Archive

ShareThis Page
Court rules against proposed Pa. pipeline project | TribLIVE.com
News

Court rules against proposed Pa. pipeline project

The Associated Press
483573PipelineA

BUFFALO — An appeals court in upstate New York has ruled in favor of landowners who are fighting against a gas company’s plans to build a pipeline from Pennsylvania to Lake Ontario.

WIVB-TV in Buffalo reports the court ruled corporations can only use eminent domain to gain access to private property if the project is legal, which the planned project by National Fuel Gas isn’t.

The state Department of Environmental Conservation previously ruled the pipeline by National Fuel doesn’t meet water quality standards.

The suburban Buffalo-based company has issued a statement saying it remains committed to the project and is considering an appeal.

Lia Oprea, one of four landowners opposed to the project, says they are thrilled.

National Fuel has until Dec. 9 to file their appeal.

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.