StopPATH WV

The Wall Street Journal reports that FirstEnergy could profit more than $200M from the closure of 6 of its old, coal-fired plants announced last week.

As reported earlier, this is a business decision intended to make more money for FE's stockholders.  Too bad, so sad for the 500 employees who will be in the unemployment line, and also for the towns who depended on these plants as as economic engine.

You'd think that a few of those millions could be parted with to set up programs to ensure that affected employees were given opportunities for equivalent jobs elsewhere, or given the benefit of retraining for equal jobs in another area of the energy industry, such as the booming renewable energy sector.  Transition programs for the affected localities could also be instituted.  Instead, FE is absconding with all that happy cash.

One word.  Karma.

AEP subsidiaries are "selling" assets to each other in another corporate shell game.  This article says that AEP-Ohio will be selling generation it owns in WV to fellow subsidiary Appalachian Power.  Meanwhile, they fired up their new gas-fired plant located in Ohio, which will be paid for, at least in part, by Appalachian Power customers in WV.  Confused yet?  AEP hopes so!

In this article, the reporter was treated to an explanation of AEP's "power pool" (probably because she asked tougher questions).

What's in neither article is the promised merging of AEP WV sudsidiaries Appalachian Power and Wheeling Power, which was promised to the WV-PSC in AEP's last rate case.

Why all this confusion?  Because Ohio is deregulating generation and AEP is trying to keep their costly generation behemoths in a regulated environment.  In a deregulated, or market-based, market, costly upgrades and other costs of running these plants are wrapped into the cost of the generation bid into market.  In a regulated state, these "extra" costs are covered by ratepayers of subsidiaries who "own" these assets.

Bottom line:  It's all about AEP making even MORE money at your expense!

Despite their recent public posturing, Susquehanna-Roseland project owner PPL has absolutely no respect for the National Park Service or the federal Environmental Impact Statement process.  A December 2011 school project prepared by a Lehigh University student who spent some time at PPL with program director Patrick McMackin contains this quote:  "The park service has responded by filibustering the request by apportioning a 42-month period where they will accept and analyze public comments. Afterwards, public sentiment will factor into the creation of a preferred alternate route and a finalized EIS."

Filibustering?  Is that what PPL calls the NEPA process?  Just an unnecessary obstruction to their get rich quick scheme?  It seems to me that many hardworking, dedicated, ethical NPS personnel have put many, many hours into doing their jobs conscientiously.  Filibustering?

I'm sure PPL will be quick to point fingers at the student and accuse him of taking liberties or making this stuff up, but the truest way to see your own self is always through the eyes of an innocent.  This report is the impression PPL project managers left on this kid.  I guess they mixed a little too much reality into the koolaid they gave him to drink.

Here's a couple of other gems from the report:

1. "The subject was covered in the North American Electric Reliability report, which concluded a major investment in electric transmission would be essential to “keep pace” with the expected 18% growth in demand."  How old were the statistics they fed this kid anyhow?
2. "Because the situation will become increasingly
   volatile the longer the delays hold, PPL has stressed the perfection of its Preparedness, Prevention and Contingency (PPC) plan.  Although PPL is responsible for all aspects of permitting, the company cannot ensure total compliance once the instructions reach the contractor.  However, the existence of a well-defined plan covers any responsibility PPL shares in case of litigation."  What does that mean?  The company cannot ensure total compliance?  It means that any violations will be blamed on the contractor and responsible individuals at the contractor level will be "reprimanded," but PPL avoids legal responsibility.  This is exactly how these power companies operate.  We've seen this same behavior with their land agent contractors, who violate all laws and codes of conduct in the interest of getting the job done and the purchase and option agreements signed.  When a violation is reported, the power company pretends to slap the contractor on the wrist, *wink* and avoids all responsibility for the bad behavior, although this same bad behavior has been ordered by the power company.  They put a legal separation between themselves and the contractor in order to avoid responsibility for their own orders to take certain actions.  For its part in this charade, the contractor is paid well.  Is this the kind of for-profit corporation the NPS should allow to perform construction in one of our national parks? 
   
3. "Having a well-organized permitting portfolio that is readily accessible lubricates the project and keeps compliance agencies at bay."  So, it's all about showing those rabid compliance agencies that you have all the instructions (not that you necessarily follow them).  It's not about following the rules, but about not getting caught and held responsible for breaking them.
4. "The biggest concern the SRTP faces (outside of obtaining the overhead construction contract) is people. NIMBY protesters, environmentalists and politicians alike have rallied against the project.  Some have accused PPL and PSEG of being motivated to expand infrastructure and increase transfer capacity in order to increase their market values.  Organizations such as the Sierra Club and Stop the Lines! warn of the health hazards associated with high EMF levels and remind the public of the grotesque size of the towers. The electric commission determines the minimum cable height based on voltage and possible interference. In some instances, the existing line is over 90 years old and does not meet present codes. The public is often unaware of these mandates, and naturally condemns any attempt to increase the tower height. Ironically, all of the pictures comparing
   the size of the proposed monopoles to existing lattice structures do not come from cited sources, and are generally homemade.  The common theme throughout these opinions and complaints is their failure to acknowledge the work PPL has put in to see that the chosen route has a minimal impact on the environment and the community. Route B was chosen because 90% of the route was covered by existing easements. The snowstorm of October 2011 devastated the northeast, leading to 1.6 million power outages.  It took some utility companies over a week to return power to customers. If these blackouts were to become commonplace due to electrical overloading, I would expect the opinions of many of these protesters to reverse."  Those "homemade pictures comparing the size of the proposed towers to the existing" is illustrated by a piece of Sierra Club literature that looks like it was taken from a project Line Routing Evaluation.  Sierra Club didn't make this stuff up!  Kid, spit out that koolaid they gave you to drink, it's poison!
5. "The industry knew this project was coming for fifteen years. Now one organization (NPS) holds the SRTP back from success. If PPL’s project  management team succeeds in obtaining a
   construction and ROW permit, construction will begin in August 2012. Too much time and money has been consumed to acknowledge any other option."  Fifteen years?  Gee... we've only been able to trace it back to the 2005 Project Mountaineer scam.  The NPS is not "an organization," it's a federal governmental agency tasked with stewarding publicly owned resources and protecting parks from profiteering pirates like PPL.  They aren't "holding PPL back from success," they are doing their jobs under federal law!  And don't bet on that "too big to fail" thing, that's so last decade.

These are the things that PPL told a college student who spent some time with them.  The student didn't make all this stuff up, or "misunderstand" what he was told.  This is the TRUE face of PPL.  Pretty revolting, don't you think?

And... PPL had better NOT take this out on the student or it's going to get worse for them.  Students are like sponges, and this report is what this particular student absorbed at PPL.  The truth hurts!

The power companies behind the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line made some skimpy details of their "mitigation package" public today in their comments on the NPS Draft Environmental Impact Statement.  Today was the deadline for comments (hope you got your comments in!).

Their comment letter goes on for pages and pages and refers to Exhibits that are nowhere to be found.  If anyone knows where Exhibit 9 is, let me know, that's the one that supposedly contains the "methodology" for their madness.

The letter contains some of the most outrageous lies I've ever heard, and just in case the NPS doesn't believe them, the power companies unleash a couple of veiled threats.  Nice.  And I haven't even read the whole thing yet.

Anyhow, here's what's available on the power company's proffered bribe:

1. The price is now somewhere between $30 - 40M, but the NPS can just fill in the amount with whatever they think is reasonable.  You know, name their price for the $ale of the parks.  Price doesn't matter to PSE&G and PPL, they're using YOUR money for this bribe and collecting interest on the amount they spend.  The more they spend, the more they make!
   
2. The power companies will set up an "endowment" with your money, the Middle Delaware Mitigation Fund.  The "endowment" is supposed to be administered by "a not-for-profit organization with demonstrated expertise in land and resource conservation and successful collaboration with the Department of the Interior."  The "endowment" would be used by the Administrator for the purposes of preserving, restoring and enhancing Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Cherry Valley National Wildlife Refuge, the Middle Delaware Wild & Scenic River segment, and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail within the Delaware River basin, including reasonable costs associated with administration of the Fund.  In other words, this "administrator" is going to be able to take a big chunk of this endowment for salaries and expenses.  Now, who in the heck is going to monitor that for fraud?  "The Administrator would commit Endowment funds solely to projects or activities reviewed and recommended by the Secretary of the Interior, acting directly or through a designee, following appropriate consultation with representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and State of New Jersey, and Delaware River basin-oriented conservation organizations and recreational interests."  Oh, I see, Ken Salazar, the person with the loose morals that engineered this bribe, is going to oversee the morals of the "not-for-profit organization" who manages the "endowment."  Ever heard that phrase, "the blind leading the blind"?
   
3. 50% of the bribe would be paid when all permits are issued and land clearing begins, and the other 50% would be paid when construction is complete and the line goes into service.
   
4. So, whose land are they planning to steal?  "We have focused on parcels previously identified by land management agencies and conservation groups as important potential additions to the DEWA-area parks and refuges-- lands with natural values that would be of great value to the public.  We have identified lands potentially for sale (because everything's FOR $ALE), most* already on the market in some fashion, that offer great potential to benefit the public."  *most = qualifying weasel word -- this means that only a very small portion of this land is actually "on the market in some fashion" (another qualifying mush phrase).
   
5. So, who is this "administrator"?  "The Applicants have engaged and provided funds to a nationally respected* land conservation organization to begin acquiring interests in private properties of high value to the Department of the Interior’s conservation mission in the area around DEWA, MDSR, APPA and Cherry Valley National Wildlife Refuge."  *Not anymore, as soon as this crooked bribe is made public, this will be the LEAST RESPECTED land conservation organization in the nation... and that's why the power companies aren't giving out the name of this organization that's already taken your money to start acquiring land for a project and bribe that is completely undecided... or is it?
   
6. The details of the land grab?  Well, that's "proprietary," don't ya know... "The Applicants and their consultants have collected a great deal of very specific information about lands that are for sale (in fee or pursuant to conservation easement) in the DEWA area. Most of the information is confidential and proprietary; all of it is sensitive. The potential to acquire the land for conservation purposes likely would be frustrated if the information were to be publicized.  (here's your cue, project opponents -- go fetch and publicize, publicize, publicize -- hope your neighbor grapevine in PA & NJ works as well as ours in WV, VA & MD does)  To meet the requirements of current owners, a substantial portion of the information has been obtained with the understanding that the Applicants would keep the information confidential. Based on our outreach to conservation partners and other investigations and analyses, we have identified, at this time, an overall universe of 650 parcels or interests in land that merit further consideration for use as compensatory mitigation including 425 tracts (39,500 acres) in Pennsylvania and 225 tracts (20,500 acres) in New Jersey. Of these, there is dialogue with landowners for the following parcels/acreage: 150 tracts (13,500 acres) in Pennsylvania, and 10 tracts (500 acres) in New Jersey. Of the parcels under dialogue at this time the following parcels/acreage are either under option, option pending or active negotiation: 12 tracts (10,700 acres) in Pennsylvania ($34,000,000 fmv est.), and 5 tracts (410 acres) ($2,600,000 fmv est.) in New Jersey.  (that's $36.6M already, with only 17 of 650 tracts of land acquired.)
   
7. I saved the best laugh for last:  "The Applicants are prepared to commit funds in an amount that will fully recognize and show respect for the public value of the resources potentially affected by the Project."  These guys have absolutely no respect for themselves, much less any respect for the public.  What a joke!  And they "will ensure that there can be no basis for any reasonable party to conclude that the benefit to the resources at issue is anything other than substantially greater than the impacts of the Project."  What part of THE PARK IS NOT FOR SALE AT ANY PRICE don't they get?

The Susquehanna Roseland opposition groups did a great job at the National Park Service public hearings held last week.  This link even has a recording of the public comments.

And a representative of PPL has now joined his counterpart at PSE&G in admitting that the $30M "mitigation package" will become the responsibility of the 60 million ratepayers in the PJM region.  However, the only beneficiary of the "mitigation" and the power line itself will be PPL and PSE&G, who will earn a 12.93% profit on the cost of the project every year for the 50 - 70 life of the line.  Both individuals quoted in the article aren't quite accurate though.  The PPL guy claims that the return on equity is part of the state ratemaking process, but this line is under FERC jurisdiction.  The Sierra Club representative only calculates one year's interest in his $4M profit estimate.  Profit is calculated on the remaining balance EVERY year, and the companies also receive a percentage of their investment back every year as well through depreciation.

PPL claims that they haven't "identified precise locations" of the land they propose to purchase for their "mitigation package" yet.  So, PPL, what happens when the owners don't want to sell?  Do you offer them more money, or do you use your state-granted eminent domain powers to take the land from a private individual and give it to the NPS or other conservation group?  I don't see anyone addressing this question yet.

But, this editorial in the Pocono Record is by far the most revealing.  The editor (who drives me NUTS with his poor writing skills -- please, let one of your copy editors edit your editorials!) has had at least one sit-down with Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area Superintendent John Donahue.  Donahue told the editor, "We've been working with the power company for some time for a mitigation package and are reaching the point where they might come to the public and offer something huge for what they want."

The "mitigation package" is all about Donahue's personal vision for the park.  His vision includes linking the park with state parks and turning Rt. 209 into a "parkway." Maybe someone should tell Donahue the story of the Lenape Indians of Manhattan who entered into what they thought of as a land-sharing pact with the European settlers.  It didn't work out so well for the Indians.

Oh, FirstEnergy, you're such a little fibber!

Yesterday, FE announced the closure of six of their oldest, dirtiest coal-fired generating plants, including the local R. Paul Smith plant in Williamsport, Maryland.  Residents of the town say it's a "devastating blow."

FirstEnergy blames the EPA for the shut down and says that 529 employees will lose their jobs at the six plants.  Aside from early retirement and severance, FirstEnergy has nothing much to offer these loyal employees.  They also have nothing to offer the towns who are losing tax revenue and business generated by the plants.  FirstEnergy says "too bad, so sad, look at what the EPA did to you" to all the "little people" affected by their business decision.

And make no mistake about it, the decision was all about what's best for FirstEnergy's bottom line and stock dividends.  FirstEnergy closed these plants because they are no longer profitable.  That's the real bottom line.

These plants rarely operate because they are obsolete and expensive to run.  The only reason they have remained open this long is that they have been receiving capacity payments through PJM Interconnection's electricity market to remain available to supplement base load plants on a couple days a year when loads are heavy.

"The plant, which has a coal-fired boiler and a fuel-oil fired boiler, hasn’t generated power recently but has been run within the past year, he said.

But Durbin couldn’t say when the plant last generated power, noting that such information would be considered proprietary."

Proprietary?  That's power company double-speak for, "I can't tell you because the answer would make me a liar."

Electrical demand has been down for several years and continues to fall.  This is due to energy efficiency, demand side management and the building of new generation near load centers on the east coast.  The "peaks" in electrical demand are flattening due to demand side management, whereby electricity use is voluntarily curtailed during times of peak demand.  Smaller peaks means that peaking plants like the one in Williamsport are no longer needed.  If they're no longer needed, they're not going to continue to receive capacity payments to sit around idle for 363 days a year.  No money coming in, and FirstEnergy gives them the axe.  This has NOTHING to do with the EPA.

Now, let's take a look at what FirstEnergy says out of the other side of their mouth... the one that speaks to their shareholders, who continually demand an increase in their earnings every quarter.

In this press release on Marketwatch, FE claims that the generating plant shut downs resulted in a .38 per share "charge" to their Non-GAAP earnings, but it didn't do a thing to their overall $2.44 per share GAAP earnings. 

It's all about FirstEnergy's greedy bottom line.  It's not about the EPA, or the well-being of their loyal employees, or the communities they serve.

While looking at the Susquehanna Roseland EIS today, I came across the slide show that the NPS is presenting at their public hearings in Pennsylvania and New Jersey this week.

The slide show obviously uses power company-submitted "photo simulations" to show citizens what the proposed power line will supposedly look like.  These photo sims are created by environmental permitting firms like Burns & McDonnell, who are being paid to produce Photoshopped propaganda.  I saw many just like them in PATH's LRE and EIS application.

These Photoshop phonies take great liberty with perspective, hoping you're dumb enough to fall for their trickery.

Here's a great example.  Notice how the "before" picture only captures the bottom 50 feet or so of the lattice tower structure?  When this 100 foot high structure is replaced with a tubular steel structure twice it's size in the "after" picture, the perspective of the tower suddenly changes, although the background remains the same.  All of a sudden most of the structure is visible in the "photo."  Sometimes they place the new structure further away along the right-of-way in order to make it appear smaller by comparison, but it looks like they didn't even bother in this one.  They placed the out of perspective structure in the same basic location as the existing one.  Fail!

And what's that hiding behind the tower?  Is it a new right-of-way three times the width of the old one (yes, I measured it)?  You're not supposed to notice that!

If you're interested in seeing the entire slide show that demonstrates the damage the new line will do to the parks, you can download it here and view with a great deal of skepticism.

Note to Power Companies and Paid Contractors:  Seriously guys, use some of your ill-gotten booty to invest in a new bag of tricks.  This one has gone stale.

Remember all the fun we had last year with AEP's "Principles of Business Conduct"? 

Well, now it's FirstEnergy's turn to sing, dance and make us laugh with their improbable "Code of Business Conduct."

According to FirstEnergy CEO Anthony "Tony" Alexander,

"Maintaining high ethical standards builds trust with our customers, shareholders, fellow employees, and the communities we serve.  Our Code of Business Conduct communicates the fundamentals of ethical behavior in the workplace and provides important guidelines to ensure we maintain our high standards."

FirstEnergy?  Ethical?

I'm not going to analyze the whole thing this time -- I've got better things to do, but here's a real whopper from Tony the Trickster.

"Corporate Records – Ensure you accurately record all financial transactions in a timely manner in accordance with prescribed accounting principles. Make full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure of financial and nonfinancial information as required by law and regulation. Never knowingly record false or misleading information on any Company record, report, or document, including those reports and documents submitted to any government agency, including but not limited to the Securities and Exchange Commission."

Their Q & A section is a laugh a minute!

Q: Why do I need a Code of Business Conduct since honesty is common sense?
A: We all must maintain the highest standards of honesty and integrity. Even honest individuals are sometimes not sure of what is appropriate business conduct since not everyone shares the same perspective and values. The Code of Business Conduct provides guidelines for appropriate business conduct and a formal method of establishing accountability for noncompliance.

Does this mean that Mr. Burns and Tony the Trickster are short on common sense?

This one is my favorite:

Q: What are some warning signs that actual or contemplated business activities may be contrary to the Code of Business Conduct?
A: If you hear any of the following types of statements, there could* be a problem:
• "Shred those documents immediately."
• "No one will ever be the wiser."
• "This sounds too good to be true."
• "I know it's not totally above board, but it's the only way to get the results we need."
• "Everybody does it."
• "It never happened. Right?"
• "OK, but just this once."
• "I don't care how you do it, just make it happen within the deadline."
• "A little white lie won't hurt anything."

*This means that you may hear these statements regularly at FirstEnergy, but that doesn't necessarily mean there's a problem.  After all, where do you think they got these quotes from if not from their daily business interactions?

Well, here it is -- the power companies behind the unneeded Susquehanna Roseland 500kV transmission line proposal in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have put together a "mitigation package" that they will present to the NPS at the end of January.

As reported last month, the NPS is expected to bend over and approve destruction of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area in exchange for $30M of new park land.


Read a good article about the situation here:

"Thousands of acres identified as priorities by conservation groups would be preserved at a cost of tens of millions of dollars, PPL and Public Service Electric & Gas Co. said in a press release."

The proposal, however, was met with derision from some environmentalists. The New Jersey Sierra Club accused the utilities of trying "to buy silence from environmental groups and others that should be opposing this line."

"You cannot mitigate for the destruction of a National Park," the organization said in a press release. "This project would ruin the scenic beauty, breathtaking vistas, and critical resources of our national parks" and "allow for the production of more coal-fired energy, creating more coal pollution that will impact people's health while they are using the parks."

The Sierra Club also noted the utilities' ratepayers would ultimately pay for any mitigation, since utilities fold their expenses into rates. Additionally, utilities are entitled under federal rules to a 12 percent profit on transmission line expenditures.

"The utilities cannot make up for his kind of destruction by buying lands in other places," Jeff Tittel, the New Jersey Sierra Club director said. "This is nothing more than blood money."

Because the Susquehanna Roseland Project is within the PJM regional transmission zone and is a 500kV project, this means that every one of the 60 million electric consumers within PJM's 13 state region will pay a portion of the cost of the transmission project.  Even if you're a PJM grid customer in Michigan, Tennessee, Illinois or North Carolina, or any other PJM  state far removed from Pennsylvania and New Jersey, you will still pay for a portion of PSE&G and PPL's payoff of National Park Service officials. 

This $30M of new park land will be paid for by you over the next 50 - 70 years, and PSE&G and PPL will make a 12.9% profit on the purchase every year, courtesy of federal transmission incentives granted to the project's owners by FERC.  Here's how it works:  The power companies will purchase the land and claim it's a "regulatory expense" (a cost necessary to obtain regulatory approval for the project).  The cost of the land will be placed into the companies' transmission rate base account for the project, which you will pay down by reimbursing them for their cost of the project in your monthly electric bill over the expected 50 - 70 year life of the line.  Just like a new car, the $30M value of the land-bribe will depreciate a little bit each year.  You will reimburse the power companies for that yearly amount of depreciation, plus 12.9% interest on the remaining value of the land-bribe.  So, let's say that in the first year, the balance of the land purchase is $30M and the depreciation rate is 5%.   You will pay them $1.5M, and the value of the land will fall to $28.5M, but you will also pay them 12.9% of $30M that year - $3.87M.  The amount electric consumers will pay for the power companies "mitigation package" will total $5.37M in the first year alone.  The second year will again reduce the value of the land by 5%, and add in a 12.9% return for the power companies on the remaining value.  The depreciation rate I'm using is only hypothetical, of course, but the profits for PSE&G and PPL are real.  What you can depend on is that this "mitigation package" won't cost the corporations a thing and will, in fact, make them a huge profit.

The end result here is that YOU will pay for the "mitigation" of damage to YOUR park and the power companies causing the damage and making a profit selling electricity over the line will get off scott free!  The power companies behind the transmission line claim that the line will save electric consumers millions of dollars in "congestion costs," but that savings is being whittled away by deals like this and is not taking into account the billions of dollars electric consumers will pay for the line over its lifetime.

Are you angry enough to do something about this yet?  Good, we're going to make this easy!  Send your comments about this rip-off of consumers and citizens (who are the ultimate owners of our national parks) to the NPS through this online form, and tell them that you do not want to pay the cost of PSE&G and PPL's "mitigation package" bribe or have your national park assets squandered in the name of corporate greed!

Do it now!  Comment period closes at midnight on January 31, 2012.  Please share this one with your friends and link on Facebook and other social media sites!

I know there's another topic started for this list, but it's slipped quite a ways down the page, thanks to TrAILCo's shenanigans, so let's start another one because the weeklies are publishing now.

Here's an article in The Shepherdstown Chronicle.  Reporter Kelly Cambrel does a great job with a difficult subject, but contrary to what's stated in the article, the January 2011 Challenge detailed 2009 expenses, and the December 2011 Challenge detailed PATH's 2010 expenses.  We haven't gotten to their 2011 expenses yet.

Here's an article in The Spirit of Jefferson.

"An official with American Electric Power said the company is entitled to recover reasonable
expenses of the PATH project.
"It is certainly their right to intervene. They have a different view on recoverable expenses," said Geri Matheney, a director of corporate communications for Appalachian Power, a subsidiary of American Electric Power. "It is certainly their right to question the expenses.  FERC will decide whether there is merit in their complaints or not. We are entitled to recover
the reasonable and prudent expenses of the PATH project.'"

Well, that certainly blows a few holes in all Randy's legal efforts at FERC over the past 3 months, insisting that we don't have standing and are not interested parties.  Now we find out that AEP doesn't agree with Randy and PATH's legal team.  Isn't that refreshing news?  Maybe Jeri should take a few notes from Todd "the school girl" Meyers and adopt the "no comment" thing.  But then again, she's probably not likely to get stuck in an elevator or accidentally meet up in the Men's Room with Mr. Personality either.  Jeri just doesn't know when to shut up.  :-)

More to come...