Potential pipelines under review by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, including the Mountain Valley Pipeline

The Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) is a natural gas pipeline being constructed from northwestern West Virginia to southern Virginia. The MVP will be 304 miles (489 km) long, and there is also a proposed Southgate Extension which will run 75 miles (121 km) from Virginia into North Carolina.[1] The completed pipeline will have a capacity of 2 million dekatherms (Dts) of natural gas per day (approximately 200 TWh per year), with gas produced from the Marcellus and Utica shale formations.

The pipeline has met with opposition in the form of legal challenges, regulatory hurdles, and direct action. Some of the issues raised by opponents include the seizure of land through eminent domain and negative impacts to the forests, waterways, and protected wildlife. Opponents have also voiced concerns about the project's contribution to climate change, and permits have been denied on the basis of environmental justice laws in the state of Virginia. These challenges have resulted in the project being years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget.[2][3]

The American Petroleum Institute stated that the pipeline would get a cleaner, cheaper fuel to market and spur the economy.

In July 2022, West Virginia senator Joe Manchin made a deal with US Democratic Party leadership to ease regulatory barriers for the MVP in exchange for his support of the Inflation Reduction Act. His proposed legislation would have required the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to take "all necessary actions" to ensure completion of the MVP.[4] This deal prompted protests in Washington, DC in September, led by Indigenous people and others voicing environmental justice concerns.[5][6] Manchin's bill was later withdrawn.[4]

On June 3, 2023, President Biden signed into law the Fiscal Responsibility Act that requires all federal permits needed to complete the project be issued by June 24, 2023. The project developer expects the pipeline to be in-service by mid-year 2024.[7][8]

Project description

The MVP project is a natural gas pipeline from northwestern West Virginia to southern Virginia retrieving its supply from the Marcellus and Utica shale sites. It is expected to provide two billion cubic feet of firm capacity per day.[9] The pipeline is projected to span approximately 303 miles (488 km),[10] and its route crosses the Appalachian Trail near Peters Mountain Wilderness in Virginia.[11]

The MVP is owned by Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (MVP LLC), which is a joint venture between Equitrans Midstream, NextEra Energy Resources, Con Edison Transmission and other midstream partners.[12][13] The MVP would be operated by Equitrans Midstream which is the majority owner. Equitrans Midstream was formed in a June 2020 merger.[14]

The MVP is an interstate pipeline so it is federally regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under United States Natural Gas Act.[10][15] State level ordinances also apply. In October 2015, MVP LLC applied for permits for the pipeline from FERC, and the regulatory commission issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement in June 2017.[16] The pipeline's operation would be regulated by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).[17]

The evidence of a market demand and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Certificate policy requires at least 25 percent of the Mountain Valley Pipeline's capacity to deliver natural gas be met by service contract agreements in order to justify the need for the project.[18] MVP LLC was able to secure these service contracts allowing them to proceed with the proposed project. The completed pipeline would have the ability to ship 2 million dekatherms (Dts) of natural gas per day for distribution, with a large quantity of that gas being produced from the Marcellus and Utica shale formations.[12]

Opposition to the project

Opposition was met during the initial request to obtain a certificate of convenience and necessity from the FERC.[18] Some of the issues raised by citizen groups include the right of eminent domain and the potential for negative impacts to the forests, waterways, and protected wildlife during construction.[19][20] Concerns were raised because the route cuts across the Appalachian Trail.[11] Activists have set up numerous blockades to prevent construction along the pipeline path including a month-long tree-sit near Peters Mountain,[21][22] an aerial blockade in which a woman occupied a platform atop a pole for 57 days,[23] other aerial blockades, and the 932 day yellow finch tree-sit from September 2018 to March 2021.[24][25] Protestors have also blocked construction by parking junk cars on the pipeline route or locking themselves to machinery;[26] in one case, a professor chained herself to construction equipment.[27][28] Obstruction of pipeline construction has been ongoing in spite of significant criminal and civil penalties being levied against protestors.[25][26]

The head of the Jefferson National Forest was reassigned, allegedly due to heavy handed tactics involving the protest, which included running ATVs on a section of the Appalachian Trail,[29] and, according to Outside magazine, blocking food and water supplies to protesters.[30] In Virginia, bumper stickers are appearing on cars that read "No Pipeline". Many articles against the pipeline have been published in The Roanoke Times, and many protests have been organized.[31][32][33][34]

The MVP has been cited by government agencies for violations of Virginia's Stormwater Management Act because of problems with runoff from land clearing while installing the pipeline.[35] The pipeline was challenged in court, including lawsuits during 2018 in which cultural preservation officers from the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe sued FERC for failing to satisfy the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act after they found evidence of burial mounds along the path of the pipeline. These lawsuits were thrown out by federal courts in February 2019.[36]

Many landowners complain that they are kept up at night by construction, mainly because most of the land used to build the pipeline was taken from private landowners by eminent domain. A ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Elizabeth Dillon on January 31, 2018, granted the right of eminent domain to MVP LLC in a disputed area but required current appraisals and bonds be set forth to compensate for any losses incurred by the land owners.[37]

Landowners located along the pipeline project see the privately owned pipeline as a "government sanctioned land grab" impacting not only the environment, but also the local economies of surrounding towns.[38] In June 2018, a federal court put a hold on a required permit for construction of the pipeline in Monroe County, West Virginia.[39]

Compressor stations that were proposed as part of the Southgate extension were denied permits in Virginia in 2021 when state regulators ruled that the permits would violate state environmental justice laws. Residents were concerned about noise, pollution, and the danger of explosions.[40]

Impacts

The American Petroleum Institute stated that the pipeline would get a cleaner, cheaper fuel to market and spur the economy.[41] There are concerns however from communities that will be impacted by the pipeline's construction and from groups who want to preserve historical landmarks, forests, wildlife, waterways, and parks. Questions were raised regarding the need for the project and its purpose. Additional inquiries called in to question whether there were alternatives to avoid impacts to the forest among other things which were detailed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement, along with recommendations by the FERC to minimize the impacts on the environment.[42][18]

The environmental concerns of the pipeline include threats to the streams, rivers, and drinking water along the route. This can include the forests, endangered species, fish nurseries, and the public lands that surround the pipeline.[43] Water contamination has been one of the biggest concerns with the growth of this project, and there are concerns by some about the path of the pipeline, which cuts across sections of national forests including the Jefferson National Forest in Virginia and West Virginia along with the Appalachian Trail.

The Appalachian Trail Conservancy has opposed the pipeline,[44] with the following concerns:

The Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group, says:

Timeline

2014-2019

October 2014

October 23, 2015

October 13, 2017

December 2017

December 20, 2017

December 22, 2017

January 31, 2018

2018 (first quarter)

July 3, 2018

July 27, 2018

October 2, 2018

November 27, 2018

December 2018

March 1, 2019

October 11, 2019

October 15, 2019

2020-Present

June 2020

July 31, 2020

August 11, 2020

August 25, 2020

September 4, 2020

September 11, 2020

September 22, 2020

October 9, 2020

February 21, 2022

July 27, 2022

September 8, 2022

May 31, 2023

June 1, 2023

July 9, 2023

July 10, 2023

July 24, 2023

July 27, 2023

August 8, 2023

References

  1. ^ "Overview". MVP Southgate. Retrieved November 25, 2022.
  2. ^ "Key U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Delayed as Costs Grow to $6.6 Billion". Bloomberg. May 3, 2022.
  3. ^ a b "NextEra takes $800 mln charge for WV-VA Mountain Valley natgas pipe". Reuters. February 19, 2022. Retrieved November 8, 2022.
  4. ^ a b Weisbrod, Katelyn (October 7, 2022). "Pressing Safety Concerns, Opponents of the Mountain Valley Pipeline Gear Up for the Next Round of Battle". Inside Climate News. Retrieved November 25, 2022.
  5. ^ a b "Appalachian, Indigenous pipeline foes say climate deal 'left us to burn'". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved November 25, 2022.
  6. ^ a b "Appalachian, Indigenous pipeline foes protest climate deal". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved November 25, 2022.
  7. ^ "Mountain Valley Pipeline To Proceed". Retrieved June 4, 2023.
  8. ^ "Mountain-Valley-Pipeline". Retrieved February 14, 2024.
  9. ^ "Overview - Mountain Valley Pipeline Project". mountainvalleypipeline.info. Retrieved March 29, 2018.
  10. ^ a b "Mountain Valley Pipeline Project". mountainvalleypipeline.info. Retrieved March 29, 2018.
  11. ^ a b Gayter, Liam (February 21, 2017). "Thru-Hikers in the Blast Zone: Pipelines Will Intersect the Appalachian Trail". Blue Ridge Outdoors. Retrieved February 26, 2020.
  12. ^ a b "Overview". mountainvalleypipeline.info. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
  13. ^ "THE MONEY BEHIND THE MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE" (PDF). www.priceofoil.org.
  14. ^ Gough, Paul J. "Equitrans, EQM complete merger". www.bizjournals.com. Retrieved November 8, 2022.
  15. ^ "FERC Strategic Plan" (PDF).
  16. ^ "Overview - Mountain Valley Pipeline Project". www.mountainvalleypipeline.info. Retrieved April 26, 2018.
  17. ^ Feridun, Karen (May 30, 2017). "What FERC Is And Why It Matters". Huffington Post.
  18. ^ a b c "Order Issuing Certificates and Granting Abandonment Authority" (PDF). ferc.gov. October 13, 2017. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
  19. ^ Schmalz, Arthur E. (February 6, 2018). "Virginia District Court Requires Pipeline Company to Obtain Appraisals Before Granting Preliminary Injunctions For Prejudgment Possession of Land". lexology.com. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
  20. ^ Mall, Amy (February 26, 2018). "Northam Must Act to Protect Clean Water from Pipelines". nrdc.org. National Resource Defense Council.
  21. ^ Sturgeon, Jeff. "Mountain Valley Pipeline protesters continue tree-top vigil in W.Va". Roanoke Times. Retrieved March 16, 2018.
  22. ^ Schneider, Gregory S. (May 5, 2018). "Women sitting in trees to protest pipeline come down after judge threatens fines". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved May 6, 2018.
  23. ^ Hammock, Lawrence (May 23, 2018). "Pipeline protester known as 'Nutty' has come down from her pole in Giles County". The Roanoke Times.
  24. ^ Dhillon, Matt (April 16, 2021). "Last Tree-sitters Removed from Path of Mountain Valley Pipeline". The Appalachian Voice.
  25. ^ a b Hammack, Laurence (May 5, 2021). "Pipeline opponents sentenced to spend day in jail for each day in tree-sit protest". The Roanoke Times.
  26. ^ a b Hammack, Laurence (August 30, 2021). "3 Mountain Valley Pipeline protesters convicted, fined for Poor Mountain blockade". The Roanoke Times.
  27. ^ "Why a Virginia Tech professor locked herself to pipeline construction equipment". Yale Climate Connections. December 3, 2019. Retrieved December 8, 2019.
  28. ^ "Why a Virginia Tech professor locked herself to pipeline construction equipment". Yale Climate Connections. December 3, 2019. Retrieved December 8, 2019.
  29. ^ Hammack, Laurence (August 15, 2018). "Head of Jefferson National Forest temporarily reassigned as pipeline controversy continues". Roanoke Times. Retrieved December 8, 2019.
  30. ^ Miles, Kathryn (April 25, 2018). "The Forest Service Is Arresting Protesters Along the AT". Outside Online. Retrieved December 8, 2019.
  31. ^ Adams, Mason. "How a "bunch of badass queer anarchists" are teaming up with locals to block a pipeline through Appalachia". Mother Jones. Retrieved November 1, 2020.
  32. ^ Hammack, Laurence. "Tree-sit protest of Mountain Valley Pipeline escalates, drawing police response". Roanoke Times. Retrieved November 1, 2020.
  33. ^ "Photos: Protests at the Mountain Valley Pipeline work site". The Franklin News Post. Retrieved November 1, 2020.
  34. ^ "Community Fights Construction of Mountain Valley Pipeline". Pulitzer Center. April 13, 2020. Retrieved November 1, 2020.
  35. ^ "Virginia DEQ issues violation for Mountain Valley Pipeline". whsv.com. Retrieved July 20, 2018.
  36. ^ Riddler, Kevin (October 28, 2020). "The Appalachian Pipeline Resistance Movement: "We're Not Going Away"". The Appalachian Voice.
  37. ^ a b Hammack, Laurence (March 14, 2018). "Judge allows Mountain Valley Pipeline work to proceed on private property". The Roanoke Times. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
  38. ^ Adams, Duncan (July 27, 2017). "Landowners along pipeline route sue FERC and Mountain Valley Pipeline". The Roanoke Times.
  39. ^ Mishkin, Kate (June 21, 2018). "Federal court puts Mountain Valley Pipeline water crossing permit on hold". Charleston Gazette-Mail. Retrieved June 28, 2018.
  40. ^ "State regulators deny necessary permit for MVP Southgate compressor station in Pittsylvania County". WVTF. December 3, 2021. Retrieved November 25, 2022.
  41. ^ Tadeo, Michael (December 22, 2016). "VIRGINIA'S CONSUMERS AND ECONOMY WILL BENEFIT FROM THE MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE". American Petroleum Institute.
  42. ^ ""Final Environmental Impact Statement". FERC Staff Issues Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mountain Valley Project and Equitrans Expansion Project (CP16-10-000 and CP16-13-000)". ferc.gov. June 23, 2017. Retrieved March 14, 2018.
  43. ^ a b "10 Reasons to Stop Mtn. Valley & Atlantic Coast Pipelines". NRDC. Retrieved March 15, 2018.
  44. ^ "About Mountain Valley Pipeline". Appalachian Trail Conservancy. Archived from the original on March 23, 2018. Retrieved March 15, 2018.
  45. ^ Adams, Duncan (May 18, 2016). "Study backed by Mountain Valley Pipeline opponents suggests negative economic impacts for region". The Roanoke Times.
  46. ^ a b c "Frequently Asked Questions | Mountain Valley Pipeline Project". www.mountainvalleypipeline.info. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  47. ^ "Exhibit".
  48. ^ a b c d e f Sierra Club v. USFS, No. 17-2399 (4th Cir. 2018)
  49. ^ a b Dashiell, Joe. "State Water Control Board says it has no authority to revoke pipeline certification". wdbj7.com. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  50. ^ Feld, Lowell (October 2, 2018). "BREAKING: U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Vacates Nationwide Permit 12 for Entire Mountain Valley Pipeline". Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  51. ^ Vogelsong, Sarah. "Mountain Valley Pipeline agrees to pay Virginia $2.15 million for environmental violations". Virginia Mercury. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  52. ^ a b Vogelsong, Sarah. "Federal commission orders work stopped on Mountain Valley Pipeline". Virginia Mercury. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  53. ^ "October 11, 2019 - MVP LLC to Pay More Than $2 Million, Submit To Court-Ordered Compliance And Enhanced, Independent, Third-Party Environmental Monitoring". www.oag.state.va.us. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  54. ^ "Mountain Valley Pipeline Project |". www.mountainvalleypipeline.info. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  55. ^ Gough, Paul J. (August 17, 2020). "US Trinity Energy Services sues Mountain Valley Pipeline". Retrieved August 27, 2022.
  56. ^ "State Denies Water Quality Certification for MVP Southgate Pipeline | NC DEQ". deq.nc.gov. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  57. ^ "Statement from Secretary Regan on MVP Southgate Decision | NC DEQ". deq.nc.gov. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  58. ^ a b "The 'last pipeline'? Mountain Valley Pipeline remains stalled as it seeks extension from federal regulators". Virginia Mercury. September 10, 2020. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  59. ^ a b "Time's up for the Mountain Valley Pipeline > Appalachian Voices". September 22, 2020. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  60. ^ Hammack, Laurence. "Mountain Valley Pipeline regains permit to cross streams, wetlands". Roanoke Times. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  61. ^ Eggerding, Matthew, Assistant General Counsel of Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC. “Request to Resume Certain Construction Activities.” Received by Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, September 22, 2020. https://appvoices.org/images/uploads/2020/09/MVP-request-to-resume-construction-Sept-22-2020.pdf
  62. ^ Callahan, Eddie. "FERC approves extension for Mountain Valley Pipeline". wdbj7.com. Retrieved October 31, 2020.
  63. ^ "NextEra takes $800M impairment charge on Mountain Valley Pipeline investment". www.spglobal.com. Retrieved November 8, 2022.
  64. ^ Benshoff, Laura (September 6, 2022). "An unfinished natural gas pipeline in West Virginia is back in the national spotlight". NPR News. Retrieved September 7, 2022.
  65. ^ Friedman, Lisa (August 1, 2022). "Manchin Won a Pledge From Democrats to Finish a Contested Pipeline". The New York Times. Retrieved August 2, 2022.
  66. ^ Nilsen, Ella (May 31, 2023). "Manchin could get a gas pipeline out of the debt ceiling deal, and environmental advocates are livid | CNN Politics". CNN. Archived from the original on June 2, 2023. Retrieved June 3, 2023.
  67. ^ McElhinny, Brad (June 2, 2023). "Senate passes debt ceiling deal, including Mountain Valley Pipeline approval". WV MetroNews. Archived from the original on June 3, 2023. Retrieved June 3, 2023.
  68. ^ "S.Amdt.101 to H.R.3746". www.congress.gov. June 1, 2023. Retrieved June 3, 2023.
  69. ^ Young, Charles (July 10, 2023). "Mountain Valley Pipeline receives FERC approval to resume construction". WV News. Archived from the original on July 10, 2023. Retrieved July 10, 2023.
  70. ^ Lefebvre, Ben (July 10, 2023). "Appeals court orders temporary halt to Mountain Valley Pipeline construction". POLITICO. Archived from the original on July 11, 2023. Retrieved July 11, 2023.
  71. ^ HAMMACK, LAURENCE (July 10, 2023). "Federal court stops construction of Mountain Valley Pipeline in national forest". Roanoke Times. Archived from the original on July 11, 2023. Retrieved July 11, 2023.
  72. ^ Raby, John (July 24, 2023). "US Supreme Court asked to set aside ruling that blocks construction on Mountain Valley Pipeline". AP News. Archived from the original on July 25, 2023. Retrieved July 25, 2023.
  73. ^ Catenacci, Thomas (July 27, 2023). "Supreme Court reinstates major gas pipeline in blow to environmental groups". Fox News. Archived from the original on July 27, 2023. Retrieved July 27, 2023.
  74. ^ Quinn, Melissa (July 27, 2023). "Supreme Court paves way for construction of Mountain Valley Pipeline to resume - CBS News". www.cbsnews.com. Archived from the original on July 27, 2023. Retrieved July 27, 2023.
  75. ^ "Appalachian Voices et al. v. United States Department of Interior" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Retrieved August 12, 2023.