Search
`
November 20, 2024

Posted on

Maryland PSC Approves Infinite Net Metering Credit Accumulation

Ratepayers with their own solar generating projects can reap the financial benefits from accumulating net-metered credits indefinitely under rules approved Wednesday by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) that are set to take effect Sunday.

The rules update the existing 12-month accumulation period, under which the utility reimburses each ratepayer annually for any outstanding credits awarded from electricity fed into the grid when a solar system generated more power than the ratepayer needed.

PSC officials, working with the state’s four utilities — Delmarva Power & Light Co., Potomac Electric Power Co., Baltimore Gas and Electric Co. and The Potomac Edison Co. — crafted the rules to meet the requirement of S143, known as the Net Metering Flexibility Act, which Gov. Wes Moore signed in May. It takes effect Oct. 1.

Ratepayers, under the new rules, are by default limited to a 12-month accrual period. But they can opt each March 1 to limit the period for any credit accumulation to one year, or to accumulate credits indefinitely. The rules also apply to subscribers to community solar projects, who accrue virtual credits as a result of their participation in that program.

Eligible ratepayers include any customer who owns and operates, leases and operates, or contracts with a third party who owns a project. In addition to solar generators, the rules cover projects that generate electricity with biomass, micro-combined heat and power, fuel cell, wind or hydro.

Jacob M. Ouslander, assistant counsel at the Office of People’s Counsel, an independent ratepayer advocacy organization, said the rules could be a big benefit to some ratepayers.

“When the NEM (net energy metering) credits are paid out in excess generation, the customer ends up receiving a lower financial benefit from the credit,” he said in an interview with NetZero Insider after the meeting. That’s because ratepayers buy electricity at the “full retail rate,” including distribution charges, but the utilities don’t pay those charges when they buy excess energy credits, he said.

So, ratepayers whose electricity use rises in the future would be better off holding credits and using them in the future, rather than cashing them in.

Fair Valuation of Accrued Credits

Speaking at the meeting, Ouslander expressed concern, however, that it was unclear which method utilities would use to calculate the amount they would pay out for credits accumulated over a long period.

“When you have a situation where a customer could potentially indefinitely bank credits, meaning that they could bank credits for years and years and years, the method that’s spelled out in the tariffs [concerns] us,” he said. “Because there could be a situation where the credits that are eventually cashed out if the customer switches back (to annual accrual) or closes the account end up being much higher than the excess generation that would have been paid out had the customer been receiving the payouts under the 12-month annual accrual cycles.”

That would hurt other ratepayers, who collectively would be paying for the excess amount paid, he said. “Ideally, there would be a method that values the accrued credits at a level close to what the customer would have received under the annual accrual method,” he said.

He added that utilities need to educate ratepayers that they have the option and how to go about it, if they want to switch from the 12-month accrual period to indefinite accrual, or back.

That and other issues related to helping ratepayers understand the impact of such decisions would best be resolved by creating a clear form that would educate ratepayers and allow them to communicate their desired accrual period to their utility company, Ouslander said.

Utility representatives generally agreed. However, PSC officials said a working group tasked with creating the form had yet to complete its work.

Commissioner Bonnie A. Suchman suggested the commission approve the new rules but “suspend” the ability of ratepayers to make a decision until those details had been ironed out.

“If you haven’t nailed down how the indefinite accrual method will work, it’s very hard for a customer to make a choice,” she said.

Joel Michel, assistant general counsel at Baltimore Gas and Electric, said any ratepayer choice would not take effect until March 1. In response, the commissioners agreed to make that the deadline to produce the form and clear up unresolved questions about the process.

Posted on

CISA Publishes Hardware BOM Framework

The Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) put a spotlight on supply chain risk management Monday with the release of its Hardware Bill of Materials (HBOM) Framework, intended to help buyers of electronics equipment identify and mitigate risks in their supply chains.

CISA’s Information and Communications Technology Supply Chain Risk Management (ICT SCRM) Task Force developed the document. The group is managed by CISA with participation from the information technology and communications sectors, both classified as critical infrastructure by the agency.

The impetus behind HBOMs is to provide a list of the names and origins of all physical materials that went into a hardware product. A single modern hardware product may contain components from dozens of separate manufacturers, and an HBOM could provide a major help for purchasers who need to verify that the parts in the items they buy come from trustworthy sources. If something goes wrong with a piece of hardware, the HBOM could more quickly help track down the source of the problem.

Consistency Across HBOMs

But while the potential value of HBOMs is clear, an inconsistent approach may make it difficult for vendors and buyers to get on the same page. CISA’s HBOM framework is meant to provide a common platform to “help organizations illuminate supply chains and support the efficient evaluation and mitigation of” hardware supply chain risks “on a voluntary and flexible basis.”

The body of the framework is organized into three key components. Appendix A sorts HBOMs into potential use cases for risks that they may face. For example, the compliance use case deals with adherence to internal and industry regulations, the security case evaluates exposure to known security vulnerabilities, and the availability case assesses potential impacts from world events and supply chain constraints.

In Appendix B, CISA provides a format that vendors and buyers can use to ensure consistency across products. The appendix also describes a method for addressing components and subcomponents acquired from third parties and tracking their potential vulnerabilities.

Appendix C lists component attributes that may be appropriate to include in an HBOM, with the goal of creating “consistency across HBOMs by defining a data field associated with each attribute.”

Appendix D suggests potential enhancements that the ICT SCRM Task Force may later add to the document.

Grid security officials have been raising the alarm about hardware supply chains for some time as the operation of the North American power grid becomes increasingly reliant on remote connectivity and electronic devices largely manufactured in China.

In 2020, then-President Donald Trump declared a national emergency regarding foreign threats to the grid and banned federal agencies, citizens and companies from certain transactions involving grid equipment developed or manufactured by entities connected with “foreign adversaries” including China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. President Biden suspended Trump’s order upon taking office but largely reinstated it after a review. (See Biden Reinstates Trump Supply Chain Order.)

CISA Identifies New China Threat

Just days after releasing the HBOM framework, CISA, along with the FBI, National Security Agency, and their counterparts in Japan, issued a joint warning that cyber actors linked to China have demonstrated the capability to modify router firmware and install custom malware in targeted computer systems. The cyber group, dubbed BlackTech by law enforcement, has targeted “a wide range of public organizations and private industries across the U.S. and East Asia,” in sectors including technology, industry, electronics and telecommunication.

BlackTech — also called Palmerworm, Circuit Panda and Temp.Overboard — has been active since 2010, the agencies said in a more detailed advisory. Like Volt Typhoon, another China-linked hacking group that CISA warned about earlier this year, BlackTech uses so-called “living off the land” techniques to hide within a target system by appearing to be legitimately installed software. (See NERC Issues Cybersecurity Data Request.)

The group targets international subsidiaries of Japanese and U.S. companies, first gaining access to the branches and then pivoting to attack the central offices and steal confidential information.

“With our U.S. and international partners, CISA continues to call urgent attention to China’s sophisticated and aggressive global cyber operations to gain persistent access and, in the case of BlackTech actors, steal intellectual property and sensitive data,” said Eric Goldstein, CISA’s executive assistant director for cybersecurity. “We encourage all organizations to review the advisory, take action to mitigate risk, report any evidence of anomalous activity and continue to visit [CISA’s China page] for ongoing updates about the heightened risk posed by PRC cyber actors.”

Posted on

New Mexico Contemplates Organized Market Choice

When it comes to choosing one of the two competing Western day-ahead market offerings, who else is participating in the market is a key consideration, a representative of a New Mexico utility said last week.

The New Mexico Public Regulation Commission (PRC) held a workshop on Sept. 21 to discuss the pros and cons of utility participation in a regional day-ahead market or RTO. The discussion came as CAISO prepares to roll out its extended day-ahead market, in competition with SPP and its Markets+ offering.

Kelsey Martinez with the Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) said during the workshop that both market operators are “proven,” and PNM believes the two offerings would provide similar benefits.

“Less and less of the decision feels about the market operator and the market design,” said Martinez, who is PNM’s RTO and markets manager. “And more and more of it feels really about who’s in the market with you. So which resources are in the market, which transmission is in the market, what loads are in the market.”

In written comments to the commission, PNM was even more specific, saying “existing market transmission connectivity represents the largest deciding factor in choosing a day-ahead market.”

PNM said it currently has the most market transmission connectivity with Arizona Public Service. PNM expects to select a day-ahead market in 2024.

PNM also worked with consultant Energy and Environmental Economics (E3) to look at the impact of market seams between New Mexico and Arizona. The utility defined seams as areas where entities that share transmission connectivity are in different market footprints.

“For PNM … [the study] showed a large reduction in benefits when seams exist between Arizona and New Mexico,” the utility said in its comments.

PNM noted that it won’t know what transmission connections will be in each footprint until other utilities reveal their day-ahead market choices.

The E3 analysis was a follow-up to a report the consultant prepared for the Western Markets Exploratory Group, looking at the impact of different market footprints on WMEG member benefits.

Moving Renewables to Market

In August, the PRC opened a docket to establish “guiding principles” for participation in a regional day-ahead market or RTO by two investor-owned utilities in the state, PNM and El Paso Electric. (See NM Commission to Set Standards for RTO, Day-ahead Participation.)

PNM has been participating in CAISO’s Western Energy Imbalance Market (WEIM) since 2021 and El Paso Electric joined the WEIM this year.

Last week’s workshop was scheduled as part of PRC’s guiding principle development. In addition, PNM, El Paso Electric and other stakeholders filed lengthy written comments answering questions posed in the commission’s initial order opening the docket.

Some stakeholders used the workshop as an opportunity to make a pitch for a Western RTO.

“Moving forward in the stepladder of market opportunities before us is good, but stopping short of a full RTO leaves real opportunity on the table,” said Rikki Seguin, executive director of the Interwest Energy Alliance.

Interwest is an advocacy group that represents utility-scale renewable energy developers in six Western states. For the renewable industry, “getting to the benefits of centralized transmission planning and cost allocation is key,” Seguin said.

To meet state policy goals, the West will need to add 9 GW of renewable energy each year starting in 2026, Seguin said, citing data from Energy Strategies’ Western Flexibility Assessment.

New Mexico is well-positioned to help satisfy that demand, she said, with its “world class” solar and wind resources.

But “absent the transmission planning … it’s going to be really hard to move those renewables to market,” Seguin said.

Bifurcation Challenges

Public interest group Western Resource Advocates (WRA) also weighed in on the regional market issue in written comments and with a presentation during the PRC workshop.

WRA said a single, large-footprint market would provide the most economic, environmental and reliability benefits to New Mexico. In terms of challenges arising from regional markets, WRA said one of the largest would be a bifurcation of day-ahead energy markets and their impact on efficient clean energy dispatch and economic gains from the WEIM.

In addition, WRA is concerned about New Mexico utilities’ decision-making process for joining a market.

“The choice to join a regional market … should not be based on grounds of expediency to satisfy an adjoining utility that it relies on for transmission access and dispatch,” WRA said in written comments.

Posted on

MISO Somewhat Open to COD Allowances in Interconnection Queue Rules

MISO has signaled it is receptive — but only to an extent— to stakeholder ideas on loosening its commercial operation date deadlines in its generation interconnection queue.

MISO will collect stakeholder suggestions through Oct. 17 on how it might stretch deadlines around commercial operation date rules in its interconnection queue. The RTO is experiencing a growing number of generation projects that are approved to connect to the system but aren’t finished.

However, MISO said the potential commercial operation dates generation developers are using in negotiations for upcoming generator interconnect agreements (GIAs) so far don’t exceed the existing extensions MISO’s tariff allows.

“It appears at least on the surface that commercial operation date extensions are adequate,” MISO’s Brady Mann said at a Sept. 26 Interconnection Process Working Group teleconference.

Mann pointed out that MISO allows a three-year deferral when transmission owners cannot bring equipment necessary to connect new generation into service on time.

MISO policy requires GIAs struck among interconnection customers, transmission owners and MISO to contain a commercial operation date that’s within three years of the date originally requested in their queue applications. The grid operator additionally allows up to a three-year extension of the commercial operation date in the initial GIA. When developers can’t meet either extension, MISO can remove the project from its queue or developers can seek a waiver of the queue tariff deadlines with FERC.

Mann added that MISO is open to hearing potential remedies from stakeholders.

“It is a new world we’re living in, so having that collaboration and conversation will be helpful,” Mann said. “Our intent here is to understand the issues you’re facing and additional remedies that may be required.”

EDP Renewables last month requested that MISO consider extending its grace period or letting developers amend commercial operation dates to be more realistic in GIAs. The developer said study delays and supply chain setbacks mean interconnection customers can’t realistically meet the commercial operation dates set forth in the first drafts of their GIAs. (See MISO to Assess Extending Queue’s COD Grace Period.)

Multiple renewable energy developers told MISO that behind-schedule commercial operation dates will be common.

“We’re in a different world than in 2018. There are supply chain and delivery issues on both the interconnection customer and transmission side. … The problem is not likely to go away, in our view, and will extend into several future queue cycles,” EDP Renewables’ David Mindham said. “We believe it’s better to deal with this problem holistically than file a bunch of one-off waivers at FERC.”

Mann said MISO expects both interconnection customers and transmission owners to simultaneously gather supplies, conduct engineering analysis and construct facilities after a GIA is negotiated. He said one shouldn’t be waiting on the other to move ahead.

Growing Share of Approved And Unbuilt Generation

In a separate presentation, Mann said volumes of executed generator interconnection agreements are on the rise, with the 35 GW in GIAs expected to be executed by year’s end more than doubling 2022’s 16 GW.

MISO acknowledged the lion’s share of gigawatts from recently executed GIAs isn’t yet in commercial operation. Mann said MISO predicts a “large increase” in commercial operations in 2028, when developers exhaust their three-year grace periods.

MISO has said it has about 49 GW worth of generation projects that are approved to connect to the system under completed GIAs but remain unbuilt, which raises its near-term reliability risks. (See MISO: Reliability Risk Upped by 49 GW in Approved but Unbuilt Generation.)

By year’s end, MISO expects that value to grow to 66 GW in executed GIAs for generation projects that have yet to reach commercial operation.

Meanwhile, MISO’s interconnection generation queue studies continue to slip on their intended timelines. Most interconnection queue cycles for MISO’s four planning regions are delayed.

Posted on

DOE Looks to Build Clean Energy Park at Hanford Site

The U.S. Department of Energy wants to convert 30 square miles of the state of Washington’s heavily contaminated Hanford Site into a clean technology park.

But the agency doesn’t yet know what type of clean tech it wants there.

Led by Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk, DOE officials talked about the concept Friday with about 75 people, including developers, in Richland.

The Hanford Site consists of 586 square miles of land set aside for nuclear research and development, of which the central portion and much of the Columbia River shoreline are highly contaminated. Southeastern Hanford borders Richland with a 30-square-mile portion that is mostly uncontaminated.

That 30 square miles includes the fenced-off Columbia Generating Station nuclear plan and a long-defunct research reactor. A handful of small, mildly contaminated waste burial sites are also in the area, which DOE says would be easy to clean up. The area is adjacent to the Pacific Northwest Laboratory’s complex in northern Richland.

DOE wants to combine its cleanup and energy missions by turning this area into a clean tech park, Turk said. However, it does not plan to pin down what it wants to put in that park for a while.

The agency is seeking public comments on how it should proceed by Oct. 12. It then expects to issue a request for proposals in late November. Decisions to narrow down those proposals should occur by early 2024.

“We’re not going into this with, ‘It has to be this technology, it has to be that technology.’ … We’re soliciting creative options,” Turk said. He declined to say if solar farms would be considered for the site.

Brian Harkins, DOE Hanford Site assistant manager for mission support, said wind farms would face hurdles in the area because of their vibrations. Just west of the 30 square miles is a Nobel-prize-winning observatory that captures gravitational waves from black holes and colliding stars. Its instruments are ultra-sensitive to outside vibrations.

The site could conceivably hold several projects simultaneously. The requirement is that any specific project must generate at least 200 MW of electricity. “We’re thinking big, really big,” said Ingrid Kolb, director of DOE’s Office of Management.

The area has been already heavily surveyed on environmental and cultural matters. DOE officials estimated that the appropriate environmental impact studies would take two to four years to complete. One advantage is that the studies would tackle the entire 30 square miles at once, instead of being divided into separate studies for individual projects, DOE officials said.

In a separate development, southeast Washington economic development organization Tri-City Development Council earlier this month said it planned to set up a nonprofit subsidiary to help develop clean energy businesses in the region. The group’s leader told NetZero Insider that it has not yet set a timetable for getting the venture up and running or identifying goals. (See Southeast Wash. Looks to Become Clean Tech Hub.)

Posted on

Wash. Judge Rejects Cap-and-trade Lawsuit

A Washington judge on Friday rejected a lawsuit that sought to suspend the state’s cap-and-trade program.

Thurston County Superior Court Judge Mary Sue Wilson ruled that the 2022 transportation bill that included a clause giving Washington’s Department of Ecology rulemaking authority to implement a 2021 cap-and-invest law did not violate the state’s constitution by having more than one subject in it.

The conservative Citizen Action Defense Fund sued the state in January, alleging that the Legislature invalidated its 2022 transportation bill by cramming multiple subjects into it.

The lawsuit had two intentions, said Jackson Maynard, executive director for the Citizen Action Defense Fund. One was to hold the line on the state constitutional rule that limits a bill to one subject. The second was to at least temporarily halt the state’s new cap-and trade program by eliminating Ecology’s rulemaking authority.

The program went into effect Jan. 1 and has so far this year raised $1.462 billion in three quarterly auctions and one special auction. (See Wash. Allowance Prices Surge Again in 3rd Cap-and-trade Auction.)

The money is earmarked for many programs that combat climate change, which has been linked to health, agriculture, fish and wildfire issues. A large portion of cap-and-trade revenue is used to address transportation concerns.

Plaintiff’s attorney Callie Castillo argued Friday that the Legislature overreached by loading too many subjects into the transportation bill.

“We don’t know if this is a transportation bill or a climate action bill. Those two don’t go together. … [The bill] is simply a tax increase,” Castillo said.

Assistant Attorney General Alicia Young argued that the disputed bill provided resources to tackle transportation programs with several sub-sections to address a bigger issue.

“This is an omnibus bill to address a broad issue in multiple ways. … This is a resources bill,” Young said.

Judge Wilson agreed with Young. “In this legislation, subjects come together or hang together on one topic,” Wilson said.

Posted on

State Ratepayer Advocates Discuss Role in Energy Transition

BURLINGTON, Vt. — ISO-NE, states and stakeholders must work together to prevent transmission costs from skyrocketing amid the energy transition, consumer advocates told the ISO-NE Consumer Liaison Group (CLG) last week.

Consumer advocates from all six New England states convened at the CLG fall meeting Thursday to discuss their role in the transition off fossil fuels.

The advocates stressed the importance of keeping energy affordable for consumers, while highlighting the dual climate and cost benefits of limiting the peak demand on the grid as electrification of transportation and heating increases.

“We’re trying to broaden the definition of what a consumer interest is,” said Bill Dornbos, legal director for Connecticut’s Office of Consumer Counsel, making the case that consumer needs include both low rates and a healthy climate and environment.

Dornbos added that it is time to “rebalance the power dynamic between ratepayers and utilities” to spur innovation and adapt to the climate crisis.

Andrew Landry, Maine’s deputy public advocate, agreed on the importance of keeping electric rates low in the clean energy transition.

“I believe, and our office believes, that we can achieve our climate policy goals in a way that is affordable,” Landry said.

Jacob Powser of the CLG Coordinating Committee | Rebecca Beaulieu

ISO-NE has projected a 2050 winter peak of up to 57 GW due to the electrification of heating and transportation as part of its 2050 Transmission Study. (See ISO-NE Planners Outline Potential Solutions for 2050 Tx Overloads.) Landry said more planning and focus is needed to limit the growth of the peak, including increased investment in demand response programs, energy efficiency and storage.

“I think we have underinvested in efficiency and demand response,” Landry said, noting that ISO-NE indicated in the initial transmission study findings that a 10% reduction in the 2050 winter peak would be associated with a one-half to one-third reduction in transmission costs. (See ISO-NE Projects Decrease in Gas, Increase in Coal and Oil for 2032.) Landry added the region should “do everything we can to lower that peak.”

Landry said ISO-NE has a key role in keeping transmission costs low as demand from electrification increases.

“I think market rules can be designed to support demand response and support energy storage,” Landry said, adding that “we also need to think about demand response and storage in the transmission planning process,” along with non-transmission alternatives.

Don Kreis, New Hampshire’s consumer advocate, agreed on the need to keep peak loads low and prevent runaway transmission costs.

“I am absolutely rabid about energy efficiency,” Kreis said, adding that there is an overlap in climate and ratepayer interests. Kreis also called for more scrutiny on asset condition projects, which represent the largest source of new transmission investments in the region. Asset condition projects are transmission upgrades for infrastructure that is old, obsolete or in need of wide-scale repair.

This month, Kreis co-signed a letter with representatives from Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island calling for a pause on all nonemergency asset condition projects not yet under construction until the asset condition approval process is reformed. The current process requires relatively minimal scrutiny for the multimillion-dollar projects, the costs for which are spread among ratepayers across New England. (See States Press New England TOs on Asset Condition Projects.)

The consumer advocates wrote there is about $5 billion in proposed, planned or under-construction asset condition projects and that this cost has increased by approximately 50% in the past six months.

“All stakeholders … need the opportunity to assess the reasonableness of each [transmission owner’s] planned spending,” the consumer advocates wrote. “Ultimately, the NETOs must be held accountable for the prudency of this spending.”

Community Members Call for Clean Energy, Transparency

Several local climate and environmental justice advocates who spoke at the meeting called on ISO-NE to take bolder steps to spur the transition away from fossil fuels.

Julie Macuga, a researcher for Global Energy Monitor, said it’s difficult for states to implement decarbonization policies when ISO-NE policies like the Minimum Offer Price Rule and forward capacity auctions ensure ratepayer dollars go directly to fossil fuels.

“ISO New England has the power to support actual grid reliability in the face of climate change,” Macuga said, adding that “you can end coal, gas, biomass and more.”

Jacob Powsner, a member of the CLG Coordinating Committee, climate activist and maple farmer, told RTO Insider he would like to see more transparency and democratic engagement from ISO-NE, as well as a larger voice for ratepayers at NEPOOL.

“If a member of the public wants to join [NEPOOL], it costs $500,” said Powsner, who added that even as an active member of the CLG Coordinating Committee, he still personally would have to bear the costs of NEPOOL membership.

“That would just come out of the farm budget,” Powsner said.

Energy transition

Burlington activists Leif Taranta and Julie Macuga | Rebecca Beaulieu

Leif Taranta, a Burlington-based community organizer, emphasized the impacts of climate-fueled flooding that hit Vermont this summer, displacing hundreds of residents.

“What is reliable energy when business as usual means that folks don’t even have a light switch?” Taranta asked.

Taranta called for increased focus on community resilience solutions and said there is “widespread desire” for programs including community solar, net metering and demand response.

“We can change our ways to take care of each other, and that should be the first priority,” Taranta said.

Posted on

Massachusetts Announces Permitting And Siting Reform Commission

To increase the pace of development for clean energy resources, Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey (D) signed an executive order Tuesday creating a state Commission on Clean Energy Infrastructure Siting and Permitting.

The goal of the commission, the administration said in a press release, is to identify and reduce barriers for clean energy infrastructure and cut permitting timelines. The commission will work with state agencies within the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) and make recommendations to government officials and legislators.

“This commission represents our administration’s efforts to bring people together and build consensus to tackle one of the most complex issues of our time,” Healey said, adding that “the clean energy transition can’t wait.”

The announced commission members, who were sworn in on Tuesday, represent a variety of interests, including labor, environmental justice and climate groups, electric utilities and the clean energy industry.

“With these members leading this effort, we are confident that the recommendations will be smart, balanced and ready for action,” said EEA Secretary Rebecca Tepper.

The commission also will make recommendations about how best to engage with communities in expedited permitting processes and ensure the benefits of the energy transition extend to all state residents.

“We’re going to need a lot of new infrastructure, and we’re going to need it fast,” said Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll. “With these stakeholders at the table, we’re going to build serious consensus on how to tackle this challenge in a way that ensures environmental justice communities don’t bear a disproportionate burden, greenspace and other development priorities are protected, and we can all share in the benefits of clean energy.”

The executive order also tasked the commission with convening a “Siting Practitioner Advisory Group” to advise the commission on technical issues. That group will be chaired by Mary Beth Gentleman, a former assistant secretary for policy at the EEA and partner at Foaley Hoag.

The co-chairs of the legislature’s Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy (TUE), Rep. Jeff Roy (D) and Sen. Mike Barrett (D), both have listed permitting and siting reform as top priorities of the current legislative session and are on the commission. (See Checking in on Clean Energy at The Mass. Legislature.)

Rep. Roy introduced a bill (H.3215) this session that would create an electric infrastructure permitting office to issue consolidated permits covering all necessary state and local approvals for clean energy infrastructure, which the office would need to issue within seven months of an application.

“What we’re trying to do,” Roy told NetZero Insider this year, “is move the community input back to the beginning of the process, give folks an idea of what they’re trying to do and how it’s going to help them and then streamline the permitting process so it runs parallel.”

The TUE committee played a large role in the omnibus climate bills passed in the legislature’s two prior sessions, and the committee’s leaders have said they intend to construct another climate bill in the current session, which ends Nov. 15.

Healey’s executive order also creates an Interagency Siting and Permitting Task Force to inform the commission, with experts from the EEA, Economic Development, Housing and Livable Communities, and Transportation Executive Offices.

A final report from the commission is due at the end of March 2024.

Posted on

DOE, FERC Outline Plans for Possible Government Shutdown

The split control of Congress means another possible shutdown of the federal government looms this weekend with a funding deadline of Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

While several days remain before the deadline that could be extended by just a short-term deal, the Department of Energy and FERC already have laid out plans for what would be the first shutdown of the government since 2018. (See FERC to Furlough Most Employees in Govt. Shutdown.)

FERC would run with a skeleton crew of 60 as 1,506 out of 1,566 employees would not work after the agency runs out of funding. The commission said it would be able to keep going for some time using money it has on hand, but once exhausted it would limit activities to the bare minimum for as long as the government is unfunded.

DOE normally has 13,850 full-time employees and some 4,139 of those are financed by a resource other than the annual appropriations Congress is fighting over, while 1,404 employees are “necessary to protect life and property.”

Both agencies said they would be able to wind down standard operations within a half day of finding out the government is not funded.

FERC would keep up its safety reviews of dams and natural gas infrastructure, as well as continuing to monitor the bulk power system for reliability and policing energy markets against manipulation.

As presidential appointees, the commissioners themselves would continue working and issuing any orders that have to come out. For court cases, FERC would ask for stays. If courts deny stays, then staff will have to meet any deadlines in their cases.

DOE headquarters would keep a small staff to help coordinate its actions that must continue, which include maintaining and safeguarding the country’s nuclear arsenal and providing electricity from federal power administrations.

Bonneville Power Administration is self-funded and will continue to operate normally (its employees are covered in the category where their salaries are funded outside of the normal appropriations process). The other power marketing administrations (Southeastern Power Administration, Southwestern Power Administration and Western Area Power Administration) will perform functions related to the safety of human life and the protection of property by engaging in controlling and directing power to utilities, transmission of power and repair of the power transmission system.

“After the exhaustion of available balances, those activities not related to the preservation of life and property, unnecessary to the discharge of the President’s constitutional power, not funded by other than annual appropriations or not otherwise expressly authorized by law will cease,” DOE’s plan said.

Posted on

GE Sues Wind Turbine Blade Recycling Company

General Electric is suing a contractor it says failed to recycle GE customers’ old wind turbine blades.

GE alleges it paid Global Fiberglass Solutions of Texas LLC $16.9 million to provide an environmentally sound end-of-life disposal for about 5,000 blades, but GFS instead stockpiled them with other companies’ used blades.

This was “fraud and deception,” GE states in a Sept. 20 filing in federal court in New York City. (Case 1:23-cv-08346)

It also tarnished GE’s reputation when the situation was publicized, the lawsuit states.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality measured two GFS stockpiles in Sweetwater, Texas, at a combined 450,000 cubic yards during a 2021-2022 investigation of unauthorized storage of industrial solid waste.

Iowa regulators conducted a similar investigation of three stockpiles in that state in 2020.

Global Fiberglass Solutions is based in Washington state. Its LinkedIn page indicates it also has operations in Sweetwater and in Newton, Iowa. The most recent post on its Facebook page is more than three years old. A top-of-the-page banner indicates its website is under construction.

A person who answered the company’s phone number Tuesday said no one was available to speak to NetZero Insider about the lawsuit.

Allegations

GE’s lawsuit makes the following statements and allegations:

    • GFS hosted GE on-site in Texas to demonstrate the process by which it reduced the massive blades to pellets that could be reused in a variety of products.
    • GE contracted with GFS in 2017 and 2018 to remove roughly 5,000 blades from GE customer sites in Iowa and Texas and recycle them.
    • GFS billed GE for its services within 48 hours of completion of removal from each site.
    • GE paid a premium — $3,525 or $3,600 per blade — to what it thought was an environmentally conscious industry leader.
    • GFS repeatedly assured GE that it was actively recycling them.
    • GE heard reports that GFS instead was stockpiling the blades; it visited Sweetwater in late 2018 and saw the GFS facility did not appear to be in full operation.
    • GE on Dec. 18, 2018, demanded GFS rectify this breach of agreement within 10 days.
    • GFS “all but shut down” its operations; GE cannot be certain that any of the roughly 5,000 blades have been recycled.
    • The Iowa Department of Justice in September 2022 threatened civil action against GFS and GE under the state’s solid waste law; three months later, GE agreed to pay another company $5.5 million to recycle the blades stockpiled in Iowa to avoid litigation and prevent further harm to its reputation.

In its lawsuit, GE is seeking return of the money it paid GFS, plus interest; court costs and legal fees; and declaratory relief on indemnification for the third-party expenses it has incurred.

Background

Onshore wind power is one of the largest businesses of General Electric Renewable Energy. One of its lines is repowering or servicing existing wind farms, which can entail replacing turbine blades. As part of its sustainability pledge, GE actively seeks alternatives to landfilling these extremely large and heavy objects.

Aerial images of the main Sweetwater stockpile are striking — thousands of blade sections and nacelle components gleaming in the sunlight, arranged in piles with aisles between them.

Texas Monthly published a report in August 2023 on local frustration with the situation. Neighbors worry the site is a breeding ground for rattlesnakes and mosquitoes; community leaders fear the company will never remove the blades.

The report quotes the managing director of GFS saying the company is ramping up to shred the blades into pieces the size of coarse sand and has found a buyer for the material. He said the heaps of blades would be gone from Sweetwater by late spring 2024.

He declined to discuss the situation in Iowa.