Skip to main content

Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests

Get our e-news!

Sign up

small nav

  • About Us
    • Staff
    • Board of Trustees
    • Our History
    • Contact Us
    • COVID-19 Updates
    • Partners
    • Business Members
    • Annual Reports
    • Bylaws
    • Policies
    • Conservation Center
    • Employment
  • log in
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram

Main menu

  • What we do
    • Land Conservation
    • Education & Events
    • Advocacy
    • Forestry & Recreation
    • News & Features
    • Forest Notes & More Publications
  • Current Projects
    • Mount Major Stewardship Fund
    • Forest Society North at The Rocks Campaign
    • Clay Brook Forest, Hampton Falls
    • Stillhouse Forest Addition, Northfield
    • Moose Mountains Expansion
    • Merrimack: River at Risk
    • Weeks Woods - Rene and Elizabeth Gilbert Tract, Gilford
  • Visit & Explore
    • The Rocks
    • Conservation Center
    • Forest Reservation Guide
  • Get Involved
    • Upcoming Events
    • Membership/Renewal
    • Support Our Work
    • Take Action
    • Volunteer
    • Subscribe to E-news
  • Search

Search form

Donate
Menu

News

  • Eversource Pulls Final Plug on Northern Pass

    Will Abbott
    July 26, 2019

    On July 25, less than a week after the New Hampshire Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision affirming the also unanimous decision of the NH ...

  • Eversource Gives Up Northern Pass

    July 26, 2019

    CONCORD — Eversource has decided Northern Pass “has no path forward” after the New Hampshire Supreme Court unanimously decided to uphold the Site Evaluation Committee’s decision denying the $1.6 billion project.

    The company filed a document with the Securities and Exchange Commission ...

    Read more
  • Eversource Pulls Plug on Northern Pass after NH Supreme Court Rebuke

    July 26, 2019

    Eversource has officially pulled the plug on the Northern Pass transmission line.

    The utility filed a notice with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission late Thursday, a spokesman says, “reflecting our conclusion that Northern Pass has unfortunately been brought to an end.” ...

    Read more

NH Supreme Court Denies Northern Pass Appeal

Unanimous Court Decision Upholds SEC Decision to Deny Permit
Jack Savage
July 19, 2019
Northern Pass
NH Supreme Court Northern Pass
Interested parties lined up outside the NH Supreme Court in Concord to get a seat to hear oral arguments in Eversource's appeal of the Site Evaluation Commitee's decision to deny a permit for the proposed 192-mile transmission line known as Northern Pass earlier this year. Jack Savage photo.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court unanimously denied the appeal by Eversource of the state Site Evaluation Committee (SEC) decision to deny a permit for the proposed Northern Pass transmission line. After nearly nine years, the battle over the controversial 192-mile project is effectively over.

The Court strongly affirmed the SEC’s decision, finding that the SEC fully complied with the law and with SEC rules to administer the law. It would not appear that there is any realistic path forward for Northern Pass at this juncture.

“We applaud the decision by the Supreme Court. We took on Northern Pass because we saw the proposed overhead line as a direct threat to conserved lands in the state, including three of our Forest Reservations and dozens of conservation easements,” said Jane Difley, president/forester of the Forest Society. “We felt privileged to stand with the thousands of individuals, dozens of communities and partner organizations who expressed appreciation for what we believe makes New Hampshire special.  We want to thank all of those who invested a significant portion of their lives over the past nine years in hopes of this outcome."

“This legal victory is a win for everyone in New Hampshire and beyond that treasures New Hampshire’s superior landscape and outdoor recreation,” said Amy Manzelli, BCM Environmental & Land Law, who represented the Forest Society at the SEC and the Supreme Court.

"We have reviewed the record and conclude that the Subcommittee’s findings are supported by competent evidence and are not erroneous as a matter of law. Accordingly, we hold that the petitioners have not sustained their burden on appeal to show that the Subcommittee’s order was unreasonable or unlawful," concluded the Supreme Court. The decision was written by Associate Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi, with the other four justices concurring.

Eversource does have the option of filing a motion for reconsideration of the Supreme Court decision within 10 days. A similar motion for reconsideration was also filed last year at the SEC after its unanimous decison to deny a requested Certificate of Site and Authority, and was denied by the SEC, prompting Eversource to appeal to the Supreme Court.

In its written decision to affirm the SEC ruling and deny the appeal, the Supreme Court rejected Eversource's arguments one by one, reaching the following conclusion:

“The legislature has delegated broad authority to the Committee to consider the ‘potential significant impacts and benefits of a project,’ and to make findings on various objectives before ultimately determining whether to grant an application.” Appeal of Allen, 170 N.H. at 762 (quoting RSA 162-H:16, IV). In this case, the Subcommittee considered and weighed extensive evidence including testimony from 154 witnesses and over 2,000 exhibits presented by the parties, including 160 intervenors, conducted seven site visits, and held 70 days of adjudicative hearings. Our review is limited to determining whether the Subcommittee’s findings are supported by competent evidence in the record and are not 31 erroneous as a matter of law. In doing so, we defer to the Subcommittee’s resolution of conflicts in the testimony and its determination of the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given evidence. We reiterate that it is not our task to reweigh the evidence or to determine whether we would have credited one expert over another. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the Subcommittee’s findings are supported by competent evidence and are not erroneous as a matter of law. Accordingly, we hold that the petitioners have not sustained their burden on appeal to show that the Subcommittee’s order was unreasonable or unlawful. 

The Union Leader coverage of the story can be read here.

The full text of the decision can be read here.

Footer menu

  • Privacy Policy
  • About Us
Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests54 Portsmouth St.Concord, NH 03301
Phone: 603.224.9945Fax: 603.228.0423info@forestsociety.org
Land Trust Alliance accreditation logo