The Accelerated Renewable Energy Growth and Community Benefit Act (“Accelerator Act”) was enacted to speed up the siting and construction of major renewable energy projects in New York State. One of the key components of the Accelerator Act was the creation of the Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES) within the New York State Department of State to address, in large part, many of the shortcomings of New York State’s existing Article 10 siting process. At the statutory level, ORES is intended to improve and streamline the process for cost-effective siting of large-scale renewable energy in a timely fashion in order to achieve the State’s aggressive renewable energy targets. Of course, the details would be fleshed out in regulations required to be promulgated within a year of the Act’s passage.

The UK Government recently announced that it is developing legislation that would make it illegal for large businesses operating in the UK to use certain commodities that have not been produced in line with local laws, and require in-scope companies to conduct due diligence to ensure that their supply chains are free from illegal deforestation and ecosystem change. A failure to comply could result in significant fines (the precise levels of fines are yet to be determined).

The coronavirus pandemic has resulted in increased use of disposable plastics and plastic waste reduction efforts have experienced setbacks as the need for these products grows. Nonetheless,

proponents of a federal bill aimed at reducing plastic waste, the “Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act,” (the Act) continue to advocate for its passage.  Recently, Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) and Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-CA) authored an open letter urging states to use the Act as a blueprint for passing state legislation to reduce plastic waste. The bill would require manufacturers of items including packaging and paper to support recycling programs and use more recycled plastics feedstock in addition to mandating more stringent US EPA standards for the sector. It would also restrict use of disposable plastic products by retail establishments.

On August 20, 2020, the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department issued a decision in Cornell University v. Board of Assessment Review (“Cornell University”), finding that a solar photovoltaic system is taxable real property. See No. CA 19-00339, slip op. 04636, 2020 WL 4876486 (4th Dep’t Aug. 20, 2020). This decision settled, at least in the Fourth Department, a real property tax question long considered—and feared—by solar developers. Although this decision has the potential for significant impacts on solar development projects throughout New York State, it may be possible to mitigate the financial impact of this tax burden with careful planning and mindful project decisions.

In a published opinion filed on August 17, 2020, the Third District Court of Appeal mostly affirmed the trial court’s judgment upholding Placer County’s partial abandonment of public easement rights in an emergency access/public transit road connecting two Lake Tahoe-area residential subdivisions; the County took the action to resolve disputes that had arisen after one subdivision’s residents began using the road as an all-purpose public road and short-cut through the other subdivision to get to Northstar-at-Tahoe.  Martis Camp Community Association v. County of Placer, et al. (Retreat at Northstar Association, et al., Real Parties in Interest) (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 569.  My partner Bryan Wenter’s post covers the land use issues at the heart of the case, and can be found here; readers should consult that post for the case’s factual background and primary holdings.  This post covers the CEQA issue at the “tail end” of the opinion, which involved application of CEQA’s “subsequent review” rules to County’s partial road abandonment project.

Barn Doors

On August 27, 2020, in Protecting Our Water and Environmental Resources v. County of Stanislaus, Case No. S251709 (“Protecting Our Water”), the California Supreme Court held that the County in that instance could not categorically classify its issuance of groundwater well construction permits as ministerial decisions exempt from environmental review under the…

As discussed in one of our earlier blogs, back in  March 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its controversial Enforcement Policy outlining certain situations where EPA would not pursue enforcement actions for specific instances of noncompliance in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Most of the suspended obligations related to routine monitoring and…