SUGGESTED PROCEDURE 163 



it was impossible to adhere to the suggestion that the domestic rate be 

 but twice the commercial rate, and the Commission agreed with us that 

 it would be disastrous to the community if the rate should be so changed as 

 to increase materially the industrial service rate which is now approximately 

 six cents per thousand gallons, compared with the thirty-three cent rate per 

 thousand gallons upon the domestic service. To have materially raised the 

 manufacturing rate would unquestionably have involved the loss of the ser- 

 vice of the large steel mills, one of which, for instance, is now paying $10,000 

 annual revenue, which business shows the company a profit over the 

 cost of the service, and the loss of which would increase the domestic con- 

 sumers' burden. 



Suggested Procedure. The following outline, in very general 

 terms, may be helpful in cases where detailed calculations like 

 those described in the following chapters are not feasible, and 

 as an aid in checking such calculations after they have been made. 



Where the cost of the distribution system, or a large part of 

 it, is assessed upon the abutters when pipes are laid, as is done 

 in Philadelphia, Milwaukee, St. Paul, Seattle and Los Angeles, 

 then there appears to be no reason for using the sliding scale, 

 and a uniform rate should be used. 



Where the distribution system is paid for by the water depart- 

 ment in the usual way, a moderate amount of slide in the scale 

 seems to produce rates that are most equitable to all. Where 

 the water itself is more than usually expensive, either because 

 of costly works for storage, or transportation, or because of 

 Dumping and purification expenses, the amount of slide will be 

 relatively small. Where the source of supply is near at hand, 

 and cheap, and water is delivered at less than average expense, 

 the cost of distribution becomes the principal part of the whole 

 cost of furnishing water, and the amount of slide will be relatively 

 great. 



In the former cases slides in ratios ranging from i to 1.3 

 to i to 1.6, in the latter cases from i.o to 1.5 to i to 2.0, more 

 or less, would seem to be about the ranges that on present evi- 

 dence would include the greatest number of cases. 



When rates are drawn up in this way, if it appears that the 

 manufacturing rate is considerably greater than the rates that 

 are actually paid by the largest consumers, the question may be 



