16 U.S.C. § 802
Information to accompany application for license; landowner notification
Former subsec. (c), included in the provisions designated as subsec. (a) by Pub. L. 99–495, has been editorially redesignated as par. (3) of subsec. (a) as the probable intent of Congress.
1986—Pub. L. 99–495 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), redesignated former subsecs. (a) and (b) as pars. (1) and (2) of subsec. (a), and added subsec. (b).
Amendment by Pub. L. 99–495 effective with respect to each license, permit, or exemption issued under this chapter after
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases, 1945–2010 · leading case: City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of Tacoma
City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of Tacoma (1958)
“1068 , 16 U. S. C. § 802 (a). Those maps, plans and specifications made clear that the State's hatchery would be inundated by the proposed Mayfield Reservoir.”
First Iowa Hydro-Electric Cooperative v. Federal Power Commission (1946)
“1063 , 1068; 16 U.S.C. § 802 (b), [1] Congress explicitly required that before the Commission can issue a license for the construction of a hydro-electric development, such as the proposed project of the petitioner, the Commission must have "satisfactory evidence that the…”
California v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1990)
“§802 (a)(2) (formerly 16 U. S. C. §802 (b) (1982 ed.)), provides: “(a) Each applicant for a license under this chapter shall submit to the commission— “(2) Satisfactory evidence that the applicant has complied with the requirements of the laws of the State or States within which…”
PPL MONTANA, LLC v. State (2010)
“6 (quoting 16 U.S.C. § 802 ); see also 16 U.S.C.A. § 821 (West 2010).”
Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. East Bay Municipal Utility District (1977)
“§ 821 ), like section 8 of the Reclamation Act, provides that nothing in the act shall be interpreted so as to interfere with state laws concerning the control, appropriation, use or distribution of water.”
Escondido Mutual Water Co. v. La Jolla Band of Mission Indians (1984)
“§ 821 , and the license applicant must submit satisfactory evidence that he has obtained sufficient water rights to operate the project authorized in the license, 16 U. S. C. § 802 (b). Second, if the Bands are using water, the rights to which are owned by the license applicant,…”
City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of Tacoma (1957)
“Section 9 ( 16 U.S.C.A. § 802 ) provides: "Each applicant for a license under this chapter shall submit to the commission "(a) Such maps, plans, specifications, and estimates of cost as may be required for a full understanding of the proposed project.”
Federal Power Commission v. Oregon (1955)
“1068 , 16 U. S. C. § 802 (b), and 49 Stat. 842 , 16 U.”
Karuk Tribe of Northern California v. California Regional Water Quality Control Bd., North Coast Region (2010)
“Each applicant for a license under this chapter shall submit to the commission—[ft] (2) Satisfactory evidence that the applicant has complied with the requirements of the laws of the State or States within which the proposed project is to be located with respect to bed and banks…”
Town of Springfield v. Vermont Environmental Board (1981)
“In First Iowa, the seminal case for preemption by the Federal Power Act, the Federal Power Commission had dismissed a license application without prejudice because the applicant had failed to submit satisfactory evidence, pursuant to section 9(b) of the Act, 16 U.S.C. § 802 (b),…”
Hackett v. J.L.G. Properties, LLC (2008)
“" 16 U.S.C. § 802 (a)(2). As a condition of a license, a licensee is required to develop a "comprehensive plan" for the "adequate protection, mitigation, and enhancement of fish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat), and for other beneficial public uses,…”
National Wildlife Federation, Idaho Wildlife Federation, and the Nez Perce Tribe, Intervenor-Petitioner v. Federal Energ (1986)
“” 16 U.S.C. § 802 ; see generally 18 C.F.R.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 802(b) — 2 cases
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.