El Paso Electric Co. v. Public Utility Commission

The Court withdraws the concurring opinion issued April 5, 1995 and substitutes the following opinion in its place.

In its fourth point of error, EPEC complains that the Commission’s final order is not accompanied by findings of underlying fact that “support” the Commission’s conclusions of law on the ultimate issues of deci-sional prudence and used-and-useful investment as these pertain to Palo Verde Unit 3 and its exclusion from rate base. I would sustain the point of error and remand to the Commission on this basis.

EPEC refers to certain formalities with which agencies must comply in…