On Thursday, May 24,  the New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee (SEC) confirmed its decision to deny a certificate of Site and Authority to Northern Pass. In doing so, it dismissed complaints and found no merit in arguments by Eversource that they were somehow entitled to a permit despite the failings of their own application and witnesses.

The Forest Society applauds the SEC’s thoroughness and backbone. We believe they made the correct decision to deny the Motion for Rehearing. We stand ready to continue the fight to defend New Hampshire’s landscapes from Northern Pass at the New Hampshire Supreme Court should Eversource take its complaints there.

Eversource failed to meet its burden of proof that the proposal would not have unreasonable adverse impacts on orderly development of the region. They failed because a credible and complete analysis of those impacts would have shown that the Northern Pass as proposed in fact would have had unreasonable adverse impacts. Ignoring the obvious doesn’t make it go away.

In short, Northern Pass was not a winner—conceptually flawed, with far too many adverse impacts and few if any real benefits to the people of New Hampshire, and there simply are no conditions or cash payments that could turn a bad idea into good. The seven members of the SEC subcommittee rightly made a reasonable decision to deny Northern Pass and the Motion for Rehearing.

The Forest Society, a formal intervenor in the SEC process in opposition to Northern Pass as it was proposed, had objected to the Motion for Rehearing. Click here for a link to the Motion and the Forest Society's Objection.  Click here to read the SEC's written decision denying Northern Pass a Certificate of Site and Facility.