Updates
PSC Revokes Completeness Determination
The Responsible Energy Alliance is extremely grateful that the Public Service Commission has revoked the completeness determination for ATC’s application.
With approximately 564 additional documents filed after the application was initially deemed complete, the record became extraordinarily difficult for affected property owners and members of the public to follow, understand, and meaningfully evaluate—much less use as the basis for such a consequential decision.
We are thankful that the Commission listened to the concerns raised by residents and stakeholders. This decision reinforces the importance of a complete, transparent, and understandable record when decisions of this magnitude may affect families, farms, businesses, communities, and natural resources for generations.
We sincerely thank everyone who took the time to submit comments, sign petitions, attend meetings, and make their voices heard.
We were heard.
An urgent request from our lawyer!
Friends I just received this urgent request from Erik Olsen, our lawyer for the Responsible Energy Alliance, I'm sending it on because it is so important that we all take action ASAP!
Dear Pastor Plough,
I wanted to send you this Petition that we filed to Revoke the Completeness of ATC's application. The PSC has requested that any and all concerned citizens file a comment if they feel that ATC's application is incomplete.
We strongly believe that ATC's application is incomplete because it does not present any justification for defying the legislature and blazing through the ecologically and culturally sensitive Greenfield routes in Ozaukee and Washington Counties.
ATC has also not explained why they think it is acceptable to use public funds (AKA OUR MONEY) to build a transmission line to serve A SINGLE (1) FOR-PROFIT COMPANY!!!!
I am positive that we are legally correct, but sometimes the law is only part of the battle.
The PSC wants to hear from We The People! So if people actually care, people need to take five minutes to post a comment saying that the PSC should find ATC's application incomplete.
Please send them our Petition to read, and encourage them to post comments on the PSC Re:Completeness, and ask all concerned citizens to do the same.
One or two sentences is enough, but if We The People want to be heard we have to speak up!
In this situation "speaking up" means posting a comment on the docket stating whether the PSC should revoke ATC's Completeness.
I am begging you: Please let EVERYBODY know that if they care they must ACT NOW!
Sincerely,
Erik Olsen
———————————————
Submit Your Comment by:
Wednesday, August 5, 2026, at 1:30 p.m.
How to Submit Your Comment
New State Filing by Citizens Group Challenges ATC Plan to Build "Greenfield" Transmission Lines
PORT WASHINGTON, Wis. - July 7, 2026 - PRLog -- The Responsible Energy Alliance, a local coalition of concerned citizens and property owners, alleged today in a public filing with state regulators that the application of American Transmission Company (ATC) to run new extra high-voltage transmission lines through pristine lands in western Ozaukee and eastern Washington counties is incomplete, and should be rejected.
The proposed transmission lines would transmit electrical power to the new mega AI data center under construction by Vantage Data Centers in Port Washington. In today's filing with the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC), the Responsible Energy Alliance urges regulators to send ATC back to the drawing board to prepare a new application. Another filing on the same day by Restoring Lands, a local land trust in Ozaukee and Washington counties, made similar claims.
Rather than utilizing existing utility corridors to site the high-voltage transmission lines, as state law prioritizes, ATC proposes to construct them through "greenfield" areas in western Ozaukee County and eastern Washington County. The ATC plan, first introduced publicly last fall, has generated widespread public concern and criticism.
An initial PSC determination in December 2025 found that the ATC application was complete, starting an up-to-360-day clock for a final power lines routing decision. ATC has since filed hundreds of amendments, supplements, clarifications, and modifications to its initial proposal. Yet, according to the citizens group, nowhere in the voluminous filings does ATC ever explain why the "greenfield" segments of its proposed routing should be approved, instead of alternative routing that complies with the priorities established under Wisconsin's statutory routing criteria.
The citizen group claims that ATC has not explained why its proposal "so utterly fails to comply with the Wisconsin statutory routing criteria" that favors existing utility corridors for such transmission lines. Today's filing was in response to ATC's request that the PSC reconsider a July 1 order for ATC to revise its application, to account for the extraordinary number of changes made over the past seven months to the initial proposal.
In another filing made today, the citizens group submitted expert testimony to demonstrate that serious biological consequences would result from the transmission lines being routed through either of the greenfield segments, as proposed by ATC.
In the filing, the expert, Dr. Gary Casper, explains that the proposed routing "most definitely will cause harm, there is no question about that." He continues, "n my opinion neither [of the proposed greenfield] routes are acceptable. The application fails to convincingly demonstrate that either option is necessary or offers functional or environmental advantages over using the [a]lternative route" that utilizes the existing utility corridors, consistent with Wisconsin law.
Wisconsin law identifies using existing utility corridors as a priority. Instead, ATC seeks to build new industrial-scale trestle towers and related transmission lines through roughly eight miles of greenfield territory running along the Milwaukee River watershed and corridor in Fredonia and Farmington, and/or a few miles south through Saukville and Trenton. The estimated cost of the project is roughly $1.36 billion to $1.64 billion, depending on the final route selection, according to ATC's original application.
ATC's proposal to run the power lines through greenfield areas, which contain a multitude of ecologically-sensitive and valuable parcels, has generated substantial concern from impacted communities, citizens, and others. Among those who have publicly expressed their opposition to ATC's greenfield routing proposal are the Town of Fredonia, the Village of Fredonia, the Town of Farmington, the Town of Saukville, the Town of Trenton, Ozaukee County, Washington County, and the City of Port Washington, the community that is sponsoring the AI data center project and providing substantial tax breaks to the developer through a TID.
Even the data center developer itself, Vantage Data Centers, has expressed publicly its support of the alternative routing, which would largely follow existing utility corridors instead of dissecting greenfield areas as ATC proposes.
Others who have recommended the alternative routing be used (instead of the greenfield routing) include the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Wisconsin Trust for Historic Preservation, each of which expressed concern about the loss of important cultural heritage sites such as Native American effigy mounds and their associated viewsheds, and the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, which is concerned about potential loss of agricultural acreage.
Ultimately, the PSC will decide which route will be used for the Port Washington AI data center transmission lines. A decision was expected before the end of 2026. However, if the PSC revokes its completeness determination, thus requiring ATC to file a brand-new application, the process could start all over again, causing material delay to the Port Washington AI data center operations.
The citizens group and Dr. Casper both believe that, from an environmental and public safety standpoint, more time to analyze this enormous and expensive transmission line project would be a blessing rather than a burden. Dr. Casper's testimony points out that the due diligence issues are considerable, and argue strongly for a revised timeline to assess adequately the environmental impacts.
For example, he notes that there has not been sufficient time for him to perform adequate gap surveys for missing information on wildlife occurrences in the subject area. He notes that many species standard survey protocols have seasonal guidelines and biologists are typically allowed one to two full seasons (years) to conduct their studies. This has not been the case here, where the process has been rushed by ATC.
Among other things, Dr. Casper's tentative finding of a federally endangered dragonfly in the study area is important but must be verified in the July-August flight season, which is only just beginning. As Dr. Casper notes in his testimony: "One solution to this out-of-synch information gathering would be for the project proponents [ATC] to withdraw the [proposed greenfield routing proposal] and simply use the existing right-of-way for the [a]lternative route."
Comment Deadline approaching
June 1st Deadline for Public Comments Regarding Data Center Power Lines!
Greetings, friends! We are down to the wire! This is the last week in which a citizen may issue a public comment on the draft environmental impact statement or EIS issued by the DNR and PSC to the Ozaukee County and Washington County proposed extra high-voltage transmission lines, which would transmit huge amounts of electrical power to the new data center in Port, Washington. Now is the time to issue a comment with your opinion.
We encourage you to ask the authorities to ensure that the final environmental impact statement or EIS makes it crystal clear that the South Alternative Route, which follows existing utility corridors, is far less damaging from a natural and cultural heritage perspective than either the South Proposed or South Proposed-Contingent Routes.
Let the DNR and PSC know what damage will occur if they run the new transmission lines through the ATC-recommended greenfield routes. Make your voice heard! Your opinion matters!
Comments needed!
Once again we have an opportunity to let the PSC and DNR know what you think about the potential placement of these lines through our towns. The PSC is now accepting public comments on the Draft EIS. Like the initial comment period it is important our voices are heard every step of the way! Deadline is June 1st. Please go here for a more in depth layout and explanation: https://www.responsiblepower.org/
And go here to file your comment: https://apps.psc.wi.gov/ERF/ERF/comment/filecomment.aspx?util=137&case=CE&num=221
Thanks everyone, I know it gets old seeing these prompts, but we must keep our focus and attention on this issue until it is resolved!
In case you are still unsure what to say, a shorter guide as to how to write your comment is listed below:
PROTECT OUR PRECIOUS NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURAL ASSETS
The ATC-recommended routing for the new Port Washington AI data center transmission lines will disrupt important Native American cultural resources, including effigy mounds, burial sites, viewsheds, etc. The alternative routing avoids these impacts. Encourage the Public Service Commission to preserve our precious local assets and minimize the environmental and cultural heritage destruction by choosing the alternative route.
For more information about these issues, please see a paper authored by Mark Olsen, Higher Power Autonetics, LLC, and Joseph P. Gromacki, Kelton House Farm. The paper can be accessed here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LsAwgbQisfj3e8E1zgO5JKC3J9_fHhNW/view?usp=sharing
Wis. Audubon Society
Core member of our Coalition, Joe Gromacki, recently had an article published in the magazine for the Wisconsin Audubon Society. Pages are below.
No discounts for data centers
A video recording of the presentation given at Riveredge Nature Center on Monday Feb 2nd.
Tips- What to Say in Your PSC Comment (and If You Speak at a Meeting)
Tips on What to Say in Your PSC Comment (and If You Speak at a Meeting)
If you’re planning to submit a public comment to the Public Service Commission (PSC) — or attend an upcoming PSC public meeting — here are practical tips based on what the PSC says is most helpful to hear from the public.
What to Include in a Written Comment
The strongest public comments are based on your personal experience and opinions. You do not need to be an expert. The PSC is looking for real, local impacts described clearly and specifically.
Include:
Who you are and your connection to the project area
(Resident, landowner, farmer, business owner, utility customer, etc.)Specific impacts on your life or property, such as:
Farmland and agricultural operations
Wetlands, waterways, woods, wildlife habitat
Noise, views, privacy, safety, and quality of life
Property value, rental income, or business impacts
Details that help them understand the “real world” effects
(What you’ve observed on your land, how you use the property, what will change for you if this happens)An alternative or solution
(Alternative Route, or the private entity can provide their own power)
Referencing studies or articles:
You may reference outside materials, but it’s best to summarize in your own words how that information supports your concern, rather than relying on attachments or technical language.
If You Attend a PSC Public Meeting and Are Given the Opportunity to Speak
If you speak at a meeting, keep it simple and direct. You do not need a long speech.
A strong format is:
Introduce yourself and explain why you’re connected to the area
Share one or two clear impacts this project would have on your life, home, or land
Add a specific example (something real and personal)
If possible, propose an the alternative route or a way to reduce harm like the data center providing their own power
Important Note on Environmental/EIS Input
During the environmental review process (including EIS-related outreach), PSC staff may request input to help evaluate environmental impacts. In those phases, emails or mail is accepted and used by staff to inform their environmental review.
Bottom Line
Tell your story. Be specific. Speak from your lived experience. Whether you submit a written comment or speak at a public meeting, your voice matters.
Upcoming opportunities to participate include meetings, Wednesday, Thursday, and the 28th.
Sincerely Yours,
Pastor Patti,
Saukville, & Fredonia Property Owner
Regional Alliance Leader
PSC Comment window opens!
This is stage is critical in the regulatory process. During scoping, the public helps determine what environmental, community, and property impacts the state must study before any decision is made. At this point no route has been approved, no construction has been authorized. The PSC is deciding what impacts must be studied in the EIS, or Environmental Impact Statement. Issues raised now shape the entire review going forward.
You do not have to wait for public meetings to make your voice heard.
Written scoping comments may be submitted now until February 6th.
How to Submit Comments
Option 1: Online (Fastest)
Go to https://apps.psc.wi.gov/ERF/ERF/comment/filecomment.aspx?util=137&case=CE&num=221
Follow the prompts to submit your comments
All comments become part of the public record.
Option 2: By Snail Mail
Mail must be received by February 6, 2026.
PSC Environmental Review Coordinator – Docket 137-CE-221
Andrew Craft
Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
P.O. Box 7854
Madison, WI 53707-7854
What Should Comments Address?
The PSC encourages comments on:
Environmental impacts (wetlands, waterways, wildlife, forests)
Human and property impacts (homes, farms, land use, property values)
Route-specific concerns
Alternatives and mitigation measures
Coalition Focus
While each letter should reflect personal concerns, a common theme is critical:
The Environmental Impact Statement should fully evaluate the use of pre-existing high power transmission corridors (as opposed to expanding home service corridors to high power) or the Alternative Route, rather than creating new greenfield corridors.
Letters previously sent to ATC may also be reused and submitted to the PSC during this scoping period.
Public Scoping Meeting – Port Washington
Attendance is optional but encouraged.
Wednesday, January 21, 2026
Holiday Inn Express – Banquet Hall
350 E Seven Hills Road
Port Washington, WI 53074
Sessions at 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. (identical sessions)
Attending a meeting does not replace submitting written comments — doing both is best.
Deadline
All written scoping comments must be submitted by Friday, February 6, 2026.
This is one of the most important opportunities for public input in the entire process.
If you need help writing your letter please contact us protectfredoniacoalition@gmail.com
Intervenors…
The Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO)—the organization responsible for overseeing the high-voltage power grid and the wholesale electricity market—has formally intervened with the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC). MISO’s intervention may benefit the Reliable Energy Alliance (Saukville Trenton and Fredonia, Farmington groups), as it introduces additional scrutiny, highlights uncertainty, may limit ATC’s unilateral authority, and reinforces the Commission’s obligation to fully evaluate route options and community impacts.
As of yesterday, Port Washington Mayor Ted Neitzke IV informed us in person at the Port Washington Common Council meeting that his application to intervene with the PSC—advocating for selection of the alternative route—was mailed that morning. In addition, Vantage has publicly stated that it will also be intervening in support of choosing the alternative route.
As of this morning, Ozaukee County has passed a resolution opposing the preferred and preferred contingent routes and supporting selection of the alternative route. This county resolution joins those already adopted by surrounding townships, including Saukville, Fredonia, Farmington, and Trenton. We are deeply grateful for the leadership and support of Ozaukee County, Mayor Ted Neitzke, and Vantage in encouraging the Commission to select the alternative route.