NOTE: Restrictions are in place to limit access to one or more of the files associated with this item. Authorized users must log in to gain access. Non-authorized users do not have access to these files.
Visit the Energy Systems Laboratory Homepage.
A State Regulator's View of 'PURPA' And Its Impact on Energy Conservation in the Industrial Sector
MetadataShow full item record
The purpose of my comments this afternoon is to share with you my views concerning the status of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), and how some of the rate standards contained in the Act may affect energy conservation in the industrial sector. As most of you are aware, there currently is a great deal of uncertainty regarding the status of PURPA. In the case of the State of Mississippi vs. the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Judge Harold Cox issued a summary judgment on February 19, 1981. In his decision he ruled PURPA was an unconstitutional intrusion into an area traditionally left to the states and that there was no express authorization for the federal government to regulate public utilities. In the final judgment rendered February 27, 1981, he ruled that Title One, Section 210 of Title Two and Title Three were unconstitutional. The case currently is now on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. As of yet, no date has been set for arguments and no action is expected before the November 1981 hearing deadline.
SubjectPublic Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA)
Industrial Energy Conservation
Williams, M. L. (1981). A State Regulator's View of 'PURPA' And Its Impact on Energy Conservation in the Industrial Sector. Energy Systems Laboratory (http://esl.tamu.edu); Texas A&M University (http://www.tamu.edu). Available electronically from