Commission Orders Establishing PAYS® Precedents

 Four states—New Hampshire, Kansas, Kentucky, and Hawaii—have authorized PAYS® tariffs. All were for state-regulated utilities. Additionally, a municipality approved a PAYS® tariff for its municipal water utility in California. Here is a list of attached Commission orders noting the highlights.

New Hampshire:

Order 23574 page 18 Section G discussion of Pay As You Save® and why it should be considered

Order 23758 was the order in which the NHPUC ruled it had the power to have charges run with the meter and disconnect for non-payment

Order 23851 was the NHPUC’s approval of the Pilots prepared by the Energy Efficiency Institute, Inc. (EEI) and filed by two utilities, New Hampshire Public Service and New Hampshire Electric Cooperative

Order 24417 required both utilities to continue offering PAYS over their and other NH utilities’ objections


The Kansas Corporations Commission first ruled on 8/16/07 in Dockets No. 07-MDWG-784-TAR and 07-MDWE-788-TAR its approval of MidWest Energy’s filing of a PAYS tariff (How$mart Approvalf)

On December 20, 2007, the KCC reconsidered its 8/16/07 order and reapproved its decision to authorize Midwest Energy to offer a PAYS® Tariff with Disconnection for Non Payment. (KCC-Reconsideration)


Inasmuch as the Commission was ordered by State Statute to implement PAYS® the Commission’s anger at being forced to implement the tariff may be understandable and this order does not offer much. However, in its October 24, 2006 Order No. 22974, it does cite its authority to implement PAYS® instead of just citing its obligation under state law. In its June 29, 2007 Order No. 23531, the Commission’s anger at being forced to implement these programs seems to be reflected in a somewhat illogical order, but there is one important statement on page 35. The Commission actually states disconnection for non-payment is sound public policy:

Indeed, by paying for the SWH system on their utility bills, the participating customers are effectively paying for electricity because the SWH systems result in electricity savings. Therefore, the commission finds that the disconnection of service for non-payment of the SWH system charges results in sound public policy.

On February 1, 2013, Hawaii’s Public Utilities Commission in Order No. 30974 closing Docket 2011-0186 made Hawaii the first state in the nation to authorize a state-wide tariffed on-bill financing program. The order reads: “The commission concludes that any on-bill financing program should be structured as a service and tariff-based 2011-0186 30 program, rather than a loan-based program. (pp. 30 – 31).


Four public power utilities filed an application to operate pilot programs, Case No. 2010-00089, based on the PAYS® system serving a total of 200 – 300 customers split among the utilities depending upon demand for the program.

In spite of objections by the Attorney General, in its order, the Commission approved the pilot programs because they were voluntary tariffs and only 90% of the savings were allocated to pay back installation costs. (2010-00089_PSC_ORDER)


The Michigan Commission issued an order from addressing the PAYS® system. Its order helps with one of the two key issues: disconnection for non-payment. In its order of September 26, 2006 in Docket U-13808, the Michigan PSC approved what it called a PAYS tariff (in violation of US Trademark law) without the charges running with the meter. Ironically, it permitted disconnection for non-payment.