AEP wants to increase its corporate profits by building a transmission line through your property? Bad news. AEP has been increasingly disrespectful to landowners and actively seeks to coerce and bully landowners into submission long before its projects are even approved. It's high time this company's abysmal treatment of landowners is reined in by regulators. It's coming: AEP's "relationship" with landowners is speeding down the track on its way to a spectacular wipeout.
AEP likes to pretend it is "working with landowners." As if saying it makes it so. Nothing could be further from the truth. The reality is that AEP is working AGAINST landowners.
AEP's huge dilemma is that it is engaged in several transmission projects with compacted time lines. If AEP cannot get its projects approved and built by certain dates, the projects will be cancelled. And what's the first thing that goes by the wayside when AEP is in a big hurry? Landowner relations. AEP simply doesn't care about establishing a cordial relationship with landowners it proposes entering into a co-tenant relationship with in perpetuity. Instead, AEP is simply attempting to mow down landowners on its path to profit. Logically, this just can't end well for AEP. There's going to be a huge price to be paid for each minute, incremental "victory" AEP believes it has won along the way.
A transmission company files an application at a state regulatory commission, hoping to ultimately receive approval for its project. The regulatory process takes a long time, especially in states with no statutory deadline for a decision on the application. Transmission companies have dealt with this long lead time by attempting to perform surveys, environmental studies, and engineering work during the regulatory process, with the goal of getting as much pre-construction work accomplished as possible before the regulatory decision. However, this requires cooperation from landowners who may grant permission for the company to enter private property to perform its pre-construction work. When landowners refuse, the company has no choice but to put this work on hold until after the regulators make a decision on the project. When all pre-construction work has not been performed on a project that a regulator approves, the transmission permit is conditioned upon such work being performed before construction begins. It's simple. And it works. And, most importantly, it avoids the kinds of power struggles AEP has recently engaged in with landowners. As well, it avoids the extra expense of pre-construction work for a project that is ultimately denied by regulators. Since many transmission projects approved by regional transmission authorities such as PJM Interconnection come with abandonment incentives that reimburse transmission companies for project expenses in the event that a project is subsequently cancelled or denied by state regulators, the money transmission companies like AEP spend on pre-construction activites comes out of the pockets of electric customers across the region. Having to wait for approval before engaging in expensive pre-construction work can save ratepayers a lot of money on an abandoned project.
But AEP didn't want to wait on its Transource Independence Energy Connection. Because PJM Interconnection put such a tight timeline on the project, AEP is attempting to get as much of its project built as it can before regulators make a decision. After all, it doesn't cost them a thing... except goodwill. And AEP is going to need a lot of landowner goodwill if it expects to actually build this project someday.
So AEP lied to landowners who refused to grant access. AEP told them they would be arrested. AEP told them they would trespass on private property after giving 10-day notice under Pennsylvania law. Except the law wasn't really as clear as AEP tried to make everyone believe. AEP threatened to sue landowners for access.
None of this made any impression whatsoever on landowners (except to further anger them and create entrenched resistance). AEP filed a whole bunch of confused legal actions against landowners. Lengthy court processes ensued. And the court processes have gone on just long enough to ensure AEP's time sensitive turtle hunts can't possibly take place this year. Awww... that's really too bad. But were turtles really the reason? I'm sure there's plenty of damage AEP can do to landowner property cutting down trees, running over freshly planted crops, drilling holes, propagating invasive weeds, compacting soil, encouraging erosion, creating drainage issues and generally impacting farm operations for the entire growing season. Sadly, all these activities can be performed any time of the year, perhaps even after harvest, when their effects will be somewhat mitigated. But AEP is a bully, and destroying farm operations for this year is supposed to intimidate landowners into agreement.
That's not going to happen. The more AEP tries to bully landowners the more determined the landowners become to resist. This battle is far from over.
AEP's huge dilemma is that it is engaged in several transmission projects with compacted time lines. If AEP cannot get its projects approved and built by certain dates, the projects will be cancelled. And what's the first thing that goes by the wayside when AEP is in a big hurry? Landowner relations. AEP simply doesn't care about establishing a cordial relationship with landowners it proposes entering into a co-tenant relationship with in perpetuity. Instead, AEP is simply attempting to mow down landowners on its path to profit. Logically, this just can't end well for AEP. There's going to be a huge price to be paid for each minute, incremental "victory" AEP believes it has won along the way.
A transmission company files an application at a state regulatory commission, hoping to ultimately receive approval for its project. The regulatory process takes a long time, especially in states with no statutory deadline for a decision on the application. Transmission companies have dealt with this long lead time by attempting to perform surveys, environmental studies, and engineering work during the regulatory process, with the goal of getting as much pre-construction work accomplished as possible before the regulatory decision. However, this requires cooperation from landowners who may grant permission for the company to enter private property to perform its pre-construction work. When landowners refuse, the company has no choice but to put this work on hold until after the regulators make a decision on the project. When all pre-construction work has not been performed on a project that a regulator approves, the transmission permit is conditioned upon such work being performed before construction begins. It's simple. And it works. And, most importantly, it avoids the kinds of power struggles AEP has recently engaged in with landowners. As well, it avoids the extra expense of pre-construction work for a project that is ultimately denied by regulators. Since many transmission projects approved by regional transmission authorities such as PJM Interconnection come with abandonment incentives that reimburse transmission companies for project expenses in the event that a project is subsequently cancelled or denied by state regulators, the money transmission companies like AEP spend on pre-construction activites comes out of the pockets of electric customers across the region. Having to wait for approval before engaging in expensive pre-construction work can save ratepayers a lot of money on an abandoned project.
But AEP didn't want to wait on its Transource Independence Energy Connection. Because PJM Interconnection put such a tight timeline on the project, AEP is attempting to get as much of its project built as it can before regulators make a decision. After all, it doesn't cost them a thing... except goodwill. And AEP is going to need a lot of landowner goodwill if it expects to actually build this project someday.
So AEP lied to landowners who refused to grant access. AEP told them they would be arrested. AEP told them they would trespass on private property after giving 10-day notice under Pennsylvania law. Except the law wasn't really as clear as AEP tried to make everyone believe. AEP threatened to sue landowners for access.
None of this made any impression whatsoever on landowners (except to further anger them and create entrenched resistance). AEP filed a whole bunch of confused legal actions against landowners. Lengthy court processes ensued. And the court processes have gone on just long enough to ensure AEP's time sensitive turtle hunts can't possibly take place this year. Awww... that's really too bad. But were turtles really the reason? I'm sure there's plenty of damage AEP can do to landowner property cutting down trees, running over freshly planted crops, drilling holes, propagating invasive weeds, compacting soil, encouraging erosion, creating drainage issues and generally impacting farm operations for the entire growing season. Sadly, all these activities can be performed any time of the year, perhaps even after harvest, when their effects will be somewhat mitigated. But AEP is a bully, and destroying farm operations for this year is supposed to intimidate landowners into agreement.
That's not going to happen. The more AEP tries to bully landowners the more determined the landowners become to resist. This battle is far from over.
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.
AEP uses eminent domain only 1.28% of the time, you say? The more AEP enrages landowners, the less they fear the company, and the higher that percentage climbs. Has AEP ever built a transmission project that required eminent domain for 98% of the project? Of course not. That's absurd. Those kinds of projects never get built.
And how successful will AEP be asserting involuntary entry on Pennsylvanians when the Maryland portion of its project is not subject to such abusive laws? And what about AEP's transmission projects in other states that don't have laws that allow trespassing prior to condemnation? Does AEP think that pretending it does have such authority will actually be enough to intimidate landowners into allowing involuntary entry?
The only thing it does is fill landowners with a terrible resolve to resist AEP completely. Resistance causes project delays. AEP's timetable is not a landowner priority. It's not a regulatory requirement. The more desperate AEP becomes, the more resistance it creates which will ultimately result in prolonged delays... and project failure. The price of victory in one small battle oftentimes results in losing the war. Pretty dumb stuff, AEP. What idiot there thought that was a good idea? If I was in charge, I'd fire that person.
So, what if AEP involuntarily forces its way onto your land? Fully document the condition of your land before the invasion using pictures and video. Keep a running visual diary of AEP's actions on your land, both during and after the invasion. Don't sign any voluntary permission forms that abrogate your rights. Have damage professionally remediated and keep all receipts. Don't settle for less than it costs to restore your property to its original condition. This bully deserves to be treated the same way it treats you.
And remember how you were treated by AEP during the next legislative session. Abusive laws need changing.
Having a reputation as a landowner bully really isn't a good thing in the long run. It squanders goodwill for no reason. Nobody likes a bully.
And how successful will AEP be asserting involuntary entry on Pennsylvanians when the Maryland portion of its project is not subject to such abusive laws? And what about AEP's transmission projects in other states that don't have laws that allow trespassing prior to condemnation? Does AEP think that pretending it does have such authority will actually be enough to intimidate landowners into allowing involuntary entry?
The only thing it does is fill landowners with a terrible resolve to resist AEP completely. Resistance causes project delays. AEP's timetable is not a landowner priority. It's not a regulatory requirement. The more desperate AEP becomes, the more resistance it creates which will ultimately result in prolonged delays... and project failure. The price of victory in one small battle oftentimes results in losing the war. Pretty dumb stuff, AEP. What idiot there thought that was a good idea? If I was in charge, I'd fire that person.
So, what if AEP involuntarily forces its way onto your land? Fully document the condition of your land before the invasion using pictures and video. Keep a running visual diary of AEP's actions on your land, both during and after the invasion. Don't sign any voluntary permission forms that abrogate your rights. Have damage professionally remediated and keep all receipts. Don't settle for less than it costs to restore your property to its original condition. This bully deserves to be treated the same way it treats you.
And remember how you were treated by AEP during the next legislative session. Abusive laws need changing.
Having a reputation as a landowner bully really isn't a good thing in the long run. It squanders goodwill for no reason. Nobody likes a bully.
RSS Feed