to salvage the dams reputation in both power and non-power regards.Directly after the Edwards application was filed in 1991, the aforementioned concerned environmental groups joined together to form the Kennebec Coalition. The Coalition consisted of the Natural Resources Council of Maine, American Rivers, Trout Unlimited, and the Atlantic Salmon Federation. It was formed to oppose the issue of a new license to the operators of the Edwards Dam, and they continuously petitioned the Commission to either order the dam destroyed in the public interest or force the owners of the dam to construct extremely expensive fish passageways that would also shelter the spawning fish. For three years after the application by the Edwards Company the deliberations on the question of relicensing continued without any definitive actions taken.Another controversial case popped up concerning the Edwards Manufacturing Company in October of 1994. The company had proposed the construction of fishways on their dam; ironically, conservationists vehemently opposed the new additions. With the issue of the license pending, the conservationists believed it foolish to add fishways if the dam was possibly going to be decommissioned in the near future. Both parties must have had ulterior motives. If the Edwards Company wanted to install fish passages to help restore the anadromous fish populations, it was merely trying to build its case in the future so it could argue that the dam was environmentally conscious. This is what the conservationists were worried about as well. In the end FERC allowed the fishways to be built; the decision was made without any prejudice regarding the pending relicensing case and possible removal of the dam (Duane,Morris&Hecksher,Oct.1994).Two months later in December of 1994 the Commission declared its authority to deny a new license in a Policy Statement, thereby attempting to clarify the position of authority that was granted to FER...
