Cohen v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge Barry,
553 C.D. 1983
The Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA) appeals a final order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) which permitted inclusion in its rate base of the co.st of construction of four cancelled nuclear plants by Duquesne Light Company (Duquesne).
In 1967, Duquesne became a member of the Central Area Power Coordination Group (OAPOO)1 which *102developed a plan to construct seven nuclear power plants. In January, 19-80, CAP00, however, cancelled plans to construct four nuclear plants. At that time Duquesne’s share of the expended cost was $34,697,-389.00.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Philadelphia Electric Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- United States Steel Corp. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- UGI Corp. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Chappell v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Bell Telephone Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Duquesne Light Co. v. BaraschSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United Services Automobile Ass'n v. MuirCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
- Barasch v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- People's Organization for Washington Energy Resources v. Utilities & Transportation CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1985
- United Services Automobile Association v. William J. Muir, IiiCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.