Senate Finance pauses S.13 after testimony from Great River Hydro and Agency of Transportation

Senate Finance members heard two hours of testimony on S.13, a bill that would require the Agency of Transportation to request conditions related to relicensing of the Bellows Falls hydroelectric project, then declined to move the bill forward, leaving it to sit in committee rules.

The bill matters because it would expressly authorize or direct the state transportation agency to participate in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing process for the Bellows Falls project — a step supporters say could create leverage for local infrastructure priorities and opponents say would inappropriately convert regulatory review into a mechanism to finance municipal bridge replacements.

Great River Hydro representatives said the measure is untimely and unfair. Erin O'Day, chief executive officer of Great River Hydro, described the relicensing as a lengthy, multiagency process that began in 2012 and has consumed more than a decade of studies and stakeholder work. "We conducted 33 different studies for the cost of $12,000,000 to inform this process," O'Day said, and the company has operated under successive license extensions while awaiting a new FERC license. O'Day told the committee the company filed its initial license application in 2017, amended it in 2020, submitted a Fish Passage Settlement Agreement in February 2024 and filed state water quality certificate applications in April 2024; the company expects a draft environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act in April 2025 and hopes a new license will be issued in the second quarter of 2026.

Brandon Gibby, vice president of external affairs for Great River Hydro, said the company opposes the bill because it would create a precedent that could require hydropower owners across the state to fund infrastructure projects unrelated to FERC's licensing criteria. "We oppose that," Gibby said. He and O'Day both emphasized the company's local tax contributions, telling the committee Great River Hydro pays about $22,000,000 a year in property taxes across its New England portfolio and roughly $3.9 million toward Rockingham's property tax base; the testimony said that represented about 71 percent of the town's property-tax revenue in the year cited.

Jeremy Mead, chief engineer for the Vermont Agency of Transportation, also opposed the statutory approach. Mead told the committee there are two town highway bridges and two railroad bridges crossing the Bellows Falls canal; his agency is planning to replace the two town bridges with a single structure and has scheduled construction for 2029. "As an initial estimate, as we sit here today, I would say that project is going to be in the $20,000,000 range," Mead said, and he described typical funding splits for town‑highway bridge projects as roughly 80 percent federal, 10 percent state and 10 percent municipal. Mead also described right‑of‑way constraints and contaminated soils that raise project costs and complexity.

Both Great River Hydro and AOT attorneys and witnesses cautioned the committee against using a relicensing comment requirement as a funding vehicle. Mead said agency counsel and staff had not found any historical agreements that impose an obligation on dam owners to maintain the public bridges; the department found references to an old railroad agreement in land records but said the content of that agreement remains unknown. Company representatives said the canal, associated land and water rights were acquired by predecessor companies in the early 20th century and that the bridges predated hydropower development.

Committee members expressed sympathy for local infrastructure needs but questioned the timing and legal consequences of the bill. One senator said the bill was "a little late in the process" and expressed reluctance to change the relicensing framework at the point when the project is nearing draft federal environmental review. No senator moved to advance S.13; the chair noted that if no action is taken before the next day the measure will remain in committee rules rather than proceed. "I'm not hearing anyone say they move to approve. And if you do nothing by tomorrow... It's well, essentially, dead because it will sit in the rules," the chair said.

The committee discussion also included technical relicensing details offered by Great River Hydro: the company said it expects federal agencies to issue preliminary license articles and a draft environmental assessment in April 2025, followed by a 60‑day public comment period; it estimated the relicensing effort has taken roughly 12–14 years so far and cost multimillions in studies and stakeholder engagement. Company witnesses also described nontechnical community benefits they said flow from the project, including a river‑side visitor center, a fish ladder and an ongoing partnership delivering renewable energy into Vermont markets under a long‑term power purchase agreement.

With no motion to advance S.13 and explicit opposition from both the dam owner and the Agency of Transportation, the bill remains in committee. Several senators and witnesses suggested staff and legislators pursue additional conversations with town officials and the project owner outside the rulemaking or licensing process; committee members and Great River Hydro also discussed organizing a site visit to the Wilder/White River Junction control center and the Bellows Falls facilities to view the canal and fish ladder operations.

What happened next: because no motion was made to approve the bill, the measure will remain in committee rules and faces practical uncertainty unless sponsors locate another vehicle or reintroduce the idea later in the session.