This article describes the policy framework for siting, permitting, and developing offshore renewable energy facilities in the United States. It also highlights features of regulatory programs in other countries and makes some comparisons. Initially, the article presents a brief historical background of US regulatory development, and then it provides a synopsis of the more salient features of the federal siting and permitting program, followed by descriptions of policy frameworks in three other countries—the United Kingdom, Germany, and Portugal. It concentrates on federal policies as set apart from state and local-level policies, on policies encouraging or authorizing construction of offshore facilities, and on those offshore energy technologies considered relevant in the short term by the Alternative Energy and Alternative Use Program of the US Minerals Management Service. These hydrokinetic energy sources are generated in or over submerged lands and include offshore wind energy. To facilitate comparisons, framework elements are categorized as: (1) research and innovation policies that help to develop emerging and improved technologies; (2) market-based policies that underwrite the cost of introducing technologies, provide a competitive framework, and may internalize externalities; and (3) regulatory advances that simplify and improve the efficiency of permitting offshore energy facilities.

Portman, M.E. 2010. Marine renewable energy policy: Some US and international perspectives compared. Oceanography 23(2):98–105, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2010.49.

AEA Energy & Environment. 2006. Review and Analysis of Ocean Energy Systems Development and Supporting Policies: A Report By Area Energy & Environment on Behalf of Sustainable Energy Ireland for the IEA’s Implementing Agreement on Ocean Energy Systems. Implementing Agreement on Ocean Energy Systems, 59 pp. Available online at: http://www.iea-oceans.org/_fich/6/Review_Policies_on_OES_2.pdf (accessed March 9, 2010). 
1. Böhme, D., W. Dürrschmidt, M. van Mark, F. Staiß, C. Linkohr, F. Musiol, M. Ottmüller, eds. 2008. Development of Renewable Energies in Germany in 2007. Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU), Division KI III 1 (General and Fundamental Issues Relating to Renewable Energies), Berlin, 9 pp. Available online at: http://download.inogate.org/Seminar%2015-16%20April%202008%20%93EE,%20DSM%20&%20RES%94/DENA%20Documentation/background_paper_renewables_Germany_2007_en.pdf (accessed March 23, 2010). 
2. Ferro, B.D. 2006. Wave and tidal energy: Its emergence and the challenges it faces. Refocus 7(3):46–48.
3. Frank, W.J. 2010. The role of the Minerals Management Service in offshore renewable energy development. Oceanography 23(2):60–67. 
4. Konnert, T. 2010. The role of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in authorizing hydrokinetic technology projects. Oceanography 23(2):54–59.
5. Kuffner, A. 2009. Several companies want to be the first to develop an offshore wind farm in the U.S. The Providence Journal, August 16, 2009. Available online at: http://www.projo.com/news/content/OFFSHORE_WIND_RACE_08-16-09_EBF0D97_v107.3eaefee.html (accessed March 8, 2010).
6. Leary, D., and M. Esteban. 2009. Climate change and renewable energy from the ocean and tides: Calming the sea of regulatory uncertainty. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 24:617–651.
7. Martin, G.R., and O.A. Smith. 2004. The world’s largest wind energy facility in Nantucket Sound? Deficiencies in the current regulatory process for offshore wind energy development. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 31(2):285–323.
8. Minerals Management Service. 2007. Final Alternative Energy Programmatic EIS (ES-1): Executive Summary. Department of Interior, Washington, DC. 16 pp. Available online at: http://ocsenergy.anl.gov/documents/fpeis/Alt_Energy_FPEIS_ExecutiveSummary.pdf (accessed March 9, 2010).
9. Noblett, J. 2009. Marine energy research center gets $1M in funding. Boston Business Journal, June 19, 2009. Available online at: http://boston.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2009/06/22/story17.html (accessed March 9, 2010).
10. Palha, A., L. Mendes, C.J. Fortes, A. Brito-Melo, and A. Sarmento. 2010. The impact of wave energy farms in the shoreline wave climate: Portuguese pilot zone case study using Pelamis energy wave devices. Renewable Energy 35(1):62–77.
11. Portman, M.E., J.A. Duff, J. Köppel, J. Reisert, and M.E. Higgins. 2009. Offshore wind energy development in the exclusive economic zone: Legal and policy supports and impediments in Germany and the US. Energy Policy 37(9):3,596–3,607.
12. Renewable Energy Action. 2004. Feed-in Tariffs for Wind Energy—Case Study #25 (Portugal).Renewable Energy Action, 8 pp. Available online at: http://www.senternovem.nl/mmfiles/Feed-in%20tariffs%20for%20wind%20energy_tcm24-116990.pdf (accessed October 28, 2009).
13. Snyder, B., and J.M. Kaiser. 2009. Offshore wind power in the US: Regulatory issues and models for regulation. Energy Policy 37(11):4,442–4,453.
14. The Crown Estate. 2009. Round 3: Developers. Available online at: http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/r3-developers (accessed January 31, 2010).
15. Waveplam. 2008. Portugal: A rising marketplace for wave energy? Available online at: http://www.waveplam.eu/page/default.asp?id=175 (accessed March 9, 2010).

This is an open access article made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format as long as users cite the materials appropriately, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate the changes that were made to the original content. Images, animations, videos, or other third-party material used in articles are included in the Creative Commons license unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If the material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission directly from the license holder to reproduce the material.