upr000275 73

Los Angeles, M a y 5, 1949 1-7354 A. M, Folger: Referring to my letter April 12th and previous ? correspondence, your file W 23-1-A, regarding application from Nomelllni Construction Company for crater main extension . to Paradis© Village Tract, Las Vegas: Subsequently, in conference, Mr* Campbell advised that our proposal to construct the proposed lines under Rule 9-A was not acceptable to Horaellinl Construction Co*, and that if necessary it would file formal application with the Nevada Public Service Commission for a hearing with the view of obtaining a revision of our rule. Nomellini contends that in the case of a housing project, the Water Company will, as soon as the houses are completed and occupied, commence receiving revenue from the project, which Is not always done in the case of a subdivision. There is merit to Noraellinl*s contention, and I am fearful that if the Commission holds a hearing, we could not defend our position, and the Commission might impose other obliga­tions upon the Water Company. As a matter of Information, some of the privately owned water companies in California offer a similar refund basis in the case of housing project and subdivision. To avoid an attack upon our Rule 9-A, we consider it advisable to recommend a modification of our former Rule 0-C as outlined in attached copy of letter to Mr. Stoddard; but before submitting the matter.for executive consideration, will appreciate your views. Mr. Bennett has reviewed the recommendation and concurs• Wm. Reinhardt 1^ Id % Ori g / 1-7334 - Las\Vegas - Water Rate Schedule and Regulations Copy, 1-7334 - ” - Nomellini Constn. Co.