A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Court Defines Utility's Capital Structure
The Gary‐Hobart (GH) Water Corporation supplied water to several Indiana communities. In May 1990, GH sought approval of adjusted rate and charge schedules, seeking to yield an increase of not less than $1.9 million in annual operating revenue. This was an increase of approximately 13 percent over 1989 operating revenue. The state utility regulatory commission granted GH authority to implement a 2.9 percent increase, producing $451,328 in revenue. In arriving at its decision, the commission excluded customer advances for construction (GACs) from the calculation of synchronized interest. GH appealed. The appellate court said the exclusion was erroneous and sent the case back to the commission.
Court Defines Utility's Capital Structure
The Gary‐Hobart (GH) Water Corporation supplied water to several Indiana communities. In May 1990, GH sought approval of adjusted rate and charge schedules, seeking to yield an increase of not less than $1.9 million in annual operating revenue. This was an increase of approximately 13 percent over 1989 operating revenue. The state utility regulatory commission granted GH authority to implement a 2.9 percent increase, producing $451,328 in revenue. In arriving at its decision, the commission excluded customer advances for construction (GACs) from the calculation of synchronized interest. GH appealed. The appellate court said the exclusion was erroneous and sent the case back to the commission.
Court Defines Utility's Capital Structure
1993-02-01
1 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
Utility's Capital Structure in Question
Wiley | 1999
Online Contents | 1998
Defense Conversion - One Utility's Advantage
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1994
Arizona Utility's Service Rights Not Exclusive
Wiley | 1993