(1) The assets of any public utility, including any certificate of public convenience and necessity or rights obtained under any such certificate held, owned, or obtained by any public utility, may be sold, assigned, or leased as any other property, but only upon authorization by the commission and upon such terms and conditions as the commission may prescribe; except that this section does not apply to assets that are sold, assigned, or leased:
(a) In the normal course of business; or
(b) That are owned by a telecommunications service provider and:
(I) Are not used in the provision of regulated telecommunications services; or
(II) (A) Are land and support assets and are not directly used in the provision of regulated telecommunications services.
(B) A telecommunications service provider shall provide notice to the commission of transactions subject to this subparagraph (II), along with the associated accounting entries on the provider's books and records, to permit the commission to determine, if necessary, the disposition of any gain or loss from the transaction.
Source: L. 45: p. 526, § 2. CSA: C. 137, § 36. CRS 53: § 115-5-5. C.R.S. 1963: § 115- 5-5. L. 69: p. 938, § 31. L. 71: p. 1100, § 1. L. 2004: Entire section amended, p. 164, § 1, effective March 17.
Notes of Decisions
People ex rel. Woodard v. Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co., 739 P.2d 850 (Colo. 1987).
· cites it 21× “” US West, Landmark, and USWD asserted in their answer that “[t]he assets transferred between Mountain Bell and Landmark, effective January 1, 1984, were not public utilities assets, and accordingly do not fall within the scope of C.R.S. § 40-5-105.” In its order of April 18,…”
Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 763 P.2d 1020 (Colo. 1988).
· cites it 38× “(1984), the PUC asserts that it has specific jurisdiction over this matter under section 40-5-105, 17 C.R.S. (1984), which states: *1025 The assets of any public utility, including any certificate of public convenience and necessity or rights obtained under any such certificate…”
City of Colorado Springs v. Mountain View Elec. Ass'n, 925 P.2d 1378 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 4× “Mountain View, however, contends that § 40-5-105, C.R.S (1998 Repl.Vol. 17) requires that the PUC determine whether the deletion of portions of Mountain View’s service area is in the public interest.”
City of Aurora v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 785 P.2d 1280 (Colo. 1990).
· cites it 2× “” Furthermore, section 40-5-105 of the Public Utilities Law expressly provides that the assets of any public utility may be sold other than in the normal course of business only upon authorization by the commission “and upon such terms and conditions as the commission may…”
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.