Comment: fresh lawsuit against the Mountain Valley pipeline

“This case appears to be landowners objecting to a pipeline’s route through their land, the old adage – Not in My Backyard. It’s understandable – few would welcome a large diameter pipeline cutting a swath through their land,” says Weiler. “The landowners’ concern is amplified by recognition that an interstate natural gas pipeline must obtain not only NGA authorisation, but myriad other state and federal authorisations and permits.

“Delays in development timelines can produce cascading impacts that threaten the viability of an entire project. The MVP project is a case in point: it has been subject to a series of sequential administrative and State court and Federal court appeals, all in an attempt to kill the project with a ‘death by a thousand cuts.’ It’s unclear whether the landowner challenge will be a mortal cut. But on Friday, August 11, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued a ‘Notice of Proposed Safety Order’ that could require additional testing before and after the pipeline enters service. The cuts keep coming,” says Weiler.

In addition to talking about the new lawsuit, Mr. Weiler also gives more background on the project and additional information on FERC certificate authorisation:

“The US$6.6 billion, 303 mile Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) will transport gas from West Virginia to markets in the Mid-and South Atlantic areas. All but 20 miles have been constructed and more than 50% of the right-of-way fully restored. Failure to finish the construction could scuttle years of work and billions of dollars, and deprive markets of a needed gas supplies,” explains Weiler.

“Before new interstate natural gas pipeline facilities can be constructed and operated, the sponsor must first obtain authorisation from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), specifically a ‘certificate of public convenience and necessity’ issued under Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). [Although pipelines were initially awarded actual certificates (suitable for framing), that practice ended decades ago. ‘Certificate authorisation’ is still granted, but without an actual certificate.] To grant certificate authorisation, FERC must find that the pipeline project is required by the ‘public convenience and necessity.’ To make that determination, FERC balances the public benefits of the pipeline project (e.g., access to reliable natural gas service, reduced costs, etc.) against the potential adverse consequence to three interests—existing customers, existing pipelines, and landowners or communities impacted by the route—and whether the pipeline has made efforts to eliminate or minimise any adverse effects,” says Weiler.

“This balancing is necessary for the FERC to satisfy its primary purpose under the NGA – ‘to protect the consumer.’ FERC’s consideration of landowner interests is particularly important, because certificate authorisation also permits natural gas companies to exercise the power of federal eminent domain. For this reason, FERC requires pipeline companies to work with landowners and communities to minimise the impact of the pipeline route,” says Weiler.

Read the latest issue of World Pipelines magazine for pipeline news, project stories, industry insight and technical articles.

World Pipelines’ August 2023 issue

The August 2023 issue of World Pipelines includes a contractors’ focus, a keynote section on pipeline project management, and articles on construction best practice. We also cover inline inspection tools, pipeline services and surface preparation.

Read the article online at: https://www.worldpipelines.com/regulations-and-standards/24082023/comment-fresh-lawsuit-against-the-mountain-valley-pipeline/