President Obama’s new proposed Personal Data Notification and Protection Act provides a national standard for companies responding to security breaches.
In his State of the Union Address on January 20, U.S. President Barack Obama featured his proposed Personal Data Notification and Protection Act—federal legislation that would replace the existing patchwork of state data breach notification laws with a unified national standard for companies responding to data security breaches. The president’s proposal comes at a particularly relevant time in light of recent cybersecurity attacks and large-scale data breaches affecting retailers, banks, and other national companies.
Last November, the Japanese Diet approved a bill to ratify the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC). On January 15, 2015, the Japanese representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) signed and delivered to IAEA’s director general Japan’s instrument of acceptance of the CSC. The CSC is now expected to enter into force on April 15, 2015. Once the CSC enters into force, it will make a significant additional international fund available to compensate third parties for damages in the event of a nuclear accident and will also introduce restrictions on jurisdiction over incidents that involve nuclear installations within the territories of CSC parties. Thus, the CSC will provide new protections to U.S. vendors that do business overseas, although the breadth of these protections will largely depend on how many countries adopt the CSC.
FERC issued two decisions on October 16 involving its policies for determining the return on equity (ROE) for transmission-owning members of ISO New England (ISO-NE) and the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO). Opinion No. 531-A confirms that gross domestic product (GDP) growth should be used to approximate long-term growth rates as part of FERC’s recently adopted two-step discounted cash flow (DCF) methodology. The decision echoes FERC’s tentative finding in Opinion No. 531 regarding the use of GDP in the two-step DCF. In a separate order, FERC set for hearing a complaint that alleged MISO transmission-owning members’ 12.38% base ROE is unjust and unreasonable.
Across the United States, there is a growing interest in distributed generation, which produces electricity in small quantities near the point of use, rather than in large amounts in a few places. Yet, distributed generation presents certain challenges for investor-owned utilities, independent power producers, and state and federal regulators. The integration of distributed generation resources onto the electric grid on a wide scale may dramatically impact utility investment and operations.
During this one-hour webinar, our presenters discussed distributed generation resources, their impact on utilities, and relevant policy considerations.
On August 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the challenges filed by various utilities, industry groups, and state commissions that claimed that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) overstepped its authority when promulgating Order No. 1000. The court’s decision in South Carolina Public Service Authority v. FERC, which FERC Chairman Cheryl LaFleur hailed as “critical to the Commission’s efforts to support efficient, competitive, and cost-effective transmission,” substantially strengthens FERC’s ability to establish the structures necessary to encourage and facilitate competitive transmission planning and development.
On July 17, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) proposed to approve a new mandatory reliability standard that would require electric utilities to protect their transmission facilities and control centers against physical threats. Although FERC did not take issue with most of the language in the CIP-014-1 standard proposed by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), FERC did express concern over the ability of utilities to identify their own critical facilities, even when that determination is subject to third-party review. To address that concern, FERC proposed to direct NERC to modify the standard so that FERC, or other appropriate federal agencies, could direct electric utilities to add additional facilities to their list of facilities that need physical security protections.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) introduced a set of reforms on June 19 to its current market-based rate (MBR) program for wholesale sales of electric energy, capacity, and ancillary services. Much of the wholesale electricity delivered on the U.S. interstate power grid—especially in the Commission’s organized market regions in the Northeast and California—is sold under MBR regulation, in which the terms and conditions of sale are typically FERC-regulated, but the selling parties are not themselves subject to traditional utility cost-of-service ratemaking or regulatory (non-GAAP) accounting.
The Commission’s main goal in issuing its notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) is to streamline the application process and increase the transparency of information submitted to the Commission as part of the MBR program. If adopted, the changes could reduce some administrative burdens on industry participants while still preserving FERC’s regulatory jurisdiction and capability to supervise the market conduct and eligibility of MBR sellers. Overall, the changes exempt some participants from certain filing requirements while imposing additional requirements on other participants with MBR authority.