756.515
Investigations and hearings on commission’s own motion; hearings for aggrieved
persons. (1)
Whenever the Public Utility Commission believes that any rate may be
unreasonable or unjustly discriminatory, or that any service is unsafe or
inadequate, or is not afforded, or that an investigation of any matter relating
to any public utility or telecommunications utility or other person should be
made, or relating to any person to determine if such person is subject to the
commission’s regulatory jurisdiction, the commission may on motion summarily
investigate any such matter, with or without notice.
(2) If after
making such investigation the commission is satisfied that sufficient grounds
exist to warrant a hearing being ordered upon any such matter, the commission
shall furnish any public utility or telecommunications utility or other person
interested a statement notifying it of the matters under investigation, which
statement shall be accompanied by a notice fixing the time and place for
hearing upon such matters in the manner provided in ORS 756.512 for notice of
complaint.
(3) Thereafter
proceedings shall be had and conducted in reference to the matters investigated
in like manner as though complaint had been filed with the commission relative
thereto, and the same orders may be made in reference thereto as if such
investigation had been made on complaint.
(4) The
commission may, after making an investigation on the commission’s motion, but
without notice or hearing, make such findings and orders as the commission
deems justified or required by the results of such investigation. Except as
provided in subsections (5) and (6) of this section such findings and orders
have the same legal force and effect as any other finding or order of the
commission.
(5) In addition
to any other remedy provided by law, any party aggrieved by an order entered
pursuant to subsection (4) of this section may request the commission to hold a
hearing to determine whether the order should continue in effect. Any such
request for hearing shall be submitted to the commission not later than 15 days
after the date of service of the order, and the commission shall hold the
hearing not later than 60 days after receipt of such a request for hearing.
(6) If the
commission receives a request for hearing pursuant to subsection (5) of this
section, the order is suspended pending the outcome of the hearing unless the
commission finds that the order is necessary for the public health or safety or
to prevent the dissipation of assets of a business or activity subject to the
commission’s regulatory jurisdiction. [Formerly 757.515; 1973 c.776 §29; 1975
c.318 §1; 1983 c.703 §18; 1987 c.447 §92; 1995 c.733 §69]
HEARING PROCEDURE
Notes of Decisions
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 898 P.2d 774 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 8× “In response, PUC opened this “own motion” rate case pursuant to ORS 756.515. 1 The case was docketed as UT 85.”
Crooked River Ranch Water Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 198 P.3d 967 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 5× “Whether or not the commission determines that a hearing is necessary, ORS 756.515 contemplates that, in the case of a dispute over the PUC’s exercise of its authority, the PUC will first issue an order determining whether a person is ■within the PUC’s regulatory authority before…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Katz, 841 P.2d 652 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “" It has been granted the power to represent the customers of PNB in all controversies respecting rates, valuations, service and all other matters under its jurisdiction and, in doing so, the legislature has directed that PUC shall use its powers "to protect those customers, and…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 888 P.2d 562 (Or. 1995).
· cites it 14× “” ORS 756.515. 2 In a proceeding without a “complaint,” the statutes are silent as to whether the regulated party is to be considered a “defendant.”
Am. Can Co. v. Davis, 559 P.2d 898 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).
“The Commissioner could have disapproved or modified the proposed tariff if he had found different rates to be reasonable. ORS 757.210, 757.215.”
Garrison v. Pac. Nw. Bell, 608 P.2d 1206 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
“” ORS 756.515(1). Under ORS 756.565, "All rates, tariffs, classifications, regulations, practices and service fixed, approved or prescribed by the commissioner * * * shall be in force and shall be prima facie lawful and reasonable, until found otherwise in a proceeding brought…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Katz, 853 P.2d 1346 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 2× “” ORS 756.515(4). ORS 756.515(6) provides: “[I]f the commission receives a request for hearing * * * the order is suspended pending the outcome of the hearing unless the commission finds that the order is necessary for the public health or safety or to prevent the dissipation of…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 872 P.2d 21 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 11× “Pursuant to ORS 756.515(1), PUC opened an “own motion” rate case to determine if Pacific Northwest Bell (PNB) had excessive rates.”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 826 P.2d 105 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“89-1044 pursuant to ORS 756.515(4), and in October, 1989, PNB sued to vacate the order in the Circuit Court for Multnomah County.”
Coalition for Safe Power v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 911 P.2d 1272 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“Eachus, 320 Or 557 , 888 P2d 562 (1995) (Eachus IV), the Supreme Court held that a public utility, which was the subject of an “own motion” proceeding instigated without formal complaint by the PUC pursuant to ORS 756.515, was a defendant for purposes of ORS 756.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.515(1) — 4 cases
Garrison v. Pac. Nw. Bell, 608 P.2d 1206 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
“” ORS 756.515(1). Under ORS 756.565, "All rates, tariffs, classifications, regulations, practices and service fixed, approved or prescribed by the commissioner * * * shall be in force and shall be prima facie lawful and reasonable, until found otherwise in a proceeding brought…”
Crooked River Ranch Water Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 198 P.3d 967 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“Whether or not the commission determines that a hearing is necessary, ORS 756.515 contemplates that, in the case of a dispute over the PUC’s exercise of its authority, the PUC will first issue an order determining whether a person is ■within the PUC’s regulatory authority before…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 872 P.2d 21 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
“Pursuant to ORS 756.515(1), PUC opened an “own motion” rate case to determine if Pacific Northwest Bell (PNB) had excessive rates.”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 888 P.2d 562 (Or. 1995).
“” ORS 756.515. 2 In a proceeding without a “complaint,” the statutes are silent as to whether the regulated party is to be considered a “defendant.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.515(2) — 3 cases
Crooked River Ranch Water Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 198 P.3d 967 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“Whether or not the commission determines that a hearing is necessary, ORS 756.515 contemplates that, in the case of a dispute over the PUC’s exercise of its authority, the PUC will first issue an order determining whether a person is ■within the PUC’s regulatory authority before…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 888 P.2d 562 (Or. 1995).
“” ORS 756.515. 2 In a proceeding without a “complaint,” the statutes are silent as to whether the regulated party is to be considered a “defendant.”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 872 P.2d 21 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
“Pursuant to ORS 756.515(1), PUC opened an “own motion” rate case to determine if Pacific Northwest Bell (PNB) had excessive rates.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.515(3) — 3 cases
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 888 P.2d 562 (Or. 1995).
“” ORS 756.515. 2 In a proceeding without a “complaint,” the statutes are silent as to whether the regulated party is to be considered a “defendant.”
Crooked River Ranch Water Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 198 P.3d 967 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“Whether or not the commission determines that a hearing is necessary, ORS 756.515 contemplates that, in the case of a dispute over the PUC’s exercise of its authority, the PUC will first issue an order determining whether a person is ■within the PUC’s regulatory authority before…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 872 P.2d 21 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
“Pursuant to ORS 756.515(1), PUC opened an “own motion” rate case to determine if Pacific Northwest Bell (PNB) had excessive rates.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.515(4) — 4 cases
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 898 P.2d 774 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“In response, PUC opened this “own motion” rate case pursuant to ORS 756.515. 1 The case was docketed as UT 85.”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Katz, 853 P.2d 1346 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
“” ORS 756.515(4). ORS 756.515(6) provides: “[I]f the commission receives a request for hearing * * * the order is suspended pending the outcome of the hearing unless the commission finds that the order is necessary for the public health or safety or to prevent the dissipation of…”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 872 P.2d 21 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
“Pursuant to ORS 756.515(1), PUC opened an “own motion” rate case to determine if Pacific Northwest Bell (PNB) had excessive rates.”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 826 P.2d 105 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“89-1044 pursuant to ORS 756.515(4), and in October, 1989, PNB sued to vacate the order in the Circuit Court for Multnomah County.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.515(5) — 1 case
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Eachus, 898 P.2d 774 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“In response, PUC opened this “own motion” rate case pursuant to ORS 756.515. 1 The case was docketed as UT 85.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 756.515(6) — 1 case
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Katz, 853 P.2d 1346 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
“” ORS 756.515(4). ORS 756.515(6) provides: “[I]f the commission receives a request for hearing * * * the order is suspended pending the outcome of the hearing unless the commission finds that the order is necessary for the public health or safety or to prevent the dissipation of…”
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.