Update – WI PSC Objects to NoCapX and CETF!

Filed under:Uncategorized — posted by admin on September 6, 2012 @ 1:17 pm

What’s new… but here we go!  Update – just filed No CapX and CETF Response to PSC Motion — the PSC consistently tries to keep Overland out of this.  PSC staff and ALJ Newmark knew they were way off base, and we’re fighting the same ol’ fight once more:

NoCapX and CETF Response to PSC’s Motions

On August 29, 2012, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission filed a pile of objections to the appeal, by snail mail as that’s the way the Circuit Court system works (one of the joys of administrative dockets is it’s almost all by email!).

But before we get into that, on August 31, 2012, Judge Amy Smith, of Dane County Circuit Court, Branch 4, who has been assigned to this matter, sent a letter:

Letter – Judge Smith

In that letter, she notified all parties that:

From 2004 to 2007, I served as the Administrator of the Division of Enforcement and Science at the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”).  In that capacity, I directly supervised DNR’s Director of the Office of Energy, which I understand is now called the Office of Energy and Environmental Analysis.  That office provided review and coordination of energy and utility projects in the State of Wisconsin, including power transmission lines.  The Office of Energy Director was one of three of my direct reports as Administrator, and I believe about half of that Office’s present staff are individuals that I either directly or indirectly supervised, including its Director.  I do not recall the particular project at issue in this case was pending during my time at DNR; however, I do remember a number of transmission line projects, including at least one involving American Transmission Company, which were active in my tenure.

Given the limited information I presently have regarding this lawsuit, I do not now see a need to recuse myself from this matter.  However, I wanted to make sure that the parties were aware of my past experience in this subject area, in the event these facts may inform any decisions you may wish to make regarding this lawsuit.

There aren’t DNR related issues at play, so no objection here!

And now, on to the PSC.  The PSC is objecting to Overland filing the appeal, participating, no different than PSC Counsel Diane Ramthun’s objections at the outset when we were at the PSC, objections that the PSC staff and the ALJ assigned the case did not agree with, and I represented NoCapX and CETF throughout that proceeding with the ALJ’s blessing.  So here we go again:

PSC’s Objections filed 8/29/12

Response is almost done, will post as soon as it is.

one comment so far »

  1. you are so great Carol

    Comment by lori isch — September 7, 2012 @ 3:33 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)




image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace