Court Opinion

ID: 9702063
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 22:52:25.323841+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:33.159627
License: Public Domain

FLAHERTY, Justice,
dissenting.
I agree with the majority that Section 1315, 66 Pa.C.S.A. § 1315, applies to this case, but because this statute became effective only when the case was before Commonwealth Court, no record has been developed before the Public Utility Commission on the applicability of § 1315 to nuclear fuel. We are not benefitted by any expert testimony or by the expert opinion of the Commission in determining wheth*440er nuclear material, a unique substance, can be compared with the traditional sources of energy, such as coal, oil and the like. It may be that the nuclear fuel manufacturing process, or the longevity of nuclear fuel, once manufactured and installed, would cause experts to view nuclear fuel as more a part of the construction of the facility than as a traditional fuel source.
In spite of the fact that the applicability of § 1315 to nuclear fuel is the main substantive issue in the case, the majority disposes of this issue rather summarily, in my view.
Whether the record would establish that nuclear fuel falls within the purview of § 1315 is the crucial question; indeed, the resolution of this question dictates the resolution of the case. Because no factual findings have been made by the Commission on the applicability of § 1315 to nuclear fuel, and there is no record to support any such finding by any tribunal, I would remand to the Commission so that a record can be developed which will enable us to make a more educated determination.