Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

PIKE COUNTY LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY -- ELECTRIC DIVISION v. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION (09/22/83)

decided: September 22, 1983.

PIKE COUNTY LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY -- ELECTRIC DIVISION, PETITIONER
v.
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission in case of Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Milton Staub, County of Pike, Walter W. Cohen, Consumer Advocate, J. O. Ryder Rendering Co., Inc. v. Pike County Light and Power Company, No. R-821857, dated October 15, 1982.

COUNSEL

Gerald A. Maher, with him Andrew Gansberg, Bruce V. Miller, Robert M. Axelrod and Paula Silberthau, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae, and Christopher Zettlemoyer, Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, for petitioner.

John F. Povilaitis, Assistant Counsel, with him Charles F. Hoffman, Chief Counsel, David A. Christiansen, Assistant Counsel, and Albert W. Johnson, Deputy Chief Counsel, for respondent.

H. Kay Dailey, Assistant Consumer Advocate, with her Philip F. McClelland, Assistant Consumer Advocate, and Walter W. Cohen, Consumer Advocate, for intervenor, Office of Consumer Advocate.

Timothy F. Nicholson, Adler, Nicholson, Claraval & Magdule, for Amicus Curiae, Pennsylvania Gas Association.

Gerald Gornish, Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen, for intervenor, J. O. Ryder Rendering Co., Inc.

President Judge Crumlish, Jr., and Judges Rogers, Blatt, Williams, Jr. and Doyle. Opinion by Judge Doyle.

Author: Doyle

[ 77 Pa. Commw. Page 270]

This is an appeal by Pike County Light and Power Company (Pike) of an order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) which disallowed $597,917.00 of purchased power expense in the settling of rates under Pike's Supplement No. 12 to its Tariff Electric-Pa. P.U.C. No. 7.*fn1 We affirm.

[ 77 Pa. Commw. Page 271]

Pike operates in the vicinity of the boroughs of Matamoras and Milford in the County of Pike, Pennsylvania and serves approximately 2,548 residential customers, 426 general service customers, 4 municipal street lighting customers, and 77 private area lighting customers.*fn2 Pike is a subsidiary of Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. (Orange & Rockland), a New York State operating utility. Pike's power supply is provided by the parent company through a Power Supply Agreement filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Pursuant to an investigation of Pike's proposed tariff supplement, three days of evidentiary hearings were held before an administrative law judge and a record consisting of more than 200 pages of testimony, statements and exhibits was developed. On August 13, 1982, the administrative law judge submitted a Recommended Decision to the PUC, concluding that Pike's reliance on Orange & Rockland as a source of power represented an abuse of management discretion in consideration of available, alternative, more economical, supplies of electricity. Accordingly, Pike's purchased power expense was reduced $597,917.00. This resulted in a revenue increase of $361,000.00 to Pike, rather than the $438,500.00 sought in the tariff supplement.

By order adopted October 1, 1982, and entered October 15, 1982, the PUC adopted the findings and conclusions of the administrative law judge with the exception of certain mathematical errors ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.