Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000105 272

Image

File
Download upr000105-272.tif (image/tiff; 26.43 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000105-272
    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

    tr. Walter E. Rouse 3 January 10, 1952 stand that it is Hr* Hulsiser's suggestion that the fa­cilities of the LA&SL and ITLfcil Company be transferred to the UTRft at one®, but that they only fee transferred to the Union Pacific at the time the Union Pacific is ready to sake a transfer of the system to the District. I think it would be undesirable for the facilities to be transferred to the Union Pacific at any earlier date because 1 do not ballova it is desirable for the Union Pacific at any time to actually conduct operations as a distributor of water. In order to do so it would hare to obtain a certificate ©f public convenience and neces­sity from the Public Service Commission, and I believe tije Public Service Commission would be very suspicious of any attempt by the Railroad Company to incorporate the distribution system in the properties of the Rail­road Company. The Commission would immediately ^uaip to the conclusion that the Railroad Company was attempting to bury the water distribution system in the Railroad properties for some ulterior motive. If all of the transfers were made at the same time, we would not face this problem. M r. Rulsizer suggests that the LAi-SI convey to the Union Pacific all of the land necessary for the opera­tion of the Water Company west ©f Its main tracks ex­cept the area occupied by the shop grounds and facili­ties, but including the frontage on Charleston Boule­vard. It would appear to ms that if the water system were to he donated to the District, It would be best to donate as little land as possible* I would think that the only land which should be donated would, be the land immediately surrounding the wells and reservoirs and a right of way for transmission lines to the distribution system cast of the tracks. This may, in fact, be $r. Eulslser*s idea. At the time we presented our evidence in the rate case we designated 679*4>2 acres of land in the vicinity of the wells as being water bearing land and excluded from the proposed rate base all land lying east of the water field and west of the tracks constituting some 551 acres of land. I believe that much of this exclud-