Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “FERC”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Comprehensive Database of Environmental Mitigations Extracted from FERC-Licensed Hydropower Projects Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques, 1998-2023

This dataset provides a comprehensive inventory of environmental mitigation measures required by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensed hydropower facilities from 461 licenses that were issued from 1998 to 2023. These licenses constitute 446 of the 1015 FERC projects that were active at the end of 2023. 17,612 mentions of environmental mitigations were identified and categorized in 128 unique categories. Mitigations were identified using a Natural Language Processing (NLP) approach, specifically with a Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer (BERT) model. Model-derived results were then reviewed and updated by a subject matter expert as needed. This dataset introduces important enhancements to previous efforts to inventory environmental mitigations, such as including associated license text for each mitigation, tracking the number of instances a mitigation was identified within a license, and providing improved location information. These enhancements significantly expand the dataset's utility, offering greater analytical capabilities and ensuring reproducibility. The dataset is downloadable as a zip file containing the metadata and dataset files.

Ruggles, Thomas [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (OR↗
DOE OSTI2026

FERC order 2222 & DER policy and implementation report - January 2026

The January 2026 FERC 2222 Tracker Report provides an overview of the progress and challenges in the implementation of FERC Order 2222, emphasizing the critical need for state-level action to address gaps in DERA/EDC communication protocols. The report highlights the importance of reliable communication between electric distribution companies (EDCs) and DER aggregators (DERAs) for seamless market operations, noting the absence of specific directives from FERC and RTO/ISO compliance filings. Key discussions include the operational coordination required to manage DER operations within aggregated markets, the potential use of tools like DER Registries for efficient data exchange, and the implications of non-performance due to communication issues. While steps are being taken at the state level, such as ongoing policy development and bi-monthly webinars for stakeholder education, no states have fully developed coordination frameworks as of early 2026. The report underscores the growing role of states and local regulators in defining these protocols and ensuring effective coordination amidst the complex dynamics of distributed energy resources (DERs) integration into wholesale markets.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

FERC Order No. 2222 and Considerations for Distributed Wind

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued Order No. 2222 in October 2020. The rule directs Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators (ISOs) to amend their tariffs and participation models to accommodate heterogeneous distributed energy resource (DER) aggregations in the wholesale energy markets that they operate, including capacity, energy, and ancillary service markets. The Commission issued the rule to better capture the benefits provided by DERs deployed in the United States, whose use has been expanding rapidly. The Commission defines DERs as “any resource located on the distribution system, any subsystem thereof or behind a customer meter,” including but not limited to “electric storage resources, distributed generation, demand response, energy efficiency, thermal storage, and electric vehicles and their supply equipment.” The rule aims to increase DER participation in wholesale markets by allowing the creation of DER aggregations, in which multiple DERs that are too small to meet minimum capacity requirements for wholesale markets individually would be able to participate in markets as a single unit. As of June 20, 2023, all ISOs have filed initial compliance plans and a number have begun implementation. Compliance dates range from 2024 to 2029, with Midcontinent ISO having the latest date of compliance proposed for 2029. Southwest Power Pool still has an outstanding date, having no final order yet from FERC, but a target date of the third quarter of calendar year 2025. The rule, which is technology agnostic and requires ISOs to create participation plans that accommodate different DERs, provides an opportunity for distributed wind market expansion. In addition, distributed wind can bring benefits to heterogenous DER aggregations. These benefits include resource diversity (i.e., a complementary generation profile to other types of distributed generation), its small footprint and ability to be co-located with load, and its potential to provide frequency response, voltage support, and black start services, among other ancillary services. This report provides a status update on FERC Order No. 2222, the current state of ISO compliance, and information relevant to the distributed wind industry as DER aggregators and other stakeholders expand their participation to wholesale energy markets.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Distributed Wind and Impacts of FERC Order No. 2222 Implementation

In September of 2020, FERC issued Order No. 2222, directing ISOs to adjust their long-standing tariffs and participation models to enable the operation of distributed energy resource (DER) aggregators in wholesale energy markets. The rule sought to bring wholesale markets under its jurisdiction up to speed with existing expansion of DERs across the United States and to capture the potential benefits that these technologies can provide. This report describes the implementation of FERC Order No. 2222 and the compliance plans that have been submitted so far, attempt to understand the potential impact the rule may have on distributed wind, and provide opportunities for future work to analyze and encourage deployment under these policy conditions. There is an information gap for the type of market interactions distributed wind may have or how it could be best deployed in DER aggregations under future market conditions. There is significant potential for profitable deployment of distributed wind in states that are served by ISOs and covered under Order No. 2222. Distributed wind and other DERs provide local energy that does not need to travel those distances and avoids the losses typically associated with long-distance energy transmission. Deployment of distributed wind can benefit communities that exist away from large load centers by providing local, clean, and affordable energy. Aggregating DERs that include distributed wind could provide these benefits across multiple far-ranging communities if they have access to participate in wholesale markets. A new baseline valuation of distributed wind in areas covered by Order No. 2222 is required to accurately gauge where it is profitable and how it can compete or complement existing or future DER deployment, including as part of an aggregate.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

FERC Order 2222 DER Policy and Implementation Report - November 2025

The FERC Order 2222 DER Policy and Implementation Report delivers bi-monthly updates on policy and implementation activities related to FERC Order 2222 across the United States. This report is made available on the FERC2222.org website for stakeholder access.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

FERC order 2222 & DER policy and implementation report: May 2025

FERC and several states took action on distributed energy resource (DER) policy, the implementation of virtual power plants (VPPs), and FERC Order 2222 in the last several months. A summary of the actions is listed below.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Maximizing Demand Flexibility with Buildings and FERC 2222

In 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved a rule, Order 2222, that requires market operators to create pathways enabling distributed energy resource aggregators (DERAs) to compete in all regional organized wholesale electric markets. The goal is to encourage various forms of distributed energy resources (DERs) to participate in electricity markets in a way that would enhance competition, encourage innovation, and drive down costs for consumers. In this document, we briefly discuss how FERC Order 2222 affects the opportunities for participation in electricity markets for building owners and operators, the role of aggregators, and the involvement of buildings in the electricity market.

demand flexibility↗
DOE OSTI2024

Transforming Regional Transmission Planning: FERC Order 1920 Explained [Slides]

This presentation presents the key topics from FERC Order 1920: Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation. It breaks down and summarizes the main reforms from the regulation including comments from diverse perspectives on how the new rules may be implemented. This presentation can serve as a resource for diverse stakeholders including policymakers, utilities, industry, and researchers who seek to understand how the new ruling may impact regional transmission planning.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Basin-Wide Approaches to Hydropower Licensing

This presentation summarizes findings from a 2020 NREL technical report including the FERC relicensing process for non-federal hydropower projects, analyzes FERC-licensed projects with license expiration dates from 2018-2037, discusses FERC's authority to coordinate license terms of hydropower projects within a shared river basin and provides basin-wide case studies and considerations to hydropower relicensing. In the United States there are 1,043 active FERC-licensed hydroelectric projects with a total capacity of 56,097 MW. Of those, 647 with a total capacity of 21,870 MW have license expiration dates from 2018-2037. The expected workload in conjunction with the time, cost, and complexity associated with issuing a single new license has led to initiatives that aim to increase the efficiency of the relicensing process. Federal and state regulators and licensees in California, Maine, New York, and Wisconsin have begun to develop approaches to look at hydropower relicensing as part of a larger system - a river basin. These basin-wide approaches seek to coordinate different stages of the relicensing process for multiple projects at the same time. The goal of these basin-wide approaches is to increase the efficiency of the relicensing process and allow for a more comprehensive analysis of the cumulative impacts of the projects within the basin. These innovative approaches to relicensing could also reduce the workload for regulators and costs associated with relicensing. This presentation discusses some of the findings from the Basin-wide Approaches to Hydropower Relicensing: Case Studies and Considerations including a summary of the key considerations for the FERC relicensing process for non-federal hydropower projects, key findings from the analysis of FERC-licensed projects with license expiration dates from 2018-2037, discusses FERC's authority to coordinate license terms of hydropower projects within a shared river basin and provides basin-wide case studies and considerations to hydropower relicensing.

basin-wide↗
DOE OSTI2025

Environmental Impacts of Closed-Loop Pumped Storage Hydropower

The goal of this report is to help license applicants, resource agencies, and other members of the hydropower community involved in closed-loop pumped storage hydropower permitting and licensing process, focus the scope of environmental reviews, and more quickly identify impacts with project nexus and potential mitigation measures for these impacts. Pumped storage hydropower (PSH) is an energy storage technology that uses energy to pump water up from a lower reservoir to an upper reservoir where water is stored until electricity is needed and the water is released to a lower reservoir passing through turbines. Closed-loop PSH—PSH that is not continuously connected to a naturally flowing water feature—is one of the lowest greenhouse gas emitting energy storage technologies and is therefore a critical part of the transition to renewable energy (Simon et al. 2023). Proposals for closed-loop PSH facilities in the United States currently account for more than 40% of original licenses and 99% of potential generation capacity in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) hydropower licensing pipeline (Johnson et al. 2023). While closed-loop PSH facilities can have lower environmental impacts than open-loop PSH facilities, no closed-loop facilities have been constructed in the United States to enable direct accounting of project impacts and efficacy of mitigations. Many proposals for closed-loop PSH submitted to FERC are abandoned early in the permitting and licensing process prior to license applications and environmental assessments, so there is little documentation describing potential project impacts and proposed mitigations. The newness of closed-loop PSH proposals in the United States may mean that tribal, federal, and state agencies with authorities for cultural and natural resources protection and management involved in the FERC licensing process may not have experience with closed-loop PSH regulation. Moreover, many proposed closed-loop PSH facilities are in areas that do not have high concentrations of conventional hydropower, so these agencies may also be unfamiliar with the FERC hydropower licensing process. The goal of this report is to help license applicants, resource agencies, and other members of the hydropower community focus the scope of environmental review for the closed-loop PSH development, licensing, and federal authorization process enabling quicker identification of potential impacts, mitigations, and situations where mitigation may not be possible. We found that environmental impacts of closed-loop PSH are highly site-specific, and generalizations about the types of environmental impacts across closed-loop PSH projects are difficult to make. Environmental impacts of closed-loop PSH are like those for open-loop PSH with a few exceptions including water sourcing, which can lead to delays and contention due to potential complexities with water rights, impacts to aquatic resources, and greenhouse gas emission potential. Cultural resource impacts were commonly reported in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents reviewed and discussed in interviews, but in many cases such impacts cannot be mitigated.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Variable Transmission Line Ratings

This paper outlines the concept of variable-transmission facility ratings. This topic is of heightened importance following the recent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order No. 881 which requires the implementation of ambient adjusted ratings (AARs) for FERC jurisdictional portions of the transmission system. Additionally, FERC issued an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANOPR) implying a future order on Dynamic Line Rating (DLR) requirements. The various types of facility-rating methodologies will be discussed with a focus on how they can benefit the stability, capacity, and reliability of the grid.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Cost of Fish Exclusion and Passage Technologies for Hydropower

Hydropower represents a reliable source of renewable energy and accounts for approximately 7% of the total electrical generation in the United States. Future expansion of hydropower is likely to be in the form of either smaller new stream development projects or powering existing non-powered dams. For these new projects to be successful, careful analysis of risks, costs, and uncertainty to offset reduced power production as well as ensuring the protection and safe passage of migratory fish to gain public support, will be required. Exclusion and passage are two common approaches to protect fish from entrainment and impingement at hydropower facilities. The thresholds for entrainment risk and requirements for exclusion and passage often differ depending on the species involved, the characteristics of the facility, and the goals of stakeholders. While the costs associated with environmental mitigations represent a large proportion of the total costs required for the licensing of hydropower facilities, little quantitative information is present within the literature regarding the specific costs of fish exclusion and passage. Working with FOA awardee Natel Energy, scientists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory were tasked with assessing the capital construction costs for downstream fish exclusion and passage infrastructure. This report used keyword searches of an existing environmental mitigation cost data set and manual extraction of additional cost data associated with protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PM&E) measures related to positive barrier screening and passage from regulatory licensing documents available in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) eLibrary. This approach yielded a total of 50 PM&E mitigation measures with estimated capital construction costs pertaining to positive barrier screens, 142 pertaining to passage studies, and 26 pertaining to passage-related studies. PM&E measures associated with positive barrier screens represented <10% of the 171 total FERC project dockets available in the data set. These data were highly skewed toward conventional relicensing projects, as <7% were associated with new stream development (NSD) projects. Results from these data indicate highly variable costs associated with fish screening, with flow-normalized costs one to two orders of magnitude higher for screening with the highest exclusion capability (≤0.09 in. spacing) compared with coarser screening (1 to 2 in.). Furthermore, estimated capital costs of passage infrastructure were positively related to the scale of the project based on installed capacity for some, but not all, types of passage. These data provide an initial baseline for estimating exclusion and passage costs for hydropower development and may help developers consider options for more fish-friendly generation technologies, though gaps remain relating to a lack of data, particularly for NSD projects. More data may still be available within the FERC eLibrary, but significant effort will be required to manually identify and extract the data for future analyses.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Basin-Scale Relicensing Opportunity Product User Guide

The Basin-Scale Relicensing Opportunity products provide a platform for identifying favorable areas for basin-wide collaboration using metrics derived from anticipated Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing dates. The hydropower relicensing process requires long-term resource allocation by agencies, hydropower owner/operators, non-governmental organizations, and tribal, state, and federal governments. Basin-scale hydropower relicensing has begun to receive attention as a potential solution for reducing licensing timelines, costs, and uncertainty which can provide benefits to a broad spectrum of participants in the licensing process. Two products were developed: (1) an interactive web map that allows users to browse facilities and rivers of interest and uncover locations for potential collaboration based on FERC relicensing metrics summarized along river reaches and (2) a spreadsheet that contains 1,261 facilities with associated FERC relicensing metrics and that allows users to join these data to others and develop and conduct their own analyses.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Basin-Scale Relicensing Opportunity

This dataset contains 1,261 hydropower facilities with associated Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing metrics. Anticipated FERC license renewal dates are summarized by river reach for observing areas of opportunities for basin-wide collaboration on environmental mitigations. Identifying rivers and basins with facilities that have similar anticipated Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing dates may be one potential indicator that multiple licensees within the same basin may be willing to collaborate on a basin-scale relicensing effort. The hydropower relicensing process requires long-term resource allocation by agencies, hydropower owner/operators, non-governmental organizations, and tribal, state, and federal governments. Basin-scale hydropower relicensing has begun to receive attention as a potential solution for reducing licensing timelines, costs, and uncertainty which can provide benefits to a broad spectrum of participants in the licensing process. This dataset contains one a data file in comma separated (*.csv) format, a data dictionary in *.csv format, and a user guide in *.pdf format. These data are also available as an interactive web map available at:

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

A Blockchain Based Co-Simulation Framework for Integrating DERs to Wholesale Electricity Markets

As the number of distributed energy resources (DERs) continue to increase across energy-delivery systems, there remains a need for integrating their capabilities into traditional grid operations. In this paper, a blockchain-based solution is proposed to facilitate FERC's Order No. 2222 implementations. The presented use-case enables small-scale DERs to participate in wholesale market operations through DER aggregators, while also enabling local distribution system operators to enforce distribution system constraints in a secure and traceable manner. The presented use case is built around the Unified Testing Platform (UTP) being developed as a part of the Blockchain for Optimized Security and Energy Management (BLOSEM) project. This is a multi-lab effort intended to simplify the deployment of blockchain-powered grid solutions by enabling the integration of simulation tools, and blockchain technologies through the use of system-agnostic interfaces that provide a modular, interoperable, and reusable connectivity layer.

blockchain interoperability↗
DOE OSTI2023

Estimated capital costs of fish exclusion technologies for hydropower facilities

Hydropower is a reliable source of renewable energy, and its future expansion is likely to be in the form of either smaller new stream development (NSD) projects or powering existing non-powered dams. Thresholds for entrainment risk to fish and the requirements for fish exclusion at hydropower facilities often differ depending on the species involved, the characteristics of the facility, and the goals of stakeholders, but little quantitative information is present within the literature regarding the specific costs of fish exclusion measures. Cost data associated with protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PM&E) measures related to positive barrier screening were identified using keyword searches of an existing environmental mitigation cost data set and manual extraction from regulatory licensing documents available in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) eLibrary. This approach yielded a total of 50 p.m.&E mitigation measures with estimated capital construction costs pertaining to positive barrier screens and represented <10% of the 171 total FERC project dockets available in the data set. These data were highly skewed toward conventional relicensing projects, as <7% were associated with NSD projects. Results indicate highly variable costs are associated with fish screening, with flow-normalized costs one to two orders of magnitude higher for screening with the highest exclusion capability (≤0.09 in. spacing) compared with coarser screening (1–2 in.). These data provide an initial baseline for estimating exclusion costs for hydropower development and may help developers consider options for more fish-friendly generation technologies, though gaps remain relating to a lack of data, particularly for NSD projects.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗