"Because of the `block' system of plant construction, Central Maine Power has available plant capacity which can be used to serve the load added through the promotional program. We are satisfied that the findings of the Commission are fully supported by credible evidence. The respondent's witnesses expressed concern with respect to a decline in its percentage increase in sales of kilowatt hours to residential customers in 1963, a trend which it sought to correct by an authorized decrease in rates and by an active promotional campaign of which the allowance program formed a part.
Statistical evidence tended to support these opinions and conclusions. The respondent's officer in charge of sales testified that the increasing of sales of electricity through promotional programs makes possible greater utilization of existing facilities, thereby spreading capital costs and lowering unit costs to the benefit of all customers that the cost of the entire allowance program should be recovered within eleven months by additional revenue produced after meeting incremental (fuel) costs that the allowances were reasonable in amount both in relation to other legitimate promotional expenses of the company and when compared to the programs of other regulated utilities and that the program was effective in increasing sales. It was his opinion that as a result of its normal program of construction the respondent has available capacity in all such facilities to serve any additional load added through the promotional program at only the incremental or fuel cost required to produce the additional kilowatt hours. it is currently making a cash payment of ten dollars to the purchase price of a quick recovery electric water heater to be installed in its service area."Ī witness who serves the respondent as "operating engineer-electrical" testified that maximum economies are achieved in the electric utility business when generating, transmission, distribution and transformation facilities are added to a system in large enough "blocks" or units to provide for both operating efficiency and future growth. it is currently making a cash allowance of ten dollars per kilowatt of permanently installed electric heating equipment to the owner of a home which is built for or converted to the use of electricity as the primary method of heating.ĭ. it is currently making a cash allowance of seventy-five dollars to those only of its residential customers who change an existing service entrance to one of 200-ampere capacity and initially add at least one of the appliances listed in subparagraph (a) hereof.Ĭ. it is currently making a cash allowance of fifty dollars to those only of its residential customers who change an existing service entrance to one of 100-ampere capacity and add at least one of the following 240-volt appliances: water heater, range with surface *201 unit and oven, dryer, combination washer-dryer, a 120-volt freezer, or a combination refrigerator with a zero degree freezer.ī. The Commission described the promotional allowances in question as follows: This statute provides: "If any public utility makes or gives any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, firm or corporation or any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in any respect whatever, such public utility shall be deemed guilty of unjust discrimination which is prohibited and declared unlawful." (Emphasis ours) They assert that these practices are "unreasonable, unlawful and unjustly discriminatory" and thus in violation of 35 M.R.S.A.
They complain that as rate-payers they are aggrieved by a practice instituted by the respondent of offering certain promotional allowances designed to encourage and promote increased use of electric energy by residential customers. Complainants are all residential customers of the respondent utility and are all connected with the fuel oil business. This is an appeal from a decision of the Public Utilities Commission taken pursuant to 35 M.R.S.A. J., and WEBBER, TAPLEY, MARDEN, RUDMAN and DUFRESNE, JJ. Amero, Portland, for defendant.īefore WILLIAMSON, C. Brewster, Augusta, Pierce, Atwood, Scribner, Allen & McKusick by Vincent L.