Skip to content Skip to main navigation Skip to footer

Public Comments

2026 Regular Session SB641 (Energy and Public Works)
Comment by: Lesley Meehling-Baker on March 10, 2026 16:34
This bill is laughable with all the current problems plaguing our state waterways, and logically only benefits big business, not constituents.  While I am fortunate enough to live in an area that has clean drinking water currently. I was adversely affected by the MCHM spill on the Elk River in 2014.   The tiny settlement check we received was not even enough to pay for a new hot water tank and those chemicals are now being stored at the Sycamore Landfill less than 1 mile from my house.  What guarantees, if any, do I have now that those same chemicals will not leak out and affect my community again???  Lifting ANY regulations on environmental protections relating to water would further compound an already stressed system (which according to you, we don’t have enough money to fully rectify statewide already).   The mining companies have skirted safety issues for decades that have led to our current crisis.  How long did it take for us to realize they were poisoning the land?  We need STRICTER environmental guidelines not looser!  When we will put the health of our citizens above corporate greed???  Do better!!
2026 Regular Session SB641 (Energy and Public Works)
Comment by: Amy Margolies on March 10, 2026 15:45

I am writing to oppose any legislation that weakens oversight of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), particularly those located near drinking water sources. Reducing oversight on these tanks puts hundreds of downstream communities at serious risk of contamination, with little to no warning or accountability when leaks occur. Dismantling or weakening our current regulatory framework is not reasonable when the stakes are the drinking water that families, farms, and communities depend on.

I urge lawmakers to prioritize public health over convenience and reject any measure that reduces protections for our water.

2026 Regular Session SB641 (Energy and Public Works)
Comment by: Jeremiah Johnson on March 9, 2026 15:11
Chairman Anderson House Energy and Public Works Committee West Virginia Legislature State Capitol Complex Charleston, WV 25305 Re: Opposition to Senate Bill 641 Dear Chairman Anderson and Members of the Committee: On behalf of the West Virginia Municipal Water Quality Association (WVMWQA), which represents public drinking water systems and wastewater utilities across the State of West Virginia, we respectfully submit this letter in strong opposition to Senate Bill 641. SB 641 proposes to exempt aboveground storage tanks containing 10,000 gallons or less of brine water or other fluids associated with hydrocarbon production and to reclassify tanks under 50,000 gallons from Level 1 to Level 2, drastically reducing inspection frequency, reporting requirements, and oversight for tanks located even within Zones of Critical Concern (ZCC). These changes represent a significant rollback of the protections implemented after the Freedom Industries chemical spill—legislation enacted specifically from lessons learned after a tank from a small company failed and released coal processing chemicals into a water supply.  This event impacted hundreds of thousands of West Virginia residents and economically harmed hundreds of small businesses.   The tank regulations you consider today were created to prevent another catastrophic threat to our public drinking water supplies. Across West Virginia there are hundreds of tanks containing oilfield brines and other hazardous fluids associated with the production and transmission of natural gas, located within watersheds of public water systems.   Many tanks fall within ZCCs, with some positioned within hours or less of a drinking water intake.   As history has shown, even a leak of 7,500 gallons can have devastating consequences for communities, businesses, and the State’s economy.  Reducing oversight on tanks storing many times that volume is an unnecessary and unjustifiable risk.   Our customers and your constituents expect and deserve protection of the water they consume and the plumbing systems that they own and operate. We acknowledge that certain producers have expressed concerns about compliance costs.  However, financial cost cannot be the primary justification to lowering the standards that protect the drinking water of hundreds of thousands of West Virginians. Water utilities themselves are subject to stringent storage tank regulations, despite the fact that many of our tanks are housed inside secure, contained structures and present minimal environmental risk. We comply because safeguarding the State’s water resources is a core responsibility—not an optional one. For these reasons, the West Virginia Municipal Water Quality Association urges the Committee to reject Senate Bill 641 and preserve the regulatory framework that currently protects the source waters relied upon by families, hospitals, schools, and businesses throughout the State. Thank you for your consideration and for your continued commitment to protecting West Virginia’s drinking water. Respectfully submitted, West Virginia Municipal Water Quality Association Jeremiah O. Johnson President 304.256.1760