The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20140957 Ver 2_11_13_2017 follow up ltr to Gov. and Sec. Regan_20171113November 13,2017 Governor Roy Cooper (via web form and hand delivery) NC Office of the Governor 20301 -Mail Service Center Raleigh., NC 27699-0301 '11Z Via email: Jeremy Tarr, Office of the Gov. Policy Advisor Environment, Energy,, Transportation NC DEQ Secretary Michael Regan (via email and hand delivery) 1601 Mail Service Center Raleigh., N.C. 27699-1601 Via email: Tracy Davis, Director,, DEQ Div. of Energy Mineral and Land Resources Sarah Rice,, DEQ Title VI Coordinator Jay Zimmerman., Director,, DEQ Div. of Water Resources Linda Culpepper, Div. of Water Resources; Jennifer Burdette, Div. Water Resources., 401 Unit Dear Governor Cooper and Secretary Regan: To follow up on several communications with your offices on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline,, we start by enthusiastically thanking Governor Cooper and his policy team for making a principled and very important decision to make North Carolina a part of the United States Climate Alliance. We hope that we will set ambitious targets for our state to substantially- reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. The single. most important action NC can take towards achieving the goals of the Climate Alliance, we believe, is to prevent the construction of the unneeded, costly and damaging Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Because the ACP is being built moWy by utility affiliates, it will be costly to captive NC and VA electric customers in the coming years. This, despite extensive data showing the LACK of significantly increasing demand for natural gas-fired electricity in the Southeast US. We are grateful for DEQ!s rigorous reviews of ACP,, LLC"s permit application for the 401 Water Quality Certification and the Erosion and Sediment Control plan. 'We have been astonished by the lack of information from the applicant to make these permit applications even close to credible. They fall far short of providing DEQ assurance that ACP.. LLC and its contractors would protect North Carolina's water quality. We salute your persistent efforts to get that information in order to make a rigorous decision. Thanks also to the 401 staff for adding requirements to provide cumulative impacts analysis for the extension into South Carolina that ACP, LLC is openly discussing. The responses you have received to date from ACPI LLC indicate a level of arrogance and presumption that the approval of the ACP is a "done deal." Therefore, your continued careful adherence to regulatory requirements is reassuring to the public. We believe there are no benefits that could compensate for the inevitable and permanent harms the ACP would cause to, our waters, communities and economy. We appeal to you to do exactly as Tracy Davis had said to several of us at a stakeholder meeting in March, "'if we don't have the evidence that North Carolina's waters will be protected,, we WILL disapprove the permit." As we've written before, our organizations do not believe that it will be possible to legally approve these permits as protective of NC waters. We note many other reasons that the ACP is truly not in the public interest for North Carolina. We summarize those reasons below. 1. The ACP is unnece to meet any documented residential or economic development need. On the contrary, energy demand curves from the industry and the EIA show a lack of increasing demand. FERC has carried out no regional analysis to assess the need for, or impact of, several planned major gas pipeline projects in the Southeastern US. Further, this massive project would increase our state and global climate vulnerability through substantially increased routine and episodic methane releases. 2. The ACP will actually increase costs for NC electric ratepayers, as it. is acknowledged that the builders will cover th e $5+ Billion cost through rate increases to electric customers. 3. Critical natural resources, unique to North Carolina,, would be substantially impacted,, and in some cases, irreversibly harmed. Of the three states that the ACP would cross, NC has the largest number of wetlands that would be impacted, in addition to hundreds of tributary streams'in nearly all of NCs eastern rivers basins, which support our estuaries, commercial fisheries and NCs $1.6 B recreational fishing industry. Therefore, an extremely rigorous 401 Certification process and exhaustively documented decision are critical for our entire state*4s future health and economy. 4. In the near future, the ACP Pipeline will become even MORE superfluous and a more unjustified expense as renewables (wind and solar) are already the predominant source of new and increasingly cost -competitive generating capacity being built in NC and the nation. The growing renewables industry and increasing energy efficiency, driven by cost savings, are already flattening energy demand, reducing climate impacts and creating thousands of jobs. 5. The ACP's claim that thousands of new jobs will be created by the ACP is a gross exaggeration. In fact, the project is officially projected to create only 18 permanent jobs in NC. I . The indirect jobs that ACP proponents say would be created through new industries� could happen in only a few wealthier locations where there is enough investment to cover the cost of $500,000 to several $$ million to tap onto the ACP. The poorest counties would see no taps or ecodomic development at all, but would face significant risk, community disturbahcOs and costs". 6. Ldw income and minority residLants and landowners would be disproportionatel� impactOd. The ACP proposed corridor passes through communities with higher poverty levels than the state as a whole in seven of the eight counties. All but one county through which the pipeline would pass also have significantly higher minority populations, but FERC's contorted analysis assured that this EJ impact would be undetected. We have learned there has been additional pressure put on vulnerable landowners --the elderly, people of color and low education, to lease for the project, presenting a further major environmental justice impact. 7. The pipeline would bring with it the risk of leakage, fire and explosions, and additional expenses to local governments, as well as potential impacts to groundwater and private wells. In the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, FERC dismisses concerns about pipeline safety by simply saying the builders will follow the safety rules of PHMSA. However, the agency's own data show that pipelines built since 2010 have experienced a five -fold increase over the previous decade in significant incidents. A recent report by Clean Water for North Carolina "High Consequence Areas, Blast Zones and Public Safety Along the Atlantic Coast Pipelines" points out that, rather than 660 feet., the actual "blast zone" along the pipeline corridor is at least 943 feet either side of the pipeline. County and municipal governments are ill prepared and under -equipped to respond to serious emergencies along the pipeline. Simply put,, ACP would not serve the public good in North Carolina. The ACP has received conditional, approval from FERC.. so it will be granted the right of eminent domain to take private property for a project designed by the ACP owners to be very profitable to them, while providing no economic or other benefits to any but the two largest cities along the corridor. We believe that a commitment to Environmental Justice, to the economic well-being of NC utility ratepayers saddled with the pipeline construction costs, to safety for residents near the pipeline corridor and to the right of landowners and residents to use and enjoy their property should give our elected and agency officials considerable concern. The promised economic benefits of the ACP to the public have been exaggerated to the point of fraud, while the adverse environmental and economic impacts have been greatly downplayed. We ask that you take all possible steps to protect North Carolina's people and natural resources, holding FERC and the ACP owners accountable through continued critical review of all permits, credible analysis of Environmental Justice impacts. Please undertake more careful permitting of the proposed compressor station in one of North Carolina's smallest and poorest communities,, and require additional protections for groundwater from hazardous wastes and other potential contaminants during construction and operation. Please bear in mind the vulnerability of many residents, human and otherwise, to the impacts of the ACP project, frankly designed for the private profit of the ACP owners and their affiliates, while failing to serve any documented public need. , Yours truly, Marvin Winstead, Nash Stop the Pipeline Hope Taylor,. Clean Water for North Carolina John Runkle, NC WARN Belinda Joyner,, Concerned Citizens of Northampton County Keely Wood,, Environmental -EE Karen Beardon., 350 Triangle Amy Adams,. Appalachian Voices Denise Lee, Pee Dee Water, Air., Land and Lives (WALL) Joe McDonald., Save Our Sandhills Sharon Garbutt,, Chatham Research Group Lib Hutchby,, Triangle Women's Intl. League for Peace & Freedom Christine Ellis, Winyah Rivers Foundation Kyle Dalton,, No Fracking in Stokes George Matthis, River Guardian Foundation Denise DerGarabedian, Western NC Frack Free Will Scott, Yadkn RiverKeeper Jenny Edwards, Roanoke River Basi -n Association Bobby Jones, DownEast Coalition