CPUC Program for Alternative Energy Contracts Preempted by More Eco-Friendly Federal Law
The Ninth Circuit on Monday found that the CPUC's program was preempted by a federal law which requires electric utilities to buy all power produced by alternative energy generators. The decision upholds an earlier ruling by a federal judge in San Francisco.
July 29, 2019 at 05:57 PM
3 minute read
In a potentially significant win for green energy production projects in California and the Western U.S., a federal appeals court has found that a California Public Utilities Commission program for determining when to award electric power contracts to alternative generators is preempted by federal law.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Monday found that the CPUC's program was preempted by the federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, which requires that electric utilities buy all power produced by alternative energy generators known as Qualifying Cogeneration Facilities, or QFs.
The Ninth Circuit panel agreed with a decision by U.S. District Judge James Donato of the Northern District of California, who found after a one-day bench trial in 2017 that the CPUC's program capped the amount of energy the state's utilities must purchase from alternative energy generators and set a market-based rate rather than one based on the utilities' avoided cost as required under federal law.
“Like the district court, we believe the conclusion to be drawn from this web of regulations is not complicated: California's Re-MAT program violates, and is therefore preempted by, PURPA,” wrote Judge M. Margaret McKeown in Monday's opinion.
Representatives of the CPUC didn't immediately respond to a request for comment Monday. Christine Jun Hammond, an in-house lawyer at the commission, argued the matter at the Ninth Circuit for the CPUC.
The decision is a win for Winding Creek Solar LLC, a company attempting to develop a one-megawatt solar generating facility in Lodi, California, which was represented by Eric Lee Christensen of Beveridge & Diamond. The Ninth Circuit decision, however, did leave standing Donato's ruling to not force Pacific Gas & Electric, a nonparty to the lawsuit, to enter into a contract with Winding Creek under the same CPUC program he'd found preempted.
“In what's otherwise an excellent opinion, it does defer the remedy once again,” said Christensen in a phone interview Monday. That decision, Christensen said, put it back in the hands of the CPUC to develop a program or a standard contract that would comply with PURPA and offer renewable energy projects a consistent, stable market price for their electricity, something needed to secure funding for projects.
“One way or the other, the program is going to look pretty significantly different from what the CPUC tried to defend in the Ninth Circuit,” Christensen said.
He added that although the win is significant for alternative providers in California, it could prove even more important in other Ninth Circuit venues outside the state. California, he noted, already has significant programs aimed at supporting alternative energy and explicit goals to cut back on carbon emissions.
“PURPA remains the really critical path for renewable energy projects” in other Ninth Circuit states, he said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: A $604.9M Trade Secrets Verdict With a Big Assist From a Juror Question
Securities Case Over Hawaiian Electric Company's Wildfire Readiness Dismissed
2 minute readFTC Bans Exec From Chevron Board—Exercising Authority It Doesn't Have, GOP Dissenters Say
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Ex-Six Flags CLO Lands New C-Suite Post—This Time as HR Chief
- 2Holland & Knight Promotes 42 Lawyers to Partner, Prioritizing Corporate Practices
- 3'Pickier' Law Firms Did Mergers at Same Rate Last Year as 2023
- 4Boxing Promoter Don King Hit With $3B Lawsuit Over Cancellation of 'Rumble in the Jungle 2'
- 5Letter From London: 5 Predictions for Big Law in 2025, Plus 5 More Risky Ones
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250