CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC v. Public Utility Commission, 354 S.W.3d 899

PURA 39.905 imposes energy-efficiency goals and EECRF to recover expenditures; statutory amendments added EECRF and true-up (b‑1) requirements.
The Commission amended rule 25.181 in 2008 to implement EECRF for timely cost recovery of energy-efficiency expenditures.
In 2010 the Commission proposed amendments including an optional LRAM to recover lost revenues; CenterPoint supported LRAM.
The Commission declined to include an LRAM, asserting lost revenues are not energy-efficiency costs recoverable through EECRF.
CenterPoint appealed directly, challenging rule 25.181’s validity and the Commission’s authority under PURA 39.905.
The court assesses statutory construction de novo to determine whether LRAM is authorized or required.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is LRAM required by PURA 39.905 in Rule 25.181?	CenterPoint: statute requires LRAM in EECRF	CenterPoint contends EECRF must include lost-revenue recovery	No; lost revenues are not costs; EECRF recovers expenditures only
Did the Commission err in not adopting LRAM due to its interpretation of PURA 39.905?	CenterPoint: Commission misinterpreted authority	Commission appropriately limited to expenditures under PURA 39.905	Commission acted within statutory authority; LRAM not authorized

Office of Pub. Util. Counsel v. Public Util. Comm'n, 104 S.W.3d 225 (Tex.App.-Austin 2003) (validity scrutiny; agency rule within statutory scope)
City Pub. Serv. Bd. v. Public Util. Comm'n, 53 S.W.3d 310 (Tex.2001) (agency authority and statutory interpretation)
GTE-Southwest v. Public Util. Comm'n, 901 S.W.2d 401 (Tex.1995) (agency authority; implied powers)
Sheshunoff v. Sheshunoff, 172 S.W.3d 686 (Tex.App.-Austin 2005) (same-term usage governs interpretation of statute terms)
First American Title Ins. Co. v. Combs, 258 S.W.3d 627 (Tex.2008) (statutory interpretation; plain meaning controls)