Eversource Motion for Rehearing on Northern Pass Take Two

Claims SEC acted unlawfully

Jack Savage | April 27, 2018

As anticipated, Eversource filed a second Motion for Rehearing Friday afternoon asking the New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee to reconsider it's written decision to deny a Certificate of Site and Facility for the Northern Pass transmission line project.

In the 74-page Motion, attorneys for Eversource attempt to make the case that the decision was contrary to law, even unconstitutional. 

"The Order is unlawful, unjust and unreasonable for several reasons, as described in detail in this Motion. First, as discussed above, the Subcommittee failed to assess 4 conditions proposed by the Applicants. The proposed conditions were an integral element of the evidence the Applicants presented to meet their burden of proof, and could be imposed to alleviate or mitigate the Subcommittee's concerns about potential interference with the orderly development of the region ("ODR"). Second, the Subcommittee failed to provide any definition for the vague "undue interference with the orderly development of the region," standard in Site 301.15 and failed to explain how its discussion regarding the elements of Site 301.09 (both in oral deliberations and the Order) were used to draw the legal conclusion regarding the Applicants'burden of proof. It compounded that failure by misapplying the standard in Site 301 .15, and it failed to provide any factual findings for its conclusion of law that the Applicants' burden had not been met. Third, the Order relies on several elements in Site 301.09 to deny the Certificate namely, land use, the views of municipal bodies, property values, tourism and construction related issues. In so doing, the Subcommittee fails to explain how the Applicants' evidence on these elements failed to prove the negative that there would not be "undue interference" with ODR. Further, the Order ignores past SEC precedent, misapplies the SEC's rules or simply creates new standards, misconstrues the evidence offered by the Applicants, and fails to consider other evidence in the record establishing the effect of the Project. As a result of these errors, the Subcommittee should reconsider and vacate the Order, complete deliberations on all of the criteria in RSA 162-H:16, IV (2017) and grant the Certificate.

The Forest Society will be reviewing the motion in detail next week in anticipation of filing a formal objection. The SEC has said it would deliberate on all Motions and related filings on May 24.

To read the full Motion for Rehearing, click here.