“What (the justices) said is that the only public interest determination to be made in Missouri is by the Public Service Commission,” said Hans Detweiler, vice president of development for Clean Line Partners. “So the counties… should not be making their own public-interest determinations. They should only look at engineering questions.”

Further, Grain Belt acknowledges it will be required to obtain county assent pursuant to section 229.100 if it intends to construct utilities impacting publicly owned roads. The provisions in that section, however, are not relevant to the Commission’s decision-making process in issuing a line CCN. Section 229.100 does not purport to give counties the authority to stand in the shoes of the Commission in determining whether a proposed utility project is in the public interest of the state or whether a utility should be granted a CCN. Other than providing that county assent must be obtained prior to beginning construction when county roads are impacted, section 229.100 is silent as to timing, order of priority, or any other reference to section 393.170 covering the Commission’s authority to issue CCNs. The Commission erred in relying on ATXI in denying Grain Belt’s application based on its failure to first obtain assent from impacted counties. Admittedly, Grain Belt will need to obtain such assent before it can begin construction if county roads will be impacted, but county assent is not required prior to the Commission issuing a line CCN.

2011 Missouri Revised Statutes
TITLE XIV ROADS AND WATERWAYS
Chapter 229 Provisions Relating to All Roads
Section 229.100. Improvements along public roads--location--control.
Improvements along public roads--location--control. 229.100. No person or persons, association, companies or corporations shall erect poles for the suspension of electric light, or power wires, or lay and maintain pipes, conductors, mains and conduits for any purpose whatever, through, on, under or across the public roads or highways of any county of this state, without first having obtained the assent of the county commission of such county therefor; and no poles shall be erected or such pipes, conductors, mains and conduits be laid or maintained, except under such reasonable rules and regulations as may be prescribed and promulgated by the county highway engineer, with the approval of the county commission.

In conclusion, the only argument I've noticed that needs addressing, is the Right of Way with landowners. Most of the Transmission route is satisfactorily settled to landowners' liking. There will always exist individuals that aim to capitalize on any efforts to improve a populations quality of living. I understand and readily concur that there are some situations
that need clarification and potential settlements, but this in no way impacts pre-approval of cost recovery. Laws exist by the legislature to ensure both landowners and corporate entity interests are protected regarding Right of Way. It seems arguments are rather one sided lately favoring the landowners. If our nation aimed at 100% satisfaction, we wouldn't even be able to elect governmental officials. With corporate expansion, the same holds true. A majority of Oklahomans approve this project and want our state to lead the nation.

He is an accomplished strategic thinker...

...his expertise in developing large-scale infrastructure projects

Mr. Skelly is the founder and Chairman of Clean Line Energy Partners, a leading U.S. renewable energy infrastructure company.

"We knew that if we were going to focus, we would need a leaner, meaner team."

Though he declined to comment on the sale price of the assets Clean Line has sold or the company’s current, reduced headcount, Skelly did say he isn’t looking to move into a smaller office with the slimmed-down team.

Houston-based Clean Line Energy Partners LLC has trimmed its portfolio down to one $2.3 billion project in the midwest called Grain Belt Express.

That left Clean Line with Grain Belt Express, a transmission project moving wind power from Kansas to as far east as Illinois. That’s what Skelly wants to hone in on, he said.

Grain Belt is still in the permitting phase, and it had been hung up in a Missouri Supreme Court case around who determines whether the project is in the public interest. The court ruled that the central Public Service Commission gets to decide, a favorable outcome for Clean Line, according to a July 26 press release.

The PSC has broad discretion in how it handles the decision going forward, so the timeline for the project could still change depending on what it does, Skelly said. But right now Grain Belt is looking at five or six years before it’s operational, he said. Clean Line should hear the PSC’s decision within the next several weeks, Skelly said.

Since its single remaining asset is still in development, Clean Line is not producing revenue right now.

Clean Line’s founder and president, Michael Skelly, hasn’t yet decided what to do with Clean Line once it either sells or completes Grain Belt, he said. If it sells the project, it will have cash and a very small number of employees — a good position for the company, Skelly said. It’s still to be determined whether the company would make an exit from the market at that point or start working on a new project, he said.

Dear Abby, Dear Abby
Bet you never thought
Telling your lies, that you'd ever be caught;
There is no PUC deadline for eminent domain
The deadline is yours, and your lie is insane.

Many landowners are in the process of negotiating rights of way, and Transource had to meet the PUC deadline for any easement which might require eminent domain, according to Transource spokeswoman Abby Foster.

"Those names may come off as negotiations happen," she said.

Transource will not proceed with eminent domain proceedings until the project is approved, according to Foster.

Landowners should meet with Transource right-of-way agents so they can understand the process and can negotiate the location of the line, she said. 

"They can still say no at the end of the process," she said. "It's up to the landowners whether to sign the documents."

However, given the construction schedule and in-service date for the proposed lEC-East Project, it is necessary for Transource PA to seek Commission approval to exercise the power of eminent domain in order to ensure that the lEC-East Project is constructed and operational by the in-service date.

Miss Abby, Miss Abby, I have a complaint,
The truth is the truth and truth this just ain't
So, listen up, missy, and listen up good
Stop telling your lies and go back to your 'hood.

“We’re extremely disappointed in today’s Public Utility Commission of Texas’ decision rejecting our Wind Catcher proposal,” Melissa McHenry, an American Electric spokeswoman, said in an email. “We are evaluating our options.”

“Looks like curtains to me,” said Paul Patterson, an analyst at Glenrock Associates LLC. “Almost everyone was opposed to this. Barring any big concessions from AEP, it looks to me like it’s dead.”

Ali Agha - SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc.
Thank you, good morning. Good morning. First up, on Wind Catcher, Nick, to be clear, if either Texas or Oklahoma does not approve, can the project still go forward or do you need both of those approvals for this project to happen?
Nicholas K. Akins - American Electric Power Co., Inc.
Yeah. My going-in assumption is we need both of those approvals, because these are regulated jurisdictions and that's where the needs are. And so, our – certainly, our strong preferences for that project is sized based upon the wind farm that's in existence with the transmission line and to do something different than that would be suboptimal so, we're really focused on making sure that all of the jurisdictions approve it.

Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates LLC
And then, also – and just to clarify on the Ali Agha's question. There is really, I guess, no sort of Wind Catcher light or – I mean, basically, it's kind of you guys might do other things, obviously, you're always looking for things and other opportunities, but it sounds like, essentially, it's kind of – this deal is kind of – it's kind of a pretty much not really given to any significant modification, if this doesn't have – if there's a rejection or something like that, we shouldn't think of there being a sort of Wind Catcher light opportunity per se with respect to this project, is that correct?
Nicholas K. Akins - American Electric Power Co., Inc.
That's correct. I think you could see, I mean, obviously, with the integrated resource plans that we followed, you may see smaller projects develop in some fashion but they could be renewables, may not be renewables. So, you really – but you won't see another Wind Catcher-like project because that one has – that one's very unique in its scope and scale and the benefits provided. And so, it's – you're probably moving to either less efficient type of opportunities and there certainly will continue to develop those kinds of options. But keep in mind, you should look at AEP as a 5% to 7% foundational growth stock with all these little incremental opportunities.

Wind Catcher was incremental...