380 S.E.2d 825
23031Supreme Court of South Carolina.Heard May 15, 1989.
Decided June 5, 1989.
Edward W. Mullins, Jr., James C. Gray, Jr., John E. Schmidt, III, of Nelson, Mullins, Riley Scarborough, Columbia, and Mark W. Buyck, Jr., of Wilcox, Hardee, McLeod, Buyck, Baker Williams, Florence, for appellant.
Francis P. Mood, Robert W. Buffington, of Sinkler Boyd, Belton T. Zeigler, of Lewis, Babcock Pleicones Hawkins; Patricia T. Smith and H. Thomas Arthur, of S.C. Pipeline Corp., Columbia, for respondent.
Heard May 15, 1989.
Decided June 5, 1989.
Per Curiam:
Affirmed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23. Our reasons are essentially the same as those of the Circuit Court. We reject the argument that the Court applied the wrong standard of review. See S.C. Code Ann. § 58-9-1450 (1976) (“All orders of the Commission shall be deemed prima facie just and reasonable. . . .”); GTE Sprint Communications Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm’n, 288 S.C. 174, 179, 341 S.E.2d 126, 128-29 (1986) (“The Public Service Commission is recognized as the `expert’ designated by the legislature to make policy
Page 348
determinations regarding utility rates; thus, the role of a court reviewing such decisions is very limited.”). We decline to make any legal distinction between transmission service and distribution service. Any such distinction will have to be made, if at all, by the Public Service Commission or the Legislature.