Cities of Batavia Ill. v. Federal Power Commission, 74-1411
| Citation | 179 U.S.App.D.C. 101,548 F.2d 1056 |
| Decision Date | 04 January 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 74-1411,74-1411 |
| Parties | The CITIES OF BATAVIA ET AL., ILLINOIS, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent, Commonwealth Edison Company, Intervenor. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia) |
Charles F. Wheatley, Jr., Washington, D. C., with whom Grace Powers Monaco, Washington, D. C., was on the brief for petitioners.
James T. McManus, Atty. F. P. C., of the bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, pro hac vice, by special leave of court for respondent. Drexel D. Journey, Gen. Counsel, F. P. C., George W. McHenry, Jr., Sol., at the time the brief was filed, John H. Burnes, Jr., and A. Lee Wallace, Attys., F. P. C., Washington, D. C., also entered appearances for respondent.
Richard G. Ferguson, Paul T. Ruxin and William S. McKay, Jr., Chicago, Ill., were on the brief for intervenor.
Before LEVENTHAL, ROBINSON and WILKEY, * Circuit Judges.
This is a case where cities complained to the Federal Power Commission that the rate charged to them by Commonwealth Edison on interstate sales of electric power subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission were higher than the rates charged by the utility on direct sales to industry, and reflected an anticompetitive program by the utility, one that had the purpose and effect of ousting the cities from sales, on resale, to such industrial consumers. The Commission's order rejecting the complaint appears at 51 F.P.C. 86, rehearing denied 51 F.P.C. 978 (1974), and we see no need to spell out the details of the situation.
The Commission ruled that it had no jurisdiction to consider the level of rates charged by Commonwealth Edison to industrial consumers. All parties agree that this Commission ruling is erroneous under the Conway doctrine. 1
Commission counsel argues that the Commission's order should be affirmed on the basis of the Commission's alternative ground, namely, that there is cost justification for the differential between the rate on sales to the cities, which generally take their peak at the same time as the system peak load, and the rate charged on sales to industrials, which generally take their peak load at times different from the system peak.
Under the Conway doctrine the Commission function extends not only to consideration of the existence of a difference between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional rates, but also to the anticompetitive impact of the particular magnitude of rate differential. The Commission's counsel indicates that the amount of the differential set...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cities of Batavia, Naperville, Rock Falls, Winnetka, Geneva, Rochelle and St. Charles, Ill. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
...customers were price squeezed from the retail market. On the basis of Conway, we remanded, Cities of Batavia v. Federal Power Commission, 548 F.2d 1056 (D.C.Cir.1977) (hereinafter Batavia), and the Commission, finding already submitted evidence sufficient to require further study of the pri......
-
Sugar Bowl Gas Corp. v. Louisiana Public Service Commission
...Cf. Hicks v. City of Monroe Utilities Comm., 237 La. 848, 876, 112 So.2d 635, 645 (1959).22 See, Cities of Batavia et al. v. Federal Power Commission, 179 U.S.App.D.C. 101, 548 F.2d 1056 (1977) which suggests such a justification would exist for a disparity between rates on sales of electri......
-
Illinois Cities of Bethany v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 80-1633
...before proposing new increases, in this era of rising fuel costs and inflation, would be truly unreasonable.34 In Cities of Batavia v. FPC, 548 F.2d 1056 (D.C.Cir.1977), this court considered and remanded to the Commission for reconsideration a price squeeze complaint arising from a ten-mon......