Decommissioning and Site Restoration of Non-Federal Hydroelectric Projects John A. Schnagl Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (202) 219-2661.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Not to be Considered as a Regulatory Submittal Pre-Decisional DRAFT 19438_1 Preferred Alternative Recommended by Core Team Environmental Impact Statement.

Advertisements

Gold Ray Dam Interagency Technical Team Meeting. NEPA Update Deconstruction Plans Hydraulic Modeling Next Steps Agenda.

Proposed Rogun Hydropower and Regional Reservoir Project (Rogun HPP) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report by Panel of Experts* Almaty.

TM/WSP 5-9 Nov Group D1- Nuclear fuel cycle, nuclear waste QUESTIONS / DIFFICULTIES  Why is the NPP decommissioning required / necessarily?  How.

Dam Removal in Rhode Island: Present and Future David Chopy, DEM July 16, 2009.

FLOW 2008 Oct. 7-9, 2008 San Antonio, TX Housatonic River Case Study Melissa Grader U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

FLOW 2008 Oct. 7-9, 2008 San Antonio, TX Housatonic River Case Study Robert Gates FirstLight Power Resources Services.

Trends, Obstacles, and Opportunities Affecting Instream Flow Issues by Tom Annear, Wyoming Game & Fish Department Nina Burkardt, U. S. Geological Survey.

Conference on Environmental Assessments in Federations A Montana Perspective September 14, 2009 Tom Livers, Deputy Director Montana Department of Environmental.

Hydroelectric Relicensing in Vermont Brian Fitzgerald Vermont Agency of Natural Resources.

Wild and Scenic Rivers “ LESSONS LEARNED TO AVOID LITIGATION”

THE GEOMORPHIC RESPONSE OF RIVERS TO DAMS Speakers – John Berry and John Esler.

Eric J. Tomasi – Project Manager Division of Gas – Environment & Engineering Office of Energy Projects Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Northeast Energy.

NHPA, Section 106, and NEPA Highlights and Misconceptions.

FERC & Hydrokinetic Projects Ocean Energy for New England Conference Hosted by the Marine Renewable Energy Center at the Advanced Technology and Manufacturing.

FERC and the Development of an Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Robert J. Cupina, Deputy Director Office of Energy Projects Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

By: Kelsea and Troy.. What is hydropower? Hydropower is energy that comes from the force of moving water. The fall and movement of water is part of a.

Challenges and opportunities for dam removal projects in Texas Lessons that can be learned from other states Ryan McGillicuddy – Texas Parks and Wildlife.

World Nuclear Association 38th Annual Symposium September 2013, Central Hall Westminster, London Nuclear Operation and Radioactive Waste Management.

HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANNING Charles J. Randel, 1 III, Howard O. Clark, Jr., 2 Darren P. Newman, 2 and Thomas P. Dixon 3 1 Randel Wildlife Consulting,

Kiggavik Project Final Hearing Presentation

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency How do you know how far you have got? How much you still have to do? Are we nearly there yet? What – Who – When.

Fish and Wildlife Service Mission Conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American.

Sept 18, 2008CVEN 4838/5838Slide #1 Lecture 8 Regulatory Processes.

Susquehanna River Hydroelectric Projects 1 Shawn A. Seaman September 27, 2010 Image or Graphic.

Blackstone Hydropower Status Report 3 rd Annual River Users Conference Blackstone Valley Tourism Council Tricia Jedele, Conservation Law Foundation Bruce.

State of Oregon New Hydroelectric Projects Mary Grainey October 2008 Oregon Water Resources Department.

Eagle Crest Energy Company February Page 2 New Hydro: Making it Happen Background on the Eagle Mountain Pumped Storage Project Need for Eagle.

Claytor Hydroelectric Project Water Quality Study Mark Hutchins, Project Manager January 25, 2007.

Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake Executive Council November 29, 2012.

FERC Relicensing of the Toledo Bend Project – Hydroelectric Power Generation Drought Hydroelectric vs. Water Supply Sabine River Authority Issues.

Chelan County PUD March 16, Staff recommendation for license action and resolution License Order Rehearing and Clarification Rehearing Items License.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada Intervention to the Nunavut Water Board on the Type A Water License Renewal for the Nanisivik Mine Project Fisheries and Oceans.

1 Potential Project Betterments to be studied further during Relicensing June 20, 2006 Stakeholder Meeting Middle Fork American River Hydroelectric Project.

SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 “ Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decisionmaking”

Chapter 33 Dam Construction. Objectives After reading the chapter and reviewing the materials presented the students will be able to: Give reasons why.

Kilarc-Cow Creek Hydroelectric Project Decommissioning FERC Project No. 606 Technical Meeting May 16, 2007, 1-4 pm Red Lion Redding, CA.

SCOPE CREEP IN LICENSE IMPLEMENTATION  Root Causes Ambiguous license terms/plans Ambiguous license terms/plans Changing social values Changing social.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission The Pre-Filing Process IRWA/AI January 13-14, 2009 IRWA/AI.

1 RIC 2009 Nuclear Power Plant/Electric Grid Regulatory Coordination and Cooperation George Wilson NRR/ADES/DE/EEEB March 11, 2009.

Fish and Wildlife : Regulatory Framework and Challenges Cherise M. Oram STOEL RIVES LLP Hydrovision 2008 Ocean/Tidal/Stream Power Track 7D “Environmental.

New Technologies: Fish & Wildlife Permitting Issues Cherise M. Oram STOEL RIVES LLP NWHA Annual Conference – February 20, 2008.

1.What is the standard relicensing process in the U.S. and what is the ALP (Alternative Licensing Process) ? 2.How did we convince FERC to agree to an.

1 CDBG and Environmental Review For Local Officials.

Channel Rehabilitation Projects TAMWG - June ‘04 Trinity River at Hocker Flat 1/16/2003.

HYDROELECTRIC POWER AND FERC. HYDRO 101A ”Water Runs Down Hill”

California Energy Commission Transmission Interconnection and the California Energy Commission Generator Licensing Process PANC 2010 Annual Seminar San.

Implementing Wave Energy Process and Permitting Issues Presented by Therese Hampton February 20, 2008.

Kilarc-Cow Creek Hydroelectric Project Decommissioning FERC Project No. 606 Shasta County Board of Supervisors March 4, 2008.

The partnership principle and the European Code of Conduct on Partnership.

The Extent of BLM Responsibility over Actions Occurring on Non-Federal Lands: Cultural Resources.

Kilarc-Cow Creek Hydroelectric Project Decommissioning FERC Project No. 606 Public Meeting May 15, 2007, 6-9 pm Millville Grange Palo Cedro, CA.

Margaret Byrne, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Emergency Response Policy Revision Update ( ER & EP ) Jeffrey Jensen CECW-HS USACE Flood Risk Management.

Water Quality Certification for hydropower licensing in Wisconsin.

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Technical Meeting on Regulatory Oversight of Human and Organizational Factors Vienna, Austria | December.

Mekong River Commission Information System/ “WUP-FIN Phase III” Concept The information system development is critical activity for maintaining the MRCS.

HYDROPOWER Themes: 1. Ongoing interest group conflict over: development vs. environment (universal) public vs. private ownership 2.How the licensing process.

Director’s Order 12 contains information concerning review of other agency proposals.

1 Calcasieu River & Pass, Louisiana Dredged Material Management Plan (DMMP) Kick off Meeting February 2, 2005 Project Manager Mireya Laigast, Civil Engineer,

INTERSTATE PIPELINE FORUM Presented by: Rebecca F. Zachas, Esq.

Lecturer: Lina Vladimirovna Zhornyak, Associate Professor.

4:46 AM June 2, 2009Sanders 14.2 Environmental Policies in the United States Unit 14: Toward a Sustainable Future “Act, act, act. You can’t just watch.”

Federal Energy and Environmental Regulation Agencies and Laws

Environmental Considerations

Technical-economical study of Czech NPPs Long Term Operation P

Electricity Mergers & Acquisitions – FERC Policy

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519 (1978)

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)

Presentation transcript:

Decommissioning and Site Restoration of Non-Federal Hydroelectric Projects John A. Schnagl Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (202)

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Regulates non-federal hydroelectric facilities. Project construction and operation Minimum flows Reservoir levels Fish passage Recreational access Historic preservation

Decommissioning Decommissioning can occur when a license holder wants to give back its license or FERC determines, at the end of the license term, not to issue a new license. Result: FERC no longer has regulatory authority over the project site.

Commission’s 1994 policy statement Why would someone with a license want to give it up? Why Decommission?

Overwhelming reason is Economic High cost of maintaining aging dams Increased cost of environmental mitigation Decreasing/unpredictable energy prices also

Agreements Licensees agreeing to remove one dam to relicense other dams

Decommissioning and site restoration options Close the door and turn off the lights to Dam removal and site restoration.

Determining what is appropriate Licensee’s proposal, public comments and agency recommendations Dam safety Public safety Future use of the site Environmental issues

What is the Commission’s role? Inform the public Obtain comments and recommendations Conduct public meetings (NEPA process) Maintain public and environmental safety Provide for appropriate regulatory transition Determine if decomissioning is in the best public interest

Three Dams Edwards Dam Augusta, Maine Mussers Dam Sellinsgrove, PA Fort Edwards Dam, New York

Edwards Dam on the Kennebec River in Augusta, Maine ( ) Excellent example of collaborative problem solving.

Edwards Dam Augusta, Maine

Mussers Dam, Pennsylvania 1992 Dam Safety Concerns Mobilization of 15% of the total accumulated sediment (140,000 cubic yards) Extensive fall seeding Selective removal of project facilities

Mussers Dam, Pennsylvania

Fort Edwards Dam in New York (1973) FERC authorized dam removal 700,000 cubic yards of PCB laden sediment contaminated the downstream Hudson River

WHAT HAPPENED? After 12 years of litigation and finger pointing, this we know. Sediment sampling was conducted. Analyses for PCB were negative. Sediment sampling was flawed Why did it happen? It was inevitable, Those conducting the impact analysis did not have the technical expertise to anticipate the consequences of dam removal. Analysts had no idea of the magnitude of the PCB contamination upstream or of the limitations of the sediment sampling procedures.

LESSONS LEARNED FROM NUMEROUS DECOMMISSIONING ACTIONS: Accurately evaluating impacts of dam removal is not easy; even small dams can pose unique challenges. For all but the smallest dams, multi-disciplinary expert teams are essential to adequately evaluate impacts. There will be surprises. Cooperative support and expertise from other federal and state agencies, and non-governmental organizations is very important to keep surprises from becoming insurmountable obstacles. Luck helps, but it can't replace careful preparation, seasoned expertise, and attention to detail.