United States: The Court Has Spoken: State Programs To Incentivize The Construction Or Continued Operation Of Electric Generators Must Be Crafted To Avoid Preemption By Federal Law Or May Be Rejected

Energy regulators throughout the United States are looking for ways to encourage production of clean electricity, including from renewable sources. States, public utility commissions, power producers, power distributors and other stakeholders must be cautious not to run afoul of federal law or risk having their efforts derailed under the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution.

The case of Hughes v. Talen Energy Marketing, LLC, 136 S. Ct. 1288 (2016), decided by the US Supreme Court on April 19, 2016, is a cautionary tale with helpful insights.

Hughes involved the State of Maryland's effort to encourage new in-state power generation. In Maryland, wholesale sales of electricity are conducted via auction administered by PJM Interconnection, a Regional Transmission Organization (RTO). RTOs, together with Independent System Operators (ISOs), manage the wholesale bulk power grid for two-thirds of electricity consumers in the United States under oversight from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Federal Power Act (FPA) grants exclusive jurisdiction to FERC over wholesale sales and transmission of electricity in interstate commerce. The FPA preserves for the states regulation of retail electricity sales, local distribution of electricity and generation, including siting of generation. 

The Maryland Public Service Commission (MPSC) became concerned that PJM's electric generating capacity auction failed to provide sufficient economic incentives to encourage new in-state electricity generation where and when needed. As a result, the MPSC took matters into its own hands.

In Maryland, as in most states where generation has been unbundled from transmission and distribution service, Load Serving Entities (LSEs) typically purchase electricity at wholesale (for resale) through the regional markets administered by the ISO or RTO. Wholesale rates are determined by auction under ISO/RTO market rules approved by FERC. The LSEs, in turn, resell the electricity to retail consumers. Some RTOs (ISO-New England, NYISO, PJM and MISO) hold capacity auctions to meet the projected power demand. Each LSE must procure sufficient electric capacity to meet its customers' peak demand plus a reliability reserve margin. Power suppliers sell the electric capacity in the interstate market through RTO/ISO-administered auctions. All the electric capacity that clears the auction is purchased by LSEs at the locational "clearing price" for the capacity zone in which it is sold. In the case of PJM, all the capacity that bids in below a demand curve developed by PJM (and approved by FERC) receives the locational clearing price.

In some markets, in addition to purchasing power through the RTO auction, LSEs enter into bilateral contracts with electricity suppliers. The bilateral contract transfers ownership of the electric capacity and/or energy from the supplier to the LSE. LSEs may use bilateral contracts in such a way that the LSE purchases electricity below the auction rate. The FERC has long made accommodations for the use of bilateral contracts.

In 2012, MPSC issued an order aimed at encouraging construction of new in-state electric power generation by soliciting proposals for construction of a new power plant and requiring LSEs in Maryland to enter into long-term contracts with the new power plant at a specified rate determined through a competitive solicitation process. The MPSC ordered electric distribution companies (EDC) to enter "contracts for differences" (CFD), which required the seller to clear capacity from the new power plant in the PJM auction, but the EDC would pay the owner of the power plant the difference between the auction clearing price and the CFD price if the clearing price were lower. The owner would pay the EDC the difference between the auction clearing price and the CFD price if the auction price were higher. The CFD in effect locked in the capacity price the generator would receive. The MPSC scheme did not transfer the capacity from the new power plant to the EDC. Rather, the contract for differences constituted a financial arrangement to assure the owner of the power plant that, regardless of the auction price, it would receive the state-approved CFD price for the wholesale sale of its capacity.

Incumbent generators in PJM challenged the Maryland scheme in federal court, claiming that the State imposed a wholesale price for capacity outside the FERC-approved PJM auction. They asserted that such a state-supported price must yield to FERC's exclusive jurisdiction over wholesale sales of power in interstate commerce.

The district court ruled in favor of the generators and the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed, finding that the Maryland program and CFDs were both field preempted and conflict preempted. PPL EnergyPlus, LLC v. Nazarian, 753 F.3d 467, 476, 479 (4th Cir. 2014). Under field preemption, when a state law or regulatory action targets regulation of the same subject matter that federal legislation has reserved for FERC in a field which the federal regulator fully occupies, there is no room for state regulation. Oneok, Inc. v. Learjet, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1591, 1595 (2015). Under conflict preemption, both one or more states and a federal regulator may regulate the same subject matter so long as the state regulation does not conflict with the federal regulation. Id.

In Hughes, the Supreme Court found that the MPSC order was preempted by the FPA because it "set[] an interstate wholesale rate." The Court noted that states improperly "interfere with FERC's authority by disregarding interstate wholesale rates."

The Supreme Court took issue with the MPSC initiative in three significant ways. First, the MPSC compelled LSEs to enter into "contracts for differences" with the new power plant at a price approved by the MPSC. Second, the "contracts for differences" required by the MPSC differed from bilateral contracts because the MPSC "contracts for differences" did not transfer ownership of electricity to the LSEs outside the auction. Third, traditional long-term hedging contracts between generators and LSEs, also known as contracts for differences, need not require a party to enter and clear the capacity auction. The MPSC order, on the other hand, tied the payment at the state-approved rate under the "contracts for differences" to power that cleared the PJM capacity auction (under exclusive jurisdiction of FERC), thereby setting a non-FERC approved wholesale rate.

By carefully pointing out these differences, the Supreme Court indicated that had the MPSC order been more precisely crafted, it may have survived judicial challenge. The Supreme Court stated that its holding is "limited" and that the MPSC order was rejected "only because it disregards an interstate wholesale rate required by FERC."

A long line of Court decisions make it clear that a state is not permitted to modify wholesale rates approved by FERC, even if a state believes the rates are unreasonable. The Court noted, however, that its opinion does not address the permissibility of using tax incentives, land grants, direct subsidies, or other means to encourage development of new or clean energy. The Supreme Court appears to be inviting states to experiment with other programs "untethered to a generator's wholesale market participation." The fight for years to come will likely be to determine the outer limits of state incentive programs where the programs only indirectly affect the interstate wholesale rate. A key question going forward for state incentive programs is: To what extent does this program stand as an obstacle to Congress's objective to have FERC establish interstate wholesale rates?

A major takeaway from Hughes is that regulators and market participants that wish to participate in state programs would be wise to craft state programs that achieve new, clean and renewable generation objectives without interfering with or establishing wholesale rates.

Market participants interested in addressing state regulatory policy issues, including new, clean and renewable energy development, are encouraged to contact Dentons' Energy Markets & Regulatory practice lawyers.

Readers who would like to hear a more in-depth analysis are encouraged to attend the Energy Bar Association Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, on June 7, 2016, where Stuart Caplan, a partner at Dentons US LLP, will moderate a distinguished panel discussing the impact of Hughes, together with Oneok, Inc. v. Learjet, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1591 (2015) and FERC v. Electric Power Supply Ass'n, 136 S. Ct. 760 (2016), a rare trilogy of Supreme Court cases all focused on the dividing lines between FERC and state authority to regulate the electricity and natural gas markets.

Dentons is the world's first polycentric global law firm. A top 20 firm on the Acritas 2015 Global Elite Brand Index, the Firm is committed to challenging the status quo in delivering consistent and uncompromising quality and value in new and inventive ways. Driven to provide clients a competitive edge, and connected to the communities where its clients want to do business, Dentons knows that understanding local cultures is crucial to successfully completing a deal, resolving a dispute or solving a business challenge. Now the world's largest law firm, Dentons' global team builds agile, tailored solutions to meet the local, national and global needs of private and public clients of any size in more than 125 locations serving 50-plus countries. www.dentons.com.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
26 Sep 2018, Conference, New York, United States

Dentons is delighted to support a global IT services and consulting firm Miratech as an event host partner at their annual conference called M-Force18 New York on September 27th. The event will be held at Dentons New York office in the heart of Midtown Manhattan, opposite Rockefeller Center.

2 Oct 2018, Seminar, Dallas, United States

We are pleased to offer a program of five sessions designed specifically for in-house counsel. Topics will include:

  • In-house corporate ethical issues
  • What recent Supreme Court decisions mean for business
  • Keeping lawyers out of your benefit plans
  • Litigation tactics for in-house counsel
  • Employment issues in the age of #MeToo
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions