upr000282 248

sft&i * 2 * are aware, this exhibit was {resented solely because the Commission la determining its previous findings ig» nored Inhibit Cl and went outside of the evidence to use only the incomplete estimated costs referred to in (a). Exhibit 14 shows a segregation by work orders and years in which the total cost of the faciItties .referred to iJi id) was reoordsd in the accounts* This exhibit supports in­hibit 15# On pages | end 4 it is stated that the Commission noted frost exhibits 10 and If that replacement of pipe lines has been made with only Minor retirement credits given, and where retirement of cast iron pips Is mads, no report or die* position of it is evident* Also, if retirement credit was available, it would undoubtedly reduce the value of the pro* duction unit* the foregoing is a complete misstatement of fact# Exhibit 10 is a map, and its caption reading "Http showing water production facilities in place as of December >1, 1951 at las Vegas, Nevada" clearly indicates that it pur* ports to show the facilities then In place with all prior re* tirements omitted* Exhibit 15 likewise reflects only the cost of the facilities in place. and credits for retirements were current­ly included in the accounts coincident with the physical change* There are no unrecorded retirements represented in the figures on the exhibit and, as you know, this was thoroughly explained to Commissioner Allen on several occasions in conference. Also, something to this effect should be in the transcript, of which X do not have a copy. On page 5 it is stated that the contract valuation of #751,843 as of January 1, 1950 does not agree with the value of #745,070 shown on Exhibit Id* The figures should not agree* The contract figures represent the average of the original cost of the water production facilities at December 31, 1948 and 1949, plus the market value ef the water bearing lands and rights of way, working cash, and material and supplies, minus accrued depreciation* The figures shown in Exhibit 18 reflect similar costs and deductions for the average at December 31, 1950 and 1951* Therefore, the difference in the figures is represented in the average cost of two additional years of ad­ditions and betterments, minus the average of two additional years of depreciation* In the third full paragraph on page 5 the Commission stated that based on Exhibit 18, the annual payment to Onion Pacific of $47,850.35 for income taxes, and #40,803*94 for