[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11061-11062]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      FEDERAL POWER ACT AMENDMENT

  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 2786) to amend the Federal Power Act with respect to the criteria 
and process to qualify as a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 2786

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. QUALIFYING CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITIES.

       Section 30(a) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 823a(a)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)(C), by striking ``45 days'' and 
     inserting ``30 days''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)(C)--
       (A) in clause (i), by adding ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (B) by striking clause (ii); and
       (C) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (ii).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Upton) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.


                             General Leave

  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
insert extraneous material in the Record on the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill, H.R. 2786, introduced by my two colleagues, 
the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson) and the gentlewoman from 
Colorado (Ms. DeGette), has always been a bipartisan bill. It amends 
the Federal Power Act to promote renewable energy from small conduit 
hydropower facilities.
  The bill would encourage the generation of electricity from existing 
manmade conduits operated for the distribution of water for 
agriculture, municipal, or industrial consumption.
  I would note that Congress established qualifying conduit exemptions 
under the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013. This bill, H.R. 
2786, builds on that law to provide benefits to a greater range of 
conduit hydropower projects. This bill, in fact, will shorten the 
review period and allow larger conduit projects to be eligible for 
exemption from certain listing requirements.
  I know of no serious objections to the bill. It is bipartisan, as it 
should be. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2786, the Promoting Small 
Conduit Hydropower Facilities Act of 2017.
  In 2013, our committee moved bipartisan legislation by Representative 
McMorris Rodgers and Representative DeGette that created an exemption 
from hydropower licensing for certain conduit hydropower facilities of 
5 megawatts capacity or less.
  Under the provision established in the McMorris Rodgers-DeGette bill, 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, must determine within 
15 days after receipt of a notice of intent to construct a small 
conduit project by the developer if the project meets the qualifying 
criteria for exemption under the law.
  If FERC makes an initial determination that the project meets that 
criteria, current law requires FERC to publish a public notice of that 
determination and provide the public 45 days for an opportunity to 
comment on or contest FERC's determination.
  That bill went on to be signed into law by President Obama and, as of 
May of this year, has resulted in qualifying 83 projects being exempted 
from Federal licensing requirements.

                              {time}  1315

  The bill before us now, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2786, sponsored by Mr. 
Hudson and Ms. DeGette, will amend the Federal Power Act to lift the 5-
megawatt cap on conduit projects that could qualify for exemption. The 
bill would also reduce from 45 days to 30 days the amount of time the 
public will have to comment on or contest FERC's determination of 
whether a project qualifies for exception.
  There is clearly strong support on both sides of the aisle for the 
development of conduit hydroelectric projects and for efforts like the 
Hudson-DeGette bill, which cuts red tape to ensure that environmentally 
sound projects can move forward quickly and efficiently.
  However, Mr. Speaker, the original version of this bill cut the 45-
day timeframe for public comment on a proposed exemption too much, down 
to 15 days. That, in my view, Mr. Speaker, and that of many of my 
colleagues, was too short a period of time to allow for meaningful 
public input into the process.
  Fortunately and wisely, Mr. Speaker, Chairman Upton and Chairman 
Walden accepted an amendment by Ranking Member Pallone that reduced the 
amount of time for public notification by a third, from 45 days to 30 
days, rather than the 15 days that many of us felt was excessive.
  As a result, we now have a bill that is good policy, that cuts down 
on unnecessary regulation, while properly balancing the interests of 
hydropower development with that of the public.
  The bill was rightfully reported by the committee with the unanimous 
support of Members on both sides of the aisle, and I hope the full 
House will do the same today.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson), the original author of the 
bill.
  Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support H.R. 2786, my bipartisan legislation focused on tapping our 
Nation's immense conduit hydropower potential.
  Hydropower remains one of the most efficient and affordable sources 
of electricity, as well as one of the largest sources of renewable 
electricity in America. In North Carolina alone, it

[[Page 11062]]

generates enough electricity to power 350,000 homes each year.
  The opportunity is tremendous. Picture a tiny turbine placed in an 
existing man-made pipe that transports water from a water treatment 
plant. We can produce clean electric power inside these types of man-
made conduits. There are over 1.2 million miles of water supply mains 
in the United States creating literally thousands of energy-recovery 
hydropower generation opportunities. This technology is readily 
available and environmentally friendly, but Federal regulations have 
discouraged and stifled the development.
  That is exactly why I introduced this commonsense bill with my 
colleague, Diana DeGette, whom I will say, even though her Broncos 
defeated my Panthers in the Super Bowl a couple years ago, it has 
really been a pleasure to work with on this.
  What we are working on is to streamline the Federal review process 
for noncontroversial conduit hydropower projects and make the projects 
eligible for streamlined consideration.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation to 
expand the development of conduit hydropower projects, create clean 
energy jobs, increase production of affordable renewable power, reduce 
consumer electricity costs, and improve energy diversity.
  Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), the cosponsor of this bill.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I won't 
talk exclusively about the Broncos today. Instead, I want to thank 
Representative Hudson for working with me on the bill. It has been a 
pleasure.
  I also want to thank Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Rush and 
Energy and Commerce Chairman Walden and Ranking Member Pallone for 
helping us work on this important bill. It is really an example of what 
we can accomplish when we put partisanship aside and work to address 
our country's needs.
  Hydropower is a clean, domestic energy source. Over the last 2 years, 
it has provided almost 6 percent of U.S. electricity and almost half of 
all renewable electricity. It also supports hundreds of thousands of 
good jobs across the country.
  As a westerner, I know how important water is to our environment and 
to our communities, and I am committed to advancing hydropower in a way 
that both respects existing water rights and minimizes environmental 
disruption.
  Hydropower is often associated with large-scale projects like dams, 
but I have been particularly interested in smaller-scale projects 
attached to existing infrastructure, including irrigation canals and 
municipal water supply systems.
  As Mr. Rush noted, in 2013, I worked with Representative Cathy 
McMorris Rodgers, another westerner, to pass the Hydropower Regulatory 
Efficiency Act. That bill became law, and it established a process for 
qualifying conduit hydropower facilities to move forward without 
requiring a license from FERC.
  A lot of people in western Colorado told me that this was one of the 
most important bills that they had ever seen come out of Congress, only 
demonstrating that all politics is local. Even though maybe it didn't 
seem so important to some people here at the time, 83 hydropower 
projects have been successfully promoted using the new process, 
including 23 projects in Colorado. This progress is encouraging, but 
there is even more we can do.
  The Colorado government estimates that existing agricultural 
irrigation conduits in our State could support an additional 30 
megawatts of hydropower, and municipal water supply systems could 
support another 20 to 25 megawatts. But to realize this potential, we 
need to listen to the advice that the Energy and Commerce Committee has 
heard on how to make the process as simple and flexible as possible.
  We have heard testimony from FERC that the existing comment period is 
rarely used for comments that have a bearing on determining whether the 
project qualifies under the statute. In response, the bill we are 
considering today would shorten the comment period from 45 to 30 days 
to avoid unnecessary delays.
  Second, FERC suggested lifting the megawatt cap on qualifying conduit 
projects. The amount of energy demonstrated by a hydroelectric project 
is not a good indication of its environmental impact. In fact, any 
project built on existing conduit infrastructure will have little to no 
environmental impact because it is using water that has already been 
diverted from its natural course.
  The bill would not change the requirement in existing law that the 
project be built on a conduit that is primarily intended for non-power 
generating uses, further limiting the potential for any environmental 
impact.
  Together, these two changes will open the door to more conduit 
hydropower projects without compromising important environmental 
protections.
  Mr. Speaker, again, I would like to emphasize that bill shows what 
Congress can accomplish when we work together in a bipartisan manner to 
address our country's needs now and in the future. I urge everyone to 
support it.
  Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I just want to comment briefly on the remarks 
by my two colleagues.
  This is an important bill, and for those of us who have always 
supported all of the above, whether it be renewable or safe nuclear, 
all those different things, hydro is part of that mix.
  I would just note that I had a question yesterday morning. I did a 
big Farm Bureau breakfast in my district, and the question about 
hydropower came up. Just like my friend from Colorado talks about the 
most important bill in Colorado, this is an important bill.
  It is also important that we work together to get this bill done so 
that the Senate can follow suit. I urge my colleagues to vote for this 
bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 2786, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________