Category: Press Releases

Citizens turn to states to scrutinize environmental impacts

 
The Trump administration’s final environmental report issued today for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, which would carry fracked-gas through West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina, utterly fails to independently assess whether the project is even needed. This is the core issue upon which all other considerations of the controversial project are based, says a coalition of community groups and legal and technical experts.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relies solely on the project developer’s claims of need for the 600-mile, $5.2 billion pipeline, which would yield substantial profit for Dominion Energy and the other private companies behind the project, while the public would be saddled with the financial, environmental and health risks.
“FERC’s action is an affront to American democracy, ignoring the thousands of citizens who participated in the public comment process and handing over the private property rights of hundreds of families to corporate interests.  As landowners and business leaders, as ratepayers and conservationists, as parents and grandparents, we insist that the state agencies serve the public trust and rigorously examine the impacts of this pipeline in full view of the public,” says Lew Freeman, a Highland County resident and executive director of  the Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance. The coalition comprises 52 local community groups and other organizations in Virginia and West Virginia.
FERC has authority to grant the power of eminent domain for interstate projects, but by law must first determine that the projects serve the public interest. The agency’s Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline fails to do so, says the alliance, whose member groups represent thousands of citizens, including hundreds of families along the pipeline route who are facing the taking of their land against their will.
The alliance points to numerous studies in recent years showing that the gas and utility sector is overbuilding natural gas infrastructure and that electricity demand is projected to grow much less than the pipeline developer’s inflated projections. These analyses are ignored in the impact statement.
The coalition also condemns the agency for glossing over the profound and permanent harm to water resources and drinking water supplies, forest ecosystems, wildlife and endangered species habitat, historic sites, agricultural resources, public lands including the Appalachian Trail and Blue Ridge Parkway, and local economies. The pipeline would also significantly worsen climate change impacts in the region due to the greenhouse gas emissions of drilling, producing, transporting and burning natural gas.   
“Regardless of FERC’s decision, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline is not a done deal. Far from it,” says Freeman. “State leaders in Virginia, West Virginia and North Carolina will soon decide whether to grant water quality permits for the project. We call upon each state to give this project the environmental scrutiny it requires, and that they are obligated to do.”
A significant red flag for the coalition is FERC’s reliance on Dominion’s pledges to mitigate harm to water resources rather than requiring the company to provide upfront detailed plans to be shared with the public prior to granting federal certification and the power of eminent domain. The coalition has repeatedly expressed concerns that the standard control measures are insufficient to protect water resources given the scale of the pipeline proposal and the steep and highly erodible mountainsides that must be excavated during construction.
Coalition members are now concerned that state environmental agencies are similarly planning to approve the Atlantic Coast Pipeline before there is a thorough and public vetting of detailed water pollution prevention plans.
In Virginia, in particular, the Department of Environmental Quality has stated it will review those plans (stormwater management and erosion and sediment control plans) separately from its review under the Clean Water Act Section 401. As a result, the State Water Control Board’s decision whether to certify that construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline will not harm state waters will not be informed by the essential details that the erosion and runoff control plans should provide.
Key points from the Final Environmental Impact Statement:

• Need: FERC fails to make an independent assessment of the need for the ACP, instead relying on the developer’s claims that the project should be built. In doing so, it short circuits any meaningful consideration of the alternatives that could avoid or minimize the harm caused by this project.
• Public lands. The ACP would cross 21 miles of national forest, destroying 430 acres and threatening the survival of seven federally listed species and native brook trout. The project would be a disaster for the mountain and forest headwaters of the Potomac and James rivers.

• Public process. The FEIS fails to correct or address the numerous, substantial defects in the draft EIS that government agencies and citizens alike pointed out during the public comment period. In addition, the final document fails to incorporate significant new information that has come to light since the end of the public comment period on April 6, including more than 400 pages submitted in May.
• Climate: The FEIS continues to ignore the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of the project. It entirely fails to consider emissions from fracking that this massive pipeline would trigger and seriously discounts the emissions from burning the natural gas.
• Environmental justice: The FEIS notes that the Buckingham Compressor Station #2 could have serious health and safety impacts on three census tracts within one mile with predominantly low-income, minority populations, yet claims the impacts would be temporary or mitigated without adequately detailing the mitigation plans or considering any impact to safety or property values in those communities.
• Forests: Operation of the ACP (and the companion “Supply Header Project”) would have long-term or permanent effects on about 3,456 acres, including about 2,744 acres of upland forest (deciduous, coniferous and mixed). The recovery time for a closed canopy of mature forest and wildlife habitat could take up to a century or more.
• Mountain slopes: The project would cross more than 100 miles of slopes greater than 20 percent. Constructing the pipeline and access roads in steep terrain or areas prone to landslide increases the potential for landslides to occur.
• Ridgetop removal: The FEIS does not require Dominion to make any changes to minimize ridgetop removal, which would impact approximately 38 miles of ridgetop and result in 247,000 trips by large dump trucks to remove the overburden.

• Alternatives: The FEIS completely fails to even consider renewable energy as an alternative to this project.

 
 
********
The Allegheny Blue-Ridge Alliance  is a coalition of 52 organizations in Virginia and West Virginia, founded in September 2014, that opposes the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline because of the ecological and economic harm it would cause the affected region, communities and landowners.  www.abralliance.org
 

Following The Lead Of Standing Rock Protesters, Groups Launch First Of Its Kind Protest Encampment To Urge Gov. Hogan To Reject TransCanada’s Fracked-Gas Pipeline

CLEAR SPRING, MD– On June 30, a coalition of area citizens, elected officials, and environmental advocates announced the launch of a protest encampment to stop TransCanada’s proposed pipeline under the Potomac River. This encampment is the first of its kind in Maryland history to protest fossil fuels. The proposed pipeline would threaten millions of residents in Maryland, Virginia and Washington, D.C. who rely on the Potomac river for drinking water. The protesters are camping out to draw attention to the issue and demand Maryland Governor Larry Hogan reject the permit required for construction of this pipeline.
The encampment, titled “Standing Rock to Hancock: Camp Out to Stop the Potomac Pipeline,” will take place throughout the summer with camp outs along the C&O canal near Hancock, Maryland. The coalition intends to draw attention to the many concerned citizens, environmental advocacy groups, and elected officials who are opposed to endangering drinking water for a pipeline that won’t benefit Maryland citizens.
TransCanada’s proposed Eastern Panhandle Expansion project would transport fracked gas from Pennsylvania to West Virginia by way of Maryland underneath the Potomac River and C&O Canal. The encampment will take place at McCoy’s Ferry, near the pipeline’s proposed route.
“Clean energy is where our nation needs to be. This isn’t a partisan issue, it’s about protecting our environment, national security, economic security and public health,” said Senator Cardin, senior member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “Investment in clean energy is booming and Congress has to act swiftly to support this effort or risk hurting the United States financially and damaging our global reputation as a clean energy innovator.”
“Fracked gas and the supporting infrastructure has no long term benefits to the State of Maryland, and this pipeline project puts an enormous amount of risk on Maryland residents,” said Brent Walls, Upper Potomac Riverkeeper. “Drilling under the Potomac River –the drinking water source for millions of people — for a fracked gas pipeline in sensitive karst geology that threatens water quality is not a plan we support. And strong arm tactics, like threatening eminent domain, don’t play well out here. But they’re trying it anyway.”
The pipeline would cross sensitive karst geology, which is characterized by underground drainage systems with sinkholes and caves and is easily susceptible to transmission of pollutants through connected underground aquifers. The pipeline could degrade pristine streams and further threaten public and private water supplies. Using hydraulic directional drilling under streams in karst geology would create pathways for water to drain down the bore holes and dissolve the limestone around the piping. This activity can create sinkholes that could impact the integrity of the pipeline, causing subterranean ruptures and even explosions, further threatening the Potomac River.
“Governor Hogan took a huge step forward on climate by signing Maryland’s statewide fracking ban in April,” said Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “But fracking infrastructure like the Potomac Pipeline will only result in more fracking elsewhere. Gov. Hogan needs to complete the fracking ban by rejecting this pipeline.”
“The health of the Potomac River basin is essential to the health of millions of Marylanders,” said Maryland Delegate Jheanelle Wilkins (D-20). “TransCanada, a company known for its blatant disregard for environmental protection, is proposing a pipeline that would put our drinking water at risk for a pipeline that is not needed. For the health of our water and our communities, I urge Governor Hogan to reject the pipeline.”
“This pipeline is literally an investment in fossil-fuel infrastructure that will lock our region into a tremendous amount of climate pollution for decades to come,” said Josh Tulkin, Director of the Maryland Chapter of the Sierra Club. “At a time when Maryland and other states need to be investing in wind and solar, this pipeline will open the floodgates for years and years of continued pollution. After banning fracking and setting an aggressive climate change goal we cannot turn around and allow a fracked gas pipeline that threatens our communities and water resources through our state. We hope Governor Hogan will make the right decision and reject this pipeline.”
“For the same reason we called for a ban on fracking, we’re calling on Governor Hogan to stop the Potomac Pipeline,” said Rianna Eckel, Maryland Organizer, Food & Water Watch. “Dangerous fracked gas infrastructure divides communities, pollutes our air and our water, and increases our reliance on fossil fuels while we are simultaneously barreling toward climate chaos.”
“Where is our peace on earth?” said Patricia Kesecker, landowner in Morgan County, West Virginia in a statement. “When you have put your blood, sweat and tears into the land for years and they come and try and take it away from you, it’s heartbreaking.  Whether it’s one acre or hundreds of acres, it is your home.” The Keseckers are currently in court with Mountaineer Gas over the company’s efforts to forcibly take parts of their land by eminent domain.
There is already a growing movement of opposition among citizens that live along the route. When TransCanada held a forum about the pipeline, more than 100 residents of Maryland and West Virginia showed up to oppose its construction. In order for the pipeline to move forward, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) would need to grant the 401 Water Quality Certificate under the Clean Water Act. Hogan has the ability to direct the MDE to reject this certificate.

A coalition of landowners and advocacy organizations today condemned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for disregarding the profound and long-lasting human and environmental trauma the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) would cause. In its final environmental review, released Friday morning, FERC ignores the most harmful impacts this 300-mile-long pipeline for fracked gas would have on lives, communities, drinking water supplies, private property, local economies, and publicly owned natural resources. The groups called these risks unacceptable, especially for a pipeline that is not even needed. The coalition also calls the pipeline an assault on the climate and the future of children in West Virginia and Virginia, and notes that the pipeline can still be blocked on multiple federal, state, and legal levels.
The final environmental review¹ issued today by FERC for the proposed $3.2 billion MVP — to be developed by EQT Midstream Partners; NextEra; Con Edison Transmission; WGL Midstream; and RGC Midstream — commits the same central failure of its draft review: failing to prove that the pipeline is needed. An independent study shows there is enough existing gas supply in Virginia and the Carolinas to meet consumer demand through 2030, while experts have warned that the gas industry is overbuilding pipeline infrastructure in West Virginia and Virginia. Key federal government agencies and officials have criticized FERC’s failure to properly determine a project’s need. 
Former FERC Chairman and Director Norman Bay in his parting recommendations to the agency, urged the commission to rethink how it determines need when certifying natural gas pipelines. The Bureau of Land Management and Environmental Protection Agency have also criticized FERC specifically for failing to address whether the MVP is needed, and a bill has been introduced in the U.S. Senate to reform FERC’s approach to public engagement.
FERC has a history of greenlighting natural gas pipelines with insufficient reviews, resulting in dangerous leaks and spills.  The Rover Pipeline recently spilled millions of gallons of drilling chemicals into Ohio’s wetlands, the Sabal Trail pipeline leaked drilling chemicals underground into the Withlacoochee River in Florida, and the highly contentious Dakota Access pipeline has already suffered three leaks. 
West Virginia and Virginia citizens opposed to the MVP say FERC has proven unable to properly assess the environmental risks of these pipelines, and its incomplete reviews have dealt a huge blow to public confidence, not to mention safety and the environment. MVP developers submitted more than 16,000 pages of information after the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was issued. The public did not have the opportunity to submit comments to FERC on the additional submittals. The NEPA review process for the MVP was bypassed by FERC.
While legal and environmental experts are continuing to review today’s document, they have initially identified major gaps in FERC’s Final EIS, including:

• An accurate assessment of whether the project is needed and in the public interest;²
• Alternative analysis including development of energy efficiency, solar, and wind as alternatives to construction of pipelines;
• A complete analysis of the cumulative, life-cycle climate pollution that would result from the pipeline;³
• A thorough and accurate analysis of visual impacts from the pipeline, including impacts to the iconic Appalachian Trail and potential damage to its tourism economy;
• Cumulative impacts analysis of all environmental and human health damage from increased gas fracking in West Virginia that would supply the pipeline;
• An analysis of the compound effects of multiple regional geo-hazards, including a meaningful analysis of the karst topography; and
• A thorough review of damage to water quality and natural resources along and downstream from the pipeline route.

The coalition is committed to blocking the pipeline through every available avenue on the federal, state, and legal levels to assure that the very best options for energy, jobs, and landowner rights are considered.
Statements from affected landowners, community members, and environmental and legal experts:

• Ty Bouldin, landowner in Summers County, West Virginia, stated: “The DEIS for the Mountain Valley Pipeline project was disheartening testimony to the inadequacies of FERC’s environmental assessment procedures. It failed to provide rational scientific standards for evaluating such impacts as were acknowledged. The DEIS simply argued that any impacts—however severe they might prove to be—would be judged acceptable. Such a conclusion was not valid given the inadequacies of the materials submitted by MVP, and it remains unacceptable as the basis for undertaking a responsible Final Environmental Impact Statement.”
• Maury Johnson, affected landowner in Monroe County WV and The Appalachian Trail Conservancy, Indian Creek Watershed Assoc. WV Rivers Coalition, and more, stated: “The Mountain Valley Pipeline will devalue our land, limit its uses and reduce taxes which support our schools and public services. It will jeopardize the safety and security of residents and anyone who visits the area where it is located. It will impact the water that we so much depend upon for our families, our farms and our communities. It will impact the world class water that comes from Peters Mountain in WV and VA. The impacts to the Jefferson National Forest and the Appalachian Trail will be severe and irreversible. It should be criminal to attempt such a pipeline when the profound environmental damage has not been adequately assessed by FERC, by West Virginia’s DEP or by Virginia’s DEQ.”
• Andrew Downs, Regional Director, Appalachian Trail Conservancy, stated: “The public has never been allowed adequate access to this process which increasingly seems like it’s been driven by distant a bureaucracy. The devastation anticipated to the Jefferson National Forest and the iconic Appalachian Trail is a violation of the public trust that spans from nearly a century and into our uncertain future.”
• Diana Christopulos, President, Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club, stated: “The FEIS ignores the potential negative impacts of the project on public drinking water supplies on the Roanoke River, even though the pipeline’s own consultants reported a major increase in sedimentation in the North Fork of the Roanoke River that would travel all the way from Jefferson National Forest through the cities of Salem and Roanoke to either Niagara Dam or Smith Mountain Lake. The FERC never required to applicant to report fully on the sediment that would occur on the South Fork of the Roanoke River, which could have significant impacts on the same downstream communities.”
• April Keating, Mountain Lakes Preservation Alliance/West Virginia Sierra Club/Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights, stated: “Not only are these new pipelines not needed, but they lock us into flammable, radioactive, climate warming methane use at a time when renewable energy is needed most. Renewable energy is more affordable than ever and has created more jobs than the fossil fuel market in recent years. FERC has refused to look at cumulative impacts of this and other projects in the same region, which is doing a real disservice to our public health and putting a chokehold on our economic opportunities.”
• Anne Havemann, General Counsel, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, stated: “Time and again, we’ve seen how FERC’s utter failure to honestly assess the impacts of massive, dangerous gas pipelines. We know this pipeline would result in massive climate pollution equivalent to 26 new coal-fired power plants. FERC’s own former chairman has urged the commission to reconsider how it evaluates environmental impacts, including climate change. If FERC was honest in its environmental accounting, it would have no choice but to reject the project.”
• Dr. Richard Shingles, Coordinator, Preserve Giles County, stated: “An obscure, independent regulatory agency, controlled by the very gas and oil industry it is supposed to regulate, has taken one more step in a fraudulent ‘public review’ process towards finalizing a predetermined decision. The FEIS ignores the scientific consensus⁴ as to the cumulative threats to communities, local economies and natural resources and the pipeline itself. The multiple geological hazards abound in this region should make it a ‘no build zone’ for large, interstate, high pressure gas pipelines. To date FERC has failed to require the applicant to show that these threats can be avoided or safely mitigated – an assurance that the scientific consensus demonstrates cannot be provided.”
• Hugh Irwin, Landscape Conservation Planner, The Wilderness Society, stated: “Damage to national forest lands and values including wilderness, roadless lands, the Appalachian Trail, clean water, and wildlife habitat have been inadequately addressed, putting these public resources in jeopardy.”
• Jerolyn Deplazes, Secretary, Preserve Newport Historic Properties, stated: “FERC has shown blatant disregard for the laws concerning the protection of historical properties in the process of reviewing the MVP. Four landowners in the Greater Newport Rural Historic District have been denied the right to consult with FERC, MVP and other cooperating agencies to develop alternatives to the proposed route of MVP. And many filings by the Greater Newport Rural Historic District Committee have been made pointing out the continually incorrect, misleading, and apparently deliberately incomplete information provided to FERC by MVP and the failure of FERC to require full corrective action by MVP. Without complete and correct data input to FERC, there is no way that FERC can make an informed decision on the MVP project.”
• Ben Luckett, Staff Attorney, Appalachian Mountain Advocates, stated: “FERC’s failure to look at whether this pipeline is actually needed to serve the public, and not just the bank accounts of MVP’s shareholders, is absolutely galling. All too often, like with the recently completed Sabal Trail project, these new pipelines just shift gas away from existing infrastructure instead of offering any new beneficial service. Without a real market analysis, FERC can’t tell whether the pipeline’s extreme impacts to landowners, communities, and the environment will bring about any public benefit. Our independent studies indicate that they will not.”

 
CONTACT:
Kristen Friedel, Chesapeake Climate Action Network; kristen@chesapeakeclimate.org; 240-396-2146
Anne Havemann, Chesapeake Climate Action Network; anne@chesapeakeclimate.org; 240-396-1984
April Keating, Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights; apkeating@hotmail.com; 304-642-9436
 
CONTACTS FOR THOSE QUOTED:
Maury Johnson, landowner: maurywjohnson@yahoo.com; 304-832-6085
April Keating, Mountain Lakes Preservation Alliance/West Virginia Sierra Club/Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights: apkeating@hotmail.com; 304-642-9436
Andrew Downs, Appalachian Trail Conservancy: adowns@appalachiantrail.org; 540-904-4354
Diana Christopulos, Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club: dianak16@earthlink.net; 540-204-3961
Anne Havemann, Chesapeake Climate Action Network: anne@chesapeakeclimate.org; 240-396-1984
Dr. Richard Shingles, Preserve Giles County: shingles@vt.edu; 540-921-7324
Hugh Irwin, The Wilderness Society: hugh_irwin@tws.org; 828-357-5187
Jerolyn Deplazes, Preserve Newport Historic Properties: jdeplazes@pemtel.net
Ben Luckett, Appalachian Mountain Advocates: bluckett@appalmad.org; 304-645-0125
 
Notes:
1: The main document for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mountain Valley Pipeline can be viewed by clicking on the last link titled, “MVP_EEP_FEIS_Sections 1-5.PDF” at the bottom of FERC’s file list.
2: Opposition to the Mountain Valley Pipeline has grown in Virginia and West Virginia. In the Supreme Court in both states, judges have ruled in favor of landowners preventing MVP surveyors to enter their land. Also, financial institutions are increasingly backing away from investing in the MVP and other pipelines, suggesting that financial support is waning along with public support. Additionally, more than 17,000 people in the affected region — along with tens of thousands of others across the country — submitted comments criticizing FERC’s draft review, demanding the agency ultimately reject the project. And a poll conducted by the nonpartisan Cromer Group found that 55 percent of Virginia voters oppose McAuliffe’s efforts to build fracked-gas pipelines. Furthermore, Virginia legislators have introduced a bill that aims to improve FERC’s process for public input. Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) stated that the bill is “a direct result of feedback from constituents about the need for reform in FERC’s natural gas pipeline approval process,” and aims to “ensure that local concerns are addressed, particularly when easements on and takings of private lands for private infrastructure are a possibility.” As Senator Tim Kaine stated: “FERC’s job is to adjudicate the public interest — especially when eminent domain is involved — and this requires taking public input more seriously.”
3: An analysis from Oil Change International has found that the Mountain Valley Pipeline would result in nearly 90 million metric tons of greenhouse gases each year (measured as CO2 or the equivalent). That’s the greenhouse gas equivalent of 26 average coal plants or more than 19 million vehicles.
4: This consensus is based on four detailed, independent reports written by leading karst geologists (Dr. Ernst Kastning of Radford University, Paul Rubin, President of HydroQuest, an environmental consulting firm, Dr. Chris Groves of Western Kentucky University, and Dr. Pamela C. Dodds, senior geologist for the Virginia DEQ,1997-1999). Their overall conclusion and the science on which is based has been positively reviewed by the prominent karst geologist, Arthur Palmer (SUNY-Oneonta), and supplemented by scores of site specific findings submitted to FERC from other scientists at Virginia Tech, Radford University and the University of West Virginia. [Kastning: 2016713-5029, 20170310-5024, 20170524-5177; Rubin: 20161222-5458 and 20170602-5147; Groves: 20161223-5058; Dodds: 20170622-5028.]

###