18 C.F.R. § 16.18

Annual licenses for projects subject to sections 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) This section applies to projects with licenses subject to sections 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act.

(b) The Commission will issue an annual license to an existing licensee under the terms and conditions of the existing license upon expiration of its existing license to allow:

(1) The licensee to continue to operate the project while the Commission reviews any applications for a new license, a nonpower license, an exemption, or a surrender;

(2) The orderly removal of a project, if the United States does not take over a project and no new power or nonpower license or exemption will be issued; or

(3) The orderly transfer of a project to:

(i) The United States, if takeover is elected; or

(ii) A new licensee, if a new power or nonpower license is issued to that licensee.

(c) An annual license issued under this section will be considered renewed automatically without further order of the Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise.

(d) In issuing an annual license, the Commission may incorporate additional or revised interim conditions if necessary and practical to limit adverse impacts on the environment.

[Order 513, 54 FR 23806, June 2, 1989, as amended by Order 513-A, 55 FR 18, Jan. 2, 1990; Order 540, 57 FR 21738, May 22, 1992]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1999–2025 · leading case: California Trout, Inc. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n S. California Edison Co., 313 F.3d 1131 (9th Cir. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

California Trout, Inc. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n S. California Edison Co., 313 F.3d 1131 (9th Cir. 2002). · cites it 4× “, 50 FPC 758, 773 (1978)); see also, 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 (b). The Lac Courte court itself observed that “Commission and congressional action is proper even significantly after the license expiration date, and interim licenses should issue so long as the Commission is proceeding in…”

California State Water Resourc v. Ferc, 43 F.4th 920 (9th Cir. 2022). “§ 808 (a)(1); 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 . 12 CAL. STATE WATER RES.”

Vill. of Morrisville, VT v. FERC, 136 F.4th 1117 (D.C. Cir. 2025). · cites it 2× “§ 808 (a)(1); 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 . As a result, during the process of renewal, the withdrawal-and-resubmission practice can create perverse incentives.”

Rivers v. Comm'n, 201 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2000). “; 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 (b) (1998). . The Commission delegated its licensing authority to the Director.”

Hoopa Valley Tribe v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 629 F.3d 209 (D.C. Cir. 2010). “Contrary to the Tribe’s claim, moreover, the “unanticipated, serious impacts” test is consistent with 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 (d). By its terms, § 16.”

Am. Rivers v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 187 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 1999). “; 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 (b) (1998). . The Commission delegated its licensing authority to the Director.”

Cnty. of Butte v. Dept. of Water Resources (Cal. 2022). “(See 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 (b)(1) (2022).) A. At the time DWR undertook the relicensing process, FERC regulations allowed applicants to pursue the traditional licensing process or an alternative.”

— 18 C.F.R. § 16.18(c) — 1 case

California Trout, Inc. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n S. California Edison Co., 313 F.3d 1131 (9th Cir. 2002). “, 50 FPC 758, 773 (1978)); see also, 18 C.F.R. § 16.18 (b). The Lac Courte court itself observed that “Commission and congressional action is proper even significantly after the license expiration date, and interim licenses should issue so long as the Commission is proceeding in…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.