Court Rules in Favor of Edison Co. Over 5 Cities : Litigation: Anaheim and four other cities lost the 12-year-old suit. They claimed the utility overcharged them for electricity and violated antitrust laws.

Southern California Edison Co. has won a 12-year-old lawsuit filed by Anaheim and four other cities which sought $300 million in damages, claiming that the utility overcharged them for electricity and violated antitrust laws by denying them access to transmission lines, officials said Thursday.

The draft decision by U.S. District Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzerin Los Angeles was issued Tuesday and ruled in favor of Edison on all counts in the lawsuit filed by Anaheim, Riverside, Banning, Colton and Azusa. The five cities own their own utilities, purchase power wholesale through Edison and resell it retail to their municipal customers, an Edison spokesman said.

Anaheim had the largest interest in the lawsuit, which was filed in 1978 and reached trial in 1986. If the cities had prevailed, Anaheim’s share of the award would have been about $150 million, said Ray Merchant, communications officer for Anaheim’s Public Utility Department.

“We’re certainly disappointed in the decision,” Merchant said. “We’ve been waiting quite a while for a decision. It’s certainly fair to say we’re disappointed.”

Edison officials, however, hailed the ruling.

“The judge’s ruling emphasizes that Edison has acted to protect the interests of its customers, that Edison has not sought to restrict competition and that Edison’s dealings with the cities have been proper in regard to access to its major electrical transmission lines to the Pacific Northwest,” said Edison Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John E. Bryson in a prepared statement.

The 77-page draft decision is expected to be issued in final form next week, and Merchant said the city’s attorneys need to study it before deciding what the next step will be. Anaheim continues to be interested in using Edison’s transmission lines to deliver electricity purchased from generating plants in the Northwest, he said.

The lawsuit addressed two issues. One was an allegation that Edison “price squeezed” the five municipal utilities by charging them more at wholesale rates than Edison charged some of its customers, such as large industries, at retail rates, Merchant said. He did not know how much the alleged overcharges totaled because the prices varied according to a complex schedule, he said.

The second issue involved the cities’ allegations that Edison violated federal antitrust laws by denying them access to transmission lines, which would have enabled them to buy power from hydroelectric generating plants in the Northwest.

Merchant said Anaheim had arranged to buy power directly from a utility in the Northwest and transmit it as far as Southern California. “But we couldn’t get it the rest of the way home” because Edison denied the city access to its network of transmission lines, called the Pacific Intertie.

“We said no because we needed the capacity for the needs of all of our customers, not just a few,” said Edison spokesman Lewis M. Phelps.

The judge found that Edison had acted properly and that in serving the interests of its own customers, Edison had not violated antitrust laws, Phelps said. If Edison had given the cities the access they requested, costs would have risen for other customers, the judge ruled.

Anaheim’s public utility was established in 1894 and began operating in 1895, buying its power from outside sources and distributing it to city customers, which number 100,000 today.

Until 1975, Anaheim’s utility purchased 100% of its power from Edison, but in the early 1970s began looking elsewhere when Edison began increasing its rates, Merchant said.

Since then, Anaheim has obtained its power from a variety of sources, concentrating on nuclear, coal and hydroelectric, and not relying much on oil. Only 2% of Anaheim’s power now is purchased from Edison.