Thank you for the opportunity to submit a comment on the periodic review of the Surface Water Management regulations.  This comment will have implications to other regulatory groups and I plan to follow up with the other groups as well. I am currently retired but have had  a career background in population health statistics at the National Institute of Health (NIH) and in submarine motion analysis as a physicist for the Navy.  My skills apply directly to the issues at hand.  

I would  like to open with a recent statement from the Sierra Club Virginia Chapter in the wake of a Stop Work Order issued on August 2, 2019 by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for two miles of construction along the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) route. That statement reads:

“The Sierra Club Virginia Chapter commends DEQ’s decision to enforce a partial stop work order on the dirty, dangerous fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline. After recurrent and anticipated erosion and sediment control failures in Montgomery County, and the more than 300 water violations of MVP’s broader construction, today’s decision reinforces the fact that there is no safe way to build this dangerous and unnecessary pipeline. Southwest Virginians are suffering demonstrable damage to their communities, waterways and property, and we are hopeful that DEQ will take further measures that reflect its responsibility to put the needs of Virginians first by issuing a stop work order for the entire route.”

I fully concur with the sentiment expressed by Sierra Club Virginia Chapter Director, Kate Addleson.  I add that each violation by MVP, LLC in its construction of the pipeline creates a hazard for which full remediation may be impossible.  Thus it is essential that these violations be reviewed in view of the larger context and action be taken by the overseeing Virginia regulatory groups  to mitigate large scale environmental damage. While MVP, LLC made assurances that this pipeline would be built in a manner consistent with all federal and state laws protecting human health, water quality, and endangered species, it has repeatedly failed to do so, as demonstrated just by looking at MVP, LLC’s legal problems alone—including the August 2 Stop Work Order by DEQ and the still-pending lawsuit by the Attorney General for over 300 violations of water control laws. 

I ask you to consider, has the DEQ ever managed a project of this scope?  The ACP and the MVP would span hundreds of miles of Virginia landscape and cross hundreds of streams.  This endeavor represents hundreds of projects across the Virginia landscape with similar inspection requirements.   A failure at one inspection site may have ramifications across all inspection sites. As an example from the airline industry, often a failure on a single aircraft will necessitate the grounding of all such models worldwide until the correction is implemented.  Similarly, a failure in one construction site may indicate a change in the inspection requirements for all construction sites. Until the implications of any construction failure is resolved at scale, all construction should be halted. By having this additional inspection requirement, the amount of environmental damage can be kept to a bare minimum.

I make the request that the periodic review of Surface Water Management Regulations add new regulations that will enhance inspection procedures applicable to both the ACP and the MVP that will take into account the full scale of the projects. 

Thank you.  Stephen Padgett,  Norfolk VA. 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit a comment on the periodic review of the Surface Water Management regulations.  This comment will have implications to other regulatory groups and I plan to follow up with the other groups as well.

I would like to open with a recent statement from the Sierra Club Virginia Chapter in the wake of a Stop Work Order issued on August 2, 2019 by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for two miles of construction along the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) route. That statement reads:

“The Sierra Club Virginia Chapter commends DEQ’s decision to enforce a partial stop work order on the dirty, dangerous fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline. After recurrent and anticipated erosion and sediment control failures in Montgomery County, and the more than 300 water violations of MVP’s broader construction, today’s decision reinforces the fact that there is no safe way to build this dangerous and unnecessary pipeline. Southwest Virginians are suffering demonstrable damage to their communities, waterways and property, and we are hopeful that DEQ will take further measures that reflect its responsibility to put the needs of Virginians first by issuing a stop work order for the entire route.”

I fully concur with the sentiment expressed by Sierra Club Virginia Chapter Director, Kate Addleson.  I add that each violation by MVP, LLC in its construction of the pipeline creates a hazard for which full remediation may be impossible.  Thus it is essential that these violations be reviewed in view of the larger context and action be taken by the overseeing Virginia regulatory groups to mitigate large scale environmental damage. While MVP, LLC made assurances that this pipeline would be built in a manner consistent with all federal and state laws protecting human health, water quality, and endangered species, it has repeatedly failed to do so, as demonstrated just by looking at MVP, LLC’s legal problems alone—including the August 2 Stop Work Order by DEQ and the still-pending lawsuit by the Attorney General for over 300 violations of water control laws. 

I ask you to consider, has the DEQ ever managed a project of this scope?  The ACP and the MVP would span hundreds of miles of Virginia landscape and cross hundreds of streams.  This endeavor represents hundreds of projects across the Virginia landscape with similar inspection requirements.   A failure at one inspection site may have ramifications across all inspection sites. As an example from the airline industry, often a failure on a single aircraft will necessitate the grounding of all such models worldwide until the correction is implemented.  Similarly, a failure in one construction site may indicate a change in the inspection requirements for all construction sites. Until the implications of any construction failure is resolved at scale, all construction should be halted. By having this additional inspection requirement, the amount of environmental damage can be kept to a bare minimum.

I make the request that the periodic review of Surface Water Management Regulations add new regulations that will enhance inspection procedures applicable to both the ACP and the MVP that will take into account the full scale of the projects. 

Thank you for your time.