Murkowski Reintroduces FERC Hydropower Licensing Act

Michael Harris, Online Editor, HydroWorld.com
March 18, 2013 | 3 Comments

Bipartisan legislation introduced today by Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski continues the recent trend of proposals designed to increase domestic hydro development.

The Hydropower Improvement Act of 2013 -- a reintroduced version of the Hydropower Improvement Act of 2011 which didn't come up for voting before the conclusion of this past congressional session -- would promote the development of small hydropower and conduit projects by decreasing regulatory timeframes of certain other low-impact hydropower projects.

Specifically, the act would allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to:

Extend preliminary permit terms;
Explore a possible two-year licensing process for hydropower development at non-powered dams and closed-loop pumped-storage projects;
Establish an expedited process for "qualifying conduit" hydropower facilities;
Increase the rated capacity for small hydro projects from five to 10 MW.

"Hydropower is, and must continue to be, a major part of our energy solution," Murkowski, R-Alaska, said. "It is the largest source of renewable electricity generation in the United States, and our most cost-effective clean energy option."

The bill is co-sponsored by Senate Energy Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), alongside senators James Risch (R-Idaho), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska).

The National Hydropower Association (NHA) said about two-thirds of America's renewable energy comes from hydroelectric sources, though up to 60,000 MW and 1.4 million cumulative jobs could be created should the right legislation come to fruition.

"NHA applauds Sen. Murkowski's continued leadership to promote hydropower development through a more efficient regulatory process," NHA Executive Director Linda Church Ciocci said. "We look forward to working with Sen. Murkowski and the Energy and Natural Resource Committee to move this and other pieces of hydropower legislation through the Senate."

The act is a companion piece to House Resolution 267, or the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives with a unanimous 422-0 vote in February.

HydroWorld.com also reported earlier this month that the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power had held legislative hearings on the Bureau of Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act (H.R.678) and the Bonneville Unit Clean Hydropower Facilitation Act (H.R. 254) -- both of which would also help American hydroelectric development.

Lead image: U.S. Capitol via Shutterstock

3 Comments

ANONYMOUS
April 30, 2013

The days should be past when hydro-projects in this country are fast-tracked for development interests without regard to putting these projects in areas where wild fish stocks will not be negatively impacted.

Washington, Idaho, Oregon, California have few wild salmon stocks left. They are looking at restoration for wild salmon stocks at the current pace of recovery efforts will only happen centuries from now.

Alaska, on the other hand, has some wild fish stocks left worthy of protection before they are destroyed. If legislation is passed that will fast-track federal funding for hydro-power projects as "renewable energy without restriction" in Alaska, there is serious danger of losing some of the last best wild salmon runs left on the planet. Including fisheries protection language is a must.

ANONYMOUS
March 20, 2013

While this same legislation has been passed by a unanimous vote in the Republican-controlled House for the past two years, the Democrat-controlled Senate has not even bothered to bring it up for a vote.

And while I appreciate the fact that Republican Sen. Murkowski from Alaska has decided to sponsor this legislation in the senate, I have to question just what her motivation is for doing so. Sen. Murkowski's home state economy is heavily dependent on oil/gas production. So why would she endorse legislation that would seem to have a negative impact on her state's GDP? The only logical answer would be that she has arranged some sort of political deal with other senate members that would benefit Alaska's oil/gas economy.

Gerry Wootton
March 20, 2013

It's about time to facilitate renewable energy projects, especially smaller distributed generation. In many states, the number of water control structures (a.k.a. dams) which do not produce power vastly outnumber those that do. With technology making even low head and low flow producible, this represents a large unused resource. Unfortunately, most estimates of potential only consider large, and for the most part new, control structures.
Overall, this is a modest step that at least recognizes the impact of regulatory process. Currently, it takes 1/4 the effort to permit a natural gas plant and 1/10th the effort to permit a gas well. Even the effort to permit a dam or diversion is much less if the purpose is resource extraction rather than power generation. The same is true for pipe diversions for sewage treatment rather than power generation. Dual function systems are rare partly because the regulatory process for the power generation component is so onerous. Regulation isn't a bad thing, but in fairness, it should burden all enterprises equally.