Legislative Memos

IPPNY supports S.2585-A (Parker). This bill passed the Senate unanimously in 2021, and it would further the implementation of the Climate Action Council’s adopted Scoping Plan. The Scoping Plan indicates that the NYS Public Service Commission (PSC), in coordination with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, and other agencies “should identify, explore, evaluate, and support the development of dispatchable technologies and solutions as they emerge in support of the Climate Act’s requirements for a zero-emission electricity system by 2040 and for consistency with Section 7(2) and 7(3) of the Climate Act.”

IPPNY supports the purpose of S.1694 (Parker), which is to identify technology solutions to address the electric system reliability warnings made by the New York Independent System Operator’s (NYISO) 2021-2040 System & Resource Outlook, released just a few months ago. The NYISO is the federally established entity that ensures electric system reliability requirements are met and that operates competitive wholesale electricity markets in this state. The NYISO has continually provided warnings regarding looming reliability concerns, especially for New York City and Long Island.

Thank you, Chair Paulin, Chair Cusick, and Chair Englebright for the opportunity to testify before you today. The topic of today’s hearing is examining the role of State authorities in facilitating the development of renewable energy to meet the goals of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). When this hearing was first announced in June by Speaker Heastie, the purpose was to get additional public input about the Build Public Renewables Act, A.1466-D (Carroll) / S.6453-C (Parker), and to solicit testimony to help guide the development of a sound and sustainable approach to meeting the CLCPA’s goals.

We strongly oppose S.6453-C (Parker) / A.1466-D (Carroll). 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.

We strongly oppose S.6453-C (Parker) similar to A.1466-C (Carroll). 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.

We strongly oppose S.9426 (Parker) / A.10484 (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 already rising energy costs.

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.

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.

IPPNY opposes S.7006-A (May) / A.7768-A (Kelles). This legislation is unclear and could have broader unintended consequences.

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.