Copyright & Fair-use Agreement
UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Information
Digital ID
Permalink
Details
More Info
Rights
Digital Provenance
Publisher
Transcription
V II - Present Cost of Reproduction MTo Wehe said that he simply wished the cost of reproduction statement previously furnished by Mr. Hulsizer brought up to December 31, 1949, and to be furnished with a general description of the method used in preparing the reproduction cost estimate, along with some detail as to the cost elements that become a part of the estimates. Mr. Hulsizer said that he could furnish this. Ill - Charges Reflected in Capitalized Plant Additions Mr. Wehe advised that all he desired was a general statement as to whether our accounting included any indirect costs, overhead or other arbitrary percentages. Mr. Hulsizer said this could be furnished. B. OPERATING EXPENSE - Las Vegas Land and Water Co. I - General Expenses II III -- TRaexteisrement Expense ^Account 782) There was no particular discussion concerning these items. Mr. Hulsizer stated that the Information called for would be furnished. C. RETIREMENT RESERVES (Account 251) I I - Accrued Depreciation There was no particular discussion of this item. II ~ Amortization (Account 251) There was considerable discussion concerning this item. It was apparently the -understanding of Messrs. Hulsizer and Barnes that the Los Angeles representatives proposed to omit the amortized facilities from the rate base. They were opposed to this and pointed out that there had been substantial deficits In the years in which the facilities were amortized, and that they had not, therefore, been amortized at the expense of the rate payer. We agreed with this view and stated that it had been our intention to include them in the proposed rate base, even though the Commission might not allow this item. Mr. Wehe pointed out that he desired the income tax information for the purpose of making a computation to justify the inclusion of the amortized 2