The Commission shall require the construction, maintenance, and operation by a licensee at its own expense of such lights and signals as may be directed by the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is operating, and such fishways as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate. The license applicant and any party to the proceeding shall be entitled to a determination on the record, after opportunity for an agency trial-type hearing of no more than 90 days, on any disputed issues of material fact with respect to such fishways. All disputed issues of material fact raised by any party shall be determined in a single trial-type hearing to be conducted by the relevant resource agency in accordance with the regulations promulgated under this subsection 11 So in original. Probably should be “section”. and within the time frame established by the Commission for each license proceeding. Within 90 days of August 8, 2005, the Secretaries of the Interior, Commerce, and Agriculture shall establish jointly, by rule, the procedures for such expedited trial-type hearing, including the opportunity to undertake discovery and cross-examine witnesses, in consultation with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The operation of any navigation facilities which may be constructed as a part of or in connection with any dam or diversion structure built under the provisions of this chapter, whether at the expense of a licensee hereunder or of the United States, shall at all times be controlled by such reasonable rules and regulations in the interest of navigation, including the control of the level of the pool caused by such dam or diversion structure as may be made from time to time by the Secretary of the Army; and for willful failure to comply with any such rule or regulation such licensee shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as provided in section 825o of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Grand Canyon Air Tour Coalition v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 154 F.3d 455 (D.C. Cir. 1998).
“at 661 (quoting 16 U.S.C. § 811 ). In doing so, FERC declined to consider Bangor’s arguments concerning the need for the fishway, concluding that under the statute it had no choice but to require Bangor to construct it.”
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 379 F.2d 153 (D.C. Cir. 1967).
“825f (1964), for willful failure to testify or produce documents; Section 314(a), 16 U.S.C. § 825m (1964), for willful violation of the Act, rules, regulations, or orders; Section 315(a), 16 U.”
United States v. Appalachian Elec. Power Co., 107 F.2d 769 (4th Cir. 1939).
· cites it 2× “" Section 18, 16 U.S.C.A. § 811 , provides for the operation of navigation facilities constructed in connection with licensed dams.”
Rivers v. Comm'n, 201 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2000).
· cites it 2× “” 16 U.S.C. § 811 . Conspicuously absent from this provision is a qualifying clause, such as the one in FPA subsection 10(j)(2), which expressly enables the Commission to reject a recommendation submitted under color of section 10(j).”
Am. Rivers v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 187 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 1999).
· cites it 2× “” 16 U.S.C. § 811 . Conspicuously absent from this provision is a qualifying clause, such as the one in FPA subsection 10(j)(2), which expressly enables the Commission to reject a recommendation submitted under color of section 10(j).”
Sauk-suiattle Indian Tribe v. City of Seattle (9th Cir. 2022).
· cites it 3× “In it, FERC explained that neither the Secretary of Commerce nor the Secretary of the Interior had prescribed a fishway under 16 U.S.C. § 811 . 4 It also explained that both the Department of Commerce and the Department of the Interior were parties to the Settlement Agreement in…”
Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe v. City of Seattle (W.D. Wash. 2021).
· cites it 3× “11 Neither the Department of the Interior nor the Department of Commerce, as authorized 12 under 16 U.S.C. §811 , prescribed as a condition of relicensing the construction of a fishway at 13 Gorge Dam (or any of the other two dams in the Project) to enable the passage of…”
Water Audit California v. Merced Irrigation Dist. CA5 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “” ( 16 U.S.C. § 811 .) Therefore, if FERC has licensing authority over a dam, the USFWS and NMFS have the ability to require fish passage measures as a condition of licensure.”
Water Audit California v. Merced Irrigation Dist. (Cal. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “” ( 16 U.S.C. § 811 .) Therefore, if FERC has licensing authority over a dam, the USFWS and NMFS have the ability to require fish passage measures as a condition of licensure.”
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.