Roseanna Sacco wondered aloud whether what she described as overwhelming opposition would count for much.
She heard that it might not.
On Jan. 21, the U.S. Forest Service solicited public comment about whether it should authorize crews working for Mountain Valley Pipeline to survey two small sections of the Jefferson National Forest for a possible route for the proposed interstate natural gas pipeline.
The Forest Service set a deadline of Feb. 13 for public comment.
On deadline day, Sacco and seven others from Monroe County, West Virginia, hand-delivered 796 letters to the U.S. Forest Service’s office in Roanoke County.
The letters expressed opposition to granting a permit to allow Mountain Valley Pipeline to survey a total of about 2 miles and about 77.5 acres of Jefferson National Forest in two sections. One piece would be in Monroe County and Giles County, Virginia, and the other in Montgomery County.
Ken Landgraf, natural resources group staff officer for George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, met with the group.
He observed early on during what turned out to be a meeting of about two and a half hours that national forests are designated for multiple uses. He said that a buried natural gas pipeline that might help meet the nation’s energy needs could potentially qualify as a legitimate land use in a national forest.
And Landgraf emphasized that the public comment period sought input solely about whether to allow pipeline contractors to survey and study a 300-foot corridor. He said the current focus is not whether the proposed pipeline should be built across national forest land and noted that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will determine whether the pipeline would provide a public benefit.
Landgraf said Wednesday that the Forest Service received about 1,850 comments and two petitions with a total of about 250 signatures that focused on Mountain Valley Pipeline’s permit application.
“We haven’t read all of the comments yet, but nearly all have opposed our issuance of the permit to survey,” Landgraf said.
A Forest Service news release on Jan. 20 reported that if FERC determines the pipeline is needed, “the Forest Service would make a separate determination whether to issue a right-of-way permit to construct, operate and maintain a natural gas pipeline on the Jefferson National Forest.”
Mountain Valley Pipeline, a joint venture of EQT Corp. and NextEra Energy, wants to build a 42-inch diameter pipeline that would transport natural gas at high pressure from West Virginia to a delivery point in Pittsylvania County.
Mountain Valley recently acknowledged it is considering alternate routes. But the corridor identified during open houses in December and January would pass through West Virginia, including Monroe County, and the Virginia counties of Giles, Montgomery, Roanoke and Franklin on its way to Pittsylvania County.
Landgraf said the Forest Service typically issues survey permits in similar circumstances because the information gathered often yields important details for environmental impact studies.
“What is the weight of the public input?” Sacco asked.
“It’s not a vote,” Landgraf replied.
The Forest Service had previously solicited public comment about surveying for the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline, which would cross portions of the George Washington National Forest.
Landgraf said many of the concerns raised about the impact of that project focused on issues that ultimately would be addressed during environmental impact analysis.
“What’s the problem with allowing [surveying]?” Landgraf said. “I haven’t heard many reasons why the survey could not move forward.”
Monroe County resident Laurie Ardison said she was surprised that “hundreds of hundreds of letters from people who are vehemently opposed to the surveying” might not carry much weight.
“That sheer numbers don’t count is unconscionable,” Ardison said.
Survey opponents filing comments also included individuals and a host of conservation and environmental organizations, ranging from the New River Land Trust to the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Appalachian Mountain Advocates submitted a 14-page letter. The West Virginia-based nonprofit, an environmental law firm, asked the Forest Service to deny the permit. Among other things, the organization argued that Mountain Valley Pipeline’s application was incomplete and inconsistent with the Forest Plan for the Jefferson National Forest.
During the Feb. 13 meeting with Landgraf, Monroe County resident Joe Chasnoff asked whether the Forest Service would extend the public comment period or initiate a new comment period if Mountain Valley Pipeline makes a route change that potentially affects more or different sections of the Jefferson National Forest.
“It depends,” Landgraf said.
Relevant factors would include when the route change was unveiled and whether an environmental impact study was under way, he said.
Chasnoff’s voice rose in apparent indignation. He said Mountain Valley Pipeline should not be allowed to “skip a step” when studying a potential route through the national forest, noting that each variation also impacts private owners whose properties adjoin national forest land.
“We need you to make them [the pipeline company] do the work,” Chasnoff said. “Every time the route changes you’ve got real people in the way and everything in their life is on hold.”
Landgraf told the group that a decision about the surveying permit would likely be made within a month. Forest Supervisor Tom Speaks will make the decision.
In January, Speaks said surveying could provide information that could help reduce impacts to sensitive resources if the pipeline project moves forward.