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.
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
Transcription
% inadequate and contrary to the evidence as above stated, and should be at least §138,181.00 higher. 2. The 6% rate of return allowed the Water Company is insufficient and should be at least 6-1/4$. 3. The operating expense allowances of the Water Company are too low to the extent of §56,725.00 (Schedule IV p. 1). A portion of the deficiency in the operating expenses of the Water Company is created by the deficiency and error of §36,654.00 in the joint facility rents allowance made by the Commission. This in turn results from the deficiency and error of more than §311,000.00 in the Railroad Company rate base fixed by the Commission, the failure of the Commission to use a 6-1/4$ rate of return in lieu of a 6% return, and the errors made by the Commission in computing the depreciation and income tax charges reflected in the joint facility allowance. 4. The Commission made a mathematical error of §11,118.00 in computing the revenue required to pay the Water Company the return which the Commission intended to allow it after federal income tax payments. I, ? SUMMARY OF R5SULTS The overall results of the Commissions decision can be summarized as follows: 1. The rates prescribed by the Commission should -8-
