I converted a couple statements to a quote, and put my name on it. Perhaps Bill, you should put your name in (they are your words, after all).
There is one line on the second Page I had questions about. What is the evidence that TrAILCo recognized in January that they had not carried the burden? Look for the section highlighted in yellow and green.
I also formatted this as a press release, with my name and phone number. I will be in the field this afternoon, so if you get the word, feel free to send it out as soon as you have the details of the PSC Order.
Thanks for doing this, this is a great way to get the needed publicity.
JBK
P. S. While I agree that this is the most likely outcome, what do we say if we win and the PSC denies the line?
"William V. DePaulo, Esq." william.depaulo@gmail.com 8/1/2008 12:23 PM >>>
Ken Ward sent an email asking if we would have comments -- assuming the PSC acts today. I have drafted a press release which is attached. Please respond with any comments promptly.
Bill
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 9:03 AM, James Kotcon jkotcon@wvu.edu wrote:
I concur. I will bet a six-pack of your favorite legal beverage that Mile Layton of the Dominion Post will call me before I even have a chance to read the decision.
Would this be a good time to focus attention once again on the PSC Staff flip-flop? I think it is fair to point out that the Commissioners rely on accurate and objective input from their Staff, and Melton's testimony that the line is not needed till 2014, and that they were influenced by the economic "goodies" offered by Allegheny in determining "need" is clearly inappropriate, both legally and scientifically. (Need to work on that sound bite).
JBK
"William V. DePaulo, Esq." william.depaulo@gmail.com 8/1/2008 3:22
AM >>> Technically the PSC is not required to decide TrAILCo until Aug 2, Saturday. But the *probability is that they will issue a decision today in TrAILCo's favor* -- there's no reason to ruin a weekend with a formality that can be dispensed with on Friday.
It is very likely we will get calls from some *media*. Assuming the decision is to approve TrAILCo's application -- and I expect nothing else -- I believe we should express *disappointment with the PSC decision, without questioning their good faith*, and indicate that *we will in all probability will appeal *to the WV Supreme Court. And we will continue our fight to stop other unnecessary and environmentally degrading transmission lines in the future, i.e. PATH from AEP in the fal.
I also be strongly that we should *avoid anything that could be viewed as personal attacks *on the intelligence or character of PSC Commissioners McKinney and Staats, whom we will appear in front of for many years.
There is plenty on the merits to criticize here. We should* focus on the big themes* --
the *temporary, short term character of the purported benefits* and
the *permanence of the long term environmental costs*, both
physically on the ground in West Virginia and world-wide in terms of global warming.
- the alternative energy solutions -- the low hanging fruit of
conservation, wind and solar -- simply waiting to be picked*.
- the risks of *failing to divesify *West Virginia's energy base away a
97% dependence on coal at a time when coal is about to be hit with massive cost increases, increases that W. Va. consumers and businesses will have no way to avoid.
In short, let's use this exercise as an opportunity for education.
Bill
-- William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel: 304-342-5588 Fax: 304-342-5505 william.depaulo@gmail.com www.passeggiata.com