In the case of Clean Air Council and Environmental Integrity Project v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, EHB Docket No. 2015-111-R, the Environmental Hearing Board (EHB) denied a motion for a protective order without prejudice with respect to documents Shell Chemical Appalachia sought to protect. The EHB’s approach may be instructive for other companies seeking to protect information it considers confidential.
By way of background, on Jan. 18, the supervisors of Potter Township in Beaver County approved a conditional use permit for Shell’s proposed petrochemical complex. The facility, comprised of an ethane cracker and three polyethylene units, is designed to employ a natural gas liquid from the Marcellus and Utica shale formations to produce plastic pellets used in plastics manufacturing. The site of a former zinc smelter will also host a natural gas power plant and three pipelines, and with a tax credit valued at $1.65 billion over 25 years, the facility is slated for the largest tax break in Pennsylvania history.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
