City spokeswoman Stephanie York said Akron officials are aware that the electric utility might be interested in moving from 76 S. Main St.
“What we know is that FirstEnergy is coming to the end of their lease, and that their desire is to stay downtown,” York said Thursday in an email. “We are excited that they are looking to stay downtown (whether in the same building or not), just as we are energized about the increased vitality and development of downtown over the past dozen years.”

Outside the Church of the Nazarene Fellowship Hall, members of a grassroots protest group gathered to tell landowners of their opposition to the project. Inside the hall, company officials told of its benefits.

"They are filing for expedited review with the (Illinois Commerce Commission) which provides for limited time for landowners to object and even shorter filing periods, which constrains ability to have fair and full hearings insuring that due process rights of each landowner are protected," Probst said.
"Our firm is looking into calling a meeting of landowners and invite other interested parties to discuss what options are available to the landowners of Shelby County," the lawyer added.

In the late 1990s, I made 12 videos for a distance learning version of my course Ecological Anthropology at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. I made these with the assistance of my wife, Ursula, my colleague Paul Eide in University Media Resources, and research assistant Tis Stringer.  To make these videos, we used 16 mm movie film, 35 mm slide/still film, and audio tape that Ursula and I had taken over years of anthropological field research in the USA, Kenya, Germany, and other places.  Our practice has been to complement written note taking with film and audio recording during this field research.  We draw upon our film and tape library to present lectures in class and also to make films and videos for use in class and in distance learning.  In recent years, we have digitized film and analog tape to make programs that can be presented via computer. 

It is thus that we made the Ecological Anthropology program Grassroots Energy.  I introduce and then conclude the movie with still photos and voice over narration. The movie itself is 27 minutes long, originally a 16 mm film.  We filmed during our field research.  We began research and recording in August 1974, shortly after farmers and townsfolk in West Central Minnesota learned that Cooperative and United Power had applied to state authorities for permits to build a +/-400kVDC line from a mine mouth plant in North Dakota across their land to a AC converter facility in a Minneapolis suburb.  We continued research and recording through the construction and energizing of the line and early response in 1980.  The film focuses on the period 1976-1978, when resistance to the line was most intense and widespread. 

Filming in the field and making slide shows and movies in the era before digital imaging presented problems not experienced by the users of digital cameras.  Instead of being able to take countless pictures and see the results immediately, one had to ration film and wait until processing to determine if one “got it or not.”  One had to keep film – and batteries - cool in the summer and warm in the winter.  And it was obvious to all that one was taking pictures or recording audio.  In any event, we observed the cardinal and ethical rule of anthropology: to get informed consent of those photographed.  

Before we released the film about the CU transmission line issue and resistance to it, we showed it to those involved in the resistance. 

A citizen’s organization in Wisconsin concerned with electricity production, distribution and use asked me if it could show the Grassroots Energy movie for a fundraiser.  After some deliberation, I agreed.  I then also agreed that a blog concerned with electricity transmission issues could provide access to this movie.  Further, I have included clips from the movie as well as other information about the CU case in a presentation to a workshop on transmission held in part by Edison Electric Institute.

I am now working to make available more of my published and unpublished material, print and audiovisual, on transmission and other energy issues.

Luther P. Gerlach, PhD
Professor emeritus of Anthropology, University of Minnesota

Biosketch

My studies of public response to electricity transmission lines is part of my broader study of the interplay of social movements and established orders in the management of technological and ecological risk and resource use locally, regionally and globally.  Thus, I examine how the interplay between advocates and opponents of transmission grid expansion produces debate about the energy future and shapes this future.

I have studied social movements, ecological adaptation, and related cultural change in the USA, Germany, and along the Kenya coast.  Following undergraduate and graduate study at the University of Minnesota, I served as a US Army officer in the Far East and a US government researcher in Germany. I then attended the University of London, particularly its School of Oriental and African Studies and also its London School of Economics, receiving certificates in African Law(Islamic Law Option) and Swahili, and a PhD in Cultural Anthropology (1960), following field research in Kenya.  In addition to my professorship in Anthropology at the University of Minnesota, I have been visiting professor at the Environmental Quality Lab of the California Institute of Technology, the Aspen Institute of Humanistic Studies, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Science Center, Berlin, Germany.

Formula Rate Matters. DAA continues to examine accounting that populates formula rate recovery mechanisms used in determining billings to wholesale customers. In recent formula rate audits, DAA observed certain patterns of noncompliance in the following areas:
• Merger Goodwill – including goodwill in the equity component of the capital structure absent Commission approval;
• Depreciation Rates – using state-approved or a blended depreciation rate consisting of Commission and state-approved depreciation rates without Commission approval;
• Merger Costs – including any merger-related costs in rates (e.g., third-party advisory fees, internal labor, severance, and other general and administrative costs) without Commission approval;
• Tax Prepayments – incorrectly recording tax overpayments not applied to a future tax year’s obligation as a prepayment leading to excess recovery through working capital;
• Unused Inventory and Equipment – including the cost of materials, supplies, and equipment purchased for a construction project without removing the cost of items unused in whole or in part from the cost of a project;
• Allocated Labor – using labor cost allocators not based on a representative time study to determine the amount of indirect labor costs to distribute to construction projects;
• Asset Retirement Obligation (ARO) – including ARO amounts in formula rates, without explicit Commission approval;
• Below-the-Line Costs – including below-the-line costs in formula rates (e.g., lobbying, charitable contributions, fines and penalties, and compromise settlements arising from discriminatory employment practices) without Commission approval; and
• Improper Capitalization – seeking to include in rate base (and earn a return on) costs that should be expensed.

The Commission also observes that the approval of a line route as part of this Certificate Order should facilitate negotiations with landowners, and that the issuance of the Certificate will enable Rock Island to gain access to the property to conduct surveys and related activities, which are steps characterized by Rock Island as important ones in which to engage in the near future.

“The ICC approval is a great step forward for the Rock Island Clean Line project and brings Illinois one step closer to creating a cleaner energy future,” said Michael Skelly, President of Clean Line Energy. “We are grateful to the Commission for their careful consideration of our application and proposed route. By approving game-changing projects like the Rock Island Clean Line, Illinois will benefit from access to low-cost clean energy and job creation in the construction and manufacturing sectors.”

Companies like Clean Line that propose electric transmission projects are forced to meet a high threshold to prove that their energy project serves the public need and benefits consumers.

This project should demonstrate that independent, investor-driven transmission infrastructure can become a viable business solution in a traditionally utility-driven arena.

The wind energy delivered by the Rock Island Clean Line will allow other generators to run less and burn less fuel by eliminating the need for the equivalent amount of energy to come from fossil fuels, thereby reducing pollution. More than 1.4 million homes will be powered by the renewable energy generated as a result of this project.

Developing a project of this scale is a long-term undertaking...

Rock Island therein requests an order granting it a certificate of public convenience and necessity (“CPCN” or “Certificate”), pursuant to Section 8-406 of the Act, authorizing it to operate as a transmission public utility in the State of Illinois and to construct, operate and maintain an electric transmission line (“Project”); and authorizing and directing it, pursuant to Section 8-503 of the Act, to construct the proposed line. 

Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa., was the first to ask the inspector general to look at the way FERC has been investigating alleged energy market manipulation. Stressing the need for investigations to be transparent, Casey in July urged Friedman to look at seven specific aspects of FERC's enforcement program, including whether the agency has pursued enforcement actions against entities "that were not acting in violation of then-current applicable laws and regulations," and is "properly allocating its limited resources to investigation of cases that have the most deleterious effects on energy markets."

Then, in September, Barrasso and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, asked the inspector general to explore allegations questioning the fairness and transparency of FERC's enforcement program, including those made in an Energy Law Journal article co-authored by a former FERC general counsel asserting that the commission's enforcement process has become "lop-sided and unfair."

The two senators specifically asked if FERC is holding certain parties to different standards with regard to market manipulation. For instance, Barrasso and Collins questioned whether the public is being given "actionable notice" of the types of conduct FERC considers to be market manipulation. They also asked Friedman to explore the article's allegations that the targets of FERC investigations and their employees are not being afforded the due process "required by FERC's own regulations and precedents" and that provided by other federal enforcement agencies.