Get your popcorn, folks, it's shaping up to be an epic battle!
Since then, several entities have intervened in the FERC docket. First there was MEC, formerly known as MJMEUC. Perhaps they're interested in the fact that MLA questioned whether their contract with GBE is even valid (hint: it's not because Clean Line never made the required FERC compliance filing). Then there was Ameren. No idea why they intervened. Perhaps it's because Ameren has been awarded new MISO transmission projects that compete with Grain Belt Express? Sierra Club intervened and filed a completely clueless comment about how great GBE is. It was completely irrelevant and had nothing to do with GBE's former (or future) negotiated rate authority. Maybe FERC can use it in the restroom if the other paper runs out? And then there was "Clean Line Investment LLC." What? Didn't Clean Line go bankrupt? According to one Michael Skelly, who filed the Petition to Intervene,
Clean Line Investment LLC (“Clean Line Investment”) is a Delaware Limited Liability Company that was formed for purposes of investments in independent transmission projects. Clean Line Investment was a financial partner in Clean Line Energy Partners LLC, which originally developed the Grain Belt Express Project. While Invenergy has acquired ownership and control of the Grain Belt Project, Clean Line Investment maintains a long-standing, direct interest in the successful implementation of this project. Given its originating role in this project, Clean Line Investment’s interests cannot be represented by any other party. Therefore, this intervention is in the public interest.
Oh for goodness sake... an "interest" in a proceeding means a LEGAL (financial) interest, not a driving-by-hoping-to-see-severed-heads rubbernecking interest. And why would any Clean Line company still exist? Maybe it's so Invenergy has a legal entity to blame this snafu on?
What's the problem? Well, after GBE filed a prohibited answer to MLA's protest that tried to brush all the allegations aside and pour so much mud in the water that it is impossible for FERC to see the sharks GBE let loose there, this morning MLA filed a response.
It's short and sweet... and it makes me laugh so hard!
What's the problem? Well, after GBE filed a prohibited answer to MLA's protest that tried to brush all the allegations aside and pour so much mud in the water that it is impossible for FERC to see the sharks GBE let loose there, this morning MLA filed a response.
It's short and sweet... and it makes me laugh so hard!
| 20231108-5040_er24-59_response_final.pdf |
While GBE was busy telling FERC that there was no deadline for it to inform FERC that GBE had been sold, it couldn't see the forest for the trees. GBE told FERC that it would be selling interests in GBE and that it would apply for approval of these sales as required under Sec. 203 of the Federal Power Act. Section 203 requires
“No public utility shall, without first having secured an order of the Commission authorizing it to do so -- sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of the whole of its facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission, or any part thereof of a value in excess of $10,000,000.”
Wait... didn't Clean Line sell GBE to Invenergy and dispose of the whole of its facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission's negotiated rate authority? Yes. Yes, it did.
And did Clean Line first secure an order of the Commission authorizing it to do so?
NO. NO, it did not.
I wonder if Michael Skelly is still "interested" in his failure to get approval for the sale from FERC?
Pass the popcorn! Meow!
And did Clean Line first secure an order of the Commission authorizing it to do so?
NO. NO, it did not.
I wonder if Michael Skelly is still "interested" in his failure to get approval for the sale from FERC?
Pass the popcorn! Meow!
RSS Feed