The parties agreed on remand that no further evidence was required for the Commission to render its decision. In re Apple Hill Solar LLC [Apple Hill II], 2021 VT 69, ¶ 8, 215 Vt. 523, 280 A.3d 44. The Commission appointed a hearing officer to address the issues identified by this Court.
The parties agreed on remand that no further evidence was required for the Commission to render its decision. In re Apple Hill Solar LLC [Apple Hill II], 2021 VT 69, ¶ 8, 215 Vt. 523, 280 A.3d 44. The Commission appointed a hearing officer to address the issues identified by this Court.
On remand, “[t]he parties agreed that no additional evidence was necessary.” In re Apple Hill Solar, 2021 VT 69, ¶ 8. The PUC appointed a hearing officer to address issues identified by the Vermont Supreme Court, and the hearing officer recommended that the PUC deny the CPG petition.
” In re Apple Hill Solar LLC, 2021 VT 69, ¶ 24. The PUC then denied the CPG petition for the Apple Hill facility, finding that it would interfere with orderly development of the region.
In September 2021, we reversed the PUC's denial of a CPG for the Apple Hill facility and remanded for additional proceedings. See In re Apple Hill Solar LLC, 2021 VT 69, ¶ 1, ___Vt.___, ___A.3d ___.