O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 46-3-2 (2019)

Legislative findings and declaration of policy

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The public interest requires, and it is declared to be the policy of the State of Georgia, that, in order (1) to assure the most efficient, economical, and orderly rendering of retail electric service within the state, (2) to inhibit duplication of the lines of electric suppliers, (3) to foster the extension and location of electric supplier lines in the manner most compatible with the preservation and enhancement of the state’s physical environment, and (4) to protect and conserve lines lawfully constructed by electric suppliers, it is necessary and appropriate that the state establish and implement a plan whereby every geographic area within the state shall be either assigned to an electric supplier or declared unassigned as to any electric supplier; that, to accomplish such a plan, it is necessary that all electric suppliers within the state be subject to this part; that the commission be delegated power, authority, and jurisdiction with respect to such plan; and that all electric membership corporations and all municipalities which furnish retail electric service be additionally subject to regulation by the commission in the same manner as provided for regulation of electric light and power companies, except as to the fixing of their rates, charges, and service rules and regulations, it being determined by the General Assembly that such electric membership corporations and municipalities, which by their corporate nature are wholly or substantially controlled by their consumers, should for regulatory purposes be classified differently in certain respects from electric light and power companies.

History

(Ga. L. 1973, p. 200, § 2.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Purposes of chapter appropriate. - Purposes of this part of Ga. L. 1973, p. 200 (see O.C.G.A. Ch. 3, T. 46) enumerated in Ga. L. 1973, p. 200, § 2 (see O.C.G.A. 46-3-2) are appropriate and are put into effect completely and thoroughly by other provisions of this part. City of Calhoun v. North Ga. Elec. Membership Corp., 233 Ga. 759, 213 S.E.2d 596 (1975).

Cited in Greensboro Lumber Co. v. Georgia Power Co., 643 F. Supp. 1345 (N.D. Ga. 1986); Marietta Bd. of Lights & Water v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 182 Ga. App. 702, 356 S.E.2d 737 (1987); Colquitt Elec. Membership Corp. v. City of Moultrie, 197 Ga. App. 794, 399 S.E.2d 497 (1990).

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Grant of perpetual franchise to public service corporation, 2 ALR 1105.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: Sawnee Elec. Membership Corp. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 544 S.E.2d 158 (Ga. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sawnee Elec. Membership Corp. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 544 S.E.2d 158 (Ga. 2001). · cites it 24× “An exception is created by OCGA § 46-3-8(a), which allows a consumer to choose an electric supplier different from the one assigned, where service is furnished to one or more new premises (but if more than one, such premises must be located on the same tract or on contiguous…”

Greensboro Lumber Co. v. Georgia Power Co., 643 F. Supp. 1345 (N.D. Ga. 1986). · cites it 4× “O.C.G.A. § 46-3-2. The Georgia Territorial Electric Service Act empowers the Georgia Public Service Commission to assign to individual retail electric power suppliers exclusive geographic territories within Georgia, subject to certain narrow exceptions which are not relevant to…”

City of Lagrange v. Georgia Power Co., 363 S.E.2d 286 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “The legislative intent and policy is specifically declared within Section 2 (OCGA § 46-3-2) of the Territorial Electric Service Act, as the Supreme Court pointed out in City of Calhoun, supra at 761 (1).”

City of Lagrange v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 675 S.E.2d 525 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 46-3-2. 2 (Punctuation omitted.) Sawnee Elec.”

Athens-Clarke Cnty. v. Walton Elec. Membership Corp., 454 S.E.2d 510 (Ga. 1995). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 46-3-2. The General Assembly so acted with the avowed purposes of assuring the most efficient, economical, and orderly rendering of retail electric service in the state; to inhibit duplication *230 of electric supply lines; to foster extension and location of lines…”

Walton Elec. Membership Corp. v. Snyder, 487 S.E.2d 613 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “OCGA §§ 46-3-2; 46-3-12; 46-3-200; see also Freeman, supra at 846-847 ; Hunnicutt, supra.”

Jackson Elec. Membership Corp. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 668 S.E.2d 867 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 46-3-2. Once a service territory is assigned, an electric supplier “shall have the exclusive right to extend and continue furnishing service to [any] new premises” within that area.”

Rabun Cnty. v. Georgia Transmission Corp., 575 S.E.2d 474 (Ga. 2003). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 46-3-2. But “[i]t is the province of the General Assembly to determine when the right of eminent domain may be exercised.”

Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. Sawnee Elec. Membership Corp., 529 S.E.2d 186 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 46-3-2. The evidence indisputably showed that Georgia Power billed Dominion and no one else for the electric service being provided to this apartment complex.”

Colquitt Elec. Membership Corp. v. City of Moultrie, 399 S.E.2d 497 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 46-3-2. Accordingly, we find that the superior court did not err in affirming the PSC decision.”

City of Norcross v. Georgia Power Co., 399 S.E.2d 725 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “” OCGA § 46-3-2. The general restriction of competition among electrical suppliers resulting from the Act is lifted for the specific large load consumers delineated in the exception, who are granted a free choice of suppliers.”

Georgia Power Co. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 675 S.E.2d 294 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “2 OCGA § 46-3-2. 3 See OCGA § 46-3-4. 4 See Bd.”

Show all 14 citing cases →

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.