids federal approval without that certification.

The editorial implied that “environmentalists” are naive or ignorant in being “convinced an anti-pipeline governor could still thwart the pipelines by directing the Department of Environmental Quality to withhold certain permits by find[sic] the pipelines violate the Clean Water Act.” I am neither naive nor ignorant about these matters, having worked on them for more than 30 years, as a VA-DEQ regulator and an attorney working with citizens in 10 states and the District of Columbia.

I do not expect and would never propose that a governor “direct” the VA-DEQ to do anything that’s not supported by science and law but the governor cannot be divorced from the regulatory process. The governor leads the executive branch and is responsible for the soundness of state agency decisions.

The Times’ editorial implied that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo improperly ordered environmental regulators to reject a 401 certification for a pipeline. The evidence does not support that implication nor are pipeline company claims that the decision was “arbitrary and capricious” supportable.

In reviewing the New York Department of Environmental Conservation’s decision denying 401 approval for the Constitution pipeline, one finds that the agency cited many areas where the applicant failed or refused to provide the necessary data and analyses or prove water quality standards would be upheld. Many other cases exist where states rejected 401 certifications, for a wide variety of federally-licensed projects. One example pertinent here is Connecticut’s denial of a 401 certification for the Islander East Pipeline, which the federal appeals court upheld.

It is important to note that many of the deficiencies in information and water quality problems cited by the New York DEC apply for both the ACP and MVP. The Virginia DEQ’s own comments on the draft environmental impact statement for the MVP contain dozens of areas in which the company has failed to provide necessary data and where valid impact analyses are missing. Likewise, the U.S. EPA, the Forest Service, and citizens have identified a large body of missing or inaccurate information for MVP.

Citizens have, for many months, sought assurances from Governor Terry McAuliffe and his top officials that the state would conduct a full and open regulatory review for each of these pipelines. We have yet to obtain those assurances. The state must conduct individual section 401 reviews, with public involvement, for each pipeline but VA-DEQ staff indicated this may not happen.

Instead, agency employees said these pipelines might be covered under blanket approvals issued for a category of small projects with minimal impacts. Such an approach would be illegal and we will not accept it. Neither should the governor. VA-DEQ’s requests for sufficient information and adequate protections for MVP cannot remain mere suggestions or requests for proper regulation by FERC. They must become legal mandates from the VA-DEQ.

I again call on Governor McAuliffe to commit to full, public reviews for both ACP and MVP. I make the same call to all those asking to be Virginia’s next governor, because the timeline for decision may well extend into the next administration. I urge all other public officials, all concerned citizens, and The Roanoke Times editorial board to join in this call. I thank Tom Perriello for supporting a fair and open process and for recognizing the enormous harms these pipelines would impose on Virginia’s environment and its people.

Look also for more Pipeline Update information.

Chesapeake Climate Action Network

Over 16,000 Citizens Demand Unbiased Review of Proposed Fracked Gas MVP Pipeline

Article from the Press Room, Appalachian Voices, 12/22/16

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Over the past three months, more than 16,000 people have sent comments or signed petitions to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) demanding the agency do a thorough, accurate and unbiased review of the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline, and ultimately reject the project. Local groups and environmental organizations submitted hundreds of detailed comments to FERC outlining numerous reasons finding the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) substantially lacking information for meaningful review. FERC’s deadline for public comment is today.

Just yesterday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, an official “cooperating agency” during the project review, filed its comments with FERC, finding the environmental review “incomplete” and “insufficient,” and said there are hazards that “have not been fully assessed.”

The proposed pipeline passes through important habitat in the Jefferson National Forest and would have devastating impacts on the New River Valley and surrounding areas. There are many substantial deficiencies in the DEIS that must be corrected through the issuance of a completely revised DEIS, including the failure to fully evaluate the need for the MVP and the failure to fully evaluate the impacts to water resources, wetlands, cultural resources, threatened and endangered species, and climate change implications. Correcting these deficiencies will require significant new analysis and the incorporation of high quality and accurate information regarding MVP impacts.

Legal and environmental experts have filed review comments of the nearly 2,600-page document that identified major gaps in FERC’s analysis, including:

• Failure to identify, consider, and analyze all reasonable alternatives. The DEIS fails to consider alternative routes and options, including a “no action” alternative, as required by the National Environmental Protection Act. The Council on Environmental Quality refers to the alternatives analysis section as the “heart of the EIS”.
• Failure to consider climate change impacts. FERC does not analyze the significance of the total annual greenhouse gas emissions in any meaningful way.
• Failure to address the need for the MVP. Despite the clear requirement to discuss the need for the MVP project in the DEIS, FERC says that it will not address project need until after the environmental analysis is over.
• Failure to provide adequate environmental information. The DEIS lacks sufficient information about the MVP and its potential environmental impacts on a wide variety of resources, including water resources, wetlands, cultural resources, threatened and endangered species, and climate change implications.

In addition to significant flaws, there is a significant amount of information regarding other environmental impacts that is missing from the DEIS that will not be provided by the applicants in a manner that facilitates meaningful public disclosure and participation.

David Sligh, Conservation Director, Wild Virginia, 434-964-7455, davidwsligh@yahoo.com
“FERC must revise the draft EIS to correct gross deficiencies in information and flawed analyses. Wild Virginia calls on the federal Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service to insist on a new and adequate DEIS from FERC, or to fulfill their legal duties and prepare their own.”

Ben Luckett, Senior Attorney, Appalachian Mountain Advocates, 304-645-0125, bluckett@appalmad.org
“We’re shocked the FERC has continued to disregard its federal duties and fast track this project — especially given major gaps in the agency’s understanding of the pipeline’s impacts, as well as any need for it in the first place. FERC has the extraordinary power to allow MVP to take private property for its shareholders’ own private gain. Just because the job of evaluating the impacts of such a massive project is difficult doesn’t mean that FERC may cut corners and ignore its important duty to the public. FERC should not proceed forward, sacrificing family land and other private property, without fully analyzing this destructive and unnecessary pipeline.”

Lara Mack, Virginia Field Organizer, Appalachian Voices, 540-246-9720, lara@appovices.org
“FERC woefully underestimated the impacts the Mountain Valley Pipeline will have on the Appalachian mountains, wildlife habitat, water resources, and communities. If FERC did it’s job correctly, with the public interest in mind, it would see this project for what it is — a dangerous boondoggle.”

Andrew Downs, Regional Director, Appalachian Trail Conservancy, 540-904-4354, adowns@appalachiantrail.org
“Through a deficient level of planning and environmental impact assessment, the MVP project represents a threat not only to the purpose and values of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail but, by undermining the United States Forest Services’ protection of the AT, it represents a fundamental and existential threat to the entire National Trails System”

Anne Havemann, General Counsel, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, 240-396-1984, anne@chesapeakeclimate.org
“FERC’s draft environmental review utterly ignores the pipeline’s full impacts on the climate. The limited–and opaque–review fails to fully account for methane pollution from increased fracking that the pipeline would trigger, from leakage along the route, and from the ultimate burning of the gas. The pipeline would fail the White House’s climate test. FERC must revise its review to include the pipeline’s full lifecycle of climate pollution, and consider clean energy alternatives.”

Laurie Ardison, POWHR Co-Chair, Monroe County, WV 304-646-8339
ikeandash@yahoo.com
Ellen Darden, POWHR Co-Chair, Montgomery County, Va. 540-230-1091
greennrv.ellen@gmail.com
“The people of Appalachia stand united in an unprecedented interstate coalition: Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights (POWHR), to make clear to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the United States Forest Service, the US Army Corp of Engineers, US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land Management that Mountain Valley Pipeline has failed to establish a need for this destructive project.

FERC’s DEIS summarily ignores the detailed, credentialed hydrogeologic, economic, historical preservation and cultural attachment research submitted by the POWHR coalition and hundreds of landowners opposed to MVP. Rather than interfering and obstructing public opposition to MVP, FERC must review the entire body of scientific research submitted and reject this project.”

Kirk A Bowers, PE, Pipelines Campaign Coordinator, VA Chapter, Sierra Club, 434-296-8673, kirk.bowers@sierraclub.org
“The Draft EIS is blatantly biased. It makes sweeping unsubstantiated claims of the need for the pipeline while dismissing any and all potential adverse effects. The applicant provides cursory responses to data requests in a perfunctory manner without analyses or serious consideration of the adverse effects of the proposed pipeline. The applicant has failed to make reasonable efforts to avoid and minimize adverse effects on communities, landowners and ecosystems impacted by the proposed pipeline. In light of the incompetent and unprofessional manner in which the application has been handled by MVP LLC, it is incumbent on FERC to reject the application.”

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

Pipeline Fires & Explosions Very Dangerous

Problem(s) with Pipelines: An Anthology

From an Article by David Manthos, SkyTruth, December 21, 2016

On Sunday, Dec. 4 the Army Corps of Engineers issued a decision which will again delay construction of  the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). The ruling was cheered by water protectors entrenched in the path of the pipeline at the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. These representatives of indigenous nations, environmental activists, veterans, and many other groups have been resisting pressure from private security and law enforcement officers from at least 76 different state and federal agencies or departments, as well as enduring sub-zero blizzard conditions. However, the ruling does not definitively end the controversy, it only delays the decision until further environmental impact studies are conducted.

Unfortunately the choices before the Army Corps appear to be limited, given the fact that as much as 87% of the North Dakota portion of the pipeline is already complete, and nearly 50% of the almost $3.8 billion dollar project is completed and/or in the final stages of cleanup and reclamation. Furthermore, any further environmental impact study and public comment for the Army Corps could easily hand the decison over to Trump Administration which has expressed support the pipeline (despite the obvious conflict of interest with the President-Elect owning stock in several of the key companies involved).  So while hands are wrung and ink is spilled on the specifics of this pipeline, let’s take a look at why people around the world are rallying  in opposition to ANY new pipelines.

The short answer is 1) accidents happen, and 2) they are multi-million dollar investment projects which further lock us into years, even decades, of fossil fuel extraction and emissions.

You can explore this map of pipeline spills and releases from our friends at FracTracker, but what exactly do some of these incidents look like on the ground and in the water? Here are some of the most egregious cases from the past decade.

Western North Dakota, near Belfield – December 5, 2016: Just this month, less than 150 miles from Oceti Sakowin Camp, a leak was discovered in the Belle Fourche pipeline. An estimated 176,000 gallons leaked and crews are reportedly testing whether or not they can burn some of the spilled oil to stop further spread of the oil.

As of Dec. 15, ten days after the spill was discovered, less than 1/3rd of the oil had been recovered. But this is the not the first time that True Companies, the pipeline operator, has been in the news.

Yellowstone River, northeastern Wyoming – January 17, 2015: True Company/Bridger Pipeline’s Poplar oil line leaked 32,000 gallons of oil into the Yellowstone River, a tributary of the Missouri River (and by extension, upstream of Standing Rock). The pipeline was supposed to be buried eight feet beneath the river bed, but after the spill investigators discovered that the pipeline had become completely exposed. And it wouldn’t be the first time for the Yellowstone River. In July 2013, an Exxon pipeline also leaked 63,000 gallons of oil directly into a different section of the river when it too became exposed and was damaged by flood debris.

Oil is hard enough to remove from water, but what about when that oil sinks?

Kalamazoo River, Michigan – July 25, 2010: In south-central Michigan a thirty-inch pipeline carrying diluted bitumen from Canada blew a six-foot gash along a corroded seam, releasing 843,000 gallons of heavy oil product into the Kalamazoo River. Canadian energy transporter Enbridge, the operator of the pipeline, would ultimately be deemed responsible for the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history, with a U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) official comparing the company’s spill response to the “Keystone Cops.”

Fittingly, the Enbridge spill quickly became Exhibit A in the fight against the Keystone XL pipeline which was ultimately rejected by President Obama in 2015. While scientists and activists debated whether or not tar sands bitumen diluted for transport was more corrosive to pipelines than regular oil,  another major tar sands pipeline would make headlines.

Mayflower, Arkansas – March 29, 2013: In a quiet Arkansas suburb, Exxon Mobil’s Pegasus pipeline burst, spilling an estimated 210,000 gallons of tar sands bitumen through a residential subdivision and into nearby Lake Conway. With assistance the Arkansas Chapter of Sierra Club, we used satellite imagery taken before and after the disaster to document the impact on the community and nearby public lands.

But it is not just the United States concerned about new oil pipelines. Our neighbors in Canada have also had their fair share of pipeline accidents and have their own slate of new pipeline projects concerning them.

Burnaby, British Columbia –July 24, 2007 : On a warm summer afternoon in British Columbia, a contractor’s backhoe struck the Transmountain Pipeline near Westridge, releasing a gusher of over 59,000 gallons of crude oil into a residential neighborhood. But in 2016, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently approved Kinder Morgan’s plans to expand the Transmountain Pipeline, while making moves to block Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline.

In addition to spills on land, locals are deeply concerned about the risk of oil spills from increased oil tanker traffic along the coasts. Those concerns were brought back to the fore when a tug boat, the Nathan E. Stewart, ran aground near Bella Bella, B.C. while pushing an empty fuel barge. Even without any cargo in the barge, fuel and hydraulic fluids from the tug contaminated the shoreline and shellfish beds while it took over a month to extract the Stewart from its watery resting place.

These spills have all focused on oil pipelines, but natural gas and refined petroluem pipelines pose their own unique threat.

Sissonville, West Virginia – December 11, 2012: Here in the Mountain State, an aging 20-inch transmission line exploded a few years ago, enveloping Interstate 77 in a wall of flames and destroying several homes. Fortunately there were no fatalities. The pipeline was constructed in the 1960’s.

Salem Township, Pennsylvania – April 29, 2016: More recently, a thirty-inch gas transmission line in western Pennsylvania exploded, destroying a house and hospitalizing a 26-year-old with third-degree burns over 75% of his body. The Spectra Energy transmission line was installed in the 1980’s.

Shelby County, Alabama – Oct. 31, 2016: An excavator conducting repairs from a prior incident on the Colonial Pipeline struck the massive gasoline transmission line, causing a fiery explosion and ultimately killing two. The Colonial Pipeline provides the East Coast with 40% of the gasoline consumed and is the largest petroleum distribution system in the U.S.

As we have published before, even the Obama Administration has fallen short in addressing serious concerns surrounding pipeline safety. For all of the claims that modern pipelines will be safe and loaded with spill-prevention tech, we’ve yet to see clear evidence of this technology stopping major spills. Even in the Gulf of Mexico, Shell recently lost 90,000 gallons of oil from a subsea pipeline but the person credited with discovering it was not the pipeline operator, but a helicopter pilot who just happened to be passing by.

Even assuming that we could put an end to this litany of disasters, many people are standing up to pipelines because each new project is a multi-million dollar commitment to perpetuate further fossil fuel extraction and consumption for decades to come. In some states and regions, New England for example, companies have proposed passing the construction costs on to ratepayers, even those who don’t consume the gas directly.  If this subject concerns you, we urge you to investigate what kind of pipeline proposals may be in the works in your region. Here are just a few we are aware of:

Mountain Valley Pipeline – West Virginia, Virginia. Public Comments due Thursday, Dec. 22, 2016

Mountaineer Gas – Washington Co., Maryland; Morgan, Berkeley, and Jefferson County, West Virginia: More info on public comments and meetings – Eastern Panhandle Protectors

Trans Mountain Pipeline – British Columbia, Canada.

Pacific Connector LNG – Oregon. More info on the pipeline and Jordan Cove LNG terminal at Citizens Against LNG.

Rover Pipeline – Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan. More info from Ohio River Citizens’ Alliance

Know of other pipeline projects that should be listed here? Shoot us an email: info@skytruth.org

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

Pipelines Damage Streams & Forests

Join us next Thursday evening, September 29th,  Ireland Community Building

The next step for the Mountain Valley Pipeline was the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, or DEIS. This document, released on September 16, explains the environmental impacts of building the pipeline. The impact statement’s 90-day public comment period is the key window during which we can point out the weaknesses of the draft and express just how great of a threat building the pipeline is to our communities and the environment.

We’ll review information about the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (the agency that approves inter-state pipelines), the DEIS, as well as discuss specific environmental and community threats including property rights and property values, hydrology and water issues, and historical and cultural resources.

Thursday’s meeting will be at the Ireland Community Building in Ireland, WV (from Route 19 turn onto Wildcat Road) at 6:30 pm. Sign up now. 

This Mountain Valley Pipeline Public Meeting relates to Nicholas, Webster, Braxton, Lewis, Doddridge, Harrison, and Wetzel Counties.

Lawyers will be present to answer questions on a range of topics, including:

Public Comment Period Still Open, -Landowner legal rights, -Future Land Use, -Blast zone, -Impact radius, -Property Values, -Public health and safety issues, -Historical and cultural resources, -Hydrology/water issues, -Your concerns and next steps, -Q & A.

>  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >

Monitor Water Quality Along the Proposed Mountaineer Express Pipeline Route

Streams are at risk from the development of natural gas pipelines. That’s why we’re training volunteers, as part of the WV-VA Water Quality Monitoring Program, to effectively monitor water quality along proposed pipeline routes before, during and after potential pipeline construction.

The program will be hosting a training in partnership with Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition (OVEC) and WV Highlands Conservancy at Coonskin Park, in Charleston, WV on Sunday, October 16. Call 304-637-7201 to learn more about this opportunity.

What: Natural Gas Pipeline Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Training
When: Sunday, October 16, 1:00pm – 6:00pm
Where: Coonskin Park Tennis Center – Charleston, WV

If you are interested in attending the training, please fill out the application here. Please apply by Monday, October 10. Directions to the training session and an agenda will be provided the week of the training.

The WV-VA Water Quality Monitoring Program is a program developed by Trout Unlimited that is being implemented by Trout Unlimited and WV Rivers to train volunteers to monitor coldwater streams for impacts from shale gas and pipeline related development and other sources of non-point source pollution. Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition and WV Highlands Conservancy have partnered with TU and WV Rivers to organize this training session.

For more information contact West Virginia Rivers Coalition:

www.wvrivers.org - (304) 637-7201

>  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >

 WV-DEP to Hold Public Meeting

In response to comments concerning the air permit applications for Columbia Gas Transmission Sherwood Compressor Station, there will be a public meeting held on October 13, 2016.  Details concerning the public meeting can be found below:

The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection’s Division of Air Quality (DAQ) will hold a public meeting on Thursday, October 13, 2016, to provide information regarding Columbia Gas Transmission LLC’s air quality permit application for the Sherwood Compressor Station.  Columbia Gas Transmission has proposed to construct and operate a natural gas compressor station near Smithburg in Doddridge County.

The public meeting will be held at the Doddridge County Senior Citizens Center, 403 East Main Street, West Union, West Virginia, at 6 p.m.  Representatives from the DAQ will conduct the meeting regarding the construction application submitted by Columbia Gas Transmission on May 3, 2016.

The application, engineering evaluation/fact sheet and draft permit can be downloaded at:

http://www.dep.wv.gov/daq/Pages/NSRPermitsforReview.aspx

Copies are also available for public inspection during normal business hours at the following location:

 ·    West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street, SE, Charleston, WV  25304; telephone 304/926-0499, extension 1250.

 Comments on the proposed application will be accepted until the end of the public meeting.  All written comments should be addressed to Jerry Williams, WVDEP – DAQ, 601 57th Street, SE, Charleston, WV 25304; or Jerry.Williams@wv.gov.  Please include the applicant’s name and permit application number — Columbia Gas Transmission LLC, Sherwood Compressor Station, R13-3313 — along with your name, return address and daytime telephone number.  Please also indicate any organization on behalf of which your comments are submitted.

The Class I legal ad noticing this meeting will be published in the Doddridge Independent on September 30^th and the Herald Record on October 4^th.  Please let me know if you have further questions.

 Jerry Williams, P.E., Engineer, WVDEP – Division of Air Quality

601 57^th Street, SE, Charleston, WV  25304

(304) 926-0499 ext. 1223,   jerry.williams@wv.gov

WV Residents Concerned About Pipelines --- www.pipelineupdate.org

From: Rick Webb, Nelson County, VA
Sent: August 22, 2016
To: Pipeline Contacts and Affected Persons
Subject: Guidance for Monitoring Water Supplies Threatened by Pipeline Development

The Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance (ABRA) has released a report for landowners and water providers concerned about the potential impacts of pipeline development on water supplies:
GUIDANCE FOR MONITORING EFFECTS OF GAS PIPELINE DEVELOPMENT ON SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES

The report was prepared by Downstream Strategies, a West Virginia-based environmental consulting firm. Funding was provided by ABRA member groups and individual contributors.

Although the developers of the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) and Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) indicate that they will monitor the quality and quantity of water supply springs and wells, the information they have provided about monitoring plans and acceptance of responsibility for water supply damage is incomplete.

The new report provides information concerning:
• Risks, potential impacts, and other water supply issues related to pipeline development;
• Collection of the data that will be needed to hold pipeline developers responsible for harm to water supplies;
• Methods for establishing baseline information on water quantity and quality and for long-term monitoring to detect change; and
• Laboratories and consultants that can conduct monitoring and analysis.

For landowners, the guide describes a tiered approach to water supply monitoring that incorporates collection of defensible data by water resource professionals and landowner collection of screening or early-detection data.

For water providers, a primary benefit of the guide is to document likely contaminants and the potential impacts to source water from pipeline development that may affect their treatment processes or finished (post-treatment) drinking water distributed to customers.
Although some of the information in this report is specific to the MVP and ACP pipelines, the guidelines for monitoring water resources is applicable to any landowners and water providers who may be impacted by pipeline development.

ABRA is a coalition of 50 organizations concerned about the natural gas pipeline that Dominion Resources and its partner companies have proposed to build through portions of West Virginia and Virginia.
Organizational contributors to the water supply monitoring guidance project include:  Dominion Pipeline Monitoring Coalition, Cowpasture River Preservation Association, Friends of Nelson, Greenbrier River Watershed Association, Highlanders for Responsible Development, West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, and West Virginia Rivers Coalition.

Rick Webb, Coordinator
Dominion Pipeline Monitoring Coalition
rwebb.dpmc@gmail.com
540-468-2881 h, 540-290-0913 c

The Oil & Gas Threat Map for West Virginia

The Threat Map for West Virginia is here:

http://oilandgasthreatmap.com/threat-map/west-virginia/

Learn How To use the maps.

Are there standards that control methane emitted from existing oil and gas facilities (the facilities on the Threat Map)?

• In West Virginia, no.
• At the federal level, no. But the Environmental Protection Agency is conducting an Information Collection Request that could lead to standards.

Are there standards that control methane emitted from new or modified oil and gas facilities emitting this pollution?

• In West Virginia, no.
• At the federal level, yes. On June 3rd, 2016, the Environmental Protect Agency published standards that limit pollution from new and modified facilities.

What can I do to better protect my community?

Share the Oil & Gas Threat Map on Facebook and Twitter

The best way to make change is to make more people aware that there’s a problem that needs fixing.

Call President Obama at 202-456-1111!

Tell him that:

• People living with oil and gas pollution now need help ASAP; and
• He needs to direct the Environmental Protection Agency to create new standards to cut methane and associated toxic air pollution from the 1.2 million existing oil and gas facilities around the United States.

For more information about efforts to protect the public, visit: methanefacts.org

Communities SHARE THEIR STORY and Take Action!

See also: http://oilandgasthreatmap.com/threat-map/west-virginia/

• >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >

<<< Threat Maps for the Various States >>>

Threat Maps for the Various States of the United States

• 1,193,118 ACTIVE OIL & GAS WELLS, COMPRESSORS AND PROCESSORS
• 12.4 MILLION PEOPLE LIVE IN THE THREAT RADIUS
• 238 COUNTIES EXCEED EPA’S CANCER RISK LEVEL OF CONCERN
• 11,543 SCHOOLS ARE IN THE THREAT RADIUS
• 639 MEDICAL FACILITIES ARE IN THE THREAT RADIUS
• 184,578 SQ. MILES ARE COVERED BY THE THREAT RADIUS

The Oil & Gas Threat Maps shows us that oil and gas air pollution isn’t someone else’s problem, it’s everyone’s problem.