utilities

Significant experience before the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is a primary strength of HMS™ regulatory practice.

environmental

Representation in compliance and enforcement, litigation and investigation by state and federal environmental agencies is a large segment of HMS' regulatory practice, with a particular emphasis on water and waste water matters.

agencies

HMS administrative agency practice brings us before a variety of state and federal administrative agencies, where we assist clients in meeting specific business goals.

government

HMS acts as solicitor and special counsel to a variety of municipalities and authorities on issues ranging from procurement to environmental law.

HMS counsels insurance entities in regulatory compliance matters and is their advocate in dealings with state regulators and in administrative and civil disputes.

appeals

HMS diverse appellate practice includes frequent appearances in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania's appellate and original jurisdiction, where challenges to regulatory actions typically are litigated.

NIMBYs and Environmental Groups Win First Round Before PUC Against Sunoco Pipeline

Sunoco’s proposed Mariner East pipeline that would transport natural gas liquids (NGLs) from Pennsylvania’s rich Marcellus Shale production in Western Pennsylvania to processing plants in southeastern Pennsylvania, received a blow from Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission ALJs on July 23, 2014.

Under Pennsylvania law, if the PUC finds public utility buildings or structures to be “reasonably necessary,” they are exempt from local zoning.  Seeking such an exemption for the 18 pump stations and 17 valve control stations enclosed in metal buildings that it plans to install in 31 separate locations in order to carry the NGLs across Pennsylvania, Sunoco Pipeline filed petitions with the PUC seeking such an exemption and requesting a finding that the buildings are “reasonably necessary” for the operation of its pipeline.  The rub is that the exemption is not available unless the applicant is a “public utility,” and under recent PUC decisions, the determination of whether an entity is a public utility has gotten less and less predictable.

In reaching their conclusion the ALJs relied on a number of factors, ranging from Sunoco’s recent abandonment of service on portions of the line to questions about whether the new proposed service transporting propane and ethane is subject to regulation at all, and, even if it is, whether the service to be provided will be, as required under the statute, “to or for the public.”

The ALJs summarized Sunoco’s petitions as “premature at best” because Sunoco’s applications to operate its NGL service from west to east are still pending before the Commission in other dockets, and its status as a public utility entitled to the exemption is not clear.

Sunoco has the opportunity to file exceptions to the ALJs’ decision to the PUC.

Victory For Sunoco Pipeline in Second Round Before...
PUC Divested Of Remaining Marcellus Zoning Duties

By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to https://www.hmslegal.com/