Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000341 133

Image

File
Download upr000341-133.tif (image/tiff; 23.09 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000341-133
    Details

    Rights

    This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.

    Digital Provenance

    Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

    Publisher

    University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

    Thursday, August lkt 1952 PSC Approves CARSON CITY, Aug. 14 (UP) I—The Nevada, public service 5 commission today approved an­other 20 per cent increase in Las Vegas water rates. The commission filed in diS' jtrict court its decision after re-j viewing new evidence submitted by the Las Vegas Land and Wa­ter Co. in a court challenge of the agency’s earlier action in granting it only ten per cent of a requested 42 per cent rate hike. The new 20 per cent boost brings to 32 per cent th'e total j water rate increase for Las Ve- !gas consumers since the com­pany originally sought to raise its rates by 42 per cent. In granting the new increase, the commission observed that it agreed with District Judge Clark J. Guild Sr. in that “it is particularly, unfortunate that this exhibit (the new evidence and testimony) was not given to the PSC originally.” The commission said that in considering the matter again it had viewed t h e water produc­tion facilities and the distribu­tion company as a single unit, despite the contention of the ap­plicant that this could not be done. The water company is a subsidiary of the Union Pacific railroad. The water company had claimed the value of 677 acres of water-bearing land in the Las Vegas^as $488,650 but, the com­mission ’said it could find only 240 acres directly related to wa­ter production. In reaching its rate decision, the commission valued this acreage at only $24,- 000. Kfi The commission found that the water company showed a net of 2.72 per cent for 1951, including four months with the original 10 per cent increase' Had the 10 per cent rate hike been in effect dur­ing all of 1951, the commission noted, the operating profit would have been 3.42 per cent. The commission said it felt a 20 per cent increase over the firm’s present; water rates— which include the original ten per cent boost—would return the company a net operating profit of 5.65 per cent which was (described as “fair and equita- Ible.” | The decision listed the com- Ibined valuation of the company’s | production and distribution sys­te m s as $1,197,220. | The commission considered las entirely written off water | pipelines built during World [War II to serve a defense hous­ing project in the. Las. Vegas larea. The company contended it entitled &o list this as an expense in asking the rate increase.