Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.040

General powers

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      756.040 General powers. (1) In addition to the powers and duties now or hereafter transferred to or vested in the Public Utility Commission, the commission shall represent the customers of any public utility or telecommunications utility and the public generally in all controversies respecting rates, valuations, service and all matters of which the commission has jurisdiction. In respect thereof the commission shall make use of the jurisdiction and powers of the office to protect such customers, and the public generally, from unjust and unreasonable exactions and practices and to obtain for them adequate service at fair and reasonable rates. The commission shall balance the interests of the utility investor and the consumer in establishing fair and reasonable rates. Rates are fair and reasonable for the purposes of this subsection if the rates provide adequate revenue both for operating expenses of the public utility or telecommunications utility and for capital costs of the utility, with a return to the equity holder that is:

      (a) Commensurate with the return on investments in other enterprises having corresponding risks; and

      (b) Sufficient to ensure confidence in the financial integrity of the utility, allowing the utility to maintain its credit and attract capital.

      (2) The commission is vested with power and jurisdiction to supervise and regulate every public utility and telecommunications utility in this state, and to do all things necessary and convenient in the exercise of such power and jurisdiction.

      (3) The commission may participate in any proceeding before any public officer, commission or body of the United States or any state for the purpose of representing the public generally and the customers of the services of any public utility or telecommunications utility operating or providing service to or within this state.

      (4) The commission may make joint investigations, hold joint hearings within or without this state and issue concurrent orders in conjunction or concurrence with any official, board, commission or agency of any state or of the United States. [Amended by 1961 c.467 §1; 1971 c.655 §9; 1973 c.776 §15; 1987 c.447 §76; 1995 c.733 §53; 2001 c.569 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1962–2026 · leading case: Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2014) or · cites it 17× “” The PUC appeared to conclude that that authority stemmed from ORS 756.040, which gives the PUC authority to do “all things necessary and convenient” in the exercise of its legislatively delegated powers.”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp · cites it 18× “Because public utilities are natural monopolies, the rates that they charge for their services are regulated.”
Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Davis (1979) orctapp · cites it 16× “ORS 756.040 and ORS 756.060, both supra, do not constitute a "clearly defined statutory grant of authority" for the enactment of the "tagline" rule.”
Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Katz (1992) orctapp · cites it 7× “ORS 756.040 states, in pertinent part: "(1) In addition to the powers and duties now or hereafter transferred to or vested in the commission, the commission shall represent the customers of any public utility, telecommunications utility, railroad, air carrier or motor carrier…”
Citizens' Utility Board v. Public Utility Commission (1998) orctapp · cites it 6× “Katz, 116 Or App 302 , 309 n 5, 841 P2d 652 (1929), rev den 316 Or 528 (1993), that ORS 756.040 and other general empowering statutes have given PUC “the broadest authority — commensurate with that of the legislature itself — for the exercise of [its] regulatory function”…”
Springfield Education Ass'n v. Springfield School District No. 19 (1980) or “210, and to "protect such customers, and the public generally, from unjust and unreasonable extractions and practices and to obtain for them adequate service at fair and reasonable rates,” ORS 756.040(1). The legislature can, if it chooses, enact more specific statutes as to…”
Isom v. Portland General Electric Co. (1984) orctapp · cites it 4× “The contention that their claim under the Unlawful Debt Collection Practices Act, ORS 646.639 et seq, should not have been dismissed will be discussed separately.”
American Can Co. v. Davis (1977) orctapp · cites it 2× “” ORS 756.040(1). Unjust discrimination in rates is expressly forbidden by statute: "(1) * * * [N]o public utility * * * shall, directly or indirectly, by any device, charge * * * any person a greater or less compensation for any service rendered or to be rendered by it than:…”
Garrison v. Pacific Northwest Bell (1980) orctapp · cites it 2× “ORS 756.040 grants the Commissioner broad regulatory authority over public utilities, including the duty to *529 "represent the customers of any public utility, railroad, air carrier or motor carrier, and the public generally in all controversies respecting rates, valuations,…”
Wah Chang v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp · cites it 26× “” That question, the PUC concluded, turned on the interplay between two statutes, ORS 756.040 and ORS 757.230. The former statute states the general requirement that the PUC is to protect utility customers, and the public generally, “from unjust and unreasonable exactions and…”
Klamath Off-Project Water Users, Inc. v. PacifiCorp (2010) orctapp “2 To the contrary, the nature of the agreement — that is, an agreement concerning the provision of services subject to the general regulatory authority of the PUC — suggests quite the contrary.”
State Ex Rel. MoGas Pipeline LLC v. Missouri Public Service Commission (2012) mo “§ 16-2a; Or.Rev.Stat. § 756.040. Importantly, though the PSC previously has sought such authority, the Missouri legislature thus far has declined to similarly permit it to intervene in FERC matters.”
Show all 35 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.040(1) — 21 cases
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2014) or “” The PUC appeared to conclude that that authority stemmed from ORS 756.040, which gives the PUC authority to do “all things necessary and convenient” in the exercise of its legislatively delegated powers.”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp “Because public utilities are natural monopolies, the rates that they charge for their services are regulated.”
Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Davis (1979) orctapp “ORS 756.040 and ORS 756.060, both supra, do not constitute a "clearly defined statutory grant of authority" for the enactment of the "tagline" rule.”
Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Katz (1992) orctapp “ORS 756.040 states, in pertinent part: "(1) In addition to the powers and duties now or hereafter transferred to or vested in the commission, the commission shall represent the customers of any public utility, telecommunications utility, railroad, air carrier or motor carrier…”
Springfield Education Ass'n v. Springfield School District No. 19 (1980) or “210, and to "protect such customers, and the public generally, from unjust and unreasonable extractions and practices and to obtain for them adequate service at fair and reasonable rates,” ORS 756.040(1). The legislature can, if it chooses, enact more specific statutes as to…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.040(1)(a) — 1 case
Gearhart v. PUC (2014) or
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.040(2) — 7 cases
Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Davis (1979) orctapp “ORS 756.040 and ORS 756.060, both supra, do not constitute a "clearly defined statutory grant of authority" for the enactment of the "tagline" rule.”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2014) or “” The PUC appeared to conclude that that authority stemmed from ORS 756.040, which gives the PUC authority to do “all things necessary and convenient” in the exercise of its legislatively delegated powers.”
Citizens' Utility Board v. Public Utility Commission (1998) orctapp “Katz, 116 Or App 302 , 309 n 5, 841 P2d 652 (1929), rev den 316 Or 528 (1993), that ORS 756.040 and other general empowering statutes have given PUC “the broadest authority — commensurate with that of the legislature itself — for the exercise of [its] regulatory function”…”
Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Eachus (1995) orctapp
NewSun Energy LLC v. PUC (2026) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.040(l)(a) — 2 cases
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2014) or “” The PUC appeared to conclude that that authority stemmed from ORS 756.040, which gives the PUC authority to do “all things necessary and convenient” in the exercise of its legislatively delegated powers.”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp “Because public utilities are natural monopolies, the rates that they charge for their services are regulated.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.040(l)(b) — 1 case
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp “Because public utilities are natural monopolies, the rates that they charge for their services are regulated.”
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.