Technical Conference on Financial Assurance Measures for Hydroelectric Projects

11:30 – 11:45 a.m.:

Welcome and Opening Remarks

11:45 am – 12:45 p.m.:

Panel 1:  Protecting Hydroelectric Facilities and Communities with Financial Assurance Requirements

This panel will examine the potential safety risks hydroelectric facilities face and how a financial assurance requirement could mitigate these risks.  This will include examining project-specific risks (e.g., condition of project facilities), regional risks (e.g., changes to the project area since construction), and global risks (e.g., climate change).  The panel may discuss the following questions:

1. What project-specific characteristics, such as facility age, condition, reservoir size, dam safety hazard potential, geography, natural resources, and development in the surrounding floodplain should the Commission consider as it evaluates the need for a financial assurance requirement? 
2. How can financial assurance requirements protect against broader risks, including increased risk from aging infrastructure and regional heat/severe storm stressors from climate change? 
3. How should the Commission weigh the impacts of the various risks when establishing a financial assurance requirement?
4. What are the impacts on communities and how should they be factored into the requirement? 

Panelists:

• Amy Cordalis, Principal, Ridges to Riffles Conservation Fund
• Monica Derbes Gibson, Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, National Hydropower Association
• Jennifer King, Regulatory Specialist, Kodiak Electric Association, Inc. Opening Comments
• Douglas Spaulding, President, Nelson Energy LLC
• Bob Stuber, Executive Director, Michigan Hydro Relicensing Coalition Opening Comments

12:45 – 1:00 p.m.:

Break

1:00 – 2:15 p.m.:

Panel 2:  Establishing a Financial Assurance Requirement

This panel will explore factors that should inform the Commission’s decision to establish a financial assurance requirement.  Panelists will recommend specific project characteristics that should be considered.  The panel will also evaluate the appropriate amount of financial assurance that the Commission should require.  The panel may include a discussion of the following questions:

1. How should certain project characteristics, such as the hazard classification of the dam, the size of the project reservoir, the size of the project (capacity), compliance history, location, or other factors, inform a financial assurance requirement?
2. Should the Commission treat projects at government dams where financial assurance may already be required for the use of that facility (e.g., U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation) differently?
3. Depending on the risk (i.e., project specific, regional, or global), how could the appropriate amount of financial assurance be determined?
4. What methodology should be used to set the required funding levels (e.g., is it a formula based on the hazard level of the dam and the acre-feet of storage or is it based on the amount of generation)? 

1. What level of funding or assurance should each licensee be required to demonstrate?  Should this level be applied broadly or be determined on a case-by-case basis?

Panelists:

• Dan DeVaun, Dam Safety Engineer, Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy Dam Safety Unit
• Madeleine Mineau, Chief Operating Officer, Essex Power Services
• Hon. Philip Moeller, Executive Vice President, Business Operations Group and Regulatory Affairs, Edison Electric Institute Opening Comments
• Michael A. Swiger, Partner, Van Ness Feldman, LLP, counsel for Public Power Licensee Group Opening Comments

2:15 – 2:45 p.m.:            

Break

2:45 – 4:00 p.m.:            

Panel 3:  Evaluating Mechanisms for Financial Assurance 

This panel will discuss the mechanisms licensees could use to satisfy a financial assurance requirement and the availability of these mechanisms.  The panelists will discuss various instruments used by other federal or state agencies to satisfy financial assurance requirements and those used in other industries.  The panel may include a discussion of the following questions:

1. Should the Commission require licensees to use a performance or surety bond (or bond bank); irrevocable letter of credit; individual trust, escrow, or remediation fund; or insurance policies or self-insurance?  
2. What is the availability of the various financing instruments?
3. Should licensees be required to file financial records or financing plans?  If so, how should the Commission establish financing thresholds or a way to measure or determine if a license’s financials are sufficient?
4. Should the Commission require licensees to reaffirm or recertify that they have adequate financial assurance instruments during their license term?  Or should the Commission reexamine the financial assurance requirements after a set number of years?
5. How should the experience of other federal, state, and industry regulators inform the Commission’s financial assurance requirements?

Panelists:

• Kurtis Crawford, Director of Finance, Yuba County Water Agency Opening Comments
• Arnold Garcia, Director, Insurance, Duke Energy Corporation
• Michael Pease, Senior Economist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
• Richard Roos-Collins, Principal, Water and Power Law Group PC
• Lex Wolf, Partner, Climate Adaptive Infrastructure Fund

4:00 – 4:15 p.m.:

Closing Remarks