Great editorial in yesterday's Frederick News Post!

Someone in Frederick has obviously been paying attention to the facts.  Public opinion in Frederick continues to swirl down the porcelain throne for PATH.  Way to go, folks!

Interesting article in Technology Review about the IEEE SmartGridComm2010 conference held this week.  Hackers seeking to make millions at the expense of electric consumers (not to be confused with PATH, who is already making millions at the expense of electric ratepayers in 13 states) could also make the grid unstable and prone to those dreaded "blackouts" PATH always talks about.

It seems that decades-old technology, such as that proposed for the "new" PATH line, makes it very easy for these intruders.  In addition, unmanned substations, like PATH's proposed "death site" in Mt. Airy, are also an infiltration point.

While the power companies pursue outrageous profits creating "new" transmission, they continue to ignore the existing threats posed current infrastructure.  As gigantic new "backbone" lines further complicate and interconnect the grid and eliminate local generation on the east coast, we set ourselves up as the perfect target whereby a careless hacker can take the entire east coast off line in an instant.

PATH = not smart!

Five citizens from West Virginia and Maryland attended PATH's 2011 PTRR meeting this morning in DC, while several  more attended via conference call from all three states.

Attending from their side were PATH attorneys Randy Palmer and Monique Kennedy, Milo Pokrajac from PATH's Regulatory Finance something or other, an attorney from Pillsbury Winthrop (where the meeting was held) and Dennis somebody-or-other from AEP's Ratemaking something.  Yeah, I was paying attention ;-) 

On the phone, in addition to citizens, were some AEP people, a guy from Dominion Power, a guy from Old Dominion Electric Cooperative and Anne Johnson and Gary Alexander from Maryland's Office of People's Counsel.

Here's a link to what PATH presented, in case you're into that stuff.  When asked what the $36.9M revenue requirement would cost the "average" (1,000kwh per month) Allegheny Power customer in West Virginia, Dennis whats-his-name came up with the figure of about 5 cents per month.  Doesn't sound like much  -- but they don't even have proper applications in 2 of the 3 states yet, much less a permit or anything constructed!

The sound system in the room didn't work, so we ended up with Randy playing Jerry Springer walking around the room with the lone working microphone.  When I think about how much this meeting cost the ratepayers, the least we could have gotten was a working sound system.  Is that too much to ask?

First question came from WV's Patience Wait who pointed out a serious flaw in the protocol whereby the PTRR's Attachment 4 references a FERC Form 1 that doesn't exist.  Watching them dance around this was fun, but not a one of them thought it should be corrected.  This was related to Randy's Resentful Rule #1, "Participants may ask questions and seek information regarding the 2011 PTRR. To the extent that the PATH Companies’ participants do not have the information available during the meeting to answer a question or information request posed during the meeting, participants may submit written information requests pursuant to the PATH formula rate protocols set forth in Attachment H-19B of the PJM Tariff."  The best part about this is that Randy was notified in advance that this question would be asked.  So he made up the rule and purposely didn't bring it.  Not to worry, I'll get the information eventually, although I should have had it before the meeting, except I got out-lawyered by a lawyer.  I hope it strokes his ego just right, because it didn't affect mine at all.

WV's Steven Smith next made Milo explain the Unamortized Regulatory Asset (which is all their costs that were incurred prior to receiving their ability to recover costs as incurred from FERC), Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes and Working Capital.  I'm not going to explain all that here.  Do you really want to know?  Probably not.

WV's Dan Lutz asked a question that they really didn't answer to his satisfaction.

Next I asked them why all the advertising for next year was placed into the "Safety, Education, Siting and Outreach" category when the advertising didn't even exist yet.  It's because all the ads they do are "educational", don't you know?  I don't know about you, but I never feel "educated" after coming across a PATH ad -- I feel more like going to take a shower.  Here's the real reason:  because that's the only kind of advertising that the ratepayers are on the hook for!  God forbid they would have to pay for their own propaganda, huh?  I was also told that the definition was in FERC's Uniform System of Accounts (it's not) and then Monique tried to tell me that the definition is somehow sprinkled around FERC's case law and that I should call them.   Nothing I was saying was registering, but at that moment WV's Ali Haverty jumped in over the phone and informed Monique that she had already called FERC and been told that advertising should not be placed directly into SESO without a determination of its nature being made first and that to do so "raised a red flag".  Monique made a face and tried to look skeptical.

And while we're on this subject, the body language and expressions were an exquisite pleasure!  Almost made it worth the commute to DC to witness it. 

I can't remember how it started, but at one point Gary Alexander started ranting at Randy about how he should send me the H-19B protocols so I could request further information, and he was reluctant to relinquish his soapbox, which was obviously stomping on Randy's main nerve before he could manage to get a word in edgewise to tell Gary that both Ali and I had already been availing ourselves of H-19B's protocol!

I believe it was Maryland's Esther Brinkmann who brought up the expenses of a lobbyist that showed up in BOTH PATH's Outside Services and Advertising accounts in 2009.  Monique was very proud of herself to announce that they had noticed and corrected it and it was only around $4,000.  Sorry, Monique, but it actually totaled $11,334.00 and you only noticed it because of our discovery requests.  If we weren't all over you like stinkbugs looking for a place to hibernate, the ratepayers would still be paying for this expense that's not allowed.  Monique claimed it was just an error, and those happen in accounting all the time.  At PATH, that's the truth -- they happen all the time and result in millions of dollars of expense annually put upon the ratepayers that should not be allowed under FERC's US of A.  Here's an idea -- why doesn't Monique find all the rest of PATH's "errors" and save me the trouble of taking this to formal challenge before FERC.  Please?  I've never seen such a screwed up mess.  I'd almost be embarrassed for PATH, if all the "errors" weren't sticking it to the ratepayers and costing them money.  To top it all off, they claimed that these expenses are audited by both internal and independent auditors (Deloitte and Touche).  Really??

Moving right along, I posed the following question:  Since PATH was originally proposed, its permitting process has been delayed three years, which is entirely PATH's fault.  How much extra has this delay cost the ratepayers?

Randy had to take offense and state that it wasn't PATH's fault.  Milo then answered that it has cost the ratepayers three years worth of O & M, taxes, return on rate base, etc.  Monique then had to repeat that it wasn't PATH's fault.  Ali Haverty took exception to that and reminded them that every delay in the case has been at PATH's request. 

I also asked Milo about PATH's $2.1B price tag.  $2.1B is the cost of PATH's physical components (towers, wire, etc.) and the land it's going to sit on.  That's it.  In actuality, the ratepayers are also on the hook for O & M, pre-construction costs (that regulatory asset mentioned earlier), taxes, return (PATH's hefty profit), and every other expense imaginable associated with the project.  Milo agreed that this was correct.  Conclusion:  The true cost to the ratepayers will be staggering!  We can't afford PATH!

Great meeting -- we should do this more often!  Well, maybe not.  Getting up at 4 a.m. to commute into the city is a bad habit that I gave up many years ago.  Tomorrow morning I'm going to punch the alarm and roll over.

Today, in the "Making the rules up as you go" Department, PATH Assistant General Counsel Randy Palmer came up with a whole new set of "rules" for PATH's 2011 Projected Transmission Revenue Requirement Open Meeting tomorrow in DC.  Perhaps we've tightened the screws with a little too much vigor lately and thrown him into a fit of pique?  Whatever the reason, here are the new "rules":

The purpose of the meeting is to explain the PATH PTRR for Rate Year 2011 which was posted on the formula rates page of the PJM website on September 1, 2010. Participants may ask questions and seek information regarding the 2011 PTRR. To the extent that the PATH Companies’ participants do not have the information available during the meeting to answer a question or information request posed during the meeting, participants may submit written information requests pursuant to the PATH formula rate protocols set forth in Attachment H-19B of the PJM Tariff. Written information requests should be sent to [email protected]. Depending on the nature of the information request, the submitter may be required to execute a Protective Agreement prior to receiving the response. Under the protocols, the current Discovery Period for submitting information requests will end on October 29, 2010.
Matters not pertaining to the 2011 PTRR, including matters pending before state and federal agencies, will not be addressed during the meeting.
Photography as well as video and audio recordings will not be permitted during the meeting or within the meeting premises before, during or after the meeting.

Pardon me while I laugh myself silly, but I see exactly where each "rule" came from.  I guess I should put my screwdriver down for a bit before he goes postal.  If this guy thinks he's getting one step ahead of me, he'd best think again.  Creativity is my middle name and "no" is never an answer, but always considered a challenge.  Keep on keeping on there, Captain Acrimony, and I'll see you tomorrow.

We can generously allow him to win a battle or two but what he doesn't realize is that he's losing the war.

We're a scary bunch, folks!  When we throw off the sheepskin of "calm" that PATH continually tries to smother us with, it's apparently a police matter.  Read this story in the Town Courier (if you're one of the ones who can't get this link to work, click here) about how PATH's paranoia about the prospect of citizens "raising their voices" during their Charlie Foxtrot "Public Meeting" resulted in an advance request for police presence.

Ridiculous!

Just another heavy-handed attempt to bully and intimidate the citizens, who will not be cowed into silent acceptance of a greedy, unneeded corporate initiative that intends to devalue or take their homes, endanger their health and dip into their pockets.

We will continue to voice our disapproval as loudly as possible and there's nothing PATH can do to silence us.  Hey, PATH, can you hear me now?

As requested, here's a little discussion regarding the trollish comments proliferating on recent PATH stories in the Frederick News Post.  Frederick County, Maryland, has become the newest PATH battleground over the past month, with much riding on the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals regarding the "death site" substation.  The PATH companies have expended quite a bit of time and energy trying desperately to drum up public support for their loser project.  However, all their efforts have come to naught  - from their rejection by the Frederick County Planning Commission (now that was a fun hearing!); to their "media event" that the opposition stole right out from under them; and ending with their most recent failure, the Charlie Foxtrot "Public Meeting".  All that time, money and effort, and still no one showed up at the BZA hearing to support them.  What options are left for them now?  Online newspaper story comment forums, perhaps?

Although these folks flocking to the forums seem to have strong opinions, they are never based on facts or research.  Their opinion has already been formed and there is no reasoning with them.  These folks like to complain and love to toss around one of the power companies' favorite insults - "NIMBY".  Some of them also seem to throw in a technical term here and there that would be completely inappropriate for your average citizen.  So, who are these guys?  Some have accused them of being PATH plants.  The case for this is strong:
1.  They seem to have above average understanding of the transmission system, although a complete lack of knowledge specific to PATH.
2.  They love Allegheny Energy & American Electric Power's "NIMBY" insult.
3.  They claim to have attended and have a working knowledge of events that transpired at recent Frederick County events.  However, we have never seen one person speak for PATH and encountered very few who wouldn't accept our stickers or literature.  Certainly the opposition members have never been called "NIMBY" in person or had a conversation with any citizen who thought PATH was a good idea.  For a bunch of people who have such a strong opinion, why would they attend these events and then sit quietly without voicing their opinion in a public forum?
4.  They claim to know who was at these meetings and what was said by the opposition. 

Personally, I'm not convinced one way or the other as to their authenticity.  I have no proof that PATH employees spend their work time posting on internet forums, however I have it on good authority that they have been known to lurk and at least read comments.

Think of these guys as drive-by trolls and not worth your time.  You can even categorize them, for some added fun.  Their purpose in posting their "NIMBY" and "treehugger" comments is to draw you into an argument and waste your valuable time that you could otherwise be spending giving information to folks who have an open mind.  Don't bother trying to convince them with references or facts.  Ferrous Cranus has his mind made up!  Just skip along.  Comments on an online newspaper forum aren't going to be considered by any entity making a decision on the PATH project and are therefore irrelevant.  You could try some of the tactics demonstrated in this video, if you have time and inclination to play a bit.

Wherever there is controversy on the internet, you're going to find trolls.  They are perfectly harmless if you can develop the proper immunity and keep your focus.  Nobody really cares what they think, and since they only exist in cyber form, they have no real meaning.

Snip, snap, snout.
This tale's told out.