Texas Codes
Tex. Util. Code § 31.001 (2026)
Legislative Findings; Purpose Of Subtitle
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 31.001. LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS; PURPOSE OF SUBTITLE. (a) This subtitle is enacted to protect the public interest inherent in the rates and services of electric utilities. The purpose of this subtitle is to establish a comprehensive and adequate regulatory system for electric utilities to assure rates, operations, and services that are just and reasonable to the consumers and to the electric utilities.
(b) Electric utilities are by definition monopolies in many of the services provided and areas they serve. As a result, the normal forces of competition that regulate prices in a free enterprise society do not always operate. Public agencies regulate electric utility rates, operations, and services, except as otherwise provided by this subtitle.
(c) The wholesale electric industry, through federal legislative, judicial, and administrative actions, is becoming a more competitive industry that does not lend itself to traditional electric utility regulatory rules, policies, and principles. As a result, the public interest requires that rules, policies, and principles be formulated and applied to protect the public interest in a more competitive marketplace. The development of a competitive wholesale electric market that allows for increased participation by electric utilities and certain nonutilities is in the public interest.
Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 166, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: Sw. Elec. Power Co. v. Grant, 73 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. 2002).
Sw. Elec. Power Co. v. Grant, 73 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. 2002). “" Tex. Util.Code § 31.001(a). Because electric utilities were regional and service monopolies, the PURA authorized the PUC to regulate utilities as a substitute for competitive forces.”
City of Corpus Christi v. Pub. Util. Comm'n of Texas, 51 S.W.3d 231 (Tex. 2001). “We are troubled by the appearance of haste in proceedings as significant as these, but we cannot say, on balance, that the Cities were denied constitutional due process. .Former Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat. Ann.”
Bexar Metro. Water Dist. v. City of Bulverde, 156 S.W.3d 79 (Tex. App. 2005). “2004) (court found Public Utility Commission was given exclusive jurisdiction because Public Utility Regulatory Act stated its purpose was to "establish a comprehensive and adequate regulatory system" and stated "the Commission has exclusive original jurisdiction over the rates,…”
Jenkins v. Entergy Corp., 187 S.W.3d 785 (Tex. App. 2006). “V, § 8; Tex. Util. Code Ann. §§ 31.001 , 32.001 (Vernon 1998).”
Elec. Reliability v. Just Energy, 57 F.4th 241 (5th Cir. 2023). “” Tex. Util. Code § 31.001(a); accord §§ 31.”
Dallas Area Rapid Transit v. Oncor Elec. Delivery Co., 331 S.W.3d 91 (Tex. App. 2010). “The source of the PUC's power is clearly stated in the Public Utility Regulatory Act ("PURA"), which states in part, "The purpose of this subtitle is to establish a comprehensive and adequate regulatory system for electric utilities to assure rates, operations and services that…”
Kevin Ellis v. Reliant Energy Retail Servs., LLC, 418 S.W.3d 235 (Tex. App. 2013). “Tex. Util.Code Ann. § 31.001(a) (West 2007) (emphases added).”
Elec Reliability Council v. Phillips, 101 F.4th 369 (5th Cir. 2024). “” Tex. Util. Code § 31.001(a). Part of PURA’s purpose is to develop “a competitive wholesale electric market that allows for increased participation by electric utilities.”
Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. Auchan USA, Inc., 995 S.W.2d 668 (Tex. 1999). “While it is true that when Auchan’s outage occurred, the Utility Code expressly recognized that the electric utility industry “is becoming a more competitive industry that does not lend itself to traditional electric utility regulatory rules, policies, and principles,” Tex.…”
Pub. Util. Comm'n v. City Pub. Serv. Bd. of San Antonio, 109 S.W.3d 130 (Tex. App. 2003). “Laws 3972 , 3988-89 (codified at Tex. Util.Code Ann. § 31.001(c)). The centerpiece of PURA 95’s wholesale-deregulation scheme is a requirement that electric utilities provide open access to their transmission facilities.”
Oncor Elec. Delivery Co. LLC v. Giovanni Homes Corp., 438 S.W.3d 644 (Tex. App. 2014). “” Tex. UtiLCode Ann. § 31.001(a). Except as otherwise provided by the PURA, “[p]ublic agencies regulate electric utility rates, operations, and services.”
Sw. Elec. Power Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n of Texas, 419 S.W.3d 414 (Tex. App. 2011). “*426 Tex. Util.Code Ann. § 31.001(c) (West 2007).”
— Tex. Util. Code § 31.001(a) — 16 cases
Sw. Elec. Power Co. v. Grant, 73 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. 2002). “" Tex. Util.Code § 31.001(a). Because electric utilities were regional and service monopolies, the PURA authorized the PUC to regulate utilities as a substitute for competitive forces.”
Elec. Reliability v. Just Energy, 57 F.4th 241 (5th Cir. 2023). “” Tex. Util. Code § 31.001(a); accord §§ 31.”
Dallas Area Rapid Transit v. Oncor Elec. Delivery Co., 331 S.W.3d 91 (Tex. App. 2010). “The source of the PUC's power is clearly stated in the Public Utility Regulatory Act ("PURA"), which states in part, "The purpose of this subtitle is to establish a comprehensive and adequate regulatory system for electric utilities to assure rates, operations and services that…”
Kevin Ellis v. Reliant Energy Retail Servs., LLC, 418 S.W.3d 235 (Tex. App. 2013). “Tex. Util.Code Ann. § 31.001(a) (West 2007) (emphases added).”
Elec Reliability Council v. Phillips, 101 F.4th 369 (5th Cir. 2024). “” Tex. Util. Code § 31.001(a). Part of PURA’s purpose is to develop “a competitive wholesale electric market that allows for increased participation by electric utilities.”
— Tex. Util. Code § 31.001(b) — 5 cases
Sw. Elec. Power Co. v. Grant, 73 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. 2002). “" Tex. Util.Code § 31.001(a). Because electric utilities were regional and service monopolies, the PURA authorized the PUC to regulate utilities as a substitute for competitive forces.”
City of Corpus Christi v. Pub. Util. Comm'n of Texas, 51 S.W.3d 231 (Tex. 2001). “We are troubled by the appearance of haste in proceedings as significant as these, but we cannot say, on balance, that the Cities were denied constitutional due process. .Former Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat. Ann.”
Data Foundry, Inc. v. City of Austin, Texas (Tex. 2021).
City of Houston v. Centerpoint Energy Houston Elec., LLC (Tex. App. 2012).
— Tex. Util. Code § 31.001(c) — 5 cases
Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. Auchan USA, Inc., 995 S.W.2d 668 (Tex. 1999). “While it is true that when Auchan’s outage occurred, the Utility Code expressly recognized that the electric utility industry “is becoming a more competitive industry that does not lend itself to traditional electric utility regulatory rules, policies, and principles,” Tex.…”
Pub. Util. Comm'n v. City Pub. Serv. Bd. of San Antonio, 109 S.W.3d 130 (Tex. App. 2003). “Laws 3972 , 3988-89 (codified at Tex. Util.Code Ann. § 31.001(c)). The centerpiece of PURA 95’s wholesale-deregulation scheme is a requirement that electric utilities provide open access to their transmission facilities.”
Sw. Elec. Power Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n of Texas, 419 S.W.3d 414 (Tex. App. 2011). “*426 Tex. Util.Code Ann. § 31.001(c) (West 2007).”
North Star Steel Texas, Inc. v. Entergy Gulf States, Inc., 33 F. Supp. 2d 557 (S.D. Tex. 1998).
Sw. Elec. Power Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n of Texas (Tex. App. 2011).
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.