Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000054 78

Image

File
Download upr000054-078.tif (image/tiff; 26.59 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000054-078
    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

    Hr. Reinhardt #5 billed for this service prior to January 1, 1952. fbe water company has no outstanding bills for undercharge®. Item 5. Page 13. The Commission finds that the Las Veg&a Land and Water Company | should in equity reimburse those customers who have paid for sefvlflt under the 1951 schedule of Bates $21 (effective s»ept. X* 1951) cooling water for refrigeration machines* fhe amount collected for refrigeration and air conditioning subsequent to Sept. 1, 1951 under Rate m to June 30, 1953 amounts to $2350.70 which includes $2!**8.5© now being held in a aeparat# water company account, the difference of 1202.20 represents amount paid by consumers during the period Sept, 1 to Dec.. 31# 1951* Referring to the last paragraph of the Commission’s order on Page 1? which states that “the Las ?egas Land and Water Company is authorized to refund any overcharges and waive any undercharges for this type of service which may have occurred prior to the effective date of this order”. I believe that my comments under Items 2 to 5 inclusive of Commission’s findings will furnish the information required by the above mentioned paragraph. It is my thought that the question as to whether refunds authorised by the Commission j should or should not be made, should be decided by the legal depart- 1 sent and executives of the Water Company• L , R. Haag Enel. LRM/tp