Share This Page

Quest sues over Sunoco easement in Penn

| Wednesday, May 14, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

Nine months after Sunoco Logistics received an easement in Penn Township through eminent domain for a pipeline project, the property owner wants a different Westmoreland County judge to rescind the court order.

In suing Sunoco last week, Quest Realty Partnership is renewing its challenge of Sunoco's right to be considered a public utility under Pennsylvania's Business Corporation Law.

Quest officials also contend that a right-of-way drawing prepared by Sunoco and recorded with the county doesn't identify precisely where Sunoco's 50-foot permanent easement is located.

Common Pleas Court officials assigned the case to Judge Christopher Feliciani, whose colleague, Richard E. McCormick Jr., granted Sunoco's eminent-domain petition on Aug. 2.

William McCabe, who filed the suit on Quest's behalf, did not respond to an interview request.

Sunoco spokesman Jeffrey Shields said company officials generally do not comment on pending litigation.

The disputed easement is on 89 acres that are bordered by Mellon, Ader and Walton Roads. Quest also owns the William Penn Care Center and William Penn Senior Suites and Personal Care, which are on nearby properties.

Construction on the pipeline already is under way in the region.

The 50-mile pipeline, which will transport ethane and propane as natural-gas liquids, will run from the Houston area in Washington County to Salem Township.

It is part of an infrastructure network that will transport ethane and propane across the state into a small part of Delaware.

“Mariner East is scheduled to begin shipping propane by (the) second half of this year, and both ethane and propane by mid-2015,” Shields said in an email.

Chris Foreman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8671, or cforeman@tribweb.com.

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.