If you've been following PATH's abandonment recovery case at FERC, here's the latest.
PATH filed what it called its "case-in-chief" last week. Not sure why PATH couldn't have filed its case when it applied to recover its abandonment costs on September 28. I guess PATH was seriously expecting the Commission would rubber stamp that dreadful mess it filed last year so PATH wouldn't actually have to go to the trouble of filing a case?
At any rate, some of it may be worth a read. The testimony of Archie Creepyfreak and Snidely Whiplash is worthy of a scoffing snort or two. The testimony of the accounting ladies and Milo -- eh, probably over the average person's head and not worth your time.
Don't miss the testimony of PATH's hired ROE "expert," Dr. William Avera because it's the most amusing part of this whole 500+ page filing. Now, keep in mind that PATH is paying this guy a pretty penny (from YOUR piggy bank, little ratepayer) to blather on for 78 pages about PATH's ROE during the 5-year amortization period. 78 pages! Plus 24 more pages of exhibits! One hundred and two pages to say what can be simply paraphrased as: When we do the DCF analysis, the median that the Commission usually uses is 9.1%. We even tossed out a bunch of low numbers while keeping in the high ones, but that was the highest we could get it. But we want 10.4% *stomps feet*!!! Therefore, the Commission should abandon their usual approach (that provides regulatory certainty) and just give PATH what it wants. PATH needs a higher number because this ROE is going to be be in place for five whole years, during which time they expect that the cost of equity is going to rise. Gee, I didn't hear this guy talking about the longevity of PATH's original 14.3% ROE when the cost of equity went down in following years. PATH's "expert" comes up with several other ways to twist and massage numbers and make crap up that would give the Commission an excuse to award PATH the 10.4% ROE it wants. And if that doesn't work, Dr. Avera is going to try to confuse you or bore you to death with his financial diarrhea. I'm betting his testimony (102 pages!) cost more than PATH stands to gain by maintaining the 10.4% ROE, however, you're paying the bill!
Don't bother with the last 350 pages or so. PATH actually tells the truth for a change when it characterizes the Period I and II data as useless and "trying to fit a square peg in a round hole."
And now parties to the abandonment case have less than two weeks to go through all this before the first settlement conference on Feb. 26. Happy reading, everyone :-)
PATH filed what it called its "case-in-chief" last week. Not sure why PATH couldn't have filed its case when it applied to recover its abandonment costs on September 28. I guess PATH was seriously expecting the Commission would rubber stamp that dreadful mess it filed last year so PATH wouldn't actually have to go to the trouble of filing a case?
At any rate, some of it may be worth a read. The testimony of Archie Creepyfreak and Snidely Whiplash is worthy of a scoffing snort or two. The testimony of the accounting ladies and Milo -- eh, probably over the average person's head and not worth your time.
Don't miss the testimony of PATH's hired ROE "expert," Dr. William Avera because it's the most amusing part of this whole 500+ page filing. Now, keep in mind that PATH is paying this guy a pretty penny (from YOUR piggy bank, little ratepayer) to blather on for 78 pages about PATH's ROE during the 5-year amortization period. 78 pages! Plus 24 more pages of exhibits! One hundred and two pages to say what can be simply paraphrased as: When we do the DCF analysis, the median that the Commission usually uses is 9.1%. We even tossed out a bunch of low numbers while keeping in the high ones, but that was the highest we could get it. But we want 10.4% *stomps feet*!!! Therefore, the Commission should abandon their usual approach (that provides regulatory certainty) and just give PATH what it wants. PATH needs a higher number because this ROE is going to be be in place for five whole years, during which time they expect that the cost of equity is going to rise. Gee, I didn't hear this guy talking about the longevity of PATH's original 14.3% ROE when the cost of equity went down in following years. PATH's "expert" comes up with several other ways to twist and massage numbers and make crap up that would give the Commission an excuse to award PATH the 10.4% ROE it wants. And if that doesn't work, Dr. Avera is going to try to confuse you or bore you to death with his financial diarrhea. I'm betting his testimony (102 pages!) cost more than PATH stands to gain by maintaining the 10.4% ROE, however, you're paying the bill!
Don't bother with the last 350 pages or so. PATH actually tells the truth for a change when it characterizes the Period I and II data as useless and "trying to fit a square peg in a round hole."
And now parties to the abandonment case have less than two weeks to go through all this before the first settlement conference on Feb. 26. Happy reading, everyone :-)
RSS Feed