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757.145 [Repealed by 1971 c.655 §250]
757.150 [Repealed by 1971 c.655 §250]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
Citizens' Util. Bd. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 962 P.2d 744 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· 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. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 299 P.3d 533 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
· 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. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 356 P.3d 216 (Or. 2014).
· 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 Gen. Elec. Co., 142 P.3d 1010 (Or. 2006).
· 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.”
Util. Reform Proj. v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 170 P.3d 1074 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
· 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 Gen. Elec. Co. v. United States, 189 F. Supp. 290 (D. Or. 1960).
“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, 10 P.3d 257 (Or. 2000).
· cites it 3× “ORS 757.140 is amended to read: “757.140.”
Wah Chang v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 301 P.3d 934 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“For one, Wah Chang argues that ORS 757.230 is triggered only by a tariff filing and does not apply to a subsequent *163 challenge to the reasonableness of the special tariff rates.”
Util. Reform Proj. v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 372 P.3d 517 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“PUC, 154 Or App 702, 716-17 , 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 (Or. 2014).
· 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' Util. Bd. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 962 P.2d 744 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“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' Util. Bd. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 962 P.2d 744 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“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. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 299 P.3d 533 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“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. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 356 P.3d 216 (Or. 2014).
“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 Gen. Elec. Co., 142 P.3d 1010 (Or. 2006).
“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.”
Util. Reform Proj. v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 170 P.3d 1074 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“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
Util. Reform Proj. v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 170 P.3d 1074 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“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.