Abstract
As the prospect of competition has gained salience with regard to the electricity industry in the United States, a number of transitional issues have garnered substantial attention. Certainly among the leaders, if not the leader, is the extent to which policy makers should impose ex post fees in the competitive environment to provide utility stockholders with revenues to cover the otherwise not recovered ex ante costs of generator investments and power purchasing contracts made during the regulatory era.
Discussions with Paul Kleindorfer, Dale Lehman, Colin Loxley, Molly Macauley, Glenn Meyers, Karen Palmer, Richard Simnett, and Tom Spavins were quite helpful. Errors of commission and omission remain the author’s sole responsibility.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brennan, T. 1991. “Depreciation, Investor Compensation, and Welfare Under Rate-of-Re-turn Regulation,” Review of Industrial Organization 6: 73–87.
Brennan, T. 1996. “Is Cost-of-Service Regulation Worth The Cost?” International Journal of the Economics of Business 3: 25–42.
Brennan, T. and J. Boyd. 1995. “Political Economy and the Efficiency of Compensation for Takings,” Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 95–128: Washington, DC.
Brennan, T. and J. Boyd. 1997. “Stranded Costs, Takings, and the Law and Economics of Implicit Contracts,” Journal of Regulatory Economics 11: 41–54.
Council of Economic Advisers. 1996. Economic Report of the President. Washington: Government Printing Office.
Council of Economic Advisers. 1997. Economic Report of the President. Washington: Government Printing Office.
Department of Energy. 1998. Comprehensive Electricity Competition Plan, http://www.hr.doe.gov/electric/cecp.htm.
Federal Communications Commission. 1996. The First Report & Order In the Matter of Implementation of the Local Competition Provisions in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, FCC 96–325.
Iowa Utilities Board v. FCC. 1996. Order Granting Stay Pending Judicial Review. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, Docket No. 96-3321, slip op., filed Oct. 15, 1996.
Linhart, P. and J. Weber. 1997. “On Cost-Based Pricing for Regulation,” Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, Alexandria, VA.
Moore, W. 1998. “Identification and Recovery of Stranded Costs for Electric and Telephone Utilities,” Rutgers University Western Advanced Regulatory Workshop, Monterey, CA.
Palmer, K. 1992. “A Test for Cross Subsidies in Local Telephone Rates: Do Business Customers Subsidize Residential Customers?” RAND Journal of Economics 23: 415–435.
Sidak, G. and D. Spulber. 1997. Deregulatory Takings and the Regulatory Contract. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
U. S. Congress. 1996. Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brennan, T.J. (1999). Comparing “Stranded Cost” Arguments in Telecommunications and Electricity. In: Crew, M.A. (eds) Regulation Under Increasing Competition. Topics in Regulatory Economics and Policy Series, vol 30. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5117-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5117-1_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7328-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-5117-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive