The Daily Alaska empire., 1946-03-15
COUNCIL IS IMPRESSED
 BY EXPERT
Consulting Engineer Siraighiens Out Sev-
 eraI Matters

Juneau's City Council sat up and became "all ears" last evening as Consulting Engineer Henry L. Gray gave them the benefit of his 40 years experience devoted largely to valuation of public utility proper ties for rate setting and other pur- poses.
 Noticeably impartial and out standingly lucid, MT. Gray's testi- mony before the Council left that body with a far clearer understand ing of it's position as panel sit ting to regulate the rates of the Alaska Electric Light and Power Company.
 Throughout the longest and most consistenly interesting session yet to develop in the current rate hear ing, Engineer Gray. though called as a witness for the light company, did not completely support that firms indicated stand regarding rate base issues; nor did he more than partially endorse tEe other end of f-the-line position on which the City Administrations attack on present rates has been based.
 Under direct questioning by company counsel H. l.. Faulkner, Gray qualified himself as public utility expert, licensed in the State of Washington as both an electrical and civil engineer. A graduate ot the University of Washington, Gray liased complete or partial apprais- al of 55 light and power companies, for differing purposes, as part of his background. In addition, he served for seven years as Chief En- gineer for the Washington State Public Service Commission and the agency which preceded it.
 Wide Experience
 He has represented cities, states, industries. receivers, bond houses, Federal agencies and has served on five arbitration boards. At present he is retained by the Clark County, Washington, Public Utilities Dis trict in the valuation of the hold ings of the Pacific Power and Light Company and one other elsc- trio utility for use as evidence in a condemnation case to be heard September 1, 1946.
 After qualifying his witness Attor- ney Faulkners questioning brought out these material points:
 That Gray, in fixing rates, would give consideration to such values as replacement cost, going value and other intangibles. The witness said he had never seen a case where they were not given some weight.
 2-That the function and rules of the Federal Power Commission (much referred to by City Utility Engineer Walter T. Stuart ii, gre senting the case against the light company are: To administer Fed eral ownership in water power rights, license users and investigate values and rate returns in inter- state commerce. The, FpC has Jurisdiction over a limited numhcr of public utilities-the AEL&P is not one of them-but there has been a recent tendency on the part of Western States to adopt it's rules, which do not differ greatly from those in general use. FPC account- ling rules have nothing to do, direct { ly, with rates.
 Third Point
 | 3-That the Hope Gas Company decision by the U. s. Supreme Court (on which the City has bas- ed it's position) does not sanction any one formula for fixing values, instead it permits wide latitude to regulating bodies-if the Court does not like their decision, it will throw them out.
 4-That in his opinion, quality of service, reproduction cost. new, reproduction cost less depreciation
 actual original cost and deprecia- tion, as well as many other factors
 varying in the circumstances and ! history back of each particular case, all are elements to be con sidered in fixing rates-not just
 any ore of them alone.
 Comparing his own valuation oi
 the light company as of December ! 31, 1945 $l,418,629 with that made by Black and veatch for the City. Gray declared that. since neither had previously seen the
 others report, he would have ex-
 pected greater difference than is
 shown when both are reduced tt
 the same basis The big difference
 is said, is in valuation of the Colo