upr000105 291

Mr. Roy A. Wehe 2 January 2, 1952 of completion filed with the State Engineer with respect to each well drilled since 1931 and also that we spent large amounts of money for other capital expenditures not covered by our affidavits of completion* I do not propose to accede to his proposal that we change our filings with the State Engineer because I.am satisfied that they were not incorrect in view of the fact that the form of affidavit did not call for the ac­tual cost. There is no reason why he should have been misled by the statements contained in the affidavit be­cause he was at one time State Engineer and certainly _ knows the purport of the form of affidavit prescribed by the State Engineer’s office. I may not ask you to attend the next conference with Mr. Allen because it will be devoted primarily,to a dis­cussion of the accounting documents which Mr. Carson will have prepared* I am inclined to drop the idea which we originally had of filing a supplement to the Annual Report of the Railroad Company showing the capital expenditures and the revenues and expenses of the water production facilities. It is too difficult to break down the Railroad accounts ^ith respect to that operation. Many of the overhead charges which find their way into the joint facility rent bill cannot be def­initely identified in the Railroad accounts, and I would ra­ther file nothing with the Commission than a statement which the Commission could claim was not a true reflection of our accounts. I would be willing to file with the Commission each year a detailed statement of our joint facility frent bill and a statement of our capital expenditures in that year upon Railroad facilities. This would not purport to show the expenditures by accounts or to reflect exactly the state of our books. If Mr. Allen is not satisfied with the material which we shall be able to furnish him, I do not think that there is any other way in which we can appease him. T/e shall have no alternative than to litigate with him.