RICHMOND — Del. Joseph Yost and Sen. John Edwards are renewing efforts to repeal a controversial 2004 law at the center of a heated debate about pipelines and property rights.
Yost, R-Pearisburg, introduced a bill Wednesday to scrap Code Section 56-49.01 — a law that allows natural gas pipeline companies to do surveying and other initial work on private land without the owner’s consent provided that advance notice is given.
“For me, it’s a property rights concern,” Yost said. “Saying no to somebody coming onto your property and then having that overruled, I think that leaves a bad taste in a lot of folks’ mouths.”
Landowners along the routes of both the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline and the nearby Atlantic Coast Pipeline project have protested the law and tried unsuccessfully to fight it in court.
People are also reading…
Edwards, D-Roanoke, said he has a repeal bill coming in the Senate.
The measures may be in for an uphill climb in the General Assembly. A bid to repeal the law was made last year by Sen. Emmett Hanger, R-Augusta County, whose district lies in the path of the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline.
His proposal was scuttled in committee.
The same year, Del. Dickie Bell, R-Staunton, sponsored a narrower measure that would have required more public disclosure of pipeline company records on projects in which eminent domain could be invoked.
His bill, which Yost co-sponsored, also died in committee.
On Wednesday, Bell said he had not yet reviewed Yost’s latest proposal, but he agreed the legislature should rein in the surveying law.
He was hopeful the two regions could join forces to advocate for the issue.
“If we’re going to get anything passed in terms of changing these eminent domain laws, we’re going to have to have a coalition,” he said. “It’s going to be a very difficult thing to do against a very strong lobby.”
The Atlantic Coast Pipeline is a 564-mile proposal put together by a partnership led by Dominion.
The approximately 300-mile Mountain Valley Pipeline proposal is a multi-partner venture whose majority owner would be EQT Midstream Partners.
In a statement Wednesday, Mountain Valley Pipeline spokeswoman Natalie Cox said the 2004 state law “allows for the timely surveying of property for gas pipeline projects, which is a critically important step in the planning and development phase as it assists in preserving and protecting the environment, sensitive species, and cultural and historic resources.”
“Mountain Valley Pipeline believes the current law is accomplishing the intended purpose by allowing gas pipeline companies to assess the feasibility of various routes in order to evaluate and define a route that has the least overall impact to landowners, community members, and our natural resources,” she said.
Edwards said Wednesday that private property rights should be carefully guarded. But he noted state action alone won’t halt the pipelines and urged opponents to continue making their case to federal regulators as well.
“The real emphasis needs to remain on convincing FERC,” he said, referring to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which will ultimately decide the fate of the pipeline proposals.