There is an unfair advantage in using the name of a 140-year-oldutility when marketing gas in Georgia, the state public servicecommission ruled Friday, ordering Atlanta Gas Light Services (AGLS)to market gas in the state under a different brand until AtlantaGas Light Co. exits the merchant function.

The commission, however, will allow the utility affiliate to usea disclaimer revealing that it is another subsidiary of AGLResources. But it also must remind customers it gains no advantageover other marketers through that affiliation.

The PSC’s decision followed an appeal by AGLS of a June 23decision by a PSC hearing officer. Hearing Officer Philip Smithruled the marketing affiliate could not use “Atlanta Gas Light” inits name because it would “mislead the public.” Smith said the useof the name violated the standards of conduct set out in GeorgiaNatural Gas Competition and Deregulation Act.

The utility affiliate decided to change its name to Atlanta GasLight Services from The Energy Spring in April, triggering a numberof protests from other marketers. AGLS seems to have intended touse the utility’s name from the beginning, having registered it in1996.

AGLS claimed the hearing officer’s decision actually would”reduce competition in direct violation of the statutory purposesof the [Georgia] natural gas act” when the deregulated market opensthis fall. The company also said the decision was an”unprecedented, over-broad and punitive restriction on freespeech.”

However, the PSC ruled that although depriving the company ofusing the utility name may interfere with its commercial freespeech “such interference is necessary to accomplish thissubstantial interest in promoting market-based competition.”

The commission said it will allow the utility affiliate to use adisclaimer with its new name following the “transition” towardcompetition. It suggested the following: “[the company] is asubsidiary of AGL Resources, Inc. No advantage accrues to customersor others in the use of Atlanta Gas Light Company’s services as aresult of customers dealing with [the company].”

Once competition “has developed beyond its infancy the lessrestrictive means of a disclaimer should be adequate to address thestate’s interest in promoting market-based competition.”

The PSC said it eventually might allow AGLS to use theutility’s name “in a particular delivery group after a finding bythe Commission that adequate market conditions exist and uponAtlanta Gas Light Company ceasing to provide merchant functions inthat delivery group..”

AGLS still vowed to fight the ruling, saying it would “continueto support the consumers’ right to know from whom they buy theirgas as well as a company’s right to use the name to which it islegally entitled…”

Rocco Canonica

©Copyright 1998 Intelligence Press, Inc. All rightsreserved. The preceding news report may not be republished orredistributed in whole or in part without prior written consent ofIntelligence Press, Inc.