Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 40
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 40-3-111 (2026)

Rates determined after hearing

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Whenever the commission, after a hearing upon its own motion or upon complaint, finds that the rates, tolls, fares, rentals, charges, or classifications demanded, observed, charged, or collected by any public utility for any service, product, or commodity, or in connection therewith, including the rates or fares for excursion or commutation tickets, or that the rules, regulations, practices, or contracts affecting such rates, fares, tolls, rentals, charges, or classifications are unjust, unreasonable, discriminatory, or preferential, or in any way violate any provision of law, or that such rates, fares, tolls, rentals, charges, or classifications are insufficient, the commission shall determine the just, reasonable, or sufficient rates, fares, tolls, rentals, charges, rules, regulations, practices, or contracts to be thereafter observed and in force and shall fix the same by order. In making such determination, the commission may consider current, future, or past test periods or any reasonable combination thereof and any other factors which may affect the sufficiency or insufficiency of such rates, fares, tolls, rentals, charges, or classifications during the period the same may be in effect, and may consider any factors which influence an adequate supply of energy, encourage energy conservation, or encourage renewable energy development.

(1.5) (a) If the commission considers environmental effects when comparing the costs and benefits of potential utility resources, it shall also make findings and give due consideration to the effect that acquiring such resources will have on the state's economy and employment, including, but not limited to, the effect on the mining, electric, natural gas, energy efficiency, and renewable resource industries.

(b) If the commission considers factors which encourage renewable energy development, it shall also make findings and give due consideration to the effect of such factors on the utility's ability to recover its capital and operating costs.

(2) (a) The commission has the power, after a hearing upon its own motion or upon complaint, to investigate a single rate, fare, toll, rental, charge, classification, rule, contract, or practice, or the entire schedule of rates, fares, tolls, rentals, charges, classifications, rules, contracts, and practices of any public utility; and to establish new rates, fares, tolls, rentals, charges, classifications, rules, contracts, practices, or schedules, in lieu thereof.

(b) As part of any inquiry or investigation into rate structures of regulated electric utilities undertaken on or before July 1, 2009, the commission shall consider whether to adopt retail rate structures that enable the use of solar or other renewable energy resources in agricultural applications, including, but not limited to, irrigation pumping.

Source: L. 13: p. 475, § 23. C.L. § 2934. CSA: C. 137, § 24. CRS 53: § 115-3-11. C.R.S. 1963: § 115-3-11. L. 81: (1) amended, p. 1914, § 1, effective July 1. L. 93: (1.5) added, p. 202, § 1, effective March 31. L. 94: (1) and (1.5) amended, p. 611, § 3, effective April 8. L. 2008: (2) amended, p. 1793, § 9, effective July 1.

Cross references: For the legislative declaration contained in the 1994 act amending subsections (1) and (1.5), see section 1 of chapter 102, Session Laws of Colorado 1994.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1979–1997 · leading case: Colorado-Ute Elec. Ass'n v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 760 P.2d 627 (Colo. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Colorado-Ute Elec. Ass'n v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 760 P.2d 627 (Colo. 1988). · cites it 16× “-Ute's rate filing, the district court focused upon a provision of the public utilities law which provides, in part: "Upon complaint filed by any member or customer of a cooperative electric association or by any affected public utility, the commission shall determine whether…”
Peoples Nat. Gas Div. of N. Nat. Gas Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 590 P.2d 960 (Colo. 1979). · cites it 9× “The Commission also appealed the decision in the Durango case, but has not actively pressed its appeal. I. The two cities contend that granting the surcharge (1) constitutes constitutionally retroactive ratemaking under Colo.”
Pub. Serv. Co. of Colorado v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 644 P.2d 933 (Colo. 1982). · cites it 3× ““(2) Every public utility shall furnish, provide, and maintain such service, in-strumentalities, equipment, and facilities as shall promote the safety, health, comfort, and convenience of its patrons, employees, and the public, and as shall in all respects be adequate,…”
Bennett Bear Creek Farm Water & Sanitation Dist. v. City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners, 928 P.2d 1254 (Colo. 1996). · cites it 3× “While the standard for judicial review of PUC rate making is set forth by statute, § 40-3-111(1), 17 C.R.S. (1996 Supp.), and § 40-6-115(3), 17 C.”
Colorado Off. of Consum. Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 752 P.2d 1049 (Colo. 1988). · cites it 3× “§§ 40-3-111(1) and 40-6-lll(2)(a), 17 C.R.”
Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Dist. Court, City & Cnty. of Denver, 778 P.2d 667 (Colo. 1989). “” § 40-3-111(1), 17 C.R.S. (1984). Although such a hearing might well be adverse to Mountain Bell's interests, Mountain Bell concedes that it would be required to disseminate notice of such proceedings to its customers.”
CF&I Steel, L.P. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 949 P.2d 577 (Colo. 1997). “See § 40-3-111(1), 11 C.R.S. (1997). The PUC’s regulatory powers and duties are aimed primarily at the protection of consumers who have little or no choice in the selection of their provider because the utility enjoys monopoly status.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 40-3-111(1) — 5 cases
Colorado-Ute Elec. Ass'n v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 760 P.2d 627 (Colo. 1988). “-Ute's rate filing, the district court focused upon a provision of the public utilities law which provides, in part: "Upon complaint filed by any member or customer of a cooperative electric association or by any affected public utility, the commission shall determine whether…”
Bennett Bear Creek Farm Water & Sanitation Dist. v. City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners, 928 P.2d 1254 (Colo. 1996). “While the standard for judicial review of PUC rate making is set forth by statute, § 40-3-111(1), 17 C.R.S. (1996 Supp.), and § 40-6-115(3), 17 C.”
Colorado Off. of Consum. Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 752 P.2d 1049 (Colo. 1988). “§§ 40-3-111(1) and 40-6-lll(2)(a), 17 C.R.”
Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Dist. Court, City & Cnty. of Denver, 778 P.2d 667 (Colo. 1989). “” § 40-3-111(1), 17 C.R.S. (1984). Although such a hearing might well be adverse to Mountain Bell's interests, Mountain Bell concedes that it would be required to disseminate notice of such proceedings to its customers.”
CF&I Steel, L.P. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 949 P.2d 577 (Colo. 1997). “See § 40-3-111(1), 11 C.R.S. (1997). The PUC’s regulatory powers and duties are aimed primarily at the protection of consumers who have little or no choice in the selection of their provider because the utility enjoys monopoly status.”
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.