Policy Statement on Establishing License Terms for Hydroelectric Projects, 49501-49504 [2017-23286]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
(3) Do a general visual inspection of the
right-hand landing light compartment for
traces of fuel coming from the APU EFP.
(i) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the certification office,
send it to ATTN: Program Manager,
Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New
York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone
516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a
principal inspector, the manager of the local
flight standards district office/certificate
holding district office.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any
requirement in this AD to obtain corrective
actions from a manufacturer, the action must
be accomplished using a method approved
by the Manager, New York ACO Branch,
FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation
(TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.’s TCCA Design
Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by
the DAO, the approval must include the
DAO-authorized signature.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
(j) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian
AD CF–2016–32R1, dated October 12, 2016,
for related information. This MCAI may be
found in the AD docket on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2017–0521.
(2) For more information about this AD,
contact Steven Dzierzynski, Aerospace
Engineer, Avionics and Administrative
Services Section, FAA, New York ACO
Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516–228–
7367; fax 516–794–5531.
(3) Service information identified in this
AD that is not incorporated by reference is
available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 604–28–
022, dated October 19, 2015.
(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 605–28–
010, dated October 19, 2015.
(3) For service information identified in
ˆ
this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Cote´
Vertu Road West, Dorval, Quebec H4S 1Y9,
Canada; Widebody Customer Response
Center North America toll-free telephone 1–
866–538–1247 or direct-dial telephone 1–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Oct 25, 2017
Jkt 244001
514–855–2999; fax 514–855–7401; email
ac.yul@aero.bombardier.com; Internet https://
www.bombardier.com.
(4) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(5) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on October
17, 2017.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–23015 Filed 10–25–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Parts 4, 5, and 16
[Docket No. PL17–3–000]
Policy Statement on Establishing
License Terms for Hydroelectric
Projects
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Policy statement.
AGENCY:
The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
giving notice of a new policy on
establishing license terms for
hydroelectric projects. In this Policy
Statement, the Commission adopts a 40year default license term for original
and new licenses for hydropower
projects located at non-federal dams.
The Policy Statement also sets forth
when the Commission will consider
issuing those projects a license with a
term for less or more than 40 years.
DATES: This policy statement will be
applicable as of October 26, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicholas Jayjack, (Technical
Information), Office of Energy
Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–
6073.
Carolyn Clarkin, (Legal Information),
Office of the General Counsel—Energy
Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–
8563.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49501
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. In this Policy Statement, the
Commission sets forth a new policy on
establishing license terms for original
and new licenses for hydropower
projects located at non-federal dams.
The goal of this action is to provide
more certainty for stakeholders
regarding the Commission’s regulatory
process, reduce regulatory burden,
increase administrative efficiency for all
stakeholders, and further encourage
licensees to negotiate settlement
agreements and promptly seek
authorization to implement voluntary
environmental, recreational, and
developmental enhancements.
I. Background
A. Current License Term Policy
2. Section 6 of the Federal Power Act
(FPA) 1 provides that hydropower
licenses shall be issued for a term not
to exceed 50 years. There is no
minimum license term for original
licenses. FPA section 15(e) 2 provides
that any ‘‘new license’’ 3 shall be for a
term that the Commission determines to
be in the public interest, but not less
than 30 years or more than 50 years.
3. It is current Commission policy to
set a 50-year term for licenses issued for
projects located at federal dams.4 For
projects located at non-federal dams, the
Commission sets a 30-year term where
there is little or no authorized
redevelopment, new construction, or
environmental mitigation and
enhancement; a 40-year term for a
license involving a moderate amount of
these activities; and a 50-year term
where there is an extensive amount of
such activity.5 The Commission
previously established this policy to
ease the economic impact of new costs,
promote balanced and comprehensive
development of renewable power
generating resources, and encourage
licensees to be good environmental
stewards.6
4. Determining whether the measures
required under a license are minimal,
moderate, or extensive is highly case1 16
U.S.C. 799 (2012).
U.S.C. 808(e) (2012).
3 ‘‘New license’’ is the term used in the FPA to
refer to a license issued to replace a project’s
expiring license.
4 City of Danville, Virginia, 58 FERC ¶ 61,318, at
62,020 (1992) (citing Little Falls Hydroelectric
Associates, 27 FERC ¶ 61,376 (1984)).
5 Id. (addressing original licenses); Consumers
Power Co., 68 FERC ¶ 61,077, at 61,384 (1994)
(addressing new licenses). Projects that entail
construction of a new dam have generally received
50-year licenses. City of Danville, Virginia, 58 FERC
¶ 61,318 at 62,020 (citing Little Falls Hydroelectric
Associates, 27 FERC ¶ 61,376).
6 Consumers Power Co., 68 FERC ¶ 61,077 at
61,384.
2 16
E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM
26OCR1
49502
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
specific and largely based on a
qualitative analysis of the record before
the Commission. In establishing the
appropriate license term, staff initially
examines the nature and extent of the
required measures in the context of the
project at issue,7 and then uses the cost
of measures as a check on a qualitative
conclusion that the measures required
under the license are minimal,
moderate, or extensive. The
Commission’s current policy takes a
forward-looking approach, such that any
measures adopted under a prior license
term are not considered.8 It has also
been the Commission’s policy to
coordinate, to the extent feasible,
license terms for projects in the same
river basin to maximize consideration of
cumulative impacts when the projects
are due to be relicensed.9
5. The length of an original license
has not been contested on rehearing for
some time; however, licensees and other
parties have recently contested the
length of a new license in several
relicensing proceedings. The arguments
raised in these cases include that the
Commission, when establishing the
license term, should have considered, or
given more weight to: Previouslyauthorized capacity-related investments
or environmental enhancements made
by the licensee before issuance of the
new license; 10 total cost of the
relicensing process; 11 losses in
generation value related to
environmental measures; 12 the license
terms of projects that the license
applicant states are similarly situated to
its project; 13 and the license term
7 For example, one type of fishway may be more
expensive than another, and a fishway type that
might be considered extensive for a small project
could be seen as minimal for a larger one.
8 See, e.g., Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 156 FERC
¶ 61,010, at P 19 (2016) (Duke Energy) (stating
Commission’s long-standing policy is to only
consider measures required in the new license)
(citing Alabama Power Co., 155 FERC ¶ 61,080, at
P 72 (2016); Georgia Power Co., 111 FERC ¶ 61,183,
at P 12 (2005); Ford Motor Co., 110 FERC ¶ 61,236,
at PP 6–8 (2005)).
9 18 CFR 2.23 (2017); see also Public Utility of
District No. 1 of Chelan County, Washington, 127
FERC ¶ 61,152, at P 18 (2009) (Chelan PUD).
10 See, e.g., Duke Energy, 156 FERC ¶ 61,010 at
P 12; Alabama Power Co., 155 FERC ¶ 61,080 at P
71; Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County,
Washington, 143 FERC ¶ 61,130, at PP 12–13 (2013)
(Douglas PUD); Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ¶ 61,152 at
PP 12–13; Georgia Power Co., 111 FERC ¶ 61,183
at P 10; Ford Motor Co., 110 FERC ¶ 61,236 at P
6.
11 See, e.g., Duke Energy, 156 FERC ¶ 61,010 at
P 12.
12 See, e.g., id.
13 See, e.g., id. P 20; Alabama Power Co., 155
FERC ¶ 61,080 at P 71; Duke Energy Progress, Inc.,
153 FERC ¶ 61,056, at P 39 (2015); Douglas PUD,
143 FERC ¶ 61,130 at P 15.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Oct 25, 2017
Jkt 244001
provided for in settlement agreements.14
In each circumstance, the Commission
declined to extend the length of the
license.
B. Notice of Inquiry on Establishing
License Terms for Hydroelectric Projects
6. On November 17, 2016, the
Commission issued a notice of inquiry
(NOI) to seek comments on whether,
and if so how, the Commission should
revise its current license term policy.
The NOI invited comments on five
potential license term policy options: (1)
Retain the current policy; (2) modify the
current policy to consider voluntary
authorized actions implemented under
the prior license (‘‘previouslyauthorized voluntary actions’’); (3)
replace the current license term policy
with a policy for a 50-year default
license term unless a lesser license term
would be in the public interest (for
example, to better coordinate the license
terms of projects in the same river
basin); (4) add a more quantitative costbased analysis to the current policy; and
(5) alter the current policy to accept
license terms agreed upon in settlement
agreements, when appropriate.
Comments on alternative policy options
were also encouraged. The NOI
established January 24, 2017, as the
deadline for comments, which staff
extended to March 24, 2017.
7. Industry members, federal and state
resource agencies, environmental and
recreation groups, and individuals filed
comments. Most commenters support
revising the current policy. Several
commenters state that under the current
policy stakeholders lack certainty, and,
consequently, license applicants lack
guidance on what measures will yield
longer license terms and are deterred
from proposing additional protection,
mitigation, and enhancement measures.
Further, many commenters state that
because the policy is forward-looking,
licensees delay seeking authorizations
for capacity upgrades and
environmental and recreational
enhancements until they apply for a
new license. Some industry commenters
state that under the current policy,
license applicants and settlement
parties cannot use the license term as a
bargaining chip because the
Commission might reject that term in
the license order. To address these
concerns, many commenters
recommend that the Commission
consider previously-authorized
voluntary actions and defer to the
14 See, e.g., Duke Energy Progress, Inc., 153 FERC
¶ 61,056 at P 40; Douglas PUD, 143 FERC ¶ 61,130
at P 18; Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ¶ 61,152 at P 16.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
license term that was negotiated as part
of a settlement agreement.
8. Commenters disagree on the 50year default license term policy option.
Industry commenters generally support
the 50-year default license term because
they state it would provide a clear,
predictable standard. Industry
commenters add that such policy would
eliminate the current ‘‘penalty’’ for
efficient, well-maintained, and
relatively low-impact projects that do
not require substantial environmental or
developmental measures and therefore
only receive a 30-year license.
9. In contrast, environmental groups,
individuals, and most resource agencies
oppose the 50-year default license term
option. Several resource agencies argue
that this option would provide little
incentive for a license applicant to
voluntarily propose or agree to
mitigation measures because such
measures would no longer factor into
the Commission’s license term decision.
The resource agencies also contend that
such policy would result in applicants
focusing their license application study
efforts on disproving project effects
rather than on identifying potential
mitigation measures.
10. Most commenters recommend
against the policy option to adopt a
more quantitative cost-based analysis.
Many commenters state that it would be
difficult to develop a quantitative costbased analysis that takes into account
the diverse hydropower fleet and
environmental and recreational values.
11. As an alternative to the five policy
options, several industry commenters
recommend that the Commission adopt
a 40-year default license term with
credit (up to an additional 10 years) for
previously-authorized actions and
deference to settlement agreements.
They state that under this alternative,
licenses should be issued for less than
40 years only when a license applicant
has agreed to a settlement agreement
with a negotiated license term of less
than 40 years, or voluntarily coordinates
its license term with other projects in a
river basin.
II. Discussion
12. The extensive comments received
have given the Commission a deeper
understanding of the effects that the
current license term policy has on
stakeholders in hydropower licensing
proceedings. The Commission
recognizes the importance of providing
license applicants and other
stakeholders as much certainty as
possible. License applicants expend
significant financial resources on
preparing their license applications and
complying with their licenses thereafter.
E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM
26OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Further, stakeholders need certainty to
determine the protection, mitigation,
and enhancement measures that they
will negotiate and license applicants
will propose.
13. The current policy also affects the
Commission’s staff and resources
needed to review and process license
applications. Staff anticipate that over
300 projects will enter the relicensing
process through 2025. Under the current
policy, staff would establish the license
term for each of those projects case by
case.
14. After considering this matter and
the comments on the NOI, the
Commission has decided it is in the
public interest to change its license term
policy. With this Policy Statement, the
Commission establishes a 40-year
default license term policy for original
and new licenses for hydropower
projects located at non-federal dams.15
15. There are three circumstances
where the Commission will consider
issuing a license for less or more than
40 years. First, the Commission will
establish a shorter or longer term if
necessary to coordinate license terms for
projects located in the same river basin.
Second, the Commission will defer to a
shorter or longer term explicitly agreed
upon in a generally-supported
comprehensive settlement agreement,
provided that such term does not
conflict with coordination. Settlement
agreements that state the settlement
signatories would not oppose a certain
term or would support a term within a
range of years will not be considered to
include an explicitly agreed upon
license term.16
16. Third, the Commission will
consider a longer license term—
provided that doing so is consistent
with coordinating license terms within
a basin—when a license applicant
specifically requests a longer license
term based on significant measures
expected to be required under the new
license or significant measures
implemented during the prior license
term that were not required by that
license or other legal authority 17 and for
which the Commission has not already
15 This policy does not apply to pilot
hydrokinetic projects, which have terms of up to
five years. See FERC, Licensing Hydrokinetic Pilot
Projects, www.ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/geninfo/licensing/hydrokinetics/pdf/white_paper.pdf.
16 See, e.g., Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ¶ 61,152 at
n.27 (settlement states that the signatories do not
oppose the licensee’s efforts to seek a 50-year term);
Duke Energy, 156 FERC ¶ 61,010 at P 24 (settlement
states the signatories agree to support a license term
that is not less than 40 years nor more than 50
years).
17 See, e.g., Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ¶ 61,152, at
P 14 (stating that the licensee acted in order to
comply with the Endangered Species Act, not to
simply voluntarily resolve relicensing issues early).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Oct 25, 2017
Jkt 244001
given credit through an extension of the
prior license term. The Commission will
consider, on a case-by-case basis,
measures and actions that enhance nondevelopmental project purposes (i.e.,
environmental, project recreation, water
supply), and those that enhance power
and developmental purposes, together
with the cost of those measures and
actions to determine whether they are
significant and warrant the granting of
a longer license term. Maintenance
measures and measures taken to support
the licensing process will not be
considered. As guidance, we note that
the Commission has found that
measures including the construction of
pumped storage facilities, fish passage
facilities, fish hatcheries, substantial
recreation facilities, dams, and
powerhouses warranted longer license
terms.
17. There are a number of reasons for
establishing a 40-year default license
term with exceptions for coordination,
deference to generally-supported
comprehensive settlement agreements,
and consideration of previouslyauthorized voluntary actions. This
policy will provide significant certainty
to licensees, resource agencies, and
other stakeholders. A 40-year default
license term will provide a simpler
method for Commission staff to
establish license terms, and, thus,
increase administrative efficiencies. A
case-specific assessment will only be
required for those license applications
that request a longer license term, and
are not explicitly supported by a
generally-supported comprehensive
settlement agreement. Because many
projects would be relicensed less
frequently, the policy would also lower
administrative costs for all stakeholders,
provide licensees longer license terms to
recoup costs, and reduce regulatory
burden. Further, the policy will place
efficient, low-impact projects that
require minimal measures—and thus,
would receive a 30-year term under the
current policy—on more equal footing
with projects that require more
measures.
18. The policy may also encourage
licensees to voluntarily make capacity
upgrades and enhance recreational and
environmental resources during the
prior license term. Affected resources
will benefit from licensees undertaking
preventative or remedial measures
sooner rather than later. In addition, the
policy may further encourage license
applicants to engage with stakeholders
to negotiate a license settlement
agreement. Because a generallysupported comprehensive settlement
agreements represent stakeholder
values, terms negotiated as part of those
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49503
agreements are in the public interest,
provided they do not conflict with
coordination.
19. A 40-year default license term will
not adversely affect environmental and
recreation resources. All of our licenses
contain extensive environmental and
recreation measures. While under our
new policy some projects may be
relicensed less frequently and
unanticipated project effects on
environmental resources may go
unmitigated for longer durations of time
than before, there are many tools
available to address these unanticipated
effects in a timely manner. The
Commission may address serious,
unanticipated environmental effects
using its standard reopener article,18
and licensees often file applications for
license amendments to address
significant, unanticipated
environmental issues. Further, resource
agencies frequently reserve authority to
address those effects under FPA section
4(e) (federal reservation) 19 and section
18 (fishway prescription),20 and in
water quality certifications issued under
section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
Stakeholders have also negotiated with
or encouraged licensees to propose
measures that include adaptive
management approaches to allow for
appropriate modifications as additional
information is gathered, new
technologies develop, and societal and
environmental needs change.
20. This Policy Statement will apply
to all licenses issued following its
publication in the Federal Register with
no retroactive application. License
applicants with pending license
applications may file a comprehensive
settlement agreement, or addendum to
an existing agreement, that includes an
explicitly agreed upon license term or
may make a filing demonstrating why
the Commission should award them a
longer license term than 40 years. The
Commission, however, will not
entertain applications to amend existing
licenses to extend their license terms
simply on the basis of this new license
term policy. Pursuant to current policy,
licensees that seek to extend existing
licenses with terms of less than 50
18 Each license incorporates a Commission LForm that includes standard reopener clauses to
enhance fish and wildlife resources. See
Standardized Conditions for Inclusion in
Preliminary Permits and Licenses Issued Under Part
I of the Federal Power Act, 54 F.P.C. 1792 (1975).
19 16 U.S.C. 797(e) (2012) (licenses for projects
located on federal reservations are subject to and
contain conditions as the Secretary of the
department under whose supervision such
reservation falls shall deem necessary).
20 16 U.S.C. 811 (2012) (Secretaries of the Interior
and Commerce may prescribe fishway
prescriptions).
E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM
26OCR1
49504
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
years, must justify such requests, for
example by proposing development,
environmental, and recreation
enhancements in a license amendment
application accompanied by a request
that the Commission extend their
license term.21
III. Document Availability
21. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://
www.ferc.gov) and in FERC’s Public
Reference Room during normal business
hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern
time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426.
22. From FERC’s Home Page on the
Internet, this information is available on
eLibrary. The full text of this document
is available on eLibrary in PDF and
Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access
this document in eLibrary, type the
docket number excluding the last three
digits of this document in the docket
number field. User assistance is
available for eLibrary and the
Commission’s Web site during normal
business hours from FERC Online
Support at 202–502–6652 (toll free at
1–866–208–3676) or email at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at (202) 502–
8371, TTY (202)502–8659. Email the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
By the Commission.
Issued: October 19, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–23286 Filed 10–25–17; 8:45 am]
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
21 See, e.g., Idaho Power Co., 132 FERC ¶ 62,001
(2010) (10-year extension of the license term due to
the costs of replacing the project’s existing
powerhouse and increasing generating capacity);
PPL Holtwood, LLC, 129 FERC ¶ 62,092 (2009) (16year extension of license term due to costs
associated with the constructing a new powerhouse,
installing two turbine generating units at the
existing powerhouse, and various environmental
measures).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Oct 25, 2017
Jkt 244001
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
21 CFR Part 1308
[Docket No. DEA–473]
Schedules of Controlled Substances:
Temporary Placement of orthoFluorofentanyl, Tetrahydrofuranyl
Fentanyl, and Methoxyacetyl Fentanyl
Into Schedule I
Drug Enforcement
Administration, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Temporary amendment;
temporary scheduling order.
AGENCY:
The Administrator of the Drug
Enforcement Administration is issuing
this temporary scheduling order to
schedule the synthetic opioids, N-(2fluorophenyl)-N-(1-phenethylpiperidin4-yl)propionamide (ortho-fluorofentanyl
or 2-fluorofentanyl), N-(1phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)-Nphenyltetrahydrofuran-2-carboxamide
(tetrahydrofuranyl fentanyl), and 2methoxy-N-(1-phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)N-phenylacetamide (methoxyacetyl
fentanyl), into Schedule I. This action is
based on a finding by the Administrator
that the placement of orthofluorofentanyl, tetrahydrofuranyl
fentanyl, and methoxyacetyl fentanyl
into Schedule I of the Controlled
Substances Act is necessary to avoid an
imminent hazard to the public safety.
As a result of this order, the regulatory
controls and administrative, civil, and
criminal sanctions applicable to
Schedule I controlled substances will be
imposed on persons who handle
(manufacture, distribute, reverse
distribute, import, export, engage in
research, conduct instructional
activities or chemical analysis, or
possess), or propose to handle, orthofluorofentanyl, tetrahydrofuranyl
fentanyl, and methoxyacetyl fentanyl.
DATES: This temporary scheduling order
is effective October 26, 2017, until
October 28, 2019. If this order is
extended or made permanent, the DEA
will publish a document in the Federal
Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael J. Lewis, Diversion Control
Division, Drug Enforcement
Administration; Mailing Address: 8701
Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia
22152; Telephone: (202) 598–6812.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Legal Authority
Section 201 of the Controlled
Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 811,
provides the Attorney General with the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
authority to temporarily place a
substance into Schedule I of the CSA for
two years without regard to the
requirements of 21 U.S.C. 811(b) if he
finds that such action is necessary to
avoid an imminent hazard to the public
safety. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). In addition,
if proceedings to control a substance are
initiated under 21 U.S.C. 811(a)(1), the
Attorney General may extend the
temporary scheduling 1 for up to one
year. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(2).
Where the necessary findings are
made, a substance may be temporarily
scheduled if it is not listed in any other
schedule under section 202 of the CSA,
21 U.S.C. 812, or if there is no
exemption or approval in effect for the
substance under section 505 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FDCA), 21 U.S.C. 355. 21 U.S.C.
811(h)(1). The Attorney General has
delegated scheduling authority under 21
U.S.C. 811 to the Administrator of the
DEA. 28 CFR 0.100.
Background
Section 201(h)(4) of the CSA, 21
U.S.C. 811(h)(4), requires the
Administrator to notify the Secretary of
the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) of his intention to
temporarily place a substance into
Schedule I of the CSA.2 The
Administrator transmitted notice of his
intent to place ortho-fluorofentanyl,
tetrahydrofuranyl fentanyl, and
methoxyacetyl fentanyl in Schedule I on
a temporary basis to the Assistant
Secretary for Health of HHS by letter.
Notice for these actions was transmitted
on the following dates: May 19, 2017
(ortho-fluorofentanyl) and July 5, 2017
(tetrahydrofuranyl fentanyl and
methoxyacetyl fentanyl). The Assistant
Secretary responded by letters dated
June 9, 2017 (ortho-fluorofentanyl) and
July 14, 2017 (tetrahydrofuranyl
fentanyl and methoxyacetyl fentanyl),
and advised that based on review by the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
there are currently no investigational
new drug applications or approved new
drug applications for ortho1 Though DEA has used the term ‘‘final order’’
with respect to temporary scheduling orders in the
past, this document adheres to the statutory
language of 21 U.S.C. 811(h), which refers to a
‘‘temporary scheduling order.’’ No substantive
change is intended.
2 As discussed in a memorandum of
understanding entered into by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) and the National Institute on
Drug Abuse (NIDA), the FDA acts as the lead agency
within the HHS in carrying out the Secretary’s
scheduling responsibilities under the CSA, with the
concurrence of NIDA. 50 FR 9518, Mar. 8, 1985.
The Secretary of the HHS has delegated to the
Assistant Secretary for Health of the HHS the
authority to make domestic drug scheduling
recommendations. 58 FR 35460, July 1, 1993.
E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM
26OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 206 (Thursday, October 26, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49501-49504]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23286]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Parts 4, 5, and 16
[Docket No. PL17-3-000]
Policy Statement on Establishing License Terms for Hydroelectric
Projects
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Policy statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
giving notice of a new policy on establishing license terms for
hydroelectric projects. In this Policy Statement, the Commission adopts
a 40-year default license term for original and new licenses for
hydropower projects located at non-federal dams. The Policy Statement
also sets forth when the Commission will consider issuing those
projects a license with a term for less or more than 40 years.
DATES: This policy statement will be applicable as of October 26,
2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicholas Jayjack, (Technical Information), Office of Energy Projects,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, (202) 502-6073.
Carolyn Clarkin, (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel--
Energy Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8563.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. In this Policy Statement, the Commission sets forth a new policy
on establishing license terms for original and new licenses for
hydropower projects located at non-federal dams. The goal of this
action is to provide more certainty for stakeholders regarding the
Commission's regulatory process, reduce regulatory burden, increase
administrative efficiency for all stakeholders, and further encourage
licensees to negotiate settlement agreements and promptly seek
authorization to implement voluntary environmental, recreational, and
developmental enhancements.
I. Background
A. Current License Term Policy
2. Section 6 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) \1\ provides that
hydropower licenses shall be issued for a term not to exceed 50 years.
There is no minimum license term for original licenses. FPA section
15(e) \2\ provides that any ``new license'' \3\ shall be for a term
that the Commission determines to be in the public interest, but not
less than 30 years or more than 50 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 799 (2012).
\2\ 16 U.S.C. 808(e) (2012).
\3\ ``New license'' is the term used in the FPA to refer to a
license issued to replace a project's expiring license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. It is current Commission policy to set a 50-year term for
licenses issued for projects located at federal dams.\4\ For projects
located at non-federal dams, the Commission sets a 30-year term where
there is little or no authorized redevelopment, new construction, or
environmental mitigation and enhancement; a 40-year term for a license
involving a moderate amount of these activities; and a 50-year term
where there is an extensive amount of such activity.\5\ The Commission
previously established this policy to ease the economic impact of new
costs, promote balanced and comprehensive development of renewable
power generating resources, and encourage licensees to be good
environmental stewards.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ City of Danville, Virginia, 58 FERC ] 61,318, at 62,020
(1992) (citing Little Falls Hydroelectric Associates, 27 FERC ]
61,376 (1984)).
\5\ Id. (addressing original licenses); Consumers Power Co., 68
FERC ] 61,077, at 61,384 (1994) (addressing new licenses). Projects
that entail construction of a new dam have generally received 50-
year licenses. City of Danville, Virginia, 58 FERC ] 61,318 at
62,020 (citing Little Falls Hydroelectric Associates, 27 FERC ]
61,376).
\6\ Consumers Power Co., 68 FERC ] 61,077 at 61,384.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Determining whether the measures required under a license are
minimal, moderate, or extensive is highly case-
[[Page 49502]]
specific and largely based on a qualitative analysis of the record
before the Commission. In establishing the appropriate license term,
staff initially examines the nature and extent of the required measures
in the context of the project at issue,\7\ and then uses the cost of
measures as a check on a qualitative conclusion that the measures
required under the license are minimal, moderate, or extensive. The
Commission's current policy takes a forward-looking approach, such that
any measures adopted under a prior license term are not considered.\8\
It has also been the Commission's policy to coordinate, to the extent
feasible, license terms for projects in the same river basin to
maximize consideration of cumulative impacts when the projects are due
to be relicensed.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For example, one type of fishway may be more expensive than
another, and a fishway type that might be considered extensive for a
small project could be seen as minimal for a larger one.
\8\ See, e.g., Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 156 FERC ] 61,010, at
P 19 (2016) (Duke Energy) (stating Commission's long-standing policy
is to only consider measures required in the new license) (citing
Alabama Power Co., 155 FERC ] 61,080, at P 72 (2016); Georgia Power
Co., 111 FERC ] 61,183, at P 12 (2005); Ford Motor Co., 110 FERC ]
61,236, at PP 6-8 (2005)).
\9\ 18 CFR 2.23 (2017); see also Public Utility of District No.
1 of Chelan County, Washington, 127 FERC ] 61,152, at P 18 (2009)
(Chelan PUD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. The length of an original license has not been contested on
rehearing for some time; however, licensees and other parties have
recently contested the length of a new license in several relicensing
proceedings. The arguments raised in these cases include that the
Commission, when establishing the license term, should have considered,
or given more weight to: Previously-authorized capacity-related
investments or environmental enhancements made by the licensee before
issuance of the new license; \10\ total cost of the relicensing
process; \11\ losses in generation value related to environmental
measures; \12\ the license terms of projects that the license applicant
states are similarly situated to its project; \13\ and the license term
provided for in settlement agreements.\14\ In each circumstance, the
Commission declined to extend the length of the license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See, e.g., Duke Energy, 156 FERC ] 61,010 at P 12; Alabama
Power Co., 155 FERC ] 61,080 at P 71; Public Utility District No. 1
of Douglas County, Washington, 143 FERC ] 61,130, at PP 12-13 (2013)
(Douglas PUD); Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ] 61,152 at PP 12-13; Georgia
Power Co., 111 FERC ] 61,183 at P 10; Ford Motor Co., 110 FERC ]
61,236 at P 6.
\11\ See, e.g., Duke Energy, 156 FERC ] 61,010 at P 12.
\12\ See, e.g., id.
\13\ See, e.g., id. P 20; Alabama Power Co., 155 FERC ] 61,080
at P 71; Duke Energy Progress, Inc., 153 FERC ] 61,056, at P 39
(2015); Douglas PUD, 143 FERC ] 61,130 at P 15.
\14\ See, e.g., Duke Energy Progress, Inc., 153 FERC ] 61,056 at
P 40; Douglas PUD, 143 FERC ] 61,130 at P 18; Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ]
61,152 at P 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Notice of Inquiry on Establishing License Terms for Hydroelectric
Projects
6. On November 17, 2016, the Commission issued a notice of inquiry
(NOI) to seek comments on whether, and if so how, the Commission should
revise its current license term policy. The NOI invited comments on
five potential license term policy options: (1) Retain the current
policy; (2) modify the current policy to consider voluntary authorized
actions implemented under the prior license (``previously-authorized
voluntary actions''); (3) replace the current license term policy with
a policy for a 50-year default license term unless a lesser license
term would be in the public interest (for example, to better coordinate
the license terms of projects in the same river basin); (4) add a more
quantitative cost-based analysis to the current policy; and (5) alter
the current policy to accept license terms agreed upon in settlement
agreements, when appropriate. Comments on alternative policy options
were also encouraged. The NOI established January 24, 2017, as the
deadline for comments, which staff extended to March 24, 2017.
7. Industry members, federal and state resource agencies,
environmental and recreation groups, and individuals filed comments.
Most commenters support revising the current policy. Several commenters
state that under the current policy stakeholders lack certainty, and,
consequently, license applicants lack guidance on what measures will
yield longer license terms and are deterred from proposing additional
protection, mitigation, and enhancement measures. Further, many
commenters state that because the policy is forward-looking, licensees
delay seeking authorizations for capacity upgrades and environmental
and recreational enhancements until they apply for a new license. Some
industry commenters state that under the current policy, license
applicants and settlement parties cannot use the license term as a
bargaining chip because the Commission might reject that term in the
license order. To address these concerns, many commenters recommend
that the Commission consider previously-authorized voluntary actions
and defer to the license term that was negotiated as part of a
settlement agreement.
8. Commenters disagree on the 50-year default license term policy
option. Industry commenters generally support the 50-year default
license term because they state it would provide a clear, predictable
standard. Industry commenters add that such policy would eliminate the
current ``penalty'' for efficient, well-maintained, and relatively low-
impact projects that do not require substantial environmental or
developmental measures and therefore only receive a 30-year license.
9. In contrast, environmental groups, individuals, and most
resource agencies oppose the 50-year default license term option.
Several resource agencies argue that this option would provide little
incentive for a license applicant to voluntarily propose or agree to
mitigation measures because such measures would no longer factor into
the Commission's license term decision. The resource agencies also
contend that such policy would result in applicants focusing their
license application study efforts on disproving project effects rather
than on identifying potential mitigation measures.
10. Most commenters recommend against the policy option to adopt a
more quantitative cost-based analysis. Many commenters state that it
would be difficult to develop a quantitative cost-based analysis that
takes into account the diverse hydropower fleet and environmental and
recreational values.
11. As an alternative to the five policy options, several industry
commenters recommend that the Commission adopt a 40-year default
license term with credit (up to an additional 10 years) for previously-
authorized actions and deference to settlement agreements. They state
that under this alternative, licenses should be issued for less than 40
years only when a license applicant has agreed to a settlement
agreement with a negotiated license term of less than 40 years, or
voluntarily coordinates its license term with other projects in a river
basin.
II. Discussion
12. The extensive comments received have given the Commission a
deeper understanding of the effects that the current license term
policy has on stakeholders in hydropower licensing proceedings. The
Commission recognizes the importance of providing license applicants
and other stakeholders as much certainty as possible. License
applicants expend significant financial resources on preparing their
license applications and complying with their licenses thereafter.
[[Page 49503]]
Further, stakeholders need certainty to determine the protection,
mitigation, and enhancement measures that they will negotiate and
license applicants will propose.
13. The current policy also affects the Commission's staff and
resources needed to review and process license applications. Staff
anticipate that over 300 projects will enter the relicensing process
through 2025. Under the current policy, staff would establish the
license term for each of those projects case by case.
14. After considering this matter and the comments on the NOI, the
Commission has decided it is in the public interest to change its
license term policy. With this Policy Statement, the Commission
establishes a 40-year default license term policy for original and new
licenses for hydropower projects located at non-federal dams.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ This policy does not apply to pilot hydrokinetic projects,
which have terms of up to five years. See FERC, Licensing
Hydrokinetic Pilot Projects, www.ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/gen-info/licensing/hydrokinetics/pdf/white_paper.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. There are three circumstances where the Commission will
consider issuing a license for less or more than 40 years. First, the
Commission will establish a shorter or longer term if necessary to
coordinate license terms for projects located in the same river basin.
Second, the Commission will defer to a shorter or longer term
explicitly agreed upon in a generally-supported comprehensive
settlement agreement, provided that such term does not conflict with
coordination. Settlement agreements that state the settlement
signatories would not oppose a certain term or would support a term
within a range of years will not be considered to include an explicitly
agreed upon license term.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See, e.g., Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ] 61,152 at n.27
(settlement states that the signatories do not oppose the licensee's
efforts to seek a 50-year term); Duke Energy, 156 FERC ] 61,010 at P
24 (settlement states the signatories agree to support a license
term that is not less than 40 years nor more than 50 years).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Third, the Commission will consider a longer license term--
provided that doing so is consistent with coordinating license terms
within a basin--when a license applicant specifically requests a longer
license term based on significant measures expected to be required
under the new license or significant measures implemented during the
prior license term that were not required by that license or other
legal authority \17\ and for which the Commission has not already given
credit through an extension of the prior license term. The Commission
will consider, on a case-by-case basis, measures and actions that
enhance non-developmental project purposes (i.e., environmental,
project recreation, water supply), and those that enhance power and
developmental purposes, together with the cost of those measures and
actions to determine whether they are significant and warrant the
granting of a longer license term. Maintenance measures and measures
taken to support the licensing process will not be considered. As
guidance, we note that the Commission has found that measures including
the construction of pumped storage facilities, fish passage facilities,
fish hatcheries, substantial recreation facilities, dams, and
powerhouses warranted longer license terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See, e.g., Chelan PUD, 127 FERC ] 61,152, at P 14 (stating
that the licensee acted in order to comply with the Endangered
Species Act, not to simply voluntarily resolve relicensing issues
early).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. There are a number of reasons for establishing a 40-year
default license term with exceptions for coordination, deference to
generally-supported comprehensive settlement agreements, and
consideration of previously-authorized voluntary actions. This policy
will provide significant certainty to licensees, resource agencies, and
other stakeholders. A 40-year default license term will provide a
simpler method for Commission staff to establish license terms, and,
thus, increase administrative efficiencies. A case-specific assessment
will only be required for those license applications that request a
longer license term, and are not explicitly supported by a generally-
supported comprehensive settlement agreement. Because many projects
would be relicensed less frequently, the policy would also lower
administrative costs for all stakeholders, provide licensees longer
license terms to recoup costs, and reduce regulatory burden. Further,
the policy will place efficient, low-impact projects that require
minimal measures--and thus, would receive a 30-year term under the
current policy--on more equal footing with projects that require more
measures.
18. The policy may also encourage licensees to voluntarily make
capacity upgrades and enhance recreational and environmental resources
during the prior license term. Affected resources will benefit from
licensees undertaking preventative or remedial measures sooner rather
than later. In addition, the policy may further encourage license
applicants to engage with stakeholders to negotiate a license
settlement agreement. Because a generally-supported comprehensive
settlement agreements represent stakeholder values, terms negotiated as
part of those agreements are in the public interest, provided they do
not conflict with coordination.
19. A 40-year default license term will not adversely affect
environmental and recreation resources. All of our licenses contain
extensive environmental and recreation measures. While under our new
policy some projects may be relicensed less frequently and
unanticipated project effects on environmental resources may go
unmitigated for longer durations of time than before, there are many
tools available to address these unanticipated effects in a timely
manner. The Commission may address serious, unanticipated environmental
effects using its standard reopener article,\18\ and licensees often
file applications for license amendments to address significant,
unanticipated environmental issues. Further, resource agencies
frequently reserve authority to address those effects under FPA section
4(e) (federal reservation) \19\ and section 18 (fishway
prescription),\20\ and in water quality certifications issued under
section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Stakeholders have also negotiated
with or encouraged licensees to propose measures that include adaptive
management approaches to allow for appropriate modifications as
additional information is gathered, new technologies develop, and
societal and environmental needs change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Each license incorporates a Commission L-Form that includes
standard reopener clauses to enhance fish and wildlife resources.
See Standardized Conditions for Inclusion in Preliminary Permits and
Licenses Issued Under Part I of the Federal Power Act, 54 F.P.C.
1792 (1975).
\19\ 16 U.S.C. 797(e) (2012) (licenses for projects located on
federal reservations are subject to and contain conditions as the
Secretary of the department under whose supervision such reservation
falls shall deem necessary).
\20\ 16 U.S.C. 811 (2012) (Secretaries of the Interior and
Commerce may prescribe fishway prescriptions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. This Policy Statement will apply to all licenses issued
following its publication in the Federal Register with no retroactive
application. License applicants with pending license applications may
file a comprehensive settlement agreement, or addendum to an existing
agreement, that includes an explicitly agreed upon license term or may
make a filing demonstrating why the Commission should award them a
longer license term than 40 years. The Commission, however, will not
entertain applications to amend existing licenses to extend their
license terms simply on the basis of this new license term policy.
Pursuant to current policy, licensees that seek to extend existing
licenses with terms of less than 50
[[Page 49504]]
years, must justify such requests, for example by proposing
development, environmental, and recreation enhancements in a license
amendment application accompanied by a request that the Commission
extend their license term.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See, e.g., Idaho Power Co., 132 FERC ] 62,001 (2010) (10-
year extension of the license term due to the costs of replacing the
project's existing powerhouse and increasing generating capacity);
PPL Holtwood, LLC, 129 FERC ] 62,092 (2009) (16-year extension of
license term due to costs associated with the constructing a new
powerhouse, installing two turbine generating units at the existing
powerhouse, and various environmental measures).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Document Availability
21. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through FERC's Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's
Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
22. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket
number field. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the
Commission's Web site during normal business hours from FERC Online
Support at 202-502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
[email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202)502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at
[email protected].
By the Commission.
Issued: October 19, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-23286 Filed 10-25-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P