Fortnightly Magazine - September 1 1995

Traditional utility regulation has been unable to prevent the electric rates of some utilities from rising far above those of neighboring companies. Two factors are responsible for this failure. First, regulators lack the means to keep seemingly reasonable but unnecessary costs from creeping into rates. Second, ratemaking considers a utility's costs in isolation and does not use peer benchmarks to true up rates.

Political pressure helped limit rate increases for nuclear plants during the 1980s.

While setting a new gas cost adjustment rate for Delmarva Power & Light Co., a combined electric and gas utility, the Delaware Public Service Commission (PSC) found the utility's unaccounted-for-gas incentive program unnecessary because it had accomplished its objective, as evidenced by a steady decline in the rate of unaccounted-for gas. The PSC approved a $300,000 incentive award for the current adjustment. Re Delmarva Power & Light Co., PSC Dkt. No. 94-123F, March 21, 1995 (Del.P.S.C.).In another case, the PSC allowed Chesapeake Utilities Corp.

The Arizona Corporation Commission (CC) has approved new rules that allow telephone companies to provide basic dial tone service in competition with existing monopoly providers. The competitive companies may also provide intraLATA toll service.

Following an established policy disallowing rate recovery of executive incentive compensation awards, the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has rejected ratepayer funding for a salary plan administered by GTE Hawaiian Telephone Co., Inc. The PUC denied the carrier's attempt to differentiate its executive incentive plan by asserting that the plan was not a "bonus or extra compensation," but part of a total salary package set at a level competitive with market compensation.