PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 22, 2001
Hydroelectric Licensing Process Improvement Act of 2001- Amends the Federal Power Act to prescribe mandatory factors for consideration and documentation by Federal agency participants (consulting agencies) in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) hydroelectric license renewal process when setting forth renewal prerequisites, including the economic impact, and the means to ensure that such prerequisites address only direct project environmental impacts at the lowest project cost.Mandates that each condition be subjected to scientific peer review.Requires a consulting agency to provide a license applicant an opportunity to obtain expedited administrative review of its proposed conditions before filing a FERC application.Empowers the reviewing body to remand the matter to such agency upon finding that the agency's conditions are inconsistent with this Act.Sets a one-year deadline by which a consulting agency must file its proposed licensing conditions with FERC.Directs FERC to: (1) conduct an economic analysis of each condition submitted by a consulting agency to determine whether it would render the project uneconomic; (2) conduct a single consolidated environmental review for each licensed project; and (3) consider the need of license applicants for a prompt decision when setting a deadline for the submission of comments by governmental agencies regarding environmental impact statements or assessments.Directs FERC to study and report to certain congressional committees on the feasibility of establishing a separate licensing procedure for small hydroelectric projects with a generating capacity of five megawatts or less.
People & committees
Sen. Craig, Larry E. [R-ID] · R–ID
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (text of measure as introduced: CR S329-331)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S328-329, S330-331)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.71 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.71 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.71 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.71 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.