AEP is Desperate for Wind Catcher Approval in Oklahoma

What was it AEP's CEO said about the time line for the company's Wind Catcher project recently?

Nicholas K. Akins - American Electric Power Co., Inc.
I don't think there's a statutory deadline, but certainly there's a business deadline. I mean, we've been very transparent about the timing necessary and the procedural schedules have been set up consistent with getting a decision on time. So, I think it's really more driven by, I guess, one of the previous questions sort of brought out, when is our drop-dead date and that kind of thing. But I can just tell you that May and June fits.

May and June.  AEP must have its Wind Catcher project approved in May and June.  Of course, May and June were an extension of AEP's original time line to  have Wind Catcher approved by April.

Steve Fleishman - Wolfe Research LLC
So just if I recall back last fall, you had talked about wanting decisions by April to make sure that you would have it online to get the full PTCs.  Is May-June going to be okay to be able to capture full PTCs? Like, what is the real deadline?
Nicholas K. Akins - American Electric Power Co., Inc.
Yeah, we'll be fine. Really, we have to get to a point of getting these orders in place, and then we'll cover it with our board, obviously, in our July meeting. And then once they approve it, we're off and running. So if we get it in that June timeframe, we get the orders in the May to June timeframe, we'll be in good shape.

And here it is mid-June and the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC) has yet to make a ruling.  It sort of seems like they've been waiting for a settlement to happen so they didn't have to make a decision at all.  However AEP has failed at reaching a settlement with all parties, and the parties who oppose have proposed their own settlement.  And what about the Administrative Law Judge?  Didn't she hear this case months ago and issue a Report and Recommendation that AEP's application be denied?  What about that?

Will AEP push its approval deadline ahead, or is this really it?  How fast can Invenergy build a wind farm, and how fast can Quanta build a transmission line?  And would either one of these two AEP contractors want to invest serious money buying components without a guarantee that AEP will reimburse them in the event the project is cancelled?

I'm going to guess this is AEP's last desperate push to get its project approved.... because its recent filing at the OCC has desperation written all over it.

Here's what AEP has asked the OCC to do:

1. Supplement or re-open an alternate "record" of Commission deliberations on Wind Catcher.  This record is separate from the evidentiary record considered by the ALJ when she recommended denial.  That record cannot be re-opened.  It sort of looks like AEP is asking that the Commissioners completely ignore the recommendation of its Administrative Law Judge.
2. Allow AEP to present its "settlement agreements" with some of the other parties as "evidence."  None of these agreements are unanimous and none of the settling parties represent the interests of the PSO ratepayers who will be saddled with the cost burden of Wind Catcher in their monthly bills.
   
3. Use AEP's settlement agreements as "the basis for a final order."  In other words, AEP is asking the OCC to approve a contested settlement based on some new evidentiary record comprised of AEP's settlement agreements and supporting "testimony."
4. Issue an Order setting a hearing on the merits to consider AEP's settlement agreements and new "evidence" before the Commission en banc commencing on the 2nd day of July 2018, at 1:30p.m., and continuing each business day thereafter until the hearing concludes, in Courtroom 301, Third Floor, Jim Thorpe Office Building, 210 I N. Lincoln Blvd., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105.  AEP even included a sample order that the commissioners simply have to sign, easy peasy.

The fly in AEP's ointment is that the Commission has yet to issue the requested order.  The Commission has not yet filed a response to AEP's motion.  The hearing is not yet set.

But, I wonder, if AEP can re-open some alternate evidentiary record on a whim, whether the affected public can also contribute to this new record by giving public comment during the proposed hearing?  I suppose anyone can ask by filing a motion similar to AEP's.  Being a regulatory attorney is no big thing... even a monkey can do it.  And it sort of looks like a monkey DID do it for AEP.... because the legal basis for AEP's proposed course of action for Wind Catcher doesn't really give it legs.  AEP's monkey is simply throwing stuff against the wall and hoping something sticks. 

Because AEP is desperate.  Desperate to get Wind Catcher approved before its own impossible deadline.

It remains to be seen what, if any, response the OCC will make to AEP's desperate machinations in this election year.  I'm pretty sure AEP cannot cast a corporate vote for PSC Commissioners, nor can it force its employees to cast certain votes as a condition of their employment (although apparently it can force the employees to sign letters of support to the OCC).  Who will be electing the OCC Commissioners?  The people of Oklahoma!  The same people who may have their properties devalued and spoiled by a new transmission line.  The same people whose electric bills will go up to pay for AEP's Wind Catcher folly.  I'm sure the OCC Commissioners will choose very carefully... while you watch.

UPDATE:  The Oklahoma Attorney General and Public Utility Division of the OCC have also filed a motion docketed this morning asking the Commissioners to consider their joint statement against preapproval and proposed settlement agreement in the event that the Commissioners decide to approve Wind Catcher despite all the evidence that this project is not beneficial to ratepayers.

And the best part?  They have asked for the OCC to re-open public comment and made it easy on you.  That's some pretty wishful thinking ;-)  Or maybe it was just common sense...

PUD and the Attorney General additionally respectfully request that public comment
by members of the public interested in the outcome of this proceeding be allowed at
any hearing to take evidence on the PSO Settlement and the Consumer Protection
Settlement Agreement.

It's a perfectly reasonable request.  If AEP wants to create a new evidentiary record, then the record should be open to everyone.  If ordered by the Commissioners, this means that anyone and everyone will be permitted to speak directly and in person to the Commissioners during any new hearing that is set and let them know what you think.  So, mark your calendars, landowners and keep your eye on the OCC docket to see when and where (or if) a hearing is ordered by the Commissioners.  AEP failed at public notice of its plan and the vast majority of landowners were not aware of Wind Catcher's effect on their properties during the first OCC hearing.  If you feel you weren't heard, this could be your golden opportunity!  Don't miss your chance!