consideration of utility’s cost of equity, allowance for attrition, working capital requirements for ratemaking purposes
How later courts described this case
- consideration of utility’s cost of equity, allowance for attrition, working capital requirements for ratemaking purposes
- decisions of other jurisdictions' regulatory commissions may be persuasive precedent in Maine
- PUC interpretation of regulations
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
NICHOLS and ROBERTS, Justices,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
We respectfully disagree with the Court’s disposition of the issue discussed in Part I of the opinion. We are persuaded that the Legislature has not authorized the Commission to implement public policy relating to conservation and cogeneration by the method utilized by the Commission in this case. In the absence of such authority, that method should not be condoned by the Court. In all other respects we concur with the opinion of the Court.