As anticipated, on October 10 the EPA signed a proposed rule to repeal the Clean Power Plan rules for existing stationary sources. The proposed rule concludes that the Clean Power Plan exceeds EPA’s authority under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act by regulating emissions by (among other approaches) substituting generation from lower-emitting existing natural gas combined cycle units and zero-emitting renewable energy generating capacity.
Rather, EPA has now determined that
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has announced his intention to act today to sign a proposed rule that would “withdraw the so-called Clean Power Plan of the past administration.” This move by the agency is no surprise, given President Trump’s campaign promises to bring back coal and Pruitt’s lawsuit challenging the rule filed in his capacity as the Oklahoma Attorney General.
The goal of the Clean Power Plan rules is to significantly limit
On September 29, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued a notice that may impact wholesale rates in all federally regulated wholesale markets (not including ERCOT), possibly affecting: (i) merchant plant owners, (ii) wholesale market customers, (iii) renewable and gas fired generation, (iv) coal and nuclear power plant owners, and (v) power traders. Husch Blackwell energy regulatory attorneys Linda Walsh, Chris Reeder and Sylvia Bartell issued a detailed client alert on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) issued by DOE requiring regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs) “to ensure that certain reliability and resilience attributes of electric generation resources are fully valued.” The proposed market reform would provide
Husch Blackwell international trade attorney, Jeffrey Neeley, and energy attorney, John Crossley, hosted a teleconference in which they discussed the implications of and next steps in the US International Trade Commission’s (ITC) ongoing case that imported crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) cells and modules have caused “serious injury” to domestic manufacturers. A detailed summary of the ITC’s September…
In an in-depth and informative analysis on the Department of Energy’s recently released Staff Report to the Secretary on Electricity Markets and Reliability, Husch Blackwell regulatory attorneys Linda Walsh and Sylvia Bartell examine the department’s stated goal of considering past and current trends in the electric industry in an effort to “exercise foresight to help ensure a…
As you are all aware, hurricane Harvey had a major impact on Texas and has left many residents without power. On August 28th, in order to facilitate the monitoring of the effects of the hurricane, the PUCT opened PUC Project 47552 – Issues Related to the Disaster Resulting From Hurricane Harvey. At…
Last week, Wisconsin state legislators introduced a proposal to repeal the so-called “moratorium” on the mining of sulfide ore bodies (i.e., mineral deposits in which nonferrous metals are mixed with sulfide minerals) in Wisconsin. The state law in question was enacted in 1998 over concerns that sulfide minerals exposed during mining activities can react with air and water to form acid drainage which can pollute groundwater and harm lake and stream life.
The moratorium is actually a requirement that prohibits
The month of August, 2017 has seen three distinct developments that may significantly impact management of “Coal Combustion Residuals,” or “CCR,” which include bottom ash, fly ash, boiler slag, and flue gas desulfurization materials generated from burning coal at steam‑powered electricity plants. Although one of these developments may provide a degree of regulatory relief, the other two may preserve or even strengthen existing regulatory requirements.
NOTE: An earlier draft of this update indicating that the FAA policy was still under consideration was inadvertently published last week. That draft was out of date and should not be relied on as a statement of FAA policies currently under consideration.
Changes to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) policy concerning the issuance of Determinations of No Hazard to Air Navigation (DNHs) under discussion late last year would have had profound and potentially adverse repercussions on wind development projects nationwide. Fortunately,
In an article by Keith Goldberg of Law360, Husch Blackwell attorney and former FERC Chairman, Jim Hoecker, discuss the role of FERC Order 1000 in regional transmission planning. He and other experts provide insight on how Order 1000 has initiated the long-term planning process but failed to spur the significant development necessary to provide regional electricity solutions.
