Eminent domain

Atlantic Sunrise Pipeline Condemnations

Property owners in the path of the Williams Company Atlantic Sunrise pipeline are now subject to condemnation court filings. The litigation requests approval of the taking of property rights by eminent domain and quick possession of those rights. Property owners may have weak challenges to the condemnations, but continue with rights to just compensation. Williams Company appraisals have valued incorrect property rights to facilitate negotiation of minimal settlements. Owners are encouraged to contact experienced eminent domain counsel to obtain just compensation.
Access sought to 13 properties
A Texas gas pipeline company is seeking a preliminary injunction to obtain immediate possession of rights of way over 13 properties in four counties for the Atlantic Sunrise project.

The motion filed Wednesday in U.S. Middle District Court by Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Co. seeks access to four properties in Lebanon County, five in Columbia County, three in Northumberland and one in Schuylkill.

The 13 are among the 16 central Pennsylvania properties over which Transco seeks to obtain rights […]

By |February 24th, 2017|Categories: Condemnation, Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|

Sunoco Pipeline Obtains Environmental Approval

While Sunoco Pipeline has obtained regulatory approval, Sunoco continues to seek property rights. Faherty Law Firm continues to contest eminent domain power based on the Pennsylvania anti – Kelo statute, the Property Rights Protection Act. Oral argument is scheduled for March 6  before the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg. Mike Faherty will ask the Court to review whether the public is the primary and paramount beneficiary of the project.
PA grants final permits for $2.5B Mariner East pipeline
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection on Monday approved water-crossing and sedimentation permits for the hotly contested Mariner East 2 pipeline, which would transport natural-gas liquids across Pennsylvania to a terminal in Marcus Hook.

The permits are believed to be the final regulatory hurdle for Sunoco Logistics to begin construction of the pipeline, though environmental groups that oppose the project, including the Clean Air Council and the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, are expected to appeal their approval to the Environmental Hearing Board.

DEP conducted five hearings and […]

By |February 14th, 2017|Categories: Condemnation, Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|

FERC Approval of Atlantic Sunrise

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has approved the Williams Partners proposed Atlantic Sunrise pipeline. Williams is expected to conclude property acquisition negotiations or proceed with condemnation filings in February, 2017.
Pipeline clears federal hurdle
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has signed off on the contested Atlantic Sunrise project, which calls for the expansion of a natural gas pipeline that would funnel natural gas from the Marcellus Shale regions through the midstate and across the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast.

The commission issued a certificate of public convenience and necessity to Williams Partners LP, placing the Oklahoma-based energy group behind the $3 billion project another step closer toward breaking ground on the expansion.

The energy company’s plans call for about 200 miles of new natural gas pipelines, some of which would pass through the midstate.

Williams Partners still must garner approvals from the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the State Historic Preservation Office.

The decision marked the final clearance Williams Partners needed from […]

By |February 6th, 2017|Categories: Condemnation, Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Denial

On December 29, 2016 our Pennsylvania Supreme court refused to hear the property owners’ appeal of the Commonwealth Court decision of Martin et. al. v. Sunoco Pipeline. The Martin decision had approved the use of eminent domain for the Mariner East 2 pipelines. The Martin case had involved three properties. Owners of one of the properties settled before the Supreme Court decision. The approval of use of eminent domain is final and binding concerning the other two properties in that case.

Other cases remain on appeal. To the extent that those cases involve different issues and evidence, those cases preserve some hope that eminent domain would be eventually denied because the public is not the “primary and paramount beneficiary” of the project.

By |January 4th, 2017|Categories: Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction|

Delay of Atlantic Sunrise Pipeline

The Federal Protection Environmental Protection Agency in July of 2016 recommended further environmental study and FERC consideration of alternative routes. This resulted in a delay in the projected issuance of the final Environmental Impact Statement to December 30, 2016 with expected FERC approval of the project on March 30, 2017. Williams Partners continues to purchase land options and purchase easements.
Williams delays Atlantic Sunrise pipeline project
Two pipelines fueled by Pennsylvania’s natural gas boom – the Atlantic Sunrise and Mariner East 2 pipelines – are expected to bisect Lebanon County. Here’s what you need to know.

Pipeline won’t be completed until 2018.

Tulsa, Okla.-based Williams Partners is delaying the target date for its proposed Atlantic Sunrise natural gas pipeline until 2018 after federal regulators delayed their approval process.

The Atlantic Sunrise pipeline would bisect Lebanon County from north to south while carrying natural gas from Marcellus Shale-rich northeastern Pennsylvania to the Transcontinental Pipeline (Transco) that covers the east coast.

Williams Partners previously targeted the project to […]

By |December 22nd, 2016|Categories: Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|

Mariner East 2 Pipeline Risks

Dr. Kirk Jalbert has authored an analysis of the explosion risks of the Mariner East proposal of Sunoco Pipeline. His analysis of a 20 inch diameter pipeline transporting ethane would have a blast radius of 1,171 feet. He estimated 105,419 people to live within the Mariner East 2’s thermal impact zone. The threat to these individuals could be a significant consideration as to eminent domain power and who would be the primary and paramount beneficiary of such a pipeline.
Mariner East 2: At-Risk Schools and Populations
Written by: Kirk Jalbert, Manager of Community-Based Research & Engagement
with technical assistance from Seth Kovnant | Published in FracTracker Alliance

In September, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) rejected a number of permits for wetland crossings and sedimentation control that were required for Sunoco Pipeline’s proposed “Mariner East 2” pipeline. According to Sunoco, the proposed Mariner East 2 is a $2.5 billion, 350-mile-long pipeline that would be one of the largest pipeline construction projects in […]

By |December 14th, 2016|Categories: Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|

Mariner East 2 Pipeline Again Delayed

Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P. / Sunoco Pipeline has announced a delay in the start up (operation) of the Mariner East 2 proposed pipeline. Sunoco has now announced a plan of start up in the 3rd quarter of 2017. Sunoco attributed the delay to the Pa. Department of Environmental Protection permit process. Sunoco continues to attempt to obtain property rights from owners while eminent domain litigation continues in county and appellate courts.

Sunoco blames permit delays for later Mariner East 2 pipeline start-up
Written by: by Andrew Maykuth, Staff Writer / philly.com

Sunoco Logistics Partners LP said Thursday that it is pushing back next year’s start-up of the contentious Mariner East 2 pipeline to deal with unanticipated delays in obtaining permits from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

The 300-mile pipeline, which would deliver natural-gas liquids such as ethane and propane from the Marcellus Shale region to Sunoco’s Marcus Hook terminal, has aroused opposition from some adjoining property owners, as well as from environmental activists.

Michael […]

By |November 18th, 2016|Categories: Condemnation, Eminent domain, In the News, Pipeline Construction|

PA Supreme Court Protects Property Rights

A Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision provides very strong support of private property rights. It rejected an attempt at use of eminent domain for  primarily private, not public, purposes. The decision continues the long established consistency of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court protection of private property rights.

Eminent domain has again been reaffirmed to only be for a valid, and primarily, public purpose. The attached decision in the matter known as Robinson Township v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania provides great support and encouragement to those challenging the Sunoco Pipeline attempt to use eminent domain for the Mariner East 2 proposed pipeline which would ship ethane across Pennsylvania and to Europe. The decision very strongly suggests that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will reject the use of eminent domain for the Mariner East 2 pipeline(s) which would have less public purpose than the underground gas storage proposal reviewed in the attached decision. The most pertinent language is found at pages 78 – 86. Pennsylvania property owners […]

By |September 30th, 2016|Categories: Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|

Township Proclamation Concerning Sunoco Pipeline

Thornbury Township in Delaware County, Pennsylvania has issued a Proclamation expressing great concern about Sunoco Pipeline use of Mariner East 1 and the Mariner East 2 proposal.

Thornbury Hazardous Liquids Proclamation

By |September 28th, 2016|Categories: Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|

Faherty Law Firm Defends Property Rights in Commonwealth Court

Lawyer tries to stop seizure of farmland
A July Cumberland County Court ruling gave Sunoco Pipeline the go-ahead to use eminent domain to take a portion of Upper Frankford Township farmland for the Mariner East II pipeline.

But on Friday, the landowners’ attorney filed notice that he is appealing the decision to Commonwealth Court. Property owners Rolfe Blume, John Perry and Alan Waters were in court in February, arguing through their attorney, Mike Faherty, that Sunoco Pipeline does not have the authority to take parts of their land.

Faherty told the court that under state law, eminent domain cannot be used for private enterprise, even if there is an element of public use.

The pipeline would move liquid natural gas from Ohio to the Delaware River for shipment overseas, making it subject to federal regulations and not the state regulations that allow for eminent domain, he said.

But judges in Huntingdon and Washington counties, as well in another Cumberland County case with different property owners, […]

By |August 5th, 2016|Categories: Condemnation, Eminent domain, Pipeline Construction, Property Rights|