Talking Points for MVP amendment request in Docket CP21-12

Environmental Concerns

• Additional information is needed on the amount of dewatering necessary for the bore pits
• Pumping may be needed 24/7, but there is no discussion in the Environmental Report of capacity of dewatering devices. This information should be included in an SEIS.
• An analysis of dewatering impacts on shallow groundwater should be performed and included in SEIS and an analysis of impacts to nearby residential drinking water wells must be performed and included in an SEIS
• Additional information is needed on the best management practices for handling of drilling mud. Drilling mud will be required for longer bores or bores through mixed ground.
• A full geotechnical analysis must be performed at each boring site to determine if boring is feasible since the drill bit subject to deflection from cobbles and boulders greater than 14 inches
• MVP has a history of non-compliance with their dewatering structures for borings and has received two notices of violations from the WVDEP for improperly installing dewatering devices and not operating properly causing sediment laden water to enter streams, a violation of WV water quality standards. 
• MVP’s amendment request for their FERC Certificate would change 69 water crossings over 77 miles to conventional bore from open water trench crossings.
• MVP should not be allowed to get around the Clean Water Act and court decisions to stay their existing permits.
• The Environmental Impact Statement process that MVP was required to undergo in order to receive their Certificate does not consider the impacts that conventional bore would have on these streams and wetlands. Therefore, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is warranted.
• Conventional bore is a risky process that is not suited for longer crossings and requires certain subsurface soil and geologic conditions and suitable topography. Wetlands and stream crossings in steep terrain with karst geology are not safe for conventional boring.
• MVP has not demonstrated a track record of construction practices that are in line with environmental protections, and should not be trusted to perform these risky methods.
• FERC must order site-specific assessments of each water crossing to determine the subsurface soil and geologic conditions, the likelihood for sediment run-off or boring hole collapse and whether long term impacts would be created from the large boring pit staging areas before considering MVP’s amendment request.
• Due to the substantiated lack of need for the project and the list of federal permits that are stayed that MVP is trying to work around, FERC should reject the amendment request.  

Procedural Concerns

• The request does not include any supplemental environmental analysis
• Multiple requests by Intervenors for a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement^[1] for this project in response to granted variances have gone unanswered by the Commission.
• Unclear procedurally how approval of this amendment would factor into the remainder of the route, and the missing Nationwide 12 permits for the Huntington and Norfolk Districts

Additional Links: Step-by-Step How To Kit for submitting comments    

Content for Talking Points provided by West Virginia Rivers Coalition, Sierra Club, POWHR & Appalachian Voices.