Barnes, one of the administrative law judges, said the commission has an interest to "reduce the impact" on landowners, and she’s “hard pressed” to approve the currently proposed project. 

Not only did she mention that some of the existing transmission lines in Franklin and York counties are “underutilized” and “defunct,” but Barnes also emphasized that the cost of the $320 million market efficiency project is concerning.

During a second prehearing conference before the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Monday, July 9, a PPL Electric representative said the company's existing infrastructure could accommodate the goal of moving more power from the northern U.S. to the south.

In response to a question, PPL counsel Amy Hirakis told administrative law judges Elizabeth Barnes and Andrew Calvelli "it's feasible to use existing PPL right-of-way and facilities for the market efficiency project identified by the PJM Interconnection."

Joe Nixon, PPL strategic communications manager, also confirmed "our existing transmission lines in the York County area has the capacity to carry additional circuits." 
"PPL proposed an alternative market efficiency project to address the issue identified by PJM, but ours was not the selected solution," Nixon explained. "PJM awarded the project to Transource. We always look at the least impact to landowners in developing solutions."

State Rep. Kristin Phillips-Hill, R-York Township, said the project doesn't show that it will provide "long-term, significant benefits to our local Pennsylvania communities economically, nor preserve our tremendous agrarian heritage and scenic beauty."

She said, "York County is proud of its strong preservation heritage with nearly 42,000 acres and 282 farms."

Phillips-Hill said the question of why two existing high-voltage power transmission lines that run parallel to the proposed route and are not operating at full capacity aren't being utilized hasn't been satisfactorily answered.

AEP also did not want to discuss specific eminent domain cases. However, AEP spokesperson Melissa McHenry specified that as of this past spring, the company had more than 3,200 easements on projects, including more than 903 miles of transmission line. Out of the 3,200 easements, only 41, or 1.28%, required eminent domain filings, she said. In some of those cases, eminent domain was necessary “because the land was without clear title, and, therefore, condemnation by publication was necessary,” she said.

According to McHenry, when AEP constructs or upgrades a transmission line that requires the use of a landowner’s property, easement negotiations begin with property owners after state regulators have approved the project. The negotiations are based on the fair market value of the property needed for the ROW, she said. Appraisals and market data studies are conducted to determine market values and a basis for acquisition negotiations. Negotiations will continue “as long as practical” to reach a voluntary agreement.

If it becomes clear that a voluntary agreement between AEP and the property owner cannot be reached and other viable alternatives do not exist, the company will then exercise the right to eminent domain to secure required easements.

Transource spokeswoman Abby Foster said "...the study was requested by Transource to provide the community answers for the benefit related to the company’s role in this project. If the study is requested by the PUC, Transource will provide it."

An independent economic impact analysis projects the Pennsylvania and Maryland counties involved in the Transource Independence Energy Connection (IEC) project will benefit from construction of the estimated $230 million project.

NOW ANYONE CAN CALCULATE ECONOMIC IMPACTS

"We strongly disagree that JCP&L failed to prove the need for the Monmouth County Reliability Project," the utility said. "The initial decision contradicts the findings made by the regional grid operator and industry experts."

I FIND that the preponderance of credible evidence proves that JCP&L commenced studies to justify the MCRP as its preferred route months before any “problem” was even identified as needing a solution.

During the hearings, PJM concurred that JCP&L will not suffer any financial penalties if the Board rejects the MCRP. Both PJM and JCP&L agree that if the MCRP is not approved, they will return to the planning stage and find another way to solve the P7 contingency.

There were four alternative 230 kV lines into Red Bank on the narrowed list but apparently no technical studies were undertaken of them because they were considered by JCP&L to lack the appropriate level of “robustness.” Palermo could not find any definition for that term and was unfamiliar with its use generally in the transmission industry.

Applying these standards, I FIND that Dr. Moliver’s expert opinion is entitled to greater weight than that of McHale. I FIND that McHale’s credibility was undermined by his careless quotation of synopses of studies he never read. He utilized a general search engine that returned results for terms “effect of HVTL at 15 ft” and followed a link to a New Hampshire Siting Commission webpage, copied the summaries, and deleted the attribution footer from his reprint. As reluctant as I am to express this, in my opinion, such “scholarship” by a student would produce an “F” and subject one to claims of plagiarism. It is certainly not the work product of a professional entitled to much weight to count the number of supportive studies versus the number of unsupportive studies without regard for the study criteria and quality. The merits, depths, sampling size, and commonality must be taken into account before a study can be cited as persuasive to a novel setting. I also FIND that his opinion as an expert witness was blended with several lay perceptions that fell outside the scope of his presentation for the Company and were unverified.

The evaluation directed by JCP&L was both pre-emptive in the timeline of the “need” for the Project and created an unlevel playing field tipped in its obvious favor. This is not a close case of general public interest versus parochial interest, with a tie going to the public utility company. I CONCLUDE that JCP&L’s application for municipal waivers pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-19 must be denied because the Company has not supported its application by the preponderance of the relevant and admissible evidence. The MCRP is not a safe or reasonable response to the potential P7 violation.

The prepared summary of written statements indicates that eighty-three (83%) percent were opposed to the MCRP; and, seventeen (17%) percent in favor. Approximately twenty-five (25%) percent of the statements opposing the Project were form letters; and ninety-two (92%) percent of the statements in favor of the Project were form letters, of which eighty-eight (88%) percent were not from the impacted area.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.  --  Margaret Mead

Defendants will suffer no damage as a consequence of granting immediate possession, because any damage to the land will be remedied by the payment of money, per the statute.

Transource appreciates that many landowners have granted them access to conduct surveys, Foster said. 
​
"Transource and its representatives are committed to treating landowners and their properties with respect," Foster said. "While reaching a voluntary agreement with property owners is a high priority, it is imperative for Transource to continue through the phases of the project as the company seeks regulatory approvals. The approval of this filing will allow Transource to proceed with field work for those landowners who have not yet granted the company access.”

Transource PA will not be able to begin construction in time to allow the Project to be completed to meet the in-service date set by PJM.  If Transource PA misses the PJM-mandated in-service date, the public will suffer irreparable harm in the form of continued electric gridlock, and delay or ultimate failure  of the project.  Furthermore, Transource P A will suffer irreparable harm as Transource Energy has invested considerable time and money in attempting to obtain access rights to the route.

In fact, Transource PA has invested more than $6.0 million to date in siting, design and engineering. The foregoing harms would also result if Transource PA's access is obstructed by Landowners, or other unauthorized and untrained third parties who are present on the Property in the vicinity of the work corridor at the invitation of Landowners

Accordingly, this Court may issue an Order, granting this petition and authorizing Transource MD to enter onto the Subject Property to conduct surveys, and obtain information in connection with the acquisition and project, without the need for a hearing prior to the issuance of the Order.

The PUC should question if the applicant has fully evaluated the use of existing transmission lines in Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection (PJM's) regional planning process before proposing a new line, which will be constructed parallel to three established high-voltage transmission power lines operating in York County. Since the intention of the applicant is to relieve congestion on the energy-grid, why not utilize transmission lines that are not operating at
full capacity? I strongly encourage the Administrative Law Judge to modify this application to use these existing transmission lines, thereby minimizing the impact of this project on the community and preserved open space, as well as protecting private landowners from being subject to the oppressive use of eminent domain actions when other utility-owned infrastructure
is available.

PJM/Transource has managed to unite virtually every constituent group in Franklin County in opposition to the project. 

...neither PJM or its surrogate, Transource, has been able to establish a quantified need for the project; more importantly, they have never been able to articulate the benefits to Franklin County.

Finally, it is worth noting that the FCADC has not received a single call, email, or letter from a Franklin County business voicing support for the project.  (As an aside, one should be aware that Transource simply assumed that because the FCADC is involved in economic development that we would automatically support the project.  We all know the definition of assume.)

Transource officials believe the project would alleviate congestion in the high voltage grid and would create an economic benefit locally. Abby Foster, community affairs representative with Transource, released a statement saying in part: 

"The project will bring investment in the region’s local economies during the construction phase with a direct investment in the project area communities. Construction activities alone are projected to support 112-147 full-time jobs with 50-60 of these being in Franklin County."

In the photo above, one of Transource's full-time permanent, local Franklin County workers discusses where he will place the ladder when he climbs the pole to squeeze electricity through the brand new transmission line. Other workers look on in awe, so grateful they have jobs that they don't mind climbing a ladder to the top of a transmission tower and manually squeezing electricity through the wires.

Why is this project needed? Through its regional transmission expansion planning, PJM identified concerns with the delivery of electricity on the high-voltage grid into the region.

Furthermore, the Transource letter sent to landowners  dated January 5, 2018 is inaccurate  and misrepresentative of the proper procedures set in place  under the Eminent  Domain  Code and public  codes of the Commonwealth. In  the letter, your company  stated it  has obtained utility status by Pennsylvania. While the Public Utility Commission (PUC) approved Transource's application for utility  status on December 21, 2017, your company  has yet to obtain  the appropriate certificate  and orders from  the PUC to  operate as a public utility  and conduct land surveys/assessments. Moreover,  even after obtaining the appropriate approvals,  Transource must follow the Eminent Domain Code  and issue a  10-day notice to all landowners before  accessing private property. As of today, Transource cannot  send such a notice until the proper certificate and approvals from the PUC.

I have received numerous complaints from constituents in my legislative district who experienced threatening behavior from your contracted land  services agent, Western Land Services. In communication with landowners,  agents from Westem Land  Services threatened to call the sheriff's office  and arrest residents who did not  sign letters granting access to their properties. This type of coercive behavior and  harassment by your contracted  agent is unacceptable  and illegal  at best. I  am requesting punitive actions be  taken to  ensure this type of disrespectful behavior  does not  happen again during  the remainder of  the project.

We heard about the valuable role agriculture plays in this region and our engineers worked to ensure typical farming practices in **INSERT COUNTY NAME HERE** County, from crops to orchards, could continue to exist within the right-of-way.