Depreciation Rate an Engineering Problem

From the above discussion it is apparent that the determination of rates is essentially an engineering problem. The accountant, however, needs a knowledge of the fundamental considerations and requirements of fixing depreciation rates and an appreciation of the difficulties of the problem. As Henry Floy[30] says: “What engineer is able to foretell the misuse and neglect or care and high degree of maintenance that any given apparatus or ... property as a whole will receive, even during the next five or ten years, with vicissitudes of climate, load conditions, changes of management, and requirements of the public?” On the other hand, in the opinion of another prominent engineer, “Consideration of these matters (misuse, neglect, etc.) may eventually form the basis for a systematic appraisal of the probabilities of life, or average of the risks, which would provide a method for the insurance of the life of machinery.”

The author does not attempt to discuss the relative merits of the two contentions other than to point out the fact that engineers are not discouraged in spite of the many contingencies and uncertainties inherent in the problem. They are constantly gathering data from which conclusions as to rates are being formed, the use of which is being compelled by regulating bodies. It is possible that the problem will ultimately be worked out on some kind of an insurance basis.

Attitude of Regulatory Bodies

At the present time the attitude of most regulatory bodies—public service boards, federal commissions, and tax officials—is well expressed by a regulation of the Public Utility Commission of New Jersey which says that, “Until otherwise prescribed, the amount estimated to be necessary to cover such wear and tear and obsolescence and inadequacy as have accrued during any month shall be based on a rule to be determined by the accounting corporation; such rule may be derived from a consideration of the said corporation’s history and experience. A general statement of the rule in use by each company, together with the general information upon which it is based, is to be filed with the Board of Public Utility Commissioners.” The trend at the present time is towards a more thorough supervision of depreciation rates on the part of many public service boards, and the future will undoubtedly see interesting developments.

Methods of Handling Repairs

Three distinct practices are met with in handling repairs and renewals on the books. The most general method is dictated by ease of application and rests on the theory of averages, viz.: that the amount of repairs annually recurring for depreciating equipment in all degrees of deterioration and all stages of decay and age is a fairly constant figure which secures an equitable distribution over the product of the different years. The larger the plant and the greater the variety of the equipment used, the more nearly does this work out as expected.

Further consideration will be given to this point in the discussion in [Chapter X] of the effect of the various methods used for calculating depreciation on the equality of the distribution of the charge.

Another method, used in plants where a very accurate determination of the costs of production is desired, has as an outstanding feature a preliminary estimate, made at the time of installation, of the expected amount of repairs needed during the entire life of the asset. Periodically this estimate, or proportional share thereof, is brought on the books as a charge to Repairs and credit to Reserve for Repairs and so is spread evenly over the service life of the asset. As repairs are actually made, the cost of these is not charged against operation but against the reserve created for that very purpose. At a given time, the status of the reserve account shows: (1) if the equipment has just been placed in a normal state of repair, the under-or over-estimate of the amount of actual repairs needed, or (2) if the equipment is not in repair, the reserve account gives an index of the probable amount of deferred maintenance. Both items of information are of value in the proper management of properties. It is to be expected, of course, that during the early years of the life of an asset there will be a fairly large credit balance in the reserve because repair charges are light. The credit balance so accumulated will be needed during the later years when the costs of maintenance become heavier.

The third method, which is a variation of the second, has as its characteristic feature the inclusion of the repairs cost with the depreciation charge. This likewise necessitates a preliminary estimate of the amount of expected repairs during the life of the asset. Instead of being handled separately, it is added to the depreciation rate and in this way charged against the product. This method has been prescribed in the case of some utilities in England but is not much used here. Under this method two depreciation estimates of probable life are necessary, viz.: (1) maximum life brought about by an inclusion of repairs, renewals, etc., and (2) minimum life without such repairs. By this it is not meant that other methods of calculating the depreciation rates fail to take cognizance of the repairs factor, but that this method specifically calls attention to it and includes it in the charge made. It seems best for regulatory boards to make a separate book record of repairs and depreciation, thus insuring against any oversight of the factors of depreciation and also insuring the correctness of a statement of condition.