A complaint was filed today in federal court alleging that Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and NPS Regional Director Dennis Reidenbach violated the National Environmental Policy Act, the NPS Organic Act and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act when they issued a decision granting PSEG & PPL a permit to destroy national parks with their unneeded Susquehanna-Roseland power line two weeks ago.

Here's a link to the complaint.  Very interesting reading.  I think my favorite part was this:

"The EIS must be prepared so as to “serve practically as an important contribution to the decisionmaking process” and cannot be “used to rationalize or justify decisions already made.” 40 C.F.R. § 1502.5; see also id. §§ 1502.2(f), 1506.1. The inclusion of the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line in the set of projects to be “fast-tracked” by the Rapid Response Team for Transmission placed undue pressure on rapid approval of the Project and influenced the Park Service to commit to a determination about the preferred alternatives before environmental review under NEPA had been properly concluded. Such prejudgment by the
agency is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with NEPA and its implementing regulations."

The groups also complain about the mysterious $56 million dollar "mitigation" plan that was never presented to the public.  There's some shady involvement by a greenwashing "conservation" group that involves buying additional property.

And guess what?  Y-O-U are going to pay every last penny of that $56M "mitigation" fund, plus 12.9% interest yearly on the remaining balance for the next 50 years or so. 

"Johnson said the rate of return is in fact 12.93 percent and said it is true PSE&G would earn a rate of return on the land purchase.
"The current rules say the cost of a project such as this will be shared by electric customers who will benefit," she said."

Perhaps it's time to start asking some questions about Susquehanna-Roseland's shifty financial schemes and collection of the amount they donated to the NPS from ratepayers, ya think?

Bravo to all the groups who are persevering in their fight to preserve national parks that belong to all of us while staring down political skulduggery, bribery, and two huge corporations' attempt to hurry up and get their project built before the truth gets out.  The truth is that the power line isn't even needed!

This article, Meet the 10 highest paid utility CEOs, was sent to me by a friend today in the form of a guessing game.  The question posed was, "I wonder if you can guess who's #1?"  No fair peeking!

Go ahead, guess in the comments.  Then read the article.

(And yes, I guessed correctly.)

How utterly revolting.

Remember all the hoo-hah over New Jersey's and Maryland's plans to provide incentives in order to get new generation built in their states?

As expected, PJM's incumbent generator PIGS cooked up a new way to stop new generation entries in New Jersey and Maryland, and the PJM cartel, of course, was right there in the thick of things, giggling behind hairy knuckles.

Worse yet, PJM's "independent" market monitor was scheming right along with them.  Shame on you, Market Monitor!

Douglas Nazarian, Chairman of the Maryland PSC, is calling foul on the PJM cartel's secret scheming to the detriment of electric consumers in the state.  In a recent letter to PJM, Nazarian roasts PJM's PIG.

"I write to express our Commission's profound disappointment and concern with the clandestine and exclusionary process that has led to the latest round of proposed changes to the Minimum Offer Price Rule (the "MOPR"). Although we have and will raise serious objections to the proposal itself, those are for another time. At this point, because the process that begat the
new proposal was fatally and unfairly flawed, PJM should bring the fast-track "educational" process to an immediate stop and hold an open and transparent stakeholder discussion before proceeding further.

We were not shocked to learn that certain stakeholders would like to revise the MOPR further. We were shocked, however, to learn after the fact that PJM and the Independent Market Monitor participated in, and that PJM facilitated, a secret and exclusionary negotiation to devise a new set of MOPR revisions. PJM's own slides state that the discussions were initiated by suppliers and public power interests, but that P JM and the IMM were invited, and that selected other stakeholders were included and provided an opportunity 'to represent their unique interests."  By PJM's own reckoning, four of its five sectors were included in the discussion - put another way, one of PJM's stakeholder sectors, the sector that includes Consumer Advocates, was actively excluded. And although we are not official stakeholders, State regulators -the parties most deeply interested in the terms of the MOPR and at whom these proposed changes are aimed - were excluded as well. So in spite of our well-known views on the MOPR, our
"unique" and public interests were, by design, never heard or considered.

Indeed, we and the Consumer Advocates and the few others not at the table learned of the discussions only when PJM Staff began rolling out (to great fanfare in the trade press) a fully formed proposal, using PJM's slide template, as part of a PJM-led "education process" that will fast-track this significant and targeted fait accompli from revelation to FERC filing in less than two months. 

It may well be that we would never have reached
agreement with others on changes to the MOPR, but that is beside the point: these negotiations were held behind closed doors, with PJM's blessing and assistance (if not outright leadership), specifically for the purpose of revising the MOPR to the detriment of our State's long-term reliability needs. And the proposed changes are now being represented to the world, and will shortly be characterized to the FERC, as a  PJM-endorsed proposal, despite the fact that the parties being targeted were affirmatively disinvited from the process.

PJM claims not to make policy. This time, however, PJM picked a policy winner at the beginning of the conversation, perhaps to try and preempt or moot the appeal to last year's changes that remains pending. This time, PJM excluded altogether the parties with the most at stake.

And this time, despite these shortcuts, PJM is visibly leading a forced, double-time march to the FERC on
behalf of a favored group of stakeholders, all so that the new rules can be in place for the May 2013 RPM auction."

Gosh, why does Nazarian sound so ticked off?  Doesn't he already know that PJM is a self-interested industry cartel?

"Our experience with PJM since 2007 had led us to expect better."

Ooops, maybe not.  Well, in that case, welcome to the real world that the consumers you serve have been living in for the past five years, Chairman Nazarian!

"Issues of courtesy aside, however, PJM's selective inclusion and exclusion of parties to these discussions has indelibly tainted the process and its results."

What?  PJM's processes are tainted?  Say not so!  Coincidentally, that's exactly what we've been trying to tell you all along!

It's about time someone sends a very frank note home to Mother FERC regarding the playground behavior of her little brat, PJM.  PJM is a selfish bully who steals from the other children.  PJM doesn't know how to play nice and has no morals.  It's time to take PJM out behind the woodshed and give it a little "tough love."

Consumers can't afford PJM any longer.

Since our first round of e-bay auctions for a limited quantity of Stop the PATH of Destruction t-shirts was so successful, we've decided to do one more round.

Until October 17, you can place your bid to snap up your very own souvenir piece of the grassroots opposition that kicked the poorly planned and unneeded PATH project to the curb.  Join the thousands of happy citizens and electric consumers in three states who proved that ordinary citizens can beat two huge, greedy, corporate goliaths at their own game!

Shirts are still available in sizes small - x-large - click on "see more items" to find other sizes.  All proceeds will go to local Jefferson County charitable organizations.

And don't worry, I promise I won't post the names of the winning bidders (although I may snicker quietly with my E-bay auctioneer).  If you're a government official, regulator, or even one of our power company fans who just has to have one of these shirts, your secret is safe with us.  Unlike PATH, I actually keep my promises  :-)

You just never know who you may bump into in Washington, D.C. that may be sporting one of our shirts ;-)

After a week of vacation, I've finally had time to read through PATH's PATH-etic sec. 205 filing to recover an additional $121M of investment in their abandoned project.

In their filing, PATH says:  "The project management structure provided the PATH Companies with a “forest and trees” assessment of daily activities and expenditures to ensure their reasonableness and prudence."

PATH's "forest" was continually in flames because their project was an unneeded economic-based project intended to increase the use of coal-fired electricity on the east coast that was masquerading as a reliability project.  The daily activities and expenditures were designed to continually shore up their rapidly deteriorating reliability case, denigrate feasible alternatives, and desperately attempt to build advocacy for the project by making it "too big to fail." 

It was never about reasonableness or prudence, it was about spending whatever was necessary to continue the charade.  And now PATH expects 60 million PJM ratepayers to pay for their planning errors and bungling of state approvals.

Worse yet, PATH seems to be in a big hurry to convince FERC to rubber stamp their PATH-etic proposal without modification, suspension or hearing.

PATH wants to recover $121M over 5 years.  They say they need 5 years to try to sell all that property they imprudently purchased at inflated prices so they can credit the proceeds to the amount they intend to recover.  PATH also claims there will be additional expenses to close down the project added over the 5 year recovery period.  What has PATH been doing with themselves during the 18 month "abeyance," at the beginning of which "all contractors and suppliers were told to cease activity on the Project and to prepare their final invoices?"

PATH also believes they should be allowed to collect a 10.9% annual return on equity for the unrecovered balance, in addition to carrying costs.  Although PATH so graciously offered to forgo the 150 bonus point ROE adder (1.5%) FERC granted them as an incentive, they want to continue to collect the 50 point adder (.5%) for their continued participation in PJM.  What benefit do ratepayers receive from the continued PJM membership of a soon-to-be-dead company that owns an already-dead project?  The 50 points for PJM participation was an incentive that PATH is no longer entitled to receive and PATH's continued membership in PJM is pointless.

And about those land purchases, PATH says: 

"As described in the testimony of Mr. Pokrajac, the PATH Companies propose to mitigate the overall Abandonment Costs included in the Filing by selling or transferring the parcels of fee land purchased for construction of the 765 kV transmission line, and the proposed Welton Spring and Kemptown Substations. As we explained earlier, due to the large scale of the PATH Project and PJM’s aggressive development schedule, the PATH Companies had to begin acquiring property that would be needed for the PATH Project in advance of CPCN authorizations. The PATH Companies attempted to negotiate the most reasonable price possible for all real estate purchases, but as noted previously, the location and size of property with respect to the needs of the Project were necessary considerations that impacted the purchase price. Approximately $30 million of total Abandonment Costs incurred by the PATH Companies are costs incurred to purchase twenty parcels of land as sites for construction of the PATH Project. More than half of these land purchase costs are for acreage acquired for construction of the proposed Welton Spring and Kemptown Substations.
The PATH Companies expect to transfer or sell all of the parcels of land acquired for the PATH Project to mitigate the Abandonment Cost, but completion of these transactions could not be accomplished prior to the filing. The property will be sold or transferred at fair market value, and Mr. Pokrajac explains how the sales or transfer price will be credited to mitigate the overall Abandonment Costs."

Quit laughing, little PATH opponents, PATH is spinning this yarn with a straight face.  :-)

PATH continues to hide behind PJM's skirts, blaming them for the poor planning and constantly delayed in service dates for the project.  It just never occurred to PATH that their project could be cancelled, although it was continually delayed due to decreased demand, increased demand response and new generation on the east coast, so PATH continued to blindly spend generously on their project.  Although the in service date never got any closer than 5 years, PATH continues to whine about how "aggressive" the construction schedule was.  But, that didn't stop PATH's continual requests to toll or withdraw the three state CPCN applications, did it?  Maybe PATH should have taken out their "aggression" getting their legal ducks in a row, instead of tossing away the ratepayers' money on property options and purchases, as well as public relations dreck that included front groups, lobbying and advertising.

Go ahead, read PATH's filing -- it's the perfect punchline to their joke of a project.

If you think PATH is all wet and want to intervene and protest PATH's plan to collect their investment in the abandoned project, you can join the ranks of entities who have already intervened, such as Exelon, PJM Industrial Customer Coalition, Dominion, PSE&G and the Maryland PSC, by filing your own petition and/or protest, which should follow this format, and be filed through FERC's e-filing system.  FERC has set a deadline for interventions, protests and comments on docket ER12-2708 of 5 p.m. on October 19.

Or, you can just sit back and watch the show, however only parties to this docket will have a seat at the table if FERC can be convinced to set this matter for hearing and possible settlement.

Pam Kasey at the State Journal investigates PJM's new ISAC in this informative article, which poses these questions:

If New Jersey wants wind power from the Midwest, should that mean a power line gets built across West Virginia to supply it?

And if it does, should West Virginians help pay for it? 

The West Virginia PSC, who only talks to the media through spokespeople, looks at ISAC as "a seat at the table."  

However, without integrated resource planning, which was rejected by the legislature last year at the urging of AEP & FE, West Virginia might as well stay home.  

Regulatory expert Scott Hempling says:

"...states that do Integrated Resource Planning will get the most out of the ISAC. It's clear enough that a state that doesn't have its own vision for the mix and type and timing of power supply … is putting itself in a down position," he said, while also asserting his familiarity with and respect for West Virginia's commission.

"States will have a much softer voice in the regional discussion if they don't have their own plans because they'll have nothing to assert — they're just reacting," he said. "It's better to write the first draft."

"Just reacting."  That astutely describes West Virginia's Public Service Commission, who continues to eschew the public interest in favor of corporate initiatives.

PATH made a filing at FERC today to collect their stranded investment in the PATH Project over a 5 year period.  This $121M is in addition to the $95M PATH will have collected from ratepayers through the end of 2012, and the $20M they propose to collect from ratepayers in 2013.  That's a total of $236M, for a project that was never built.  PATH even has the audacity to ask for a return on the abandoned project costs over the 60 month amortization period.

PATH says:

"The PATH Project was abandoned for reasons beyond the control of PATH LLC, the PATH Companies or their upstream owners, and the Commission previously determined that the PATH Companies may recover their prudently-incurred costs under such circumstances.
Accordingly, the PATH Companies seek authorization to recover abandoned plant costs over a sixty-month amortization period, including a return on the average unamortized balance under the transmission cost-of-service formula rates contained in Attachment H-19A of the PJM Tariff (“Formula Rate”), as revised herein, effective December 1, 2012. The abandonment plant costs for which the PATH Companies seek recovery are previously unrecovered costs incurred from January 1, 2008 through August 31, 2012, of approximately $121 million, subject to goingforward  accounting entries to reflect proceeds and costs associated with the orderly closing of transactions, including transfers or sales of land acquired by the PATH Companies for development of the PATH Project (“Abandonment Costs”)."

Read the whole 200 page filing here.

Is the utility industry finally starting to admit that weak demand isn't strictly a product of the economy that will bounce back very soon?

The utilities have been telling their investors that demand is about to skyrocket at any second, although just recently a few of them have been pondering whether slow load growth may be the permanent effect of increased energy efficiency.

We've been telling them that for years, but apparently it took an equities research firm to drag the truth out of them. 

"Macquarie Equities Research said in a client note several days ago that energy efficiency measures really do seem to be having an impact on electricity demand, and the effect is likely to continue. It’s not just theoretical or wishful, the analysts said. “Unfortunately for investors,” the firm said, “utilities expect this demand destruction to continue or even accelerate.”

PJM used "the economy" as an excuse for cancelling the PATH and MAPP projects, but yet they refuse to consider decreased demand in their rush to construct the gold-plated Susquehanna Roseland transmission project.  As well, a hideous, uncoordinated snarl of new wind farms and transmission lines are proposed for the Midwest.  Is there really a market for all this new centralized generation and long distance transmission, or will hundreds of billions of dollars of new infrastructure end up rusting quietly in fields as more and more consumers decrease their usage through energy efficiency and drop off the grid altogether by deploying of their own small scale renewable generators?

The utilities who continue to deny permanent change to consumer demand and stick blindly with their 100-year old business plans of centralized generation and transmission will go belly up.  Those who welcome and embrace change and seek to develop a foothold in a distributed generation, consumers-as-producers future, will thrive.

We're cleaning out the StopPATH WV closet and have a limited supply of "Stop the PATH of Destruction" t-shirts to unload.  For a limited time only, you can place your bid to own a genuine, original PATH battle souvenir! The shirts are available in sizes S - XL (click "see other items" for more sizes).  All proceeds will go into the pot that will be split between two local community charitable organizations when StopPATH WV, Inc. dissolves the corporation.

Is your trophy case missing that all important "StopPATH" t-shirt?  Or are you simply an opponent who wants to wear one of these shirts while doing a victory lap around 800 Cabin Hill Drive?  Or perhaps you're an opponent of a different transmission project who wants to make your particular transmission owning opponent's blood run cold by dropping the subtle hint that you've studied the techniques used by StopPATH to terminate the PATH project and make the power companies run away screaming with their tail between their legs?

Or perhaps you're a PATH employee who wants one to use to clean up pet messes while grumbling about this blog; or perhaps you need something to wear when you sit in the corner of your closet sobbing uncontrollably? 

Whatever you think you might do with a StopPATH t-shirt, this is your last chance to own one!

Go.  Bid.  Now.

A lot of you have been wondering what FERC's Order last Thursday means, but your eyes glaze over around page 2 of the 36-page order.  If that describes you, here's your "real world" explanation.

In 2010, a group of electric consumers who were paying PATH's transmission charges in their electric bill attended an "open meeting" in DC regarding the rate they were forced to pay.  PATH welcomed these consumers (and the consumers were the only ones who actually showed up for the meeting!) to the process as "interested parties" as defined in the legal protocols that govern PATH's rate setting process, which is under FERC's federal jurisdiction.

Two of the consumers, Ali and Keryn, continued looking into the rates, through the processes set in the protocols, by submitting requests and receiving information from PATH.

At the end of the examination phase, Ali and Keryn filed a formal challenge of $3.3M of PATH's expenditures and recovery from ratepayers during 2009.  The challenge process is specifically set out in PATH's protocols as the proper avenue to challenge rates.

In 2011, Ali and Keryn once again examined PATH's rates under the protocols.  Disputes over discovery, and Ali and Keryn's standing as end-use consumers, soon erupted.  PATH wasn't so eager to provide the same information Ali and Keryn had used in their first formal challenge as it related to PATH's 2010 expenditures.  PATH began to claim that Ali and Keryn had no legal standing to file challenges or participate in the examination process.  It was an unsuccessful attempt to avoid providing information that could be used in another challenge.  A second formal challenge was filed at the end of the second examination period that totaled an additional $2.5M of expenditures improperly recovered from ratepayers in 2010.

In order to prevail in a valid challenge to PATH's rates before FERC, Ali and Keryn had to raise "serious doubt" about the accuracy of PATH's rate calculations and/or the prudence of the expenditures.  Once a challenge is filed, the burden of proving the rate is accurate shifts to PATH.  PATH provided little defense and absolutely no evidence in their answer to the challenges.

FERC granted the challenges, finding that Ali and Keryn carried their burden of raising "serious doubt."  In the order, FERC takes the next step, which is to set the accuracy and prudence of the challenged expenditures for a public, trial-type, evidentiary hearing before a FERC administrative law judge.  However, standard practice at FERC is to avoid hearings in favor of a settlement between the parties.  The parties here are PATH and Ali & Keryn.  Therefore, FERC has ordered settlement judge proceedings to explore whether this matter can be resolved without a hearing.

The expenditures FERC found questionable are:  lobbying, advertising, PATH's "Reliable Power Coalitions" and "PEAT" program, PATH's membership expenditures, shared parent company costs charged in PATH's rates, and donations and civic, political and related activities.  In addition, FERC also set some "double counting" of expenses for hearing.  In that instance, PATH recorded invoices in more than one account, increasing recovery over and above the amount they paid for the service.  FERC dismissed prudence challenges totaling $100K for PATH's three-year contract for right-of-way maintenance with the National Wild Turkey Federation, however FERC also believes PATH recorded that expenditure in the wrong account and set that issue for hearing.  FERC also set discovery procedures for hearing.

In a separate but related matter, FERC also granted two complaints filed by Ali and Keryn.  Remember how PATH asked FERC to dismiss the challenges because they contended that Ali and Keryn did not have legal standing to file the challenges, nor participate in the examination of PATH's rate?  PATH kept ratcheting up their incorrect "determination" that end-use consumers do not have standing, culminating this summer in a refusal to allow consumers to attend PATH's "open meeting" conference calls or to provide any information requested by consumers under the protocols.  In response, separate complaints were filed.  FERC agreed with Ali and Keryn that end-use consumers who pay transmission rates as part of their electric bill do have legal standing under section 206 of the Federal Power Act.  PATH had complained in one of their filings that if FERC found that consumers have standing, it would open the door for "all of the millions of retail customers in the PJM footprint that may be indirectly charged some portion of [PATH's] transmission rates" to participate in examination of these rates and create an administrative "quagmire."  Indeed, that is what FERC found.  Any one of the 61 million consumers in PJM who pay a portion of a transmission rate have standing to examine and challenge that rate.  PATH imagines that it (and other transmission owners) will now be deluged with information requests from every one of the 61 million consumers in the PJM footprint who fund their transmission projects.  However, it's never happened before, and is unlikely to happen in the future.  Formula rates are complicated and examining them is tedious.

In summary, consumers have standing to participate in the examination and challenge of transmission rates they pay, and PATH's 2009/10 recovery of $5.8M in inaccurate or imprudent expenditures from 61 million PJM consumers will now head to settlement and hearing for possible refund.