FILED 16 FEB '1610:32 USDC·ORE 

1 Mary C. Benafel 

2696 Moon Mountain Drive 

2 Eugene OR, 97401 

Phone: (541) 343-1600 

3 E-mail: ecr963@gmail.com 

In Pro Per 

4 

5 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

EUGENE DIVISION 

6 

7 

Mary C. Benafel, 

Plaintiff, 

Case No.: lo·. I to -c v - 213 --,Mc. 

COMPLAINT 

8 v. 

9 United States Department of 

Transportation, Anthony Foxx, Ross 

10 Reineke; Williams Northwest Pipeline, 

Rodney Gregory; City of Eugene and 

11 members of the City Council, Mayor 

Kitty Piercy, George Brown, Betty 12 Taylor, Alan Zelenka, George Poling, 

13 Mike Clark, Greg Evans, Claire 

Syrett, Chris Pryor; William David 

14 and Shannon G. Tom; Does 1to50, 

15 Defendants. 

16 

17 I. 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

Introduction 

18 1. Plaintiff alleges the named Defendants, all of them, engaged in a conspiracy 

19 to violate Plaintiffs federal civil rights under color of state law, including, but not limited 

20 to, the unlawful taking of Plaintiffs property without just compensation. 

21 

22 2. Plaintiff seeks the removal of the "Williams" Northwest Pipeline "pigging" 

23 facility from Plaintiffs property and to restore it, along with just compensation for the 

24 taking, and the inverse condemnation of Plaintiffs property, by the listed Defendants acts 

taken, in concert with the United States Department of Transportation, Anthony Foxx, 

COMPLAINT 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 1 of 9
1 United States Secretary of Transportation, Ross Reineke; the City of Eugene Oregon, 

2 members of the City Council, Mayor Kitty Piercy, George Brown, Betty Taylor, Alan 

3 Zelenka, George Poling, Mike Clark, Greg Evans, Claire Syrett, Chris Pryor, and 

4 Plaintiffs neighbors, William David and Shannon G. Tom. 

5 

6 3. The Parties that are currently identified are Plaintiff herein, who is Mary C. 

7 Benafel, 2696 Moon Mountain Drive, Eugene, Oregon 97401. The Defendants are, United 

8 States Department of Transportation, Anthony Foxx, Ross Reineke CATS Manager 

9 PHMSA/Westem Region , Phone: (720)-963-3182, U.S. Department of Transportation, 

10 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE, Washington, DC 20590; Williams Northwest Pipeline, Rodney 

11 Gregory; City of Eugene and members of the City Council, Mayor Kitty Piercy, George 

12 Brown, Betty Taylor, Alan Zelenka, George Poling, Mike Clark, Greg Evans, Claire 

13 Syrett, Chris Pryor, 125 East 8th Avenue, 2nd Floor, Eugene, OR 97401; William David 

14 and Shannon G. Tom, 2693 Agusta Street, Eugene OR 97401. Does 1 through 50 are 

15 remaining unidentified co-conspirators. 

16 

17 II. Jurisdiction 

18 4. The United States is a Defendant and regarding the other Defendants the 

19 cause of action arises under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U.S.C. Sections 1983 and 

20 1988) and the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This Court 

21 has jurisdiction of the federal claims under 28 U.S.C. Section 1331, 1332, 1343(3) 

22 1343(4), 2201, and 2202. This court has pendent jurisdiction over the causes of action as 

23 they state claims which arise under "Real Property 240 Torts to Land" on the Court's civil 

24 cover sheet which Plaintiff has checked. 

-2-

COMPLAINT 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 2 of 9
1 

2 5. 

III. Statement of Claims 

Claim I. The Williams Northwest Pipeline "pigging" station was put on my 

3 property at 2696 Moon Mountain Drive, Eugene, Oregon, without any 45-days notice 

4 first. A new road was constructed off of Moon Mountain Court. The contour of the 

5 Berger/Benafel property at 2696 Moon Mountain Drive was changed, causing 

6 environmental damage, including, but not limited to, the loss of trees and vegetation, and 

7 the construction was built over an aquifer. No US EPA report was filed, even though the 

8 property line is within 100 feet of a wetland. Williams Northwest Pipeline hired people to 

9 spray pesticides regularly without any further notice to Plaintiff first. The local zoning 

10 does not allow for pigging stations within subdivision. The neighbor, the Tom's, their land 

11 easement with Williams Northwest Pipeline, is outside the subdivision. Permits were 

12 falsified by Williams Northwest Pipeline to obtain access to install the Williams 

13 Northwest Pipeline "pigging" station. 

14 

15 6. On October 8, 2009 Plaintiff, as a member of CAiifornians for Renewable 

16 Energy, Inc. ("CARE") filed an formal complaint in Docket CPl0-5-00 with the Federal 

17 Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC'') for "Williams's construction of a pig receiver, 

18 fence, road and driveway on CARE member Mary Benafel's property, without accurate 

19 and adequate notice, as required by Williams's blanket certificate, 18 C.F.R. § 157.203(d), 

20 and without the necessary property rights". 

21 

22 7. On December 3, 2010 FERC denied the complaint. On January 3, 2011 

23 rehearing was requested. On January 31, 2011 FERC granted rehearing and on May 19, 

24 2011 rehearing was denied. Exhibit 1 is an excerpted copy of the FERC's Order Denying 

- 3 -

COMPLAINT 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 3 of 9
1 Rehearing. See http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/ common/ opennat.asp ?fileID= 12663 903 for 

2 a complete copy of the FERC's Order. 

3 

4 8. FERC' s Order on Rehearing finds in regards to Plaintiffs claims the 

5 Williams Northwest Pipeline actions where an unlawful talcing and inverse condemnation 

6 of Plaintiffs property, in that regard the FERC found it lacked subject matter jurisdiction 

7 stating: 

8 CARE' s Request for Rehearing 

9 18. CARE variously asserts that the Complaint Order "constituted an 

10 act of unlawful 'inverse condemnation' of the Berger/Benafel property" 

11 and/or "approv[ed] the inverse condemnation of the Berger/Benafel property 

12 by Northwest." 

13 Commission Holding 

14 19. While CARE's argument on this point is unclear, it appears to draw a 

15 distinction between the talcing of property through an eminent domain 

16 proceeding and the taking of property without going through the eminent 

17 domain process. The logical thrust of such an argument would be that in 

18 either event, the landowner was due just compensation/damages. The 

19 Commission is not the appropriate forum in which to adjudicate property 

20 rights. If CARE, Mr. Berger, or Ms. Benafel believes that Northwest does 

21 not have the property rights to construct these facilities, they may bring an 

22 action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction to assert their rights. [135 FERC 

23 ~ 61,158 at pages 7-8] 

24 

-4 -

COMPLAINT 

i ' I 

I 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 4 of 9
1 9. Plaintiff attempted without success to seek redress in the Lane County 

2 Circuit Court as demonstrated by Exhibit 2 herein the State Appeals Courts affirming the 

3 Circuit Court decision in that matter. So Plaintiff has exhausted all her administrative 

4 remedies and state court remedies for relief. 

5 

6 10. Claim II. The Tom's conspired with Williams Northwest Pipeline to change 

7 the construction site for the pigging station from their property's part of the easement that 

8 was outside the subdivision, to the Plaintiffs property which is within the subdivision, 

9 and changed evidence on documents regarding the siting of the pigging station. The 

10 Tom's misrepresented facts to Plaintiff and falsified evidence received by Williams 

11 Northwest Pipeline. The Tom's received $20,500 from Williams Northwest Pipeline for a 

12 small portion of the pigging station on a small portion of their part of the easement. 

13 Exhibit 3 is the Recorded Document that shows an offer of proof to the Tom's knowingly 

14 recording a false document that states the Tom's only received $10 from Williams 

15 Northwest Pipeline. As part of their on-going conspiracy with Williams Northwest 

16 Pipeline, Plaintiff alleges the Tom's have received additional payments in excess of the 

17 $20,500 already received, as Plaintiff will prove at trial. 

18 

19 11. Claim III. The City of Eugene permitted Williams Northwest Pipeline to 

20 enter my property without my express written permission from an unauthorized point 

21 without my approval which allowed Williams to develop a Pig launcher Receiver. The 

22 address was given by the applicant Williams to the city of Eugene in applicants request 

23 for a permit, for an apron and an 8' Fence. The Addresses are erroneous, and do not exist, 

24 and specifically, do not apply to Lot 14, Parcel# 18-03-04-44-01200. 

-5-

COMPLAINT 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 5 of 9
1 

2 12. I have suffered considerable loss, time cash and expenditures for 

3 professional assistance travel, and research. The City of Eugene's actions contributed to 

4 the devaluation and inverse condemnation of the remainder by making my property less 

5 marketable. Specific individuals that signed and issued permits: Bob Graef, Rick Steiner, 

6 Stuart Ramsing, MR Harrison, ML Wilcox. My Neighbors David and Shannon Tom and 

7 their Lawyer Rebecca Bierman Tom, conspired with Williams shifting all impact of siting 

8 of the Pig Launcher Receiver causing me significant emotional and monetary loss. 

9 Actions began May 3, 2007 and continued to worsen, until the date the City of Eugene 

1 o approved a paperless permit. (June 4, 2007). There is no such thing as a paperless permit. 

11 

12 13. The City of Eugene has a legal requirement to issue permits. The erroneous 

13 and false addresses contribute to the process allowing the apron to be built. (999, Site 

14 address), was concocted to get the job done, as well as the 2708 site address, that Plaintiff 

15 alleges were Falsely added to allow Williams to build a 8' Fence around Pig Launcher 

16 Receiver and Construct a 8' High Cedar fence. The Apron and other permits were flawed 

17 because the addresses do not apply to the Site in the permitted Documents. As a result of 

18 the City of Eugene giving Williams a Paperless permit Construction by Williams NWP 

19 was then able to take my land by building a road, without my approval and without 

20 compensation. 

21 

22 14. The City of Eugene participated in a conspiracy with Williams in the road 

23 process, made a cut, and concreted a permitable apron according to City of Eugene 

24 Specifications, which gave the opportunity to Williams to then build an Unauthorized 

-6-

COMPLAINT 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 6 of 9
1 road. As a result of an unauthorized road Noise Impacts, public use from cars and people 

f 

2 has encroached on Plaintiffs property. 

3 

4 15. Claim IV. On April 23, 2008, my professional appraiser, Robert Booth, 

5 contacted Mr. Ross Reineke CATS Manager PHMSNWestern Region, Phone: (720)-963-

6 3182, with U.S. Department of Transportation, to query him about the Williams pigging 

7 station. In an April 30, 2008 email Mr. Reineke advised Mr. Booth [See Exhibit 4] "I'm 

8 not an attorney, but I believe the Natural Gas regulations: Part 192.3 Definitions would 

9 override Title 18 (concerning Natural Gas pipeline definitions). From my pipeline 

1 o Operator/Engineering background; I still believe pig launchers/receivers are considered 

11 part of the pipeline facilities." 

12 

13 16. On July 14, 2009 [See Exhibit 5] Michael Boyd, the President of CARE, 

14 contacted Mr. Reineke in my behalf by e-mail stating: 

15 Dear Ross, 

16 Ms. Benafel asked me to contact you regarding the matter of Williams NW 

17 trespass on her property. She asked me to send you this (picture) of a letter 

18 to President Obama from her mother. Last night Ms. Benafel's mother 

19 Elaine had a stroke and Mary is at the hospital taking care of her and my 

20 prayers go out to her. 

21 

22 You stated; At this point, I'm not sure how DOT/PHMSA can help you 

23 resolve this issue. According to Williams, the ROW agreement allowed 

24 them to change from a block valve to a Launcher/Receiver facility. It this is 

-7-

COMPLAINT 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 7 of 9
1 true, it seems to me that Williams had the legal right to change from a block 

2 valve to a Launcher/Receiver facility on your property. 

3 

4 None of that is factual. The facts are attached in the complaint I sent the 

5 FERC for Ms. Benafel and the copy of the April 2, 2007 letter from 

6 Williams NW that clearly shows the pig receiver/launcher was to be located 

7 on the neighbor's property not Mary's. Mary has provided me no evidence 

8 that she was ever properly served notice of the project and since Mary 

9 turned down Williams NW's offer they broke their easement once they 

1 o trespassed on her property and they couldn't offer her less than what Mary's 

11 appraiser said the property was worth if they started the work on her 

12 property first before they denied her counter offer. Otherwise the deal would 

13 be under duress and therefore unlawful. 

14 

15 17. Plaintiff claims that through accident or intention Mr. Reineke and the U.S. 

16 Department of Transportation he represents are guilty of gross negligence and willful 

17 misconduct, as will be proven at trial. 

18 

19 IV. PRAYER 

20 WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for the following relief: 

21 18. For a judgment which includes a requirement to refund all moneys as 

22 follows: 

23 a. Williams is to remove the pigging station and restore the property. 

24 

- 8 -

COMPLAINT 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 8 of 9
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

b. Compensatory damages $570,000: compensatory damages itemized as 

follows; Original value of the property $350,000, value after pigging station 

installed $160,000, difference in property value $190,000, cost of litigation 

to date $180,000, personal stress struggle and suffering $200,000; total 

compensatory damages $570,000. 

c. Punitive damages against the individual defendants according to proof; 

d. Costs of suit; and 

e. For such other and further relief as the court deems appropriate. 

1 o 19. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, 

11 signed this February 16, 2016 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

-9-

Plaintiff, in Pro Per 

2696 Moon Mountain Drive 

Eugene OR, 97401 

Phone:(541)343-1600 

E-mail: ecr963@gmail.com 

COMPLAINT 

I 

f 

! 

I 

Case 6:16-cv-00273-MC Document 1 Filed 02/16/16 Page 9 of 9