16 U.S.C. § 838g

Schedules of rates and charges for sale of Federal power and transmission of non-Federal power; confirmation and approval; criteria for modification and establishment

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

Schedules of rates and charges for the sale, including dispositions to Federal agencies, of all electric power made available to the Administrator pursuant to section 838f of this title or otherwise acquired, and for the transmission of non-Federal electric power over the Federal transmission system, shall become effective upon confirmation and approval thereof by the Secretary of Energy. Such rate schedules may be modified from time to time by the Secretary of Energy, acting by and through the Administrator, subject to confirmation and approval by the Secretary of Energy, and shall be fixed and established (1) with a view to encouraging the widest possible diversified use of electric power at the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent with sound business principles, (2) having regard to the recovery (upon the basis of the application of such rate schedules to the capacity of the electric facilities of the projects) of the cost of producing and transmitting such electric power, including the amortization of the capital investment allocated to power over a reasonable period of years and payments provided for in section 838i(b)(9) of this title, and (3) at levels to produce such additional revenues as may be required, in the aggregate with all other revenues of the Administrator, to pay when due the principal of, premiums, discounts, and expenses in connection with the issuance of and interest on all bonds issued and outstanding pursuant to this chapter, and amounts required to establish and maintain reserve and other funds and accounts established in connection therewith.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 21 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Alcoa, Inc. v. Bonneville Power Administration

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Alcoa, Inc. v. Bonneville Power Administration (2012) ca9 · cites it 6× “” 16 U.S.C. § 838g. [13] Whether framed in terms of ripeness or standing, peti- tioners’ alleged injury is too speculative to give rise to a case or controversy as required by Article III.”

Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative v. Bonneville Power Administration (2010) ca9 · cites it 3× “” See 16 U.S.C. §§ 838g; 839e(a)(l); 825s. The mere fact that BPA has chosen to contract with a DSI at the statutorily authorized IP rate does not insulate the decision to contract from review under the “sound business principles” standard.”

Northwest Requirements Utilities v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2015) ca9 · cites it 2× “See 16 U.S.C. §§ 838g, 839e(a)(l); see also id.”

United States v. Tex-La Electric Cooperative, Inc., United States of America v. Northeast Texas Electric Cooperative, In (1982) ca5 · cites it 3× “IV 1980), and the 1974 Federal Columbia River Transmission System Act, 16 U.S.C. § 838g (1976 & Supp.”

Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles v. Bonneville Power Administration (1985) ca9 · cites it 2× “News at 3343 (statute designed to put BPA back on sound financial ground); 16 U.S.C. § 838g(2) (rate schedules to be based upon BPA need to recover operating and capital costs); 16 U.”

Association of Public Agency Customers v. Bonneville Power Administration (2013) ca9 “§ 839 (4) (emphasis added); see also 16 U.S.C. § 838g (explaining that “rate schedules .”

Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities v. Bonneville Power Administration (2014) ca9 · cites it 3× “” 16 U.S.C. § 838g (emphasis added). A different provision similarly requires that BPA set rates that “recover, in accordance with sound business principles, the costs associated with the acquisition, conservation, and transmission of electric power.”

Idaho Conservation League v. Bpa (2023) ca9 “” 16 U.S.C. § 838g. BPA sets its rates through ratemakings, called “rate cases,” a process that resembles agency rulemaking.”

Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. United States (1991) cc “§ 832e, and section 9 of the Federal Columbia River Transmission Act, 16 U.S.C. § 838g. .”

Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative v. Bonneville Power Administration (2009) ca9 · cites it 3× “” See 16 U.S.C. §§ 838g; 839e(a)(l); 825s. The mere fact that BPA has chosen to contract with a DSI at the statutorily authorized IP rate does not insulate the decision to contract from review under the “sound business principles” standard.”

Central Lincoln Peoples' Utility District v. Johnson (1984) ca9 “§ 838 ) [16 U.S.C. §§ 838g and 838h], section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 [16 U.”

Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities v. Bonneville Power Administration (2005) ca9 · cites it 2× “1990); 16 U.S.C. §§ 838g, 839e(a)(l). At the same time, Congress requires that the BPA market federal power “with a view to encouraging the widest possible diversified use of electric power at the lowest possible rates to consumers consis *642 tent with sound business principles.”

Show all 21 citing cases →

— 16 U.S.C. § 838g(2) — 1 case

Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles v. Bonneville Power Administration (1985) ca9 “News at 3343 (statute designed to put BPA back on sound financial ground); 16 U.S.C. § 838g(2) (rate schedules to be based upon BPA need to recover operating and capital costs); 16 U.”

— 16 U.S.C. § 838g(3) — 1 case

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.