Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-08-07
Optional UTILITY
RATESARE PROBED
Conflicting Views Expressed
on Practice OF Making Sew
eraI Different Schedules.
Ry GEORGE z. RnYING.

D~ NEOG0E =. EOAAN0.
Much interest is shown by public util-
ity operators in the conflicting views c'a
the use OF optional rates as expressed IN
orders Of the public service commissions
of Pennsylvania and New York. The
subject also holds considerable interest
to many industrial users OF electricity
and gas
optional rate schedules generally are
filed BY public utility for the purpose
of providing a rate that viii attract
business which the utility otherwise cam
not secure. or to retain certain Gus
toners who contemplate q change Of
service because they can, or think they
can, save money.
Practice Generally Approved.
The practice of filing optional rate
schedules is generally approved by the
State regulatory commissions but ncverr
theless affords opportunities for dis
elimination. The customary theory Is
that It is UP TO the consumer to asceTe
tain for himself the best rate applicable
TO his business and II he guesses wrong
it's just too bad. and nothing can be
done about It except to let him change
to another schedule for the future.
Some utilities when they adopt an
optional schedule make a survey Of their
customers who might be affected, and,
at least for some of such customers, VIII
Other utilities. however, file number
Of riders" along with an optional
schedule, so that the average corsumaT
not versed in the technicRlities Of the
situation is unlikely to note that such
schedule would reduce hts bills. :.
The Pennsylvania commission has de-
clared with some emphasis that IL IS
not the duty Of a public utility to detef-
mine for its customers which of two
lunar
| monthly bills. The rates are on file AMI
open to public inspection, the commits
sion said in effect, and each customer
must investigate for himself.
The New York commission, howevers
takes q directly contrary view. and m
the particular case under consideration
ordered the Long Island Lighting Co.
to submit a new schedule ESTABLISHING o
single rste applicable to all customers
In the same class.
Change Held Unlikely.
public utilities" the commission said.
ARE under the legal obligation to charge
every consumer in class the same rate.
AS a matter of fact, it is admitted that
under optional rates customers using
exactly the same amount Of gas or ele-
triity and in the same months are
charged different rates. The only 6e-l
tense is that an option has been given
the customer; that If he does not accept
the most advantageous rate it is his
fault, and that he must keep informed
Of his options at all times and act
wisely.
IF this be sound, II is obviously q
severe criticism of optional rates. It
may be a move to shift responsibility
placed by law upon the utility COM
panies from their shoulders to custom
ers But If the responsibility Is so
shifted, and If utilities are under no OBJ
| legations to guard against such obvious
| improper charges as in the case now
before us, 1t may well be that optional
rates should be declared unreasonable
and improper. and that the commission
should announce its opposition TO such
rates"
widespread adoption of the principle
suggested by the New York commission
would be exceedingly embarrassing TO
the gas and electric utilities particularly
those with large industrial consumers.
out it is not expected that such a change
is likely to be made as general policy.
tcopyriglt, ias19