News Home

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

News Watch Home

9th Circuit tosses suit over electricity mandate  

Credit:  By NICK MCCANN | Courthouse News Service | August 11, 2015 | www.courthousenews.com ~~

Wholesale electricity customers who sued the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission do not have standing to pursue claims the agency improperly issued a nondiscrimination mandate, the Ninth Circuit ruled.

The Bonneville Power Administration sells electricity generated from dams in the Columbia River in the Pacific Northwest, largely to public and private utilities.

In 2011, the Administration enacted a policy that allowed it to curtail customers’ electricity generation through dispatch orders, in response both to expected high water levels in the Columbia River Basin, and an increase in wind power generation.

The policy was effective between May 2011 and the end of March 2012.

“Dispatch Orders were to be issued only as a last resort during ‘overgeneration events’ when spill limits were reached, water levels required Bonneville to generate electricity that outpaced demand, and excess hydropower could not be disposed of at low or zero prices or by curtailing non-wind generation,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Andrew Hurwitz on behalf of the three-judge panel.

In June 2012, a group of wind generators filed a complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, seeking a order revising the administration’s policy. Several wholesale energy customers joined the complaint, claiming the administration could pass electricity costs onto customers in future proceedings.

Later that year, the commission approved an administration policy that allowed it to redispatch wind generation, called it “a balanced interim measure that addressed Bonneville’s oversupply problems,” but ordered the administration to propose a different cost-sharing plan.

FERC had previously concluded that the redispatch policy “results in noncomparable transmission service that unfairly treats non-Federal [i.e., wind] generating resources connected to Bonneville’s transmission system.”

After revisions, the commission found BPA’s methodology for oversupply costs complied with the commission’s nondiscrimination mandate.

A number of the administration’s “preference customers” and trade organizations representing their interests petitioned the FERC orders for review before the Ninth Circuit.

The petitioners argued that FERC’s nondiscrimination mandate exceeded the agency’s authority because the redispatch of generation involved generation, and not transmission. They also argued the commission did not give a reason for the mandate or consider relevant evidence.

While the judges found the petitioners “plainly” suffered imminent injury in the form of increased energy prices, they concluded the consumers do not have statutory standing under FERC rules.

“Ultimate consumers of energy plainly stand to benefit from open access and increased competition in energy markets,” Hurwitz wrote. “But the interests of Bonneville’s wholesale energy customers are different. They seek to reduce Bonneville’s costs, which are passed on to them by statutory mandate.”

The panel denied the petitioners’ petitions for review.


Source:  By NICK MCCANN | Courthouse News Service | August 11, 2015 | www.courthousenews.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.