U.S. Code » Title 16 » Chapter CHAPTER 12— FEDERAL REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF POWER › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— REGULATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF WATER POWER AND RESOURCES

16 U.S.C. § 823b

Enforcement

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 16 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Monitoring and investigation

The Commission shall monitor and investigate compliance with each license and permit issued under this subchapter and with each exemption granted from any requirement of this subchapter. The Commission shall conduct such investigations as may be necessary and proper in accordance with this chapter. After notice and opportunity for public hearing, the Commission may issue such orders as necessary to require compliance with the terms and conditions of licenses and permits issued under this subchapter and with the terms and conditions of exemptions granted from any requirement of this subchapter.

(b) Revocation ordersAfter notice and opportunity for an evidentiary hearing, the Commission may also issue an order revoking any license issued under this subchapter or any exemption granted from any requirement of this subchapter where any licensee or exemptee is found by the Commission:(1) to have knowingly violated a final order issued under subsection (a) after completion of judicial review (or the opportunity for judicial review); and(2) to have been given reasonable time to comply fully with such order prior to commencing any revocation proceeding.In any such proceeding, the order issued under subsection (a) shall be subject to de novo review by the Commission. No order shall be issued under this subsection until after the Commission has taken into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the violation.(c) Civil penalty

Any licensee, permittee, or exemptee who violates or fails or refuses to comply with any rule or regulation under this subchapter, any term, or condition of a license, permit, or exemption under this subchapter, or any order issued under subsection (a) shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for each day that such violation or failure or refusal continues. Such penalty shall be assessed by the Commission after notice and opportunity for public hearing. In determining the amount of a proposed penalty, the Commission shall take into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation, failure, or refusal and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the violation, failure, or refusal in a timely manner. No civil penalty shall be assessed where revocation is ordered.

(d) Assessment(1) Before issuing an order assessing a civil penalty against any person under this section, the Commission shall provide to such person notice of the proposed penalty. Such notice shall, except in the case of a violation of a final order issued under subsection (a), inform such person of his opportunity to elect in writing within 30 days after the date of receipt of such notice to have the procedures of paragraph (3) (in lieu of those of paragraph (2)) apply with respect to such assessment.(2)(A) In the case of the violation of a final order issued under subsection (a), or unless an election is made within 30 calendar days after receipt of notice under paragraph (1) to have paragraph (3) apply with respect to such penalty, the Commission shall assess the penalty, by order, after a determination of violation has been made on the record after an opportunity for an agency hearing pursuant to section 554 of title 5 before an administrative law judge appointed under section 3105 of such title 5. Such assessment order shall include the administrative law judge’s findings and the basis for such assessment.(B) Any person against whom a penalty is assessed under this paragraph may, within 60 calendar days after the date of the order of the Commission assessing such penalty, institute an action in the United States court of appeals for the appropriate judicial circuit for judicial review of such order in accordance with chapter 7 of title 5. The court shall have jurisdiction to enter a judgment affirming, modifying, or setting aside in whole or in Part,11 So in original. Probably should not be capitalized. the order of the Commission, or the court may remand the proceeding to the Commission for such further action as the court may direct.(3)(A) In the case of any civil penalty with respect to which the procedures of this paragraph have been elected, the Commission shall promptly assess such penalty, by order, after the date of the receipt of the notice under paragraph (1) of the proposed penalty.(B) If the civil penalty has not been paid within 60 calendar days after the assessment order has been made under subparagraph (A), the Commission shall institute an action in the appropriate district court of the United States for an order affirming the assessment of the civil penalty. The court shall have authority to review de novo the law and the facts involved, and shall have jurisdiction to enter a judgment enforcing, modifying, and enforcing as so modified, or setting aside in whole or in Part,1 such assessment.(C) Any election to have this paragraph apply may not be revoked except with the consent of the Commission.(4) The Commission may compromise, modify, or remit, with or without conditions, any civil penalty which may be imposed under this subsection, taking into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the violation in a timely manner at any time prior to a final decision by the court of appeals under paragraph (2) or by the district court under paragraph (3).(5) If any person fails to pay an assessment of a civil penalty after it has become a final and unappealable order under paragraph (2), or after the appropriate district court has entered final judgment in favor of the Commission under paragraph (3), the Commission shall institute an action to recover the amount of such penalty in any appropriate district court of the United States. In such action, the validity and appropriateness of such final assessment order or judgment shall not be subject to review.(6)(A) Notwithstanding the provisions of title 28 or of this chapter, the Commission may be represented by the general counsel of the Commission (or any attorney or attorneys within the Commission designated by the Chairman) who shall supervise, conduct, and argue any civil litigation to which paragraph (3) of this subsection applies (including any related collection action under paragraph (5)) in a court of the United States or in any other court, except the Supreme Court. However, the Commission or the general counsel shall consult with the Attorney General concerning such litigation, and the Attorney General shall provide, on request, such assistance in the conduct of such litigation as may be appropriate.(B) The Commission shall be represented by the Attorney General, or the Solicitor General, as appropriate, in actions under this subsection, except to the extent provided in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.(June 10, 1920, ch. 285, pt. I, § 31, as added Pub. L. 99–495, § 12, Oct. 16, 1986, 100 Stat. 1255.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section applicable to licenses, permits, and exemptions without regard to when issued, see section 18 of Pub. L. 99–495, set out as an Effective Date of 1986 Amendment note under section 797 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 43 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2020) ca4 · cites it 12× “16 U.S.C. § 823b. We refer to them as the Default Option and the Alternate Option.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed · cites it 32× “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
Util. L. Rep. P 14,084 Bluestone Energy Design, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1996) cadc · cites it 9× “Bluestone will remain free to seek judicial review of any future Commission order under 16 U.S.C. § 823b. So ordered.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Maxim Power Corp. (2016) mad · cites it 8× “The FPA authorizes FERC to assess civil penalties for FPA violations “after notice and opportunity for public hearing” and directs FERC to “take into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation, failure, or refusal and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the…”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2016) mad · cites it 7× “, B. Federal Court Proceedings Lincoln, CES, and Mr.”
United States v. Southern California Edison Co. (2004) caed · cites it 3× “Cowlitz dealt with the interpretation of FERC’s authority to investigate and hold hearings as necessary to require compliance with the terms and conditions of its licenses.”
Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021) scotus “§136g(a)(1)(A) (pesticide in- spections); 16 U. S. C. §823b(a) (hydroelectric project inves- tigations); 21 U.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2017) caed · cites it 15× “The statute further provides that the procedures of 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d) shall govern the assessment.”
F.E.R.C. v. Silkman (2019) med · cites it 12× “" 16 U.S.C. § 823b(c). Before FERC may issue "an order assessing a civil penalty against any person," the FPA requires the Commission to "inform such person of his opportunity to elect" one of two procedural paths.”
Clifton Power Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1996) cadc · cites it 7× “In support of this argument, Clifton cites 16 U.S.C. § 823b(a), the provision of the Federal Power Act governing imposition of penalties, which states that “[t]he Commission shall monitor and investigate compliance with each license” and that “[t]he Commission shall conduct such…”
Total Gas & Power North America, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2017) ca5 · cites it 2× “16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(2). Alternatively, the alleged violator may choose to forego a hearing and for FERC to immediately assess the proposed penalty and then seek de novo review in federal district court.”
Wilson v. Commissioner (2013) ca9 · cites it 2× “§ 3414 (b)(6)(F); 16 U.S.C. § 823b(b), (d)(3)(B); 18 U.S.C.”
Show all 43 citing cases →
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(3)(B) — 2 cases
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2016) mad “, B. Federal Court Proceedings Lincoln, CES, and Mr.”
FERC v. Macdonald (1994) nhd
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(D)(3)(B) — 1 case
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2015) caed
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(a) — 14 cases
United States v. Southern California Edison Co. (2004) caed “Cowlitz dealt with the interpretation of FERC’s authority to investigate and hold hearings as necessary to require compliance with the terms and conditions of its licenses.”
Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021) scotus “§136g(a)(1)(A) (pesticide in- spections); 16 U. S. C. §823b(a) (hydroelectric project inves- tigations); 21 U.”
Friends of the Cowlitz and Cpr-Fish, City of Tacoma, Ferc Project Intervenor v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2002) ca9
Clifton Power Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1996) cadc “In support of this argument, Clifton cites 16 U.S.C. § 823b(a), the provision of the Federal Power Act governing imposition of penalties, which states that “[t]he Commission shall monitor and investigate compliance with each license” and that “[t]he Commission shall conduct such…”
Duncan's Point Lot Owners Ass'n v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2008) cadc
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(b) — 2 cases
Wilson v. Commissioner (2013) ca9 “§ 3414 (b)(6)(F); 16 U.S.C. § 823b(b), (d)(3)(B); 18 U.S.C.”
Wolverine Power Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1992) cadc
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(c) — 14 cases
SEC v. Jarkesy (2024) scotus
Util. L. Rep. P 14,084 Bluestone Energy Design, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1996) cadc “Bluestone will remain free to seek judicial review of any future Commission order under 16 U.S.C. § 823b. So ordered.”
Clifton Power Corp. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2002) cadc
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
SEC v. Jarkesy (2024) scotus
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d) — 8 cases
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2020) ca4 “16 U.S.C. § 823b. We refer to them as the Default Option and the Alternate Option.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2016) mad “, B. Federal Court Proceedings Lincoln, CES, and Mr.”
Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2009) ca5
F.E.R.C. v. Silkman (2019) med “" 16 U.S.C. § 823b(c). Before FERC may issue "an order assessing a civil penalty against any person," the FPA requires the Commission to "inform such person of his opportunity to elect" one of two procedural paths.”
Clifton Power Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1996) cadc “In support of this argument, Clifton cites 16 U.S.C. § 823b(a), the provision of the Federal Power Act governing imposition of penalties, which states that “[t]he Commission shall monitor and investigate compliance with each license” and that “[t]he Commission shall conduct such…”
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(1) — 7 cases
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2020) ca4 “16 U.S.C. § 823b. We refer to them as the Default Option and the Alternate Option.”
F.E.R.C. v. Silkman (2019) med “" 16 U.S.C. § 823b(c). Before FERC may issue "an order assessing a civil penalty against any person," the FPA requires the Commission to "inform such person of his opportunity to elect" one of two procedural paths.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2017) caed “The statute further provides that the procedures of 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d) shall govern the assessment.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
Wolverine Power Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1992) cadc
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(2) — 11 cases
Total Gas & Power North America, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2017) ca5 “16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(2). Alternatively, the alleged violator may choose to forego a hearing and for FERC to immediately assess the proposed penalty and then seek de novo review in federal district court.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. City Power Marketing, LLC (2016) dcd
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2020) ca4 “16 U.S.C. § 823b. We refer to them as the Default Option and the Alternate Option.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2016) mad “, B. Federal Court Proceedings Lincoln, CES, and Mr.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Maxim Power Corp. (2016) mad “The FPA authorizes FERC to assess civil penalties for FPA violations “after notice and opportunity for public hearing” and directs FERC to “take into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation, failure, or refusal and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the…”
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(2)(A) — 5 cases
F.E.R.C. v. Silkman (2019) med “" 16 U.S.C. § 823b(c). Before FERC may issue "an order assessing a civil penalty against any person," the FPA requires the Commission to "inform such person of his opportunity to elect" one of two procedural paths.”
Kourouma v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2013) cadc
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2017) med
Ferc v. Vitol Inc. (2023) ca9
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(2)(B) — 8 cases
Util. L. Rep. P 14,084 Bluestone Energy Design, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1996) cadc “Bluestone will remain free to seek judicial review of any future Commission order under 16 U.S.C. § 823b. So ordered.”
Clifton Power Corp. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2002) cadc
Clifton Power Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1996) cadc “In support of this argument, Clifton cites 16 U.S.C. § 823b(a), the provision of the Federal Power Act governing imposition of penalties, which states that “[t]he Commission shall monitor and investigate compliance with each license” and that “[t]he Commission shall conduct such…”
Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Arkansas Public Service Commission, Interven (2002) cadc
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2017) caed “The statute further provides that the procedures of 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d) shall govern the assessment.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(3) — 7 cases
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Maxim Power Corp. (2016) mad “The FPA authorizes FERC to assess civil penalties for FPA violations “after notice and opportunity for public hearing” and directs FERC to “take into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation, failure, or refusal and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the…”
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2020) ca4 “16 U.S.C. § 823b. We refer to them as the Default Option and the Alternate Option.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. City Power Marketing, LLC (2016) dcd
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2017) med
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2017) caed “The statute further provides that the procedures of 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d) shall govern the assessment.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(3)(A) — 9 cases
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2020) ca4 “16 U.S.C. § 823b. We refer to them as the Default Option and the Alternate Option.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2016) mad “, B. Federal Court Proceedings Lincoln, CES, and Mr.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Maxim Power Corp. (2016) mad “The FPA authorizes FERC to assess civil penalties for FPA violations “after notice and opportunity for public hearing” and directs FERC to “take into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation, failure, or refusal and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the…”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2015) caed
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(3)(B) — 14 cases
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2017) caed “The statute further provides that the procedures of 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d) shall govern the assessment.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2016) mad “, B. Federal Court Proceedings Lincoln, CES, and Mr.”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Maxim Power Corp. (2016) mad “The FPA authorizes FERC to assess civil penalties for FPA violations “after notice and opportunity for public hearing” and directs FERC to “take into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation, failure, or refusal and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the…”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2015) caed
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(3)(B)(2012) — 1 case
F.E.R.C. v. Silkman (2019) med “" 16 U.S.C. § 823b(c). Before FERC may issue "an order assessing a civil penalty against any person," the FPA requires the Commission to "inform such person of his opportunity to elect" one of two procedural paths.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(3)(C) — 1 case
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Barclays Bank PLC (2017) caed “The statute further provides that the procedures of 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d) shall govern the assessment.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(4) — 3 cases
Charpentier v. Ortco Contractors (2007) ca5
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Vitol Inc (2021) caed
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(5) — 3 cases
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2020) ca4 “16 U.S.C. § 823b. We refer to them as the Default Option and the Alternate Option.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC (2018) vaed “§ 823b : the typical administrative process, which this Court has dubbed the "Default Option," and the uncommon administrative scheme, which this Court has called the "Alternate Option," at issue here. The determination below presumes familiarity with FERC I .”
Ferc v. Vitol Inc. (2023) ca9
— 16 U.S.C. § 823b(d)(l) — 3 cases
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Maxim Power Corp. (2016) mad “The FPA authorizes FERC to assess civil penalties for FPA violations “after notice and opportunity for public hearing” and directs FERC to “take into consideration the nature and seriousness of the violation, failure, or refusal and the efforts of the licensee to remedy the…”
Kourouma v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2013) cadc
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Silkman (2017) med
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.