Pages

How Many Fracking Pipelines will be running across Virginia and North Carolina?




The Atlantic Coast Pipeline (former Spectra Pipeline )  :  Span 550 miles from West Virginia to North Carolina by way of Virginia. That includes a smaller 70-mile spur that would cut eastward to serve customers in Hampton Roads. Four companies: Dominion, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and the parent company of Virginia Natural Gas.
West Virginia Counties : Harrison, Lewis, Pocahontas, Randolph, Upshur, Virginia Counties/Cities: Augusta Brunswick Buckingham Chesapeake Cumberland Dinwiddie Greensville Highland Nelson Nottoway Prince Edward Southampton Suffolk North Carolina Counties : Cumberland Halifax Johnston Nash Northampton Robeson Sampson Wilson

Mountain Valley Pipeline:  Two companies — EQT Corp. in Pennsylvania and NextEra Energy in Florida,  330 miles southwest to Pittsylvania County, running through Giles, Pulaski, Montgomery, Floyd, and Franklin Counties
Note:  I found this under Transco, so is  Transco/Williams the true owners) Williams Announces Open Season for Transco Western Marcellus Pipeline Project:  The project is being designed to consist of a greenfield pipeline extending from the Rockies Express pipeline near Clarington, Ohio, and Williams Oak Grove processing plant in Marshall County, West Virginia, to Transco compressor station 165 in southern Virginia. From there, mainline modifications would allow both northbound flow to the proposed River Road point and southbound flow to Station 65 for significant portions of the project capacity.



Atlantic Sunrise Project:  Pre-Filing Projects :  Ferc:  Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC, 193.1 miles of 30" and 36" new PL; 2.5 mi. PL replacement; 127,000 HP compression at 2 new & 3 existing stations in PA, VA & MD to enable 1,700,000 Dt/d capacity  to NE & SE U.S. markets:  Virginia Southside Expansion: Williams Transco Co.: 100-mile pipeline:   Pittsylvania, Halifax, Charlotte and Mecklenburg counties and into eastern Brunswick County, Dominion Virginia Power natural-gas power station near Lawrenceville
http://atlanticsun.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/F-FQ-ASR-A-02RevB.pdf

http://search.usa.gov/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=ferc&query=Williams+Transco+Co+2014&commit=Search

http://atlanticsun.wpengine.com/






Two pipeline projects poised to ship gas to the Southeast

By Stephanie Ritenbaugh / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Two major pipeline projects are in the works to ship natural gas from the Marcellus and Utica shales to the southeastern U.S., a region with a growing appetite for natural gas.
Downtown-based EQT Corp. said Tuesday it is moving forward with its partner NextEra Energy, a Florida electric utility, to form a joint venture dubbed Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC. The partnership plans to build a 330-mile pipeline that would provide at least 2 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/​d) of transmission capacity to the mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic regions. The project, which is now seeking firm commitments for capacity from shippers during an open season, was first announced in June, and has already gotten commitments for 1.5 Bcf/​d, EQT said.
Meanwhile, a partnership of four energy companies — Dominion, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and AGL Resources — also announced Tuesday a roughly $5 billion pipeline project to take about 1.5 Bcf/​d to North Carolina and Virginia. The Atlantic Coast Pipeline would span 550 miles from Harrison County, W.Va., through Virginia and then south to North Carolina.
The southeastern U.S. is hungry for more natural gas. Not only is the region’s population — and, thus, consumption — growing, but power plants are also seeking out natural gas as an alternative to coal-fired power generation.
Since the shale boom, natural gas prices have fallen and become more competitive with coal. And now, new federal mandates limiting carbon emissions mean more utilities are closing down coal plants, which have higher greenhouse gas emissions, or converting plants to run on cleaner-burning natural gas.
Atlantic Coast Pipeline
There are three drivers behind the Atlantic Coast project, said Jim Norvelle, spokesman for Dominion.
“One is demand for natural gas from companies like Duke Energy, which are closing coal plants and converting coal-fired power stations to natural gas,” Mr. Norvelle said. Another is local natural gas distribution companies like Charlotte, N.C.-based Piedmont Natural Gas that are serving a growing population of customers. In addition, Dominion is “seeing economic development possibilities from industrial customers, or ones looking to build in the South but have been restricted because of a lack of natural gas,” Mr. Norvelle said.
At the moment, North Carolina is served primarily by a single major wholesale interstate natural gas pipeline, Williams’ Transco Pipeline, which runs through the western portion of the state.
The ownership stakes in the Atlantic Coast project are Dominion with 45 percent; Duke Energy, 40 percent; Piedmont, 10 percent; and AGL Resources, 5 percent.
Affiliates of all four companies plan to be customers of the pipeline under 20-year contracts, pending regulatory approvals. North Carolina-based PSNC Energy also plans to be a customer of the pipeline under a 20-year contract, pending regulatory approvals, according to Dominion.
Dominion plans to make a pre-filing request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission this fall on behalf of Atlantic Coast Pipeline. It expects to file its FERC application in summer 2015, receive the FERC Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity in the summer of 2016, and begin construction shortly thereafter.
If approved, the project is slated to go into service in late 2018.
Mountain Valley Pipeline
Mountain Valley also is expected to be in service during the fourth quarter of 2018. Subject to FERC approval, the 330-mile pipeline will connect the existing Equitrans transmission system in West Virginia, to the Williams’ Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company, or Transco, station in Virginia — “a highly marketable trading area for the southeast region,” EQT said Tuesday. EQT said it will operate the pipeline and own a majority interest in the joint venture.
“As we move into a binding open season, securing the 1.5 Bcf per day of firm capacity confirms we have an economically viable project. Marcellus and Utica producers will have cost-effective access to the growing demand for natural gas for use by local distribution companies, manufacturers, and power generation facilities,” Randy Crawford, senior vice president, EQT Corp., and chief operating officer, EQT Midstream Partners, said in a statement Tuesday.
The binding open season is scheduled to end Sept. 29, at which time the final project scope will be determined, EQT said.
“This is an exciting opportunity to invest in a high-quality natural gas pipeline that we expect to be fully contracted for the next 20 years,” said TJ Tuscai, president, NextEra US Gas Assets. “This project is expected to support production growth and physical takeaway capability in the Marcellus and Utica and provide new markets to producers and shippers in the region. In addition, customers in the southeast United States should benefit from a new reliable supply source.”
According to the American Gas Association, a trade group, 1,000 cubic feet of natural gas is about enough to meet the natural gas needs of an average home for four days. Five trillion cubic feet of natural gas is enough to meet the needs of 5 million households for 15 years.
Current natural gas demand in the South is about 14 Bcf/​d to 15 Bcf/​d, according to Bentek Energy, an analytics and research firm based in Denver. The firm forecasts that demand in the South, excluding Virginia, will grow by another 6 Bcf/​d between now and 2019. Of that, the power generation sector represents about 1 Bcf/​d. Another 3 Bcf/​d to 4 Bcf/​d is expected to come from proposed exports of liquefied natural gas from the nearby Gulf Coast.
Swami Venkataraman, vice president and senior credit officer for Moody’s Investor Service, who covers Dominion, sees the Atlantic Coast project as a unique step in the development of the Marcellus Shale.
Historically, natural gas has flowed from the Gulf Coast to the rest of the country, but the Marcellus boom of abundant gas supply in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia means pipelines are now being built in those states to serve demand centers. However, Marcellus pipeline construction is playing catch-up to soaring shale production. The pipelines that have been proposed to ship Appalachian gas out of the region have been driven by drillers trying to get their product to market.
“You have [natural gas] producers operating in the Marcellus and Utica, which may not be the largest or most credit-worthy customers since they’re smaller,” Mr. Venkataraman said. “A lot of the pipelines built in the region are meant to support these producers.
The Atlantic Coast project “stands out in that it is not producer-driven. It is demand-driven and underpinned by solid, highly rated utilities,” he said.
“What’s happening in Marcellus is the exception to the rule, because it’s grown so much, so fast, producers are pushing to get the gas out of the ground,” Mr. Venkataraman said. “This is a return to the style of demand-driven pipelines.”
Stephanie Ritenbaugh: sritenbaugh@post-gazette.com or 412-263-4910.
http://powersource.post-gazette.com/powersource/companies-powersource/2014/09/02/Felmy/stories/201409020010

100-mile pipeline will run through county

100-mile pipeline will run through county Pittsylvania County/ Mountain Valley Pipeline            

BY JOHN R. CRANE
jcrane@registerbee.com
(434) 791-7987 | Posted: Monday, September 1, 2014 12:00 am

Williams Transco Co. will start building a pipeline this month from its compressor station in Chatham to Brunswick County.
The 100-mile pipeline will run east through Pittsylvania, Halifax, Charlotte and Mecklenburg counties and into eastern Brunswick County. It will deliver natural gas to a new $1.3 billion, 1,358-megawatt Dominion Virginia Power natural-gas power station near Lawrenceville, according to the company’s website.
The new Williams Transco project will run parallel to the company’s existing line and will take about a year to complete, said Chris Stockton, Williams Transco spokesman. It will meet growing demand for natural gas — a cheaper and cleaner-burning resource than coal — in Southside Virginia, Stockton said.
Dominion Power received permission form the Virginia State Corporation Commission last month to build the plant. Commercial service is expected to begin in the summer of 2016, according to Dominion Power’s website.
Electricity from the new plant in Lawrenceville will replace energy that was previously made from coal, Stockton said.
Williams’s Transco natural gas pipeline network is about 10,200 miles long and runs from South Texas to New York City. It provides 10 percent of the nation’s natural gas, serving markets along the East Coast, Stockton said.
“It’s a major artery for gas flow in this country,” Stockton said, adding that it has been serving Virginia for several decades. Danville was its first delivery point when the pipeline was built in the 1950s, Stockton said.
Williams Transco’s project will provide about 1,000 temporary jobs during its construction phase and nine permanent jobs in operations after completion, Stockton said. Troy Construction, which has offices in Georgia and Texas, will build the pipeline.
The nine jobs will be likely split between Williams Transco’s compressor stations in Chatham and Mecklenburg County, Stockton said. About a quarter of the 1,000 construction jobs will be pulled form the local labor pool, he said.
The project’s construction will have an economic impact of about $97 million in Southside Virginia, with the line’s operation resulting in about $2 million, Stockton said.
The carbon steel line will be 2 feet in diameter and have about 270 million cubic feet capacity per day, Stockton said.
 
Mountain Valley Pipeline
Two companies — EQT Corp. in Pennsylvania and NextEra Energy in Florida — also plan to build a 330-mile natural gas pipeline from Wetzel County, West Virginia, to the Williams Transco compressor station in Chatham. The Mountain Valley Pipeline project — if approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — would connect the Marcellus shale and Utica shale natural gas deposits to markets in the Southeast, said Natalie Cox, corporate director of communications at EQT.
The Marcellus shale sweeps through Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and the Utica is in parts of Pennsylvania and Ohio.
The two companies announced in June the signing of a letter of intent to form a joint venture for the Mountain Valley Pipeline, according to a news release.
The pipeline would initially provide at least 2 billion cubic feet per day of transmission capacity. It’s expected to be operating by the fourth quarter of 2018, Cox said.
The companies have not filed the project for FERC approval, Cox said.
“Right now, we’re in the early stages and have to establish the joint venture,” Cox said Thursday.
The pipe’s size has not been determined, but it will be made of steel with corrosion-resistant coating, Cox said.
Population growth in the Southeast and the cleaner-burning properties of natural gas are driving an increase in demand, Cox said.
“Natural gas is far more clean for the environment than coal,” Cox said. Facilities that burned coal to make electricity are converting to natural gas, she said.
The abundance of natural gas in the U.S. is making it economical for Americans to continue to use natural gas made in the United States, Cox said.
“We’re continuing to reduce our reliance on foreign imports — gas and oil,” Cox said.
http://www.godanriver.com/news/pittsylvania_county/mile-pipeline-will-run-through-county/article_893fb95e-2fdc-11e4-9fb3-0017a43b2370.html



http://www.virginiaoutdoorsfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Graphic_eqt-mountain-valley.jpg

Williams Partners’ Transco Receives Binding Commitments for 1.7 Million Dekatherms per Day of Firm Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity on Its Proposed Atlantic Sunrise Expansion

TULSA, Okla., Feb 20, 2014 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Williams Partners L.P. WPZ, -1.36% today announced that its Transco pipeline system received binding commitments from nine shippers for 100 percent of the 1.7 million dekatherms of firm transportation capacity under its proposed Atlantic Sunrise expansion project. The project includes 15-year shipper commitments from producers, local distribution companies and power generators.

The project represents vital energy infrastructure that would connect surging, new supplies of natural gas in the Marcellus producing region in northeastern Pennsylvania with growing demand centers along the Atlantic Seaboard.

The Atlantic Sunrise project adds to the list of vital Transco mainline expansions, including Leidy Southeast and Virginia Southside. Transco is pursuing expansions that between 2013 and year-end 2017 are expected to add more than 50 percent to its system capacity.

“We expect to invest some $5 billion over the 2013 to 2017 timeframe in Transco expansions that represent vital connections between diverse, surging supplies of domestic natural gas and growing demand centers on the Eastern Seaboard from New York City to the far Southeast,”

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/skycross-reveals-new-products-and-technology-platform-as-well-as-partnership-program-to-advance-development-of-next-generation-wireless-broadband-front-end-solutions-2013-02-20




Atlantic Sunrise pipeline to take Marcellus gas southeast
 
August 5, 2014 3:45 AM

By Stephanie Ritenbaugh / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

proposed 178-mile pipeline in northeastern Pennsylvania that aims to connect Marcellus Shale production to the Mid-Atlantic and southeast is advancing.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said it is preparing an environmental impact statement for the proposed Atlantic Sunrise expansion project.

The pipeline, proposed by Tulsa-based midstream company Williams, will connect to the company’s Transcontinental Gas Pipeline (Transco), a 10,200-mile, 10.2 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) natural gas system that spans South Texas to New York City.

The 1.7 Bcf/d Atlantic Sunrise project will include construction in Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina and South Carolina.

FERC will use the environmental impact statement in its decision-making process to determine whether Atlantic Sunrise is a public necessity, the agency said in documents filed July 18.

Atlantic Sunrise is one of several infrastructure projects slated for the Marcellus and Utica.


http://powersource.post-gazette.com/local/2014/09/11/Warren-County-firm-agrees-to-stop-discharging-Marcellus-Shale-wastewater/
 

Large gas pipeline projects come to Southern Virginia

POSTED: 10:07 AM EDT Aug 06, 2014    UPDATED: 07:15 PM EDT Jul 08, 2014 
 
PITTSYLVANIA, HALIFAX COUNTIES, Va. - Something else is going in the ground in Southern Virginia besides tobacco and corn.
Two national energy companies based in Pennsylvania and Florida have plans to build a natural gas pipeline from Northwestern West Virginia 330 miles southwest to Pittsylvania County, running through Giles, Pulaski, Montgomery, Floyd, and Franklin Counties.
It's called the Mountain Valley Pipeline, planned to connect to the Williams Transco Company compressor station in Chatham.
The proposed pipeline is connecting other pipelines to Southern Virginia and points south. Company leaders say there is a growing need for more natural gas lines in the Southeastern United States.
Construction is expected to finish and the pipeline working by the end of 2018.

Williams Transco Company is working on another pipeline project of its own.
Contractors for the company are working now to distribute and organize 80 foot sections of steel pipe sitting on a 20 acre field beside Route 58, west of South Boston.
It's just some of the pieces that are part of the Virginia Southside Project, a a 100 mile extension from another pipeline from Pittsylvania County to Brunswick County.

The pipe connects to a new gas-fired power plant operated by Dominion Power.
Construction begins in two months with the pipeline ready to use in 2015. In the meantime, expect to see trucks with over sized loads driving slowly in Southern Virginia.
WDBJ7 talked with a few business owners in Halifax and Pittsylvania Counties who are near the proposed construction site. None of them were opposed to the project.
More than 15 hundred property owners will be effected by the projects.
http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/large-gas-pipeline-projects-come-to-southern-virginia/26851108

Williams Announces Open Season for Transco Western Marcellus Pipeline Project
9/4/2014 4:00:00 PM
To provide from one billion to in excess of two billion cubic feet per day of Marcellus and Utica natural gas to Transco markets
Williams (NYSE: WMB) has announced that it is initiating an open season from September 3 to September 29, 2014 for the Western Marcellus Pipeline Project, an expansion of the Transco interstate pipeline to provide incremental firm natural gas transportation capacity to growing markets in the Mid-Atlantic and southeastern United States by late 2018. Transco is a wholly owned subsidiary of Williams Partners, L.P. (NYSE: WPZ), of which Williams owns controlling interests and is the general partner.
The Western Marcellus Pipeline Project is being designed to provide from one billion to in excess of two billion cubic feet per day of new natural gas transportation capacity from receipt points in the Western Marcellus and Utica supply areas to points as far south as Transco's Zone 3 compressor station 65 in Mississippi and as far north as the proposed Zone 6 River Road point in Pennsylvania. The project would connect Williams' Ohio Valley Midstream processing and gathering system in northern West Virginia with the Transco pipeline, the largest volume pipeline system in the United States.
   
The project is being designed to consist of a greenfield pipeline extending from the Rockies Express pipeline near Clarington, Ohio, and Williams Oak Grove processing plant in



Marshall County, West Virginia, to Transco compressor station 165 in southern Virginia. From there, mainline modifications would allow both northbound flow to the proposed River Road point and southbound flow to Station 65 for significant portions of the project capacity.
   
The final capacity, scope and cost of the project will be determined by the results of the open season.
"The Western Marcellus Pipeline Project will for the first time offer Western Marcellus and Utica producers serviced by Williams' Ohio Valley Midstream direct access to the broad range of Transco markets in the Mid-Atlantic and southeastern states, as far south as Florida," said Rory Miller, senior vice president of Williams' Atlantic-Gulf Operating Area. "In addition, this groundbreaking project would provide enhanced supply access for burgeoning Louisiana and Texas Gulf Coast markets accessible through our Station 65 pool."
The proposed project will be subject to approval by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and other agencies. For customer inquiries, contact James Corley at (713) 215-4607.
The Western Marcellus Pipeline Project is in addition to the $3.3 billion in capital expenditures planned through 2017 on Transco growth projects designed to serve markets in the Northeast. Transco is the nation's largest and fastest-growing interstate natural gas transmission pipeline system. It delivers natural gas to customers through its 10,200-mile pipeline network whose mainline extends nearly 1,800 miles between South Texas and New York City. The system is a major provider of cost-effective natural gas services that reach U.S. markets in 12 Southeast and Atlantic Seaboard states, including major metropolitan areas in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
About Williams (NYSE: WMB)
Williams, headquartered in Tulsa, Okla., is one of the leading energy infrastructure companies in North America. It owns controlling interests in both Williams Partners L.P. and Access Midstream Partners, L.P. (NYSE: ACMP) through its ownership of 100 percent of the general partner of each partnership. Additionally, Williams owns approximately 66 percent and 50 percent of the limited partner units of Williams Partners L.P. and Access Midstream Partners, L.P., respectively.
Williams Partners L.P. owns and operates both on-shore and offshore assets of approximately 15,000 miles of natural gas gathering and transmission pipelines, 1,800 miles of NGL transportation pipelines, an additional 11,000 miles of oil and gas gathering pipelines and numerous other energy infrastructure assets. The partnership's facilities have daily gas processing capacity of 6.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas, NGL production of more than 200,000 barrels per day and domestic olefins production capacity of 1.35 billion pounds of ethylene and 90 million pounds of propylene per year.
Access Midstream Partners, L.P. owns, operates, develops and acquires natural gas gathering systems and other midstream energy assets. Headquartered in Oklahoma City, the partnership's operations are focused on the Barnett, Eagle Ford, Haynesville, Marcellus, Niobrara and Utica Shales and the Mid-Continent region of the U.S.
For more information about Williams, Williams Partners and Access Midstream Partners, visit www.williams.com, www.williamslp.com and www.accessmidstream.com.
Portions of this document may constitute "forward-looking statements" as defined by federal law. Although the company believes any such statements are based on reasonable assumptions, there is no assurance that actual outcomes will not be materially different. Any such statements are made in reliance on the "safe harbor" protections provided under the Private Securities Reform Act of 1995. Additional information about issues that could lead to material changes in performance is contained in the company's annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


Williams
Media Contact:
Christopher Stockton, 713-215-2010
or
Investor Contacts:
John Porter, 918-573-0797
or
Sharna Reingold, 918-573-2078
http://www.williamslp.com/profiles/investor/ResLibraryView.asp?ResLibraryID=72278&BzID=1296&g=345&Nav=0&LangID=1&s=0


EQT and NextEra Energy Announce Mountain Valley Pipeline Project Joint Venture Formation and Binding Open Season
Tuesday, September 2, 2014 8:10 am EDT
"We are encouraged by the market response to the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline thus far"
PITTSBURGH--(BUSINESS WIRE)--EQT Corporation (NYSE: EQT) and NextEra US Gas Assets, LLC, an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of NextEra Energy, Inc (NYSE: NEE) today announced the formation of a joint venture, Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, that will construct and own the Mountain Valley Pipeline. The joint venture also announced the launch of a binding open season for the Mountain Valley Pipeline. The companies also announced EQT Corporation, through one or more of its affiliates, including EQT Midstream Partners, LP (NYSE: EQM), will operate the pipeline and own a majority interest in the joint venture.
With a vast supply of natural gas from Marcellus and Utica shale production, the Mountain Valley Pipeline is expected to provide at least two billion cubic feet per day of firm transmission capacity to demand markets in the Mid- and South Atlantic regions of the United States. Subject to FERC approval, the estimated 330-mile Mountain Valley Pipeline will connect the existing Equitrans transmission system in West Virginia, to Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company’s (Transco) Zone 5 compressor station 165 in Virginia – a highly marketable trading area for the southeast region. To-date, the joint venture has received firm capacity commitments that total 1.5 Bcf per day. The pipeline is expected to be in-service during the fourth quarter 2018.
“As we move into a binding open season, securing the 1.5 Bcf per day of firm capacity confirms we have an economically viable project. Marcellus and Utica producers will have cost-effective access to the growing demand for natural gas for use by local distribution companies, manufacturers, and power generation facilities,” stated Randy Crawford, senior vice president, EQT Corporation; and chief operating officer, EQT Midstream Partners.
“We are encouraged by the market response to the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline thus far,” said TJ Tuscai, president, NextEra US Gas Assets. ”We look forward to working with our partner EQT to bring a new reliable supply of natural gas to customers in the southeast United States.”
The binding open season was filed by the joint venture, and the initial operator of the pipeline will be a subsidiary of EQT Corporation. The binding open season is scheduled to end on September 29, 2014, at which time the final project scope will be determined. For more information on the binding open season, please visit www.eqt.com.

Media Contacts

(For credentialed news media)
Natalie Cox
Corporate Director,
Communications
ncox@eqt.com
Tel. 412.395.3941
Linda Robertson
Manager,
Media Relations
lrobertson@eqt.com
Tel. 412.553.7827

Investor Relations

Patrick J. Kane, CFA
Chief Investor Relations Officer
pkane@eqt.com
Tel. 412.553.7833
Nate Tetlow, CFA
Investor Relations Manager
ntetlow@eqt.com
Tel. 412.553.5834

Corporate Communications

(For general inquiries)
Deborah Collier
Communications Assistant
dcollier@eqt.com
Tel. 412.395.3546

   
About EQT Corporation:
EQT Corporation is an integrated energy company with emphasis on Appalachian area natural gas production, gathering, and transmission. EQT is the general partner and significant equity owner of EQT Midstream Partners, LP. With more than 125 years of experience, EQT continues to be a leader in the use of advanced horizontal drilling technology – designed to minimize the potential impact of drilling-related activities and reduce the overall environmental footprint. Through safe and responsible operations, the Company is committed to meeting the country’s growing demand for clean-burning energy, while continuing to provide a rewarding workplace and enrich the communities where its employees live and work. Company shares are traded on the New York Stock Exchange as EQT.
Visit EQT Corporation at www.eqt.com.
About EQT Midstream Partners:
EQT Midstream Partners, LP is a growth-oriented limited partnership formed by EQT Corporation to own, operate, acquire, and develop midstream assets in the Appalachian Basin. The Partnership provides midstream services to EQT Corporation and third-party companies through its strategically located transmission, storage, and gathering systems that service the Marcellus and Utica regions. The Partnership owns 700 miles and operates an additional 200 miles of FERC-regulated interstate pipelines; and also owns more than 1,600 miles of high- and low-pressure gathering lines.
Visit EQT Midstream Partners, LP at www.eqtmidstreampartners.com.
About NextEra Energy, Inc.
NextEra Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NEE) is a leading clean energy company with consolidated revenues of approximately $15.1 billion, approximately 42,500 megawatts of generating capacity, and approximately 13,900 employees in 26 states and Canada as of year-end 2013. Headquartered in Juno Beach, Fla., NextEra Energy’s principal subsidiaries are Florida Power & Light Company, which serves approximately 4.7 million customer accounts in Florida and is one of the largest rate-regulated electric utilities in the United States, and NextEra Energy Resources, LLC, which together with its affiliated entities is the largest generator in North America of renewable energy from the wind and sun. Through its subsidiaries, NextEra Energy generates clean, emissions-free electricity from eight commercial nuclear power units in Florida, New Hampshire, Iowa and Wisconsin. NextEra Energy has been recognized often by third parties for its efforts in sustainability, corporate responsibility, ethics and compliance, and diversity, and has been named No. 1 overall among electric and gas utilities on Fortune’s list of “World’s Most Admired Companies” for eight consecutive years, which is an unprecedented achievement in its industry.
EQT Cautionary Statements
Disclosures in this news release contain certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Statements that do not relate strictly to historical or current facts are forward-looking. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, forward-looking statements contained in this news release specifically include the expectations of plans, strategies, objectives and growth, and anticipated financial and operational performance of EQT and its affiliates; including guidance regarding the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) and joint venture, such as the projected length of the MVP; the EQT affiliate to own and/or operate the MVP; the MVP’s expected interconnections with facilities and pipelines; existing customer commitments; the timing of development and construction for the MVP; and the expected in-service date for the MVP. The forward-looking statements included in this news release are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from projected results. Accordingly, investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as a prediction of actual results. EQT has based these forward-looking statements on current expectations and assumptions about future events. While EQT considers these expectations and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory, and other risks and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and are beyond EQT’s control. The risks and uncertainties that may affect the operations, performance, and results of EQT’s business and forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, those set forth under Item 1A, "Risk Factors" of EQT’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, as updated by any subsequent Form 10-Qs.
Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made and EQT does not intend to correct or update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
NextEra Cautionary Statements and Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results
This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are not statements of historical facts, but instead represent the current expectations of NextEra Energy, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, NextEra Energy) regarding future operating results and other future events, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and outside of NextEra Energy's control. Forward-looking statements in this press release include, among others, statements concerning adjusted earnings per share expectations and future operating performance. In some cases, you can identify the forward-looking statements by words or phrases such as “will,” “may result,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “intend,” “plan,” “seek,” “aim,” “potential,” “projection,” “forecast,” “predict,” “goals,” “target,” “outlook,” “should,” “would” or similar words or expressions. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which are not a guarantee of future performance. The future results of NextEra Energy and its business and financial condition are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements, or may require it to limit or eliminate certain operations. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the following: effects of extensive regulation of NextEra Energy's business operations; inability of NextEra Energy to recover in a timely manner any significant amount of costs, a return on certain assets or an appropriate return on capital through base rates, cost recovery clauses, other regulatory mechanisms or otherwise; impact of political, regulatory and economic factors on regulatory decisions important to NextEra Energy; disallowance of cost recovery based on a finding of imprudent use of derivative instruments; effect of any reductions to or elimination of governmental incentives that support renewable energy projects or the imposition of additional taxes or assessments on renewable energy; impact of new or revised laws, regulations or interpretations or other regulatory initiatives on NextEra Energy; effect on NextEra Energy of potential regulatory action to broaden the scope of regulation of over-the-counter (OTC) financial derivatives and to apply such regulation to NextEra Energy; capital expenditures, increased operating costs and various liabilities attributable to environmental laws, regulations and other standards applicable to NextEra Energy; effects on NextEra Energy of federal or state laws or regulations mandating new or additional limits on the production of greenhouse gas emissions; exposure of NextEra Energy to significant and increasing compliance costs and substantial monetary penalties and other sanctions as a result of extensive federal regulation of its operations; effect on NextEra Energy of changes in tax laws and in judgments and estimates used to determine tax-related asset and liability amounts; impact on NextEra Energy of adverse results of litigation; effect on NextEra Energy of failure to proceed with projects under development or inability to complete the construction of (or capital improvements to) electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities, gas infrastructure facilities or other facilities on schedule or within budget; impact on development and operating activities of NextEra Energy resulting from risks related to project siting, financing, construction, permitting, governmental approvals and the negotiation of project development agreements; risks involved in the operation and maintenance of electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities, gas infrastructure facilities and other facilities; effect on NextEra Energy of a lack of growth or slower growth in the number of customers or in customer usage; impact on NextEra Energy of severe weather and other weather conditions; threats of terrorism and catastrophic events that could result from terrorism, cyber attacks or other attempts to disrupt NextEra Energy's business or the businesses of third parties; inability to obtain adequate insurance coverage for protection of NextEra Energy against significant losses and risk that insurance coverage does not provide protection against all significant losses; risk of increased operating costs resulting from unfavorable supply costs necessary to provide full energy and capacity requirement services; inability or failure to manage properly or hedge effectively the commodity risk within its portfolio; potential volatility of NextEra Energy's results of operations caused by sales of power on the spot market or on a short-term contractual basis; effect of reductions in the liquidity of energy markets on NextEra Energy's ability to manage operational risks; effectiveness of NextEra Energy's risk management tools associated with its hedging and trading procedures to protect against significant losses, including the effect of unforeseen price variances from historical behavior; impact of unavailability or disruption of power transmission or commodity transportation facilities on sale and delivery of power or natural gas; exposure of NextEra Energy to credit and performance risk from customers, hedging counterparties and vendors; failure of counterparties to perform under derivative contracts or of requirement for NextEra Energy to post margin cash collateral under derivative contracts; failure or breach of NextEra Energy's information technology systems; risks to NextEra Energy's retail businesses from compromise of sensitive customer data; losses from volatility in the market values of derivative instruments and limited liquidity in OTC markets; impact of negative publicity; inability to maintain, negotiate or renegotiate acceptable franchise agreements; increasing costs of health care plans; lack of a qualified workforce or the loss or retirement of key employees; occurrence of work strikes or stoppages and increasing personnel costs; NextEra Energy's ability to successfully identify, complete and integrate acquisitions, including the effect of increased competition for acquisitions; environmental, health and financial risks associated with ownership and operation of nuclear generation facilities; liability of NextEra Energy for significant retrospective assessments and/or retrospective insurance premiums in the event of an incident at certain nuclear generation facilities; increased operating and capital expenditures at nuclear generation facilities resulting from orders or new regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; inability to operate any owned nuclear generation units through the end of their respective operating licenses; liability for increased nuclear licensing or compliance costs resulting from hazards, and increased public attention to hazards, posed to owned nuclear generation facilities; risks associated with outages of owned nuclear units; effect of disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the credit and capital markets on NextEra Energy's ability to fund its liquidity and capital needs and meet its growth objectives; inability to maintain current credit ratings; impairment of liquidity from inability of creditors to fund their credit commitments or to maintain their current credit ratings; poor market performance and other economic factors that could affect NextEra Energy's defined benefit pension plan's funded status; poor market performance and other risks to the asset values of nuclear decommissioning funds; changes in market value and other risks to certain of NextEra Energy's investments; effect of inability of NextEra Energy subsidiaries to pay upstream dividends or repay funds to NextEra Energy or of NextEra Energy's performance under guarantees of subsidiary obligations on NextEra Energy's ability to meet its financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock; and effect of disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the credit and capital markets of the market price of NextEra Energy's common stock. NextEra Energy discusses these and other risks and uncertainties in its annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 and other SEC filings, and this press release should be read in conjunction with such SEC filings made through the date of this press release. The forward-looking statements made in this press release are made only as of the date of this press release and NextEra Energy undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements.


Mountain Valley Pipeline Binding Open SeasonDocumentshttp://www.eqt.com/docs/pdf/MVPBindingOpenSeason.PDF

Virginia Southside Expansion

Historically low natural gas prices and the public’s desire for cleaner energy have fueled the growing popularity of natural gas. Clean-burning natural gas currently produces one-quarter of all electric generation and heats about half of all U.S. homes – and those numbers continue to climb.
Williams, one of the leading energy infrastructure companies in North America, has developed a proposal to serve growing natural gas markets in Virginia and North Carolina. Williams’ Transco natural gas pipeline currently transports approximately one quarter of the natural gas consumed in Virginia and nearly all of the gas consumed in North Carolina. The Virginia Southside Expansion would expand the existing Transco pipeline facilities in southern Virginia by 2015, allowing the pipeline to increase deliveries by 270,000 dekatherms per day.
The project is primarily designed to fuel Dominion Virginia Power’s new 1,300-megawatt electric power plant planned in Brunswick County, Va. Output from the Brunswick County facility is designed to replace the electricity generated by coal units at two eastern Virginia power stations, resulting in a net environmental benefit for the Commonwealth. In addition, the project will provide additional gas supply to Piedmont Natural Gas Company in North Carolina to serve its growing natural gas needs.
Facilities
The project is designed to consist of approximately 100 miles of new 24-inch diameter pipeline extending from the Transco mainline in Pittsylvania County, Va., and into Halifax, Charlotte, Mecklenburg, and terminating in Brunswick County, Va.
In addition, as part of the proposal Williams is proposing to construct a state-of-the-art 21,800-horsepower gas turbine compressor station located in Pittsylvania County, Va. The facility would be located in close proximity to the existing Transco Station 165 in Chatham, Va.
Construction is scheduled to begin in September 2014.
Permitting Process
Before the pipeline can be constructed, Williams must first obtain a federal Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), in addition to various state and local permits. In May 2012 Williams requested that FERC initiate a pre-filing environmental review of the pipeline proposal.
The FERC pre-filing process is intended to solicit early input from citizens, governmental entities and other interested parties to identify and address issues with potential facility locations. The company hosted a series of public open houses in the affected areas to formally introduce the proposal to the public and solicit feedback. Public input is important to us and can help shape the final project scope.
Following the pre-filing period, Williams filed its certificate application with the FERC in December 2012 seeking approval to construct the pipeline. The project was assigned docket number CP13-30. The FERC issued an Order granting a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity on Nov. 21, 2013. You may access the application and other project-related documentation at the FERC website.
Developing a Pipeline Route
By maximizing the use of our existing transmission corridor, our goal is to minimize the impact on property owners and the environment. The location of proposed pipeline facilities would be collocated with existing pipeline corridors or other easements for approximately 93% of the total route. A complete and thorough environmental analysis will be conducted as part of the FERC application process.
Ground Surveys
Ground surveys are a pre­liminary first step in gathering critical information that can be used in devel­oping a pipeline proposal.  Initial ground surveys (environmental, cultural and civil surveys) began in the spring of 2012.  After receiving permission from the landowner, each property will be visited by various specialists in land, engineering and environmental sciences. These may or may not be con­current visits but should not last longer than one or two days each. Some prop­erties may need to be revisited to obtain additional data. All information col­lected will be used to help us determine the best location of the proposed pipeline facilities.
Schedule
  • May 2012 – Pre-filing process began
  • May 2012 – Ground surveys began
  • July 2012 – Open Houses and Informational Meetings
  • September 2012 – FERC scoping hearings
  • December 2012 – Submit 7(c) application to FERC
  • November 2013 — FERC issued order approving the project
  • September 2014 – Proposed pipeline construction start
  • September 2015 – Target in-service
Project Benefits
The project is designed to fuel the need for additional power generation in the region with clean-burning natural gas, replacing two coal-fired power plants in eastern Virginia. The change from coal to natural gas will reduce air emissions, resulting in a net environmental benefit for the State.
There will be significant short-term economic impact during the construction phase of the project. Restaurants, hotels/motels, and retailers will experience increased activity from construction crews.  The state and local community will benefit economically through state and local sales and use taxes for the materials and equipment purchased to be installed at the job sites. Local communities will also benefit from property taxes that Williams will pay during the ongoing operation of the pipeline, estimated to be approximately $350,000 per year.
According to a 2012 economic impact study conducted by Chmura Economics & Analytics, the one-time construction of the Virginia Southside project can inject a total of $97.7 million into the economy of southern Virginia from 2014 to 2015, supporting 1,024 cumulative jobs in two years. The ongoing operations of the pipeline will have an annual impact of $2.1 million that supports nine jobs in the region.
Our Commitment
Williams is committed to working with landowners, as well as local, state and federal agencies, to design and construct the project in a manner that minimizes environmental and landowner impacts. We are committed to extensive public outreach in advance of submitting our application to the FERC. Our goals are to:
  • Generate a broad awareness of the project, its purposes and value to the region’s economy and to meeting the future energy needs of the state and region.
  • Ensure that community residents and a broad range of stakeholders have ample opportunity to understand the process and their rights, ask questions, voice concerns and present ideas about the project.
  • Ensure that Williams hears and understands the full range of stakeholder questions, concerns and feedback, and responds clearly and in a timely manner.
  • Create an atmosphere of openness, disclosure and public dialogue in which we can respond to questions, concerns and suggestions presented by the community and other stakeholders.
Contact Us
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us anytime.
Toll-free hotline: 866-455-9103
PipelineExpansion@williams.com
You may also call or write our land office, located at:
Virginia Southside Expansion Land Office
102 North Mecklenburg Avenue
South Hill, VA  23970
(434) 447-5014
http://co.williams.com/williams/operations/gas-pipeline/expansion-projects/transco-expansion-projects/virginia-southside-expansion-2/

Public Meetings

 FERC will conduct scoping hearings for the Virginia Southside project in September 2012
September 18, 2012Beginning at 6:30 PM
Brian’s Restaurant (upstairs room)
625 East Atlantic Ave
South Hill, VA 23970
September 19, 2012Beginning at 6:30 PM
Fairfield Inn & Suites Conference Suite
1120 Bill Tuck Highway
South Boston, VA  24592
September 20, 2012Beginning at 6:30 PM
Olde Dominion Agricultural Conference Center
19783 US Hwy 29 S, Suite G
Chatham, VA  24531
Williams is dedicated to working with communities to identify facility locations that minimize impacts on the community and the environment, while balancing the needs of customers. Early involvement from communities helps the company identify and address issues related to project design and location.
Importance of the public’s input

The review process builds public communication into the beginning of the FERC approval process – before a formal application is filed – so interested parties may participate more fully in the route selection process.
Williams is committed to extensive public outreach in advance of submitting our application to the FERC. Our goals are to:
  • Generate a broad awareness of the project, its purposes and value to the region’s economy and to meeting the future energy needs of the state and region.
  • Ensure that community residents and a broad range of stakeholders have ample opportunity to understand the process and their rights, ask questions, voice concerns and present ideas about the project.
  • Ensure that Williams hears and understands the full range of stakeholder questions, concerns and feedback, and responds clearly and in a timely manner.
  • Create an atmosphere of openness, disclosure and public dialogue in which we can respond to questions, concerns and suggestions presented by the community and other stakeholders.
Our public outreach tools include:
  • Direct correspondence with property owners along the possible routes
  • Contact with the local news media
  • Establishment of a toll-free information phone number, 1-866-455-9103, project website, newsletter and e-mail address (pipelineexpansion@williams.com)
  • Contact with community leaders, public officials and other stakeholders
  • Creation of materials explaining the project
  • Enhancing access to information about property owners’ rights and the regulatory review/approval process
http://co.williams.com/williams/operations/gas-pipeline/expansion-projects/transco-expansion-projects/virginia-southside-expansion-2/virginia-southside-expansion-public-meetings
 

Natural gas pipeline plan riles Floyd County

Posted: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 11:30 pm
Longtime Floyd County resident Mara Robbins said routing an interstate natural gas pipeline though the bucolic rural county would be akin to running an open sewer through a cathedral. Fred First likened the growing opposition among county residents to the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline project to the reaction of the human body’s immune system to a potential pathogen. Robbins, First and others involved with the freshly minted Citizens Preserving Floyd County have raised concerns about the pipeline’s potential impacts on, among other things, groundwater, safety, aesthetics, agriculture, tourism and property values.
The group is hosting a public meeting today at the Floyd EcoVillage to share information gleaned to date about the pipeline. The meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m.
On Tuesday morning, Jane Cundiff, who said her husband’s roots in the mountainous region date to the 1700s, told Floyd County’s board of supervisors that the companies backing the pipeline want to “plow a deep wound right across our property.”
Case Clinger, chairman of the board of supervisors, said local government has not been contacted by the pipeline companies and intends to remedy that situation. The board asked county staff to draft a resolution requesting that route surveying cease until a public meeting can be arranged with the pipeline companies.
In June, EQT Corp., based in Pennsylvania, and Florida-based NextEra Energy announced plans to assess building a 330-mile, high-pressure natural gas pipeline from a site in West Virginia to a delivery point in Pittsylvania County.
As envisioned, the pipeline, which would convey natural gas extracted through fracking in the Marcellus and Utica shale formations in the Appalachian Basin, would pass through Giles, Pulaski, Montgomery, Floyd, Franklin and Henry counties before ending in Pittsylvania County.
EQT and NextEra have said the pipeline will help meet growing demand in the Southeast for natural gas, especially as electric utilities abandon coal as a fuel source for power generation.
Recently, residents of Floyd County whose properties are apparently within a possible route for the buried pipeline received a letter advising them of the need to survey their land. The letter, which included the logos of EQT and NextEra Energy, was signed by Phil Novak of Coates Field Service, a right-of-way acquisition company based in Oklahoma.
The letter informed recipients that “as a local property owner, you have been identified as having property that is located within the proposed survey corridor.”
Jane and Ken Cundiff, both teachers who are semiretired, own and live on about 77 acres near the intersection of New Haven and Shooting Creek roads. Jane Cundiff said the proposed pipeline could damage mountain wetlands on the couple’s property that are key throughout the region to groundwater quality, wildlife and biodiversity.
Cundiff told supervisors that the pipeline threatens the quality of life long cherished by residents of Floyd County.
Nick Piazza, also a landowner in the Shooting Creek Road area, said the pipeline companies’ lack of communication with people in Floyd County at this early stage does not bode well. Piazza, a psychologist, elicited laughter Tuesday with a related observation.
“You’ll never be treated better than you are at the start of a relationship,” he said.
Rick Huff, county administrator in Franklin County, said Tuesday that local officials have heard from some landowners who have also received survey-related letters but have not had direct contact with the pipeline companies. He said the county has requested a meeting.
David Roper, a retired physics professor in Blacksburg who once taught at Virginia Tech, has long been interested in energy sustainability. He said Monday that he questions the wisdom of building a pipeline dedicated to a fossil fuel whose extraction through fracking could soon peak and then decline.
“Fracking” is a slang term for hydraulic fracturing, a controversial procedure that involves injecting fluid at high pressure into cracks in rocks and rock formations to force them open further to facilitate the extraction of gas or oil.
Elizabeth McCommon of Blacksburg, who has been involved in efforts in years past to block a dam on the New River and transmission power lines, said the new emphasis on natural gas extraction and related power generation is shortsighted.
“We’re not looking forward,” she said. “I guess it’s naive to think we really could.”
The proposed pipeline would have to be sanctioned by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is charged by Congress with evaluating the need for interstate natural gas pipelines proposed by private companies.
A FERC brochure advises landowners that if a pipeline is approved and they fail to reach an easement agreement with the companies involved, a decision about access to and compensation for the use of the landowner’s property will be determined by a court.
FERC said the pipeline builder “negotiates a right-of-way easement and compensation for the easement with each landowner.” The right-of-way is generally 75 feet to 100 feet wide during construction and the permanent right-of-way is usually about 50 feet wide, the commission reports.
Tamara Young-Allen, a spokeswoman for FERC, said Wednesday that landowners have no legal obligation to allow surveyors on their property. But she said the information obtained through surveying can help inform FERC’s decision whether to approve the pipeline.
Natalie Cox, a spokeswoman for EQT Corp., said the surveying helps identify a pipeline route that would cause the least “surface disturbance” and help avoid sensitive areas.
She said outreach to communities about the proposed pipeline would typically begin once the review process is further along.
Dominion Transmission, a subsidiary of Dominion Resources, is considering building a similar pipeline that would route through central Virginia. Dominion held a public meeting Tuesday in Nelson County to talk about its plans after being pressured for more information by the county’s board of supervisors.
Robbins said utility companies seeking easements sometimes try to pit neighbor against neighbor. She said she hopes people and local officials in Floyd County will work together to block the pipeline and she congratulated supervisors on their responsiveness to date to residents’ concerns.
On Tuesday, county resident Diane Giessler told supervisors that the pipeline could undermine efforts to attract tourism, cause drops in property values and lead to other problems without offering anything in return.
“I haven’t heard of one positive thing this pipeline will do for this county,” Giessler said.
Robbins acknowledged that all efforts to block the pipeline’s passage through Floyd County might fail. But she said vigilant monitoring of the review process, pipeline routing, construction and maintenance could yield a safer, less environmentally destructive pipeline.
First said Floyd County’s history and identity have long valued natural beauty, agriculture and a sense of well-being tied to rural living.
“Other communities have given all of that away,” he said.

More about

More about

More about


Group rallies opposition to gas pipeline through Floyd County

By Duncan Adams duncan.adams@roanoke.com 981-3324 | Posted: Friday, August 15, 2014 4:45 pm
A united community and region pack enough push-back to defeat or at least significantly temper corporate plans to route an interstate high-pressure natural gas pipeline through Floyd County and neighboring counties in Southwest and Southside Virginia.
That was the theme Thursday night of a meeting hosted by Citizens Preserving Floyd County. More than 200 people attended the gathering at Floyd EcoVillage to discuss concerns about the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline.
Blacksburg resident Elizabeth McCommon, a veteran of battles with energy utilities, told the crowd that a regional effort would be required to ensure the pipeline’s defeat. She said she would reach out to potential allies in the New River Valley.
Discussion Thursday night focused on the county’s vulnerable groundwater, property owners’ options when surveyors want access to their land, safety and other topics.
Jerry Boothe, a former member of the county’s board of supervisors, said easements previously sold to Dominion during the utility’s ultimately unsuccessful bid a decade ago to build a natural gas pipeline through Floyd and other counties could be transferred to other companies. The company ultimately abandoned plans to build the Greenbrier Pipeline after failing to secure enough customers for the pipeline’s gas.
Frank Mack, a spokesman for Dominion Transmission, a Dominion subsidiary, confirmed Friday that “any valid easements that we paid in full could be sold and assigned to an interested company or individual.”
News coverage in 2005 reported that few such easements had been sold in Floyd County.
Meanwhile, Mara Robbins, acting director of the recently organized Citizens Preserving Floyd County, said the campaign to block the pipeline has attracted some of the “most sharply focused minds in the county,” people with passion, energy and commitment to preserve the county’s quality of life.
EQT Corp., based in Pennsylvania, and NextEra Energy, based in Florida, announced plans in June to seek customers for a 330-mile pipeline that would transport natural gas from West Virginia to a delivery point in Pittsylvania County.
Robbins elicited applause from Thursday night’s crowd when she recounted a conversation she said she’d had with an employee of EQT about the proposed routing of the pipeline through seven counties in Virginia.
Robbins said she told the woman that “Floyd County was going to be a very complicated piece of the puzzle” for EQT and NextEra’s joint venture. And that observation seemed valid last night as Floyd residents who had come back to the land or never left it described strong ties to the county’s scenic beauty and agricultural heritage and determination to block the pipeline.
One focus of Thursday’s meeting was water and the potential for groundwater contamination.

Floyd County’s comprehensive plan notes that the county’s location along the Blue Ridge Plateau means that water flows out of the county and not in. The county includes tributaries of the New River and headwater streams for several rivers, including the Roanoke River, according to the comprehensive plan.

The plan notes that Floyd County “lacks true aquifers” but relies instead on water-filled fractures that can be vulnerable to contamination.
“Water is probably our biggest concern right now,” Robbins said.

Safety concerns also received attention Thursday night.
Gini Cooper, who played a role in opposing the Greenbrier Pipeline, said Thursday night that a high-pressure natural gas pipeline in Floyd County could pose significant safety risks and overwhelm regional fire departments and other emergency responders.
A so far undetermined number of county landowners have received letters from a right-of-way acquisition contractor working for EQT and NextEra. The letter notifies the landowner that their property is located within a survey corridor for the pipeline and reports that they will be contacted for permission to survey the land.
Earlier this week a spokeswoman for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said property owners have no legal obligation to allow such surveyors on their property.
But Boothe noted Thursday that Virginia law allows surveyors for natural gas companies to work on private property without a landowner’s permission if specific notification requirements have been met.
Jane Cundiff, a county landowner who has received notice that her property is in the survey corridor, advised others in the same boat to use a camera and notes to document surveyors’ time on their land.
Fred First serves on two committees for Citizens Preserving Floyd County. He told Thursday’s crowd to prepare for “an environmental confrontation of epic proportions.”
McCommon and others stressed that organizing opposition quickly and raising money for the long haul — to hire attorneys, to pay Robbins for her time and more — would be key elements as the campaign to block the pipeline proceeds.
EQT and NextEra have said the pipeline will help meet growing demand for natural gas as a cleaner alternative to coal for power generation. As envisioned, the gas pumped through the pipeline will have been extracted from Marcellus and Utica shale formations through hydraulic fracturing, a process often referred to as “fracking.”
http://www.roanoke.com/news/local/floyd_county/group-rallies-opposition-to-gas-pipeline-through-floyd-county/article_33adf57f-e7e6-5423-9ec3-9f6f7c3f273f.html

Blog: Map, video and links on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline

Alicia Petska | Posted: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 3:00 pm
The controversial Atlantic Coast Pipeline proposal announced Tuesday would tap into the vast stores of natural gas in the Utica and Marcellus shale basins, which have grown more active as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking technology has advanced.
The shales - located primarily in West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania - now account for more than a quarter of the nation's natural gas, according to the AP.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration offers a closer look at the respective production stats.
The proposed pipeline - which still needs regulatory approval - would:
>> Span 550 miles from West Virginia to North Carolina by way of Virginia. That includes a smaller 70-mile spur that would cut eastward to serve customers in Hampton Roads.
>> Have an initial capacity of 1.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day. For context, consumers nationwide are expected to use an average of 72.6 billion cubic feet per day this year.
>> Cost between $4.5 billion and $5 billion to build. Expenses would be shouldered by a new partnership made up of four companies: Dominion, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and the parent company of Virginia Natural Gas.
Gov. Terry McAuliffe's full-throated support for the project Tuesday (see video above) was admonished by both environmentalists and local grassroots groups opposed to the pipeline cutting through their counties.
Republicans pounced on the apparent rift between the Democratic governor and environmental advocates. Virginia GOP Chairman Pat Mullins said the investment the cause made to get McAuliffe elected seemed to have been "for naught."
"Given the Governor's new-found interest in working with the energy sector, I'm forced to wonder if the environmental movement has a home in the Virginia Democrat party any more," Mullins said.
The governor's office released a list of business leaders and Hampton Roads legislators joining him in endorsing the project.
Dominion and its partners plan to hold a series of open houses this month to talk to people along the proposed pipeline route. A meeting has been scheduled in Nelson County for Sept. 16.
http://www.newsadvance.com/news/local/press-pass/blog-map-video-and-links-on-the-atlantic-coast-pipeline/article_77f4dcc4-3374-11e4-a9cf-001a4bcf6878.html

Groundbreaking held for Brunswick County Power Station

By Sylvia Allen Editor | Posted: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 2:22 pm
http://www.brunswicktimes-gazette.com/article_ff64ccae-e04b-11e3-86a5-001a4bcf887a.html






When Governor Terry McAuliffe signed an executive order in July to reinstate Virginia’s long-dormant climate change commission, we stood up and applauded. It was an important moment that we hoped was the beginning of significant action by the new administration to reduce the state’s fossil fuel pollution. It was, plain and simple, a step forward.

But then, before the climate commission had even met, Gov. McAuliffe took two steps back. Last week, standing side by side with Dominion Resources CEO Thomas Farrell, the governor gave his blessing to a 550-mile pipeline for fracked gas.

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline would be a gas mega-highway tearing a scar directly through Virginia – and it’s the exact opposite of a climate solution. In fact, a slew of recent scientific studies show that methane leaked from fracked gas production could make this fossil fuel as bad as or WORSE than coal for the climate. That’s right, possibly WORSE than coal!

So we need your help. Tell Gov. McAuliffe: Withdraw your support for Dominion’s fracking “mega” pipeline. Instead, direct your climate commission to investigate and address the climate harm of piping and burning fracked gas in Virginia.

Ironically, the Virginia climate commission met for the first time yesterday in Richmond.1 Gov. McAuliffe attended and he challenged the 35 members to report back to him within a year with “big ideas” he can implement to combat climate change.

We think the commission should start by reviewing the latest climate science on fracking – BEFORE any new gas pipelines or fracking wells are recklessly embraced as global warming “solutions” by the McAuliffe administration. (They can start with the powerful essay just out from climate movement leader Bill McKibben.2) In time, Gov. McAuliffe will see that the only way to truly combat climate change is to move off of fossil fuels – period – and to real clean energy solutions.

Again, Gov. McAuliffe deserves credit for bringing together an official commission to guide his administration on climate issues. Indeed, the governor ran for office by defending the importance of the work of former UVA climate scientist Michael Mann and by saying that climate science should drive climate policy.

So please ask Governor McAuliffe to keep his promise. He should withdraw his support for Dominion’s fracking “mega” pipeline through Virginia and ask his own climate commission to study the harm of fracked gas before endorsing ANY pipeline.:  http://org.salsalabs.com/o/423/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16432

As you read this, sea-level rise from global warming is already affecting the daily lives of coastal Virginians. And farmers and businesses statewide stand to lose billions of dollars from the increase in extreme weather events. Right now, the only steps we can afford from Gov. McAuliffe are those that move Virginia forward – to real clean energy solutions.

Sincerely,
Mike Tidwell
Director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network

1. Washington Post. "McAuliffe Defends Pipeline Support at Climate-Change Meeting." 9/10/2014.

2. Bill McKibben. "Bad News For Obama: Fracking May Be Worse Than Burning Coal." 9/8/2014.

http://org.salsalabs.com/o/423/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16432

Proposed Spectra Energy Pipeline

SPECTRA/DOMINION PIPELINE UPDATE now called :

UPDATE 9/5/2014

On September 2, Dominion Resources announced more specific plans concerning its proposed 550 mile long interstate natural gas pipeline to transport fracked gas from Pennsylvania, which would begin in West Virginia, cross into Virginia (well south of Rappahannock County) and end in North Carolina. 
 
Now called the “Atlantic Coast Pipeline”, Dominion expects to form a joint venture company to include Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and AGL Resources to build and operate the pipeline.  The announcement was made at a press conference attended by Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe and various Richmond legislators, all of whom expressed strong support for the pipeline. 

The project still requires approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Department of the Interior, since the pipeline would cross portions of George Washington National Forest (which is not subject to eminent domain, as are private lands).

Further information can be found at Dominion’s website:


A map of the proposed route can be found at the following link:



UPDATE 8/19/2014:  


Spectra Pipeline Efforts Reportedly Suspended


Last week a spokesperson for Spectra Energy was quoted as stating that it
"is suspending" its development work on the proposed gas pipeline that would
have crossed Rappahannock County (Highland County Recorder, August 7).  No
reason was given for the suspension, nor was it made clear whether Spectra
has cancelled the pipeline project or simply delayed its pursuit
temporarily.

While the suspension is good news for Rappahannock County, residents should
remain vigilant for any signs of continued activities by Spectra Energy or
others regarding a pipeline project."

OVERVIEW:

Gas PipelineAs you are probably aware, Spectra Energy, a Texas-based pipeline company, is proposing to build a large natural gas pipeline across Rappahannock County for the purpose of transporting "fracked" natural gas from Pennsylvania to points south. Construction of the underground pipeline in Rappahannock County would require the digging of trenches across pastures and fields, the clear-cutting of swaths of woods and forest, the crossing of numerous rivers and streams, and the building of access roads for heavy equipment to all of the above – not to mention the heavy increase in industrial traffic on existing roads. In many cases, these activities would take place on pristine lands that have been placed in conservation easements for perpetuity.
The proposed pipeline has already drawn criticism from many residents and friends of Rappahannock County. This includes the County's Board of Supervisors, which recently passed a resolution opposing the project and its proposed routing.
Because of the serious environmental consequences to Rappahannock County if this project goes forward, RLEP is closely monitoring developments concerning the pipeline and conferring with other interested parties. As a service to our members and the community at large, we have gathered on this website a large quantity of publicly-available information concerning the pipeline, Spectra Energy, other companies and entities involved with the project, the likely regulatory and environmental permitting process, landowner issues and other relevant topics. We will endeavor to keep this information current as developments proceed.
Please note that this website is designed to provide general information only; it is not intended to provide legal advice and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Any interested parties that require legal advice, such as affected landowners, should seek independent legal counsel and should not rely upon the information provided on this website.

Proposed Spectra Energy Pipeline

Spectra Energy has proposed building a large (likely diameter 36”), high-pressure interstate pipeline extending 427 miles from an existing gas pipeline network in Pennsylvania in the Marcellus Shale area to North Carolina. As you probably know, there is a tremendous amount of natural gas drilling and production currently taking place in the Marcellus Shale, predominantly using the process of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking”. The pipeline would transport fracked natural gas south to North Carolina, primarily to fuel new gas-fired electric power plants, for deliveries starting by the end of 2018. See the section on Duke Energy.
The Spectra Energy project is at its initial stages. The pipeline was only recently added to Spectra Energy’s website listing of proposed gas pipeline projects currently being undertaken. Moreover, Spectra Energy has not yet started the application process with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the lead federal government agency with approval authority for the pipeline. See below for more information about the regulatory and environmental process.
It is not certain that Spectra Energy’s pipeline will be built, as it is only one of three separate pipelines that have been proposed by different companies to bring Pennsylvania gas to Duke Energy in North Carolina. (See the section about other proposed pipelines.) Importantly, the other two pipelines proposed to date would not cross Rappahannock County or its nearby neighboring counties. Presumably Duke Energy will be pivotal in determining which of the proposed pipelines actually gets built, at least initially, by agreeing to be the primary customer of the pipeline it selects.
Back to top

Potential Pipeline Routing

Spectra Energy’s pipeline would run north/south across the length of Rappahannock County, entering from the north through Warren and Fauquier Counties and exiting south through Madison and Culpeper Counties. It is estimated that more than 15 miles of pipeline would be located within Rappahannock County.
The proposed route for the pipeline through Rappahannock County has not been specifically identified to date. An initial map issued by Spectra Energy lacked precise details but showed a routing in the eastern part of the County, basically following the existing high-voltage electric power lines.
However, the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) has produced a much more specific route map for the pipeline’s “study corridor”, based on additional information supplied by Spectra Energy and initial contacts made by Spectra Energy to landowners for surveying purposes. The PEC map shows the gas pipeline coming from Fauquier County into northern Rappahannock County, running east of Flint Hill to Ben Venue and then continuing along the east side of Route 729 (Richmond Road) to the Laurel Mills area, then proceeding through Castleton and heading south -- in other words, far from the existing electric power lines.
Back to top

Spectra Energy

Spectra Energy is a very large, diversified natural gas and oil pipeline company based in Houston, Texas. It owns and/or operates over 19,000 miles of existing natural gas pipelines in the US and Canada.
Spectra Energy was originally a division of Duke Energy, a large electric utility that would probably be the largest customer of the proposed pipeline. Spectra Energy was spun off from Duke Energy in 2007 and became an independent company at that time.
Spectra Energy is a Fortune 500 company and trades on the New York Stock Exchange. In 2013, it had $5 billion in revenues, $1 billion in net income and assets of $33 billion.
Further information regarding Spectra Energy can be found at the following links: their home page and an investor’s guide to Spectra Energy
Back to top

Duke Energy Pipeline Solicitation

The pipeline proposed by Spectra Energy appears to be in response to a solicitation issued jointly by Duke Energy and Piedmont Natural Gas in April 2014, seeking the building of a new interstate gas pipeline into North Carolina. Duke Energy is the main electric utility in North Carolina, and Piedmont Natural Gas is a local gas distribution company in North Carolina. It is likely that Duke Energy would be the main customer of the Spectra Energy pipeline, if it is built.
Duke Energy has been shutting down coal-fired power plants and building new gas-fired power plants in North Carolina for several years, and expects to continue that process in the coming years. Duke Energy is currently served by a single interstate pipeline bringing natural gas from Texas and Louisiana, and its solicitation specifically states a “strong preference” for “geographic diversity” of gas sources for the new pipeline. That “preference” goes a long way to explaining Spectra Energy’s focus on bringing natural gas from Pennsylvania down to North Carolina.
Back to top

Other Proposed Pipelines

Spectra Energy’s pipeline is only one of three separate interstate pipelines that have been proposed by different companies in response to the Duke Energy solicitation. Dominion Energy is proposing constructing a new pipeline from Pennsylvania through West Virginia and crossing into Virginia in Highland County, heading southeast to southern Virginia and North Carolina EQT Corporation and NextEra Energy are also proposing building a new pipeline from Pennsylvania through West Virginia and crossing into southern Virginia in Pittsylvania County. The information available regarding the gas delivery points and the schedule for these proposals makes clear that they are largely in response to the Duke Energy solicitation. It is certainly possible that additional pipelines beyond these three will be proposed as well and potentially considered by Duke Energy.
Importantly, neither of the Dominion and EQT/NextEra pipelines would cross or otherwise impact Rappahannock County directly, given their proposed locations.
It is unclear at this stage whether more than one pipeline will be constructed to take gas from Pennsylvania to southern Virginia and North Carolina. Presumably, Duke Energy will be the primary customer of at least one of the proposed pipelines. However, if there are sufficient gas markets and customers to support more than one pipeline, it is certainly possible that multiple pipelines could be built through Virginia. It is also possible that FERC will authorize more than one pipeline to be built, and effectively let the pipeline companies, their customers and financiers determine how many and which pipelines get built.
Back to top

Regulatory and Environmental Process

FERC is the lead federal government agency that must approve both the construction and the specific location of the proposed pipeline. FERC determines whether the project is deemed to be in the overall “public interest”, looking at both commercial and environmental issues. While FERC is definitely a regulator of the pipeline industry, its mission is to facilitate and regulate pipeline construction, not restrict it.
In recent years, FERC has demonstrated a preference for approving large interstate pipelines that it believes will foster increased diversity of gas supply to markets and/or potential price competition. Moreover, the Environmental Protection Agency recently issued proposed air quality regulations that, if enacted, will put added pressure on electric utilities to replace coal with gas fuel. As a practical matter, these factors favor the approval of the proposed pipelines.
In addition, the pipeline will need to obtain state-level environmental and siting permits, as well as other permits from other federal agencies (e.g., for crossing rivers and wetlands, etc.). It does not appear that there are any required County-level permits or approvals.
Spectra Energy would initiate the FERC process by filing a formal application for a FERC “certificate” authorizing the pipeline, which application would identify the specific route being proposed to the extent possible. FERC would then examine the proposed route, as well as objections thereto and/or alternatives proposed by others. FERC would also prepare an environmental study of the pipeline and proposed route, presumably a full-blown Environmental Impact Study (EIS) because of the size of the project. FERC indicates that it normally takes between 1-2 years from the filing of an application before its approval is issued.
It appears there are 2 separate ways for landowners, organizations or concerned citizens to participate in the FERC proceeding. The first -- more informal -- is to submit a letter to FERC expressing a position on the environmental issues related to the project; this would allow the relevant person to receive all environmental-related materials submitted by all parties to the proceeding as a matter of course. The second -- more formal -- is to “intervene” in the proceeding and become a formal party; this would allow the relevant person to file briefs, participate in hearings, appeal decisions, etc.
FERC’s authority and process is described in more detail in the following materials. The first is a FERC-prepared pamphlet on pipeline issues, and the second is a legal guide prepared by an experienced FERC attorney.
Back to top

Eminent Domain and Landowner Rights

The Spectra Energy pipeline would be constructed in a specific corridor located primarily on private land, obtained by means of specific easements and/or rights of way acquired from the relevant landowners. The landowner would continue to own the impacted land, but Spectra Energy would have the right to build, operate and maintain the pipeline within the designated corridor. It is estimated that the final corridor would be approximately 100 feet wide, with larger areas required for construction.
Typically, Spectra Energy would attempt to obtain the necessary easements and rights of way voluntarily through negotiations with relevant landowners. Clearly there is the potential for certain landowners to be “holdouts”, either by refusing to let the pipeline cross their land or objecting to the specific compensation offered by Spectra Energy.
Once being issued a FERC certificate, however, Spectra Energy would have the clear right under federal law to use eminent domain powers to take necessary easements/rights of way from holdout landowners against their will, with compensation ultimately settled by the relevant courts. Spectra Energy would have the option of initiating eminent domain proceedings in either federal or state court, and could take and use the land before compensation issues are settled. In other words, holdouts cannot stop the pipeline from using their land once it is approved by FERC. However, landowners will still have the right to a court trial to set the appropriate level of compensation. Eminent domain issues are discussed in further detail in the attached materials (FERC pamphlet and Elefant guide)
Spectra Energy has already sent letters to a number of Rappahannock Count landowners, seeking permission to survey their land for potential use as a pipeline corridor. Also, Spectra Energy representatives have been visiting landowners in person, unannounced, asking them to sign documents permitting the survey work. At this stage it appears that there is no legal requirement that landowners allow survey work to proceed on their land or otherwise grant access to Spectra Energy representatives.
Virginia state law does provide natural gas companies with a statutory right to enter upon private land and conduct certain survey activities, without any specific landowner permission and even in the face of express landowner objections. However, exercise of these rights under Virginia law requires Spectra Energy to provide two specific notices to landowners by certified mail, a process that apparently has not been utilized to date. (Attorney General’s opinion)
Back to top

US Pipeline Network and Marcellus Shale Buildout

There is a pervasive existing interstate gas pipeline network in the US, extending approximately 350,000 miles and traversing most states. Information regarding this existing network can be found in the following federal government publication: EIA Pipeline Summary
To be fully understood, the proposed Spectra Energy pipeline (as well as the proposals from Dominion and EQT/NextEra) should be viewed in the larger context of a significant pipeline buildout already underway. This construction program is specifically intended to take fracked natural gas from Pennsylvania and West Virginia to new markets in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic and Southeast regions of the US, via new and/or expanded interstate pipelines.
As Marcellus Shale gas production has increased in recent years, it has become apparent that existing pipelines are inadequate to move the newly-available gas to potential new customers and markets. Major gas pipeline companies have responded by proposing a number of new pipelines to these regions, all of which are designed to move fracked gas. For example, new pipeline expansions have been proposed to bring Pennsylvania gas to Boston, New York City and other points in the Northeast. Moreover, the proposed Dominion pipeline includes a spur to take Pennsylvania gas to the Cove Point facility on the Chesapeake Bay (also owned by Dominion), for liquefaction and export overseas.
Each of these proposals has generated fierce opposition from affected communities and landowners, often in rural or agricultural areas such as Rappahannock County. The unfortunate reality is, given the powers granted pipeline companies under federal law and the active cooperation of FERC in approving new pipelines as being in the “public interest”, communities and landowners are at a distinct disadvantage in stopping or altering these pipelines.
Going Forward
To the extent you have any additional information concerning the proposed pipeline, please pass that along to RLEP.  In particular, if you have been approached directly by Spectra Energy regarding the pipeline, or if their personnel or contractors come onto your land, please let us know.  Last (but by no means least), if you have any particular experience or expertise that could assist RLEP in monitoring or evaluating the proposed pipeline, please get in touch with us. 
For our part, the RLEP team will continue to monitor further developments and confer with other interested parties.  We will endeavor to keep you informed of any significant new information that comes to our attention.
THE FERC PIPELINE PAMPHLET  Lots of information in this pamphlet.
http://www.rlep.org/news-alerts/proposed-spectra-energy-pipeline

Williams Announces Open Season for Transco Western Marcellus Pipeline Project
9/4/2014 4:00:00 PM
To provide from one billion to in excess of two billion cubic feet per day of Marcellus and Utica natural gas to Transco markets
Williams (NYSE: WMB) has announced that it is initiating an open season from September 3 to September 29, 2014 for the Western Marcellus Pipeline Project, an expansion of the Transco interstate pipeline to provide incremental firm natural gas transportation capacity to growing markets in the Mid-Atlantic and southeastern United States by late 2018. Transco is a wholly owned subsidiary of Williams Partners, L.P. (NYSE: WPZ), of which Williams owns controlling interests and is the general partner.
The Western Marcellus Pipeline Project is being designed to provide from one billion to in excess of two billion cubic feet per day of new natural gas transportation capacity from receipt points in the Western Marcellus and Utica supply areas to points as far south as Transco's Zone 3 compressor station 65 in Mississippi and as far north as the proposed Zone 6 River Road point in Pennsylvania. The project would connect Williams' Ohio Valley Midstream processing and gathering system in northern West Virginia with the Transco pipeline, the largest volume pipeline system in the United States.
   
The project is being designed to consist of a greenfield pipeline extending from the Rockies Express pipeline near Clarington, Ohio, and Williams Oak Grove processing plant in Marshall County, West Virginia, to Transco compressor station 165 in southern Virginia. From there, mainline modifications would allow both northbound flow to the proposed River Road point and southbound flow to Station 65 for significant portions of the project capacity.
   
The final capacity, scope and cost of the project will be determined by the results of the open season.
"The Western Marcellus Pipeline Project will for the first time offer Western Marcellus and Utica producers serviced by Williams' Ohio Valley Midstream direct access to the broad range of Transco markets in the Mid-Atlantic and southeastern states, as far south as Florida," said Rory Miller, senior vice president of Williams' Atlantic-Gulf Operating Area. "In addition, this groundbreaking project would provide enhanced supply access for burgeoning Louisiana and Texas Gulf Coast markets accessible through our Station 65 pool."
The proposed project will be subject to approval by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and other agencies. For customer inquiries, contact James Corley at (713) 215-4607.
The Western Marcellus Pipeline Project is in addition to the $3.3 billion in capital expenditures planned through 2017 on Transco growth projects designed to serve markets in the Northeast. Transco is the nation's largest and fastest-growing interstate natural gas transmission pipeline system. It delivers natural gas to customers through its 10,200-mile pipeline network whose mainline extends nearly 1,800 miles between South Texas and New York City. The system is a major provider of cost-effective natural gas services that reach U.S. markets in 12 Southeast and Atlantic Seaboard states, including major metropolitan areas in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
About Williams (NYSE: WMB)
Williams, headquartered in Tulsa, Okla., is one of the leading energy infrastructure companies in North America. It owns controlling interests in both Williams Partners L.P. and Access Midstream Partners, L.P. (NYSE: ACMP) through its ownership of 100 percent of the general partner of each partnership. Additionally, Williams owns approximately 66 percent and 50 percent of the limited partner units of Williams Partners L.P. and Access Midstream Partners, L.P., respectively.
Williams Partners L.P. owns and operates both on-shore and offshore assets of approximately 15,000 miles of natural gas gathering and transmission pipelines, 1,800 miles of NGL transportation pipelines, an additional 11,000 miles of oil and gas gathering pipelines and numerous other energy infrastructure assets. The partnership's facilities have daily gas processing capacity of 6.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas, NGL production of more than 200,000 barrels per day and domestic olefins production capacity of 1.35 billion pounds of ethylene and 90 million pounds of propylene per year.
Access Midstream Partners, L.P. owns, operates, develops and acquires natural gas gathering systems and other midstream energy assets. Headquartered in Oklahoma City, the partnership's operations are focused on the Barnett, Eagle Ford, Haynesville, Marcellus, Niobrara and Utica Shales and the Mid-Continent region of the U.S.
For more information about Williams, Williams Partners and Access Midstream Partners, visit www.williams.com, www.williamslp.com and www.accessmidstream.com.
Portions of this document may constitute "forward-looking statements" as defined by federal law. Although the company believes any such statements are based on reasonable assumptions, there is no assurance that actual outcomes will not be materially different. Any such statements are made in reliance on the "safe harbor" protections provided under the Private Securities Reform Act of 1995. Additional information about issues that could lead to material changes in performance is contained in the company's annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


Williams
Media Contact:
Christopher Stockton, 713-215-2010
or
Investor Contacts:
John Porter, 918-573-0797
or
Sharna Reingold, 918-573-2078
http://www.williamslp.com/profiles/investor/ResLibraryView.asp?ResLibraryID=72278&BzID=1296&g=345&Nav=0&LangID=1&s=0

With Central Virginia poised to become a gas pipeline cut-through, conservationists urge caution

In the span of three months, a trio of pipeline proposals through Virginia has turned the Commonwealth into a key player in the country’s rapidly expanding natural gas industry. The projects, two of which follow preliminary paths that come close to Albemarle County, aren’t exactly unexpected. Still, they have some nearby landowners worried, and conservationists say there’s reason to be concerned about Virginia’s new status as a gas corridor.
April saw the first hints of Dominion Resources’ Southeast Reliability Project, a proposed $2 billion, 450-mile pipeline that would cross into the Commonwealth from West Virginia in Highland County, cutting through Nelson County on its way to Lumberton, North Carolina.
Then came news that Houston-based Spectra Energy is planning a $4 billion, 427-mile line originating in Pennsylvania and traveling through Culpeper, Orange, Louisa, and Madison counties before terminating somewhere in North Carolina.
And earlier this month came the announcement of a third possible project. Pittsburgh-based EQT Corporation says it will partner with Juno Beach, Florida’s NextEra Energy Inc. to build the Mountain Valley Pipeline, running 330 miles through southwestern Virginia to the Carolina border in Pittsylvania County.
Below are company-provided maps for both Dominion’s and Spectra’s proposed pipelines, both of which are routed through Central Virginia (click to see them larger). Both companies stressed that the routes of their “study corridors” are still preliminary.
The proposed route of Dominion Resources' Southern Reliability Project, a 450-mile natural gas pipeline.
Spectra Energy's proposed natural gas pipeline. Image courtesy Spectra Energy
The companies have yet to seek approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), a step that will subject them to scrutiny from a five-member panel that will examine environmental impacts and alternatives. But they’re moving fast: After a round of letters to landowners, Dominion and Spectra have begun making house calls to survey possible routes within their respective 400’ to 600’ “study corridors.” All say they plan to have the projects online by the end of 2018.
Why Virginia, and why now? It comes down to geology and demand, say industry officials and conservationists.
“We’ve fracked our way to cheap gas,” said Dan Holmes, director of state policy for the Piedmont Environmental Council, which holds easements on some of the land that could be affected by the Spectra project. The Marcellus shale deposit, a vast gas field that stretches across parts of Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia and was untapped in 2008, now produces up to 16 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day. But it’s a trapped resource, said Holmes. “What are you going to do when you’ve got a supply and you’ve got to get it to market? That’s what these proposals are doing.”
At the other end of the line are southeast power companies and communities hungry for shale gas as an alternative to dirtier coal. It’s looking even more appealing in light of a new mandate from the Environmental Protection Agency to drastically reduce carbon emissions by 2030.
“You have these large industries and electric utilities looking to generate [power] with natural gas rather than coal, and you have local distribution companies looking to supply it,” said Dominion spokesman Jim Norvelle. Virginia is, quite literally, in the middle. “If you look at a map of the natural gas transmission pipelines in this section of the country, you’ll notice there are few,” he said.
The dominoes were set, and an announcement from Duke Energy was the finger that flicked the first one. The Charlotte-based electric company—which is the largest in the U.S., and has recently built or is planning half a dozen new gas-fired power plants—said on April 1 it was partnering with a gas supplier to request proposals for pipeline projects into North Carolina “to meet growing demand.”
Already, landowners and conservation groups are raising concerns. Only rough maps of the project paths have been released, but it appears Dominion’s cuts through 26 miles of the George Washington National Forest and many properties with conservation easements that restrict development. That has the attention of Charlottesville’s Southern Environmental Law Center. 
SELC senior attorney Cale Jaffe recently met with Nelson County landowners whose properties lie in the path of Dominion’s proposed pipeline, some of whom have formed an anti-pipeline community group. He said there are a lot of questions left to answer: Federal law says gas companies can use eminent domain to seize land from unwilling owners for infrastructure projects, but what happens when that land is in conservation? And could a pipeline through the GW encourage gas drilling there, something the SELC has fought for years to prevent?
“We are committed to digging a little deeper to try to understand what the threats to some of Virginia’s natural areas are,” Jaffe said.
The Spectra path, which could come close to Albemarle’s border with Orange and Louisa counties, is also under scrutiny. Holmes pointed out that the proposed line marches through many agricultural areas, and if the company buries a pipe on their land, farmers will have to negotiate the careful treatment of soils.
And, like the Dominion project, it would bisect a lot of land that’s held in conservation. Some of the easements on land in its path are held by the Department of the Interior, Holmes said, which would exempt them from eminent domain law. Also in the way, he said: Montpelier, the plantation estate of James Madison.
“These are resources I would not expect any company that had done its homework to hit,” said Holmes.
Dominion and Spectra representatives have stressed that the projects are still in early stages, and said they’re now meeting with landowners who may be affected and talking with local, state, and federal officials ahead of what will be a careful evaluation by the FERC. Holmes pointed out that even if all three pipeline proposals currently charting courses through the Commonwealth pass muster, there’s no guaranteeing that they’ll all get built. That’s partly up to whomever steps up to finance the projects.
But Virginians should be looking critically at any plan to turn their state into a gas crossroads, Holmes said. First, there’s the very real potential of leaks and accidents.
“To suggest that these things are placed and you never have problems is, I think, naive,” said Holmes.
And he and Jaffe agree that there are bigger energy issues at play. Jaffe said many in Nelson are unhappy about the fact that the gas that could be piped through their backyards would be generated by fracking, a controversial drilling process that many oppose on environmental grounds. And Holmes pointed out that natural gas is still a fossil fuel, and some studies show that the heavy environmental impact of drilling, transporting, and burning it may mean it doesn’t have a big edge over dirtier energy sources. 
Those who may be playing host to pipes should have a role in those debates, said Holmes.
“There are some larger policy questions that should be considered from the state level, as well as questions that should be considered by each of these affected communities,” he said
 
Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas select Dominion to build 550-mile 'Atlantic Coast Pipeline' to transport natural gas from West Virginia to eastern North Carolina
        Sept. 2, 2014
 
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -
Duke Energy and Piedmont Natural Gas today announced the selection of Dominion to build and operate a 550-mile interstate natural gas pipeline from West Virginia, through Virginia and into eastern North Carolina to meet the region’s rapidly growing demand for natural gas.
Called the “Atlantic Coast Pipeline,” it also is expected to serve as a key infrastructure engine to drive economic development and create jobs, helping counties on the pipeline’s route attract new, energy-dependent businesses and industries – especially along the Interstate 95 corridor in eastern North Carolina.
Duke Energy and Piedmont selected Dominion’s project after reviewing submittals by five companies in response to an April 2014 solicitation for proposals to build North Carolina’s second major interstate natural gas pipeline.
The pipeline has an estimated cost of between $4.5 billion and $5 billion, an initial capacity of 1.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day, and a target in-service date of late 2018.
The project will require Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approval, which Dominion will seek to secure by summer 2016.
The pipeline’s main customers are six utilities and related companies that collectively will purchase a substantial majority of the pipeline’s capacity to transport natural gas – Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress, Virginia Power Services Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas, Virginia Natural Gas, and PSNC Energy.
The purchases will be made through 20-year contracts, subject to state regulatory approval. The pipeline’s owners are negotiating with other potential customers as well.
Gas will be carried through a 42-inch-diameter pipe in West Virginia and Virginia, and a 36-inch-diameter pipe in North Carolina.
Four regional ownersIn addition to its role as builder and operator, Dominion will be one of the pipeline’s four owners – all based in the Mid-Atlantic or Southeast U.S.:
  • Dominion – 45 percent ownership
  • Duke Energy – 40 percent ownership
  • Piedmont Natural Gas – 10 percent ownership
  • AGL Resources – 5 percent ownership
In a joint statement, the four companies’ CEOs – Dominion’s Thomas Farrell, Duke Energy’s Lynn Good, Piedmont’s Thomas Skains and AGL Resources’ John Somerhalder – said the pipeline represents a major step forward for the region’s energy security, economic future and carbon reduction:
“The Atlantic Coast Pipeline is a transformational project for our region. It will create thousands of construction jobs during development and significant new revenue for state and local governments throughout North Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia. The expanded source of gas will also help fuel economic development across the region as businesses and homes rely more on natural gas.
“Natural gas is increasingly important for advanced electricity generation, contributing to significantly lower greenhouse gas and other emissions. The project will also provide more reliable access to new sources of natural gas, keeping consumers’ energy costs down – even during the coldest and hottest weather.”
Natural gas’ growing role in North CarolinaToday, North Carolina is served primarily by only one major interstate natural gas pipeline that traverses the state’s western and central regions, transporting natural gas largely from the Gulf Coast region.
To enhance reliability and energy security, Duke Energy’s and Piedmont’s solicitation sought proposals for a new, second natural gas pipeline that would transport additional large-scale supplies – from different sources – into the state.
The Atlantic Coast Pipeline will meet those objectives by roughly paralleling the Interstate 95 corridor in eastern North Carolina, and transporting gas from a different natural gas source – the Utica and Marcellus shale basins located largely in West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Duke Energy increasingly relies on natural gas to generate electricity after closing half of its 14 coal-fired power plants in North Carolina during the past three years.
The company has opened five natural gas-fired power plants in North Carolina since 2011 to replace those coal plants, and plans to open a natural gas power plant in South Carolina in 2017.
Natural gas-fired power plants release far fewer air emissions than do coal-fired power plants.
Duke Energy since 2005 has reduced company-wide carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent, sulfur dioxide emissions by 84 percent and nitrogen oxide emissions by 63 percent by building natural gas-fired power plants, closing coal-fired power plants and installing additional emission control equipment.
Meanwhile, Piedmont Natural Gas’ residential, commercial and industrial customer demand for natural gas also continues to grow. Additionally, Piedmont is a major retail transporter of natural gas to power plants operated by Duke Energy and other electric utilities.
Last winter’s extremely cold temperatures – which resulted in high demand and high prices for natural gas across much of the U.S. – underscored the national need for more natural gas pipelines.
Duke Energy: owner and customerDuke Energy will own its 40 percent share of the pipeline through the company’s Commercial Power business unit.
Separately, Duke Energy’s two North Carolina regulated utilities – Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress – will be customers of the pipeline, paying the pipeline’s owners to transport natural gas.
The transaction between Duke Energy’s commercial and regulated units will require North Carolina Utilities Commission approval, which Duke Energy will request this fall.
Pipeline routeThe pipeline will begin in Harrison County, W.Va., at an existing natural gas transmission facility, then travel southeast through four other West Virginia counties and 13 Virginia counties before entering North Carolina.
A separate, 70-mile extension pipeline will split off from the main pipeline at the Virginia-North Carolina border, traveling eastward through southeast Virginia to that state’s Hampton Roads region, which includes Norfolk and other cities served by Virginia Natural Gas, an AGL Resources subsidiary.
In North Carolina, the pipeline will enter the state in Northampton County, travel southwest through six other counties, then terminate in Robeson County at existing Piedmont Natural Gas transmission facilities.
Dominion is conducting land surveys along the proposed pipeline route. It will determine the final route based on landowner input; community meetings in counties on the route; consultation with government agencies and other interested stakeholders; and an environmental, historical and cultural impact assessment.
Dominion will build and operate the pipeline through a services agreement with its Dominion Transmission subsidiary, which will oversee siting, permitting, engineering and legal issues.
Related links, tweets

Dominion news release
http://dom.mediaroom.com/news
Atlantic Coast Pipeline website, route mapwww.dom.com/acpipeline
Tweet – New ‘Atlantic Coast Pipeline’ will reduce carbon, other greenhouse gases http://bit.ly/VTngSm
Tweet – New ‘Atlantic Coast Pipeline’ will bring environmental, economic, energy benefits http://bit.ly/VTngSm
Duke EnergyDuke Energy is the largest electric power holding company in the United States with approximately $115 billion in total assets. Its regulated utility operations serve approximately 7.2 million electric customers located in six states in the Southeast and Midwest. Its commercial power and international energy business segments own and operate diverse power generation assets in North America and Latin America, including a growing portfolio of renewable energy assets in the United States. Headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., Duke Energy is a Fortune 250 company traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol DUK. More information about the company is available at: www.duke-energy.com.
Media contact – Dave Scanzoni, 800-559-3853
Investor contact – Bill Currens, 704-382-1603
DominionDominion is one of the nation's largest producers and transporters of energy, with a portfolio of approximately 23,600 megawatts of generation, 10,900 miles of natural gas transmission, gathering and storage pipeline and 6,400 miles of electric transmission lines. Dominion operates one of the nation's largest natural gas storage systems with 947 billion cubic feet of storage capacity and serves utility and retail energy customers in 10 states. For more information about Dominion, visit www.dom.com.
Media contact – Jim Norvelle, 804-771-3176, Jim.Norvelle@dom.com
Investor contact – Nathan Frost, 804-819-2187, Nathan.J.Frost@dom.com
Piedmont Natural GasPiedmont Natural Gas is an energy services company, primarily engaged in the distribution of natural gas to more than one million residential, commercial, industrial and power generation utility customers in portions of North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee, including customers served by municipalities who are wholesale customers. Our subsidiaries are invested in joint venture, energy-related businesses, including unregulated retail natural gas marketing, and regulated interstate natural gas transportation and storage, and regulated intrastate natural gas transportation businesses. More information about Piedmont Natural Gas is available on the Internet at http://www.piedmontng.com/.
Media contact – David Trusty, 704-731-4391, david.trusty@piedmontng.com
Investor contact – Nick Giaimo, 704-731-4952, nicholas.giaimo@piedmontng.com
AGL ResourcesAGL Resources (NYSE: GAS) is an Atlanta-based energy services holding company with operations in natural gas distribution, retail operations, wholesale services and midstream operations. AGL Resources serves approximately 4.5 million utility customers through its regulated distribution subsidiaries in seven states. The company also serves approximately 630,000 retail energy customers and approximately 1.2 million customer service contracts through its SouthStar Energy Services joint venture and Pivotal Home Solutions, which market natural gas and related home services. Other non-utility businesses include asset management for natural gas wholesale customers through Sequent Energy Management and ownership and operation of natural gas storage facilities. AGL Resources is a member of the S&P 500 Index. For more information, visit www.aglresources.com.
Media contact – Tami Gerke, 404-584-3873, tgerke@aglresources.com
Investor contact – Steve Cave, 404-584-3801, scave@aglresources.com
Forward-Looking StatementThis press release contains forward-looking statements. These statements are based on management's current expectations and information currently available and are believed to be reasonable and are made in good faith. However, the forward-looking statements are subject to future events, risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the statements. Factors that may make the actual results differ from anticipated results include, but are not limited to, weather conditions, rate of customer growth, the cost and availability of natural gas, competition from other energy providers, new legislation and regulations and application of existing laws and regulations, economic and capital market conditions, the cost and availability of labor and materials and other uncertainties, all of which are difficult to predict and some of which are beyond our control. For these reasons, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements when making investment decisions. The words "expect," "believe," "project," "anticipate," “if,” “likely,” "intend," "should," "could," "assume," "can," "estimate," "forecast," "future," "indicate," "outlook," "plan," "predict," "seek," "target," "would," “may,” “guidance,” and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are only as of the date they are made and we do not undertake any obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statement, either as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. More information about the risks and uncertainties relating to these forward-looking statements may be found in Piedmont's latest Forms 10-K and 10-Q and in Duke Energy’s and its subsidiaries’ reports filed with the SEC and available at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
http://www.duke-energy.com/news/releases/2014090201.asp#


Williams Partners’ Transco Receives Binding Commitments for 1.7 Million Dekatherms per Day of Firm Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity on Its Proposed Atlantic Sunrise Expansion

Published: Feb 20, 2014 8:00 a.m. ET

Environmental groups may oppose $5B pipeline to N.C.

Sep 10, 2014, 4:18pm EDT Updated: Sep 10, 2014, 10:44pm EDT



Atlantic Coast Pipeline map 2
Atlantic Coast Pipeline
Groups in Virginia and West Virginia say that the pipeline would run through unstable limestone formations in the Appalachian Mountains that will cause environmental and safety hazards.


Senior Staff Writer- Charlotte Business Journal
             
Opposition appears to be gathering in the mountains of West Virginia and Virginia to the proposed route of the $5 billion Atlantic Coast Pipeline planned for eastern North Carolina.
The Southern Environmental Law Center and 21 environmental groups in Virginia and West Virginia have formed a coalition raise to raise alarms about the proposed path through the Appalachians and the Shenandoah Valley.
Lew Freeman, chairman of the newly organized Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance, says the limestone deposits along that part of the route are among the most unstable in the eastern United States. And that raises both environmental and safety issues for the pipeline, he says.
The 550-mile pipeline — a joint venture of Dominion Resources, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and AGL Resources — is proposed to run from Harris County, W.Va., to Robeson County in eastern North Carolina.

National forests

So far, no North Carolina groups are involved in the coalition. The Southern Environmental Law Center has offices in North Carolina, but it is based in Charlottesville, Va.
SELC spokeswoman Tish Tablan says her group is particularly interested because the route of the pipeline runs through through environmentally sensitive areas of the Monongahela and George Washington national forests.
The Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance has taken no formal position on the pipeline as yet, Freeman says. For now, it is content with sounding the alarm.
But he says many of the founding groups have opposed the proposed route. Some have opposed the pipeline altogether. He says others have not yet taken a position.
Freeman belongs to Highlanders for Responsible Development in Highland County, one of the founding groups. He says his organization does oppose the pipeline.
He says it is possible that the group would reconsider if an alternate route were to be proposed. “But this is the only route proposed right now, and we oppose it,” he says.

Largest customer

The pipeline is to be built and operated by Dominion. Spokesman Jim Norvelle says Dominion is not aware of any other groups that have organized to oppose the pipeline. He says Dominion has gotten resolutions of support from several counties in Virginia and North Carolina.
"Dominion is working diligently to find the best route with the least impact to environmental, historical and cultural resources," he says. "We believe we will succeed in that endeavor along the entire route."
The pipeline is designed to transport 1.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas southeast through West Virginia and Virginia and then track the Interstate 95 corridor from the Virginia line to southeastern North Carolina.
Duke Energy would be the largest single customer, purchasing a maximum of 725 million cubic feet of gas daily to feed three North Carolina gas plants.
SELC says the pipeline is not a “done deal,” noting the joint owners have not yet even applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for permission to build the pipeline.
Duke and Piedmont, who together own half the pipeline, says that preliminary filings with FERC are expected in November. In the meantime, they have asked state regulators in the Carolinas to allow their regulated utilities to negotiate deals for gas transportation with the pipeline.
Duke and Piedmont’s share of ACP will be owned by their unregulated commercial subsidiaries. State regulators must approve deals between regulated utilities and their unregulated commercial affiliates.
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/energy/2014/09/environmental-groups-may-opppose-5b-pipeline-to-n.html?s=print
Old  Pipelines History


************************************************************************

Pipeline draws heat in Va., praise in N.C.
Friday, November 30, 2001
Not everyone is against the proposed Duke Energy Patriot natural gas pipeline, which would run through Henry, Patrick and Carroll counties.

During a meeting in Martinsville on Thursday night, groups from Rockingham County and Stoneville in North Carolina spoke in favor of the economic development incentives the pipeline and taps to it could provide.

Wink Hoover, chairman of the Rockingham County Board of Commissioners, said the pipeline is vital to the revitalization of the county, also hit hard by declines in the textile, tobacco and furniture industries.

"We're in the process of building four different industrial parks and we need the natural gas," Hoover said.

Another Rockingham County commissioner said the county's 7.8 percent unemployment rate for October is the highest in the Piedmont Triad.

The collective rate for October announced Wednesday for Martinsville and Henry and Patrick counties is 8.2 percent.

"We are doing things to improve our economic development," said the Rockingham commissioner, Keith Duncan."We already have some major utilities in our county."

About 100 people gathered in the Martinsville Middle School auditorium to discuss the environmental impact the proposed pipeline would have on Henry County. The meeting's sponsor was the the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Henry County is provided natural gas by Transco, which is expected to provide half of the natural gas used by the proposed Cogentrix power plant in Axton. Duke Energy, through East Tennessee Natural Gas, has contracted for the other half. Dominion also has proposed a pipeline to run through some of Henry County.

Stoneville does not have a natural gas connection, said Rex Tuggle, the town's mayor.

"We're not very proud that we have the highest tax rate in Rockingham County," Tuggle said. "This is due to the fact that we do not have natural gas. ... We really need natural gas in Stoneville."

Robert Wyatt, the Stoneville administrator, said that the town is erecting infrastructure such as water tanks and sewer lines to assist in attracting businesses.

However, none of the 90 or so Virginians at the meeting spoke in favor of the pipeline.

Jean Parsons, of the Preston Community, called Duke's attempts to acquire the land an infringement of her 14th Amendment rights to property use.

"I'm wondering if there's not two sets of laws: One for the wealthy and the corporations and the other for us hardworking people," Parsons said. "More taxes are paid by us than the large corporations because they have lawyers to keep them from paying taxes."

The elected officials from Virginia, including state Sen. W. Roscoe Reynolds, D-Ridgeway, Del. Ward Armstrong, D-Collinsville, and Horsepasture District Supervisor Debra Parsons Buchanan, each asked FERC representative Juan Polit and Duke representative Rick Smith to give ear to the people. Polit and Smith heard from 26 people including those elected officials.

"I urge you to consider every concern addressed," Reynolds said.

"If these pipelines must be constructed, it might be less onerous to erect them along our existing 765 (kilovolt) right-of-ways," said Armstrong, expressing his opposition to the pipelines.

Buchanan and several people in the audience said that Duke representatives, especially surveyors who have "trespassed" on landowners' property, have not treated landowners with respect or courtesy.

Samuel Pearman ran into one of those surveyors who told him that "they were doing work for an organization that was going to take over a portion of my land."

Buchanan also read a resolution from the Board of Supervisors stating its opposition to more than one pipeline and opposition to it being constructed anywhere other than on existing right-of-ways.

Shirley Holland said that the North Carolina pipeline supporters were misdirected in their enthusiasm.

"No industry has left here because of a lack of gas," Holland said. Because of the natural gas pipelines, "we will be a Mecca for future power plants."

Holland, the mother of Blue Ridge Coalition vice president Darryl Holland, and Sam Dunwoody of Axton, said that two power plants are planned for Danville, as well as one in Axton, Martinsville and Eden, N.C., as well as the existing one in Dry Fork.

"Do you want your children to live under the smog of the power plant to be build in Axton?" Holland asked.

Pearman said that a leak could jeopardize the town of Ridgeway because a leak could drain into five miles of unexposed mine shafts underneath the town.

Many of the speakers specified the warning that went out about terrorists targeting natural gas pipelines as a mechanism to fight against the United States.

Jerry Summers of Ridgeway said that he read about three pipeline explosions, two in Washington state and one in New Mexico, within two years that were caused by energy transmission company's neglect.

Others were concerned of the impact the pipeline would have on the New River near the Shot Tower on I-81, where the pipeline is proposed to run.

Bill Brinegar of Spencer said natural gas out of it's natural environment is a pollutant.

"If you drill under the New River, eventually, there will be a power plant there," he said. Brinegar added that the New River is one of the most "pristine" rivers on the East Coast and a power plant would ruin that

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/article.cfm?ID=6596



127 FERC ¶ 61,259



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA


FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman;
Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc Spitzer,


and Philip D. Moeller. East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC

Docket No.

CP01-415-019



ORDER VACATING CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY, IN PART



(Issued June 18, 2009)


  1. On December 23, 2008, East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC (East Tennessee) filed a motion requesting that the Commission vacate certificate authorization for portions of its Patriot Project that East Tennessee no longer intends to construct. As discussed below, the Commission grants East Tennessee’s motion.

Background and Proposal
   
  1. In an order issued November 20, 2002, the Commission authorized East Tennessee to construct and operate natural gas facilities in Tennessee and Virginia known as the Patriot Project.1 The Patriot Project, as authorized, consisted of the construction of: 1) 93.6 miles of mainline pipeline, 82.3 miles of pipeline looping, a 7-mile lateral pipeline, and five compressor stations; 2) modifications to nine existing compressor stations; and 3) uprates to 76.7 miles of pipeline. Based on East Tennessee’s estimate that the Patriot Project facilities, as approved, would cost approximately $289.3 million, the Commission approved an initial recourse rate of $10.156 per dekatherm (Dth), or $0.3339 per Dth on a 100 percent load factor basis. The Commission’s approval of this rate was premised on the construction of all the authorized facilities.2
  2. At the time the Commission authorized the Patriot Project, Henry County Power, LLC and Duke Energy Wythe, LLC had each proposed to construct natural gas-fired electric generation facilities in Southern Virginia. Henry County Power and Duke

1 East Tennessee Natural Gas Co. 101 FERC ¶ 61,188 (2002) (November 2002 
https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/comm-meet/2009/061809/C-4.pdf

FERC Accused of Rubberstamping Pipeline

Roanoke Times – by Lois Calira - October 14, 2002
(10/6/02) - A proposed natural gas pipeline that would cross Virginia as it stretched from Tennessee to North Carolina would do little harm to the environment, federal regulators said in their final environmental impact statement. The greatest impact of the Patriot Extension, a pipeline proposed by a Duke Energy subsidiary, would be the loss of forests, the report released last week said. During construction, 922 acres of forest habitat would be cleared if the project is approved. The 24-inch-diameter pipeline would cross the New River and come right through the middle of the New River Trail State Park and a planned campground. It would cross the Appalachian Trail, the Blue Ridge Parkway at about milepost 180 in Patrick County and 243 water bodies. Some of the route will require horizontal drilling, meaning holes will be bored underneath the river and the parkway, for example. East Tennessee, the Duke subsidiary, maintains that the pipeline is needed to meet increased demand in the natural gas local distribution market and to provide gas to two proposed gas-fired power plants in Henry and Wythe counties. The $289 million gas transmission line could eventually carry more than 700 million cubic feet a day to all its customers. The environmental statement from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is yet another milestone in the regulatory process, said Robert Evans, president and chief executive officer of Duke Energy Gas Transmission. "We appreciate the conclusion FERC staff has given the Patriot project after this thorough environmental evaluation," said Evans in a statement. Earlier this year, the pipeline received a preliminary determination from FERC that confirmed the market need for the project. The final step is getting a certificate from FERC to build the Patriot Extension pipeline. The project has outraged many landowners, some Virginia county and state officials, and environmental groups. They've argued that the pipeline provides no benefits to Southwest Virginia. Instead, they contend that it would allow Duke to ship gas from a storage facility in Virginia to lucrative markets in North Carolina, lining the pockets of Duke's shareholders. "It is hard to believe that after months of so-called 'careful' study and delay, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission appears on the verge of granting Duke Energy and East Tennessee Natural Gas a permit to push through the very unpopular Patriot Extension natural gas pipeline," said Darryl Holland, a landowner in Henry County. His mother, landowner Shirley Holland, said the final environmental impact statement is a rehash of the draft statement. "It's almost like Duke Energy wrote this book and FERC rubber-stamped it," she said. Darryl Holland said the pipeline is being pushed forward because: North Carolina wants it. Duke Energy is going to make a fortune. Various politicians in both parties are in favor of this project, even though a number are not. Public apathy. Very few people are getting involved who do not live in the pipeline right-of-way. But the pipeline has far-reaching effects in Southwest Virginia, said Shirley Holland, who's also a member of the Blue Ridge Coalition, a group opposing the pipeline. "If Duke cannot successfully drill under the New River, will Virginians stand by and calmly watch as this energy company dynamites a trench across the floor of the New River, just to get their gas line across from the other side? Surely not," she said. "If the governor, George Allen and John Warner can sit in Richmond and Washington in their ivory towers and turn a blind eye on what is being done to our state park, Blue Ridge Parkway, Appalachian Trail, the New River, it's a state and national disgrace," she said. "They ought to be run out of Virginia on a rail. Their interest is not with the people because big business is more important to them than their citizens who elected them to their office." East Tennessee says it's not a charity, but the community benefits through taxes the company will pay and potential economic development. "We have shareholders who buy our stock," spokeswoman Gretchen Krueger said. "We are responsible to our shareholders." By the same token, Krueger said, "We are going to pay taxes to the county and state. We will be paying landowners for easements. And, again, there's the potential for new businesses.
 http://www.dukeemployees.com/duke1202.shtml


United States Department of the Interior
 
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Ecological Services

6669 Short Lane

Gloucester, VA 23061

Patriot Project, OEP/DEER/Gas

Branch 2, East Tennessee Natural Gas

Company, Docket No. CPO1-415-

000
 
 
The Service previously recommended that ETNG avoid the Spoon Creek Conservation Site

and those streams containing small-anthered bittercress. ETNG indicated that shifting the

pipeline to completely avoid these sites was not a feasible option. We recommend that ETNG

coordinate with the Service and the Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of

Natural Heritage to support the recovery of the small-anthered bittercress through funding a

comprehensive Virginia inventory effort and a land protection and land management project for

the species in Patrick County, Virginia.



In North Carolina, the Wilmington District of the Corps authorized a Nationwide 12 for the Patriot


Project on January 14, 2002. Description of project is as follows:


“Duke Energy Gas Transmission . . . located between NC 87 east to south of the intersection

of NC 770 . . . near Eden, in Rockingham County, North Carolina. Proposed gas pipeline

project resulting in approximately 4.42 acres of temporary impacts to the jurisdictional waters

of Martin Creek, Smith River, Cascade Creek, and Dry Creek. Vegetation will be

permanently altered within a 75-foot corridor through 2.69 acres of wetland. However,

wetland hydrology will be maintained within this 75-foot wide corridor.”
 
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/endangered/tebo/PDFs/PatriotBO.pdf



Duke Energy places Patriot natural gas pipeline expansion in service


By OGJ editors
HOUSTON, Nov. 24 -- Duke Energy Gas Transmission, the Houston-based division of Duke Energy Corp., Charlotte, NC, has placed into service its 95-mile, 24-in. Patriot pipeline extension in southwestern Virginia and northern North Carolina. The line expands the company's existing 1,129-mile East Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline System in Tennessee and Virginia.
Initially, the expansion will transport 365 MMcfd of natural gas to customers in Virginia and the southeastern US, but it can be expanded to serve expected future market growth in the Southeast and eastern Mid-Atlantic states, which is projected to grow 2.3%/year through 2010 (OGJ Online, Nov. 22, 2002).
http://www.ogj.com/articles/2003/11/duke-energy-places-patriot-natural-gas-pipeline-expansion-in-service.html