Legislative Memos

Posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2022 at 4:06 PM
IPPNY opposes A.6251-B (Carroll) similar to S.4378-B (Brisport). This legislation could have major negative consequences for electric system reliability. The bill would require owners and operators of peaker plants located in, or adjacent to, disadvantaged communities, primarily in New York City, to submit a compliance plan at the time of renewal of a Title V air permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to specify how the facility will be converted to operate using renewable energy or battery energy storage in five years. If a facility is needed for reliability and a replacement with a renewable energy system or energy storage is infeasible, there can be only one five-year extension of the deadline for replacement. The DEC cannot approve a permit for a facility that does not comply with the plan.
Posted on Tuesday, May 10, 2022 at 1:01 PM
IPPNY strongly opposes A.4503 (Thiele) / S.2042 (Gaughran). This bill would cause serious harm to companies in competition with each other to provide electricity to meet the needs of consumers.
Posted on Friday, May 6, 2022 at 10:36 AM
We strongly oppose A.1466-B (Carroll) / S.6453-A (Parker). This legislation would, among other provisions, significantly expand the New York Power Authority’s (NYPA) ability to acquire, develop, own, and operate existing and new renewable electric generating facilities and energy storage in this State. The bill is unnecessary and would undermine the current, successful model, which relies on renewable energy and energy storage companies - big and small - to develop these projects to meet New York's energy goals and the requirements of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) and to grow the State’s clean energy economy. The legislation also would not provide revenues to local communities, as NYPA does not pay taxes.
Posted on Monday, May 2, 2022 at 11:49 AM
IPPNY opposes S.4371-C (Biaggi) / A.6150-A (Septimo). The requirements of this legislation are unnecessary, overly broad, and redundant, given that power plant owners already monitor and report their stack emissions to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Those emissions are below minimum health risk standards.
Posted on Monday, May 2, 2022 at 11:38 AM
IPPNY opposes S.4162 (Harckham) / A.6652 (Englebright). This legislation is identical to the bill that was rejected by Veto #60 of 2020, due to “tremendous fiscal impact to state and local governments.” The bill would lead to delays that would jeopardize the thorough and necessary review of projects because of the doubling of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) workload to review, issue and enforce permits. The Veto Message also states that oversight over the involved streams already is being done by the State’s Soil and Water Conservation Districts, who will continue to ensure adequate environmental controls for these streams.
Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 9:45 AM
IPPNY supports S.8343 (Sanders) / A.9275 (Vanel). This legislation would help the State identify ways to enhance the ability of energy intensive businesses to comply with the emission reduction requirements of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). The Climate Action Council’s Draft Scoping Plan includes a provision for the State to find ways to aid energy intensive businesses to meet the CLCPA’s targets.
Posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 11:03 AM
We strongly oppose S.8384 (Parker) / A.9531 (Cusick). This bill would allow utility ownership of renewable generation, in contravention of over 25 years of New York State energy policy that shields electricity ratepayers from the risk of project development. Re-exposing ratepayers to this risk is not in the public interest, especially given rising energy costs. Having utilities build renewables and charge the full cost to ratepayers will not help achieve the targets of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) any faster or cheaper, partly because utilities cannot get through the Renewable Energy Siting Law (Executive Law Section 94-c) process any quicker than private independent power producers (IPP), as everyone needs to follow the same requirements for environmental review.
Posted on Monday, April 25, 2022 at 11:00 AM
IPPNY supports S.5579-A (Parker) similar to A.3904 (Cusick). This legislation would enhance protection of critical infrastructure, such as power plants, from cyberattacks. Among other provisions, the bill would amend existing law on the power and duties of the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services, and it would add cyberattacks to the list of parameters for which an assessment of the vulnerability of critical infrastructure (including, but not limited to, power plants and now, under the legislation, industrial control systems) would be done and for which protective strategies would be developed.
Posted on Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:53 AM
IPPNY supports S.8327-A (Kennedy)/ A.3768-A (Cusick). The bill would add fuel-flexible linear electric generating equipment to the provisions of the Net Metering Program and within the definition of alternate energy production facility in the Public Service Law. New York previously has provided parity-recognition for this technology relative to similarly beneficial clean energy alternatives by updating State law to add fuel-flexible linear generators to the list of equipment eligible for Sales Tax and Real Property Tax relief.
Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 3:53 PM
IPPNY opposes A.7389-C (Kelles) / S.6486-D (Parker). This bill would impose a two-year ban on the issuance and renewal of permits for fossil-fueled power plants involved with supplying “behind-the-meter” electricity to certain types of cryptocurrency mining operations, even though the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) already enforces permit requirements. This bill is also inconsistent with the Climate Action Council’s Draft Scoping Plan in that it sends a negative investment signal in business activity based upon energy use, even though associated emissions and impacts already are required to be controlled under State law.