1 Comment

Here's another filing on PATH's FERC docket that was issued yesterday.

Reality sets in -- PATH is going to lose that absurd 14.3% ROE and has begun to bend over in preparation.

On January 31, PATH will file a settlement proposal with a new rate of return on equity.  It won't be 14.3%.

"Counter-offers" will be proposed by the other parties to the case.  This is where WV's CAD, Byron Harris, will stick up for us, right?  Not unless you force him to.

How many of you have ever said, "If we could only do something about that 14.3%, Allegheny Energy & AEP's devotion to this foolish project would evaporate"?  Here's your opportunity.  Go.


12/20/2010 7:55pm

Wow, even PATH's FERC work is sounding desperate and bleary. Although its not linked here yet, PATH is asking FERC for a re-do because FERC is insisting PATH use a "median" calculation to determine how much money PATH can grab from us. Apparently those numbers don't work too well for PATH so they want to use an 'expert' to skew them back by pretending a simple math problem is really a factual finding. Just a couple of points so everyone can see FERC is not so complex after all. 1) When you read PATH's Motion for Reconsideration (Dockets ER-386-000 and 001) have a giggle at footnote 12 where PATH's argument is basically this, "But I have to be right because Amerircan Municipal Power said so when THEY asked for a re-do!" Wow Randy, when you resort to trying to pass off another utility's begging as some sort of 'authority' worthy of citation I wonder.... 2)The entire request is an argument that PATH's expert will somehow come up with a number that is more within the range of reasonableness than what FERC ordered. Now look at footnote 14 which is really what Randy wanted to say behind the smoke and mirror blah blah. translation: "But FERC, in the old days (Enron?) you promised to give us ROE at the "UPPER END OF THE ZONE OF REASONABLENESS...pleeeeeze will ya? Huh? PLEEEEEEEEZ." (sigh....I really have to stop correcting their homework)


Leave a Reply