This Note seeks to make the argument for New York’s ZEC program as a legitimate exercise of state power. Part I provides context—the history of nuclear power, the rise and fall in the incidence of nuclear power projects, and why such investments are failing. Part II then provides an overview of the CES and the ZEC program contained therein. In Part III, the legal challenges filed in response to Tier 3 are discussed, as well as the Illinois case which parallels the conventional generator challenge in New York. Part III will also discuss relevant legal precedent the cases concern, namely the recent United States Supreme Court case, Hughes v. Talen Energy Marketing, LLC. Part IV analyzes federal preemption to the extent it affects the New York program. This analysis mirrors—and in some areas, expands upon—the district court’s findings regarding New York’s program. Further, it compares similar crediting mechanisms currently used across the United States and other analogs demonstrating that, although federal preemption appears to control, there is significant room for the states to regulate. This Note ultimately concludes in Part V that the ZEC program is likely a legitimate exercise of state power, despite incidental effects it may have on related federal regulation.
Recommended CitationDavid Solimeno, Armageddon: The Inevitable Death of Nuclear Power and Whether New York State Has the Legal Authority to Keep It on Life Support, 35 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 135 (2017)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol35/iss1/4