WG&E starts project to replace aging and leaky gas lines throughout city
WESTFIELD — Westfield Gas and Electric held a brief ceremony Monday to announce it has started a yearslong project to replace all of the city's cast iron leaky gas lines with nearly indestructible polypropylene plastic.
'It's safe for our customer and good for the environment,' said WG&E Assistant General Manager Joe Mitchell about the line replacement project.
With some of the city's cast iron gas lines up to 80 years old, they prone to fracture and leak methane, WG&E was included in a federal grant program aimed to improve safety and reduce the emissions.
In 2023, WG&E announced it was recipient of a $10 million grant, which has risen to $17 million, to fund the project as part of the Natural Gas Distribution Infrastructure Safety and Modernization Program, which was established by Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Plan, and signed by former President Joe Biden.
'The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law continues to deliver results for the people of Massachusetts, and today's announcement is yet another step towards making much-needed improvement to our aging infrastructure,' said U.S. Rep. Richard Neal when announcing the grant.
However, with the changing of administrations earlier this year, there was some concern that the grant would be rescinded.
Mitchell said a portion of it was paused but because it had broad support on both sides of aisle in Congress, the pause was lifted.
'This program is on solid ground,' Mitchell said.
While it's been two years since the grant was announced, Mitchell said supply chain issues pushed the start date back and complying with a portion of the Build America Buy America Act, which was part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Plan.
'That was a challenge,' Mitchell said.
On Monday, a crew from R.H. White Companies Inc. was at the home of Gerald and Nancy Tomasko on Apple Blossom Lane to officially start the project.
The Auburn-based construction services company will do the work with WG&E as the general contractor, said WG&E Operations Superintendent Greg Freeman, who also explained the process of replacing the lines.
On the road in front of the Tomasko's home, WG&E will dig a three-foot deep trench to change out the cast-iron line. Once the new line is in place, the crew will then dig a trench from the new line to where it connects with gas conduit at the Tomasko's home — the work will tear up a small portion of their lawn.
He said each customer's natural gas service will disconnected for only a few minutes during the installation.
Freeman said once the connection is complete the disturbed area will be covered with loam and reseeded.
And that process will continue over the next four years to replace 1,200 low-pressure services to businesses and residences,
When plans for the project were being developed, it was believed that it would take 10 years, but it was moved up to four years.
Mitchell said the replacement project will cover 22 miles of line, and at no cost to the utility's ratepayers.
'Because it's a grant, the cost will not fall on our ratepayers,' he said, adding that he's asking for city residents for their 'patience' during construction.
Freeman said the gas line installation will start in April or May and continue through November or December as conditions allow.
After the crew completes the replacements in the Apple Blossom neighborhood, it will move onto the neighborhoods of Colony Circle, Birch Bluffs Drive, the west side of Southwick Road and Hillside Road.
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Eminem Is Suing Meta for $109 Million
Originally appeared on E! Online is not afraid to go toe-to-toe with a social media giant. The 'Love the Way You Lie' rapper's publishing company Eight Mile Style filed a lawsuit against Meta Platforms—which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp—accusing the tech company of copyright infringement and seeking over $109 million in damages, according to court documents filed May 30 and obtained by E! News June 3. In the filing, Eminem (real name Marshall Mathers) alleges that Meta violated the copyright of 243 songs from his catalog through the 'unauthorized storage, reproduction and exploitation' of the tracks on their platforms. The lawsuit cites the apps' features, including Original Audio and Reels, as tools that 'allow and encourage its users to steal' his music to use in video content 'without proper attribution or license.' As a result, the Grammy winner is seeking monetary damages for 'the diminished value of the copyrights by Defendants' theft of them, lost profits, and Defendants' profits attributable to the infringement.' Alternatively, he asked for the maximum statutory damages, requesting $150,000 for each of the songs in question across all three of Meta's platforms, totaling a whopping $109,350,000. Keep reading to see what other stars have said about their sobriety journeys… More from E! Online Dancing With the Stars' Jenna Johnson Reveals How Much They Get Paid Ellen Pompeo Detained for Hour by TSA and Bomb Squad Over Erewhon Sunflower Seeds Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt's Daughter Shiloh Debuts New Name E! News has reached out to Meta Platforms for comment but has not heard back. The Detroit native has frequently channeled his personal life in his music, often rapping about his difficult childhood as well as his turbulent relationships with his late mother and ex-wife Kim Mathers. In fact, he previously shared that expressing himself artistically has had a positive impact on his mental health. 'One of the great things about rap music is that you could put so much of your life in it,' he explained during an appearance on Shade 45's Sway In The Morning in June 2022. 'It's therapeutic and that's how it's always been for me.' Eminem has also frequently rapped about his battle with addiction, including a 2007 drug overdose that led him to get clean the following year. 'I remember when I first got sober and all the s--t was out of my system,' he said in an interview on the Paul Pod podcast in September 2022. 'I remember just being really happy and everything was f--king new to me again.' Keep reading to see what other stars have said about their sobriety journeys… Jason BiggsAshlyn HarrisJax Taylor Alec BaldwinAnne Hathaway Jamie Lee Curtis Jason RitterBrantley Gilbert For the latest breaking news updates, click here to download the E! News App
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump asked Congress to claw back funding for PBS and NPR. What now?
America's two big public broadcasters, PBS and NPR, have 45 days to salvage their federal funding — starting now. On Tuesday, the Trump administration sent Congress a long-awaited request for lawmakers to cancel more than $1 billion in federal funds earmarked for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the entity that disburses taxpayer funds to local NPR and PBS stations across the country. The request, known as a 'rescission package,' starts a 45-day clock for Congress to either approve or ignore the proposal. Rescinding the funds only requires a simple majority, which means in this case that no Democratic votes are needed. However, Republicans only have slim majorities in both the House and Senate, and public media executives are cautiously hopeful that they can convince some Republican moderates to ignore the White House's proposal, thereby killing it. White House budget director Russ Vought said on Fox News Tuesday afternoon that the House will be 'putting this on the floor next week.' Vought also warned, 'If it doesn't pass, we have to then release the funds and it has to be spent.' The 45-day period will end on July 18. Until then, PBS and NPR officials will be lobbying lawmakers and counting votes. NPR said its lobbying efforts will start on the House side, 'where we expect the memo to be first taken up,' CEO Katherine Maher said in a statement. 'During this fight we will demonstrate our value to Congress, as we have over the last 50 years, in providing educational, enriching programs and critical services to all Americans every day for free,' PBS CEO Paula Kerger said in a separate statement. The funds being targeted now were allocated by the Republican-controlled Congress in a bill that Trump signed into law earlier this spring but haven't been spent yet because the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is budgeted two years in advance. Trump, tapping into long-held conservative beliefs that NPR and PBS are biased in favor of liberals, is now trying to strip away the future funding and score a political win. Kerger said it would be a loss for the public at large. 'The proposed rescissions would have a devastating impact on PBS member stations and the essential role they play in communities,' she said, 'particularly smaller and rural stations that rely on federal funding for a larger portion of their budgets. Without PBS member stations, Americans will lose unique local programming and emergency services in times of crisis.' The Trump White House has targeted public media on multiple fronts in recent weeks. The president signed an executive order in early May directing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to stop funding PBS and NPR. He also tried to fire three of the corporation's board members. The corporation has essentially ignored him, however, because it is a private nonprofit entity set up by Congress and historically insulated from presidential interference. The entity has filed suit with the hopes that a federal court will affirm its independence. Both NPR and PBS have also filed separate lawsuits accusing the administration of violating the First Amendment. All three cases have been assigned to Judge Randolph D. Moss. Furthermore, the Federal Communications Commission is conducting a probe into NPR and PBS member stations, citing concerns that public media underwriting messages may be violating federal law. But of all the attempts to target public media this year, Tuesday's proposal stands out. 'This rescission proposal is the most serious threat ever faced by public broadcasting,' Maher wrote in her statement. 'We urge Congress to act in the interest of their constituents and save public broadcasting.'
CNN
33 minutes ago
- CNN
Analysis: How Trump's DOGE cuts package could put GOP in a bind
DOGE isn't dead, both President Donald Trump and Elon Musk assured last week as Musk said goodbye to the Trump administration. But the already dicey effort Musk led could soon become even more so. That's because the White House is now asking Congress to sign off on some of the cuts that the Department of Government Efficiency sought to make unilaterally. And the first set of cuts the White House has sent over to Capitol Hill epitomizes the dilemmas that lay ahead for Republicans. The dollar amount – $9.4 billion – is a tiny fraction of the federal budget, and the administration appears to be targeting low-hanging political fruit. But polling suggests the votes could still be tough ones. The idea is to make the cuts more permanent by having Congress pass what's known as a 'rescissions' package. This would codify the DOGE cuts into law, so that they can't be reversed by the next administration or overturned by the courts. Musk and fiscal conservatives have pushed for this, aiming to put a more lasting stamp of approval on cuts that have failed to live up to Musk's billing and could ultimately prove to be even less than meets the eye. The effort is also important as many of the same Trump allies have balked at the price tag of the president's 'Big Beautiful Bill' and want evidence that the administration is serious about spending cuts. Speaker Mike Johnson said Tuesday afternoon that the House had received the White House's request and vowed to put it on the floor for a vote 'as quickly as possible.' A lot will depend on how it's received and whether it passes. Such legislation needs only a majority of both chambers, meaning Republicans have the votes if they keep their side in line. 'We are intending to be strategic, work with Congress, see what they're willing to do, and if they pass this, we'll send up many more,' Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought told Fox News on Tuesday. But doing that is no small task. Spending cuts are often popular in theory but much less so in practice, when you get into specific things that will be taken away. Musk's and DOGE's efforts quickly fell out of favor with the American public, with polls showing both have become rather unpopular and Musk's efforts to impact a high-profile state Supreme Court election in Wisconsin falling flat. It's not difficult to see this legislative effort struggling and Trump – who has always talked much more about cutting spending than actually doing it – getting cold feet. Let's take a look at what's in the first rescissions package, and how it could test Republicans politically. The White House is aiming to make good on a long-standing conservative push to end federal funding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds NPR and PBS. This accounts for $1.1 billion of the rescissions package, according to Johnson's office Tuesday. But just because conservatives have been pushing this for a long time doesn't mean it's popular. A March Pew Research Center poll showed Americans supported continuing the funding rather than ending it, 43% to 24%. (About one-third of Americans offered no opinion.) Republicans and Republican-leaning voters were more in favor of the cuts, but even there it didn't seem to be a huge priority. While 44% wanted to end the funding, 19% – 1 in 5 – wanted to continue it. And past polling suggests this could be even more unpopular than those numbers suggest, depending on how the cut is sold. A 2017 Quinnipiac University poll, for instance, asked about the prospect of eliminating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Americans back then said it was a 'bad idea,' 70% to 25%. Getting 7 in 10 Americans to align on any given issue is difficult, but this one did the trick. This could also be a hurdle for some key Republican votes in the Senate and the closely divided House. Some Republicans from rural areas could worry this would decimate key news and educational programming in their areas. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, for instance, wrote an op-ed last month hailing public broadcasting and warning the administration against cuts. She called it an 'invaluable resource that saves lives in Alaska.' She noted some local stations in Alaska rely on the funding to operate – for as much as 30% to 70% of their budgets – at relatively low cost to taxpayers. Indeed, as CNN's Brian Stelter noted in April, the annual budget of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is about $535 million, or $1.60 per taxpayer. That makes it a tiny drop in the bucket when it comes to budget-cutting – but one the people who rely on the programming could quickly notice, particularly if it suddenly disappears. The Pew survey found about 1 in 5 American adults say they regularly get news from both NPR and PBS. It's a group that skews toward Democratic-leaning Americans, but still includes about 1 in 10 Republican-leaning ones. The lion's share of the money in the first rescissions package ($8.3 billion, according to Johnson's office) deals with what it calls 'wasteful foreign aid spending.' That gets to a key target of Musk and DOGE: the US Agency for International Development (USAID). And Republicans – including former USAID cheerleaders like Secretary of State Marco Rubio – have largely been in lockstep against this funding. This one is a little more complicated, politically. One the one hand, Americans generally think we send too much money overseas. A February KFF poll showed 58% of Americans said the United States spends 'too much' on foreign aid. But people also vastly over-estimate the amount of money involved. The same poll showed the average person estimated foreign aid was 26% of the budget; the actual number is about 1%. When the pollster told respondents about the actual figure, the percentage who said the government spends 'too much' dropped from 58% all the way down to 34%. Among Republicans – the group most critical of foreign aid – it dropped from 81% to 50%. We've also seen that Americans generally don't like the idea of ending most or all foreign aid. A March Pew poll showed Americans opposed ending 'most' USAID programs, 45% to 35%. The gap was similar in a March Reuters/Ipsos poll that asked about shuttering USAID. And a February CNN poll conducted by SSRS showed Americans said Trump shutting down entire government agencies like USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was a 'bad thing,' 53% to 28%. The rescissions package doesn't seem to go that far. Based on what OMB teased on social media Tuesday, it instead focuses on programs that might sound ridiculous to some. The administration has often misstated what these programs actually do, but many of them are obscure-sounding. They involve things like cultural programs in foreign countries and often things like DEI, gender equity and LGBTQ issues. And there, the administration could be on more solid ground. A Pew survey, for instance, showed that just 34% of Americans support foreign aid for 'art and cultural activities.' But some of the measures could test public support. For instance, the administration said it's requesting a rescission for $135 million in funding to the World Health Organization, which polls suggest is relatively popular. According to OMB, that includes money for circumcision, vasectomies and condoms in the African country of Zambia – part of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) program. PEPFAR is popular. And the Pew survey showed 83% of Americans support using foreign aid for 'providing medicine and medical supplies to developing countries.' Ultimately, the GOP's ability to sell these cuts – and feel confident voting for them – will depend in large part on whether Americans just see them broadly as cuts to obscure foreign aid programs, or if they view them as relatively modest investments in important programs. The real drama could come if the White House asks for more significant USAID cuts on programs beyond the ones they've cited in their talking points – programs that account for a much larger chunk of that 1%. The administration has struggled, for instance, to account for its changes to PEPFAR, which reports indicate have jeopardized the war against AIDS in Africa. The administration seems to view these initial rescissions cuts as the most politically palatable. But even they could test lawmakers' tolerance for signing off on DOGE's work – and could determine whether Republicans in Washington will press forward in actually voting on cuts.
