Buchanan Ingersoll A Rooney PC Attorneys & Government Relations Professionals 17 North Second Street 15th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101-1503 T 717.237.4800 F 717.233.0852 www.bipc.com VIA HAND DELIVERY c/5 m Rosemary Chiavetta, Secretary 3 fri c-> o m O Commonwealth Keystone Building CO 400 North Street, 2nd Floor <^ 3g ^ Harrisburg, PA 17120 g vll Re: Application of Laser Northeast Gathering Company, Docket No. A-2010-2153371 Dear Secretary Chiavetta: ^rcswe/- of MarkWest Liberty Midstream & Resources, LLC ("MarkWest") and Laurel Mountain Midstream, LLC ("LMM;" collectively, "MarkWest/LMM") to the Letter Petition Requesting Leave to Respond of Laser Northeast Gathering Company, LLC ("Laser") and the Accompanying Response On October 11, 2011, MarkWest/LMM received, by regular mail, a Letter Petition which Laser filed last Friday, October 7, requesting leave for Laser to respond to, among other things, the Joint Answer in Support filed by MarkWest/LMM on October 3, 2011. Attached to the Letter Petition was Laser's Response. MarkWest/LMM do not desire to join Laser in making unnecessary filings. However, if the Commission should consider Laser's Response, MarkWest/LMM are compelled to correct three important mischaracterizations: 1. Laser's Response mischaracterizes MarkWest/LMM's Joint Answer in Support by incorrectly contending that MarkWest/LMM "oppos[e] withdrawal unless conditioned" on rescission and/or vacatur of the Commission's June 14 and August 25 Opinions and Orders. 1 To the contrary, MarkWest/LMM's Joint Answer in Support offers unconditional, unqualified support for withdrawal of Laser's Application. 2 This is borne out by even a cursory review of the Joint Answer in Support. MarkWest/LMM further requested rescission and/or vacatur of the Commission's June 14 and August 25 Opinions and Orders, not as a condition for the Commission to permit withdrawal, but as additional relief. 2. Similarly, Laser's Response mischaracterizes the Commission's August 25 Opinion and Order, by contending that MarkWest/LMM's request for rescission and/or vacatur of that Opinion and Order is "ironic" because the Opinion and Order provided the "very 1 Laser Response at 2, 4, 7. " Throughout its Response, Laser conspicuously omits the words "in Support" when referencing MarkWest/LMM's filins. California :: Delaware :: Florida New Jersey " New York :: Pennsylvania Virginia :: Washington, DC
Rosemary Chiavetta, Secretary Page 2 of 3 clarification relief sought. 3 Laser's Response omits to mention that the August 25 Opinion and Order first and foremost denied MarkWest's request for reconsideration and reaffirmed the Commission's June 14 Opinion and Order, while also granting in part MarkWest's request in the alternative for clarification of the June 14 Opinion and Order. As Laser boasts in its Response, "[ejvery Order in this case has gone in Laser's favor." 4 Therefore, it is hardly surprising, much less ironic, for MarkWest/LMM to request rescission and/or vacatur of both of these adverse orders when the applicant has decided to discontinue the proceedings before they are fully completed. 3. MarkWest/LMM also must correct Laser's contention that the concerns behind MarkWest/LMM's request for rescission and/or vacatur are unfounded because "it is well settled law that Commission decisions are not precedent as the Commission is not bound by stare decisis." 5 Yet, in its Main Brief Laser urged the Commission to approve its Application because "[t]he Commission, in two other precedential cases, Application of Ardent Resources, Inc. and Allegheny Land and Exploration, Inc. has certificated intrastate pipeline utilities providing gathering and related services." 6 Further, while Laser contends that the case of Ardent Resources 7 does not support rescission because there the applicant requested rescission and Laser has made no such request, Laser ignores the case of PECO Energy Company where the Commission exercised its authority to rescind an Order that served no purpose, even absent the applicants' request for rescission. MarkWest/LMM urge the Commission to grant withdrawal. For the reasons explained at length in their Joint Answer in Support, if the Commission grants withdrawal, then MarkWest/LMM respectfully urge the Commission to further rescind and/or vacate its June 14 and August 25 Opinions and Orders, which will serve no useful purpose once these proceedings are terminated. * Laser Response at 2, 7. 4 Laser Response at 2 n.3. 5 Laser Response at 5 (emphasis omitted). G Laser MB at 21 (emphasis added and footnotes omitted). 7 Joint Petition of Ardent Resources, Inc. and ZHW Oil and Gas Inc. for Rescission of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission's Order entered on April 16, 2007, Docket No. A-1740005 (Opinion and Order entered April 17, 2009). 8 Laser Response at 6. 9 Joint Application of PECO Energy Company and Public Service Electric and Gas Company for Approval of the Merger of Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc. with and into Exelon Corporation, 101 Pa. P.U.C. 856 (Tentative Opinion and Order entered October 19, 2006).
Rosemary Chiavetta, Secretary Page 3 of 3 Very truly yours, Brian J. Clarl For BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC Attorneys for Laurel Mountain Midstream, LLC Brian J. Knipe For BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC Attorneys for MarkWest Liberty Midstream & Resources, LLC cc: Susan D. Colwell, Administrative Law Judge (via email and hand delivery; w/encl.) Bohdan R. Pankiw, Chief Counsel, Law Bureau (via email and hand delivery; w/encl.) Cheryl Walker Davis, Director, Office of Special Assistants (via email and hand delivery; w/encl.) Certificate of Service
BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION Application of Laser Northeast Gathering Company, LLC for Approval to Begin to Offer, Render, Furnish, or Supply Natural Gas Gathering and Transporting or Conveying Service by Pipeline to the Public in Certain Townships of Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania Docket No. A-2010-2153371 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day served a true copy of the foregoing document upon the parties, listed below, in accordance with the requirements of 1.54 (relating to service by a party). VIA E-MAIL & FIRST-CLASS U.S. MAIL Daniel P. Delaney, Esquire George A. Bibikos, Esquire K&L Gates, LLP 17 North Second Street, 18,h Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 dan.delanevfgiklgates.com george.bibikosfglklgates.com Todd S. Stewart, Esquire Hawke McKeon & Sniscak LLP 100 North Tenth Street Harrisburg, PA 17105 tsstewartfgihmslegal.com John H. Isom, Esquire Andrew S. Tubbs, Esquire Post & Schell 17 North Second Street, 12th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101-1601 iisom(2),postschell.com Carrie Wright, Esquire Office of Trial Staff PA Public Utility Commission P.O. Box 3265 Harrisburg, PA 17105-3265 carwright(g?,pa.gov Michael D. Fiorentino, Esquire 42 East Second Street Media, PA 19063 mdfiorentino@gmail.com William C. Fischer c/o Silver Lake Association 20159 State Route 167 Brackeny, PA 18812 bill(sifischerbureau.com
Elizabeth U. Witmer, Esquire Audrey J. Daly, Esquire Saul Ewing, LLP 1200 Liberty Drive, Suite 200 Wayne. PA 19087 ewitmerfgisaul.com adalv@saul.com Deborah Goldberg, Esquire Megan Klein, Esquire Earthjustice 156 William St, Suite 800 New York, NY 10038 daoldbergfgiearthiustice.org mkleinfajearthiustice.org Kevin J. Moody, Esquire Pennsylvania Oil & Gas Association 212 Locust Street, Suite 600 Harrisburg, PA 17101 kevin@pioga.org Thomas J. Sniscak, Esquire William E. Lehman, Esquire Hawke McKeon & Sniscak LLP 100 North Tenth Street Harrisburg, PA 17105 tisniscak@hmslegal.com welehman@,hmslegal.com Scott J. Rubin, Esquire 333 Oak Lane Bloomsburg, PA 17815-2036 scott.i.rubin@gmaii.com James A. Mullins, Esquire Office of Consumer Advocate 5th Floor, Forum Place Bldg. 555 Walnut Street Harrisburg, PA 17101-1921 imullins@paoca.org Date: Brian J. Knipof Esquire