Update January 17, 2024
The Short Story
Please attend the monthly meeting of the Commissioners on MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12 at 7PM.
Please contact the Marple Commissioners and let them know that you appreciate their support and funding of the PECO-Gas legal battle that has been going since 2019. Regardless of the result at the Commission, an appeal by one side or the other to the Commonwealth Court is likely, so please mention that you heartily endorse continuing the legal effort there as needed. You can:
The Reply Briefs
The Reply Briefs are all available from the PUC Website:
The Long Story
As we enter 2024, P-2021-30243, Marple Zoning Hearing Board vs. PECO-Gas, is moving into it's fourth year. After preliminary motions in Marple Township in 2020, PECO-Gas first went to the PUC in 2021, which was followed by an appeal at the Commonwealth Court in 2022. Then, in 2023, we have been back at the PUC, with an order "For a Finding Pursuant to 53 P.S. § 10619, which must incorporate the results of a constitutionally sound environmental impact review...". All Main Briefs were due on December 15, 2023, and Reply Briefs were due on January 3, 2024.
Now that all of the Briefs, Reply Briefs, and Amici Briefs have been submitted to Administrative Law Judge Mary Long at the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, it is time to consider next steps, both for the short term and for the long term.
In the short term, the next legal work will be to prepare Exceptions to the Initial Decision, where both sides submit another round of legal paperwork, finding fault with the Initial Decision, and then Reply Exceptions to the other side’s Exceptions, all of which the entire five-member Public Utility Commission will consider prior to rendering a Final Order.
Regardless of outcome of the Final Order, THE NEXT STEP THAT YOU CAN TAKE is to let the Marple Township Commissioners know
Over the years, it has been rumored that some of the Marple Commissioners are less than enthusiastic about the public money that is being spent in defense of the Township's position, so it is important that all of them know that this fight has broad support in the community. Returning to the Commonwealth Court will entail additional legal work by Adam Matlawski and/or Kaitlyn Searles, so it is vital that the Township fund this additional legal effort.
What Other States Are Doing
In the longer term, it is worth considering other options, besides those centered on the Pennsylvania PUC and the Judiciary, and that would include trying to engage with the Executive and/or Legislative branches of State Government. Apparently, over the past several years:
The Massachusetts Legislature and the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities have been moving forward with a transition towards electrification and away from fossil fuels.
https://www.wbur.org/news/2023/12/07/dpu-future-of-natural-gas-methane-electrification
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2021/Chapter8
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleII/Chapter21N
https://lpdd.org/resources/massachusetts-gas-transition-order/
In New Jersey, an Executive Order requires natural gas utilities to plan for a shrinking customer base, the elimination of subsidies, and minimizing new infrastructure, etc.
https://lpdd.org/resources/new-jerseys-executive-order-on-natural-gas-transition/
On April 14, 2021, Rhode Island’s Governor Dan McKee signed into law the 2021 Act on Climate, which includes Emissions Mandates
45% below 1990 levels by 2030,
80% below 1990 levels by 2040, and
Net-zero emissions by 2050
http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE42/42-6.2/INDEX.htm
https://climatechange.ri.gov/act-climate
On July 18, 2019, the New York State’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (Climate Act) was signed into law. It is among the most ambitious climate laws in the nation and requires New York to reduce economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent by 2030 and no less than 85 percent by 2050 from 1990 levels.
https://climate.ny.gov/
California Senate Bill 1389 (SB 1389, Statutes of 2002) requires the California Energy Commission to deveop reports related to the transition away from fossil fuels.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/proceeding/order-instituting-informational-proceeding-gas-decarbonization
https://www.nrdc.org/bio/kiki-velez/state-progress-report-kicking-gas
(see links below). Is it possible that something like this could be done in Pennsylvania?
Please attend the monthly meeting of the Commissioners on MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12 at 7PM.
Please contact the Marple Commissioners and let them know that you appreciate their support and funding of the PECO-Gas legal battle that has been going since 2019. Regardless of the result at the Commission, an appeal by one side or the other to the Commonwealth Court is likely, so please mention that you heartily endorse continuing the legal effort there as needed. You can:
- call 610-356-4040,
- or email the Commissioners ([email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]),
- but it would be best if you could attend the monthly meeting of the Commissioners on MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12 at 7PM.
The Reply Briefs
The Reply Briefs are all available from the PUC Website:
- Marple’s Reply Brief – https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1811194.pdf
- The Intervenors’ Reply Brief – https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1811193.pdf
- PECO-Gas’s Reply Brief – https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1811192.pdf
- Energy Assn of PA’s Brief – https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1811182.pdf
The Long Story
As we enter 2024, P-2021-30243, Marple Zoning Hearing Board vs. PECO-Gas, is moving into it's fourth year. After preliminary motions in Marple Township in 2020, PECO-Gas first went to the PUC in 2021, which was followed by an appeal at the Commonwealth Court in 2022. Then, in 2023, we have been back at the PUC, with an order "For a Finding Pursuant to 53 P.S. § 10619, which must incorporate the results of a constitutionally sound environmental impact review...". All Main Briefs were due on December 15, 2023, and Reply Briefs were due on January 3, 2024.
Now that all of the Briefs, Reply Briefs, and Amici Briefs have been submitted to Administrative Law Judge Mary Long at the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, it is time to consider next steps, both for the short term and for the long term.
In the short term, the next legal work will be to prepare Exceptions to the Initial Decision, where both sides submit another round of legal paperwork, finding fault with the Initial Decision, and then Reply Exceptions to the other side’s Exceptions, all of which the entire five-member Public Utility Commission will consider prior to rendering a Final Order.
Regardless of outcome of the Final Order, THE NEXT STEP THAT YOU CAN TAKE is to let the Marple Township Commissioners know
- that you heartily support the actions that they have taken so far in this matter, and,
- that you look forward to the Township continuing its legal defense of the Marple Zoning Hearing Board and the Corner of Sproul and Cedar Grove Roads in the likely appeal of the PUC’s decision to the Commonwealth Court.
- call 610-356-4040,
- or email the Commissioners ([email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]),
- but it would be best if you could attend the monthly meeting of the Commissioners on MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12 at 7PM.
Over the years, it has been rumored that some of the Marple Commissioners are less than enthusiastic about the public money that is being spent in defense of the Township's position, so it is important that all of them know that this fight has broad support in the community. Returning to the Commonwealth Court will entail additional legal work by Adam Matlawski and/or Kaitlyn Searles, so it is vital that the Township fund this additional legal effort.
What Other States Are Doing
In the longer term, it is worth considering other options, besides those centered on the Pennsylvania PUC and the Judiciary, and that would include trying to engage with the Executive and/or Legislative branches of State Government. Apparently, over the past several years:
The Massachusetts Legislature and the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities have been moving forward with a transition towards electrification and away from fossil fuels.
https://www.wbur.org/news/2023/12/07/dpu-future-of-natural-gas-methane-electrification
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2021/Chapter8
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleII/Chapter21N
https://lpdd.org/resources/massachusetts-gas-transition-order/
In New Jersey, an Executive Order requires natural gas utilities to plan for a shrinking customer base, the elimination of subsidies, and minimizing new infrastructure, etc.
https://lpdd.org/resources/new-jerseys-executive-order-on-natural-gas-transition/
On April 14, 2021, Rhode Island’s Governor Dan McKee signed into law the 2021 Act on Climate, which includes Emissions Mandates
45% below 1990 levels by 2030,
80% below 1990 levels by 2040, and
Net-zero emissions by 2050
http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE42/42-6.2/INDEX.htm
https://climatechange.ri.gov/act-climate
On July 18, 2019, the New York State’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (Climate Act) was signed into law. It is among the most ambitious climate laws in the nation and requires New York to reduce economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent by 2030 and no less than 85 percent by 2050 from 1990 levels.
https://climate.ny.gov/
California Senate Bill 1389 (SB 1389, Statutes of 2002) requires the California Energy Commission to deveop reports related to the transition away from fossil fuels.
- In January 2020, the Public Utilities Commission launched a new rulemaking to regulate the state’s transition away from natural gas.
- The 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report recommends study of ways to "Align gas rate structures with long-term clean energy goals that support deep reductions in fossil gas usage and electrification efforts for residential and commercial customers.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/proceeding/order-instituting-informational-proceeding-gas-decarbonization
https://www.nrdc.org/bio/kiki-velez/state-progress-report-kicking-gas
(see links below). Is it possible that something like this could be done in Pennsylvania?
Update December 21, 2023
All Main Briefs were due on December 15, 2023, and they are now available from the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission website. Reply Briefs are due on January 3, 2024, and links to those documents will be made available shortly thereafter.
Marple Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809420.pdf
Focuses mostly on the immediate environmental concerns of the location of the proposed facility, especially air quality, noise, and the Potential Impact Radius. There are plenty of references to Article One, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Environmental Rights Amendment, and the right to a clean enviroment.
Intervenors Baker and Uhlman Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809452.pdf
Focuses mostly on the larger downstream environmental concerns of the facility in that it is designed to allow expansion of residential natural gas consumption. Such an expansion will lead to more gas lines and more methane leakage, and, of course, is designed to support an increase in natural gas consumption at a time when global, national, state, and local governments have committed to reducing the consumption of natural gas in favor of electrification, in an effort to combat climate change
Amici Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809460.pdf
To the extent that the Marple Brief and the Intervenors Brief have different foci, this brief focuses on the legal issues that support both of the other briefs. Again, Artice One, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution is the keystone holding all of the arguments together, and no matter which approach seems more effective, the same legal standards suggest that the PUC needs, at least for this kind of infrastructure, a better process than "dueling experts".
PECO Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809424.pdf
Focuses on minimizing the need for a holistic approach to permitting, and assumes that not needing permits is a good enough way to approach the issue. Land use plans are irrelevant to PECO's desire to expand their residential natural gas consumption customer base. The PA Environmental Rights Amendment does not require a serious review of the issues. ("Dueling Experts" is good enough.)
Thank You Very Much!
None of this would be possible without your moral and financial support. Please visit http://www.marplesafe.com/donate.html for information about donating.
Marple Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809420.pdf
Focuses mostly on the immediate environmental concerns of the location of the proposed facility, especially air quality, noise, and the Potential Impact Radius. There are plenty of references to Article One, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Environmental Rights Amendment, and the right to a clean enviroment.
Intervenors Baker and Uhlman Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809452.pdf
Focuses mostly on the larger downstream environmental concerns of the facility in that it is designed to allow expansion of residential natural gas consumption. Such an expansion will lead to more gas lines and more methane leakage, and, of course, is designed to support an increase in natural gas consumption at a time when global, national, state, and local governments have committed to reducing the consumption of natural gas in favor of electrification, in an effort to combat climate change
Amici Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809460.pdf
To the extent that the Marple Brief and the Intervenors Brief have different foci, this brief focuses on the legal issues that support both of the other briefs. Again, Artice One, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution is the keystone holding all of the arguments together, and no matter which approach seems more effective, the same legal standards suggest that the PUC needs, at least for this kind of infrastructure, a better process than "dueling experts".
PECO Brief
https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1809424.pdf
Focuses on minimizing the need for a holistic approach to permitting, and assumes that not needing permits is a good enough way to approach the issue. Land use plans are irrelevant to PECO's desire to expand their residential natural gas consumption customer base. The PA Environmental Rights Amendment does not require a serious review of the issues. ("Dueling Experts" is good enough.)
Thank You Very Much!
None of this would be possible without your moral and financial support. Please visit http://www.marplesafe.com/donate.html for information about donating.
The Technical Hearing is completed;
the Initial Decision will come in the beginning of 2024
(and don't worry about the new fence)
the Initial Decision will come in the beginning of 2024
(and don't worry about the new fence)
Recently, PECO had the temporary cyclone fencing replaced with permanent cyclone fencing. This does not mean that we have lost our case. The current case, still at the PA PUC, will not be decided until sometime in the spring, and it is expected that, whichever way the decision goes, there will be an appeal to the Commonwealth Court (again) that will take several additional months.
Tuesday, November 28, from 10AM until about 4PM was the last day of the Telephonic Technical Evidentiary Hearing in the case of Marple vs. PECO, and it was all about air quality. At one point, there were 31 callers on the line, which seems to me like a significant show of support, as residents let the court know of their concern about this case. The two air quality experts, with guidance from their respective lawyers, heatedly discussed the inputs and outputs of their air modelling programs.
So now, the real work begins:
Thank. You. Very. Much.
I am certain that the community support that has been shown over the past four years has made all the difference in the world. If PECO had known how strong a fight we would put up against this woefully misbegotten project, they definately would have chosen a different location.
MarpleSafe was started with a small group of local residents and a generous donation of $5,000. Since that time, we have spent those funds, along with other donations on yard signs, door flyers, business flyers, the web site, a mass mailing, and other similar expenses. Despite continued contributions, our bank balance has been holding steady at about $2,500 for a while, but we are now spending most of that to purchase Transcripts of the recent Telephonic Technical Evidentiary Hearings, as we prepare to write our Main Briefs and Amicus Briefs, etc.
This will bring our balance down under $1,000. Due to the activity of the recent hearings, within the past week, we have received six donations totaling $380, averaging $60 each. Please consider showing your support for our cause with (another?) financial contribution.
Please visit http://www.marplesafe.com/donate.html
For more background information, please see This Brief Review, and/or This TimeLine of Events
Tuesday, November 28, from 10AM until about 4PM was the last day of the Telephonic Technical Evidentiary Hearing in the case of Marple vs. PECO, and it was all about air quality. At one point, there were 31 callers on the line, which seems to me like a significant show of support, as residents let the court know of their concern about this case. The two air quality experts, with guidance from their respective lawyers, heatedly discussed the inputs and outputs of their air modelling programs.
So now, the real work begins:
- The legal teams on each side prepare Main Briefs and Amicus Briefs (due on December 15, 2023),
- Reply Briefs (due on January 3, 2024), Surrebuttal Briefs, and any other Briefs that they can think of.
- ALJ Long has stated that she will try to publish her Initial Decision ASAP, but I will be surprised if it comes out before the middle of February.
- Then there will be a round of Exceptions, with each side writing about how and why they disagree with different aspects of the Initial Decision.
- Eventually, The Full Commission will issue their Final Decision, agreeing or disagreeing, in whole or in part, with the Initial Decision. And that will be followed by another round of Exceptions.
- And of course, both sides then have the right to appeal the Final Decision to The Commonwealth Court, which will mean more Briefs, followed by Oral Arguments.
Thank. You. Very. Much.
I am certain that the community support that has been shown over the past four years has made all the difference in the world. If PECO had known how strong a fight we would put up against this woefully misbegotten project, they definately would have chosen a different location.
MarpleSafe was started with a small group of local residents and a generous donation of $5,000. Since that time, we have spent those funds, along with other donations on yard signs, door flyers, business flyers, the web site, a mass mailing, and other similar expenses. Despite continued contributions, our bank balance has been holding steady at about $2,500 for a while, but we are now spending most of that to purchase Transcripts of the recent Telephonic Technical Evidentiary Hearings, as we prepare to write our Main Briefs and Amicus Briefs, etc.
This will bring our balance down under $1,000. Due to the activity of the recent hearings, within the past week, we have received six donations totaling $380, averaging $60 each. Please consider showing your support for our cause with (another?) financial contribution.
Please visit http://www.marplesafe.com/donate.html
For more background information, please see This Brief Review, and/or This TimeLine of Events
PLEASE DONATE!
Since June 15, over $900 has been collected. It's a good start, but the goal is to pay for expert witnesses to support the defense of the Cedar Grove Corner.
Since June 15, over $900 has been collected. It's a good start, but the goal is to pay for expert witnesses to support the defense of the Cedar Grove Corner.
THE CLIMATE CONNECTION
At a time when we should be transitioning AWAY FROM Fossil Fuels, the proposed Gas Expansion Plant at the Corner of Sproul and Cedar Grove Roads is an investment in transitioning DEEPER INTO Residential Natural Gas Consumption.
At a time when we should be transitioning AWAY FROM Fossil Fuels, the proposed Gas Expansion Plant at the Corner of Sproul and Cedar Grove Roads is an investment in transitioning DEEPER INTO Residential Natural Gas Consumption.
The Pre-Hearing Conference was held
on WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28, at 9AM
With more than 60 calls in attendance, there was a good show of support at the Pre-Hearing Conference, but the decisions made indicate that we have a difficult job in this court.
Review of the Second Case at the PUC
A review of some of the arguments made during the Evidentiary Hearings that were held on November 15, 15, 17, and 28.
A review of some of the arguments made during the Evidentiary Hearings that were held on November 15, 15, 17, and 28.
Precedent
On March 19, a seven member panel of PA Commonwealth Court judges unanimously decided that the PUC had erred in its decision, and remanded the case back to the PUC, with the following instructions:
"...that it issue an Amended Decision regarding Intervenor PECO Energy Company’s “Petition... . . . For a Finding Pursuant to 53 P.S. § 10619,”
which must incorporate the results of a constitutionally sound environmental impact review... "
On March 19, a seven member panel of PA Commonwealth Court judges unanimously decided that the PUC had erred in its decision, and remanded the case back to the PUC, with the following instructions:
"...that it issue an Amended Decision regarding Intervenor PECO Energy Company’s “Petition... . . . For a Finding Pursuant to 53 P.S. § 10619,”
which must incorporate the results of a constitutionally sound environmental impact review... "