Opinion ID: 2303572
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Research and Development Expense

Text: The Commission approved Narragansett's inclusion of an item which adjusted its 1972 cost of service by $23,000. This sum was the cost of having a nationally-known research company make a study of the feasibility of installing an automated meter reading system. The Council's expert witness stated that this expense neither benefited the customer nor was related to the test period under study  1972. We see no need to discuss the Commission's finding that the proposed expenditure was related to the betterment of customer service and greater employee productivity. Such a conclusion is warranted by the evidence. The only issue for any extended discussion is the Commission's consideration of a cost factor that postdates the test year. When there is known and measurable change occurring after the test year which would affect with certainty the test-year data, the Commission may give effect thereto. City of Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Util. Comm'n, 187 Pa.Super. 341, 144 A.2d 648 (1958). Such an adjustment is a matter directed to the ratefixer's discretion. The record presented to the Commission showed post-test-year adjustment, whose effect on the test period was known and measurable. Its use by the Commission was proper.