OCR Text |
Show The Utah Enterprise Review . February 2, 1977 Page 4b FREE PICKUP & DELIVERY Paper Banners Screen Process Graphic Design Magnetics Decals Convention Signage Machine Showcards & 2365 So. Main Give and Take Policy Guides Negotiations Utility-Consum-er The process of sitting down with responsible attorneys was fruitful. We had time to talk things over. I hope we can do more of it in the future." That was the response EXECUTIVE DESKS art fftedhnccstdl ptrnces! CHAIR WASS102 now 72 of Ray Groussman, Mountain Fuel attorney, to the process he engaged in with attorneys from Utah Power and Light, the Utah Welfare Rights Organization, and the Department of Public UtiliGroussmans sentities. ments were echoed by all the other lawyers, and were probably reflected in the outcome of the talks: a final draft of proposed residential utility service regulations, with which all parties generally agree. The new proposal creates fairly uniform policies regarding termination of service, deposit requirements and grievance procedures for customers. It is quite different from the original draft, submitted to the Commission in November. At the November hearing, when the original draft was considered, the utility companies and the consumer organization announced an agreement to enter into good faith negotiations" to draft a new proposal. Public Service Commission Chairwoman Milly Bernard said the negotiation was an innovation, and a credit to all parties. pre-heari- ng Only two parts of the final proposal met with disagreement, and only one company dissented. Mountain Fuel could not accept the introductory policy statement that residential utility service is a necessity of contemporary life." Accord ing to Groussman, he could accept the statement if the word energy were substituted for residential utility service." Another part of the proposal Groussman rejected was the requirement for a utility to continue providing service to a customer while that customer w'as disputing The the utilitys charge. hearing could take weeks or over a month, and in that time quite a bill could be run up," Groussman said. The areas of disagree- ment will be aired before the Public Service Commission, who will make the final decision. A date has not yet been set for the hearing. The final proposal differs substantially from the original one, mainly by giving more latitude to the utilities. We compromised on both sides," Groussman summarized, and we spent much of the time explaining our current practices. We found there wras a great deal of misunderstanding by the consumers about our present practices." The time period allowed for disconnecting service was shortened. The number of notices required before disconnection was lessened. Mountain Fuel was allowed to require a S30 security deposit under certain cir- cumstances (the original proposal w'ould have prohibited all deposits). The proposed grievance procedure wras simplified, to require only that a "representative of the Commission" hear complaints, rather than establishing a new Basil's Wupfxt - Bronze Aneiqrcssionuf punudite dgance and cGqnmi. AlfnedBarae, nmdL Jnnch ftnimaGfaseuirbr of w JUO.O 0 , . vh Phone: 96 1. . 399-I- 33. OU 3LC UiaH |