You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:
Section number derived automatically from the wiki page. Move the page to change the section number.
Select the flowchart which accompanies this section.
Please check the technology the roadmap section applies to.
Select the hydropower project type
Information current as of
The year this permitting roadmap section was updated to current information.
Preexisting land uses at and surrounding the site are critical considerations in the early planning stages of the project. Federal and state law may prohibit interference with certain preexisting uses. For instance, developers should consider impact on farmland, livestock, nearby airports, military lands, navigable waters and whether the project is sited in or near a floodplain.
Overview of the permit or section being discussed.
==13.1 - Review Project Location==
The developer must review the project location to determine if there are pre-existing uses of the land that may be impacted as a result of the project.
==13.2 to 13.3 - Will the Project Affect Farmland or Livestock?==
The [[United States Department of Agriculture]] and other federal agencies are tasked with ensuring that the actions of the federal government do not cause United States farmland to be irreversibly converted to non-agricultural uses. The [[Farmland Protection Policy Act]] protects agriculturally productive lands from conversion to other land uses, and it could impede a developer's ability to continue with a project. Impacts on farmland or livestock can occur through displacing agriculturally productive lands or through emissions that impact the productivity of agricultural lands.
The FPPA requires federal agencies carrying out federal programs to identify and take into account any adverse effects on farmland created by those programs. If the federal project will irreversibly convert farmland to a non-agricultural use, mitigaiton and alternative sites should be considered.
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-fed">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-FD-a|Farmland Evaluation Process: <br>13-FD-a]]</span>
==13.4 to 13.5 - Will the Project Be on or adjacent to Military Lands?==
The [[Sikes Act]] authorizes the [[United States Department of Defense]] (DOD) to carry out a program for the conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources on military installations. If the proposed project will be on military land the developer should consult the Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP).
In addition, the military engages local governments and landowners for areas adjacent to military based to develop land use restrictions suitable to the purposes of the military reservation. For projects adjacent to military land the developer should consult the relevant DOD Joint Land Use Study, local land use plans, and private land use agreements.
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-fed">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-FD-b|Military Land Evaluation: <br>13-FD-b]]</span>
==13.6 to 13.7 - Will the Project Require the Construction of a Bridge over Navigable Waters?==
Federal law protects navigable waters from any construction that could potentially impede the navigability of the channel. Construction or modification of a bridge across a navigable waterway of the United States requires a bridge permit from the [[United States Coast Guard]] (USCG). The USCG’s bridge permitting authority can be found in [[Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC 401) | Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899]], [[The Bridge Act of 1906 (33 U.S.C. 491 - 498) | The Bridge Act of 1906]], and [[The General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 525 - 533) | The General Bridge Act of 1946]]. Today, [[The General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 525 - 533) | The General Bridge Act of 1946]] is cited as the authority for bridge permits in most cases.
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-fed">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-FD-c|Bridge Permit Application Process: <br>13-FD-c]]</span>
==13.8 to 13.9 - Will the Project Have a Substantial Aeronautical Impact?==
The developer must consider any impact the project may have to nearby airports. Developers should consult with local airports to determine whether the project will have any direct or indirect effects on nearby flyways.
Generally, construction or alteration projects that include objects 200 feet above ground level (or higher) require developers to submit notice of the project to the [[Federal Aviation Administration]]. The FAA will evaluate the project based on obstruction standards and other factors in order to determine whether the construction or alteration will have a substantial aeronautical impact. Even where the FAA determines that there is no hazard to air navigation, they may include conditional provisions, limitations necessary to minimize potential problems, lighting/marking recommendations, and/or supplemental notice requirements.
For a full description of the relevant considerations and applicable processes, see
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-fed">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-FD-d|Aeronatucial Considerations: <br>13-FD-d]]</span>
==13.10 to 13.11 - Will the Project Obstruct or Alter Navigable Waters?==
Section 10 of the [[Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) | Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899]] requires a developer to obtain a permit from the [[U S Army Corps of Engineers | U.S. Army Corps of Engineers]] for any project that obstructs or alters any navigable water of the United States, including any work or structures in, over, or under or affecting the course, location, or condition of navigable waters. Navigable waters of the United States are “those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.”
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-fed">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-FD-e|Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Permit: <br>13-FD-e]]</span>
==13.12 to 13.13 - Will the Project Raise Any State Land Use Issues?==
If the project will impact any state land use, then the applicable state rules must be considered. Examples of state land use issues that may require a permit include state coastal issues, conservation districts, dune protection, etc.
<div class="state-block" data-abbr="CA">
In California, developers may need a permit for projects in or near a coastal zone or an easement for projects located protected under the Williamson Act or a Farmland Security Zone contract. For more information, see:
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-state">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-CA-a|State Coastal Zone Land Use Assessment Overview: <br>13-CA-a]]</span>
<div class="state-block" data-abbr="HI">
In Hawaii, developers must apply for a Conservation District Use Permit with the [[Department of Land and Natural Resources Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands]] to develop geothermal resources in the State Land Use Conservation District. For more information, see:
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-state">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-HI-a|Conservation District Use Permit: <br>13-HI-a]]</span>
<div class="state-block" data-abbr="TX">
In Texas, developers may need a Dune Protection Permit and/or coastal construction approval from the [[Texas General Land Office]] for geothermal project development. For more information, see:
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-state">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-TX-a|State Land Use Assessment: <br>13-TX-a]]</span>
<div class="state-block" data-abbr="WA">
In Washington, a developer must consider the location and land use designations on certain land before constructing a project. For instances a developer may need to obtain a Coastal Zone Certificate of Consistency in order to comply with [[Coastal Zone Management Act]] and Washington’s Coastal Zone Management Program. A developer may also need a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, a Shoreline Variance or Shoreline Exemption for projects that interfere with State shorelands or are located near marine waters, streams, lakes, wetlands or floodplains. For more information, see:
<span class="btn btn-rapid btn-state">[[RAPID/Roadmap/13-WA-a|Additional Pre-Existing State Land Use Assessment Overview: <br>13-WA-a]]</span>
Paragraphs supporting the elements in the flowchart. Delineate section headers with "==" wiki text.
Enter agency or multiple agencies, separated by semi-colons.
Enter multiple References, separated by semi-colons. Use standard wiki text for links.
Enter multiple Regulations, separated by semi-colons. Use standard wiki text for links.
Please provide the contact position or title. Use the drop down selection to find the appropriate contact.Options are listed in the format of: Organization: Position
Assemble a trigger using the fields below. Multiple triggers are treated as "OR" conditionals.
Surface ManagerSurface OwnerMineral ManagerMineral OwnerActivityEncroachmentEnvironmentalLocationLand Use PlanGeothermal LeaseHazardous WasteImpactsFacilityFundingManagedPlannedPower PlantTransmissionTransportation
DrillingExplorationGeophysicsLeasingPower Plant DevelopmentWell Abandonment
can be described as
CogenerationSmall Power ProductionIndependent Power ProductionWholesale CustomerFERC ExemptedFERC LicensedUnderground StorageAbove-Ground StorageTemporary Water RequirementPermanent Water RequirementDrinking Water Providing
ActiveNoApplicant Is Lessee
Capacity Exceeds 20 MWCapacity Under 20 MWCapacity Is 50 MWCapacity Exceeds 50 MWCapacity Under 100 MWPUC Certification
Historic PropertiesNative American Historic PropertyNative Hawaiian Historic PropertyNational Register Historic PropertyHistoric Property (Alteration)AirportMigratory BirdsBald Or Golden EagleMarine Mammals Or HabitatFederal Endangered SpeciesFarmland Or LivestockMilitary LandWaters Of The USNavigable WatersWild Or Scenic RiverWetlands By Dregging Or FillingGroundwater By DischargeStorm WaterWater Discharge To WellWater Discharge To LandWater Point Source DischargeWaste Water Associated With Only GeothermalReceived State 401 WQ CertHas Not Received 401 WQ CertAir QualityAir Quality From ConstructionAir Quality From OperationSolid Waste
Line Capacity Under 200 kVLine Capacity Exceeds 50 kVWithin NIETCCAISO GridExempt Per GO 131 D III B 1Not Exempt From CEQAPUC CertificationProject Under GO 131 D II B 2
Assessment CompletedImpact SignificantImpact Likely SignificantAnalysis Impacts AdverseAnalysis Impacts Not AdverseNo Best Interests FindingNo Categorical ExclusionNo Determination Of NEPA AdequacyPrior State AnalysisNo Prior State AnalysisProcess Not Complete For DrillingExtraordinary Circumstances
Interconnection AgreementPre-Application Process
State Highway ROW
Exceeds Max Length Or Load
Please note that all contributions to Open Energy Information are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Zero (see Creative Commons).
When contributing, you must abide with Open Energy Information's core content policies of neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research.
This is a minor edit
Watch this page
| Editing help