The "Best Location" Standard and PUC Review of Proposed Transmission Line Routes: In Re Bangor Hydro-Electric

Forty-five years after the enactment of legislation delegating eminent domain authority to electric power companies, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court had its first opportunity in In re Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. to construe the statute's grant of review authority to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Rejecting the "arbitrary and capricious" review standard previously applied by the PUC, the court held that the statute required the Commission to determine whether the utility's chosen location "best serves the public interest." Under the former standard, the utility had been required to present only minimal evidence in support of its choice of location in order to obtain PUC approval. But the new standard established in Bangor Hydro-Electric compels the utility to present far more evidence in support of its choice, and also requires the PUC to evaluate that evidence to ensure that the site selected is the best location in the public interest. This Note suggests that the court should have retained the "arbitrary and capricious" standard, but increased its effectiveness by raising the quantum of evidence on the existence and character of alternative routes that the utility must produce in order to meet its burden of going forward.

Publication Details

Journal
eYLS (Yale Law School)
Published
2025-04-08
Primary Topic
Magnetic confinement fusion research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The "Best Location" Standard and PUC Review of Proposed Transmission Line Routes: In Re Bangor Hydro-Electric

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Magnetic confinement fusion research
article

The "Best Location" Standard and PUC Review of Proposed Transmission Line Routes: In Re Bangor Hydro-Electric

article en

Abstract

Forty-five years after the enactment of legislation delegating eminent domain authority to electric power companies, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court had its first opportunity in In re Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. to construe the statute's grant of review authority to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Rejecting the "arbitrary and capricious" review standard previously applied by the PUC, the court held that the statute required the Commission to determine whether the utility's chosen location "best serves the public interest." Under the former standard, the utility had been required to present only minimal evidence in support of its choice of location in order to obtain PUC approval. But the new standard established in Bangor Hydro-Electric compels the utility to present far more evidence in support of its choice, and also requires the PUC to evaluate that evidence to ensure that the site selected is the best location in the public interest. This Note suggests that the court should have retained the "arbitrary and capricious" standard, but increased its effectiveness by raising the quantum of evidence on the existence and character of alternative routes that the utility must produce in order to meet its burden of going forward.

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Openalex Percentile: Top 36%
Magnetic confinement fusion research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The "Best Location" Standard and PUC Review of Proposed Transmission Line Routes: In Re Bangor Hydro-Electric · eYLS (Yale Law School) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS