16 U.S.C. § 806

Time limit for construction of project works; extension of time; termination or revocation of licenses for delay

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 16 CasesGoogle Scholar

The licensee shall commence the construction of the project works within the time fixed in the license, which shall not be more than two years from the date thereof, shall thereafter in good faith and with due diligence prosecute such construction, and shall within the time fixed in the license complete and put into operation such part of the ultimate development as the commission shall deem necessary to supply the reasonable needs of the then available market, and shall from time to time thereafter construct such portion of the balance of such development as the commission may direct, so as to supply adequately the reasonable market demands until such development shall have been completed. The periods for the commencement of construction may be extended for not more than 8 additional years, and the period for the completion of construction carried on in good faith and with reasonable diligence may be extended by the commission when not incompatible with the public interests. In case the licensee shall not commence actual construction of the project works, or of any specified part thereof, within the time prescribed in the license or as extended by the commission, then, after due notice given, the license shall, as to such project works or part thereof, be terminated upon written order of the commission. In case the construction of the project works, or of any specified part thereof, has been begun but not completed within the time prescribed in the license, or as extended by the commission, then the Attorney General, upon the request of the commission, shall institute proceedings in equity in the district court of the United States for the district in which any part of the project is situated for the revocation of said license, the sale of the works constructed, and such other equitable relief as the case may demand, as provided for in section 820 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1942–2023 · leading case: City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of Tacoma

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of Tacoma (1958) SCOTUS · cites it 4× “§ 806 , expressly provides that "the period for the completion of construction carried on in good faith and with reasonable diligence may be extended by the Commission when not incompatible with the public interests," and an application by the City is now pending before the…”

Keating v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2009) D.C. Cir. · cites it 2× “Section 13 of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. § 806 , requires a licensee to commence construction of a newly licensed hydroelectric facility within two years of license issuance but allows the Commission to extend the deadline once for a maximum of two additional years.”

Harriet F. Laflamme v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Joseph Keating , Respondent-Intervenor (1988) 9th Cir. · cites it 2× “Intervenor states that because the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. § 806 , requires the licensee to commence construction within two years of the date of the issuance of the license, he was faced with the necessity of going forward with the construction of the *392 Project to meet…”

Daniel Allen v. United States (2023) 6th Cir. “, 16 U.S.C. §§ 806 , 807, 808(f). Indeed, for example, Section 809, which addresses temporary government use of project works for national safety, does apply to project works “constructed, maintained, or operated under” a license, treating all three conditions the same.”

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation v. Federal Power Commission (1967) D.C. Cir. “825f (1964), for willful failure to testify or produce documents; Section 314(a), 16 U.”

State of California, Ex Rel. State Water Resources Board v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Rock Creek Limited Par (1989) 9th Cir. “§ 797 (g) (1982)); mandate prompt construction schedules in the license’s terms (§ 13, 16 U.S.C. § 806 (1982)); grant licenses for a limited term of fifty years (§ 6, 16 U.”

American Rivers, Inc., and the State of Vermont v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Green Mountain Power and Trout (1997) 2d Cir. “The Commission primarily fears that “to accept the conditions proposed would give the state the kind of governance and enforcement authority that is critical and exclusive to the Commission’s responsibility to administer a license under the Federal Power Act, a power the Courts…”

Gas and Electric Department of the City of Holyoke, Massachusetts v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Holyoke Water (1980) 1st Cir. “16 U.S.C. § 806 (emphasis added). The Commission relied on Section 13 on rehearing: Section 13 of the Act, as we have noted earlier, contemplates that some project works may not have a time for completion fixed in the license.”

Alabama Power Co. v. Federal Power Commission (1943) 5th Cir. “Section 13 of the Act, 16 U.S.C.A. § 806 , requires due diligence in the prosecution of the construction and completion within the time fixed in the license, and provides for an extension of the time by the Commission; but the only remedy it provides for fail *609 ure, if…”

Idaho Power Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1985) 9th Cir. “Section 13 of the Act, 16 U.S.C. § 806 , requires that construction begin within two years of the issuance of a license.”

Hudson River Fishermen's Ass'n v. Federal Power Commission (1974) 2d Cir. · cites it 2× “It says that § 13 of the Federal Power Commission Act, 16 U.S.C. § 806 , requires commencement of construction within two years of the award of a license and limits extensions of this period to two additional years; and that, due in large part to litigation, the Storm King…”

Sierra Ass'n for Environment v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1986) 9th Cir. “KRCD’s motion for extension was granted as appropriate in the public interest pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 806 . Mar. 15, 1985 KRCD filed a Request for Rehearing requesting modification of the Feb.”

Show all 14 citing 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.