What Happened?
Whether the power plant that keeps your lights on gets to close on schedule just got a lot less dependent on D.C.'s emergency orders, after a federal appeals court ruled that a planned retirement isn't an emergency. In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated a Department of Energy order that had delayed the retirement of a Michigan coal plant, holding that the law limits the department's emergency authority to a grid-reliability risk that calls for an immediate response by the department in particular and that planned retirements do not qualify, according to a Congressional Research Service report updated Oct. 1.
The Department of Energy has issued similar retirement-delay orders for plants in Pennsylvania, Washington, Indiana, Colorado and Florida, where in most cases the relevant grid operators do not appear to have requested its action.
Why Does it Matter to Me?
Electricity demand is rising fast. DOE's July 2025 resource adequacy report projected total demand growing by 101 gigawatts by 2030, with data centers alone accounting for half of that growth.
The same Department of Energy (DOE) report projected that estimated annual loss-of-load hours would rise from 8.1 under the current system to either 269.9 or 817 hours in 2030, depending on supply assumptions, and DOE cautioned that these figures are not predictions that grid operators would permit such outages but indicators of where additional generation and transmission capacity may be needed.
Both Sides, Now
President Trump signed Executive Order 14262 on April 8, 2025, directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to streamline emergency-order procedures and use all available legal mechanisms, including Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, to retain generation resources identified as critical to regional reliability.
Opponents argue DOE exceeded its authority. The D.C. Circuit agreed in the Michigan case, finding that a planned retirement does not create the kind of immediate crisis Section 202(c) was designed to address. In that same case, grid operator MISO determined the plant was not needed to satisfy its reliability criteria, and the Michigan Public Service Commission's own resource plan described the retirement as enhancing resource adequacy, according to Engineering News-Record.
A Senate bill would limit retirement delays to emergencies that cannot be addressed any other way and only when the grid operator requests DOE action. A House bill would cap the authority to emergencies that exist now or will occur within six months.
What Happens Next?
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) report says Congress could consider how long emergency orders last, how much discretion the Department of Energy (DOE) has in defining an emergency, and the scope of interventions the authority allows, and it notes that DOE said in its 1981 rulemaking that its emergency regulations were not intended to replace "prudent utility planning."
Two bills that would change the Department of Energy's emergency authority under Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act are pending: a Senate bill (S. 4337) that would limit delays of plant retirements to emergencies that cannot be met any other way and only when the grid operator requests it, and a House bill (H.R. 7977) that would limit the authority to emergencies that exist now or will occur within six months.
---
AllCiv makes it easy to stay politically informed and involved.
---
Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article