it becomes unnecessary for the Commission to make any order in the above-entitled proceeding for the determination of just compensation for the taking of property which has been acquired through a different procedure; and such proceeding should, therefore, be dismissed.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, That the above-entitled proceeding instituted for the purpose of determining the just compensation for the taking by the city of Marinette of the property of the City Water Company of Marinette be and the same is hereby dismissed.

[CA-471]

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE WINTER ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY FOR AUTHORITY TO EXTEND ITS LINES IN THE TOWNS OF WINTER AND DRAPER, SAWYER COUNTY

Decided August 12, 1937

WINTER ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY authorized to operate as a public electric utility in the town of Draper, Sawyer County, and to extend its lines into that town, as indicated. No authorization required for further extension in the town of Winter, Sawyer County.

OPINION AND ORDER

The Winter Electric Light and Power Company filed with the Commission on May 28, 1937, an application for authority to extend its electric lines in the town of Winter and into the town of Draper, Sawyer County. The company does not operate and render service in the town of Draper.

On May 6 the Commission had received a letter from the Draper Town Board which stated that a rural electrification project in the town had been abandoned and what purported to be a franchise granted to the Winter Electric Light and Power Company. A copy of a purported franchise was filed with the Commission on August 6.

Under provisions of General Order 2-U-965 (13 P.S.C. of W. 539) the Commission notified the Rural Electrification Coordination of the company's application. A waiver of objection was filed by the Coordination on June 3. Such

waiver would have operated to permit the company to proceed with its construction without further Commission authorization except for the fact that the company is not rendering service in the town of Draper. With respect to that feature of the application public hearing was therefore considered desirable under provisions of Section 196.49 (1), Statutes, and Rule 1 of General Order 2-U-20 (6 P.S.C. of W. 484). Notice of such hearing was issued June 23.

No one appeared at the hearing, held pursuant to such notice, in Madison on July 1. Through correspondence with the company the Commission has subsequently secured facts needed to make a determination in this matter, while applicable rates and rules for customers to be served have been formulated in conferences of the company and Commission staff members. These rates and rules were filed by the company on August 6.

A provision of the rules is that the company will invest an average of up to $300 per customer of its own funds in construction of rural lines.

The application in this proceeding states the company's intention to build 24 miles of line to serve 61 urban and 79 rural customers in the towns of Winter and Draper. The urban customers reside in the unincorporated communities of Loretta and Draper. Of the 140 customers to be served 82 are in the town of Draper, where 4.5 miles of line are proposed to be built this year; 61 of these 82 are urban and 21 are rural customers. The company plans further construction in the town in 1938, but such construction is not included in the present application.

Objection having been waived by the Coordination under General Order 2-U-965 to the company's application, further Commission authorization is not required for the construction in the town of Winter. We shall so find.

The line in Draper for which authority is sought would follow Highway 70 east from the town line through the community of Loretta and end in the hamlet of Draper. Rural customers residing in sections 2-9, inclusive, township 39 north, range 4 west, would also be served from the line.

Construction costs of three-phase line are estimated at $800 a mile and of single-phase line at $650 by the company,

so that the average cost per customer will be about $160, and no customer-contributions will be required. With urban and rural customers separated, the average cost of rural line alone is calculated by the company to be $218 per customer while the average investment per urban customer is estimated at $33.

No written customer-agreements have been made, but prospective consumers have been solicited and contracts will be signed before service is connected, the company states. Construction will be financed by short-term notes which may later be converted into capital stock or mortgage bonds. The Commission's approval will be required under the provisions of Chapter 184, Statutes, for any securities that may be issued by the company.

The company states that it has promised to give service in the Loretta-Draper area by August 31, 1937.

We think it proper to point out that under the decision of the Supreme Court of this state in South Shore Utility Co. v. Railroad Commission, 207 Wis. 95, towns are not authorized to grant franchises to public utilities, and that, accordingly, the Commission does not consider that the applicant will hereafter be operating in the town of Draper under any indeterminate permit resulting from the franchise which the Town Board of Draper attempted to grant.

The Commission has met and considered all the facts presented in this matter and makes the findings and determinations hereinafter stated.

THE COMMISSION THEREFORE FINDS AND DETERMINES:

1. That objection has been waived by the Rural Electrification Coordination to the application of the Winter Electric Light and Power Company in this docket, and that therefore under General Order 2-U-965 no further Commission authorization is required for construction of lines in the town of Winter, Sawyer County, in which the company now operates.

2. That public convenience and necessity require that the Winter Electric Light and Power Company be granted a certificate of authority under Section 196.49 (1), Statutes, and General Order 2-U-20 to operate as a public electric utility in the town of Draper, Sawyer County, Wisconsin.

3. That public convenience and necessity require that the company be granted authority under Section 196.49, Statutes, and General Order 2-U-20 to extend its electricdistribution system in sections 2-9 inclusive, township 39 north, range 4 west, all in the town of Draper, Sawyer County, Wisconsin.

4. That completion of such project will not impair the efficiency of the company's service, will not provide facilities unreasonably in excess of probable future requirements, and will not, when placed in operation, add to the cost of service without proportionately increasing the value or available quantity thereof.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, That Winter Electric Light and Power Company be and hereby is granted a certificate of authority to operate as a public electric utility in the town of Draper, Sawyer County, Wisconsin.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That the company be and hereby is authorized to extend its electric-distribution system as described in Finding No. 3.

[CA-486]

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE WISCONSIN POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY FOR AUTHORITY TO TRANSACT BUSINESS AS A PUBLIC UTILITY IN THE TOWNS OF DAYTON, MARSHALL, AND ROCKBRIDGE, RICHLAND COUNTY, WISCONSIN

Decided August 12, 1937

WISCONSIN POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY authorized to operate as a public electric utility in certain sections of the towns of Rockbridge, Dayton, and Marshall, Richland County, as herein set forth. In all other respects, application denied.

1. Commission—Jurisdiction-Electric-Utility Extensions-Hearing of

Evidence-Co-operatives

Objection of counsel for the company and for petitioners to the participation of the electric co-operative association in this proceeding was overruled, the Commission maintaining that although it had no jurisdiction to enforce its orders as to a private citizen, it should and would hear such citizen or group of citizens as an electric cooperative association in a proceeding involving a determination as to

whether public convenience and necessity requires the issuance of a certificate under Section 196.49, Statutes, and General Order 2-U-20 which provide that a utility may not begin to operate or render service in a municipality without first having secured a certificate of authority from the Commission.

OPINION AND ORDER

This proceeding was initiated before the Commission. with a complaint filed July 2, 1937, by Norris E. Maloney, Madison, as attorney for the Richland Cooperative Electric Association, that Wisconsin Power and Light Company had begun construction of a distribution line in the town of Marshall, Richland County, where the company does not operate nor render service, without having complied with the requirements of Section 196.49 (1), Statutes, and General Order 2-U-20 (6 P.S.C. of W. 484) to secure a certificate of authority from the Commission.

On the morning of July 3 a company official advised Commissioner Robert A. Nixon orally that instructions had been given company employees to discontinue construction work in the towns of Marshall and Dayton, Richland County, until proper authority should be secured from the Commission. Just before the Commission offices closed on July 3 the company filed an application which became the subject of this proceeding.

On July 12 the Commission issued a notice of hearing. A hearing was held at Richland Center on July 19.

Present: Commissioner Nixon.

Appearances:

Wisconsin Power and Light Company, by R. J. Sutherland, Madison, attorney, and B. E. Miller, Madison, Secretary.

Richland Cooperative Electric Association, by Norris E. Maloney, Madison, attorney, and A. Vernon Miller, Richland Center, president.

George Fogo et al., petitioners, by Levi H. Bancroft, Richland Center, attorney.

Mr. Maloney's complaint of July 2 stated that the cooperative had planned to build a line along County Trunk A where the company had begun construction but that through an error the co-operative had failed to include the area in the maps filed June 4, 1937, under provisions of Section