skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Two-Phased Approach to Synchronize the FERC-USACE Processes for Authorizing Non-Federal Hydropower Projects

Abstract

Publication summarizing how the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Federal Regulatory Energy Commission (FERC) have developed a two-phased, coordinated approach to regulating non-federal hydropower projects.

Publication Date:
Research Org.:
EERE Publication and Product Library
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Water Power Program (EE-4W) (Water Power Program Corporate)
OSTI Identifier:
1279184
Report Number(s):
DOE/EE-1148
7448
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
hydropower; usace; ferc; hydroelectric; environmental; review

Citation Formats

None. Two-Phased Approach to Synchronize the FERC-USACE Processes for Authorizing Non-Federal Hydropower Projects. United States: N. p., 2016. Web.
None. Two-Phased Approach to Synchronize the FERC-USACE Processes for Authorizing Non-Federal Hydropower Projects. United States.
None. 2016. "Two-Phased Approach to Synchronize the FERC-USACE Processes for Authorizing Non-Federal Hydropower Projects". United States. doi:. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1279184.
@article{osti_1279184,
title = {Two-Phased Approach to Synchronize the FERC-USACE Processes for Authorizing Non-Federal Hydropower Projects},
author = {None},
abstractNote = {Publication summarizing how the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Federal Regulatory Energy Commission (FERC) have developed a two-phased, coordinated approach to regulating non-federal hydropower projects.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 7
}
  • The FERC office of hydropower licensing is overburdened with license and relicense applications. Knowing how to work with the FERC can lighten the staff's load and expedite the process. While the policy debate intensifies over the proper balance between river protection and hydroelectric development, life goes on in the trenches of individual project review. Legislation on national energy policy, the Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Water Act all are important issues with long-term significance for the hydropower industry. Nevertheless, in the short term, applicants for license or relicense have real projects with which they wish to proceed. While theymore » may feel frustrated by perceived injustices in the environmental review system, they must grin and bear it to expedite project development. To this end, project proponents need to establish effective working relationships with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) staff members, which will facilitate smooth project review and avoid unnecessary delays. Which applicants, interveners, and resource agencies will be most effective in achieving their goals in the complex process of project review What is it FERC staff members are looking for when they dissect license applications What kinds of projects and submissions are processed most efficiently What is the secret to success in dealing with the FERC With the goal of identifying a pattern for effective working relations with the FERC, this article contains the answers to these questions asked of diverse parties involved with hydroelectric project review, including FERC staff, attorneys and consultants for license or relicense applicants and resource agencies.« less
  • The authors investigated the need to negotiate'' in a comparative case study of multi-agency negotiations in the FERC licensing process. Researchers interviewed participants in two cases involving environmental consultations and asked about parties' level of need to negotiate throughout the process. Participants identified a need to negotiate, and when this need was strongly felt, there was an increased opportunity for an agreement to be reached. An intense need to negotiate by all parties is not a prerequisite to successful agreements. When key participants have a strong need to negotiate, they can instigate negotiations and encourage the involvement of other parties.
  • High survival through hydropower projects is an essential element in the recovery of salmonid populations in the Columbia River. It is also a regulatory requirement under the 2008 Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) Biological Opinion (BiOp) established under the Endangered Species Act. It requires dam passage survival to be ≥0.96 and ≥0.93 for spring and summer outmigrating juvenile salmonids, respectively, and estimated with a standard error ≤ 0.015. An innovative virtual/paired-release design was used to estimate dam passage survival, defined as survival from the face of a dam to the tailrace mixing zone. A coordinated four-dam study was conductedmore » during the 2012 summer outmigration using 14,026 run-of-river subyearling Chinook salmon surgically implanted with acoustic micro-transmitter (AMT) tags released at 9 different locations, and monitored on 14 different detection arrays. Each of the four estimates of dam passage survival exceeded BiOp requirements with values ranging from 0.9414 to 0.9747 and standard errors, 0.0031 to 0.0114. Two consecutive years of survival estimates must meet BiOp standards in order for a hydropower project to be in compliance with recovery requirements for a fish stock.« less
  • An important aspect of technology exchange between the US and the Former Society Union (FSU) countries is the identification and implementation of cooperative projects that are mutually beneficial. The US Department of Energy (DOE) and its national laboratories have established a four-phase approach to identify and further develop Russian technologies that could contribute to solving DOE environmental management problems. Following an initial screening and identification of potential technologies, the country-to-country interaction is formally initiated in the first phase through a small-scale pilot project study. This phase consists of an evaluation of the specific technology for DOE applications, and provides anmore » opportunity for both US and Russian scientists and engineers to validate the use of the technology for a specific DOE requirement. The successful completion of this phase establishes the basis for continuing the technology development into the second phase, which includes laboratory testing in Russia. In the third phase, the technology is laboratory tested in the US, most likely at those DOE national laboratories having the capability and greatest interest in the particular technology area. The fourth and final phase consist of a commercialization process that establishes a partnership with a US business to finalize development of the technology and to prepare for implementation within the DOE complex. An example of this phased approach is a current high-level waste separation cooperative project between the Khlopin Radium Institute and the DOE through Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). This effort has not only enhanced separations technology for the DOE, but has also provided an example of a working process for future cooperative projects.« less
  • The USACE, because of extensive experience in real estate activities is an appropriate supporting agency for Superfund cleanup when a health based relocation is not required. EPA is authorized to acquire by purchase, lease, donation, condemnation, or otherwise any real property needed to conduct a remedial action. The fact sheet addresses the areas of initial planning, request and approval process, acquisition, summary of the major roles and responsibilities, and the timetable for 104(j) acquisitions. The role of the Remedial Project Manager (RPMs) is discussed.