While it does not stipulate that CP&L will derive from its service to Acme a fair return upon that portion of its total rate base attributable to such service, Lumbee does not allege the contrary. Lumbee does not proceed here upon that theory. We are not, however, presently required to determine whether, as such customer, it may bring a proceeding before the Utilities Commission to prevent CP&L from constructing an extension of CP&L's facilities on the theory that such extension will be unprofitable and, therefore, may, at some future date, make it necessary for CP&L to charge Lumbee rates higher than CP&L would otherwise need in order to earn a fair return on the fair value of CP&L's total plant. We are not required to determine whether Acme could compel an unwilling CP&L to serve it. They have entered into a contract for such purchase and sale. McLean & Stacy, Lumberton, for intervenor appellee.Īcme desires to purchase from CP&L the electric power it requires for the operation of its manufacturing plant. Reid Thompson, Raleigh, for Carolina Power & Light Co., appellee. Ford, Associate Commission Atty., Raleigh, for North Carolina Utilities Commission, appellee. *667 Crisp, Twiggs & Wells, Raleigh, for appellant.Įdward B. LUMBEE RIVER ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION, Appellant. UTILITIES COMMISSION, and Carolina Power & Light Company and Acme Electric Corporation and Acme Electric Corporation of Lumberton, North Carolina, Appellees,
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |