Maine Public Service Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
964 F.2d 5 (1992)

- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
In the 1970s, Central Maine Power Company (Central Maine) proposed building a power plant in Maine, inviting utilities across New England to become joint owners contingent upon their joining a pool agreement. Maine Public Service Company (MPSC) (plaintiff) accepted the offer. By the time the plant became operational, however, MPSC had not joined the pool agreement as the other utilities had. MPSC sought an extension for joining the pool, which the other utilities agreed to. Central Maine told MPSC that it would charge $1.6866 per kilowatt per year. A decade passed, and MPSC still failed to join the pool, continuing to seek and receive extensions. Central Maine then filed a petition with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) (defendant). The petition sought to increase the rate that MPSC was charged as a nonpool member from $1.6866 to $15.02. Central Maine explained that it was seeking the increase because it appeared that MPSC would never actually join the pool agreement. The sought increase reflected the costs associated with running the entire network. The FERC granted the request. As a part of its analysis, the FERC estimated that the system was capable of supplying 120 percent of its load; the FERC, however, did not explain why it used that figure, only citing a previous case. The FERC also cursorily dismissed MPSC’s argument that other similarly situated nonpool utilities received discounts for the service that MPSC did not. MPSC petitioned the court to set aside the order, raising a litany of challenges to the FERC’s order. These included claiming that the 120 percent figure and the discriminatory treatment in discounts were not adequately explained.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Randolph, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.