The information contained in Considering the Grid is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Spiegel & McDiarmid expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all the contents of this site. Continue reading
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Search Past Posts
Tags
- 5th Circuit
- ACE
- Agency guidance
- Annual Energy Outlook
- Arctic
- Army Corps of Engineers
- Behind-The-Meter Generation
- Budget
- CAISO
- California
- carbon
- Carbon Pricing
- Carbon tax
- CCS
- CEIP
- CEQ
- Clean Air Act
- Clean Power Plan
- Climate
- Climate Change
- Coal
- Coal ash
- Comments
- Commerce
- Communities
- Compliance
- Congress
- CPP litigation
- CSAPR
- Cybersecurity
- D.C. Circuit
- Demand Response
- Department of Defense
- Distributed Energy Resources
- DOE
- DOI
- EIA
- Electric grid
- Electric industry
- Electricity
- Electric vehicles
- Energy efficiency
- Environment
- EPA
- ERCOT
- Executive Orders
- Federal Agency Reports
- Federal Courts
- Federal Power Act
- Federal Register
- FERC
- Financing
- FIP
- Fuels
- GHG emissions
- Global energy
- Grid Modernization
- HAP
- Hawai'i
- Health
- Hydro
- Infrastructure
- Initial Submittal
- International
- ISO New England
- Jobs
- Judicial review
- Keystone XL
- Marine
- Market rules
- Mass-based
- Massachusetts
- MATS
- Methane
- MISO
- Modeling
- NAAQS
- NACAA
- NARUC
- Natural Gas
- NEPA
- NERC
- Net Metering
- New York
- NSPS
- Nuclear
- NYISO
- Oil
- Paris Agreement
- Performance Based Regulation
- PJM
- President
- QER
- Rate-based
- Rate design
- Regional Haze
- Reliability
- Renewables
- Resilience
- RICE
- Rulemakings
- SIP
- Solar
- SPP
- State goals
- State PUCs
- State regulation
- Stay
- Storage
- Supreme Court
- Tax
- Technology
- Trading
- Transparency
- Transportation
- Tribes
- United Nations
- Utility Planning
- Water
- Webinar
- White House
- Wind
- World Bank
CPP Update: Abeyance, Listening Sessions, and Climate Mayors’ Letter
On March 1, the D.C. Circuit ordered that West Virginia et al. v. EPA, No. 15-1363, the litigation surrounding the Clean Power Plan, should remain in abeyance for another 60 days. Consistent with prior orders, the court directed EPA to continue filing status reports at 30-day intervals. The Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, available from the Office of Management and Budget, shows that EPA is expected to issue a final rule repealing the CPP in October 2018. It also shows that agencies plan to finalize three deregulatory actions for every new regulatory action in FY 2018. (Last year, President Trump’s One-In, Two-Out Executive Order required agencies to identify at least two existing regulations to repeal for every new significant regulation an agency proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates.)
The comment deadline on EPA’s proposal to repeal the CPP has been extended until April 26, and EPA continues to hold listening sessions to allow the public to provide oral testimony on the proposal. The next listening session will be held on Tuesday, March 27, in Gillette, Wyoming; EPA held listening sessions in Kansas City, Missouri, on February 21 and in San Francisco, California, on February 28. Verbatim transcripts of the listening sessions and written statements will be included in the docket (Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355) for the rulemaking.
Finally, on February 28, 240 Mayors from 48 states and territories re-submitted a comment letter to EPA opposing the proposed CPP repeal (the letter was originally submitted to EPA on February 20 with 233 signatories). The letter states that while communities across the country are experiencing sea-level rise, heat waves, and increased extreme weather, these communities depend on national policies like the CPP to “enhance ongoing local efforts and enable new local initiatives to improve public heath, increase air quality, and reduce greenhouse gasses through energy innovation.”
Related