7955

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7955
• Author: Burkardt, N., et al.
• Title: Technical Clarity In Inter-Agency Negotiations
• USFW Year: 1995
• USFW - Doc Type: Lessons From Four Hydropower Projects, paper no. 94090 of the Water Resources Bulletin
• Copyright Material: YES

.

Burkardt, Lamb, Taylor, and Waddle

the licenses would be without substance. We investi-
gated the effect of the clarity of technical issues on
success in negotiation.

METHODS

In 1992, researchers at the National Ecology
Research Center of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
designed a study to test hypotheses about factors con-
tributing to successful negotiations. This group of
researchers is now affiliated with the National Biolog-
ical Service. The definition of a successful negotiation
was based on the work of Lee (1982), who described
the following characteristics (see also Bingham,
1986):
1. Each party believes that an agreement was
reached.
2. The agreement included an understanding of
implementation procedures and could be monitored.
3. The parties are willing to engage in future
negotiations.

The study team hypothesized that six conditions
must be present for successful negotiation to occur:

1. All identifiable stakeholders are represented in
the negotiations (Cormick 1980; Susskind and Wein-
stein 1980; Susskind and Cruikshank 1987).
2. AU parties recognize a need for negotiation
(Fisher and Ury 1981; Lee 1982; Bacow and Wheeler
1984; Bingham 1986).
3. Each party has sufficient power to prevent any
other party from acting unilaterally (Cormick, 1980;
Susskind and McMahon, 1985; Delli Priscoli, 1987).
4. Each party is able to commit itself and its con-
stituents to implementation (Cormick, 1980; Susskind
and Weinstein, 1980; Bingham, 1986; Carpenter and
Kennedy, 1988).
5. There is a sense of urgency in the negotiations
(Cormick, 1980; Susskind and McMahon, 1985; Bing-
ham, 1986; Delli Priscoli, 1987).
6. Technical issues are clear (Susskind and Wein-
stein, 1980; Bingham, 1986; Susskind et al., 1987;
Susskind and Cruikshank, 1987; Clark et al., 1991).

To study FERC licensing negotiations, researchers
used comparative case studies in a Most Similar Sys-
tems design (przeworski and Teune, 1970). This
design requires that cases chosen are as similar as
possible, with differences among the cases believed to
be explanatory. Candidate cases were compiled by
personal contact with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
field office personnel and met the following criteria:

WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN

)

1. The case involved at least three and no more
than 15 parties.
2. The decision was negotiated in the FERC licens-
ing or re-licensing process.
3. The case involved riverine resources as the main
focus of mitigation negotiation.
4. The project was located in either the Northeast-
ern or Northwestern U.S.
5. No third party imposed its will on the negotia-
tors before they could reach agreement.
6. Actual negotiations did not rise above the
Regional Office level.
7. The case was resolved after the Public Utilities
Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) [16 U.S.C. 2601-
2633fJ and the Electrical Consumers Protection Act
(ECPA) [16 U.S.C. 791a-825s] were enacted.

From an initial list of 26 cases, 10 were chosen.
Efforts were made to balance the cases in terms of
geographic location, public or private ownership, and
project size. Cases were chosen in two geographic
regions to minimize the effects of regional peculiari-
ties. To date, data collection and analysis have been
completed on four of the projects.
Data collection involved two separate tasks. First,
we obtained records of the negotiations from Fish and
Wildlife Service personnel. These records were used to
compile case histories and give the researchers a
sketch of how the consultations had proceeded. Sec-
ond, we conducted structured personal interviews
with project participants. Questions were designed to
test the presence of the six variables hypothesized as
necessary for negotiation success and to rate the level
of success of the negotiations. Each negotiation was
divided by the researchers into three phases to reflect
the current FERC consultation structure of first,
information-sharing; second, conducting studies; and
third, license application. Respondents were ques-
tioned about each of the six variables in each phase.
Thus, the researchers were able to analyze change in
the degree to which each variable was present
throughout the process. The questions used to evalu-
ate clarity of the technical issues are presented in
Table 1. All interviews were tape recorded and later
transcribed, with the permission of those interviewed.

FINDINGS

Koma Kulshan

The Koma Kulshan project is located in northwest-
ern Washington state on Sandy and Sulphur Creeks.
The facility was constructed during 1989 and 1990,

188