Friday, December 19, 2014

It's FAQ Friday!!!

You know what rubs me raw wrong?
 It’s Clean Line’s “FAQ Friday” on their Facebook page.             
Some of us were banned from their original Facebook page some time ago. Yes, I might have made a comment in anger that might be constituted as “insurrection” by some, and I apologized for that.  Let's moving on Clean Line.  We promise to play nice.

On Fridays, Clean Line’s doesn’t take questions from stakeholder, but asks themselves powder-puff-softball questions and gives political correct answers.  RidiculousRICL needs a FAQ Friday also where real questions are asks, and since Clean Line representatives won’t answer our stakeholder questions, …we’ll take the liberty to supply the answer we suspect Michael Skelly is thinking but not saying.  Again, for CLEP lawyers, these are not Clean Line's official answers, but probably closer to the truth.

If anyone has a FAQ that CLEP won’t answer, leave a comment.

FAQ for Clean Line.
FAQ:  With the Illinois Commerce Commission approving the Rock Island Clean Line’s petition, does Clean Line intend to appeal the ICC’s decision? 
CLEP’s potential answer:  We like to make a “NO” into a “YES”.  While we are pleased that the ICC has granted approval under Section 8-406, it is unfortunate they did not grant approval under 8-503. 

FAQ:  But doesn’t “NO” mean “NO”?
CLEP’s potential answer:  Sometimes “NO” means “YES”.  We believe this is one of those instances and are excited about the opportunity to convert this NO into a Yes.

Clean Line was denied by the ICC under Section 8-503 and this means they do not qualify for potential eminent domain.  Clean Line was granted consent under Section 8-460 and can operate as a "public utility" but has several qualifiers before they can start building .  After all the press releases from Clean Line stating they are pleased with the ICC’s approval, it will be interesting to see if they appeal a decision that they claim was in their favor.  As shameless as Clean Line has been, my bet is they will appeal the ICC board's decision.

1 comment:

  1. Question: If CLEP thinks that the ICC decision was so grand for the company, why has it indicated its intentions to file an expedited petition at the ICC for its Grain Belt project? Is it because an expedited petition automatically makes a finding under Sec. 8-503 without the issue being considered? If CLEP's strategy is to do it differently this time around after being burned on RICL, what are the risks that the ICC may simply deny the petition in its entirety?