upr000278 268

> Mr* Wm* 37©3.1 Reinhardt - Los Angeles: W M . _R_. CC - Mr* A. E. Stoddard, MAY 19 -jSO Mr* T* W* Boekes, Mr* E* E* Bennett - Los Angeles, Mr* R* M* Sutton May 15 Referring to your letter of April 10th, and memorandum attached thereto, regarding additional information required in connec­tion with proposed application for Increase in water rates, Las Vegas: In my phone conversation with Messrs Renwick and Wehe, I agreed to give the reasons for the increase in cost as reflected in our statement of "Original cost to date of property in place as of December 31, 19^9", and the investment cost* The reasons are as shown hereunder: 1* The investment cost (first item, sheet l) of $3^3 for 3" wrot iron pipe represents the residue after re­tirements and prior betterments, whereas the $^^4*49 shown as original cost reflects the actual cost deter­mined from the total pipe line in place at the time originally installed in 1910, a cost $3133*98 for 7020*, or O.JW-6?2 per ft# (995x0*^672 = $JM&.1}9). 2. All betterments (symbolized with letter ®B“) were ad­justed to show the cost in place of the property now in service* Such cost was determined on the cost in place of similar size pipe installed in the same year, or other years trended,to date betterment was made* The investment cost of property (symbol (l) ) acquired thru unpaid water bills, taxes, etc*, represents amount of such unpaid bills* The original cost was determined as for betterments item 2# Property donated (symbols (?) and (3 ) ) by Grandview Water Go* and by Boulder Syndicate the investment eost of which is the depreciated value at time of acquisition* The original eost, however, reflects the actual cost to the doners*