Tex. Codes » Utilities Code · TITLE 2. PUBLIC UTILITY REGULATORY ACT · SUBTITLE B. ELECTRIC UTILITIES · CHAPTER 37. CERTIFICATES OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY

Tex. Util. Code § 37.154

Transfer Of Certificate

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 37.154. TRANSFER OF CERTIFICATE. (a) An electric utility or municipally owned utility may sell, assign, or lease a certificate or a right obtained under a certificate if the purchaser, assignee, or lessee is already certificated by the commission to provide electric service within the same electric power region, coordinating council, independent system operator, or power pool, or if the purchaser, assignee, or lessee is an electric cooperative or municipally owned utility. As part of a transaction subject to Sections 39.262(l)-(o) and 39.915, the commission may approve a sale, assignment, or lease to an entity that has not been previously certificated if the approval will not diminish the retail rate jurisdiction of this state. Any purchase, assignment, or lease under this section requires that the commission determine that the purchaser, assignee, or lessee can provide adequate service.

(b) A sale, assignment, or lease of a certificate or a right is subject to conditions the commission prescribes.

Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 166, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997.

Amended by:

Acts 2019, 86th Leg., R.S., Ch. 44 (S.B. 1938), Sec. 7, eff. May 16, 2019.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2009–2022 · leading case: Public Utility Commission v. Cities of Harlingen
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Public Utility Commission v. Cities of Harlingen (2010) texapp · cites it 6× “onsidered in issuing this Order relate to *616 questions of statutory construction and procedural due process and are therefore reviewed de novo; (2) the Public Utility Commission ("PUC") exceeded its statutory authority by granting Electronic [sic] Transmission Texas, LLC…”
NextEra v. Lake (2022) ca5 “Tex. Util. Code § 37.154(a). But holding that a law complies with the Commerce Clause because an out-of-state firm can obtain the in-state favoritism by acquiring a firm with the required in-state presence would require wiping away a broad swath of dormant Commerce Clause…”
Public Utility Commission of Texas And Electric Transmission Texas, LLC v. Cities of Harlingen, McAllen, Mission, Port L (2010) texapp · cites it 3× “urt considered in issuing this Order relate to questions of statutory construction and procedural due process and are therefore reviewed de novo; (2) the Public Utility Commission ("PUC") exceeded its statutory authority by granting Electronic [sic] Transmission Texas, LLC…”
Public Utility Commission of Texas And Electric Transmission Texas, LLC v. Cities of Harlingen, McAllen, Mission, Port L (2010) texapp · cites it 2× “urt considered in issuing this Order relate to questions of statutory construction and procedural due process and are therefore reviewed de novo; (2) the Public Utility Commission (“PUC”) exceeded its statutory authority by granting Electronic [sic] Transmission Texas, LLC…”
NextEra v. D'Andrea (2022) ca5 “Tex. Util. Code § 37.154(a). But holding that a law complies with the Commerce Clause because an out-of-state firm can obtain the in-state favoritism by acquiring a firm with the required in-state presence would require wiping away a broad swath of dormant Commerce Clause…”
Navo South Development Partners, Ltd. v. Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc. (2009) txed “Tex. Util.Code Ann. § 37.154. Service to be provided shall be safe, adequate, efficient and reasonable.”
— Tex. Util. Code § 37.154(a) — 2 cases
NextEra v. Lake (2022) ca5 “Tex. Util. Code § 37.154(a). But holding that a law complies with the Commerce Clause because an out-of-state firm can obtain the in-state favoritism by acquiring a firm with the required in-state presence would require wiping away a broad swath of dormant Commerce Clause…”
NextEra v. D'Andrea (2022) ca5 “Tex. Util. Code § 37.154(a). But holding that a law complies with the Commerce Clause because an out-of-state firm can obtain the in-state favoritism by acquiring a firm with the required in-state presence would require wiping away a broad swath of dormant Commerce Clause…”
— Tex. Util. Code § 37.154(b) — 1 case
Public Utility Commission v. Cities of Harlingen (2010) texapp “onsidered in issuing this Order relate to *616 questions of statutory construction and procedural due process and are therefore reviewed de novo; (2) the Public Utility Commission ("PUC") exceeded its statutory authority by granting Electronic [sic] Transmission Texas, LLC…”
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.