In re Warren Telephone Co.

81 Ohio Law. Abs. 364
CourtOhio Public Utilities Commission
DecidedDecember 19, 1958
DocketNo. 27147
StatusPublished

This text of 81 Ohio Law. Abs. 364 (In re Warren Telephone Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Public Utilities Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Warren Telephone Co., 81 Ohio Law. Abs. 364 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1958).

Opinion

FINDINGS AND ORDER

The Commission coming now to consider the above-entitled Application and the exhibits attached thereto, the matters contained in the Report of the Secretary, issued pursuant to the provisions of §4909.18 R. C., the testimony and exhibits adduced at public hearings held in this proceeding, and, being otherwise fully advised in the premises and in compliance with §4903.09 R. C., hereby renders its Findings and Order. NATURE OF PROCEEDING:

The Applicant. The Warren Telephone Company, seeks to increase its rates and charges for telephone service furnished to its subscribers through its Warren, Lordstown and Newton Falls exchanges.

HISTORY OF PROCEEDING:

On August 6, 1957, The Warren Telephone Company, Applicant [367]*367herein, filed with this Commission its Application seeking authorization of the Commission to increase its rates and charges for telephone service rendered by it within its operating area, and in accordance with alphabetically enumerated paragraphs A, B, and C of §4909.18 R. C., filed with and attached to its Application certain exhibits purporting to represent:

(1) Exhibit A, a detailed inventory and appraisal as of December 31. 1956, of its property used and useful in the rendition of telephone service;

(2) Exhibit B, being a complete operating statement for the twelvemonth period ending December 31, 1956;

(3) Exhibit B-l, a detailed Income Statement for the year 1956 as per books, and Income Statement adjusted for increased payroll and depreciation charges and toll settlement, Income Statement annualized as of December 31, 1956, and a Pro Forma Income Statement;

(4) Exhibit C, being a comparative statement of the revenue under the existing rates and the anticipated revenue under the proposed rates by exchanges and classes of service;

(5) Exhibit C-l, being P. U. C. O. No. 6, the present tariff now on file with this Commission;

(6) The proposed tariffs to be filed with this Commission for the purpose of establishing new rates to be charged to Applicant’s subscribers, being P. U. C. O. No. 7, superseding P. U. C. O. No. 6; and,

(7) Exhibit D, being a study of the depreciation requirement of all the depreciable property of the Applicant used and useful in the rendition of telephone service as of December 31, 1956.

On August 7, 1957, this Commission issued its Entry approving the form of legal notice submitted with the Company’s Application.

In accordance with §4999.19 R. C., this Commission caused its Secretary to make an investigation of the matter set forth in said application. The Report of the Commission’s Secretary was filed with the Commission on June 18, 1958, copies thereof being served on all interested parties as required by law.

' Applicant filed its objections to the Secretary’s Report on July 10, 1958. This was followed by the objections of the Village of Newton Falls, Ohio, filed July 17, 1958, and by the objections of the City of Warren, Ohio, filed July 21, 1958.

The Applicant’s objections to the Report of the Secretary of the Commission may be summarized as follows:

(1) The offsetting of Federal Income and other tax accruals from the computation of working capital and maintenance material and supplies as includable in the recommended statutory rate base valuation;

(2) Inventory corrections, unit cost corrections, and corrections of general overhead allowances and other direct and indirect loading-charges as made by the Engineering Staff in their valuation investigation;

(3) The amount of statutory depreciation determined by the Engineering Staff for deduction from the reproduction cost new of Applicant’s plant and property;

[368]*368(4) The recommended annual allowance for depreciation accruals as determined by the Engineering Staff; and,

(5) The adjustments to Applicant’s revenue and expenses for the test year made by the Accounting Staff.

The objections of the City of Newton Falls, Ohio, and of the City of Warren, Ohio, Protestants herein, may be treated collectively. The objections of the Protestant cities primarily allege that operating revenues as disclosed by the Report of the Secretary and the exhibits of the Applicant are understated, and that, correspondingly, operating expenses as disclosed by the Report of the Secretary and exhibits of the Applicant are overstated, that the rates submitted are excessive and unreasonable, that the income available for fixed charges as reflected in said Report and exhibits is understated, and that the computed rate of return as reflected in the Secretary’s Report is excessive.

Within the statutory period as prescribed by aforecited §4909.19 R. C., the Commission caused this proceeding to be set for public hearings, and hearings were had from time to time thereon.

DISCUSSION:

RATE BASE

Applicant, The Warren Telephone Company, submitted with its Application a detailed inventory and appraisal of its plant and property used and useful in the rendition of telephone service as of December 31, 1956. The detailed reproduction cost new valuation less statutory depreciation thereof estimated by the Application and as ascertained by the Company’s Consulting Engineers may be summarized as follows:

Reproduction Cost New at December 31, 1956 $17,704,449.00
Less Depreciation (5.74%) 1,015,576.00
Reproduction Cost New Less Depreciation $16,688,873.00
Plus Working Capital 88,185.00
Plus Material and Supplies 584,279.00
Total Proposed Statutory Rate Base $17,361,337.00

As a result of its investigation the Commission’s Engineering Staff recommended that the Applicant’s Reproduction Cost New Valuation as submitted should be adjusted in the following respects:

(1) Inventory Corrections $439,441.00; (2) Unit Cost Corrections $871,411.00; and, (3) General Overhead Allowance Corrections $1,167,007.00, aggregating reductions in the appraisal valuation of $2,477,859.00. These adjustments resulted in a recommended Reproduction Cost New of Applicant’s property at the date certain in the sum of $15,226,590.00, being a 14% reduction from the corresponding RCN submitted by the Applicant. A detailed analysis of these adjustments may be found in exhibits attached to the engineering section of the Report of the Secretary and for purposes of discussion they are set forth below:

A. Inventory Corrections:

Acct. No. Description Amount
234 Add for Highway Patrol PABX $ 2,151.19
235 Deduct for booth not found at H. H. Andrews 354.69*
[369]*369243 Add account finding No. 10 copper not No. 12 23,729.14
Deduct account finding shorter average span
lengths 76,817.72
244 Deduct Construction Work in Progress 77,282.35*
Deduct account finding lesser amount of paving
cut and restored in construction 310,866.66*

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Perryman v. Woodward
238 U.S. 148 (Supreme Court, 1915)
Des Moines Gas Co. v. City of Des Moines
238 U.S. 153 (Supreme Court, 1915)
Newark Natural Gas & Fuel Co. v. City of Newark
242 U.S. 405 (Supreme Court, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 Ohio Law. Abs. 364, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-warren-telephone-co-ohiopuc-1958.