Public Service Commission, First District [Vol. 20] ing contained in this order or done by any company in pursuance thereof shall be or be construed to be in derogation of or in substitution for the duty of such company to provide reasonable and adequate service and operate a sufficient number of cars therefor at all times on each of its lines, by running cars or affording service, as needed, in excess of the requirements of such schedules and supplements at the time in force as to such line, or otherwise; and nothing contained in this order or done by any company in pursuance thereof shall be construed to prevent any of the said companies from operating at any time on any line any cars or service in addition to those set forth in the schedules and supplements at the time in force as to such line. Further ordered, That the making and entry of this order, and anything done hereunder, shall be without prejudice to any other or further order in this case or in respect to the subject-matter hereof or of the said schedules, and shall be subject to any further hearing for the purpose of requiring changes in the said schedules of service and operation, or any of them; and it is Further ordered, That this order shall take effect immediately and shall continue in force until changed or abrogated by further order of the Commission and that within five days after the service of this order said companies and each of them shall notify the Commission in writing whether the terms of this order are accepted and will be obeyed. Further ordered, That this order shall supersede and take the place of the order adopted by the Commission herein on March 4, 1918, as amended and modified by orders dated respectively May 7, 1918, and April 14, 1919. EXHIBIT "A" [Vol. 20] Public Service Commission, First District EXHIBIT "B" [Vol. 20] Schedule showing the respective dates on or before which the companies operating the respective lines shall prepare and display in scheduled cars, midnight time-tables as provided in paragraph III of this order. In the Matter of the Complaint of FRANK ROSSOMAGNO against THE BRONX GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY as to Alleged Refusal to Furnish Electric Service to the Premises No. 1653 Barnes Avenue in the Borough of The Bronx, New York City Case No. 2368 (Public Service Commission, First District, June 10, 1919) Electric service - extension of wires for domestic use method of adjusting cost of extension. Complainant's house wired and equipped for electric service is situated about 700 feet from the company's nearest domestic lighting wires. The company refuses service unless complainant makes a deposit of $136.90, no part of which is to be refunded on the basis of his bills for current. Held, that the extension desired by complainant is reasonable and an order will be entered directing the company to extend its wires and to supply electricity to complainant's premises upon the deposit of 50 per cent of the reasonable cost of the extension and that the amount [Vol. 20] Public Service Commission, First District deposited be refunded on the basis of one-half of the monthly bills for current furnished complainant and of the bills of additional consumers who may be served by the extension. NIXON, Commissioner.- The Bronx Gas and Electric Company has refused to furnish electric service to the complainant's residence situated at 1653 Barnes avenue in the borough of The Bronx, unless complainant would deposit in advance the sum of $136.90 no part of which would be refunded to him monthly or otherwise on the basis of his current bills. The residence of complainant, which is a two-family house, wired and equipped for electric service, is located about 700 feet distant from the company's nearest wires suitable for domestic lighting. The company claims that to properly connect these premises it will have to construct approximately 1,600 feet of wire with the necessary attachments at a cost of about $141. At the present time the company's poles and high tension wires used in connection with the public. lighting of Barnes avenue pass in front of complainant's home, but those wires are not adapted for domestic purposes. The company's position as to extensions of this character is stated as follows: "As the operations of the Company for the past two years have not permitted it to make a fair return on its investment and has resulted in a decided loss, it has not been in a position to accept any business involving extensions to the plant, beyond the one hundred feet required by law, unless said extensions were paid for in full by the applicant. * * This company, as its name indicates, carries both a gas and an electric business but its electrical operations must be considered apart from the gas operations. Municipal Gas Company v. Public Service Commission, 225 N. Y. 89, 99-101. An examination of its annual report for the year ending December 31, 1918, which was received in evidence, clearly shows that its electrical business cannot be considered unprofitable. It must be remembered also that this company is the only one serving or claiming a franchise to serve with electricity the eastern section of the borough of The Bronx and its failure to Public Service Commission, First District [Vol. 20] make reasonable extensions in that territory deprives the residents thereof of a service which it alone can give. The company's wires, if constructed to serve complainant's premises, would be adequate to serve other consumers on the line and, according to the complainant, his neighbor on each side and others not far distant have signified their willingness to take electricity if the extension is constructed. It appeared at the hearing that the general practice of electrical corporations within the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission for the First District as to extensions beyond 100 feet of existing wires, is to require the applicant to deposit in advance 50 per cent of the cost of construction and to thereafter refund to him one-half of his current monthly bills until the entire amount of deposit is repaid. I also understand that if any additional consumers are served by the extension those companies allow a further rebate to the original applicant of 50 per cent of the monthly bills of such additional consumers. Such a practice seems to me to be a proper one for the company to follow in this case. The extension desired, in my opinion, is reasonable, and I accordingly direct the entry of an order requiring the Bronx Gas and Electric Company to extend its wires so as to supply with electricity the premises of the complainant upon the deposit by him of 50 per cent of the reasonable cost of the extension to be refunded on the basis of one-half of his current monthly bills and of the bills of any additional consumers that may be later served from the extension. As the facts in the case of Mr. Frank A. Smith of 2447 St. Raymond's Avenue, who with the consent of the company's president, stated his complaint at the hearing in this proceeding, in my opinion justify an extension of the company's services to his premises, I recommend the construction of such an extension upon terms similar to those mentioned in the preceding paragraph of this memorandum. |