Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

man000206 18

Image

File
Download man000206-018.tif (image/tiff; 26.98 MB)

Information

Digital ID

man000206-018
    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

    t the Rules and Regulations filed with the Public Service Commission of Nevada, The refund of $165.00 per customer over a 10 year period constitutes 22$ of the annual revenue received from each customer. Under Rule 9, 35$ of the annual revenue was returned to the applicant. The rate schedule in force under the Las Vegas Land and Water Company yielded an average yearly revenue of $39*00 per consumer. When a 35$ refund was applied to this yearly average, the refund approximated $13.65 per year. The average yearly revenue at the present time is approximately $78.00 per customer. It is recommended that 15$ of the gross revenue he refunded over a 10 year period. The refund then would be $11.70 per year per customer. This will provide a refund approximating the past practice and will provide an equitable policy for both past and future extension applicants. It is proposed that both general and subdivision extensions be treated alike to avoid discrimination on the part of the District. Provision should also be made for the applicant to advance the total cost of the main extension in areas which are not completely developed. Additional refunds to the original applicant can then'be made when advances are received from subsequent customers connecting to the extension. It is believed that developers of areas requiring extensive plant facilities,such as pumping plants, reservoirs, or large feeder mains should be required to advance the total cost of these facilities and a refund policy established which would refund 15$ of the gross revenue for a 20-year period where additional plant facilities are necessary. -1 6 -