In Re Oceanside Electric & Gas Co. Decision No. 2202, March 8, 1915, supplemental order permitting notes to be issued in amounts different from, and to persons other than, theretofore specified in the notes to be refunded (for original order, see P.U.R. 1915B, 18).

In Re Chowchilla, P. R. Co. Decision No. 2204, March 8, 1915, 100 shares of capital stock of the par value of $100 per share, in lieu of stock heretofore unlawfully issued, proceeds to be devoted to proper capital purposes.

In Re Coast Counties Gas & Electric Co. Decision No. 2206, March 11, 1915, renewal of note of $4,468.66.

In Re Lassen Electric Co. Decision No. 2215, March 12, 1915, notes to an amount not to exceed $5,900, and mortgage as security therefor, such notes to be issued only in renewal of notes in a like amount due.

In Re Oro Electric Corp. Decision No. 2239, March 18, 1915, authority to pledge $180,000 face value of its bonds as security for twelve short-term notes of the aggregate face value of $60,000, such notes to bear interest at 7 per cent and to be redeemable within a year.

In Re Mt. Whitney Power & Electric Co. Decision No. 2240, March 18, 1915, $238,000 face value of 6 per cent bonds to be sold at not less than 95, for extensions and additions.

In Re Southern Sierras Power Co. Decision No. 2244, March 19, 1915, $300,000 of 6 per cent bonds sold at not less than 90, proceeds to be applied to the retirement of outstanding notes and accounts payable, the balance for partial payment of indebtedness to the NevadaCalifornia Power Company.

In Re Long Beach Consol. Gas Co. Decision No. 2251, March 22, 1915, $100,000 face value of 6 per cent bonds to be sold at not less than 95, of the proceeds, $10,000 to be used to retire a certain note, $33,163.98 to reimburse treasury for capital expenditures, the balance for additions and extensions.

In Re Marin Water & Power Co. Decision No. 2252, March 22, 1915, $77,000 bonds to be sold at not less than 95 refunding securities and capital expenditures; application granted provided that if bonds are pledged they shall be pledged at not less than 10 to 7, and only in a sufficient amount to secure the note indebtedness, the balance to remain in applicant's treasury, subject to supplemental order of the Commission.

In Re Southwestern Home Teleph. Co. Decision No. 2254, March 22, 1915, renewal of promissory notes of the aggregate face value of $11,000 for a period not to exceed two years, such notes to bear interest at not to exceed 8 per cent and to be secured by $22,000 face value of applicant's bonds.

In Re Santa Maria Gas & Power Co. Decision No. 2262, March 26, 1915, $25,000 face value bonds to be sold at not less than par,

proceeds to be used to retire certain notes of the aggregate face value of $20,000, the balance for reimbursement for money expended for capital purposes.

In Re Southern Counties Gas Co. Decision No. 2271, April 1, 1915, a 7 per cent promissory note in the sum of $40,000 for the renewal of note of like amount, $60,000 face value of three year gold notes to be pledged as security therefor, the bonds heretofore pledged as security for note to be renewed to be used as additional security, applicant being directed to use $150,000 proceeds from gold notes heretofore authorized to discharge certain notes and accounts.

In Re City Electric Co. Decision No. 2281, April 9, 1915, $426,000 face value of 5 per cent bonds for the purpose of reimbursing treasury for moneys expended for capital purposes, $250,000 of such bonds to be issued at the present time at not less than 84, the balance on supplemental order.

In Re Pires, Decision No. 2284, April 9, 1915, $12,500 par value of capital stock in payment for water system.

In Re City Electric Company, Decision No. 2286, modification of mortgage and deed of trust given July 1, 1907.

In Re Sacramento Warehouse Co. Decision No. 2290, April 9, 1915, permission to issue ten notes of the face value of $5,000 in lieu of the note for $50,000 authorized in former order of May 2, 1914. In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Decision No. 2294, April 14, 1915, $367,000 face value bonds for sinking fund purposes.

In Re Santa Barbara Gas & Electric Co. Decision No. 2300, April 19, 1915, $10,000 face value 6 per cent thirty year gold bonds for additions and betterments (Supplemental order to Decision No. 2182, of Feb. 27, 1915; see P.U.R. 1915B, 18).

In Re Annie Dell Segno, Decision No. 2302, April 19, 1915, mortgage for the sum of $4,800 for the purposes of discharging several small mortgages and. the payment of a judgment and of bills incurred in connection therewith.

In Re North Fork Ditch Co. Decision No. 2319, April 21, 1915, note in the sum of $41,000 and mortgage as security therefor, to discharge certain outstanding notes.

In Re Gard, Decision No. 2325, April 23, 1915, authority to transfer water plant for the sum of $2,000, $500 to be paid for in cash, and the remaining $1,500 to be paid for by note secured by mortgage.

In Re Oakland, A. & E. R. Co. Decision No. 2327, April 24, 1915, promissory notes of the face value of $200,400 for refunding purposes; $334,000 face value 5 per cent bonds to be pledged as security therefor and $36,000 face value of bonds as security for note issued in the sum of $21,028.77.

In Re Los Angeles R. Corp. Decision No. 2330, May 1, 1915, $250,000 face value of 5 per cent gold bonds to be sold at not less

than 83 to refund an equal amount of bonds of Los Angeles Traction Company maturing May 1, 1915.

In Re Southwestern Home Teleph. Co. Decision No. 2347, May 5, 1915, renewal of promissory notes of an aggregate face value of $14,500, and pledge of $29,000 face value of bonds as security therefor.

In Re Economic Gas Co. Decision No. 2355, May 5, 1915, supplemental order authorizing sale of stock at not less than 80 and bonds at not less than 83, or to pledge bonds as security for notes at the ratio of 3 to 2, proceeds of such stock, bonds, or notes to be used to pay floating indebtedness and for additions and betterments (original order dated January 30, 1914).

In Re Southern California Gas Co. Decision No. 2361, May 7, 1915, 6 per cent promissory notes of the aggregate face value of $15,024.77 in renewal of notes of an equal face value.

In Re San Joaquin Light & P. Corp. Decision No. 2363, May 7, 1915, promissory notes of an aggregate face value of $317,260 for the purposes of renewing notes of an equal face value.

In Re Midland Counties Public Service Corp. Decision No. 2364, May 7, 1915, renewal of ten promissory notes of the aggregate face value of $136,844.43 for a period of not to exceed one year. By a supplemental order, Decision No. 2421, May 26, 1915, permission was given to renew one note in the sum of $10,477.12 at the rate of 7 per cent interest per annum instead of 6 per cent, as provided in an original order.

In Re Coast Counties Gas & Electric Co. Decision No. 2370, May 10, 1915, 1,000 shares of capital stock of the par value of $100 per share for the purpose of discharging a note in the sum of $83,370.72, the balance to be applied in betterments to property, such stock to be sold at not less than 85.

In Re Home Teleph. & Teleg. Co. Decision. No. 2372, May 10, 1915, renewal of note in sum of $10,000.

In Re San Francisco-Oakland Terminal R. Co. Decision No. 2374, May 10, 1915, 6 per cent on demand $27,000 renewal note.

In Re Southern California Edison Co. Decision No. 2381, May 11, 1915, supplemental order approving agreement between applicant and Los Angeles Trust & Savings Bank (for original order see P.U.R. 1915B, 313).

In Re Mill Valley & Mt. T. Scenic R. Co. Decision No. 2383, May 10, 1915, extension of time within which to issue 3,000 shares of capital stock and permission to issue an additional 180 shares of the par value of $100 per share, to be sold at par, proceeds to be used to discharge obligations incurred in extensions and improvements.

In Re Fowler Independent Teleph. Co. Decision No. 2395, May 17, 1915, 60 shares of capital stock of the par value of $50 per share, 50 shares to be sold at not less than par, proceeds to be used for

additions and betterments, and 10 shares to be issued in lieu of shares issued without necessary authorization.

In Re San Pedro, L. A. & S. L. R. Co. Decision No. 2409, May 21, 1915, supplemental order granting permission to sell remainder of bond issue at not less than 82, and extending time limits (original order, Decision No. 1579, June 11, 1914).

In Re Hanford Water Co. Decision No. 2417, May 24, 1915, renewal of promissory notes aggregating the sum of $8,100, with interest at 8 per cent for a period not exceeding one year.

In Re San Diego Home Teleph. Co. Decision No. 2433, May 29, 1915, $20,000 promissory note, $12,000 to be used to reimburse treasury for moneys taken from earnings to pay portion of former note of $20,000 balance to pay up remainder of old note; and authority to pledge bonds at the ratio of three to one as security therefor.

In Re Ghriest, Decision No. 2441, June 4, 1915, permission to mortgage property to secure a one-year note in the sum of $600.

In Re Pacific Light & P. Corp. Decision No. 2456, June 7, 1915, two year 6 per cent collateral trust notes of the face value of $2,338,000, to be exchanged at the face value for collateral trust bonds due July 1, 1915. Trust agreement approved, Decision No. 2467, June 14, 1915.

In Re Mt. Konocti Light & P. Co. Decision No. 2470, June 14, 1915, 250 shares of capital stock, of the par value of $100 per share, to be sold at not less than par, proceeds to be applied partly to reimburse treasury for capital expenditures, the balance to be used for new extensions.

In Re Southern Pacific R. Co. Decision No. 2484, June 14, 1915, $910,000 face value of 4 per cent refunding mortgage bonds to be sold at not less than 88, proceeds to be used to reimburse treasury for moneys expended in betterments and improvements; Southern Pacific Company authorized to guarantee payment of bonds.

In Re Southern Pacific R. Co. Decision No. 2485, June 14, 1915, $21,000 face value 4 per cent first refunding mortgage bonds to be sold at not less than 88, proceeds to be used to reimburse treasury for expenditures; Southern Pacific Co. authorized to guarantee payment of bonds.

In Re Compton Water & Lighting Co. Decision No. 2488, June 17, 1915, 8 per cent five year note of the face value of $3,500 to cover capital expenditures, and mortgage to secure same.

In Re Marin County Electric R. Co. Decision No. 2492, June 17, 1915, permission to pay sales commission of 15 per cent on stock authorizing and remaining unsold, such commission to be paid only when such stock shall have been fully paid for. The original order authorizing the issuance was Decision No. 1377, March 26, 1914.

In Re Marin County Electric R. Co. Decision No. 2495, June 17, 1915. Permission to pay a sales commission of 15 per cent on por

tion of stock authorized and remaining unsold, such commission to be paid only when stock has been fully paid up. The original order authorizing the issuance was Decision No. 1954, November 23, 1914.

In Re Oceanside Electric & Gas Co. Decision No. 2503, June 21, 1915, notes authorized to be made payable upon demand instead of being payable for a term not in excess of one year. For original order, see P.U.R. 1915B, 18.

In Re Valley Pipe Line Co. Decision No. 2508, June 22, 1915, 53,184 shares of capital stock to be sold at not less than 80, proceeds to be applied to the construction of pipe line.

In ascertaining the reproduction cost of a waterworks company in a valuation for rate-making purposes, it was held improper to assume that 60 per cent of the excavation would be done by a trenching machine, where the distribution system was not laid by continuous construction, but rather was added to from year to year. Valuation - Pavement over mains.

In the valuation of the property of a waterworks company for rate-making purposes no allowance should be made for pavements not actually disturbed in the laying of mains.

Valuation

Waterworks property — Overhead expenses.

In the valuation of the property of a waterworks company for rate-making purposes, such charges as preliminary cost, interest, insurance, and legal expenses during construction, engineering and supervision, organization, contingencies, etc., should be given the same consideration as a capital charge; that is, given the cost of a pump, for the reason that one as much as the other represents an investment. Return · Waterworks property — 7 per cent allowance.

In a proceeding to determine the reasonableness of water rates, a return of 7 per cent was held to be just and reasonable.