Direct Lobbying Transparency
| Overall Assessment | Comment | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Strong | NorthWestern Energy provides extensive detail on which climate-related rules it engages with, but offers only limited insight into how it actually lobbies. The company names multiple identifiable measures, including Montana’s “HB 971,” “SB 557,” and “HB 284,” protections for energy choice in “MT_SB 208” and “SD_HB 1239,” federal “Regional Haze Rules,” the EPA’s “Mercury and Air Toxics Standards,” broader “Clean Air Act” proposals, and “the EPA’s new rules for the power industry that specifically target the Colstrip Plant.” These references demonstrate a high level of transparency about the policies under discussion. The outcomes it is pursuing are also made clear: it seeks to prevent EPA rules that would “add hundreds of millions of dollars of new equipment or shutdown” Colstrip, to “resume construction on the Yellowstone County Generating Station,” to block local bans on natural-gas service, and, more generally, to obtain “relief from any GHG regulations that, in our view, disproportionately impact our customers.” However, the disclosures rarely explain the channels through which this influence is exerted. Apart from noting that the company “offered the EPA input about the reality of what it takes to provide this country with reliable energy service” and will continue working with “federal and state regulatory authorities,” there is no description of whether it lobbies through meetings, letters, coalition activity, or litigation, nor are specific offices or lawmakers identified. As a result, while the company is open about the policies it addresses and the changes it seeks, the practical mechanics of its lobbying remain largely opaque. | 3 |