Municipalities and other local governments do not have free rein when it comes to regulating the environment, and the Second Circuit’s recent decision in Vermont Railway, Inc. v. Town of Shelburne is a clear reminder of that fact.
Twenty-two months into the Trump Administration and a trend has become abundantly clear: courts are profoundly skeptical of the Trump Administration’s use of executive orders to undo or undercut regulations. Federal rulemakings are serious business for courts and regulated industries, which is why we have chronicled the Trump Administration’s regulatory reform efforts, including proposals to undo rules implemented by previous administrations.
On June 18, 2014, FERC issued an order conditionally accepting California Independent System Operator Corporation’s (CAISO) proposal to implement an Energy Imbalance Market (EIM). The EIM tariff would allow neighboring balancing authorities to participate in CAISO’s real-time market to buy and sell five-minute real-time energy to meet energy imbalance needs. Participation in the EIM is voluntary, and there is no exit fee for leaving the EIM. Unlike other regional transmission organizations that administer similar real time markets, CAISO will not assume operational control over the transmission facilities in the balancing authorities participating in the EIM, except to the extent a transmission owner may have separately placed them under CAISO’s control. In a related order, FERC conditionally accepted in part revisions to PacifiCorp’s open-access transmission tariff to reflect the utility’s participation in the EIM as its first participant. CAISO and PacifiCorp conducted a study projecting annual consumer benefits of up to $129 million from economic efficiencies, improved renewable integration and increased reliability. Continue Reading Despite Customer Opposition, FERC Accepts CAISO’s Proposed Entergy Imbalance Market for the Western Interconnection and PacifiCorp’s Proposal To Be the EIM’s First Participant