Evening star., 1935-03-19
Utilities Body Fixes Sum at
$16,993,OOO for Rate
Purposes.
FURTHER REDUCTION
TO CONSUMERS SEEN
District Officials Anticipate Case
Will Be Appealed in Su-
preme Court.

The Public Utilities Commission to-
day fixed the valuation of the Wash
ington and Georgetown Gas Light
companies, for rate-making purposes
at sic, ,993, 900, ending a two-year ex-
animation into the proper rate base
for the companies.
While the companies had not during
the valuation proceedings totaled up
their claims to fair value, officials Of
the concerns said at the outset they
would submit evidence proving total
value of s30,0Oo,O0O. This would
show the commission has disallowed
claims to value amounting to some
s13.0o000
The decision sets up definite eX-
pectations for big permanent cut
IN gas rates. Since the valuation
study was started. there has been in
effect a temporary discount of S.5
per cent, which was agreed to volun-
tarily by the company. Some observ-
ers believe the decision may mean
possibly a doubling of this reduction.
The present temporary cut was
made without the benefit of formal
valuation or rate case and was agreed
to by the commission and the COM
pany partly because Of economic con-
ditions, including the Is per cent cut
in Government pay.
The commission already has called
a public hearing to begin April 10
tor consideration of the future rates
to be charged by the gas companies.
District officials anticipate the COM
pany will appeal the case TO District
Supreme Court. In the past this has
been the normal proceeding in valua-
ton and rate cases,
The commission found the fair
value of the Washington Gas Light
Co. to be s15.o39 900. and that of the
Georgetown company, Sl,954,o00.
The valuations are as Of June 80,
1892, when commission experts began
studies of value. The Georgetown
company is owned by the Washington
company, which in turn is owned BY
the Washington & Suburban Cos, a
Massachusetts common law trust.
which represents Chase National Bank
and associated financial interests.
The Washington company claimed
as the cost of reproduction. new, Sl9,-
920.603, exclusive of going concern
value The commission found the
figures should be SIS ,550.000 also ex-
cluding going concern value. The COM
pany claimed s16,99S,678 to have been
the original cost of the Washington
company property, and the commits
sion said it could not find the orig
inal cost because of the character Of
the estimates INDUCED in by witnesses
Of both Sides
Set Up Separate Claim.
The Washington company set up a
separate claim for S2.500.000 for the
Intangible element of going concern
value The commission rejected this
claim. saying: Similar claims for
going concern value. estimated in like
manner as the claims here presented.
were rejected by the Supreme Court"
and listed many citations Of recent
decision of the high court. AS Gus
tomary. the commission did not make
definite finding as to going concern
value. but said it had taken that ele-
ment into consideration.
The Washington company claimed
| S3,044 084 as the value of its land, but
the commission found the figures
should be Sl,654.846. and announced
it had applied rule followed by the
Supreme Court in the Minnesota rate
cases. The commission disallowed any
value for certain street and alley
areas and wharf lands used under
agreement with the United States
Government which the company
claimed it owned and placed the
value at S452 ,399.
The companies set up a claim of
81 1884 LAG as working capital, includ-
ing materials and supplies on hand as
of the date of valuation. The com.
mission found S689, 900 for the Wash
ington company and s133,000 for the
Georgetown, In doing so, it rejected
the companies claim amounting to
$l,038,470 for the investment in the
Continued on Page 8, Column -