AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc., a generation and transmission cooperative (G&T Coop), owned by forty-four distribution cooperatives, sells electric power exclusively to its members in four states. In 2012, Tri-State's board approved a new revenue requirement and rate design for 2013, replacing the old rate design. Upon filing the new rate design with the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, three of Tri-State's New Mexico members protested the new rates, leading to the Commission suspending the 2013 rate design and setting a hearing to consider its reasonableness. Tri-State then proposed interim rates for protesting and non-protesting members, which the Commission rejected, leading to this appeal (paras 2-6).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Tri-State): Argued that the Commission exceeded its statutory authority by rejecting the proposed interim rates and that the Order was arbitrary or contrary to law (para 6).
• Appellee (New Mexico Public Regulation Commission): Contended that Tri-State's interim rates were unreasonably discriminatory and that Tri-State failed to meet the interim rate pleading burden imposed by Commission regulation (paras 11, 28).
• Appellee (Kit Carson Electric Cooperative, Inc.): Filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the grounds that the Order was not final and that the appeal was moot (para 36).

Legal Issues

• Whether the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission exceeded its statutory authority by rejecting Tri-State's proposed interim rates (para 6).
• Whether the Commission's Order was arbitrary or contrary to law (para 6).
• Whether the Order was final and if the issues on appeal were moot (para 36).

Disposition

• The Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico vacated the Commission’s March 13, 2013, Order in Case No. 13-00037-UT and remanded for any proceedings necessary to comply with the opinion (para 38).

Reasons

• The Court, per Justice Daniels, found that the Commission's rejection of Tri-State's interim rates without a hearing violated Section 62-6-4(D) of the Public Utility Act, which requires a hearing on the reasonableness of protested rates. The Court determined that the Commission's authority over G&T Coops like Tri-State is more limited than its powers over public utilities and that the interim rates proposed by Tri-State were not unreasonably discriminatory as a matter of law. The Court also rejected the mootness claim by Kit Carson and denied its motion to dismiss, stating that the issues presented were capable of repetition yet evaded review and required resolution for future guidance (paras 11-37).