[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 36 (Thursday, February 23, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10015-10016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4354]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 2

[Docket No. RM93-23-001; Docket No. RM93-25-001]


Project Decommissioning at Relicensing; Use of Reserved Authority 
in Hydropower Licenses To Ameliorate Cumulative Impacts; Order 
Dismissing Requests for Rehearing and Denying Requests for 
Reconsideration

    Issued February 9, 1995.

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Policy statements; order dismissing requests for rehearing and 
denying requests for reconsideration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is issuing an order 
that dismisses requests for rehearing, and denies requests for 
reconsideration, of the two policy statements that were issued on 
December 14, 1994. The Commission, in Docket No. RM93-25-000, adopted a 
policy statement with respect to the use of reserved authority in 
licenses for hydropower projects to ameliorate cumulative impacts of 
such projects in the same river basin. In Docket No. RM93-23-000, the 
Commission adopted a policy statement that addressed issues related to 
relicensing and decommissioning of hydropower projects. The Commission 
found that, because there is no aggrievement, rehearing does not lie 
and that no particular circumstances requiring reconsideration of the 
policy statements have been shown.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 9, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barry Smoler, Office of the General 
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 N. Capitol Street 
NE., Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-1269.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to publishing the full text of 
this document in the Federal Register, the Commission also provides all 
interested persons an opportunity to inspect or copy the contents of 
this documents during normal business hours in Room 3104, 941 North 
Capitol Street NE., Washington, D.C. 20426.
    The Commission Issuance Posting System (CIPS), an electronic 
bulletin board service, provides access to the texts of formal 
documents issued by the Commission. CIPS is available at no charge to 
the user and may be accessed using a personal computer with a modem by 
dialing (202) 208-1397. To access CIPS, set your communications 
software to 19200, 14400, 12000, 9600, 7200, 4800, 2400, 1200 or 
300bps, full duplex, no parity, 8 data bits, and 1 stop bit. The full 
text of this document will be available on CIPS for 60 days from the 
date of issuance in ASCII and WordPerfect 5.1 format. After 60 days the 
document will be archived, but still accessible. The complete text on 
diskette in Wordperfect format may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, La Dorn Systems Corporation, located in 
Room 3104, 941 North Capitol Street NE., Washington, D.C. 20426.

Order Dismissing Requests for Rehearing and Denying Requests for 
Reconsideration

    Issued February 9, 1995.

    Before Commissioners: Elizabeth Anne Moler, Chair; Vicky A. 
Bailey, James J. Hoecker, William L. Massey, and Donald F. Santa, 
Jr.

    On December 14, 1994, the Commission issued policy statements in 
each of the two above-captioned dockets.1

    \1\The policy statement issued in Docket No. RM93-23-000 (69 
FERC 61,336) was published in the Federal Register on January 4, 
1995 (60 FR 339). The policy statement issued in Docket No. RM93-25-
000 (69 FERC 61,337) was published in the Federal Register on 
December 28, 1994 (59 FR 66714).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 13, 1995, the American Public Power Association (APPA) 
filed a request for reconsideration or rehearing of both policy 
statements. APPA expressed the view that rehearing does not lie, 
because the policy statements do not give rise to ``aggrievement'' 
within the meaning of Section 313 of the Federal Power Act,2 but 
requested rehearing in the event that the Commission determined that it 
was appropriate.

    \2\16 U.S.C. 825l (1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 13, 1995, the National Hydropower Association filed a 
``statement in opposition'' to the policy statement on decommissioning 
issued in Docket No. RM93-23-000, but did [[Page 10016]] not request 
rehearing, stating (correctly) that ``its members will have the 
opportunity to challenge any Commission assertion of decommissioning 
authority in the context of actual proceedings where this becomes an 
issue.'' Similarly, on January 31, 1995, the Edison Electric Institute 
filed comments on the policy statement on reserved authority issued in 
Docket No. RM93-25-000, as well as on the policy statement in Docket 
No. RM93-23-000.
    Also on January 13, 1995, three requests for rehearing of the 
policy statement on decommissioning, in Docket No. RM93-23-000, were 
filed: (1) By the Hydropower Reform Coalition;3 (2) by (jointly) 
the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. Department of the Interior 
(the U.S. Departments);4 and by (jointly) Edwards Manufacturing 
Co., Inc. and the City of Augusta, Maine (Edwards and Augusta).5 
The pleading filed by the U.S. Departments is styled as a petition for 
``clarification, reconsideration and rehearing.''

    \3\In the alternative, the Coalition requests reconsideration or 
clarification of the policy statement.
    \4\The pleading filed by the U.S. Departments also requests 
rehearing of a companion order issued on December 14, 1994 (69 FERC 
61,338), that removed a standard reservation of authority article 
from approximately 60 licenses. That portion of the pleading is not 
affected by this order.
    \5\The pleading filed by Edwards and Augusta also requests 
rehearing of another companion order issued on December 14, 1994 (69 
FERC 61,335), which amended their license for the Augusta 
Hydroelectric Project (Edwards Dam). That portion of the pleading is 
not affected by this order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The above-captioned policy statements issued on December 14, 1994, 
provide only notice of the Commission's general views and intentions 
with respect to a broad range of potential issues that may come before 
it in future cases. The policy statements do not apply those views and 
intentions to the specific facts of any particular case, nor do they 
purport to resolve any specific case or controversy. They do not impose 
an obligation, deny a right, or fix some legal relationship as a 
consummation of the administrative process. Therefore, as there is no 
aggrievement, rehearing does not lie. Nor have the petitioners shown 
any particular circumstances requiring that we reconsider our positions 
taken in these policy statements.6 Accordingly, the above-
described requests for rehearing of the policy statements issued on 
December 14, 1994, in the above-captioned dockets are dismissed to the 
extent that they seek rehearing of either or both of those two policy 
statements, and are denied to the extent that they seek reconsideration 
of either of both of those policy statements.

    \6\See Papago Tribal Utility Authority v. FERC, 628 F.2d 235, 
239 (D.C. Cir. 1980).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission Orders

    The request for reconsideration and rehearing filed by the American 
Public Power Association in Docket Nos. RM93-23-001 and RM93-25-001, 
and the requests for rehearing, reconsideration and/or clarification 
filed by the Hydropower Reform Coalition, by the U.S. Departments of 
Commerce and the Interior, and by Edwards Manufacturing Company, Inc. 
and the City of Augusta, Maine, in Docket No. RM93-23-001, are rejected 
as requests for rehearing and are denied as requests for 
reconsideration or clarification.

    By the Commission. Commissioner Bailey dissented in part with a 
separate statement attached.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.

    Bailey, Commissioner, dissenting in part.

    For the reasons discussed in my earlier dissent, I would grant 
reconsideration of the Decommissioning Policy Statement (Docket No. 
RM93-23-001).
Vicky A. Bailey,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 95-4354 Filed 2-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P