GRAHAM — The company behind the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline Southgate has sued five more Alamance County landowners to get access for surveys to test the pipeline’s potential route.

In all, MVP has sued eight landowners in Alamance County this year and four more in Rockingham County, according to court records. MVP has already been granted consent judgments allowing it access to three of those properties in cases it filed in the spring. Hearings on four of the five cases filed in August will be held Sept. 30, according to court records. MVP dismissed the suit against the fifth landowner Sept. 12.

North Carolina law gives condemnors, which includes pipelines, the right to “enter upon any lands, but not structures, prior to condemnation to make surveys, borings, examinations, and appraisals,” so it is likely that MVP will get access to these properties at the Sept. 30 hearings. The properties in question are on Cherry Lane, Haw River Hopedale, Basin Creek and Jimmie Kerr roads.

The proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline Southgate would be a 72-mile, 24-inch-diameter line connecting to the existing MVP in Pittsylvania County, Va., to carry Marcellus shale gas to the PSNC distribution system south of Graham, near Cherry Lane Road and Alamance Community College, according to documents submitted to the county. The earlier stage of the pipeline, still under construction in Virginia, has been controversial and mired in litigation over numerous citations for violating environmental regulations.

MVP Southgate would provide natural gas to Dominion Energy customers, according to the MVP website, but opponents, including the Haw River Assembly and Sierra Club, say it will be a health and environmental hazard, and abuse of property rights through eminent domain, and that the company heavily inflates the growing demand for natural gas in the region.

The Alamance County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution in September 2018 opposing the pipeline. While the commissioners have no authority to permit or stop the pipeline, the resolution went to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

In July, the FERC released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement minimizing the potential long-term damage the pipeline’s construction would cause, which opponents have criticized.

Reporter Isaac Groves can be reached at igroves@thetimesnews.com or 336-506-3045. Follow him on Twitter at @tnigroves.s