Here it is:
Comes now the Staff of the West Virginia Public Service Commission Staff (“Staff’) by John R. Auville, Counsel, and respectfully submits Staffs Motion, requesting that the Commission dismiss this certificate application as insufficient, or in the alternative, require the Applicant to request a tolling and implement further case processing procedures. Staff asserts that the Applicant’s failure to seek all necessary regulatory approval for the proposed transmission line in a timely manner prejudices Staffs ability to accurately evaluate this certificate application and prepare its case on the statutory deadline applicable in this case. Forthcoming economic forecasts, PJM load forecasts, and an updated RTEP will contain crucial information and present a compelling reason to require PATH to file updated information for this Commission’s consideration. As a result of the prejudice resulting from PATH’S failure to seek all necessary regulatory approval in a timely manner, Staff moves that the Commission either dismiss this case or require PATH to request a tolling sufficient to allow the Commission to implement further case processing procedures for the parties and assure a complete review of the application.
The legal staff of the WV PSC has just filed a motion to dismiss the PATH case, or to at least postpone the 400 day deadline, until AEP/Allegheny figure out what they want to do in Maryland. Until then, as the staff says, their application is “insufficient.”
The WV PSC, like the East Virginia State Corporation Commission, now faces a decision to throw out the West Virginia PATH case.
The entire motion is worth reading here. The PSC staff provides an excellent argument, made often here on The Power Line, that 2010 revisions to PJM’s Regional Transmission Expansion Plan, may further erode PJM’s claims that PATH is needed.
The Power Line 