A new legislation signed into law in August, the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA), will expand vastly the types of foreign investment transactions that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) may review. Under the new law, a wide range of foreign investments affecting the U.S. energy sector will be subject to the federal scrutiny.

Overview of the CFIUS Review Process

CFIUS has the authority to review “covered transactions” that might raise national security concern. CFIUS is a US government interagency process, chaired by the Treasury Department. Under the previous law, a “covered transaction” is one that results in foreign control over a U.S. business engaged in interstate commerce, and CFIUS is interested in reviewing a transaction if it raises risk of impairing national security, where the foreign entity is controlled by a foreign government, or if it involves any “critical infrastructure” that could impair the national security.

Critical infrastructure has been defined to mean “systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters.” Through a series of directives, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has identified 16 sectors of the economy as with assets potentially critical to the U.S. infrastructure, including the energy sector.

For each transaction that it reviews, CFIUS’s analysis considers:

  • Threat – whether the foreign acquirer has the capability or intent to exploit or cause harm;
  • Vulnerability – whether the nature of the US target asset creates susceptibility to impairment of national security;
  • Consequences – to US national security of the combination of the threat and vulnerability

This process may result in transactions being suspended, blocked, or modified.

Expansion of “Covered Transactions”

Previously the CFIUS only had jurisdiction to review foreign investments or acquisitions that could result in foreign control over a U.S. Business. After FIRRMA, the new legislation now calls for CFIUS to review a wide range of non-controlling investments made by foreign persons. Among the expanded categories of “covered transactions,” what is particularly relevant to the energy sector is that FIRRMA directs CFIUS to review all investments in US businesses that own, operate, manufacture, supply, or service “critical infrastructure” such as electricity transmission line, pipelines, oil and gas facilities, nuclear, hygro and other power plants, or US businesses that produces, designs, tests, manufactures, fabricates, or develops “critical technologies.” Such foreign investments, even though non-controlling, are subject to review if they afford the foreign person access to any material non-public technical information, membership or observer rights on the board of directors, or any involvement (other than through voting of shares) in substantive decision-making of the business in connection with critical infrastructure or critical technology.

FIRMMA provides the general contours for CFIUS reform, but not the specifics. To achieve broad-based support among competing interests and various US agency members of CFIUS, many concepts of FIRRMA, and especially key definitions relevant to the expansion of the non-controlling “covered transactions” relevant to the “critical infrastructure” and “critical technologies,” are left subject to the regulations to be prescribed by CFIUS. For example, FIRRMA continues to define “critical technologies” to mean “systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and asses would have a debilitating impact on national security.” And what type of assets will meet this bar are subject to interpretation in the regulations to be prescribed by the Committee. Congress also deferred to CFIUS to prescribe regulations to limit the application of the expanded “covered transactions” to “certain categories of foreign persons.” How broad or narrow those “categories of foreign persons” are and what criteria CFIUS will use to define the categories, remain to be seen.

FIRRMA contains an important carve-out for indirect investments made by a foreign person into an investment fund. In particular, an indirect investment does not constitute investment subject to CFIUS jurisdiction if the investment fund is managed exclusively by a non-foreign general partner; any advisory board membership associated with the investment does not come with an ability to control the fund’s investments or the activities of any portfolio company; and the indirect investor does not as result of advisory board membership, gain access to “material nonpublic technical information.

Declarations – Fast Track Process

One of the most important procedural reforms of FIRRMA is to allow the more simplified “declaration” process for parties who wish to submit them. These declarations will be shorter than fully written notices (i.e., no more than five pages), and FIRRMA requires that CFIUS provide responses to declarations within 30 days. CFIUS may notify the parties that they should file a compete notice, initiate a full review on its own, or clear the transaction. This could be used as a fast track process for parties with less sensitive transactions to secure a confirmatory declaration with a much shorter process.

Effects on CFIUS Filing Process

While FIRRMA aims at reforms that enhance the protection of national security, it does continue to emphasize on the value of continued attraction of foreign investment into the U.S. To that end FIRRMA pointedly directs, that the CFIUS should continue to review transactions for the purpose of protecting national security, and should not consider commercial purposes, or to advance trade or other industrial policy goals.

Some FIRRMA changes to the review process came into effect immediately upon enactment, but the most significant changes will only take into effect until CFIUS certifies the implementing regulations. For example, the expanded “covered transactions” relating to “critical infrastructure” does not go into effect until the implementing regulation is adopted or a pilot program is put in place.

On September 29, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued a notice that may impact wholesale rates in all federally regulated wholesale markets (not including ERCOT), possibly affecting: (i) merchant plant owners, (ii) wholesale market customers, (iii) renewable and gas fired generation, (iv) coal and nuclear power plant owners, and (v) power traders.  Husch Blackwell energy regulatory attorneys Linda Walsh, Chris Reeder and Sylvia Bartell issued a detailed client alert on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) issued by DOE requiring regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs) “to ensure that certain reliability and resilience attributes of electric generation resources are fully valued.” The proposed market reform would provide Continue Reading DOE Proposes Special Compensation to Coal and Nuclear Generators

Linda Walsh
Sylvia Bartell

In an in-depth and informative analysis on the Department of Energy’s recently released Staff Report to the Secretary on Electricity Markets and Reliability, Husch Blackwell regulatory attorneys Linda Walsh and Sylvia Bartell examine the department’s stated goal of considering past and current trends in the electric industry in an effort to “exercise foresight to help ensure a system that is reliable, resilient, and affordable long into the future.”

Linda’s and Sylvia’s conclusion?  While the report explores the directed topics identified by Secretary Perry, it does little to build on ongoing regulatory efforts at FERC. Further, it focuses on more short-term pursuits that are economically and environmentally questionable, while at the same time missing opportunities that would modernize the bulk electric power system for the longer term. Read their entire article on Law360.

 

 

 

In a four-part series recently published in Law360, Husch Blackwell’s energy regulatory group analyzed the significant aspects of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) most recent installment of the Quadrennial Energy Review (QER). The first article focused on the QER’s discussion of the critical role that the nation’s electricity industry plays in supporting the country’s economy and national security.  The second installment examined the QER’s emphasis on grid security. The third focused on Continue Reading Dissecting DOE’s Recent Quadrennial Energy Review

Electric powerlinesToday we highlight the Quadrennial Energy Review’s (“QER”) focus on grid security recommendations in the context of the newly adopted Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (“FAST Act”) and the Federal Power Act (“FPA”).  It discusses FERC role in grid security and suggests that FERC utilize its regional entities to assist in security planning. Continue Reading “Transforming the Nation’s Electricity System.” Part IV: Grid Security

Electric powerlinesToday we highlight the Quadrennial Energy Review’s (“QER”) focus on the barriers facing demand response and energy efficiency projects.  Part I of our “Transforming the Nation’s Electricity System” series reviews the QER recommendations to improve procedures for transmission project development,  permitting, and system operations.  Part II focuses on the barriers facing renewable generation development and what can be done to improve project financing, access, and the siting process.

Demand Response

QER 1.2 proposes to improve energy management and demand response in buildings and industry through Continue Reading “Transforming the Nation’s Electricity System.” Part III: Demand Response and Energy Efficiency

energy_solarToday we highlight the Quadrennial Energy Review’s (“QER”) focus on grid modernization through increased renewable generation and its identification of opportunities to improve development, project financing, access, and the siting process. Part I of our series focused on “infrastructure challenges,” namely transmission and distribution and storage.

Renewable Generation Development

QER 1.2 dedicates significant analysis to renewable generation based on Federal environmental objectives. To encourage the deployment of clean energy generation, it recommends Continue Reading “Transforming the Nation’s Electricity System.” Part II: Renewable Generation

Part I

The Quadrennial Energy Review (“QER”) is a four-part roadmap for U.S. Energy policy to the year 2040.  It is a non-partisan report that provides “policymakers, industry, investors, and other stakeholders with unbiased data and analysis on energy challenges, needs, requirements, and barriers that will inform a range of policy options, including legislation.”

The first Installment of the QER (“QER 1.1”), published in April 2015, focused on “infrastructure challenges,” namely transmission and distribution and storage (TS&D), as well as natural gas resources.  Parts II-IV will focus on renewable generation, demand response and efficiency, and grid security respectively. Continue Reading “Transforming the Nation’s Electricity System.” A Four-Part Examination of DOE’s Quadrennial Energy Review

President-elect Trump made an array of energy-related campaign promises, and elevated several of those promises to priorities for his First 100 Days in office.  Many of the energy related priorities will require action by multiple Federal agencies, including the Department of Energy (DOE).  The Trump transition team has nominated Rick Perry for secretary of the DOE.  Among the energy-related priorities found in Trump’s First 100 Days agenda, two key policy items may fall within the purview of a DOE led by Perry, including: Continue Reading Rick Perry Nomination and Trump’s Energy Priorities