New York and seven other states are suing the Trump administration over two agreements that canceled four offshore wind leases in exchange for about $1.4 billion in federal payments to energy companies, Attorney General Letitia James and Gov. Kathy Hochul announced Tuesday.
The lawsuits target separate deals with Bluepoint Wind and Invenergy. James argues that the administration improperly used the federal Judgment Fund to pay the companies to abandon wind projects, including two planned off New York's coast, and redirect money toward other energy development. The legality of the agreements is an allegation in the suits, not a court finding.
Payments and projects at issue
The Bluepoint agreement canceled an offshore lease near New York and provided $765 million from the Judgment Fund, according to the attorney general's office. The office said Bluepoint plans to use the money for a liquefied natural gas facility and has agreed not to pursue future offshore wind development in the United States.
The Invenergy agreement canceled three offshore wind leases, one of them off New York, and provided $653 million from the same fund. The company would instead direct the money toward natural gas plants in Indiana, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas and Missouri, as well as geothermal projects in the West, the states said.
The two New York projects were expected to bring more than $16 billion in investment and more than 2,800 jobs to the state, according to the announcement. They were intended to connect to New York City's electric grid; the four canceled projects together were projected to generate more than eight gigawatts, enough to power more than four million homes. Those are projections for projects that had not been built, not electricity or jobs already delivered.
New York energy planners project statewide electricity demand will grow 8% by 2030 and 24% by 2040, the attorney general's office said. James and Hochul contend that canceling planned generation as demand rises could strain the grid and raise costs, but the release does not quantify a resulting bill increase.
What the states want from the courts
The states argue that the Judgment Fund is reserved for legitimate legal claims against the federal government and that the two agreements did not settle actual or imminent litigation. The complaints also assert violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and federal spending laws.
The lawsuits ask the courts to declare the agreements unlawful, void the lease cancellations and block further federal action to carry out the deals. No ruling on those requests was reported in the announcement.
Attorneys general from Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont joined New York in both cases. California is filing a separate, concurrent challenge involving an Invenergy lease off its coast.
James said the payments would divert federal money toward fossil fuel projects outside New York. Hochul said the agreements would undermine the state's efforts to add generation and jobs; the release did not include a response from the federal government or the companies.
FingerLakes1.com is the region’s leading all-digital news publication. The company was founded in 1998 and has been keeping residents informed for more than two decades. Have a lead? Send it to news@fingerlakes1.com.