Legislative Memos

IPPNY opposes A.6251 (Carroll) / S.4378-A (Brisport). This legislation could have major negative consequences for electric system reliability. The bill would require owners and operators of a peaker plant located in, or adjacent to, an environmental justice community to submit a compliance plan at the time of renewal of a Title V air permit from the 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.

IPPNY strongly opposes S.4378 (Brisport). This bill would have major negative consequences for electric system reliability. As New York pursues economy-wide electrification, our grid will become more dependent on wind and solar resources, which are, by their very nature, intermittent. When the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining, peakers (rapid response, long duration, dispatchable units) will be able to support the grid and maintain reliability.

IPPNY opposes A.10236-B (Galef) / S.8154-B (Harckham). The legislation is pre-empted by the jurisdiction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and other federal agencies over the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and the use of their nuclear decommissioning trust (NDT).

IPPNY opposes S.8154-B (Harckham) / A.10236-B (Galef). The legislation is pre-empted by the jurisdiction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and other federal agencies over the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and the use of their nuclear decommissioning trust (NDT).

IPPNY opposes A.10236-A (Galef) / S.8154-A (Harckham). The legislation is pre-empted by the jurisdiction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and other federal agencies over the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and the use of their nuclear decommissioning trust (NDT).

IPPNY supports A.10006 (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.

IPPNY supports A.7682 (Cusick) / S.6195 (Parker). The bills would establish: (a) minimum cybersecurity and safety standards; and (b) minimum cybersecurity insurance requirements, which would be applicable to third parties seeking to connect to any electric or gas corporation's systems to receive consumption or other data. The legislation would require the New York State Public Service Commission to promulgate rules and regulations by January 1, 2021 to ensure the implementation and enforcement of the bills’ provisions.

IPPNY opposes A.7569-B (Galef). The legislation conflicts with, and is pre-empted by, federal labor law, and it would establish a damaging precedent for all types and sizes of businesses. The legislation specifically would require employees at the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant to be paid prevailing wages. The bill would require the successor owner of the Indian Point facility to retain its workforce. The legislation would require the Department of Labor to oversee the payment of prevailing wage to employees at Indian Point until the facility is closed.

IPPNY strongly opposes S.6112 (Parker) / A.7376 (Cusick). These bills would allow utilities (combination gas and electric corporations) to own "renewable reclamation projects," in contravention of long-standing State policy that prohibits utility ownership of electric generating facilities, which could expose ratepayers needlessly to higher costs. The bills send the wrong investment signal to private independent developers of renewable energy and energy storage projects at exactly the wrong time, when the State has announced its goals to dramatically increase its renewable and energy storage resources and is seeking private sector investment to meet those goals. If adopted, these bills would have the immediate impact of chilling private sector energy investment in the state because private developers cannot compete with rate-regulated utilities that charge energy consumers for all costs.

One of the most essential aspects to consider under the Climate and Community Protection Act (CCPA) is the role of carbon offsets. The implementation of offsets allows for the continued use of efficient facilities that are the backbone of our reliable electric system while accounting for their emissions. Furthermore, the economy-wide approach needed to significantly cut emissions requires the flexibility for implementation that can be provided by offsets.