Court Opinion

ID: 9792637
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:32:32.124351+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:44.086790
License: Public Domain

Justice ERICKSON
concurring in the result:
I concur with the result reached by the majority. I write separately to emphasize the reasons that compel the affirmance of the Public Utilities Commission of Colorado (PUC).
In my view, the decision by the PUC to establish mandatory measured service rates for shared tenant service (STS) providers and to continue mandatory measured service rates for public access line (PAL) service is strongly supported by the distinction that STS and PAL are resale services and arbitrage in a regulated market is not in the public interest. STS and PAL providers extend resale service that is unlike the service offered by an entity that is directly regulated by the PUC because “resellers can set their own rates and change them at will, choose the markets in which they wish to do business, and enter and leave those markets at will.” Colorado Office of Consumer Counsel v. Public Util. Comm’n, 786 P.2d 1086, 1092 (Colo.1990). Therefore, the PUC was correct in finding STS and PAL services are distinguishable from services for which the PUC sets a flat rate.
Accordingly, because there is substantial evidence in the record to support the PUC in either establishing or maintaining mandatory measured service rates for PAL and STS, I concur in the result reached by the majority.