U.S. Code » Title 16 » Chapter CHAPTER 12— FEDERAL REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF POWER › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— REGULATION OF ELECTRIC UTILITY COMPANIES ENGAGED IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE

16 U.S.C. § 824v

Prohibition of energy market manipulation

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 16 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) In general

It shall be unlawful for any entity (including an entity described in section 824(f) of this title), directly or indirectly, to use or employ, in connection with the purchase or sale of electric energy or the purchase or sale of transmission services subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission, any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance (as those terms are used in section 78j(b) of title 15), in contravention of such rules and regulations as the Commission may prescribe as necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of electric ratepayers.

(b) No private right of action

Nothing in this section shall be construed to create a private right of action.

(June 10, 1920, ch. 285, pt. II, § 222, as added Pub. L. 109–58, title XII, § 1283, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 979.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2007–2023 · leading case: Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Maxim Power Corp., 196 F. Supp. 3d 181 (D. Mass. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Maxim Power Corp., 196 F. Supp. 3d 181 (D. Mass. 2016). · cites it 5× “The first is for violation of the anti-manipulation provisions of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. § 824v, and FERC’s rules, 18 C.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Silkman, 177 F. Supp. 3d 683 (D. Mass. 2016). · cites it 4× “Issuance of Orders to Show Cause On July 17, 2012, the Commission issued an Order to Show Cause to Lincoln, at *693 taching the Enforcement Staff Report, in which the Commission required Lincoln to show cause as to why it should not be found: (1) to have violated FPA Section…”
Util. Workers Union of Am. Local 464 v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 896 F.3d 573 (D.C. Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “See 16 U.S.C. § 824v ; 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2. After the Commission deadlocked and the FCA 8 auction results took effect by operation of law, consumer advocates sought our review.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. City Power Mktg., LLC, 199 F. Supp. 3d 218 (D.D.C. 2016). · cites it 2× “16 U.S.C. § 824v(a). On the basis of this statutory authority, FERC promulgated the Anti-Manipulation Rule in January 2006.”
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. FERC, 7 F.4th 1177 (D.C. Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “In light of that trend, Congress added a new provision to the Federal Power Act in 2005, which is referred to as Section 222 (codified at 16 U.S.C. § 824v). Entitled “Prohibition of energy market manipulation[,]” Section 222 makes it unlawful for any entity “to use or employ, in…”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Barclays Bank PLC, 105 F. Supp. 3d 1121 (E.D. Cal. 2015). · cites it 3× “The Anti-Manipulation Rule was promulgated pursuant to the Federal Power Act (“FPA”) § 222, 16 U.S.C. § 824v, enacted as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Barclays Bank PLC, 247 F. Supp. 3d 1118 (E.D. Cal. 2017). · cites it 5× “In its Assessment Order, FERC states that Barclays Bank PLC (“Barclays”) and four individuals violated the anti-manipulation provisions of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”), 16 U.S.C. § 824v(a), and FERC’s Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC, 345 F. Supp. 3d 682 (E.D. Va. 2018). · cites it 5× “594 (2005), codified in part at 16 U.S.C. §§ 824v, 825o -l, in response to the "Western Energy Crisis" of 2000 to 2001.”
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC, 949 F.3d 891 (4th Cir. 2020). “” 16 U.S.C. § 824v(a). FERC has promulgated rules and regulations implementing this Provision.”
Hunter v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 527 F. Supp. 2d 9 (D.D.C. 2007). “§ 717c-l (NGA anti-manipulation provision); see also 16 U.S.C. § 824v (FPA anti-manipulation provision).”
F.E.R.C. v. Silkman, 359 F. Supp. 3d 66 (D. Me. 2019). · cites it 2× “On November 23, 2009, Enforcement staff sent CES a Preliminary Findings Letter explaining Enforcement's preliminary conclusion that CES had committed fraud in violation of the Commission's Anti-Manipulation Rule, 16 U.S.C. § 824v and 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2 (Anti-Manipulation Rule), as…”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Silkman, 233 F. Supp. 3d 201 (D. Me. 2017). “Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. § 824v, and FERC’s rule against energy market manipulation (the Anti-Manipulation Rule); (2) assess civil , penalties against the firm and the managing mem *204 ber; and (3) require the firm to disgorge unjust profits.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
16 U.S.C. § 824v(a): 12 cases
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Maxim Power Corp., 196 F. Supp. 3d 181 (D. Mass. 2016). “The first is for violation of the anti-manipulation provisions of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. § 824v, and FERC’s rules, 18 C.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. City Power Mktg., LLC, 199 F. Supp. 3d 218 (D.D.C. 2016). “16 U.S.C. § 824v(a). On the basis of this statutory authority, FERC promulgated the Anti-Manipulation Rule in January 2006.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Barclays Bank PLC, 247 F. Supp. 3d 1118 (E.D. Cal. 2017). “In its Assessment Order, FERC states that Barclays Bank PLC (“Barclays”) and four individuals violated the anti-manipulation provisions of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”), 16 U.S.C. § 824v(a), and FERC’s Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.”
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC, 345 F. Supp. 3d 682 (E.D. Va. 2018). “594 (2005), codified in part at 16 U.S.C. §§ 824v, 825o -l, in response to the "Western Energy Crisis" of 2000 to 2001.”
FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC, 949 F.3d 891 (4th Cir. 2020). “” 16 U.S.C. § 824v(a). FERC has promulgated rules and regulations implementing this Provision.”
16 U.S.C. § 824v(b): 1 case
Lawrenceburg Power, LLC v. Lawrenceburg Mun. Utils., 410 F. Supp. 3d 943 (S.D. Ind. 2019).
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.