upr000278 104

Mr. B* I* Bennett 33a accordance with Mr. Remick’s telephone call today, I am planning on coming down Friday and should be in your office by 10:00 A.M, in the morning. By that time I trust I may have reviewed the problem of dealing with the economic Impact of bringing water from Lake Meade, if financed by the Las Vegas Land and later Company or its principals. Respectfully Submitted, RAWsw P Se A copy of the California Public Utilities decision on the ASuoguutshte r2n9 tCha,l ihfaosr nijau stG asb eeCno srpeacneyi v(eAdp.p l. O3n0 2t9h9e) madtetceird eodf t phries sweenetk ,market value of land and contributions in aid of construction, the decision has this to say: "The Commission staff has likewise deducted 13,1^8,000, represent-ing the average credit balance in the account "Contributites in Aid of Construction*. The total In this account, arising largely through operation of main extension rules, represents funds obtained by applicant at no cost to it. Applicant, in its adjustments, In­creased its rat® base by $1,552,000 to represent the excess of the present market value of operative lands over the cost at which those same parcels are recorded on the company*® books. This incremental difference between cost and market value likewise has cost applicant nothing. We hold, therefore, that the prefer­able treatment for the purpose of this proceeding is to deduct "Contributions in Aid of Construction* and include lands at original cost in the rate base adopted." On the matter of Advance/for Construction, there was no issue, as the Company itself deducted that item from the fixed capital in figuring the rate base. Evers’- other California company does likewise. Co - Mr. Wa Reinhardt R. C. Renwick W. Hf Johnson