2017 ORS 758.450¹
Contract required for allocation of territory
  • prohibited activities
  • exceptions
  • third party financing

(1) Territory served by more than one person providing similar utility service may only become an allocated territory by a contract approved by the Public Utility Commission.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, no other person shall offer, construct or extend utility service in or into an allocated territory.

(3) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, during the pendency of an application for an allocation of exclusively served territory, no person other than applicant shall offer, construct or extend utility service in or into the territory applied for; nor shall any person, without the express consent of the commission, offer, construct or extend utility service in or into any unserved territory which is the subject of a filing pending before the commission under ORS 758.420 (Filing of contract) or 758.435 (Application for allocation of territory).

(4) The provisions of ORS 758.400 (Definitions for ORS 758.015 and 758.400 to 758.475) to 758.475 (Fees) do not apply to any corporation, company, individual or association of individuals providing heat, light or power:

(a) From any energy resource to fewer than 20 customers, if it began providing service to a customer prior to July 14, 1985;

(b) From any energy resource to fewer than 20 residential customers so long as the corporation, company, individual or association of individuals serves only residential customers;

(c) From solar or wind resources to any number of customers; or

(d) From biogas, waste heat or geothermal resources for nonelectric generation purposes to any number of customers.

(5) Nothing in subsection (4) of this section shall prohibit third party financing of acquisition or development by a utility customer of energy resources to meet the heat, light or power requirements of that customer. [Formerly 757.652; 1981 c.360 §2; 1985 c.779 §2]

Notes of Decisions

Municipalities are subject to exclusive territorial alloca­tion statutes and, although cities have certain authority to regulate public utilities, they may not compete with exclusive provider in allocated territory by reason of their regulatory authority. Pacificorp v. City of Ashland, 88 Or App 15, 744 P2d 257 (1987), as modified by 89 Or App 366, 749 P2d 1189 (1988), Sup Ct review denied

City may provide utility services in territory allocated to an­oth­er provider pursuant to these sec­tions if it exercises authority under ORS 221.420 (Municipal regulation of public utilities) to exclude or eject provider from territory, however, city’s mere place­ment of utility facilities and pro­vi­sion of services in territory is not exercise of that authority and is viola­tion of alloca­tion statutes in absence of formal ac­tion by city to eject or exclude provider. PacifiCorp v. City of Ashland, 89 Or App 366, 749 P2d 1189 (1988), Sup Ct review denied

Order of Public Utility Commission issued in conjunc­tion with agree­ment between electric companies to exchange electric facilities within certain defined areas did not authorize monopoliza­tion of service. Pacificorp v. Portland General Electric Co., 770 F Supp 562 (1991)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Constitu­tionality of alloca­tion statutes as applied to people’s utility districts, (1987) Vol 45, p 209

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 758—Utility Rights of Way and Territory Allocation; Cogeneration, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors758.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 758, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano758.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.