16 U.S.C. § 801
Transfer of license; obligations of transferee
No voluntary transfer of any license, or of the rights thereunder granted, shall be made without the written approval of the commission; and any successor or assign of the rights of such licensee, whether by voluntary transfer, judicial sale, foreclosure sale, or otherwise, shall be subject to all the conditions of the license under which such rights are held by such licensee and also subject to all the provisions and conditions of this chapter to the same extent as though such successor or assign were the original licensee under this chapter: Provided, That a mortgage or trust deed or judicial sales made thereunder or under tax sales shall not be deemed voluntary transfers within the meaning of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1940–2024 · leading case: Town of Norwood v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 202 F.3d 392 (1st Cir. 2000).
Town of Norwood v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 202 F.3d 392 (1st Cir. 2000). “16 U.S.C. §§ 801 , 824b. In connection with its proposed purchase of assets, USGenNE agreed to assume responsibility for providing wholesale standard offer service to Mass Electric and Narragansett, and New England Power proposed to implement a rate freeze that would prevent…”
Ppl Montana, LLC v. State, 2010 MT 64 (Mont. 2010). “16 U.S.C.A. § 801 (West 2010); 18 C.F.R. §§ 9.”
Citizens for Allegan Cnty., Inc. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, City of Allegan, Michigan, Consumers Power Co., Intervenors, 414 F.2d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1969). “16 U.S.C. § 801 (1964). 2 . 16 U.S.C. § 824b (a) (1964).”
Hydro Investors, Inc. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 351 F.3d 1192 (D.C. Cir. 2003). “16 U.S.C. § 801 (2000). Because Trafalgar never formally transferred the project’s licenses to Algonquin, Hydro claimed that Algonquin exercised an illegal amount of control over and effective “ownership” of the projects (and hence the licenses).”
Louisville Gas & Elec. Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 129 F.2d 126 (6th Cir. 1942). “Moreover, the petitioner, in taking over the license from its subsidiary, could acquire it only with the consent and approval of the Commission, and such approval was conditioned upon the petitioner’s express agreement to comply with the Commis *133 sion’s accounting…”
Town of Barnet v. New England Power Co., 296 A.2d 228 (Vt. 1972). “16 U.S.C. § 801 (1970). The United States, on two years notice in writing, upon or after the expiration of the license, may take over and operate this project upon the condition it pays the net investment of New England Power Company in the project to New England Power Company.”
State of Wisconsin v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, Kimberly-Clark Corp. & N.E.W. Hydro, Inc., Intervenors, 104 F.3d 462 (D.C. Cir. 1997). “To facilitate the sale, on March 7, 1995, Scott and NEW filed a joint application pursuant to § 8 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. § 801 , requesting FERC’s approval of the transfer of both licenses to NEW as part of the sale of the assets of the projects.”
Pac. Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 111 F.2d 1014 (9th Cir. 1940). “In May, 1937 the two companies agreed upon a transfer to Pacific of all the property, assets and licenses'of Inland, subject to the approval of the Federal Power Commission as required by §§ 8 and 203(a) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C.A. §§ 801 , 824b(a). Authorization for…”
The Montana Power Co., a Montana Corp. v. The Fed. Power Comm'n, 330 F.2d 781 (9th Cir. 1964). “ission to Montana-New Jersey it would have been required by the Act to have been a “fair value” license; that if the merger had taken place after the Commission had issued a “fair value” license to Montana-New Jersey, such license would have been transferred to Montana-Montana…”
Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 129 F.2d 183 (3rd Cir. 1942). “The Federal Power Commission found that the applicants had failed to establish that the proposed transfer would “ * * * be consistent with the public interest within the contemplation of Section 203(a) of the Federal Power Act * * and denied the application.”
Canadian River Gas Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 113 F.2d 1010 (10th Cir. 1940). “The Inland and Pacific Companies filed a joint application with the Commission for approval, under §§ 8 and 203 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C.A. §§ 801 , 824b, of a proposed transfer of all the assets of Inland to Pacific, and of the termination of Inland’s existence.”
North Carolina v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 913 F.3d 148 (D.C. Cir. 2019). “See 16 U.S.C. § 801 . The elephant in the room, as with many things in life, is money.”
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.