COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

Similar documents
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF [COUNTY NAME]

6. In the body of the motion:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. Vineyard Wind LLC ) Docket No. ER

Re: Petition for Appeal of GDF SUEZ Gas NA LLC D.P.U

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

STATE OF RHODE TSLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:14-cv RGS Document 1 Filed 09/22/14 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Virginia Freedom of Information Act ( VFOIA ) Complaint Template

Case 3:07-cv SI Document 25 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 7

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 05/03/17 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

December 13, 2004 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING

Case 3:07-cv SI Document Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 7

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

Division means Division of Public Records, Office of the State Secretary.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/19/ :45 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 168 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/19/2018

Case 1:14-cv APM Document 24 Filed 03/10/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/10/18 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR CLARK COUNTY 9. Case No.

THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT. Plaintiff, National Wildlife Federation ( NWF ), alleges as follows: INTRODUCTION

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE NO.

CIVIL ACTION. Defendant Jeff Carter, by and through his counsel Law Offices of Walter M. Luers, by

Case 1:12-cv DPW Document 1 Filed 09/21/12 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE ALLEN SUPERIOR/CIRCUIT COURT )ss: COUNTY OF ALLEN ) CAUSE NO.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA. Plaintiff, Case No. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 01/26/ :43 AM INDEX NO /2018E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/26/2018

Case 1:13-cv FDS Document 57 Filed 08/27/14 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/ :31 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Motion to Dismiss in a Debt Collection Suit Instructions, Example, Sample Form

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS ENERGY FACILITY SITING BOARD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.

Case 1:12-cv Document 1 Filed 03/30/12 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPEALS COURT. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C., Plaintiff. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al.

Case 1:17-cv RC Document 8 Filed 09/25/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BY FAX --~ FacsImile: (415) IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 3 KennethM. Walczak, BarNo

Case 1:13-cv DJC Document 1 Filed 05/17/13 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Plaintiff, Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE &C Page 2

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 04/26/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Filing # E-Filed 11/10/ :27:26 PM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION ORDER ADOPTING PROTECTIVE ORDER. (Issued January 23, 2012)

Standing Practice Order Pursuant to 20.1 of Act Establishing Rules Governing Practice and Procedure in Medical Assistance Provider Appeals

Transmission Maintenance Coordination Committee Charter

COMPLAINT (With Application for Show Cause Order)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/23/18 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 1:14-cv Document 1 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

similarly situated, seeks the recovery of unpaid wages and related damages for unpaid minimum wage and overtime hours worked, while employed by Bab.

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. COMPLAINT and Jury Demand

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 04/04/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:1

PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAX AGREEMENT This Payment in Lieu of Taxes Agreement ( Agreement ) is made as of the day of December, 2014, by and between the

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 02/26/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Introduction

Ch. 41 MEDICAL ASSISTANCE APPEAL PROCEDURES 55 CHAPTER 41. MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDER APPEAL PROCEDURES GENERAL PROVISIONS

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : VERIFIED COMPLAINT

November 12, 2004 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-CI-389 DIVISION II STATE REPRESENTATIVE MARY LOU MARZIAN

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/22/ :20 PM INDEX NO /2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/22/2018

6 Mofty Shulman (Pro Hac Vice to be filed)

Case 3:17-cv DMS-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/17/17 PageID.1 Page 1 of 20

July 28, Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions in regard to the enclosed. Very truly yours, /s/ James William Litsey

ABCs of Seeking Judicial Review of a MassHealth Board of Hearings Decision

Case 1:14-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 06/06/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case Doc 19 Filed 06/01/16 Entered 06/01/16 14:19:45 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/18/18 Page 1 of 9

Sequoia Park Associates, a California limited partnership, Petitioner and Plaintiff,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COMPLAINT

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. and DEFENDANTS REQUESTED PRELIMINARY AND CLOSING JURY INSTRUCTIONS. Now comes the defendants and moves this Court to

10/30/2017 7:04 PM 17CV47399 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PARTIES

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 06/13/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DEFENDANTS' VERIFIED ANSWER

Case 1:19-cv JGD Document 1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

MASSACHUSETTS SCHOOL BUILDING AUTHORITY FEASIBILITY STUDY AGREEMENT

Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of Suffolk The Superior Court NOTICE OF DOCKET ENTRY

Case 1:17-cv TSC Document 13 Filed 09/08/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COMPLAINT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

RESOLUTION NO

Case 1:13-cv RBW Document 117 Filed 12/19/16 Page 1 of 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ANSWER

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 06/18/17 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:17-cv WHP Document 1 Filed 06/27/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Transcription:

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Suffolk, ss SUPERIOR COURT Civil Action No. CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION, Plaintiff, v. MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY AND ENVT L AFFAIRS, Defendant. VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF 1. This is an action under the Massachusetts Public Records Law, G.L. c. 66, 10 and c. 4, 7, Twenty-sixth, and the Declaratory Judgment Act, G.L. c. 231A, 1, seeking public records from an agency of the Commonwealth, the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs ( EEA or defendant. 2. As part of a regional effort coordinated by the New England Governors through the New England States Committee on Electricity ( NESCOE, employees and representatives of EEA have been engaged in discussions regarding the procurement of additional natural gas pipeline capacity and additional imports of Canadian hydroelectric power. 3. As a result of these discussions, NESCOE has proposed that a new tariff be established by the regional electric grid operator, the Independent System Operator of New England ( ISO- NE, to pass the costs of any new natural gas pipelines onto electric customers within New England. Such a tariff is unprecedented and could result in multi-billion dollar costs for electric customers. 1

4. In addition, EEA and its employees have been advancing legislative proposals within Massachusetts in an attempt to support the above-referenced infrastructure initiative. 5. As part of an effort to examine the proposals set forth by NESCOE and supported by employees and representatives of EEA, CLF requested documents concerning EEA s participation in discussions regarding the Governors initiative to procure additional natural gas pipeline capacity and additional Canadian hydroelectric power in March 2014. The request sought all documents from June 30, 2012 to the present regarding these proposals, including internal communications and any communications with NESCOE, employees or representatives of other New England states, ISO-NE, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ( FERC, electricity market participants, and natural gas transmission or distribution companies. See March 19, 2014 Letter from Shanna Cleveland, CLF, to Energy Undersecretary Barbara Kates-Garnick, EEA. (Exhibit A. 6. However, EEA has refused to provide these documents within the ten-day time frame mandated by the statute. Instead, EEA has claimed that it does not have the resources to produce these records any sooner than July 31, 2014, coincidentally, the very last day of the legislative session in which the infrastructure legislation is being considered, and after the NESCOE deadline for additional comments on the proposal, July 3, 2014. See June 19, 2014 Letter from Hinna Upal, EEA to Shanna Cleveland, CLF. (Exhibit B. 7. EEA s continued refusal to provide CLF with copies of the documents or access to those documents that have already been identified will also prevent CLF from having sufficient time to review responsive documents prior to the next steps in the stakeholder process on the proposed tariff at ISO-NE. Additional stakeholder meetings are scheduled for July 22 and 28 with additional meetings for voting on the proposal scheduled for August 11 and 29. 2

8. These refusals to provide the documents occurred after CLF had already provided a check for $958.42 to pay for the resources to compile and copy these documents. See April 22, 2014 Letter from Shanna Cleveland, CLF to Deputy General Counsel Hinna Upal, EEA. (Exhibit C. 9. Despite payment and repeated requests explaining the time sensitive nature of CLF s requests, EEA continues to delay production of the records. See May 8, 2014 Email from Shanna Cleveland, CLF to Hinna Upal, EEA. (Exhibit D; June 12, 2014 Letter from Shanna Cleveland, CLF to Hinna Upal, EEA (Exhibit E. 10. CLF seeks a declaration that EEA was required to provide CLF with the requested documents no later than ten days from the date of CLF s request. CLF also seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring the immediate release of the requested records, which will educate the public about the proposed legislation and proposed tariff and allow CLF to make timely, informed comments on these proposals and participate meaningfully in the stakeholder process at ISO-NE. Parties 11. Plaintiff the Conservation Law Foundation ( CLF is a non-profit membership organization of over 3,000 members and supporters. CLF is incorporated under the laws of Massachusetts with a principal place of business at 62 Summer Street, Boston, MA 02110. CLF s mission is to protect New England s environment for the benefit of all people. CLF has a long history of working to reduce harmful air emissions, including greenhouse gas pollution, from all sectors of the economy on behalf of its members. 3

12. Defendant the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs ( EEA is an agency of the Commonwealth established pursuant to G.L. c. 21A, 1. Its principal place of business is located at 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900, Boston, MA 02114. Jurisdiction and Venue 13. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under G.L. c. 66, 10(b, which states, [i]f a custodian of a public record refuses or fails to comply with the request of any person for inspection or copy of a public record or with an administrative order under this section, the supreme judicial court or superior court shall have jurisdiction to order compliance. 14. Venue is proper in Suffolk County because CLF s usual place of business is in Boston. Relevant Statutory Law 15. Under the Massachusetts Public Records Law, G.L. c. 66, 10, every person having custody of any public record... shall, at reasonable times and without unreasonable delay, permit it... to be inspected and examined by any person upon request. 16. Public records are documents and records made or received by any officer or employee of any agency, executive office, department, board, commission, bureau, division or authority of the commonwealth, or any political subdivision thereof, or of any authority established by the general court to serve a public purpose... [.] G.L. c. 4, 7, Twenty-sixth. 17. Pursuant to c. 66, 10(b, A custodian of a public record shall, within ten days following receipt of a request for inspection or copy of a public record, comply with such request. 18. The corresponding regulations underscore that the public must be provided prompt access to all public records in the custody of state governmental entities and in the custody of governmental entities of political subdivisions of the Commonwealth. Mass. Regs. Code tit. 950, 32.02. 4

Factual Allegations 19. To inform itself and the public about EEA s actions with respect to the regional infrastructure initiative, CLF sent a letter requesting public records on March 19, 2014. (Exhibit A. 20. On March 28, 2014, CLF received a response from EEA s Deputy General Counsel stating that EEA was in the process of identifying documents and would provide a further response as soon as practicable. (Exhibit F. 21. EEA did not provide a further response until April 17, 2014. At that time, EEA stated that it estimated responding to the request would take roughly 34 hours and would cost $958.42. (Exhibit G. 22. CLF prepared and delivered the check for $958.42 on April 25, 2014. After receiving no further response, CLF informed EEA that time was of the essence due to the need to provide public comment on the pending tariff proposal no later than May 30, 2014. (Exhibit D. 23. On June 12, 2014, CLF submitted a letter to EEA indicating that if the documents were not provided within 7 days of the letter, CLF would have no choice but to consider its administrative and legal remedies. (Exhibit E. 24. In response, on June 19, 2014, EEA provided a letter explaining that it is our intention to provide you with responsive documents, or the opportunity to come to the office to copy any responsive documents, before July 31, 2014. (Exhibit B. 25. EEA has yet to provide any responsive documents and has denied a request to review in person any documents that have been gathered thus far. 5

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS Count I (Declaratory Judgment, G.L. c. 231A, 1 26. CLF realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above. 27. An actual controversy has arisen between CLF and EEA as to whether EEA has failed to comply with the Public Records Law by refusing to provide responsive documents within ten days of receiving CLF s request. 28. EEA is an executive office of the commonwealth and is subject to the requirement to comply with public records requests within ten days of receiving such a request. 29. For these reasons, this Court should declare that, the Public Records Law requires disclosure of documents within ten days of receipt of a request absent any claim of exemption or privilege. Count II (Violation of G.L. c. 66, 10 and c. 4, 7, Twenty-sixth 30. CLF realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained above. 31. Under G.L. c. 66, 10, every person having custody of any public record... shall, at reasonable times and without unreasonable delay, permit it... to be inspected and examined by any person upon request. 32. G.L. c. 66, 10(b requires that a custodian shall comply with such a request within ten days following receipt of the request. 33. By refusing to provide the documents requested by CLF within ten days after receipt of the request, EEA has violated the Massachusetts Public Records Law. 6

34. CLF is entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive relief ordering compliance with its request. Prayer for Relief WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, CLF, prays that the Court: 1. Issue the requested declaratory relief; 2. Enter preliminary and permanent injunctions ordering the defendant (a to conclude review of the records; (b identify all records and data that are responsive to CLF s Request; and (c to disclose all public records to CLF immediately; 3. Issue a short order of notice for a hearing to show cause why the Court should not grant the relief requested in these Prayers for Relief; and 4. Grant such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Respectfully submitted, CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION By its attorney, July 9, 2014 VERIFICATION Shanna M. Cleveland, BBO #647795 Conservation Law Foundation 62 Summer Street Boston, MA 02110 Phone: 617-850-1716 Email: scleveland@clf.org I, Shanna Cleveland, hereby declare under the pains and penalties of perjury that the factual allegations contained in this Verified Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, on this 9th day of July, 2014. 7