Except as provided in § 56-265.4:4, no certificate shall be granted to an applicant proposing to operate in the territory of any holder of a certificate unless and until it shall be proved to the satisfaction of the Commission that the service rendered by such certificate holder in such territory is inadequate to the requirements of the public necessity and convenience; and if the Commission shall be of opinion that the service rendered by such certificate holder in such territory is in any respect inadequate to the requirements of the public necessity and convenience, such certificate holder shall be given reasonable time and opportunity to remedy such inadequacy before any certificate shall be granted to an applicant proposing to operate in such territory. For the purposes of this section, the transportation of natural gas by pipeline, without providing service to end users within the territory, shall not be considered operating in the territory of another certificate holder.
1950, p. 600; 1984, c. 382; 2014, cc. 467, 507.
Notes of Decisions
Va. Elec. & Power Co. v. State Corp. Comm'n, 810 S.E.2d 880 (Va. 2018).
· cites it 2× “See Code §§ 56-265.4, 56-577(A). Direct Energy Services, LLC ("DES") is licensed as a competitive service provider ("CSP"), which allows it to sell electricity to customers located in another utility's service territory under certain circumstances.”
N. Virginia Elec. Coop. v. Virginia Elec. & Power Co., 576 S.E.2d 741 (Va. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Code § 56-265.4 prohibits a utility from providing service in another util *369 ity’s certificated service territory unless the utility proves to the Commission’s satisfaction that the other utility is incapable of providing adequate service, but only after the other utility is…”
RCC of Virginia, Inc. v. Roanoke & Botetourt Tel. Co., 288 S.E.2d 478 (Va. 1982).
· cites it 4× “” The Commission further stated that one telephone company could not “move into” the certificated territory of a second telephone company to provide service unless it proceeded under Code § 56-265.4, which required proof that the second company was rendering inadequate service.”
VEPCO v. State Corp. Comm'n (Va. 2018).
· cites it 2× “See Code §§ 56-265.4, 56-577(A). Direct Energy Services, LLC (“DES”) is licensed as a competitive service provider (“CSP”), which allows it to sell electricity to customers located in another utility’s service territory under certain circumstances.”
Potomac Edison Co. v. Town of Luray, 362 S.E.2d 678 (Va. 1987).
· cites it 2× “So far as appears from the record and argument on appeal, neither the 1951 franchise nor “any contract in pursuance thereof’ contained a provision authorizing the Town to acquire Potomac Edison’s plant and property upon termination of the franchise.”
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.