Ben Snowden is a clean energy and environmental lawyer. His energy practice focuses on representing companies developing or acquiring energy projects, in particular PURPA qualifying facilities. He has helped these companies to negotiate power purchase agreements with utilities and other offtakers, address interconnection issues, and resolve regulatory disputes before state utilities commissions and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Mr. Snowden also advises clients in the energy and manufacturing sectors on environmental permitting, compliance, and enforcement matters, with a particular emphasis on the Clean Air Act and related state programs. His enforcement experience includes internal investigations, agency information requests, and enforcement defense before state agencies and in federal court. He has also represented clients in environmental litigation in federal and state courts, including products liability, contaminated site, citizen suit, and natural resource damage cases.
Mr. Snowden has published widely on energy and environmental topics including EPA enforcement policy, greenhouse gas regulation, and toxic tort litigation. He co-authored chapters on civil enforcement and the regulation of hazardous air pollutants in the 2011 and 2016 editions of the ABA’s Clean Air Act Handbook.
Mr. Snowden was recognized as a 2013, 2014 and 2015 Washington, D.C. “Rising Star” in the area of Environmental Law by Super Lawyers magazine. Mr. Snowden was a 2007 recipient of the Southern Center for Human Rights’ Frederick Douglass Human Rights Award for his pro bono representation of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Represent developer of new 500 MW natural gas-fired power plant in environmental permitting and compliance issues related to project development, including obtaining Clean Air Act New Source Review permit for facility and Clean Water Act authorizations for site construction.
On behalf of Solar power industry association, provided testimony on legal issues related to PURPA and solar development in allowable ex parte hearing before South Carolina Public Service Commission.
Currently represent renewable industry advocacy organization in biennial avoided cost proceeding before the North Carolina Utilities Commission.
Obtained favorable settlement in a contract dispute between client, a paper manufacturer and producer of biomass RECs, and an agent retained by client to market RECs. The agent had pretextually terminated its marketing agreement with the client in an apparent effort to coopt a valuable business opportunity. Kilpatrick Townsend initiated an arbitration petition and also obtained a TRO in state court to prevent the agent from appropriating the opportunity. The agent immediately agreed to a settlement that allowed the client to take advantage of the opportunity with no financial loss.
Represented Murphy Oil USA, Inc., which owned two oil refineries in the United States, located in Superior, Wisconsin and Meraux, St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana. Under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Petroleum Refinery Enforcement Initiative, Murphy negotiated with EPA and the states of Wisconsin and Louisiana, to reach a settlement of Clean Air Act allegations. Pursuant to the settlement, which was entered by the Court in February 2011, the refineries will implement a number of emission reduction approaches through 2019, and complete supplemental environmental projects in St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana. Subsequent to finalizing the settlement with the governments, Murphy sold the two refineries to two parties, and we represented Murphy Oil in negotiating the revisions to the consent decree to reflect the new ownership of the facilities. Those amendments were entered by the Court on April 27, 2012. United States of America, et al. v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc., No. 3:10-cv-00563 (W.D. Wis. 2011).
Successfully represented solar developer in litigation with electric utility concerning the utility’s obligation under PURPA to purchase energy from the developer’s proposed facilities.
Local counsel representation for international renewable energy developer in purchase of portfolio of eight solar projects in North Carolina, including consulting regarding tax, tax-equity, construction financing, environmental laws and regulations, permits and construction approvals, endangered species act, and enforceability issues.
New York University School of Law, J.D.
Developments Editor, NYU Environmental Law Journal
Vanderbilt University, B.A. (1997) cum laude
North Carolina (2017)
District of Columbia (2010)
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia
U.S. Court of Federal Claims
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia - Paul L. Friedman
American Bar Association Section of Environment, Energy and Resources, Environmental Litigation and Toxic Torts Committee, Chair (2014-Present)
American Bar Association Section of Environment, Energy and Resources, Air Quality Committee, Vice-Chair (2012-2013)
Montgomery County, Maryland Energy and Air Quality Advisory Council, Co-Chair (2013-2014)
District of Columbia Bar, Environment, Energy & Natural Resources Section, Chair of Standing Committee on Sustainability (2013-Present)
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.