UPDATED: Here’s the announcement just made by AEP and FirstEnergy:

American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) today announced it will file, along with FirstEnergy Corp., to withdraw the applications for state regulatory approval of the Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) project following an announcement by regional grid operator PJM Interconnection that the project has been suspended.

Today’s filings in Virginia, Maryland and West Virginia are in response to a directive by regional grid operator PJM Interconnection to suspend further development of the PATH project while PJM conducts a more rigorous analysis of the potential need for PATH as part of its continuing Regional Transmission Expansion Plan. PJM directed the construction of PATH in 2007 to resolve violations of national and local standards for reliable operation of the region’s transmission system. Since then, annual studies reaffirmed the need for PATH as the recommended solution for resolving these issues. However, PJM’s latest analyses indicate that the need for the project has moved well into the future.

“While we are certainly disappointed by the suspension of PATH and the uncertainties created by the PJM planning process, we do support a thorough and detailed analysis of the need for the project. We remain convinced that the project will be needed and plan to move forward with it when PJM completes its review,” said Michael G. Morris, AEP chairman and chief executive officer.

Here’s the announcement just in from PJM Interconnection, the group that manages our regional electrical transmission grid:

The outlook for a slower economic recovery has led the Board of PJM Interconnection to direct transmission owners to suspend efforts on the Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH).

The news release doesn’t appear to be on PJM’s Web site yet, and Here’s a link to the news release. Apparently the board decision was made on Friday. Here’s more:

PJM annually reviews its transmission expansion plans. A preliminary analysis suggests that the need for the line has moved further into the future. Therefore, the PJM Board has decided to hold the PATH project in abeyance in the 2011 Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP). The preliminary analysis used the most current economic forecasts, demand response commitments and potential new generation.

PJM will continue its analysis. The PJM Board will review the comprehensive analysis as part of its consideration of the 2011 RTEP.

And:

Over the last two years, the recession and the dramatic change in the economic outlook caused PJM to forecast lower growth in the use of electricity. Growth in the use of electricity correlates with economic growth. The forecasted slower growth rate likely will delay the need for the line.

The PJM Board’s action affects only PATH, which would connect the Amos Substation in West Virginia to the proposed Kemptown Substation in Maryland.

This announcement by PJM comes after the West Virginia Public Service Commission again delayed its hearings on the PATH project, amid mounting evidence that there are viable alternatives to the power line.

The order hasn’t been posted on the agency’s Web site yet, but here’s the press release just issued by the West Virginia Public Service Commission:

The Public Service Commission of West Virginia (Commission) issued an order denying motions to dismiss the Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) case, further tolling the statutory due date and adopting a revised procedural schedule.

PATH is a proposed 225 mile, 765kV electric transmission line and related facilities that, if constructed as currently proposed, would cross through fourteen counties in West Virginia as well as parts of Maryland and Virginia.

On December 10, 2010, Commission Staff filed a Motion to Dismiss the filing as insufficient or, in the alternative, require PATH to request a tolling. The Joint Applicants filed a response, objecting to the Motion to Dismiss and requesting that the Commission further toll the running of the statutory suspension period so that they could produce additional and more current information to the Commission.

The revised procedural schedule calls for the evidentiary hearing to run from October 11, to October 26, 2011. The deadline for the Commission’s decision is now February 9, 2012.

In today’s order, the Commission stated that it was reluctantly denying the Motion to Dismiss and that all parties should proceed with the understanding that the Commission “intends to complete the case within the revised deadline.”

See other recent coverage here, here, here and here.

UPDATED: Here’s a link to the PSC order. We’ll have more on this in the Gazette tomorrow morning.

A little breaking news on the PATH power line … this just issued by American Electric Power and Allegheny Energy:

Allegheny Energy, Inc. (NYSE: AYE) and American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) announced today that their affiliates have asked the Public Service Commission of West Virginia to extend the current procedural schedule for reviewing an application to build the Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) project in the state.

The request will allow the PATH companies to prepare updated testimony that reflects information from the preliminary 2011 Load Forecast Report issued today by PJM Interconnection (PJM). The draft report differs from prior PJM forecasts and could potentially have an impact on the PATH project’s in-service date. However, the draft report alone does not change the projected in-service date for PATH or any other transmission expansion project. PJM recently re-affirmed the need for the PATH project by June 1, 2015.

Today’s filing calls for the PATH companies to submit supplemental testimony by March 31, 2011, and requests an extended procedural schedule that moves the deadline for a Public Service Commission decision on the PATH project to February 2012. Similar requests will be filed in Virginia and Maryland this week to ensure a consistent review of the project across all jurisdictions.

As I understand it, the existing PATH schedule would require the PSC to act by July 28, 2011. Here’s a copy of the power company filing from today.

Today’s announcement comes after a motion by PSC staff that the commission reject the PATH application or at least delay hearings on the project … and today, the PSC Consumer Advocate Division filed papers supporting the staff’s motion … we’ll have more on this in tomorrow’s Gazette.

We had a brief AP story earlier in the day on the Gazette web site, making note of a filing last week by the state Public Service Commission staff asking the commission to throw out the PATH power line application.

We’ve since added a full staff report that I wrote up late this afternoon. It’s posted here. You can read the full PSC staff legal filing here.

This was covered previously — and before any of us in the “mainstream” or “corporate” media — by Bill Howley on his blog, The Power Line.  Bill also had some suggestions for any intervening citizens who want to support the PSC staff filing, and another blog post about how he believes West Virginia news reporters aren’t covering PATH because of the advertisements that power companies buy in their publications.

For my part as the Gazette reporter assigned to covering the power line, I apologize for not jumping on this story sooner … I’ll try to do better, Bill.

It’s been a while since our last update on the PATH power line, so I thought we should check in on that project again.

But of course, Bill Howley and his Power Line blog are way ahead of me with the latest.

First, the companies — AEP and Allegheny — have asked for another delay in the West Virginia PSC’s review process for PATH:

PJM expects to complete its corrected base case analysis shortly, and Applicants anticipate revising their July 8, 2010 Supplemental Direct Testimony and updating their exhibits to reflect PJM’s corrected analyses on or before September 14, 2010. Applicants will propose a tolling of the current extension of the statutory decision due date until July 29, 2011, together with a revised procedural schedule that will provide the Commission and the parties with the benefit of the same testimony preparation period included in the existing procedural schedule, and with an expected evidentiary hearing in March 2011.

The entire power company letter to the PSC is here.

Bill also had an interesting post headlined, “2009 Dept. of Energy study turns away from PATH,” reporting:

The US DoE puts cost right at the heart of the issue and says that there are quite likely more effective, and more cost effective ways of solving existing problems on the East Coast than by building new transmission lines from the west, like PATH.

The Executive Summary also notes that the Mid-Atlantic region remains critically congested and that PJM’s commitment to transmission projects has been slow and ineffective.

It’s been a while since we had much discussion on Coal Tattoo about power lines, or about the huge PATH project … but today’s press announcement by Allegheny Energy and American Electric Power seems like a good opportunity for a quick update.

The news release just showed up in my e-mail inbox:

American Electric Power and Allegheny Energy, Inc. today announced that new studies by independent grid operator PJM Interconnection recommend construction of the Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) as the most effective solution to address numerous electric reliability concerns forecast for the Mid-Atlantic region.

It goes on:

The latest analyses, conducted as part of PJM’s 2010 Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP), are consistent with previous studies since 2007 identifying PATH as the preferred solution for resolving issues on the region’s transmission grid. Based on the findings announced today, PJM is directing that PATH be placed into service by June 1, 2015, at the latest.

What’s all that mean? The last time I really checked in on all this was back in December, when the power companies were in the midst of a flurry of regulatory filings to delay or halt hearings on PATH because of a new analysis that indicated the project wasn’t needed in 2014, as they had been arguing.

(more…)

Some mighty interesting news  just in about the PATH power line … It seems that the power companies have filed papers with the Virginia Corporations Commission indicating that the latest analysis shows the project isn’t needed in 2014, as they have been arguing.

The filing comes in the eve of a big hearing in Virginia, where PATH had already asked that its application be dismissed. But previously, developers said they planned to refile in early 2010, so they could better coordinate petitions in Virginia, Maryland and West Virginia. But now, they’re saying that they aren’t sure when they will refile — but it certainly won’t be before the third quarter of 2010.

Bill Howley has been kind enough to post the new Virginia filing on this Power Line blog, and you can find interesting commentary on it from Bill there as well.

Remember that the West Virginia Public Service Commission already delayed its hearing on the PATH portions in our state until late 2010, and scheduled a final decision to be due by Feb. 24, 2011.

Today was the deadline the West Virginia Public Service Commission set for all parties to the PATH power line case to make known their position and arguments concerning potentially delaying the case for more than seven months.

So, there’s a flurry of stuff coming in to the commission, and I don’t claim for a second to have read it all.

But I did notice that the power companies have extended their proposed delay in the proceedings for another month, to 247 days.  Under their new proposal, hearings would be held in October 2010, and a final decision issued by the WV PSC by late February 2011.

The PSC staff have sought to have the commission throw out the PATH application, and as I’ve discussed before (See PATH motions: More than just procedural stuff)  there are some interesting reasons behind that request.

This in from The Associated Press:

The state Public Service Commission is giving the parties involved in a multistate power line case until Nov. 17 to make their final responses on whether the project’s application should be dismissed.

The deadline was included in an order issued by the PSC on Tuesday.

(more…)

Big news out over at the West Virginia Public Service Commission, where the folks promoting the PATH power line have just asked for a 217-day delay in the proceedings.

The new filing by American Electric Power and Allegheny Power is available here.  It comes on the heels of last week’s motion by the WVPSC staff that the commission either throw out of delay consideration of the PATH application.

If approved by the WVPSC, the PATH proposal would push back formal hearings on the $1.8 billion project from February 2010 to late September 2010. The legal deadline for a ruling would be pushed back from June 2010 until January 2011.

We’ll have more details in the Gazette tomorrow.

Some of the coverage of — and some of AEP’s statements about — the recent motion by the West Virginia Public Service Commission staff to throw out the PATH power line application makes it sound a little like this is some meaningless procedural stuff that nobody should care about.

I’m not sure that I framed it entirely right in either my initial blog post (where this story first broke last week) or in the later print story published in the Gazette.

It’s true, as I wrote, that the WVPSC staff argued this in favor of their motion to dismiss the PATH application or at least stop the clock from running on the commission’s 400-day time limit to decide on the application:

Lawyers for the PSC staff cited a Maryland ruling that rejected the portion of the PATH line proposed for that state. The Maryland ruling leaves the West Virginia PSC without a complete application to study and rule on, according to the new staff legal filing.

But let’s scratch beneath that a little bit (as Bill Howley has already done on The Power Line blog) …  Here’s what else the WVPSC staff filing said:

Time elapses while PATH delays facilitating filing an appropriate certificate application before the Maryland PSC, the information presented in PATH’s Application grows stale and less reflective of a fluctuating economy.

(more…)

Attorneys for the staff over at the West Virginia Public Service Commission just filed a blockbuster motion that throws another significant procedural hurdle in front of the PATH power line project.

Similar to a motion already discussed here by their counterparts in Virginia, the WVPSC staff want the PATH application thrown out because of a Maryland ruling that leaves them unable to fully evaluate the project.

The WVPSC staff motion is available here. I’ll be doing a story for our print edition, and will post a link here when it becomes available.

New expert testimony filed today with the Virginia State Corporation Commission concludes that the PATH power line is not needed and would actually make our regional electrical grid less reliable.

The expert testimony, provided on behalf of the Sierra Club, also argues that PATH would increase air pollution, and that other cheaper and simpler alternatives are available.

American Electric Power and Allegheny Energy argue that PATH is needed to avoid power grid overloads and other reliability concerns. You can read their application to the West Virginia Public Service Commission here, or their “Frequently Asked Questions” sheet here. And, the PATH folks have a whole collection of print ads and broadcast spots here.

But here’s what George C. Loehr, a nationally renowned electricity expert, told the Virginia regulators:

Rather than increase reliability, PATH would actually make it worse.

… If PATH is approved, generating companies will be given a powerful incentive to site new generators in the Allegheny coalfields, hundreds of miles to the west, rather than in or close to the eastern load centers. Even existing coal-fired generators will have the opportunity to ramp up their outputs.

This will make the eastern megalopolis even more dependent on remote generation sources than it already is. Cities like Newark, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, Washington and Richmond will depend for their electric supply on generators hundreds of miles away. I’ve been in  electric power transmission planning and reliability for more than 47 years, but you don’t have to be an engineer to understand that this is a less reliable situation than if the resources were located nearby.

(more…)

Another round of West Virginia Public Service Commission public hearings on the PATH power line is set for tomorrow Thursday in Buckhannon,  but there’s bigger news about PATH today out of neighboring Virginia.

Remember how the power companies haven’t refiled an application yet in respose to a Maryland Public Service Commission decision rejecting PATH?

Well, now, the staff of the Virginia State Corporation Commission has filed a motion to dismiss PATH’s application in that state.  Citing the Maryland ruling, the staff explain:

There now exists such a level of uncertainty as to the termination point of the PATH project that the staff cannot discharge its duty to analyze the application and to advise the commission on whether the project should be approved and, if approved, where it should be routed.

A copy of the Virginia staff filing is here.

The West Virginia Public Service Commission’s public hearings on the PATH power line continue today and tonight up at Canaan Valley, and the final public comment sessions are scheduled for next Thursday (Oct. 22) in Buckhannon.

Meanwhile, over at The Power Line blog, Bill Howley has been pointing out a continuing series of setbacks for this controversial, $1.8 billion project.

Regular readers of Coal Tattoo and The Power Line already knew that the Maryland State Public Service Commission rejected the power line application, ruling that Potomac Edison could not apply for project approval in place of the PATH Allegheny Transmission Company because Potomac Edison, an Allegheny Energy subsidiary, was not going to be operating the PATH line.

Now, in a post titled Ruh Roh!  Howley says that the power company folks missed a key deadline for refiling their application telling regulators what they planned to do about for the Maryland portions of PATH. Rather than refiling by Friday, as the Maryland PSC had directed them, the power companies submitted a letter that said:

At this time, the Company continues to consider its filing options, including whether to re-file an application with the Commission, and intends to inform the Commissio of its decision as soon as possible.

The Power Line blog also reported recently on troubles for PATH in Frederick County, Md.,  and about setbacks for a sister power line called MAP (see here and here).

And Howley recently posted some helpful stuff for landowners along the proposed route for PATH about how to deal with power company land agents. See here and here. He also had some good nitpicks about a Gazette-Mail commentary published a couple weeks ago,

Finally, as if I don’t have enough complicated reading material on my “to do” pile, Howley posted what looks to be a very interesting article from The Industrial Physicist on why new power lines don’t make the grid more reliable.

Updated: Here is a link to today’s Gazette story on the Flatwoods’ hearings.

FLATWOODS, W.Va. — The West Virginia Public Service Commission spent about 90 minutes earlier this afternoon hearing from residents of Braxton County and surrounding communities about the PATH power line project.

More than 100 people turned out, and nearly two dozen of them addressed the commission — and almost all of them spoke out strongly against the $1.8 billion project.

All three commissioners — Chairman Michael Albert, Jon McKinney and Ed Staats — showed up for the hearing. Recall that they got a nudge earlier this year from Gov. Joe Manchin to actually turn out and hear what the public had to say.

Typical of the comments at today’s hearing were remarks from Paris Webb, whose family has owned and lived on property in the Gassaway area for five generations. Webb said her family treasured a simple life out in the country, away from crowds and pollution. She didn’t want all that to change, and argued that PATH was mean to benefit residents of big cities along the east coast, while West Virginians would bear most of the burden.

Jude Binder, an artist and teacher from Calhoun County, agreed, and explained that she views the power line as little more than a path down the road toward continued reliance on dirty coal:

At a time when people all over the world are beginning to realize the dangers of fossil fuel consumption, it goes beyond all reason to cement our future into the same old ways of obtaining energy.

(more…)

Since Monday’s power company PR event, I haven’t had much time to work on PATH reporting … I do promise to get the Coal Tattoo reader questions and power company answers up on line shortly.

Meanwhile,  the West Virginia Public Service Commission began its public comment hearings on the PATH project Tuesday and Wednesday over in Shepherdstown, W.Va.

You can read more about those hearings from West Virginia Blue,  the Martinsburg Journal, and West Virginia Public Broadcasting.

And over at the Maryland Energy Report blog (published by John Howley, whose brother Bill Howley does The Power Line blog here in West Virginia), there’s an interesting post called  AEP strains trust of Marylanders.