WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 4992

A bill to require the Secretary of the Army to issue guidance relating to the review of applications for alteration or temporary or permanent occupation or use of certain hydropower projects, and for other purposes.

119th Congress Introduced by Steve Daines and 2 co-sponsors

The bill standardizes Section 408 reviews by requiring a uniform completeness process that only checks documentation and checklist compliance, not technical design, with phased rev

Introduced in Senate
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 4992

Summary of Bill S.4992 (119th Congress, 2nd Session)

Purpose

S.4992 seeks to standardize and streamline the review process for applications under Section 408 of the Federal Power Act. Specifically, it tasks the Secretary of the Army with issuing guidance to establish uniform, defined procedures for reviewing alterations or temporary/permanent occupancy/use of non-Federal hydropower projects. The overarching aim is to ensure completeness reviews are clear, efficient, and limited in scope, without delving into detailed engineering analysis during the completeness phase.

Key Provisions

  • Definitions (Section 1(a))

    • Establishes standardized terms for the purposes of the section, including:
    • Completeness review: review to determine if a section 408 application is complete.
    • Hydropower project: non-Federal projects requiring a license or exemption under the Federal Power Act.
    • Secretary: Secretary of the Army.
    • Section 408 application: applications under Section 14 of the Act of March 3, 1899 for alteration or temporary/permanent occupation or use of a hydropower project.

  • Mandatory Guidance (Section 1(b)(1))

    • Due within 1 year of enactment, the Secretary must issue guidance that includes:
    • Application Checklist (Section 408): A standardized list of required materials, developed in consultation with:
      • Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
      • Hydroelectric Design Center of the Army Corps of Engineers
      • Hydropower project operators
      • Relevant industry associations
    • Completeness Criteria: Clear description of what constitutes a complete application, covering:
      • Required documents and analyses
      • Formatting and submission requirements
      • Evidence of compliance with applicable FERC license
    • Phased Review Procedures: For phased design reviews, specify:
      • Scope and objectives of each phase
      • Timeline for each phase
      • Definitions of terms such as “fatal flaw,” “final quality assurance,” and “technical review”
      • A statement that a completeness review shall not entail detailed technical analysis or engineering judgments about design adequacy
    • Escalation Procedures: How to refer an incomplete application to higher Corps leadership if deadlines are not met
    • Scope of Completeness Reviews (Section 1(b)(2)): Completeness reviews are limited to verifying:
    • All required documents are submitted
    • Documents are in the required format
    • The application addresses the checklist requirements
    • Prohibitions (Section 1(b)(3)): During a completeness review, the Secretary or designee may not:
    • Conduct detailed technical engineering reviews
    • Evaluate design adequacy or alternative designs
    • Request design modifications or additional analyses
    • Consider factors outside the standardized checklist
    • Impose environmental standards not established by a federal or relevant state agency before submission

Who/What Is Affected

  • Projects/Applicants: Non-Federal hydropower projects seeking Section 408 authorization for alterations or temporary/permanent occupancy or use.
  • Agencies and Stakeholders Involved in Review:
    • Secretary of the Army (in issuing guidance and conducting reviews)
    • Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
    • Hydroelectric Design Center of the Corps of Engineers
    • Hydropower project operators
    • Relevant industry associations

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Effective Guidance Timeline: The Secretary must issue the standardized guidance within 1 year after enactment.
  • Process Focus: Emphasizes a two-stage approach:
    • A clear completeness (paperwork) review, not a technical design review
    • A separate, subsequent (not detailed in this bill) technical/design review during the appropriate phase of the project review
  • Escalation: If deadlines for a Section 408 application are not met, there are defined escalation procedures to refer the case to higher Corps leadership.

Observations

  • The bill does not change the substantive engineering standards or environmental requirements imposed by other laws; it creates a standardized administrative framework for determining whether a Section 408 application is complete.
  • By limiting the completeness review to documentation and checklist compliance, the bill aims to reduce ambiguity and potential delays caused by premature or overly technical queries during preliminary review.

If you’d like, I can add a quick comparison to current practice or outline potential implementation challenges and considerations for stakeholders.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.