[10][11] Allegheny Power was ranked number one in customer satisfaction among utilities in the northeastern United States in 2010, according to TQS Research.

[12] The recent recognition marks the sixth consecutive year large commercial and industrial customers rated Allegheny Power the region's top performer.

[13] Allegheny has indicated that its policy is "to produce and distribute electricity in a reliable and responsible manner that protects its personnel, communities, customers, and the environment.

Under this accord, Allegheny Energy agreed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions (as carbon dioxide equivalents) by two million tons per year by 2000.

[18] Allegheny has taken steps to significantly reduce sulfur dioxide emissions at its generating facilities, investing $1.3 billion to install clean air technology at both the Hatfield's Ferry and Fort Martin power stations.

[20] The suit claimed that Allegheny Energy has made major upgrades at its Armstrong, Hatfield's Ferry, and Mitchell electric generating stations, having dramatically increased emissions without installing new pollution controls required by the Clean Air Act.

The scrubbers at Fort Martin and Hatfield's Ferry, completed in 2009, removed approximately 95 percent of the sulfur dioxide emissions at those facilities, totaling more than 200,000 tons annually from the two plants.

At the time the suit was filed, opponents claimed that the plants were emitting thousands of tons of pollution each year, including sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, which were allegedly wind-blown into New Jersey.

"This decision proves that New Jersey can and will pursue action to enforce the Clean Air Act's protections even when the federal government abdicates its own responsibility to do so.

New Jersey sought injunctive relief to require Allegheny to reduce its harmful emissions by installing up to date pollution controls at each of the three plants.