StopPATH WV
  • News
  • StopPATH WV Blog
  • FAQ
  • Events
  • Fundraisers
  • Make a Donation
  • Landowner Resources
  • About PATH
  • Get Involved
  • Commercials
  • Links
  • About Us
  • Contact

Iowa Legislators Propose Legislation to Stop RICL

2/4/2014

1 Comment

 
Iowa legislators have had enough Rock Island Clean Line.  In January, legislation to limit the use of eminent domain was introduced, spurred by RICL's proposal to take nearly 400 miles of right-of-way in the state.
The target of their legislation is the Rock Island Clean Line, a $2 billion, 500-mile overhead direct current transmission line.

Rogers called private property rights “critically important to our way of life.”

“Many farmers in my district live and work on land that has been in their family for generations, and they want to allow their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren to continue to farm that land and feed the world,” Rogers said. “Our laws must adequately protect their property rights.”
One bill requires that any power line project requesting eminent domain authority must deliver at least 25% of its power to consumers in Iowa.  RICL intends to export power from northwest Iowa direct to eastern Illinois, where it will be interconnected with PJM Interconnection, the regional grid operator for mid-Atlantic eastern states.

The second bill requires legislative approval of any request to bifurcate an application for a transmission project in order to separate the determination of need from the request for eminent domain authority.  RICL tried to use bifurcation to force landowners into a weak negotiating position for rights-of-way, but was rejected by the Iowa Utilities Board.

Be sure to check the lobbyist declarations on both these bills.  Clean Line doesn't appear to be happy about them.  I suppose fair is fair though... Iowans don't seem to be very happy about RICL, either.

I wonder if our Clean Line heroes envisioned this kind of opposition when planning their get-rich-quick power line scheme back in 2011?  I've heard it said that they gleefully dismissed any possibility of trouble, expecting nothing more than "a couple of ticked off farmers."  Personally, I'd never want to tick off any farmers.  They have pitchforks.  And I like the food they grow.

And speaking of eminent domain, legislators in Missouri are livid over the Arkansas Public Service Commission's approval of a SWEPCO transmission route through 25 miles of Missouri.  Within 10 days of the APSC decision, legislators had proposed:
The bill states that “the Missouri Public Service commission shall lack jurisdiction to approve the construction of any electric facilities to be built in accordance with Arkansas Public Service Commission Order 33, Docket Number 13-041-U, authorizing Route 109 as a ‘reasonable route’ for the construction of new three hundred forty-five kilovolt electric transmission lines.”
The overbuilding of new transmission of questionable necessity as a utility or investor profit center has finally gone too far.  The people have had enough of this nonsense and their elected representatives are taking action.  This transmission craze is now making it difficult to build ANY transmission, even that which may actually be needed.  Their cash cow is down and slowly bleeding to death, and it's their own fault.  Ooops.
1 Comment

Potomac Edison/Mon Power Investigation Briefs Summarize Lessons Unlearned by FirstEnergy

2/4/2014

10 Comments

 
It appears that FirstEnergy didn't learn a thing from its recent trip to the PSC hot seat over the company's shocking disregard for its customers who were trampled on the way to "merger synergy savings."  FirstEnergy maintains that it never did anything wrong, but has magnanimously offered a few ineffectual parting gifts for its customers as a fig leaf to cover its hoped-for ruling by the Commission that would let the company off scot-free.

The PSC Staff and the Consumer Advocate Division have different ideas, and the Staff, in particular, rakes FirstEnergy over the coals in its own blistering brief.  That's all fine and good, but I hope a bunch of scathing words in a brief isn't all we get out of this.  Staff says:
The Companies responding to this General Investigation proceeding have provided a lot of excuses to the Commission as to why so many customers received multiple consecutive poorly estimated bills that led to dramatically high “true up” bills.
Originally, the Companies tried to convince the Commission and the public the problems
were mainly caused by the timing and size of the Derecho and Super Storm Sandy.
When the problems continued, the Companies started providing further excuses, but did
not take responsibility for their role in creating many of the problems themselves
and compounded the problem further by making unreasonable demands for payments from the impacted customers. In Staffs opinion, they still have not taken that responsibility.
The Derecho and Super Storm Sandy undeniably played a significant role in the problems underlying this case. However, all along the way, the Companies made poor decision after poor decision with little to no thought as to how it might impact their customers.
These poor decisions lead to multiple and continued violations of their tariffs. Staff takes
these violations very seriously and believes it is time the Companies own up to their mistakes and provide the Commission with concrete evidence these types of problems
will not reoccur. Further, the Companies should be required to either correct the ongoing problems with their estimation routine or switch from bi-monthly to monthly meter reading.
Oh, so it really wasn't about storms after all?  But FirstEnergy continues the storm drama charade.  Know how I know it's being over dramatized?  Because FirstEnergy included one too many adjectives in its brief:
Hurricane Sandy struck the service territories with large amounts of heavy, salt-laden, snow that tore down trees and power lines...
Really, FirstEnergy?  That's a meteorological first -- it snowed heavy "salt-laden" snow on the trees and power lines?  What the heck, FirstEnergy?  How does that happen?  How does the salt get into the atmosphere and how does it become encapsulated in snowflakes?  When "salt-laden" snow melts, does it leave a residue behind?  That defies common sense!  Got a little carried away there, didn't you?

So, what was the REAL cause of the problems?  Staff says:
It is easy, and some may say unfair, to play Monday morning quarterback with the decisions of the Companies. Staff does not believe it is unfair to do so in this circumstance. A poor decision here or there is just that, a decision that did not work out.
What we have here is something completely different, poor decision on top of poor
decision on top of devastating storms on top of more poor decisions with no management
thought of potential impacts to customers. This is a pattern of behavior. It appears FirstEnergy had a plan for integration and was determined to follow through with that
plan no matter the result. Little consideration was given to the customers, “merger
synergy savings”
had to be captured. Indeed the Companies suspected as early as
September of 2012 there may be problems, but did nothing to attempt to resolve them
until April 2013. At that point, the problems had become so widespread the Companies
had no choice but to try and address them. However, shockingly, the Companies
continue to act as though they were simply a victim of circumstance
. Generally, Staff believes the Commission should send a strong message to the Companies that this type of behavior will not be tolerated, that the Commission believes the Companies did indeed violate their tariff in multiple ways and that continued violations will be looked upon
very unfavorably.
The Consumer Advocate's brief was not kind either.  The Consumer Advocate is still requesting that FirstEnergy be ordered to read every meter, every month, for one year
Bad historical usage data begets bad data and, thus, CAD believes the only way to correct the problem caused by the Companies’ failure to conduct bi-monthly reads of residential meters is to obtain one year’s worth of reliable data from actual monthly meter reads. It is the goal of the CAD that this matter be resolved in the best possible manner for customers of MP and PE, who have undeniably suffered - and, in some instances, continue to suffer - the ill effects of the Companies’ meter reading and billing practices.
The Consumer Advocate also thinks the companies' storm excuses are a feeble attempt to pretend that the real culprit isn't the company's merger:
Throughout the course of this proceeding, the Companies have attempted to place the
majority of the blame for their billing and meter reading problems on the Derecho that occurred in June 2012 and Superstorm Sandy, which occurred in October 2012. However, while the storms may have exacerbated the Companies’ existing problem, it is inaccurate to contend that the storms caused the billing problems so many customers have faced. In actuality, the evidence shows that the merger of Allegheny Power into FirstEnergy in 2011 and subsequent transition issues in the wake of the merger, including understaffing, transitioning from the Allegheny billing system to the FirstEnergy billing system, and the questionable timing of the meter route “renumbering” project, created this problem.
The Consumer Advocate also noted that, contrary to the company's contentions, customer complaints have been trending up again this winter.  We ain't seen nothin' yet!  Underestimations in January bills, combined with this month's prolonged frigid temperatures, are sure to cause a charlie foxtrot of unprecedented proportions in February.  Enough is enough.

Even though FirstEnergy's EPRI report still seems to be suspiciously missing, it's time for the Commission to act, if nothing else than from a position of self-preservation.  I'm starting to lose track of all the "let's punish the PSC" legislation that's been introduced in Charleston this session.  Although we'd rather see the company punished for its transgressions, I guess someone has to take the fall for this.
10 Comments

Missouri Opposes Grain Belt Express Transmission Line

1/29/2014

2 Comments

 
Clean Line Energy's Grain Belt Express transmission project proposes to plow through fifteen (15) counties in Missouri on its route from southwestern Kansas to western Indiana.

Clean Line has indeed awoken the sleeping giant, or as they like to think of it "poked the bear."


On January 13, 2014, Clean Line's Grain Belt Express subsidiary filed a Notice of Intended Case Filing with the Missouri Public Service Commission.  The notice is legally necessary at least 60 days prior to filing its application to be granted public utility status and a certificate to own and operate the project in Missouri.
  You can participate in this process once the application is filed.

For now, you can file your comments about this case with the PSC
on Docket No. EA-2014-0207.  Click the "Public Comments" tab on the horizontal menu of the MO PSC's EFIS and fill out the form.  You can also mail your comments to the PSC.  Be sure to mark them with the case number.

You can also let Missouri Governor Jay Nixon know that you do not support this project.  Click here to submit your comments online.


The good people of Missouri are standing up and banding together in record numbers to successfully stop this incredibly destructive project.

If you have questions or concerns about the Grain Belt Express, get in touch with Block Grain Belt Express to be connected with a group in your local area, and to find out how you can defend your interests.

This project is far from "a done deal," and prospects for future approval continue to dim with each citizen of Missouri who joins together with others to create a formidable chain of opposition that cannot be broken.

Citizen action has stopped transmission projects and can stop Grain Belt Express!  Take action now!
2 Comments

Ireland Struggles With Misguided Energy Policy & Big Wind Greed

1/27/2014

0 Comments

 
Well, deja vu, folks!

It seems that the Midwest shares a common struggle with the people of Ireland.

A recent editorial in Ireland's Independent reads like something penned in the central U.S.:
The expected growth in electricity demand has not materialised. There is now a wide and growing margin of generation capacity over demand. A new gas-fired plant was commissioned last year and another one is due to come on stream towards the end of 2014. The construction of new wind-farms continues apace. While some of the older stations are coming to the end of their useful lives, none are on their last legs. If Ireland was left to its own devices, there would be no urgency about adding more generation capacity for many years to come.

*snip*

Plans by Eirgrid to upgrade the high voltage transmission network, and in particular to build three major lines in the southeast, the west and a new North-South line, reflect both the ongoing need to renew and strengthen the network but also the perceived requirement to accommodate additional wind-power units. If the Government's wind targets are excessively ambitious, some of the grid projects might not be needed. There is also a push from wind-energy companies, including State companies, to build more capacity designed for exporting power to the UK. If these plans go ahead, there would be yet more high voltage lines, on top of Eirgrid's proposals, from the midlands to the east coast, as well as further undersea interconnection to Britain.

Energy infrastructure is both expensive and controversial. *snip* Plans for new transmission lines, extra wind-farms and onshore gas exploration are meeting widespread resistance around the country and promise to dominate the local and European Parliament elections in May.

If energy infrastructure projects make economic sense, the political system must arbitrate the health, safety and environmental concerns that will inevitably, and quite properly, be raised. It is sometimes tempting to regard the objectors as locally oriented nimbies seeking to blackmail politicians who are pursuing necessary national priorities. Indeed this is hinted at in the government line on pylons and wind-farms, which takes it as read that the various projects are necessary to meet the requirements of development. But if the economic justification for the projects is flimsy, the balance of the argument is altered. In Ireland it has not been demonstrated that the continuing push for ever-greater reliance on intermittent wind-generated electricity makes economic sense, nor is it clear that wind is the least-cost path to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
BINGO!

So, it's not a need issue, it's a GREED issue, just like it is here in the U.S.
0 Comments

Wisconsin Ratepayers Ask States to Consider Non-Transmission Alternatives in Planning for Peak Load

1/27/2014

0 Comments

 
Rob Danielson of SOUL of Wisconsin, and Deb Severson of Citizens' Energy Task Force, are asking state regulators to join them in supporting financially and environmentally sustainable energy solutions.

In a recent editorial in The Wisconsin State Journal, the pair of ratepayer advocates is asking the Wisconsin Public Service Commission to make utilities accountable for the financial and community costs of building more transmission, and for using the term “reliability” so loosely that ratepayers are led to think these lines are about “keeping the lights on.”

Danielson and Severson contend that energy efficiency contributes to grid reliability by reducing stress on the grid. Efficiency is also the best way to save ratepayers’ money and reduce our carbon footprint. It has no negative impacts, other than reducing utility profits.

Utilities and state regulators need to acknowledge how cost-effective it is to shave peak-demand during those very limited hours in the summer or winter when demand spikes — and that this, too, increases grid reliability. Paying customers to turn off their air conditioners for 15 minutes, or an industrial customer to use back-up diesel, makes far more economic sense than spending billions to add wires to bring in rarely needed extra power. Energy spikes can also be addressed by adding local renewables, which have the added benefit of creating additional local, ongoing jobs.

There are many ways to address need without building new transmmission, and Danielson and Severson are asking for equal consideration of them. Consumers are demanding that ratepayer and community interests — not utility and Wall Street profits — drive our future transmission planning decisions.

0 Comments

Potomac Edison's Estimated Bills Are More Screwed Up Than Ever

1/27/2014

0 Comments

 
Yeah, I know, news flash, right?  But I was actually surprised to get my most recent estimated bill.  No, it wasn't because it took 10 long days to get here after it was issued.  And, no, it wasn't because it was all bulky like it contained a small booklet of some sort.

It's because the estimated usage was much lower than I was expecting, and just over half the amount actually showing on my meter.  I was expecting the usual larger than actual estimated bill again this month, especially because the actual from the same period last year was one of those outrageously high "catch up bills" resulting from the company's failure to read meters.

So, how did the company come up with this month's ridiculously low usage estimate?  If you sat through December's PSC hearing on the General Investigation of the company's billing, meter reading and customer service practices, you'd know that the company has two estimation routines in place.  One uses same period from prior year, adjusted to current weather and days in billing period.  The other uses prior month data.

A phone call to a delightful customer service representative named Kelly advised me that my bill was based on prior year actual.  Using the handy-dandy usage history graph on my current bill, I find that my last year same period was over 4,000 kwh.  So, Kelly informs me that because the company "renumbered" me and adjusted my billing period, the current estimate also used some data from the following month on my bar graph.  That month's usage was 2,406.  So, Potomac Edison's average of 4000 and 2406 is 2,576?  No wonder there's an investigation going on.  Helpful and pleasant Kelly offered to adjust my bill because we determined that my next month actual reading will produce an outrageous bill.  But, it really doesn't matter since I am on the average payment plan.  However, many Potomac Edison customers whose bills were estimated by the same method mine was this month may not be.  Those customers are going to get gigantic bills next month, bills they may be unable to pay.  As if that's not bad enough, the unusually cold weather is going to exacerbate this problem tremendously.

I thought I heard FirstEnergy telling the PSC Commissioners that it had solved all the estimation routine problems.  It looks like that's not true, and a whole new wave of unhappy customers is quietly building and should start crashing in during the month of February.  How much longer is this going to go on?  How much longer are West Virginians supposed to put up with this stunning incompetence?  Let's get with the program here, PSC!

So, in conclusion, let's add a little levity by going back to my intro. paragraph and examining the reason for my unusually bulky bill.  That was because it contained ELEVEN (11), count 'em 11, copies of this month's bill insert.  The insert urges me to sign up for FirstEnergy's eBill program so I can "use less paper" which "is better for the environment."  Right, FirstEnergy, as soon as you take your own advice.  And to add one last giggle on top, my customer service rep., Kelly, offered to send me some energy efficiency literature because that's what she's been instructed to do when she gets a high bill call.  But, wait a sec, FirstEnergy has been fighting against energy efficiency programs in West Virginia (and many other states).  As well, maybe customers wouldn't have such high bills if the company read every meter every month until it established accurate base data and corrected its hideously inaccurate estimation routines.  Does FirstEnergy have any literature on that problem?  Probably not.

Loving those "merger synergies," FirstEnergy!
0 Comments

Arkansas PSC Judge Recommends Approval of AEP Transmission Project, But...

1/26/2014

0 Comments

 
Here's one for the "what not to do" transmission developer files.

AEP subsidiary Southwestern Electric Power Company ("SWEPCO") has been trying to get approval from the Arkansas PSC to construct a 345kv high voltage transmission line through the scenic Arkansas Ozarks region.

SWEPCO has met stiff opposition in the form of Save the Ozarks, a grassroots opposition group that produced thousands of public comments and presented a formidable opposition during evidentiary hearings before the Arkansas Public Service Commission.

Earlier this month, the judge issued her ruling recommending that the Commission issue a CPCN (permit), and selecting one of six routes submitted with the application by SWEPCO.  Save the Ozarks has vowed to continue the fight through appeals.

However, the route selected by Judge Griffin, dubbed Route 109, was not SWEPCO's recommended route. SWEPCO's recommended route was a direct Point A to Point B route that remained wholly within the state of Arkansas, but marched through local scenic treasures like Godzilla on the way to Tokyo. However, the judge-selected route also begins in Northwest Arkansas, but makes a quick beeline for the state border, where it meanders through 25 miles of Missouri before dipping back into Arkansas to connect with SWEPCO's new substation.  Judge Griffin's selected route avoided some of the damage to Arkansas by pushing it over the border into Missouri.

And here's where the fun starts... SWEPCO is not a public utility in Missouri and has not filed an application for its project in that state.  But now it will have to...
Should the Arkansas Public Service Commission approve Griffin’s order, Route 109 presents an unusual challenge, according to Brian Johnson, an employee of American Electric Power who testified on behalf of SWEPCO last fall. Johnson said the choice introduces an additional, unprecedented regulatory process because it crosses a state line.

“The permitting process for Missouri anticipates that any petitioning entity will already be a Missouri Public Utility — which SWEPCO and (American Electric Power) are not. It is unprecedented for a non-public utility to construct a line through Missouri, particularly without directly serving any Missouri customers. The likely regulatory delays and complications that arise from the line route in Missouri are of substantial concern,” Johnson testified.
What's that you say?  "Substantial concern?"  I think that's the understatement of the year.  Missouri isn't looking fondly on the prospect of hosting a transmission line that doesn't benefit its citizens.
Sen. David Sater, who is from Cassville and represents Barry, Lawrence, McDonald, Stone and Taney counties, said he is angered by the chosen route. He, Lant and Rep. Scott Fitzpatrick, of Shell Knob, met with commissioners last week.

“We encouraged MPSC members to act on behalf of Missourians and not on behalf of people from Arkansas. I think we made our presence felt there, and hopefully they’ll reject this,” Sater said.
Why, AEP, why?  Why did you toss in a route that crossed into a state where you don't do business?  That was pretty stupid, wasn't it?

Rock/SWEPCO/hard place.


Lesson for transmission developers:  Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
0 Comments

No Eminent Domain for Private Gain

1/24/2014

0 Comments

 
The "Right-to-Take Action" must be Settled BEFORE CPCN May be Granted
Guest blog by Pat Conway, Ontario, Wisconsin
The main purpose for the  Wisconsin Public Service Commission's approval process of the CPCN (Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity) is to determine the NEED for ATC's Badger Coulee Line.  At the PSC's hearing (docket 05-CE-142), it must be proven that the  NEED for the high tension power line is so great that it justifies granting ATC the authority to condemn private property and take the land it needs under "eminent domain".

The fifth Amendment to the US Constitution states:  "No person shall be denied life, liberty or property without due process of the law..."  And Wisconsin Statute 32.06(5) "Right-to-take Action, provides that a private property owner may challenge a taking for any reason other than just compensation".  In the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision of July 13, 2013 it states:  The challenge to ATC's condemnation..."is not a meaningless exercise swallowed up in the compensation process," but a property owner's assertion to protect his or her rights."

Common sense tells us that any property owner who has been notified that his or her land is under consideration for ATC's Badger-Coulee line, has the right to begin a "right-to-take" action immediately, before the PSC hearing, in order to protect his or her property rights BEFORE the ROUTE for the line IS CHOSEN.  For instance, an Amish man has a right to challenge the condemnation of his land because his farm house is also a church. Or an organic farmer has the right to challenge the right to condemn any portion of his farm because ATC's taking would endanger his or her organic certification and that would threaten their livelihood.

Therefore, any property owner who is threatened by the possibility of the PSC granting ATC condemnation rights, should become an "intervener" in PSC Docket 05-CE-142 and request that the PSC postpone their consideration of ATC's application until after any challenges to ATC's possible taking of their private property, under a "right -to-take action", is settled in the courts.  That is the only way a private property owner can assert the protection of his or her private property rights.  To grant the authority to condemn before  giving the property owner his or her "day in court" is to put the cart before the horse.  Not allowing a property owner his or her right to prevent condemnation of their private property through a "right-to-take action" would be to deny them "due process under the law", which would be a violation of the fifth amendment of our Constitution.
0 Comments

Will Midwest States Become the Next West Virginia?

1/23/2014

0 Comments

 
The West Virginia water crisis has generated a whole bunch of national media attention on West Virginia's status as the east coast's dumping ground.

This isn't a new story, it's actually a very old story.  The long and short of it is that the people and environment of West Virginia have been prostituted to out-of-state business interests by their own elected officials.  The people of West Virginia have long sacrificed for the needs of others, and all they have to show for it is crushing poverty and a fouled environment.  All the money ends up in the pockets of its out-of-state overlords.  I told this story to the people of Illinois during a public hearing on the Rock Island Clean Line project last fall.

Now, Salon tells West Virginia's story to the rest of the country.

Is there a lesson to be learned here?  How easily could wind-rich Midwest states be substituted for West Virginia in this article?
The people of West Virginia had made clear demands: put land and people first.  The companies did neither, but continued on their profit-driven rampage destroying huge swaths of the West Virginia mountains – one of the world’s most beautiful landscapes – with mountaintop removal for cheaper access to coal, exposing residents to toxic air pollution in order to provide the rest of the nation with cheap energy.  The decisions made in the early 1970s are what got us here today, with hundreds of thousands of people spending days unsure when they would be able to drink their water again, with many remaining unsure as pipe flushing and other cleanup procedures have been ineffective.
Think huge industrial wind farms and miles and miles of high voltage transmission lines are harmless?

Wind farms could endanger small aircraft
Wind turbines throw ice
Wind farms can drive you crazy
Wind farms have a multitude of adverse effects

New high voltage transmission lines also have adverse effects and will take thousands of acres of the nation's most productive farm land out of production.


The people of Illinois, Iowa, Kansas and Missouri have made clear demands:  put the land and people first.  Clean Line Energy Partners have done neither, but continue on their profit-driven rampage intent on destroying huge swaths of America's farmland -- one of the world's most productive food producers -- with acres of wind farms and miles of transmission lines for cheaper access to renewable electricity, exposing residents to economic and health risks in order to provide the rest of the nation with cheap energy.  The decisions made today will be the history of tomorrow.

And if we don't learn from history, we are bound to repeat it.

0 Comments

Arkansas Ratepayer Files Formal Challenge of American Electric Power's FERC Transmission Rate

1/23/2014

1 Comment

 
Complaint Alleges AEP's SWEPCO subsidiary overcharged regional ratepayers for transmission charges in 2012
Martha Peine of Eureka Springs, Arkansas, has filed a complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), alleging that American Electric Power’s SWEPCO transmission subsidiary has improperly charged thousands of dollars in lobbying, advertising, charitable contributions, and other non-transmission expenditures to ratepayers in Southwest Power Pool’s nine-state region, which includes portions of Arkansas.

Electric ratepayer Peine filed her Formal Challenge to American Electric Power Service Corporation’s 2013 Formula Rate Annual Update with the FERC on Wednesday.   Her examination of transmission rates, conducted under federal transparency rules, revealed AEP has improperly charged Arkansas ratepayers for general advertising and promotional expenses, charitable donations and related expenses, economic development expenses unrelated to transmission, lobbying expenses, merger expenses, and other non-transmission expenses totaling $92,511.  The complaint asks that FERC grant the challenge and order refunds to ratepayers of amounts wrongly included in rates.

According to Peine, “The problem has been that no one reviews these FERC filings on a micro-level to determine if unallowable expenses are included.”

AEP/SWEPCO has already acknowledged over $16,000 in wrongful charges as a result of Peine’s discovery efforts, and has made provisions to credit ratepayers for this amount.  However, Peine contends that an additional $95K was also wrongly charged to electric customers in their monthly bills and has not yet been refunded.

The total includes expenses such as lunch with Larry Smith, mayor of Cave Springs, and others in November 2012 while presenting a big-fat-check to the Illinois River Watershed Partnership for the development of a 30-acre watershed sanctuary at Cave Springs. Mayor Smith later gave testimony before the APSC that SWEPCO’s preferred route 33 is perfectly reasonable, even though it would damage the Trail of Tears and National Military Park at Pea Ridge, and that the alternate route proposed to pass through his own city was not reasonable.

Other corporate expenses incorrectly recovered from all AEP ratepayers, including its Arkansas transmission subsidiaries, were expenses for AEP’s “Lemonade Stand” TV commercial that AEP ran during a particularly nasty Ohio regulatory battle with rival FirstEnergy in 2012.  The commercial attempted to influence the Public Utility Commission of Ohio’s decision in a case involving AEP’s corporate reorganization to comply with Ohio’s electric deregulation laws.

Oh... ho ho ho... the Lemonade Ad?

You didn't recover that from ratepayers, did you, AEP?  Tsk, tsk, tsk!  I thought we advised you not to do that!

SWEPCO has 30 days to produce its answer to the charges before the federal commission.

The complaint can be downloaded here.
1 Comment
<<Previous
Forward>>

    About the Author

    Keryn Newman blogs here at StopPATH WV about energy issues, transmission policy, misguided regulation, our greedy energy companies and their corporate spin.
    In 2008, AEP & Allegheny Energy's PATH joint venture used their transmission line routing etch-a-sketch to draw a 765kV line across the street from her house. Oooops! And the rest is history.

    About
    StopPATH Blog

    StopPATH Blog began as a forum for information and opinion about the PATH transmission project.  The PATH project was abandoned in 2012, however, this blog was not.

    StopPATH Blog continues to bring you energy policy news and opinion from a consumer's point of view.  If it's sometimes snarky and oftentimes irreverent, just remember that the truth isn't pretty.  People come here because they want the truth, instead of the usual dreadful lies this industry continues to tell itself.  If you keep reading, I'll keep writing.


    Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
    Email me


    Search This Site

    Got something to say?  Submit your own opinion for publication.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010

    Categories

    All
    $$$$$$
    2023 PJM Transmission
    Aep Vs Firstenergy
    Arkansas
    Best Practices
    Best Practices
    Big Winds Big Lie
    Can Of Worms
    Carolinas
    Citizen Action
    Colorado
    Corporate Propaganda
    Data Centers
    Democracy Failures
    DOE Failure
    Emf
    Eminent Domain
    Events
    Ferc Action
    FERC Incentives Part Deux
    Ferc Transmission Noi
    Firstenergy Failure
    Good Ideas
    Illinois
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Land Agents
    Legislative Action
    Marketing To Mayberry
    MARL
    Missouri
    Mtstorm Doubs Rebuild
    Mtstormdoubs Rebuild
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    Newslinks
    NIETC
    Opinion
    Path Alternatives
    Path Failures
    Path Intimidation Attempts
    Pay To Play
    Potomac Edison Investigation
    Power Company Propaganda
    Psc Failure
    Rates
    Regulatory Capture
    Skelly Fail
    The Pjm Cartel
    Top Ten Clean Line Mistakes
    Transource
    Valley Link Transmission
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.