New Year, New Information

Posted on January 5, 2016 by Anjali Patel

Happy New Year to all of our readers. To kick off the New Year here is a round-up of several upcoming conferences and webinars that may be of interest:

On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 12:30 PM ET the Council on Foreign Relations will be hosting on its website a live conversation between EPA Administrator McCarthy and John C. Bussey, Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal, related to the Paris Agreement, climate policy, and diplomacy.  There is no charge to link to the conversation.

On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 10:00 AM ET the Bipartisan Policy Center will be hosting a session entitled “Understanding Allowance Allocation Options Under the Clean Power Plan” in which the panelists will explore, among other things, different allocation options, lessons learned from past experience, and potential impacts on industry and customers.  The session is free and participants may register to attend in person (1225 Eye St NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC) or by webcast.

On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 2:00 PM ET the National Conference of State Legislatures is hosting a webinar entitled “Clean Power Plan Implementation – What State Legislatures Need to Know.”  The discussion will cover the role of state legislatures in CPP implementation, litigation associated with the rule, and issues that states should know about before they submit their implementation plans. There is no charge for the webinar.

On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 1:00 PM ET the American Bar Association is hosting a webinar entitled “Clean Power Plan Litigation Update” during which the panelists will provide an update on CPP litigation and will discuss the likely timing for the resolution of the issues and how the litigation could impact CPP implementation deadlines.  There is a registration fee associated with this webinar.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on New Year, New Information

Out with the Old, in with the New: Moving from the CPP to the Proposed FIP

Posted on December 30, 2015 by Jessica Bell

When the Clean Power Plan was published in the Federal Register in October, EPA also released its responses to the millions of comments it received.  These responses are helpful in understanding aspects of the CPP and getting a better sense of EPA’s rationales in more detail.  With the new year come new opportunities to make your voice heard: comments on the proposed federal plan and model trading rules are due January 21, 2016.  EPA has compiled a summary [link eliminated] of the issues on which it specifically seeks comment.  Many states are also engaging in their own stakeholder processes related to the CPP, so there may be opportunities to comment at the state level.

We wish all our readers a very happy New Year, and we will see you in 2016!

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Out with the Old, in with the New: Moving from the CPP to the Proposed FIP

Litigation Update: West Virginia v. EPA

Posted on December 29, 2015 by Anjali Patel

In the past few weeks, there have been several developments in West Virginia v. EPA.  Here is a quick recap:

  • On December 8, 2015, the petitioners jointly filed a motion requesting the Court: (1) adopt an expedited briefing schedule and hold oral argument before May 2016 with regard to “the fundamental legal issues raised by the Rule”; and (2) sever and establish a separate docket for “state-specific and programmatic” (or “record-based”) issues.   The movants stated the “foundational legal issues relate[] to whether EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act (“CAA”) to issue the Rule, and even if it does, whether Section 111(d) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7411(d), authorizes a rule like this rule,” and that the Court’s resolution of the first set of issues could obviate the need to brief the second set of issues.
  • On December 21, 2015, EPA and intervenors supporting EPA (Power Companies and State and Local Governments, and Environmental and Health Organizations) filed responses opposing the briefing schedule motion. They urged the Court to reject the motion on grounds that the petitioners’ distinction between “fundamental legal issues” and the rest of the issues is arbitrary, and that bifurcation of the proceeding would be inefficient and prolong the judicial process.
  • On December 18, 2015, petitioners started filing their respective statements of issues (more will be coming through January).  One set of petitioners, LG&E and KU Energy, filed a companion motion to their statement of issues asking the Court to sever certain issues relating to whether the final CPP was a “logical outgrowth” of the proposed rule because these issues are the subject of the parties’ request for administrative reconsideration.  LG&E and KU Energy also asked the Court to open a separate docket on the severed issues and hold the new docket in abeyance pending EPA’s reconsideration proceedings.  EPA has requested an extension on the response deadline until January 19, 2016.
  • As of December 22, 2015, the deadline to file a petition for judicial review of the CPP, forty petitions had been filed challenging the rule.  The complete list of petitioners is available here.
  • And last but not least, on December 23, 2015, certain petitioners who have moved for the Court to stay the CPP filed replies responding to EPA and intervenors in support of EPA: Joint Reply of State Petitioners, Joint Reply of Utility, Coal, Labor, and Business Movants, and Reply of Movant-Intervenor Peabody Energy.  One interesting thing to note is that the State Petitioners’ Reply includes a chart listing activities taken by individual states since August 3 to prepare CPP state plans.
Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Litigation Update: West Virginia v. EPA

MISO Releases Initial Results of CPP Near-Term Analysis

Posted on December 23, 2015 by Amber Martin

At its December 16, 2015 Planning Advisory Committee meeting, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) unveiled the initial results of its near-term analysis of the CPP, which is meant to provide policymakers with an understanding of compliance pathways.  MISO included a range of sensitivities in its modeling in order to provide insight into the range of compliance strategies possible under the rules.  Sensitivities modeled included natural gas prices, renewable portfolio standards, incremental coal retirements, and CO2 costs.  In total, MISO ran 675 simulations.  The results of MISO’s analysis indicate that flexibility in compliance strategies will allow for lower cost compliance options.  MISO also found that the costs of compliance strategies are highly influenced by natural gas prices.  Additionally, MISO’s analysis suggests that coal retirements are significantly dependent on other variables.

MISO will present additional results of its near-term analysis at the January meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee.

 

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on MISO Releases Initial Results of CPP Near-Term Analysis

What’s in the Federal Agencies’ Wallets?

Posted on December 22, 2015 by Anjali Patel

On Friday, December 18, Congress passed and the President signed into law H.R. 2029*  the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, an omnibus spending bill** comprised of federal agency appropriations through September 30, 2016 (the end of the 2016 fiscal year) and a package of tax breaks.  The Act includes several important provisions related to the domestic energy and environmental sectors.  In particular:

  • The DOE’s budget includes $632 million for fossil energy research and development of which $160 million is earmarked to support existing CCS demonstration projects that are still in development and $207 million is earmarked for CCS technology research and development.
  • The DOE’s budget also includes over $200 million to further the development of concentrating solar power, offshore wind, geothermal, conventional hydropower, and marine and hydrokinetic technologies; $90 million to promote clean energy manufacturing; $206 million for electricity delivery and energy reliability; and close to $100 million for nuclear energy activities.
  • The production tax credit (PTC) and investment tax credit (ITC) for wind energy are extended through 2016.  They will then be phased out through 2019.
  • The solar ITC and the credit for solar residential energy-efficiency property are extended through 2019.   They will then be phased out through 2021.

The Act does not include specific funding to assist states in developing their CPP plans.  However, EPA is budgeted $21 million for grants to states and tribes to assist with the implementation of environmental programs.  According to the explanatory statement, the “[f]unds allow States and tribes to have the flexibility to direct resources for the implementation of high priority activities, including the processing of permits, which complement programs under established environmental statutes.”  EPA must allocate these funds by formula to states and tribes no later than June 15, 2016.  Presumably, once the money is allocated states and tribes will be able to apply these funds to their CPP-implementation activities.

* The link for the bill may take a few minutes to load.
**An “omnibus bill” is a type of bill in which the legislature packages together several different substantive issues for one vote.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What’s in the Federal Agencies’ Wallets?