16 U.S.C. § 839a
Definitions
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2023 · leading case: Alcoa, Inc. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 698 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2012).
Alcoa, Inc. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 698 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2012). “” 16 U.S.C. § 839a(10). 5 16 U.S.C. § 839e(c)(1) provides, in pertinent part: (c) Rates applicable to direct service industrial customers (1) The rate or rates applicable to direct service industrial customers shall be established .”
Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Cent. Lincoln Peoples' Util. Dist., 467 U.S. 380 (1984). “" § 3(17), 16 U. S. C. § 839a(17) (emphasis added). [7] Respondents' discussion of this use of nonfirm power seems to us to be somewhat less than persuasive.”
City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of City of Tacoma, 743 P.2d 793 (Wash. 1987). “" 16 U.S.C. § 839a(19)(B) (1982). [6] In its first regional energy plan, the Regional Council concluded that conservation could free up enough electricity to supply up to 17 percent of the Northwest's electrical energy needs, which equals 4,790 megawatts, the equivalent of 4.”
Port of Seattle v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 499 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2007). “16 U.S.C. § 839a(14). Prices in the Pacific Northwest spot market skyrocketed during the energy crisis.”
Portland Gen. Elec. Co. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 501 F.3d 1009 (9th Cir. 2007). “” 16 U.S.C. § 839a(8). 5 .Section 4 of the Bonneville Project Act "give[s] preference and priority to public bodies and cooperatives.”
Pacificorp, a Maine Corp., Dba Pac. Power & Light Co. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 856 F.2d 94 (9th Cir. 1988). “16 U.S.C. § 839a(14) (1982). Under the Planning Act, BPA is required to exchange power at the priority firm rate with Pacificorp for resale to Pacificorp’s residential and small farm customers located within the region.”
City of Burbank, California v. United States, 273 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2001). “16 U.S.C. § 839a(14) (2000); Kaiser Aluminum & Chem.”
Pacificorp v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, & Atl. Richfield Co., Intervenors, 795 F.2d 816 (9th Cir. 1986). “§ 839c(c)(l); see also 16 U.S.C. § 839a(19) (defining “resource”).”
Blachly-Lane Elec. Coop. Ass'n v. U.S. Dept. of Energy, 79 F. App'x 975 (9th Cir. 2003). “• BPA violated 16 U.S.C. §§ 839a(10) and 839d(b)(4) by attributing 2900 aMW to FBS replacements under 16 U.”
Portland Gen. Elec. Co. v. Peter Johnson, Adm'r of the Bonneville Power Admin., Intalco Aluminum Corp., Intervenors, 754 F.2d 1475 (9th Cir. 1985). “” Unlike utilities that serve residential customers, however, the DSI’s can tolerate unexpected interruptions of their power.”
Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 46 (Ct. Cl. 1991). “In conjunction with 16 U.S.C. § 839a(14), it defines the term “Pacific Northwest” as a specific geographical area.”
City of Burbank, California v. United States, 47 Fed. Cl. 261 (Fed. Cl. 2000). “” 16 U.S.C. § 839a(14)(A) (1994). . Complaint (Compl.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(10) — 3 cases
Alcoa, Inc. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 698 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2012). “” 16 U.S.C. § 839a(10). 5 16 U.S.C. § 839e(c)(1) provides, in pertinent part: (c) Rates applicable to direct service industrial customers (1) The rate or rates applicable to direct service industrial customers shall be established .”
Blachly-Lane Elec. Coop. Ass'n v. U.S. Dept. of Energy, 79 F. App'x 975 (9th Cir. 2003). “• BPA violated 16 U.S.C. §§ 839a(10) and 839d(b)(4) by attributing 2900 aMW to FBS replacements under 16 U.”
City of Seattle v. Johnson, 600 F. Supp. 306 (D. Or. 1984).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(10)(A) — 2 cases
Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 903 F.2d 585 (9th Cir. 1989).
Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 891 F.2d 748 (9th Cir. 1989).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(10)(B) — 1 case
City of Seattle v. Johnson, 600 F. Supp. 306 (D. Or. 1984).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(10)(C) — 1 case
Blachly-Lane Elec. Coop. Ass'n v. U.S. Dept. of Energy, 79 F. App'x 975 (9th Cir. 2003). “• BPA violated 16 U.S.C. §§ 839a(10) and 839d(b)(4) by attributing 2900 aMW to FBS replacements under 16 U.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(12)(A) — 1 case
Util. Reform Proj. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 869 F.2d 437 (9th Cir. 1989).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(13) — 1 case
Indus. Customers of Nw. Utils. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 388 F. App'x 586 (9th Cir. 2010).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(14) — 8 cases
Port of Seattle v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 499 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2007). “16 U.S.C. § 839a(14). Prices in the Pacific Northwest spot market skyrocketed during the energy crisis.”
Pacificorp, a Maine Corp., Dba Pac. Power & Light Co. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 856 F.2d 94 (9th Cir. 1988). “16 U.S.C. § 839a(14) (1982). Under the Planning Act, BPA is required to exchange power at the priority firm rate with Pacificorp for resale to Pacificorp’s residential and small farm customers located within the region.”
City of Burbank, California v. United States, 273 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2001). “16 U.S.C. § 839a(14) (2000); Kaiser Aluminum & Chem.”
Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 46 (Ct. Cl. 1991). “In conjunction with 16 U.S.C. § 839a(14), it defines the term “Pacific Northwest” as a specific geographical area.”
Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 903 F.2d 585 (9th Cir. 1989).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(14)(A) — 3 cases
City of Burbank, California v. United States, 47 Fed. Cl. 261 (Fed. Cl. 2000). “” 16 U.S.C. § 839a(14)(A) (1994). . Complaint (Compl.”
S. California Edison v. United States, 69 Fed. Cl. 66 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
Seattle Master Builders Ass'n v. Pac. Nw. Elec. Power & Conservation Plan. Council, 786 F.2d 1359 (9th Cir. 1986).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(17) — 3 cases
Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Cent. Lincoln Peoples' Util. Dist., 467 U.S. 380 (1984). “" § 3(17), 16 U. S. C. § 839a(17) (emphasis added). [7] Respondents' discussion of this use of nonfirm power seems to us to be somewhat less than persuasive.”
Portland Gen. Elec. Co. v. Peter Johnson, Adm'r of the Bonneville Power Admin., Intalco Aluminum Corp., Intervenors, 754 F.2d 1475 (9th Cir. 1985). “” Unlike utilities that serve residential customers, however, the DSI’s can tolerate unexpected interruptions of their power.”
Cent. Lincoln Peoples' Util. Dist. v. Johnson, 735 F.2d 1101 (9th Cir. 1984).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(19) — 1 case
Pacificorp v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, & Atl. Richfield Co., Intervenors, 795 F.2d 816 (9th Cir. 1986). “§ 839c(c)(l); see also 16 U.S.C. § 839a(19) (defining “resource”).”
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(19)(B) — 1 case
City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of City of Tacoma, 743 P.2d 793 (Wash. 1987). “" 16 U.S.C. § 839a(19)(B) (1982). [6] In its first regional energy plan, the Regional Council concluded that conservation could free up enough electricity to supply up to 17 percent of the Northwest's electrical energy needs, which equals 4,790 megawatts, the equivalent of 4.”
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(2) — 1 case
Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1 v. Bonneville Power Admin., 947 F.2d 386 (9th Cir. 1991).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(4)(A)(i) — 1 case
Scott Levy v. Npcc (9th Cir. 2023).
— 16 U.S.C. § 839a(8) — 3 cases
Portland Gen. Elec. Co. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 501 F.3d 1009 (9th Cir. 2007). “” 16 U.S.C. § 839a(8). 5 .Section 4 of the Bonneville Project Act "give[s] preference and priority to public bodies and cooperatives.”
Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. Bonneville Power Admin., 261 F.3d 843 (9th Cir. 2001).
Portland Gen. v. Bpa (9th Cir. 2007).
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.