Tag: natural gas

Mountain Valley Pipeline Begins Operations, Thanks Manchin

The nearly $8 billion pipeline began construction in 2018. It encountered some of the most rugged and remote terrain in Appalachia, and opposition.

After a decade of planning and construction, the Mountain Valley Pipeline is now moving natural gas.

It stretches 303 miles from north central West Virginia to southern Virginia. And as of Friday, the Mountain Valley Pipeline is in operation.

The nearly $8 billion pipeline began construction in 2018. It encountered some of the most rugged and remote terrain in Appalachia, and opposition.

Opponents succeeded in blocking the project in federal court until last summer when West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin made its completion assured as part of a spending deal.

“This pipeline is essential in ensuring the nation’s energy and national security and providing affordable, reliable natural gas to hundreds of thousands of Americans,” Manchin said in a statement Friday.

In its announcement Friday, pipeline builder Equitrans Midstream thanked Manchin, as well as Sen. Shelley Moore Capito and Rep. Carol Miller.

“We are grateful for the ongoing professionalism and tremendous efforts of the federal and state agencies that worked tirelessly for many years to ensure MVP’s construction activities met or exceeded all applicable permitting requirements,” said Thomas Karam, executive chairman of Equitrans Midstream. “In addition, we would not be commencing commercial operations were it not for the relentless advocacy and commitment of our federal and state elected officials.”

The pipe burst during water pressure testing in Bent Mountain, Virginia, last month, raising concerns among residents about its integrity.

Nevertheless, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the pipeline for service earlier this week. Residents, community groups and state and local officials had urged FERC to deny the pipeline’s request to enter service.

Capito has been one of the pipeline’s biggest supporters. She endorsed Manchin’s effort to approve all of its permits in the Fiscal Responsibility Act last year. Manchin chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, while Capito is the senior Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, giving them a prominent voice on energy infrastructure.

“This critical project is in now in service and can begin to deliver needed energy to markets up and down the Atlantic coast,” she said in a statement Friday. “This entire process took a lot of perseverance, and I’m glad we fought every step of the way to help the Mountain Valley Pipeline come to fruition, which will benefit workers and consumers for years to come.”

At full capacity, the pipeline can move 2 billion cubic feet of gas a day under high pressure.

“Natural gas is an essential fuel for modern life, and, as a critical infrastructure project, the Mountain Valley Pipeline will play an integral role in achieving a lower-carbon future while helping to ensure America’s energy and economic security for decades to come,” said Diana Charletta, president and CEO of Equitrans Midstream.

Court Upholds Landowners’ Award From Mountain Valley Pipeline

The Mountain Valley Pipeline got federal approval earlier this week to begin service. That same day, a federal court upheld a jury verdict the company had appealed.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline got federal approval earlier this week to begin service. That same day, a federal court upheld a jury verdict the company had appealed.

Mountain Valley Pipeline had sued Frank, Coles and Elizabeth Terry, of Bent Mountain, Virginia, for a 50-foot easement on their property for the project.

A jury awarded the Terrys $523,000, but then U.S. District Judge Elizabeth Dillon cut it in half.

Last month, a three-judge panel on the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the original jury award. On May 28, Mountain Valley Pipeline appealed the decision and asked for the entire Fourth Circuit to hear the appeal.

On Tuesday, the court denied both requests, preserving the original award for the Terry siblings.

In an email, Natalie Cox, a spokeswoman for Equitrans Midstream, the pipeline’s builder, said she wouldn’t comment on whether the company would appeal again.

Also Tuesday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the Mountain Valley Pipeline to begin operating, though it isn’t clear when gas will flow through the 303-mile pipeline in West Virginia and Virginia.

FERC had earlier allowed the pipeline’s builder to use eminent domain to acquire the easements it needed. Landowners challenged the agency’s decision in court but did not prevail.

The pipeline failed a water pressure test at Bent Mountain on May 1, releasing a large volume of water and sediment into nearby properties. The ruptured pipe was sent to a laboratory for analysis, but federal regulators and the company have not shared any results.

Safety, Health Doubts Linger Near Mountain Valley Pipeline’s Path

The Mountain Valley Pipeline could start moving natural gas anytime now, but the people who live near it still have questions about their safety and health.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline could start moving natural gas anytime now, but the people who live near it still have questions about their safety and health.

On Tuesday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved the pipeline to begin operating.

That’s despite a flood of comments on the commission’s public docket in recent weeks opposing or seeking to delay the decision.

Last month, the pipe burst during water pressure testing in Roanoke County, Virginia, and state and federal regulators haven’t shared much information about what happened.

Natalie Cox, a spokeswoman for Equitrans Midstream, which built the 303-mile pipeline, didn’t give a timeline for when gas would begin moving through it. 

“Final preparations are underway to begin commercial operations,” she said in an email.

People in affected communities are now wondering what to expect, including Russell Chisholm, of Newport, Virginia, co-director of Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights.

“I think it’s weighing heavily on everybody up and down the 303 miles of the route,” he said in a call Wednesday with reporters.

Chisholm said there were likely to be problems with leaks that could affect residents’ health.

Autumn Crowe, interim executive director of the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, said safety remained a concern for communities near the pipeline.

“It’s important for the public to know, it’s important for emergency responders to know, it’s important for everyone along the route to know when and how much gas is going through the pipeline,” she said on the call.

Jessica Sims, Virginia field coordinator for Appalachian Voices, said regulators had not done enough to reassure the public of the pipeline’s integrity or share sufficient detail about the failed pressure test on May 1.

“The public is still in the dark about important safety and environmental considerations from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and FERC,” she said.

The groups conceded they had few legal options remaining to challenge the pipeline, but said they would continue to monitor it.

Mountain Valley Pipeline Builder Declares Construction Complete

In a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Monday, Equitrans Midstream declared the project “mechanically complete” and in compliance with environmental and safety requirements.

The builder of the Mountain Valley Pipeline has asked federal regulators to give authorization for the natural gas pipeline to begin service on Tuesday.

In a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Monday, Equitrans Midstream declared the project “mechanically complete” and in compliance with environmental and safety requirements.

The nearly $8 billion, 303-mile pipeline has been under construction since 2018. 

Equitrans also told FERC it had completed water pressure testing on “all project facilities.”

A section of the pipeline burst during a pressure test on May 1 at Bent Mountain, Virginia.

It remains unclear whether FERC took the test failure into account. A pipeline safety watchdog asked FERC to give the project more scrutiny because of it.

The company has maintained that the incident warrants no safety concerns and demonstrates how the testing reveals problems that need to be corrected.

Residents, community groups, state lawmakers and county commissioners have asked FERC to deny the pipeline’s application for service.

Equitrans told FERC it had satisfied all aspects of a safety agreement it reached in October with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

The company cited the demand for the product in requesting quick regulatory approval.

“Multiple shippers have executed agreements to commence transporting volumes using the project facilities beginning the day after the project declares in-service, which further heightens the need for prompt authorization to meet market demands,” its letter said.

Construction of the pipeline was slowed by court challenges until a congressional spending deal last summer removed the regulatory and legal barriers to its completion.

Jessica Sims, Virginia field coordinator for Appalachian Voices, one of the groups that opposes the pipeline, said the people who live near it have unanswered questions about the pipeline’s readiness to begin operating.

“The community is in the dark about important safety and environmental considerations from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and FERC, while Mountain Valley Pipeline pressures FERC to prioritize the company’s sales schedule,” she said in an email.

When And How MVP Test Failure Was Reported To FERC Is Unclear

A Freedom of Information Act request to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission revealed no correspondence between the pipeline builder and FERC in the 10 days after the May 1 incident.

The builder of the Mountain Valley Pipeline has said it notified federal regulators when a section of the pipe ruptured last month during a pressure test.

However, a Freedom of Information Act request by West Virginia Public Broadcasting to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission revealed no correspondence between the pipeline builder, Equitrans Midstream, and the FERC Office of Energy Projects in the 10 days after the May 1 incident.

The Office of Energy Projects is tasked with approval of the pipeline to begin moving as much as 2 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day from north central West Virginia to southern Virginia. Among its other responsibilities: “safeguarding the public.”

The Pipeline Safety Trust, an independent watchdog group, encouraged FERC last month to closely examine the failed water pressure test at Bent Mountain, Virginia.

It remains unclear when and how FERC was notified of the ruptured pipe.

“We are aware of the situation,” wrote Celeste Miller, a FERC spokeswoman, in an email.

Natalie Cox, a spokeswoman for the pipeline’s builder, pointed to two documents in the FERC public docket: a construction status report posted on May 13 and an environmental compliance report posted on May 17.

Neither document conveys a sense of urgency about the incident. 

The construction status report says on page 12 that an “inadvertent hydrotest discharge caused turbid water to enter several resources.” 

On page 5 of the environmental compliance report, the entry says “the Compliance Monitor was notified that an applicant problem area report was written for sediment deposits beyond the limits of disturbance and into a sensitive resource at MP 246.1 due to a release of hydrostatic test water.”

Neither says the pipeline burst.

The incident was first made public because a landowner in Bent Mountain reported sediment-laden water on her property to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, which sent an investigator and entered a report into an online incident database.

Another landowner in Bent Mountain tracked down and photographed the damaged section of pipe, which was transported away from the site on a flatbed truck.

In a letter to FERC dated May 10, Todd Normane, Equitrans Midstream senior vice president, and legal counsel for the Mountain Valley Pipeline, wrote that the pressure test failure warranted no safety concerns and demonstrated that the testing was working as intended.

“To reiterate, hydrostatic testing is a proof test to ensure all pipeline components will safely operate at the (maximum allowable operating pressure) prior to introducing gas into the pipeline,” he wrote.

The 303-mile pipeline has been under construction since 2018, and legal challenges brought work to a halt on multiple occasions. The projected cost of the project is approaching $8 billion, more than twice the original estimate.

The pipeline got fast-tracked to completion last summer with the passage of the Fiscal Responsibility Act, a spending deal that required the approval of all remaining permits for construction. Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a Democrat turned independent, inserted the language into the bill over the objection of Virginia’s senators.

Landowners, environmental organizations, a group of Virginia state lawmakers and three county commissions have written to FERC urging it to deny the pipeline approval to enter service.

Federal Pipeline Regulator Oversees 3 Million Miles, Including MVP

Curtis Tate spoke with Cynthia Quarterman, the former head of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration from 2009 to 2014.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline is under scrutiny from federal regulators after it failed a pressure test in Virginia last month. 

Curtis Tate spoke with Cynthia Quarterman, the former head of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration from 2009 to 2014, about the federal agency’s role in regulating 3 million miles of pipeline.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Tate: What role does PHMSA play in commissioning a pipeline? Is it involved in the testing process? Or mainly once the pipeline begins operation?

Quarterman: Ordinarily, I would say that it is more of the latter than the former. It’s involved after the pipeline gets into service much more than it is during construction. Now, that’s not to say that they are not involved. They do go out while pipelines are being put in and inspect them. 

But the fact of the matter is, it’s so few inspectors and so many miles of pipeline that it’s difficult to get everywhere you want to be. Just looking at the record on this pipeline, it looks like the agency is saying they’ve been out 200 and something days, which sounds like quite a few times, although that’s been over many years. (The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) is the one who decides that it is OK for them to proceed with building a new pipeline. And they are responsible for ensuring that the construction of the pipeline meets all the safety standards. 

Tate: The MVP is under a consent decree with PHMSA over the integrity of the coating on the pipe that prevents corrosion. What is PHMSA looking for? How would they enforce it?

Quarterman: The MVP has to prove that they’ve met the terms of the consent decree. I haven’t seen the terms of consent decree in a great detail. So, I don’t know if they have required a third party that PHMSA chose to look at what MVP has done, but the coating and the pressure test are extremely unlikely to be related. 

The issue of having pipeline around for a long time, especially if it’s already coated, is that the coating can disbond from the pipe. Crevices and cavities, where corrosion could then be created because of water seeping in under the coating and that one spot becoming a pit and becoming corroded. Unlikely to have the kind of effect in this time period to make the pressure test fail. I’m just shooting off the hip here. It’s probably related to some sort of a problem at the seams or the welds, and less likely to be corrosion. On to the point where it’s created a pit so big that it’ll cause the pipe to fail from the pressure test. This is something that is not necessarily required to be reported to the public, so we’ll see if PHMSA requires MVP to tell them what the cause was, and whether that gets communicated more broadly. 

Tate: PHMSA is a relatively small agency overseeing a vast system of pipelines, right?

Quarterman: Yes, it is. And when I left, one of the things I was pushing for more inspectors and the numbers have grown substantially since then, but you’re still talking about a couple of hundred people who are overseeing 3 million miles of pipeline.

Tate: MVP crosses through some very rugged and remote terrain, with very steep slopes. Can it carry gas safely under high pressure?

Quarterman: It is certainly the safest way to carry oil and gas across the country. I have been out for inspections. I remember going out to some of the pipeline inspections where it looks like you’re going up a mountain. The pipeline is going up and coming down the other side. Obviously, there are pipelines under a great deal of the rivers and streams across the country. And for the most part, you have no idea they’re there, because they have been operating for so long without a problem, but there are occasions when horrible things happen, obviously.

Tate: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must soon decide whether to allow the MVP to begin operation. What should we expect?

Quarterman: I don’t know anybody over at FERC. I don’t have any inside knowledge. They’re pretty independent. So they’re going to make an independent decision about this. Hopefully, they will have a conversation with their sister agency PHMSA to talk about what is the current status of the consent decree, what they think about what happened with the pipeline. I’m hoping that they discuss with PHMSA what it means. I don’t know that they will. They tend to be pretty independent, meaning they don’t always, always reach out to speak to other people when they make their decision.

Tate: How persuasive is the public comment FERC receives?

Quarterman: I’m sure it’s considered. Now I’ve practiced before the rate hearings but I’ve never worked there. I don’t know who the current commissioners are, where their leanings are or anything like that. It’s going to depend upon the chairman of that commission and where they want it to go, whether they have the votes to either push it forward or delay it further.

Exit mobile version