I recommend the following order: ORDER. Yolo County Consolidated Water Company and Yolo Water and Power Company having applied to the Commission for authority, the former to lease all of its property to the latter, and a hearing having been duly held and the matters and things pertaining to said application considered, and it appearing that increased, efficient, and economical management will result from the authorization of such lease, It is hereby ordered that the Yolo County Consolidated Water Company and Yolo Water and Power Company be and they are hereby authorized to enter into a contract of lease by the terms of which the Yolo County Consolidated Water Company leases its property to the Yolo Water and Power Company for the term and upon the conditions set forth in the lease attached to the application herein, and referred to in the opinion preceding this order. The foregoing opinion and order are hereby approved and ordered filed as the opinion and order of the Railroad Commission of the State of California. Dated at San Francisco, California, this 1st day of July, 1914. DECISION No. 1640. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN COUNTIES GAS COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA FOR AUTHORITY TO ISSUE BONDS AND FOR APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT. Application No. 996. Decided July 1, 1914. Wilson & Wilson, for Applicant. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. LOVELAND, Commissioner. ORDER OF DISMISSAL. The above entitled application having come on regularly for hearing, and applicant having requested that the same be dismissed as regards the request for authority to issue bonds, and the Commission being of the opinion that its formal approval is not necessary to the contract set forth in the application, It is hereby ordered that the above entitled application be and the same is hereby dismissed without prejudice. The foregoing order is hereby approved and ordered filed as the order of the Railroad Commission of the State of California. Dated at San Francisco, California, this 1st day of July, 1914. Decisions Nos. 1641, 1642, 1643, and 1644, grade crossings; not printed. See end of volume. DECISION NO. 1645. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ORO ELECTRIC CORPORATION AND ORO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR PERMISSION TO SELL, TRANSFER AND DISPOSE OF ONE THOUSAND FIRST MORTGAGE, SINKING FUND BONDS AND CONFIRM THE SALES OF SIX HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-SIX OF THE BONDS OF SAID CORPORATION. Application No. 609. Decided July 2, 1914. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Oro Electric Corporation and Oro Development Company having, on June 30, 1914, made written request to this Commission that the above entitled application be dismissed, It is hereby ordered that the above entitled application be and the same is hereby dismissed. By order of the Railroad Commission. Dated at San Francisco, California, this 2d day of July, 1914. DECISION No. 1646. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF R. B. YOUNG FOR A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE AN ELECTRIC PLANT IN PORTOLA AND VICINITY, PLUMAS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. Application No. 1183. Decided July 3, 1914. Applicant granted a certificate of public convenience and necessity to exercise franchise rights, authorizing the construction and operation of an electric generating and distributing system in the town of Portola and vicinity. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. Whereas R. B. Young has filed with this Commission his application asking for a certificate that the present and future public convenience and necessity require the exercise by Young, his successors and assigns, of the rights and privileges granted by the board of supervisors of Plumas County, by Ordinance No. 180, adopted on May 6, 1914, a copy of which ordinance is attached to the petition herein, and to construct operate an electric system thereunder; and it appearing that Young and desires to operate in the unincorporated town of Portola, in Plumas County, California, and easterly thereof to and including Beckwith, and westerly thereof to and including Clio, and that no other electric corporation is at present operating in this portion of Plumas County, and that this is not a case in which a public hearing is necessary, It is hereby declared that the present and future public convenience and necessity require and will require the exercise by R. B. Young, his successors and assigns, of the rights and privileges granted by Ordinance No. 180 of the board of supervisors of Plumas County, adopted on May 6, 1914, and the construction and operation of a system for the generation, transmission, and distribution of electric energy thereunder, but only in that portion of Plumas County which consists of the unincorporated town of Portola and the territory east thereof to and including Beckwith, and the territory west thereof to and including Clio. Dated at San Francisco, California, this 3d day of July, 1914. DECISION NO. 1647. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ROUND VALLEY WATER COMPANY FOR AN ORDER AUTHORIZING THE LEASE OF ITS ENTIRE PROPERTY TO PLUMAS LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY, FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIAN VALLEY ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY. Application No. 1217. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF PLUMAS LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY, FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIAN VALLEY ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY, TO LEASE A PORTION OF ITS PROPERTY TO CLARA BIDWELL. Application No. 1218. Decided July 3, 1914. Round Valley Water Company authorized to lease its entire water system to the Plumas Light and Power Company and the latter company authorized to lease a certain water right to Clara Bidwell. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. Whereas, Round Valley Water Company has filed with the Railroad Commission its petition authorizing applicant to lease its entire property to Indian Valley Electric Light and Power Company, now known as Plumas Light and Power Company, on the terms specified in the indenture of lease attached to the petition in Application No. 1217, and marked Exhibit "A"; and whereas Plumas Light and Power Company, formerly known as Indian Valley Electric Light and Power Company, has filed with the Railroad Commission its petition for an order authorizing the conveyance to Clara Bidwell of a certain water right, known as the Hudson water right, and right of way in connection therewith, upon the terms specified in indenture of lease attached to the petition in Application No. 1218, and marked Exhibit "A" therein; and whereas it appears to the Railroad Commission that these two leases are part of a transaction by which the water stored or to be stored in the reservoir of Round Valley Water Company, or a part thereof, is to be utilized for the purpose of developing hydroelectric energy to be distributed by Plumas Light and Power Company to the inhabitants of the Indian Valley, in Plumas County and the territory adjacent thereto, and that the consummation of this transaction will result in a better service and at lower rates than those which now obtain, and that the public convenience and necessity will be subserved thereby, It is hereby ordered that each of said applications be and the same is hereby granted, subject to the following conditions: 1. In passing upon these applications, the Railroad Commission does not assume to pass upon the question of the title to the waters stored or to be stored in Round Valley Water Company's reservoir. 2. In passing upon said applications, the Railroad Commission does. not necessarily undertake to appraise the property leased by Round Valley Water Company as provided in the lease from Round Valley Water Company to Indian Valley Electric Light and Power Company. 3. The Railroad Commission will not be bound by the provision in the lease from Indian Valley Electric Light and Power Company to Clara Bidwell, providing that the lessor agrees not to sell water for domestic purposes in the town of Greenville, or the territory adjacent thereto, as long as Clara Bidwell is able to supply the same. 4. The Railroad Commission reserves the right to make such alterations or changes in said leases, from time to time, as the public convenience or necessity may require. Dated at San Francisco, California, this 3d day of July, 1914. DECISION No. 1648. RIVERSIDE PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY v8. SAN PEDRO, LOS ANGELES AND SALT LAKE RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. Case No. 539. Decided July 3, 1914. Complainants alleging that a certain witness of defendants was called out of order at a prior hearing in the above entitled matter and that they had no opportunity to cross-examine said witness, petition the Commission to reopen the case for further hearing. Held, Petition granted and date set for rehearing. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. ORDER UPON MOTION TO OPEN CASE FOR FURTHER TESTIMONY. The testimony in the above entitled case was regularly taken at different times and the case submitted. The complainant now files a verified application asking that the case be reopened for the purpose of taking further testimony, and sets forth as the grounds upon which such application is based the following: That the last witness called at the hearing was Mr. James A. Keller, who was called by the carriers defendant, and who testified as to the cost of transporting cement from the factory of the Pacific Portland Cement Company at Cement, California, to Suisun, and thence by water from Suisun to San Francisco. Said witness was called out of order, and after complainant's testimony in rebuttal had been fully presented. Complainant had no opportunity to examine into the facts testified to by this witness, and was therefore unable at the time of the closing of the taking of testimony to present any evidence in rebuttal of the testimony of said witness. That since the closing of said case, complainant has investigated the subject-matter of the testimony of the said witness, and finds and so states that "said witness is mistaken in his testimony in many important particulars thereof, all of which complainant is prepared to prove.' In view of the above, and in view of the fact that the Commission desires all of the light which it can possibly receive in order that its decision may do justice to the litigants in this case, It is hereby ordered that this Case No. 539 be reopened, and that complainant be permitted to submit further testimony in rebuttal of the testimony of Mr. Keller, heretofore offered in this case; and |