Proposal to reverse the flow of fuel pipeline rejected

fuel pipelines from the east and west — an advantage Western Pennsylvania would lose if it became dependent on a single region’s refineries. Currently, the Pittsburgh market is served by the Laurel pipeline from the east and three pipelines from the Midwest.

PUC chairman Gladys Brown said the case record made it clear that both Philadelphia-area shippers and the Western Pennsylvania market would be negatively affected if the Laurel pipeline’s east-to-west service dead-ended in the middle of the state.

She also said Laurel failed to “provide any evidence showing why a change in rates” — as an alternative to its reversal proposal — “was not also a viable option for its bottom line.”

Buckeye Partners applied to federal regulators this spring for permission to ship fuel in both directions on the western half of the Laurel pipeline, even as it continued to pursue its application for full reversal at the PUC.

In a statement, Buckeye said it disagrees with the PUC’s decision, but will abide by it. The company is moving forward with its plans for bi-directional service, which it says “will enhance competition and provide shippers and suppliers with more options while still increasing access to lowercost North American-produced fuels for Pennsylvania consumers.”

The fuel retailers and refiners that oppose full reversal, a coalition known as Deny Buckeye, are also protesting the company’s plan for bi-directional service because they suspect it will diminish their ability to use the line.

On Thursday, the coalition filed a petition asking the PUC to block Buckeye from shutting down the contested section of the Laurel pipeline for two weeks in August — in the midst of the busy summer driving season — to prepare the line to accept new flows from the west.

The group also wants the PUC to require Buckeye to get state utility regulators’ approval before restricting when and how much fuel can be shipped from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh on the line.