Sunoco's Westmoreland County pipeline not exempt
There might be a roadblock to Sunoco Pipeline's petition for exemption from local zoning regulations for new pumping and valve-control stations across the state.
But officials in Westmoreland County aren't particularly interested in opposing the pending request before the state Public Utility Commission, anyway.
In an “initial decision” released last week, two administrative-law judges denied the company's requested designation as a “public utility service” that would exempt it from local zoning conditions for 35 planned stations in 31 municipalities. Among those are a pumping station in Salem Township and valve-control stations in Penn, Hempfield, Rostraver, Loyalhanna and Derry townships.
PUC spokeswoman Robin Tilley said the full commission retains the authority to accept, reject or modify the initial decision at a later public meeting.
A backlash by politicians and residents against a proposed pumping station in Chester County led Sunoco Pipeline last spring to seek the statewide exemption.
In this region, only the Mountain Watershed Association lodged formal opposition to the company's petition.
“If they were going to have a compressor station, we would look at it differently,” said Les Mlakar, the solicitor for Penn, Hempfield and Loyalhanna townships.
In Salem Township, which doesn't have a zoning ordinance, officials don't have any worries, either, Supervisor Kerry Jobe said.
“We work pretty well with the (gas) companies out here,” he said.
Sunoco Pipeline spokesman Jeffrey Shields said company officials think the full PUC board will recognize that the pipeline “will result in numerous public benefits.”
Chris Foreman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-871-2363 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.