18 C.F.R. § 4.105

Action on exemption applications

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

(a) Exemption from provisions other than licensing. An application for exemption of a small hydroelectric power project from provisions of Part I of the Act other than the licensing requirement will be processed and considered as part of the related application for license or amendment of license.

(b)(1) Consultation. The Commission will circulate a notice of application for exemption from licensing to interested agencies and Indian tribes at the time the applicant is notified that the application is accepted for filing.

(2) Non-standard terms and conditions. In approving any application for exemption from licensing, the Commission may prescribe terms or conditions in addition to those set forth in § 4.106 in order to:

(i) Protect the quality or quantity of the related water supply;

(ii) Otherwise protect life, health, or property;

(iii) Avoid or mitigate adverse environmental impact; or

(iv) Better conserve, develop, or utilize in the public interest the water resources of the region.

(Energy Security Act of 1980, Pub. L. 96-294, 94 Stat. 611; Federal Power Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 792-828c); Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2601-2645); and the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101-7352); E.O. 12009, 3 CFR 142 (1978)) [Order 106, 45 FR 76123, Nov. 18, 1980, as amended by Order 202, 47 FR 4246, Jan. 29, 1982; Order 413, 50 FR 11688, Mar. 25, 1985; Order 533, 56 FR 23154, May 20, 1991]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1983–1986 · leading case: Mary Jane Ruderman Hirschey v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, Long Lake Energy Corp., Intervenor, 701 F.2d 215 (D.C. Cir. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mary Jane Ruderman Hirschey v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, Long Lake Energy Corp., Intervenor, 701 F.2d 215 (D.C. Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “See 18 C.F.R. §§ 4.105 (b), 4.31(c)-(g) (1982).”

Swanson Mining Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 790 F.2d 96 (D.C. Cir. 1986). “See 18 C.F.R. § 4.105 (b) (1981). Since the Commission took no action on Swanson’s application, Swanson’s exemption was automatically granted as of April 20, 1982.”

City of Centralia, Washington v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, & Pac. Power & Light Co., Respondent-Intervenor, 799 F.2d 475 (9th Cir. 1986). · cites it 4× “18 C.F.R. § 4.105 (b)(5) (1984). If the Commission does not act on an application for exemption within 120 days after notifying the applicant that its application has been accepted for filing, the exemption will be deemed consistent with the public interest and granted.”

Int'l Paper Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 737 F.2d 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1984). · cites it 3× “18 C.F.R. §§ 4.105 (b), 4.31(c)-(g) (1983).”

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.