ACP path thru mountains to cross Appalachian Trail, Blue Ridge Parkway, etc.

From an Article by Sarah Vogelsong, Mercury News, October 4, 2019

The U.S. Supreme Court announced this morning that it will review a decision by a federal court of appeals that threw up a major barrier to construction of a 600-mile natural gas pipeline being developed by Dominion Energy.

The order by the court consolidates two cases brought by environmental groups against the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and the U.S. Forest Service. No date has been set for oral hearings.

The cases had been appealed to the nation’s highest court after the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals revoked a permit previously granted by the U.S. Forest Service to the Atlantic Coast Pipeline allowing it to cross the Appalachian Trail.

In a lengthy December 2018 ruling that quoted Dr. Seuss, the 4th Circuit declared that “the Forest Service abdicated its responsibility to preserve national forest resources.”

That finding, said the court, “is particularly informed by the Forest Service’s serious environmental concerns that were suddenly, and mysteriously, assuaged in time to meet a private pipeline company’s deadlines.”

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline, the development of which is being led by Dominion Energy in partnership with Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and Southern Company Gas, disputed the appeals courts’ conclusion in asking the Supreme Court to review the 4th Circuit decision.

The 4th Circuit, ACP claimed, “ignores key provisions in several statutes, contradicts the longstanding views of every agency involved, and converts a special rule about National Park Service lands into an impregnable barrier dividing energy sources west of the (Appalachian) Trail from consumers east of the Trail.”

Furthermore, the pipeline company complained that the ruling “will stymie this and other needed efforts to serve the Eastern seaboard’s growing energy needs.”

The Southern Environmental Law Center, which has argued the environmentalists’ case in court, has disputed the contention that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline is necessary to meet energy demands.

“One issue regulators and the public and decision makers shouldn’t take their eye off is we still don’t have a clear answer on whether the Atlantic Coast Pipeline is a public necessity,” said SELC attorney Greg Buppert.

A statement by Dominion Energy quoted by WBOY called the Supreme Court’s decision to take up the case “a very encouraging sign.” (Dominion officials have said in the past that the company has a policy against speaking with the Mercury.)

“More than 50 other pipelines cross underneath the Appalachian Trail without disturbing its public use. The public interest requires a clear process for the issuance and renewal of permits for such pipelines, and other essential infrastructure. The Atlantic Coast Pipeline should be no different,” the statement read.

Buppert, however, disputed that the court’s decision to review the 4th Circuit ruling was a victory for the pipeline.

“The fact that the court is taking this case up doesn’t mean Dominion wins,” he said. “This issue is not resolved, and it won’t be resolved until the Supreme Court decides this question.”

FERC use of eminent domain violates private property rights?

From an Article by Shayne Dwyer, WSLS News 10, Roanoke, VA, December 26, 2018

ROANOKE, Va – A lawsuit involving the Mountain Valley Pipeline may be headed to our nation’s highest court. Wednesday, Virginia landowners filed a reply arguing their case does have merit to be heard after non-decisions by lower courts. They want to challenge the constitutionality of eminent domain before the United States Supreme Court, arguing the system is flawed and needs re-working. It even has the backing of some conservative legal scholars.

The Natural Gas Act of 1938 is the groundwork for what we now have today, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, otherwise known as FERC. These are the folks that authorized the Mountain Valley Pipeline to use eminent domain to build on private land.

Now, the Supreme Court is deciding whether or not they’ll allow Roanoke lawyers to argue why they say the 80-year-old law is unconstitutional, which could change the rules for pipelines across the country. And in the briefing submitted Wednesday, arguing FERC and the private company should have never been given that power to begin with.

Pipeline fighters have been giving it their all in the last three years, but their biggest accomplishments may be just around the corner. There’s a real possibility the nine justices of the United States Supreme Court may soon be looking into the Mountain Valley Pipeline.

“The case deals with two primary issues, both of which are essential to the preservation of individual liberty,” Gentry Locke lawyer Mia Yugo said. “The first issue is the private non-delegation doctrine and the second issue is the right to private property.”

Yugo, alongside Tom Bondurant and other colleagues at Gentry Locke, are petitioning the United States Supreme Court to hear a case on whether the use of eminent domain for private pipeline companies is legal, arguing 80 years ago, Congress made a mistake with the Natural Gas Act of 1938.

“So just because Congress passes a statute, doesn’t mean that Congress gets it right,” Yugo said. “And when they don’t get it right the individuals or really anybody can go into court, if you have standing, can go into court and challenge that statute as unconstitutional and that’s precisely what we’ve done.”

The Mountain Valley Pipeline running from West Virginia, through Virginia, and onto North Carolina is one of a number of projects planned and under construction across the country. For that reason, local landowners feel this case has national appeal and has the makings of a landmark case affecting all Americans.

“This is about the Constitution, this has relevance for all of us, every single citizen because none of us are safe when this is going on and the court absolutely needs to hear us,” Preserve Montgomery County Chairwoman Lynda Majors said.

In a surprise to some, the Rutherford Institute, a well known conservative think thank, filed a friend of the court brief in favor of the case being heard before the Supreme Court, arguing that the court could do everyone a favor by letting pipeline fighters have their day before the bench.

“Not only is private property at stake, but our constitution, the Fifth Amendment says very clearly that you can not take someone’s property without just compensation, you’re not seeing that here,” Rutherford Institute founder John Whitehead said.

In responses last week, MVP argued administrative reviews took care of this situation at the FERC level and did not respond to our request for comment. Landowners argue that that claim is invalid because FERC should have never been given the power to dole out to MVP in the first place.

“The core question here is whether the Constitution of the United States allows a profit-seeking private entity to take land from an individual landowner for the purposes of private gain, private enterprise or private benefit,” Yugo said.

The Supreme Court is expected to go to conference and make a decision on whether or not it will hear the case in the coming weeks. If accepted, it could be argued sometime in late 2019 or early 2020.

MVP and FERC responses were not required to be filed and pipeline fighters feel the fact that they did respond underscores the fact that this is a national issue. They also remain frustrated with the timeline of all this and delays issues by the court, because every day they wait to argue is another day that construction can continue.

“Nobody else has challenged the Natural Gas Act as an unconstitutional delegation of power and so this makes this particular case not just a local case, but a national case of national importance and it will affect every American in every part of this great country,” Yugo said.

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

WVDEP Launches Webpage Dedicated to Helping Citizens Learn About Pipeline Projects

Detailed maps, transcripts, permit information available on single webpage: http://bit.ly/2Ee7Myj