Motion to Dismiss Pipeline Tax Filed in Three States


The Conservation Law Foundation has filed a motion to dismiss the so-called “pipeline tax” in Rhode Island. The motion is being made after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled that National Grid and Eversource Energy can’t charge their electric customers for the cost of expanding natural gas pipelines.

Both companies intended to use the money to pay for a series of pipeline extensions in the Access Northeast buildout along the Algonquin pipeline that runs from New Jersey to Boston.

On June 30, National Grid filed a pipeline tax proposal of its own with the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that would create a fee, or tariff, to buy natural gas from Spectra Energy’s Algonquin pipeline. The money would help pay for a build-out of the pipeline in Rhode Island, including a compressor station in Burrillville.

Jerry Elmer, senior attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), said the Massachusetts decision to deny the pipeline tax isn’t legally binding in Rhode Island but there is a legal argument to close the PUC’s docket because the laws are similar in each state.

“Of course, the underlying reason CLF is opposing National Grid on this is that we believe that major new investments in fossil fuels is dangerous and wrong in light of the climate change emergency; and we are very pleased that in this case, our environmental argument stands on firm legal footing,” Elmer wrote in an e-mail.

No hearing date has been announced by the PUC to address CLF’s motion to dismiss the case in Rhode Island.

CLF filed similar motions to dismiss pipeline tax proposals in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. The tariff proposals in Massachusetts have been put on hold because of the court decision, but they are technically still before the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities.


Join the Discussion

View Comments

Recent Comments

  1. I hope we all appreciate the work of the Conservation Law Foundation as they are paying attention to all the details and filings that are at the heart of the process, and doing a good job of keeping us informed too. I hope they are right that this pipeline is not needed, since if they are wrong and their are big energy price spikes or shortages in event of a cold snap, we know who will suffer and who will be blamed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your support keeps our reporters on the environmental beat.

Reader support is at the core of our nonprofit news model. Together, we can keep the environment in the headlines.


We use cookies to improve your experience and deliver personalized content. View Cookie Settings