Platte River Whooping Crane Critical Habitat Maintenance Trust v. FERC

Court cases

962.2d 27 (1992) (Platte River II)

Issue. Does FERC have authority to unilaterally impose conditions for the protection of the environment on annual licenses when the original license does not contain an express reservation of modification authority, i.e., a re-opener clause?
Holding. FERC may not unilaterally impose conditions on annual licenses where the original licenses do not contain re-opener provisions.

Contributed by:

Hydropower Reform Coalition

 

View PDF

Related resource

Court cases

Keating v. FERC

Issue. Can FERC rely on objectives contained in a forest plan to determine whether a proposed project will be consistent with the purposes for which the national forest was created?

See all resources