Recent Projects

The Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) issued a straw program design for electric storage. We submitted comments that support PURA's efforts to make energy storage part of its overarching decarbonization agenda and provide feedback. It is important, as we explain, that PURA take into account the potential emissions consequences of energy storage operations in designing its performance-based incentive.

President Biden announced his intent to nominate Richard Revesz to serve as Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the U.S Office of Management and Budget. Revesz is AnBryce Professor of Law and Dean Emeritus at NYU School of Law, where he directs the Institute for Policy Integrity. He is one of the nation’s leading voices in the fields of environmental and regulatory law and policy. Revesz will take a leave of absence from the Institute for Policy Integrity during this period. Jack Lienke and Burçin Ünel will serve as Interim Co-Executive Directors of the Institute.

Together with partner groups, we submitted joint comments to the Department of Energy (DOE) on its proposed rule to strengthen energy conservation standards for dedicated purpose pool-pump motors. Our comments applaud the agency for appropriately applying the social cost of greenhouse gases to estimate the climate benefits of the proposed standards, even though the standards would be cost-benefit justified without considering any climate benefits. We also encourage DOE to expand upon its rationale for adopting a global damages valuation and for the range of discount rates it applies to climate effects.

We submitted comments to FERC providing recommendations for how it can clarify and improve reforms proposed in its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking addressing transmission planning and cost allocation. If finalized, the rulemaking would require planning entities to undertake long-term transmission planning. Our comments recommend that FERC clarify (at a high level) what it means to undertake long-term planning over a 20-year time horizon. We also recommend more specific improvements that can be made, including providing minimum uniform requirements on model specifications and scenario planning based on best practices; instituting administrative guardrails to protect transmission customers from excessive costs if the Commission moves forward with its proposed Right of First Refusal; and mandating a uniform set of core benefits that all planners must consider.

We also submitted reply comments in the proceeding to underscore two points. In response to commenters that argued the Commission should reconsider its proposal in light of the level of uncertainty surrounding the future, we argue that it is future uncertainty that necessitates the long-term scenario planning contemplated by the rule. Such proactive transmission planning will allow planners to prepare for and react to changing circumstances and ensure a reliable and resilient grid in the face of uncertainty. Additionally, our reply comments reaffirm previous recommendations that the Commission should require planners to use a standardized cost-benefit analysis that properly accounts for societal benefits of new transmission.

The SEC has proposed a series of new disclosures for investment companies regarding their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) activities. These disclosures would reduce "greenwashing" - a practice where companies misrepresent the sustainability of their investments in order to advertise to investors looking to invest in green funds - by providing investors with comparable and decision-useful information about fund practices. We submitted comments on the SEC's economic analysis of the Proposed Rule. We commend the Commission for complying with relevant case law and internal guidance on cost-benefit analysis and recommend steps that the SEC could take in the final rule to provide additional clarity and context regarding its findings.

The SEC has proposed a rule that would better align the names of investment companies with investor expectations, including for Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) investment funds, by requiring portfolio distribution requirements for funds whose name connotes a particular investment strategy. We submitted comments on the SEC's economic analysis of the Proposed Rule. We commend the Commission for complying with relevant case law and internal guidance on cost-benefit analysis and recommend steps that the SEC could take in the final rule to provide additional clarity and context regarding its findings.