Recent Projects

Policy Integrity submitted comments to the Department of Treasury and Internal Revenue Service on their proposed rule implementing the Section 45Y Clean Electricity Production Credit and Section 48E Clean Electricity Investment Credit. The comments focus on the treatment of waste methane fuels under these credits, emphasizing the need for accurate emissions accounting and preventing unintended consequences.

Advocates have been trying for decades to engage FERC in a significant course correction: assessing whether interstate gas pipelines serve the public interest, rather than relying on private contracts to assume that it does. Yet FERC has resolutely ignored its Natural Gas Act mandate to protect the public interest, including when it approved the Regional Energy Access pipeline despite substantial evidence showing the project would serve private interests at the public’s expense. In a case where Policy Integrity submitted an amicus brief demonstrating why FERC’s decision ought not receive deference, the D.C. Circuit vacated FERC’s authorization. This was the first time that the courts have done so for a project where there wasn’t blatant affiliate self-dealing.

The Institute for Policy Integrity submitted comments on the Illinois Commerce Commission's (ICC) draft Phase 1 Report from its Future of Gas Workshops, providing recommendations for the ICC to consider as it plans for Phase 2 of the workshops. Our comments aimed to ensure Phase 2 of the workshops thoroughly examines pathways for decarbonizing Illinois' gas system while considering economic, environmental, and equity impacts.

Institute for Policy Integrity submitted joint comments with Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law on the California Public Utilities Commission's Order Instituting Rulemaking to Update Rules for the Safety, Reliability, and Resiliency of Electrical Distribution Systems. The joint comments emphasize the importance of a comprehensive approach to climate resilience planning across utility sectors.

The State of Utah and others filed a lawsuit over EPA’s new Good Neighbor Rule in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The rule is the latest in a long line of EPA regulations effectuating the requirement that upwind States eliminate emissions that “significantly contribute” to downwind States’ inability to meet certain ambient air quality standards. We filed an amicus brief rebutting multiple arguments against the rule. Our brief explains that addressing the serious and complex spillover effects caused by air pollution was a central justification for the Clean Air Act and EPA’s regulatory impact analysis demonstrates that the rule is economically justified.  

In 2023, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued new energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters and consumer furnaces. In April 2024, a natural gas trade association challenged the standards in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, arguing that the standards are not economically justified. In response, Policy Integrity filed an amicus brief supporting DOE’s economic analyses and explaining how Petitioners’ and certain amici’s arguments overlook DOE’s sound assumptions and the relevant statutory framework.

In April 2024, EPA proposed retaining the secondary national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) and setting a new annual average standard for sulfur oxides (SOx). Policy Integrity submitted comments arguing that although the Proposed Rule begins to assess the various adverse welfare effects of SOx, NOx, and PM emissions and depositions that different populations may face, EPA should assess, consider, and present more information regarding both distributional impacts and future risks. 

In March 2024, a set of states and industry groups asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to stay the implementation of EPA’s rule to limit methane emissions from the oil and gas sector. Our Economics Director, Peter Howard, authored an expert declaration defending the agency's development and use of new values for the social cost of methane in the rule.