Catagory:Regulation and Legislation

1
High Court Grants Stay of Clean Power Plan
2
FERC Issues Staff White Paper on Guidance Principles for Clean Power Plan Modeling; Suggests Stakeholder Engagement to Consider Reliability Issues
3
“FWS Bat Intake Rule Won’t Drive Project Developers Batty” on Law360
4
Winds of Change for Alternative Energy Tax Incentives in 2016
5
The Final Northern Long-Eared Bat 4(d) Rule: Impacts to Energy Infrastructure Projects
6
Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head: What the CFTC’s Preliminary Report on the Swap Dealer Definition Might Mean for Energy Companies
7
FAST Act Expedites Permitting and Environmental Review for Large Infrastructure Projects
8
Presidential Memorandum Promotes Pre-Project Mitigation and Restoration Banking: Implications for Energy Projects and Related Development
9
Paris Climate Talks Conclude: Key Takeaways from a Critical Meeting
10
Renewable Power Purchase Agreement Presentation Next Week

High Court Grants Stay of Clean Power Plan

On February 9, 2016, in an historic and unprecedented decision, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) from implementing the Clean Power Plan (“CPP”) while the rule is challenged in lower courts. The decision is a victory for twenty-nine states and state agencies, along with several industry and trade groups (the “Petitioners”), who appealed the D.C. Circuit’s January 21, 2016 decision not to stay the CPP.

The Petitioners argued to the Supreme Court that the EPA does not have the Clean Air Act authority to implement the CPP, which they assert would reorganize the entire electric power sector of the U.S. economy. The petitioners persuaded the U.S. Supreme court that there was a reasonable probability that four justices would agree to hear the case, that there was a fair prospect that the majority of the court would find that the CPP was unlawful, and that irreparable harm would have resulted from the denial of the stay.

Read More

FERC Issues Staff White Paper on Guidance Principles for Clean Power Plan Modeling; Suggests Stakeholder Engagement to Consider Reliability Issues

On January 19, 2016, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) issued a Staff White Paper[1] outlining four guiding principles to assist transmission planning entities – including regional transmission organizations (“RTOs”), independent system operators (“ISOs”) and electric utilities – in analyzing the Clean Power Plan (“CPP”) promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”).[2]  The CPP requires each state to demonstrate that it has considered electric system reliability issues in developing its state emissions reduction plan.  The EPA explained that one particularly effective way for states to make such a demonstration is by consulting with the relevant RTO, ISO, or other transmission planning entities and documenting this consultation process in their state plans.

Read More

“FWS Bat Intake Rule Won’t Drive Project Developers Batty” on Law360

Ankur Tohan and James M. Lynch’s recent alert on the Northern Long-Eared Bat 4(d) Rule and its effects on energy infrastructure projects was recently published on Law360.

Please click here to view it on Law360 (subscription required) or view it on K&L Gates HUB.

Winds of Change for Alternative Energy Tax Incentives in 2016

Congress has some unfinished business on alternative energy policy, which may provide unusual legislative opportunities in an election year. While tax credits for wind and solar power received long-term extensions in the year-end omnibus legislation enacted at the end of 2015, other types of alternative energy were left out — reports have suggested unintentionally — spurring some in Congress to seek a remedy in 2016. Additionally, the Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) initiated a rulemaking process to further define and clarify the types of property qualifying for the investment tax credit (ITC) under section 48 of the Tax Code. These developments, along with ongoing congressional interest in comprehensive energy policy legislation, could make 2016 a pivotal year for stakeholders in the alternative energy industry.

Read the full alert on K&L Gates HUB

The Final Northern Long-Eared Bat 4(d) Rule: Impacts to Energy Infrastructure Projects

Last spring, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the “Service”) published a final rule to list the northern long-eared bat (the “Bat”) as a threatened species and an interim 4(d) rule under the Endangered Species Act (the “Act” or “ESA”) (16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq.).

The interim 4(d) rule reflected an attempt by the Service to accommodate both conservation needs and industry group interests; however, it was widely believed that the listing of the Bat as a threatened species would impose a significant burden on wind, energy, and other energy infrastructure projects carried out within range of the Bat, as defined by the Service.

Read the full alert on K&L Gates HUB

Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head: What the CFTC’s Preliminary Report on the Swap Dealer Definition Might Mean for Energy Companies

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC,” or the “Commission”) has begun a process to assess the de minimis exception to the Commodity Exchange Act’s swap dealer definition in connection with the end of the definition’s phase-in period in December 2017. At that time the swap dealer de minimis threshold will automatically fall from $8 billion to $3 billion, unless the Commission specifies a different de minimis threshold.

Read More

FAST Act Expedites Permitting and Environmental Review for Large Infrastructure Projects

Expedited permitting and environmental review for complex infrastructure projects may soon be a reality.  Buried at the end of its most recent transportation reauthorization package (the “FAST Act” or “Act”) is a significant new initiative intended to fundamentally change the way that federal agencies evaluate environmental impacts from, and issue permits for, construction of large infrastructure projects. [1]

National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) review and environmental permitting for complex infrastructure projects can be costly and protracted.  For instance, a U.S. Government Accountability Office Report stated that the average completion time for an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) in 2012 was 4.6 years. [2]  Between 2003 and 2012, the Department of Energy paid contractors an average fee of $6.6 million, and as much as $85 million, to prepare EISs. [3]  The cost to prepare an EIS is often borne by project sponsors.  Some transportation and water resources projects currently benefit from expedited permitting and environmental review procedures, [4] but the FAST Act is the first time that Congress has attempted to coordinate NEPA review across federal agencies and industry sectors.

Read the full alert on K&L Gates HUB

Presidential Memorandum Promotes Pre-Project Mitigation and Restoration Banking: Implications for Energy Projects and Related Development

On November 3, 2015, U.S. President Barack Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum (Memorandum) that potentially opens the door to agency attempts to expand mitigation obligations beyond what is required under law while also having the potential to have significant and positive net benefits for the development of energy projects. The Memorandum encourages advance (i.e., pre-project) restoration measures, including mitigation banking, by both public and private entities. [1] It directs federal agencies to adopt a clear and consistent approach, such as guidance and regulations, to further this goal. Agencies affected include the United States Forest Service (USFS), the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Department of Interior (DOI) — projects involving review by these agencies, including energy and other types of proposed development, may be affected. These agencies will be expected to draft handbooks, guidelines, policies and regulations to implement advance mitigation measures.

Read the full alert on K&L Gates HUB

Paris Climate Talks Conclude: Key Takeaways from a Critical Meeting

Intense climate negotiations in Paris have now concluded for the 21st “conference of the parties” (or COP-21) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Until quite late in the process, many big-picture questions remained unresolved, including the enforceability of emissions limitations plans under the agreement, compensation for loss, and the target limit for global temperature rise. The resolution of these questions will be summarized below, with initial commentary on the results of the negations and questions going forward.

Leading up to and during the negotiations, media reports reflected optimism among global stakeholders seeking limits to greenhouse gas emissions, and expectations for an historic deal ran high. This ambitious agenda redoubled during the talks themselves, when low-lying island nations and scientists sought to tighten temperature increase targets from 2 degrees Celsius to 1.5 degrees Celsius. As discussed below, while the agreement reflects a new level of commitment to cutting carbon, the high expectations were not met entirely in the final accord.

Read More

Renewable Power Purchase Agreement Presentation Next Week

Law Seminars International will present a discussion on renewable power purchase agreements (PPAs) next Thursday, December 10 from 12:00-1:30 p.m. PST featuring Bill Holmes of K&L Gates and other renewables industry professionals. The presentation will cover what makes a renewable PPA different from other contracts, how renewable PPAs address the complex regulatory system governing electric power, common risk sharing terms in renewable PPAs, key financial terms, and the latest ideas for “synthetic” PPAs and other new approaches allowing large companies to participate directly in the market for renewable power.

Register directly on the Law Seminars International Website.

Copyright © 2024, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.