American Rivers v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s Empirical Analysis
187 F.3d 1007 · 1999
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 16 U.S.C. § 661 (Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act) · 16 U.S.C. § 791A (§ 321 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 797 (§ 4 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 803 (§ 10 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 808 (§ 15 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 811 (§ 18 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 825L (§ 313 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 33 U.S.C. § 1341
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Sierra Club v. Morton · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“2 EWEB intervened in support of the respondent Commission. Industry amici and the City of Tacoma, Washington also have filed briefs in support of the Commission. The industry amici are American Public Power Association, Edison Electric Institute, Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities, National Hydropower Association, Northwest Hydroelectric Association, Portland General Electric Company, and Public Power Council. 3 At the request of EWEB, the Director of the Commission's Office of Hydropower Licensing (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“because EWEB may, after consulting with the federal agencies, ultimately develop plans that honor in full each of the detailed specifications for fish ladders and fish screens previously submitted by the agencies, and because the Commission may ultimately approve those plans, the orders under review cannot be considered ripe.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether license denial could appropriately be considered `no action' in the case of a relicensing . . . . [as d]enial would require action, rather than inaction, and would presumably be coupled with other proposed actions, such as federal takeover, issuance of a nonpower license, or project decommissioning.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.