- 82 -
credible evidence that the various Federal and State regulatory
agencies would have denied a rate increase had it retained the
EVC income. Petitioner's primary consideration in setting rates
was fairness and competition, according to its former executives.
Indeed, the testimony of petitioner's former executives indicates
that they could have sought greater rate increases under ZORF
than what was requested and that they were not concerned about
maximizing rates. In November 1984, petitioner sought and
obtained from the ICC and various State regulatory bodies a 5.45-
percent rate increase effective January 1, 1985. Petitioner's
rate increase of 5.45 percent was 4.55 percent less than the
maximum increase allowed by ZORF.
40(...continued)
that such rate is unreasonable on the basis that it is
too high or too low if--,
(A) the carrier notifies the Commission that it
wishes to have the rate considered pursuant to this
subsection; and
(B) the aggregate of increases and decreases in
any such rate is not more than 10 percent above the
rate in effect one year prior to the effective date of
the proposed rate, nor more than 10 percent below the
lesser of the rate in effect on July 1, 1980 (or, in
the case of any rate which a carrier first establishes
after July 1, 1980, for a service not provided by such
carrier on such date, such rate on the date such rate
first becomes effective), or the rate in effect one
year prior to the effective date of the proposed rate.
Page: Previous 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011