May 18, 2013

You are here: Home / Archives for Public Utilities Commission

Colorado Supreme Court: Record Did Not Contain Statutorily Required Findings Necessary for Denial of Application

April 23, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Mile High Cab, Inc. v. Colorado Public Utilities Commission on Monday, April 22, 2013.

Administrative Law—Burdens of Proof—Preponderance of Evidence—CRS § 40-10.1-203.

Mile High Cab, Inc. (Mile High) appealed the district court’s judgment affirming the denial of its application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. After a lengthy hearing, the administrative law judge (ALJ) to whom the application had been assigned issued a recommended decision, finding that the several incumbent carriers opposing the application had proved by a preponderance of the evidencethat public convenience and necessity did not require granting the application, and that the issuance of the certificate would be detrimental to the public interest. Although it initially ordered a remand for further evidence, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) ultimately granted the intervening carriers’ motions for reconsideration and adopted the ALJ’s recommendation to deny the application. The district court affirmed Mile High’s petition for judicial review.

The Supreme Court reversed the district court’s judgment and remanded the case with directions to return the matter to the PUC for further action. The Court held that the record did not clearly contain the finding statutorily required for a denial of Mile High’s application, and that the issuance of a certificate would actually be detrimental to the public interest.

Summary and full case available here.

Filed Under: Case Law Tagged With: , , , , ,

HB 13-1027: Requiring Public Utilities Commission Director to Report Annually on Rate Actions

February 5, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On January 9, 2013, Rep. Kathleen Conti introduced HB 13-1027 - Concerning an Increase in the Transparency of Proceedings Before the Public Utilities Commission by Requiring the Director of the Commission to Report Annually to the General Assembly Regarding Matters Discussed on the Record in Energy Rate Cases.  This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill requires the director of the public utilities commission (PUC) or the director’s designee to report annually to the joint house and senate transportation committees regarding matters discussed on the record in energy rate case hearings that were decided by the commission during the immediately preceding two years.

For all rate cases included in the report, the bill directs the commission to estimate the economic impact of the rates involved, including the average increase or decrease in ratepayers’ monthly bills. On Feb. 1, the Appropriations Committee approved the bill and sent it to the full House for consideration on 2nd Reading.

Since this summary, the bill passed Second Reading in the House with amendments.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , ,

Colorado Supreme Court: PUC Considered All Mandated Factors in Setting Rates for Basic Residential Phone Service with Evidence to Support Decision

April 30, 2012 by Leave a Comment

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Colorado Office of Consumer Counsel v. Colorado Public Utilities Commission on April 30, 2012.

Basic Residential Telephone Service Regulation—Maximum Rate Setting.

The Supreme Court reversed the district court’s judgment, holding that the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regularly pursued its authority in setting maximum rates for basic residential telephone service pursuant to CRS § 40-15-502(3)(b). The PUC considered all of the statutorily mandated factors in setting the rates and there was substantial evidence supporting its decision.

Summary and full case available here.

Filed Under: Case Law Tagged With: , , ,

Colorado Supreme Court: Initial Failure to File Review of PUC Actions in Proper Venue Did Not Deprive Court of Jurisdiction to Grant Venue Transfer

April 23, 2012 by Leave a Comment

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in In re Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado v. Colorado Public Utilities Commission on April 23, 2012.

CRS § 40-6-115(5)—“Commenced and Tried”—Remedy for Improper Venue is Transfer to Proper Venue.

The Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado (AGNC) filed a petition for judicial review in Routt County District Court, seeking judicial review of a decision by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Pursuant to CRS § 40-6-115(5), such petitions must be commenced and tried in district court either in the county where the petitioning corporation has its principal office or place of business, or in Denver District Court. In this case, the Routt County District Court found that AGNC’s principal office or place of business was in Garfield County, not Routt County. The court ordered that AGNC be permitted to transfer the case to Garfield County or Denver District Court. AGNC chose Denver District Court.

PUC petitioned the Supreme Court, under C.A.R. 21, for a rule to show cause why the case should not be dismissed rather than transferred. The Court issued the rule to show cause, and now discharged the rule. The Court held that CRS § 40-6-115(5), which enumerates the counties where a petition for review of PUC actions shall be commenced and tried, sets a venue requirement. The requirement is procedural, not substantive. AGNC’s initial failure to file in a proper venue did not deprive the Routt County District Court of jurisdiction to grant a venue transfer motion. Instead, the statute allows the Routt County District Court to transfer this case to the Denver District Court.

Summary and full case available here.

Filed Under: Case Law Tagged With: , , , , ,

HB 12-1258: Clarifying that Sellers of Electricity for Alternative Fuel Vehicles Are Not Public Utilities

March 26, 2012 by Leave a Comment

On February 7, 2012, Rep. Brian DelGrosso and Sen. Cheri Jahn introduced HB 12-1258 – Concerning Regulation of Public Utilities in Terms of Alternative Fuel Vehicles. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill specifies that sellers of electricity as fuel for alternative fuel vehicles are not regulated as public utilities. Generating electricity for sale as fuel for alternative fuel vehicles also does not make the seller subject to regulation as a public utility if the seller generates the electricity on the property where the fueling facilities are located and the electricity is generated from a renewable resource.

Public utilities must make commercially reasonable efforts to provide connection of electric and natural gas service to alternative fuel vehicle charging facilities. A public utility’s right to make unregulated operating expenditures and investments via an unregulated subsidiary with regard to alternative fuel vehicle charging facilities is not limited. On March 15 the Transportation Committee amended the bill and moved it to the full Senate for consideration on 2nd Reading.

Since this summary, the bill was laid over daily for Second Reading on March 20.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , ,

HB 12-1172: Allowing Public Utilities Commission to Impute Federal Carbon Tax to Electric Utility

March 4, 2012 by Leave a Comment

On January 20, 2012, Rep. Spencer Swalm introduced HB 12-1172 – Concerning the Rates Charged to Consumers for Electricity, and, in Connection Therewith, Prohibiting the Imputation of Certain Costs Associated with Reductions in Greenhouse Gas Emissions. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The 2004 voter initiative known as “Amendment 37” committed Colorado to a policy of increasing the portion of the state’s electricity generated from renewable sources. Subsequent legislation allows the Colorado public utilities commission (PUC) to impute the cost of a carbon tax imposed at the federal level when calculating an electric utility’s investments and comparing the cost of maintaining existing infrastructure with the cost of replacing existing power plants with more energy-efficient power plants.

The bill conditions the PUC’s imputation of the carbon tax on the actual adoption of a carbon tax as part of federal law. The bill prohibits an investor-owned electric utility from charging residential customers tiered rates according to their monthly consumption. On February 15, the Agriculture, Livestock, & Natural Resources committee amended the bill and referred it to the full House for consideration on 2nd Reading.

Since this summary, the bill passed the Second Reading with amendments and passed the Third Reading in the House.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , ,
Protected

2013-05-19 01:44:45