Stormwater management; inspections of natural gas pipelines, stop work instructions. (SB699)

Introduced By

Sen. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath) with support from co-patrons Sen. Monty Mason (D-Williamsburg), Sen. Jennifer McClellan (D-Richmond), and Sen. Jennifer Wexton (D-Leesburg)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Stormwater management; inspections; natural gas pipelines; stop work instructions. Authorizes the Department of Environmental Quality (the Department) to conduct inspections of the land-disturbing activities of interstate and intrastate natural gas pipeline companies that have approved annual standards and specifications as such land-disturbing activities relate to construction of any natural gas transmission pipeline greater than 36 inches inside diameter to determine (i) compliance with such annual standards and specifications, (ii) compliance with any site-specific plans, and (iii) if there have been or are likely to be adverse impacts to water quality as a result of such land-disturbing activities. The bill authorizes the Department to issue a stop work instruction on the relevant part of the site when the Department determines that there has been a substantial adverse impact to water quality or that a substantial and imminent adverse impact to water quality is likely to occur as a result of such land-disturbing activities. The bill requires that upon written documentation of completion by the company and approval by the Department in writing of the corrective measures specified in the stop work instruction, the instruction shall be immediately lifted. Such stop work instruction may be appealed to the circuit court of the jurisdiction where the violation was alleged to have occurred or other appropriate court. Read the Bill »

Outcome

Bill Has Passed

History

DateAction
01/10/2018Prefiled and ordered printed with emergency clause; offered 01/10/18 18104467D
01/10/2018Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources
01/24/2018Impact statement from DPB (SB699)
01/25/2018Reported from Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources with substitite (12-Y 3-N) (see vote tally)
01/25/2018Committee substitute printed 18106078D-S1
01/29/2018Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
01/30/2018Read second time
01/30/2018Reading of substitute waived
01/30/2018Committee substitute agreed to 18106078D-S1
01/30/2018Reading of amendment waived
01/30/2018Amendment by Senator Deeds agreed to
01/30/2018Emergency clause deleted
01/30/2018Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute with amendment SB699ES1
01/30/2018Printed as engrossed 18106078D-ES1
01/31/2018Passed by for the day
02/01/2018Passed by for the day
02/02/2018Passed by for the day
02/05/2018Passed by for the day
02/06/2018Engrossment reconsidered by Senate (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2018Amendments #1, #2 by Senator Chafin withdrawn
02/06/2018Reading of amendments waived
02/06/2018Amendments #3, #4 by Senator Chafin agreed to
02/06/2018Reengrossed by Senate as amended SB699E2S1
02/06/2018Printed as reengrossed 18106078D-E2S1
02/06/2018Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2018Passed Senate (31-Y 9-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2018Reconsideration of passage agreed to by Senate (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2018Passed Senate (33-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
02/07/2018Impact statement from DPB (SB699E2S1)
02/08/2018Placed on Calendar
02/08/2018Read first time
02/08/2018Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources
02/19/2018Assigned ACNR sub: Subcommittee #4
02/20/2018Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendments (6-Y 0-N)
02/21/2018Reported from Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources with amendments (22-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/23/2018Read second time
02/26/2018Read third time
02/26/2018Committee amendments agreed to
02/26/2018Engrossed by House as amended
02/26/2018Passed House with amendments (91-Y 7-N)
02/26/2018VOTE: PASSAGE (91-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
02/28/2018Passed by temporarily
02/28/2018House amendments agreed to by Senate (35-Y 5-N) (see vote tally)
03/05/2018Enrolled
03/05/2018Bill text as passed Senate and House (SB699ER)
03/05/2018Signed by Speaker
03/05/2018Signed by President
03/06/2018Enrolled Bill communicated to Governor on March 6, 2018
03/06/2018G Governor's Action Deadline Midnight, April 9, 2018
03/06/2018Impact statement from DPB (SB699ER)
03/08/2018Signed by President
03/09/2018Governor's recommendation received by Senate
03/10/2018Senate concurred in Governor's recommendation (29-Y 11-N) (see vote tally)
03/10/2018House concurred in Governor's recommendation (91-Y 6-N)
03/10/2018VOTE: ADOPTION EMERGENCY (91-Y 6-N) (see vote tally)
03/10/2018G Emergency clause added by Governor's recommendation
03/10/2018G Governor's recommendation adopted
03/10/2018Reenrolled
03/10/2018Reenrolled bill text (SB699ER2)
03/10/2018Signed by President as reenrolled
03/10/2018Signed by Speaker as reenrolled
03/10/2018Enacted, Chapter 298 (effective 3/10/18)
03/10/2018G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0298)
03/15/2018Impact statement from DPB (SB699ER2)

Video

This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 1 clip in all, totaling 1 minute.

Transcript

This is a transcript of the video clips in which this bill is discussed.

they are temporary waivers. Cms memo. Hhs will consider approving a limited number of premium assistant demonstrations to waivers to start in 2017. So frankly, if you get so called temporary waiver, it's got to become a permanent waiver. There is not one space that can tell you they've been approved for a work search requirement. We hear about that. It's great to say we're going to throw this stuff into the waiver. You've got to prove to us they've gotten things that you say they're going to get. Cost sharing. It's a level in the senate plan hasn't been approved. This opt out I keep hearing about. Just disenroll people. We know they're not going to do that. Speaking of heartless it's just not going to happen. Look at arkansas. What they're told is seven months, everyone has the right of appeals. and they're funded. So when the temporary waiver goes away, you won't even get that. I guarantee you. It's not where the obama administration's heart s let me conclude we have an unworkable, plan in the senate budget that depends on the good will of washington. Ignores the process we've set up

Comments

Richard D. Shingles writes:

Common sense, necessary legislation for storm water management.

Nan Gray writes:

Good bill. I support SB 699, thank you.

Phil Pickett writes:

I support this bill and thank Sen. Deeds and co-patrons for brining forward.
I would ask House of Delegates members to support this bill and the governor to approve so that this valuable bill that protects the water quality of all Virginia will be made law.
Phil Pickett
Blacksburg, VA

Victoria Stone writes:

It is imperative that the Commonwealth step in and address activities that can harm the water table. Please support this bill and promote good storm water management and protect this critical natural resource.

Cliff Shaffer writes:

I support SB699.

Tom Hoffman writes:

The natural gas industry is using a tool that is strictly for government: eminent domain. The state has the right to seize private property to build PUBLIC projects like roads, bridges, etc.
Mountain Valley Pipeline is a PRIVATE industry. It is using eminent domain to enrich its greedy owners who have never even been to Newport.

Susan Edwards writes:

The company hired to build the MVP and the ACP has a history of shoddy construction practices that have led to erosion and heavy sedimentation in drinking water. Please pass this bill for the sake of your constituents.

Carol Geller writes:

MVP needs to follow the highest standards for constructing a gas pipeline. I'm concerned they will take short cuts and use substandard materials in order to save money. Our environment and water quality are at risk if MVP is not closely monitored every minute of every day.

John Hildreth writes:

This is not the kind of project that should be shoddily built and have corners cut during construction. The fact that the pipeline will be monitored from hundreds of miles away in Pittsburgh, PA, should send a clear message to everyone that no one involved in building, administering and facilitating the pipeline wants to be anywhere near it when it goes into service.