Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.140

Depreciation accounts; use of certain undepreciated investment in rates

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

      757.140 Depreciation accounts; use of certain undepreciated investment in rates. (1) Every public utility shall carry a proper and adequate depreciation account. The Public Utility Commission shall ascertain and determine the proper and adequate rates of depreciation of the several classes of property of each public utility. The rates shall be such as will provide the amounts required over and above the expenses of maintenance, to keep such property in a state of efficiency corresponding to the progress of the industry. Each public utility shall conform its depreciation accounts to the rates so ascertained and determined by the commission. The commission may make changes in such rates of depreciation from time to time as the commission may find to be necessary.

      (2) In the following cases the commission may allow in rates, directly or indirectly, amounts on the utility’s books of account which the commission finds represent undepreciated investment in a utility plant, including that which has been retired from service:

      (a) When the retirement is due to ordinary wear and tear, casualties, acts of God, acts of governmental authority; or

      (b) When the commission finds that the retirement is in the public interest. [Amended by 1971 c.655 §87; 1989 c.956 §2]

 

      757.145 [Repealed by 1971 c.655 §250]

 

      757.150 [Repealed by 1971 c.655 §250]

 

      757.155 [Amended by 1971 c.655 §90; renumbered 757.480]

 

      757.160 [Amended by 1971 c.655 §91; renumbered 757.485]

 

      757.165 [Amended by 1971 c.655 §92; renumbered 757.490]

 

      757.170 [Amended by 1971 c.655 §93; renumbered 757.495]

 

      757.175 [Amended by 1971 c.655 §94; renumbered 757.500]

 

      757.180 [Amended by 1971 c.655 §21; renumbered 756.115]

 

RATE SCHEDULES; MEASURING EQUIPMENT

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1960–2016 · leading case: Citizens' Utility Board v. Public Utility Commission
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Citizens' Utility Board v. Public Utility Commission (1998) orctapp · cites it 27× “2 The preexisting part of the statute, now codified as ORS 757.140(1), provides: “Every public utility shall carry a proper and adequate depreciation account.”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp · cites it 11× “The retirement of Trojan resulted in the first core dispute: a lengthy, complex controversy over whether and to what extent PGE could recover its remaining undepreciated investment in the plant under ORS 757.140(2). That statute permitted the PUC to “allow in rates” amounts that…”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2014) or · cites it 5× “The Court of Appeals consolidated the two appeals and analyzed the two statutes at issue — ORS 757.140(2), which addressed the inclusion of undepreciated investments in rates, and ORS 757.”
Dreyer v. Portland General Electric Co. (2006) or · cites it 5× “355 (1993), a statute that Oregon voters had approved in 1978 as a ballot initiative, 3 CUB argued that PGE could not include a return on its Trojan investment in its rate base, even if ORS 757.140(2) permitted it to recover its undepreciated investment in the plant in its rates.”
Utility Reform Project v. Oregon Public Utility Commission (2007) orctapp · cites it 3× “In response, the legislature enacted ORS 757.140(2), which provides: “In the following cases the [PUC] may allow in rates, directly or indirectly, amounts on the utility’s books of account which the [PUC] finds represent undepreciated investment in a utility plant, including…”
Portland General Electric Company v. United States (1960) ord “The subject of depreciation is provided under ORS 757.140. Under the regulatory processes, for the years in question, the Utilities Commissioner had determined the lives of property and also the rate of depreciation.”
Dudley v. Jenks (2000) or · cites it 3× “…“Be It Enacted' by the People of the State of Oregon: “SECTION 1. ORS 757.140 is amended to read: “757.140. (1) Every public utility shall carry a proper and adequate depreciation account. The Public Utility Commission shall ascertain and determine the proper and…”
Wah Chang v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp “355 and ORS 757.140(2)”). As described above, Wah Chang offers various reasons why it was error for the PUC to reject its petition for relief based on the criteria in ORS 757.”
Utility Reform Project v. Oregon Public Utility Commission (2016) orctapp “Public Utility Commission">962 P2d 744 (1998), rev dismissed, 335 Or 91 (2002) (Trojan I), we concluded that ORS 757.140(2) and ORS 757.355 (1993) 1 authorized a return of PGE’s principal investment in the retired facility, but not a return on its investment in the retired…”
Gearhart v. PUC (2014) or · cites it 5× “The Court of Appeals consolidated the two appeals and analyzed the two statutes at issue—ORS 757.140(2), which addressed the inclusion of undepreciated investments in rates, and ORS 757.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.140(1) — 1 case
Citizens' Utility Board v. Public Utility Commission (1998) orctapp “2 The preexisting part of the statute, now codified as ORS 757.140(1), provides: “Every public utility shall carry a proper and adequate depreciation account.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.140(2) — 8 cases
Citizens' Utility Board v. Public Utility Commission (1998) orctapp “2 The preexisting part of the statute, now codified as ORS 757.140(1), provides: “Every public utility shall carry a proper and adequate depreciation account.”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2013) orctapp “The retirement of Trojan resulted in the first core dispute: a lengthy, complex controversy over whether and to what extent PGE could recover its remaining undepreciated investment in the plant under ORS 757.140(2). That statute permitted the PUC to “allow in rates” amounts that…”
Gearhart v. Public Utility Commission (2014) or “The Court of Appeals consolidated the two appeals and analyzed the two statutes at issue — ORS 757.140(2), which addressed the inclusion of undepreciated investments in rates, and ORS 757.”
Dreyer v. Portland General Electric Co. (2006) or “355 (1993), a statute that Oregon voters had approved in 1978 as a ballot initiative, 3 CUB argued that PGE could not include a return on its Trojan investment in its rate base, even if ORS 757.140(2) permitted it to recover its undepreciated investment in the plant in its rates.”
Utility Reform Project v. Oregon Public Utility Commission (2007) orctapp “In response, the legislature enacted ORS 757.140(2), which provides: “In the following cases the [PUC] may allow in rates, directly or indirectly, amounts on the utility’s books of account which the [PUC] finds represent undepreciated investment in a utility plant, including…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.140(2)(b) — 1 case
Utility Reform Project v. Oregon Public Utility Commission (2007) orctapp “In response, the legislature enacted ORS 757.140(2), which provides: “In the following cases the [PUC] may allow in rates, directly or indirectly, amounts on the utility’s books of account which the [PUC] finds represent undepreciated investment in a utility plant, including…”
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.