Harvey L. Reiter / Partner / Stinson Leonard Street LLP.
On February 24, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take a case that could have settled the long simmering issue of who should bear the burden of funding large scale transmission projects to move power from remote renewable energy rich regions to the consumers who can use that power.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear an appeal of FERC’s decision to approve a MISO methodology for allocating the costs of large “multi-value” projects among its customers means the debate about who should pay (and how much) rages on. As a result, disputes about allocating the costs of large transmission projects will continue to be addressed by FERC and the lower courts.
The Supreme Court’s decision also adds increasing importance to the outcome of appeals challenging FERC’s Order No. 1000, which mandates public utilities to fashion regional cost allocation agreements. Order No. 1000 appeals will be argued before the D.C. Circuit on March 20, 2014.
Stinson Leonard Street LLP
Filed Under: News