Printable Format66-101d. Same; investigations initiated by commission; powers; hearings. The commission, upon its own initiative, may investigate all schedules of rates and rules and regulations of electric public utilities. If after investigation and hearing the commission finds that such rates or rules and regulations are unjust, unreasonable, unjustly discriminatory or unduly preferential, the commission shall have the power to establish and order substituted therefor such rates and such rules and regulations as are just and reasonable.
If after investigation and hearing it is found that any regulation, measurement, practice, act or service complained of is unjust, unreasonable, unreasonably inefficient or insufficient, unduly preferential, unjustly discriminatory, or otherwise in violation of this act or of the orders of the commission, or if it is found that any service is inadequate or that any reasonable service cannot be obtained, the commission shall have the power to substitute therefor such other regulations, measurements, practices, service or acts, and to make such order respecting any such changes in such regulations, measurements, practices, service or acts as are just and reasonable. When, in the judgment of the commission, public necessity and convenience require, the commission shall have the power to establish just and reasonable concentration or other special rates, charges or privileges, but all such rates, charges and privileges shall be open to all users of a like kind of service under similar circumstances and conditions.
Hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Kansas administrative procedure act, unless, in the case of a general investigation, for good cause, the commission orders otherwise.
History: L. 1911, ch. 238, § 13; R.S. 1923, 66-110; L. 1985, ch. 225, § 25; L. 1988, ch. 356, § 220; L. 1995, ch. 10, § 3; L. 1997, ch. 132, § 5; July 1.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Costs and expenses of investigation and regulation, see chapter 66, article 15.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Corporation Commission Practice," John E. Davis, 37 J.B.A.K. 87, 88 (1968).
"Utility Regulation and the Political Process," Sid Shapiro, 33 K.L.R. 491, 494 (1985).
"Retail Electric Competition in Kansas: A Utility Perspective," Sonnet C. Edmonds, 37 W.L.J. 603 (1998).
Attorney General's Opinions:
Public utilities; powers of KCC over municipal franchises and ordinances. 84-54.
KCC; powers; rules and regulations; gas or electric public utilities; nonregulated private enterprises. 95-65.
Electric public utilities; legislative intervention into private utility contracts; authority of corporation commission. 97-47.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. "Unreasonable, unjust, oppressive and unlawful" not synonymous with "confiscatory." Railroad Co. v. Utilities Commission, 95 Kan. 604, 612, 148 P. 667.
2. Telephone rates adjudged void; private company to promulgate own rates; adequate remedy before utilities commission; injunction will not lie. City of Hutchinson v. Bell Telephone Co., 109 Kan. 545, 550, 200 P. 301.
3. Section cited in determining jurisdiction to establish telephone rate. State, ex rel., v. Telephone Co., 115 Kan. 236, 277, 223 P. 771.
4. Jurisdictional requirements to change of rates considered. Consolidated Flour Mills Co. v. Kansas Gas and Elec. Co., 119 Kan. 47, 237 P. 1037.
5. Rate base hearing hereunder not mandatory for increase requested under 66-117. City of McPherson v. State Corporation Commission, 174 Kan. 407, 412, 413, 414, 417, 432, 257 P.2d 123.
6. Existing rates must adversely affect public interest to justify rate change; rates filed presumed reasonable on failure of commission to investigate. Central Kansas Power Co. v. State Corporation Commission, 181 Kan. 817, 825, 826, 827, 829, 316 P.2d 277.
7. Action to recover intrastate railroad-car rental charges; charges legal under commission's order. Keeler Co. v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Rly. Co., 187 Kan. 125, 128, 354 P.2d 368.
8. Invalid preliminary orders of commission cannot be enjoined. State Corporation Comm. v. Wichita Gas Co., 290 U.S. 561, 54 S. Ct. 321, 322, 324, 78 L.Ed. 500.
9. Jurisdiction of corporation commission over sale of part of interstate pipe line and to require oil company to continue to buy oil discussed. Sinclair Pipe Line Company v. Snyder, 147 F. Supp. 632, 634.
10. Discussed in determining "just and reasonable rates" means more than "nonconfiscatory." Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. State Corporation Commission, 192 Kan. 39, 43, 84, 89, 90, 386 P.2d 515.
11. In action charging termination procedures violated due process, court held statute provides adequate procedural remedies. Stanford v. Gas Service Company, 346 F. Supp. 717, 719.
12. Customers of utility companies had remedy in state courts and could not bring action in federal court; action challenging legality of late assessment charges. Tennyson v. Gas Service Co., 506 F.2d 1135, 1136.
13. Commission findings supported by evidence; court could not substitute its judgment for that of commission on appeal. Kansas-Nebraska Natural Gas Co. v. State Corporation Commission, 217 Kan. 604, 612, 538 P.2d 702.
14. Action under antitrust laws for damages and injunctive relief; compliance with section noted; under facts, doctrine of primary jurisdiction not applicable; jurisdictional appeal. Litton Systems, Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 539 F.2d 418, 419.
15. Franchise fee extended to electric utility held analogous to a "sales tax"; not an impermissible exaction. United States v. City of Leavenworth, Kan., 443 F. Supp. 274, 276, 282.
16. Rate established by commission was not unlawful and unreasonable; commission did not have to establish "lifeline rate." Ash Grove Cement Co. v. Kansas Corporation Commission, 8 Kan App. 2d 128, 131, 650 P.2d 747 (1982).
17. Rates exacted by public utility must be just and reasonable; rules of construction of public utility tariff; judicial review of order of KCC. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n, 233 Kan. 375, 377, 664 P.2d 798 (1983).
18. Granting same increase received by interstate operation from FERC for lack of intrastate cost documentation held reasonable. MAPCO Intrastate Pipeline Co. v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n, 10 Kan App. 2d 527, 535, 704 P.2d 989 (1985).
19. Power to substitute rates operates prospectively under statute. Kansas Gas & Electric Co. v. Kansas Corp. Comm'n, 14 Kan App. 2d 527, 532, 794 P.2d 1165 (1990).
20. No discrimination in failure to disclose and apply tariff to plaintiff; legally filed tariff constitutes constructive notice. Grindsted Products, Inc. v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n, 262 Kan. 294, 309, 937 P.2d 1 (1997).
21. Intervenor not served with order had burden to become informed about status of case; limitations on participation proper. Farmland Industries, Inc. v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n, 24 Kan App. 2d 172, 183, 943 P.2d 470 (1997).