Should we consider asking the PSC to grant intervenors request for financial support from PATH to re-do these analyses?  While the Staff request to toll the deadline or dismiss outright is certainly reasonable and logical, it creates a significant hardship for those intervenors who expended substantial resources analyzing the old data.  PATH gets all their expenses reimbursed, but neither the taxpayers nor the other intervenors have that luxury.

 

Jim Kotcon

>>> <Elena.Saxonhouse@sierraclub.org> 10/28/2009 5:52 PM >>>

Yes - even if this motion is granted, PATH could eventually go back to the WV PSC.  But note that the staff also raises the issue that new economic and load forecast data is forthcoming and should be taken into account.  The only downside of this is that our experts have already analyzed the existing application on the existing info - if PATH is given an opportunity to update its info, we will have to come up with the resources to have them dig into a new set of materials.

Elena Saxonhouse
Sierra Club Environmental Law Program
85 Second St., 2nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 977-5765
(415) 977-5793 (fax)