Full text: Valuation, depreciation and the rate base

54 VALUATION, DEPRECIATION AND THE RATE-BASE 
In City of Ripon »s. Ripon Light and Water Co. (decided 
March 28, 1910) the staff allowed 12 per cent (5 per cent being 
for engineering and superintendence, 4 per cent interest during 
construction and 3 per cent legal expenses, organization expense 
and casualties). The respondent claimed 6 per cent interest 
during construction. 
In Dick et al vs. Madison Water Commission (decided Nov. 
11, 1910) the staff allowed 1o per cent instead of the usual 
12 per cent because the plant is a municipal plant. 
In State Journal Printing Co. vs. Madison Gas and Electric 
Co. (decided March 8, 1910), engineering was estimated at 
s per cent on the cost of the original physical plant, but not on 
additions to the plant. The staff of the Commission assumed 
that construction extended throughout one year and allowed 
3 per cent for interest but subsequently changed to 4 per cent as 
the construction period may have been underestimated. The 
respondent contended for 6 per cent interest during construction, 
claiming a 2-year period of construction. 
In the tentative valuation the staff had allowed 2 per cent 
for various items including contingencies, omissions, casualties, 
legal and organization expenses but on revision allowed 3 per 
cent. The respondent claimed through various experts 4 to 7 
per cent, the larger amount being based on 2 per cent for omissions 
and contingencies, 3 per cent for legal and organization expenses 
and 2 per cent for casualty liability. 
The Commission in this case says it is fair “ that rates charged 
for the service rendered be fixed at a level that is high enough 
to cover all reasonable costs.” 
In City of Racine zs. Racine Gas Light Co. (decided Jan. 21, 
1911) the staff allowed 12 per cent for interest during construc- 
tion, engineering contingencies, etc. 
In the application of the LaCrosse Gas and Electric Co. the 
staff allowed 12 per cent while the petitioner claimed 15 per cent 
for interest during construction, engineering and contingencies. 
In City of Milwaukee vs. Milwaukee Electric Railway and 
Lighting Co. (decided Aug. 23, 1912) 3 Cent Fare Case, the
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.