Category Archives: Sample Letters

Support HB 1118 and SB 614 by Writing Letters to Virginia Representatives

For the second year in a row, bills have been introduced in the VA House (HB 1118) and Senate (SB 614) to repeal VA 56-49.01, the “Survey Without Permission Statute” that allows pipeline companies to conduct surveys on the land of private property owners without their permission.

Please contact the legislators below and urge them to pass HB 1118 / SB 614.

Facts to share with legislators:

1. VA 56-49.01, which HB1118/SB614 repeals – deals ONLY with natural gas pipelines. See 56-49.01 here.
2. Repealing VA 56-49.01 will not affect surveying for other types of utilities.
3. VA 56-49.01 was enacted in 2004. It did not replace any other type of legislation that forced people to allow access. Gas pipelines WERE built in VA before 2004. Therefore, there IS a way to survey without forcing people.
4. Repealing 56-49.01 would provide an incentive, now wholly absent, to companies to propose only responsible, necessary projects that are in the public interest, and to treat property owners fairly.
5. The Federal Natural Gas Act grants companies the right to force people to allow survey, IF FERC grants the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity at the end of the regulatory process. A judge would determine the terms of access.
6. WV’s gas pipeline survey law only allows force if the pipeline is deemed in the public interest. 56-49.01 has no such clause.

WHO TO CONTACT:

Special subcommittee on Energy – Subcommittee of the House Commerce and Labor committee – Ask them to support HB 1118!

Del. Terry G. Kilgore (804) 698-1001 DelTKilgore@house.virginia.gov
Del. Kathy J. Byron (804) 698-1022 DelKByron@house.virginia.gov
Del. R. Lee Ware (804) 698-1065 DelLWare@house.virginia.gov
Del. Timothy D. Hugo (804) 698-1040 DelTHugo@house.virginia.gov
Del. Daniel W. Marshall, III (804) 698-1014 DelDMarshall@house.virginia.gov
Del. Benjamin L. Cline (804) 698-1024 DelBCline@house.virginia.gov
Del. Jackson H. Miller (804) 698-1050 DelJMiller@house.virginia.gov
Del. G. Manoli Loupassi (804) 698-1068 DelMLoupassi@house.virginia.gov
Del. Gregory D. Habeeb (804) 698-1008 DelGHabeeb@house.virginia.gov
Del. Ronald A. Villanueva (804) 698-1021 DelRVillanueva@house.virginia.gov
Del. Roslyn C. Tyler (804) 698-1075 DelRTyler@house.virginia.gov
Del. Lionell Spruill, Sr. (804) 698-1077 DelLSpruill@house.virginia.gov
Del. Mark L. Keam (804) 698-1035 DelMKeam@house.virginia.gov

Delegates’ emails for copying and pasting in a batch:

DelTKilgore@house.virginia.gov, DelKByron@house.virginia.gov, DelLWare@house.virginia.gov, DelTHugo@house.virginia.gov, DelDMarshall@house.virginia.gov, DelBCline@house.virginia.gov, DelJMiller@house.virginia.gov, DelMLoupassi@house.virginia.gov, DelGHabeeb@house.virginia.gov, DelRVillanueva@house.virginia.gov, DelRTyler@house.virginia.gov , DelLSpruill@house.virginia.gov, DelMKeam@house.virginia.gov

Senate Commerce and Labor Committee – Ask them to support SB 614!

Senator Frank Wagner (804) 698-7507 district07@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Richard Saslaw (804) 698-7535 district35@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Thomas Norment (804) 698-7503 district03@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Steven Newman (804) 698-7523 district23@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Mark Obenshain (804) 698-7526 district26@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Richard Stuart (804) 698-7528 district28@senate.virginia.gov
Senator William Stanley (804) 698-7520 district20@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Kenneth Alexander (804) 698-7505 district05@senate.virginia.gov
Senator John Cosgrove (804) 698-7514 district14@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Ben Chafin (804) 698-7538 district38@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Rosalyn Dance (804) 698-7516 district16@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Louise Lucas (804) 698-7518 district18@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Ryan McDougle (804) 698-7504 district04@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Richard Black (804) 698-7513 district13@senate.virginia.gov
Senator Glen Sturteyvant (804) 698-7510 district10@senate.virginia.gov

Senators’ emails for copying and pasting in a batch:

district07@senate.virginia.gov, district35@senate.virginia.gov, district03@senate.virginia.gov, district23@senate.virginia.gov, district26@senate.virginia.gov, district28@senate.virginia.gov, district20@senate.virginia.gov, district05@senate.virginia.gov, district14@senate.virginia.gov, district38@senate.virginia.gov, district16@senate.virginia.gov, district18@senate.virginia.gov, district04@senate.virginia.gov, district13@senate.virginia.gov, district10@senate.virginia.gov

Below is a sample letter that you can use when writing to these legislators.  Please remember that this is just a sample letter and that your own words and experience are the most important thing that you could share when writing to your representatives.  Please edit this letter to include your own thoughts and experiences!  Please also remember to include your mailing address when emailing these legislators so that they know that you are a resident of Virginia.

Sample Letter to Virginia Delegates and Senators in Support of HB 1118 / SB 614

Dear Virginia Representative,

I am writing to express my support for HB 1118 / SB 614 and to urge you to vote yes on this bill when it comes before the Committee on Commerce and Labor.

HB 1118 / SB 614 would repeal a 2004 provision (VA 56-49.01) that allows natural gas companies to enter a landowner’s property to conduct a survey without the landowner’s permission.

I strongly believe that Virginia law should support and uphold the rights of landowners, particularly those who find themselves in the potential path of natural gas infrastructure projects. The placement of natural gas infrastructure is an invasive and destructive process that infringes on the rights and land use of property owners, and whether the construction of such projects is in the public interest is questionable at best, given that such projects are proposed by private, profit-driven companies and have many negative environmental, cultural, public safety, and economic impacts. Until such projects are designated, through careful review, to be in the public interest, I believe that landowners should retain full property rights under the law, including the right to refuse trespassing on their property. Unfortunately, a 2004 provision of Virginia law (VA 56-49.01) currently allows natural gas companies to survey a landowner’s property without permission. I urge you to repeal this 2004 provision and support landowner rights by voting yes on HB 1118 / SB 614.

Please note that the enactment of HB 1118 / SB 614 would not impede the ability of other utilities to conduct surveys, nor would it preclude the construction of new natural gas pipelines in Virginia. HB 1118 / SB 614 would simply restore some private property rights to Virginia citizens and would ensure that a pipeline be demonstrated to be in the public interest before natural gas companies would be allowed to survey private property. VA 56-49.01, which HB 1118 / SB 614 repeals, deals only with natural gas pipelines (see 56-49.01 here); repealing VA 56-49.01 will not affect surveying for other types of utilities. VA 56-49.01 was enacted in 2004, and it did not replace any other type of legislation that could force people to allow access. Gas pipelines were built in Virginia before 2004; therefore, there is a way to survey without forcing people to do so via VA 56-49.01. Repealing 56-49.01 would provide an incentive, now wholly absent, to companies to propose only responsible, necessary projects that are in the public interest and to treat property owners fairly. The Federal Natural Gas Act grants companies the right to force people to allow survey if the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) grants the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity at the end of the regulatory process. A judge would determine the terms of access. Please note that other states have ways of enforcing survey access that are dependent upon first determining whether pipeline projects are in the public interest. For example, West Virginia’s gas pipeline survey law only allows force if the pipeline is deemed in the public interest. VA 56-49.01 has no such clause. I believe that VA 56-49.01 should be repealed in order to better protect the interests of private property holders so that surveys can only be granted if pipeline projects are truly deemed to be in the public interest.

Citizens and local governments should have the right to determine and defend the character of their land and their communities, and rural communities should have the right to refuse industrial development that threatens their local economy. The placement of natural gas infrastructure is, unlike other utility projects that invoke eminent domain (such as electrical infrastructure or roads), a highly invasive and destructive process, with myriad negative impacts, including safety risks, environmental destruction, loss of property, and a decrease in property values. Construction of such pipeline projects should only take place after rigorous analysis and a proven demonstration of public need, and the interests of for-profit companies–even for such exploratory measures as surveying–should not trump that of individual citizens and local communities. Pipeline companies should not have access to private citizens’ property without first demonstrating that there is a documented, certified public need and interest for construction of a pipeline. Our laws in Virginia should protect the rights of private property owners, not those of large, for-profit corporations.

As a resident of Virginia, I urge you to support landowner rights by repealing the 2004 provision (VA 56-49.01) that allows natural gas companies to survey a landowner’s property without permission: please vote yes on HB 1118 / SB 614.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

 

Urgent Action Needed: Write and Call the Members of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power and Ask Them to Reform FERC

Tomorrow, December 1st, the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power will be holding a hearing regarding the oversight of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  This is an excellent opportunity to call for the reform of FERC and for you to express to the House everything that you wish FERC could be and the many ways that it has failed you in the application process for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

The only witnesses to this hearing are FERC commissioners, and the subcommittee is staffed with traditional friends of the energy industry. They need to hear from you about your experiences with FERC and your vision for a FERC that works.

For talking points for your letter, please download and view this excellent fact sheet provided by the Sierra Club.

For a sample letter that you can copy, edit, and mail to members of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power, please scroll to the end of this post.

Friends of Nelson is particularly encouraging individuals to email and call the following two people:

Here is the full list of members of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power:

Republicans
Ed Whitfield (KY), Chairman
Pete Olson (TX), Vice Chairman
John Shimkus (IL)
Joseph R. Pitts (PA)
Bob Latta (OH)
Gregg Harper (MS)
David McKinley (WV)
Mike Pompeo (KS)
Adam Kinzinger (IL)
Morgan Griffith (VA)
Bill Johnson (OH)
Billy Long (MO)
Renee Ellmers (NC)
Bill Flores (TX)
Markwayne Mullin (OK)
Richard Hudson (NC)
Joe Barton (TX)
Fred Upton (MI) (Ex Officio)
Democrats
Bobby L. Rush (IL), Ranking Member
Jerry McNerney (CA)
Paul Tonko (NY)
Eliot L. Engel (NY)
Gene Green (TX)
Lois Capps (CA)
Michael F. Doyle (PA)
Kathy Castor (FL)
John Sarbanes (MD)
Peter Welch (VT)
John Yarmuth (KY)
David Loebsack (IA)
Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ) (Ex Officio)

 

You can find each member’s Web site (and thus their contact form or email address) through the main Web site for the United States House of Representatives.

Sample Letter to the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power
RE: Oversight of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Dear Member of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power,

I am writing to express my concern about the current state of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and to urge you to reform FERC’s structure and practices as you consider the issue of the oversight of FERC during your upcoming subcommittee hearing. As a citizen living in a community that has been targeted for the construction of a large transmission natural gas pipeline (the Atlantic Coast Pipeline), the application for which FERC is overseeing, I am particularly concerned by the lack of true opportunities for public comment and participation in the FERC’s utility project approval process; by FERC’s refusal to conduct programmatic environmental impact statements (PEIS) for projects in regions through which multiple gas pipelines have been proposed; by FERC’s refusal to weigh impacts of climate change when considering natural gas pipeline projects and the hindrance that these projects pose to investments in renewable energy; and by the independence or lack-thereof of FERC from the energy industry, given that FERC is paid for by fees from said industry and its members are former employees of that industry. I strongly urge you to reform FERC’s structure and approval processes, so that FERC’s processes will adequately weigh public interests and environmental impacts against the desires of the powerful energy industry.

Utility projects that are proposed and constructed in the name of the public good should be subjected to serious review, including programmatic environmental and cumulative impacts, with ample consideration of concerns and objections by the public. The current FERC process allows for little public input, and such input is not seriously taken into consideration when granting project approvals. In my home county of Nelson County, Virginia, when scoping meetings were set for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, FERC allowed Atlantic Coast Pipeline LLC premium access to the scoping meeting by allowing the company and its supporters access to the meeting venue and registration for speaking slots before the time that was advertised to the public. When the members of the public were finally allowed to speak, the transcriptions of their testimonies that were recorded by the provided clerk were horribly garbled so as to be completely nonsensical. Such practices by FERC display its true lack of regard for the public and its concerns relating to energy infrastructure projects. Furthermore, although our state and federal representatives wrote to FERC expressing their concerns over these issues, the lack of oversight over FERC’s processes meant that nothing was done by FERC to rectify the situation. FERC did not schedule more scoping meetings, as requested by the public and our representatives, and nothing was done to fix the poor transcriptions. Given the fact that the current structure of FERC is such that the Commission is funded by the utility industry through fees and annual charges, it is not surprising that, in such an environment, the approval process is inherently biased toward industry and thus does not truly serve the public good.

Private, for-profit utility companies and an industry-funded Commission should not be able to determine whether a project is for public use, nor should they be able to use eminent domain to seize private property for such projects. Only the public and a government-funded, unbiased organization should have the right to determine whether a project is in the best interests of the public and thus merits the exercise of eminent domain. In today’s energy climate, in which the motives of energy companies and utilities are increasingly at odds with the wishes and best interests of the public, increased scrutiny, reform, and public determination are called for in the review and approval of utility projects.

Across the country, myriad projects for fracked natural gas pipelines and export projects have been submitted or will soon be submitted to FERC for approval. In Virginia alone, three large natural gas transmission lines have been proposed that would cross the Appalachian Mountains as they traverse the state. These projects are not in the best interest of the public: they will not provide the public with a supply of clean, sustainable energy, and they will have a negative impact on private and public lands, on local economies, and on the global climate. The impacts of these projects need to be weighed cumulatively, with consideration for whether there truly is a demand for this large supply of natural gas, whether investments in these projects will hinder more environmentally friendly forms of renewable energy, and the many negative environmental, economic, and cultural impacts of these multiple projects. Instead of conducting such rigorous programmatic and cumulative reviews, FERC has displayed an overwhelming tendency to simply approve projects and let market forces determine whether projects should be constructed. This policy displays a reckless disregard for natural resources, private property, public spaces, and the laws that protect them. Both locally and nationally, the public is clear in its desire for increased environmental stewardship of the land, water, and climate and for serious solutions to climate change. These citizens deserve a true voice in the FERC review and approval process, and they deserve a FERC that undertakes a wide, programmatic and scientific review of energy infrastructure projects. The public should be able to determine whether a utility project is truly in the best interests of their communities and their country, and they should be able to advocate for the interests of their land, their environment, and their communities.

As a resident of a community that has been targeted by the utility industry for the construction of a large-scale utility infrastructure project, I urge you to reform the FERC structure and approval process to allow for true public input; to remove the inherent industry bias in a Commission that is both funded by and staffed by the industry; and to create a thorough, programmatic, cumulative environmental review of projects submitted for approval by the Commission. In addition, I urge the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power to enact the following reforms: (1) that FERC be required to conduct Programmatic Environmental Impact Statements (PEIS), cumulative and comparative low-cost/low-impact analyses for all competing pipeline proposals; (2) the preservation of landowner rights and the exercise of consumer safeguards to prevent predatory practices under the Natural Gas Act; (3) that the Inspector General of the Department of Energy with the assistance of the Judiciary Committee immediately undertake an investigation of the independence and accountability of FERC and the agency’s present capability to ensure adequate pipeline application review; and, finally, (4) a moratorium on pipeline development until such an investigation is complete and FERC and its processes are appropriately restructured.

As a federal agency, FERC should reflect and work toward the needs of the country and of its citizens, not the needs of the private, for-profit fossil fuel industry. As it exists today, FERC fails mightily on this count: it is funded by and staffed by the energy industry, lets the market determine the feasibility of projects instead of conducting rigorous programmatic and cumulative reviews, and it largely ignores the input of the public. No utility project can truly be said to be in the public good if the public has no voice in determining the scope or approval of the project and if the project’s cumulative and regional environmental, economic, and cultural impacts are not reviewed. Please reform FERC’s structure and processes and ensure that energy infrastructure projects are truly approved and constructed in the name of the public good.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

The ACP Has a New Docket Number: Time to Submit New Comments to FERC!

Now that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) has moved from the pre-filing stage to the formal application stage of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s filing process, it has received a new docket number: CP15-554. This means that it is time to submit new comments to FERC!

When submitting comments to FERC, it is important that you let FERC know that you oppose the use of expedited procedures for the ACP, demand that FERC create a  Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the ACP and related pipelines in the region, and provide adequate time (120 days) for review of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) when it is released.

In their application to FERC, Dominion has requested that FERC use “shortened procedures” and “waive rules and regulations to promptly grant permission” to build the ACP.  It is very important that you write to FERC and let them know that this project should not be expedited in any way!  It should be subject to the full review process and rules and regulations regarding the granting of permission for construction of natural gas pipelines.

You can quickly and easily submit a comment to FERC through their eComment form.  Please remember to use the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project’s new docket number CP15-554 when submitting your comment.  Please note that the eComment option is limited to individuals who submit text-only comments that are less than 6,000 characters in length.  FERC recommends that you create your comments in a Word or Text file and then copy/paste them in the eComment Text Box to avoid time-out limits.  To submit longer comments or comments with photos or other non-text material, please use FERC’s eRegistration electronic filing system.

You can also send comments and letters by U.S. mail, addressed to:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426

Below is a sample letter that you can use when submitting your comments to FERC (please feel free to add to this letter to let FERC know how your property and/or community would be affected by the ACP!):

Dear Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

[Choose one of the following statements to open your letter:] I am a property owner on the route of the ACP / I live in Nelson County [or another community] directly impacted by the ACP / I am a frequent visitor to the National Forest [or Nelson County or another community that is traversed by the route].
My property [or community or National Forest] will be impacted by the ACP.

1.  I strongly object to any shortened procedures being used to approve this project.  I request that FERC enforce all of its rules and regulations applicable to this filing.

2.  Furthermore, under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA),  federal agencies must evaluate the impacts of several related projects with cumulative impacts proposed or reasonably foreseeable in the same geographic region in a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  I feel that it is imperative that FERC do so in this case to properly evaluate the impacts to [my property and community/my community and beyond/nearby communities and beyond].    This Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) must be a comprehensive evaluation of the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of pipeline development in this region (including all four interstate natural gas pipelines currently proposed for the central Blue Ridge and Appalachian Mountain region of Virginia and West Virginia) and must evaluate all reasonable, less damaging alternatives.

3.  I also request that FERC provide adequate time for review of the draft Environmental impact statement when it is issued.  Given that the draft EIS will provide a large amount of information that I need to review to protect my interests, I request that FERC allow 120 days to comment on it.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

Sample Letters for Writing to FERC and Your Representatives to Ask for an Extension of the Scoping Period to 90 Days

If you haven’t yet written to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to ask them to extend the scoping period for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to 90 days, then please take the time to do so this week.  Please also take the time to write to your representatives to ask them to write to FERC to request an extension of the scoping period to 90 days.

You can quickly and easily submit a comment to FERC through their eComment form.  Remember to use the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project’s docket number PF15-6-000 when submitting your comment.  Please note that the eComment option is limited to individuals who submit text-only comments that are less than 6,000 characters in length.  To submit longer comments or comments with photos or other non-text material, please use FERC’s eRegistration electronic filing system.

Contact information for writing to your representatives can be found here.

Sample letters that you can use to write to FERC and your representatives can be found below.  You can copy, paste, edit, and add to these letters so that you can best express your views and your voice to FERC and your representatives.

Sample Letter to FERC

Project Docket Number:  PF15-6-000

Dear Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Members,

I am writing to ask you to extend the scoping period for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to 90 days and to ask you to schedule a second scoping meeting in Nelson County.

Given that new alternative routes for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline have only just been announced, a 60-day scoping period is not adequate for the public and interested agencies to assemble and submit information about the impacts of the pipeline to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Landowners who are only just now learning that they are on the pipeline route need time to understand what this means; to identify sensitive ecological, historical, cultural, and geological areas on their properties; and to assemble and submit this in document or presentation form to FERC. For many landowners, the March 18th scoping meeting in Nelson County came just days or weeks after notification that they were on one of the new routes. Interested agencies have many new landowners to contact and parcels to examine, and detailed impact studies take time and resources to execute. Given the complexity of the many proposed routes for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline in Nelson County, FERC should extend the scoping period to the full 90 days, so that landowners and interested agencies have a sufficient time for investigating, assembling, and presenting information about the many potential impacts of the pipeline.

A second scoping meeting should also be scheduled for Nelson County, so that all landowners, concerned residents, and interested agencies have a chance to voice their concerns to FERC during the scoping period.  At the recent scoping meeting in Nelson County, only 78 out of 203 citizens who signed up to speak were actually allowed to speak at the meeting.  Given FERC’s ability to invoke one of government’s strongest powers, eminent domain, it is critical that the public is able to participate fully in defending their interests.  Because so many Nelson County residents were unable to speak at the recent scoping meeting due to time limitations, a second scoping meeting should be scheduled for Nelson County, so that all residents are able to voice their concerns to FERC.

A fair, transparent, thorough regulatory process demands that citizens have the time and ability to present their concerns about the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to the FERC. Given the recent announcement of new alternative pipeline routes in Nelson County and the complexity of those routes, a 90-day scoping period is necessary. A second scoping meeting is also necessary, given that less than half of the people who wanted to present their concerns to FERC at the recent scoping meeting were able to be heard.  Please extend the scoping period to 90 days and schedule a second scoping meeting in Nelson County.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

 

Sample Letter to Representatives

Subject:  Please Ask FERC to Extend the Scoping Period for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to 90 Days

Dear Representative,

As one of your constituents and as a resident of Nelson County, I am writing to ask you to write to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to ask them to extend the scoping period for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to 90 days and to schedule a second scoping meeting in Nelson County.

Given that new alternative routes for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline have only just been announced, a 60-day scoping period is not adequate for the public and interested agencies to assemble and submit information about the impacts of the pipeline to FERC. Landowners who are only just now learning that they are on the pipeline route need time to understand what this means; to identify sensitive ecological, historical, cultural, and geological areas on their properties; and to assemble and submit this in document or presentation form to FERC. For many landowners, the March 18th scoping meeting in Nelson County came just days or weeks after notification that they were on one of the new routes. Interested agencies have many new landowners to contact and parcels to examine, and detailed impact studies take time and resources to execute. Given the complexity of the many proposed routes for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline in Nelson County, FERC should extend the scoping period to the full 90 days, so that landowners and interested agencies have a sufficient time for investigating, assembling, and presenting information about the many potential impacts of the pipeline.

A second scoping meeting should also be scheduled for Nelson County, so that all landowners, concerned residents, and interested agencies have a chance to voice their concerns to FERC during the scoping period.  At the recent scoping meeting in Nelson County, only 78 out of 203 citizens who signed up to speak were actually allowed to speak at the meeting.  Given FERC’s ability to invoke one of government’s strongest powers, eminent domain, it is critical that the public is able to participate fully in defending their interests.  Because so many Nelson County residents were unable to speak at the recent scoping meeting due to time limitations, a second scoping meeting should be scheduled for Nelson County, so that all residents are able to voice their concerns to FERC.

A fair, transparent, thorough regulatory process demands that citizens have the time and ability to present their concerns about the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to the FERC.  Your constituents in Nelson County need your help to ensure that FERC provides this fair, transparent, thorough process and gives ample time and opportunity for the public to voice their concerns and defend their interests.  Given the recent announcement of new alternative pipeline routes in Nelson County and the complexity of those routes, a 90-day scoping period is necessary.  A second scoping meeting is also necessary, given that less than half of the people who wanted to present their concerns to FERC at the recent scoping meeting were able to be heard.  Please ask FERC to extend the pipeline scoping period to 90 days and to schedule a second scoping meeting in Nelson County.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

Sample Letters in Support of SB 1338

If you have been wanting to write letters in support of SB 1338 but aren’t sure how to get started, here are some sample letters that you can use to write your emails.  If you have the time and are able, please personalize these letters so that they reflect your ideas and experience.  Personal letters always have more impact than form letters, but any letter is better than no letter!

The first two sample letters are courtesy of Friends of Nelson.

Sample Letter 1

I urge you to support SB 1338! This bill would repeal the existing law, 56-49.01, that allows gas companies to survey on private property with out landowner permission. 56-49.01 applies only to gas companies and gas pipelines—other types of utilities would not be affected, and gas pipeline companies could still survey following the same procedures as other types of projects follow. SB 1338 is important to protect private property rights because, under 56-49.01, gas companies do not have to demonstrate any public need for the project before accessing private property, nor are there any time limits on the amount of time they may spend on the private property. 56-49.01 abuses the property owners of Virginia and needs to be repealed! Please let me know how you vote on SB 1338.

Also, please support SB 1166: this bill would require that utility companies seeking to use eminent domain would be subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. This bill is important to curb eminent domain abuse through greater transparency. People should be able to verify information they are given for themselves. Please keep me informed as to your votes on these important bills!

Sample Letter 2

I am writing to you again to earnestly and respectfully request that you give your very strongest possible support and positive endorsement to SB 1166 and SB 1338 sponsored by State Senators Hanger and Deeds!

SB 1338 would repeal the egregious, 2004 provision that allows natural gas companies to enter a landowner’s property to conduct a survey for gas pipelines without the landowner’s permission.

SB 1166 would allow the Freedom of Information Act to be used in eminent domain situations, such as those with regards to Dominion’s proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline project.

These are both right and noble causes that are very important to the citizens of Virginia, especially those effected by corporate avarice, intimidation, and manipulation by Dominion, which threatens to, and will in actuality, violate their Constitutional rights, as well as their property rights. This should not, and cannot, be allowed to come to pass.

Again, thank you for giving your strongest support to SB 1166 and SB 1338! Your constituents will be watching how you vote.

Sample Letter 3

Dear Virginia Senator,

I am writing to express my strong support for SB 1338 and SB 1166 and to urge you to vote yes on these bills when they come before the Committee on Commerce and Labor.

SB 1338 would repeal a 2004 provision that allows natural gas companies to enter a landowner’s property to conduct a survey without the landowner’s permission. SB 1166 would require public service corporations to be subject to the Freedom of Information Act for any project or activity for which it seeks to exercise the power of eminent domain.

I strongly believe that Virginia law should support and uphold the rights of landowners, particularly those who find themselves in the potential path of natural gas infrastructure projects. The placement of natural gas infrastructure is an invasive and destructive process that infringes on the rights and land use of property owners, and whether the construction of such projects is in the public interest is questionable at best, given that such projects are proposed by private, profit-driven companies and have many negative environmental, cultural, and economic impacts. Until such projects are designated, through careful review, to be in the public interest, I believe that landowners should retain full property rights under the law, including the right to refuse trespassing on their property. Unfortunately, a 2004 provision of Virginia law currently allows natural gas companies to survey a landowner’s property without permission. I urge you to repeal this 2004 provision and support landowner rights by voting yes on SB 1338.

In addition, I ask you to vote yes on SB 1166: projects that attempt to invoke eminent domain should be subject to the utmost scrutiny, therefore, I believe that any corporation that attempts to invoke the power of eminent domain should also be subject to the public records provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

As a resident of Virginia, I urge you to support landowner rights and public access to information regarding projects that seek to invoke eminent domain.  Please vote yes on SB 1338 and SB 1166.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]