upr000188 186

1 Mr. Walter 1. Bracken January £1, 194£ me that with a minimu® of BO house* in a project that would permit us to extend the main pipe line a distance of 400 feet, whereas if someone built half way to the meadows, we should not have to extend the main pipe line a mile or so for 20 houses or even for 50 houses. It may be that instead of inserting the last quot­ed language idlere l have suggested, it eould be worked into the definition of a defense housing project, al­though we have somewhat of a multiplication or mathe­matical use of language in the paragraph as it now stands, and this insertion might tend to make it more complicated. The last quoted provision is certainly reasonably flexlbile and would permit us to extend our main pipe line dependent upon the site of the proposed develop­ment. If someone actually built 500 houses, It would seem that we eould readily extend our main 10,000 feet at our own expense, although you may not concur in that view. I think the proper figure to write in, if you decide that 20 feet is not proper, is one based upon the coat of the extension and the revenue from the pro­posed users of the water, consideration being given, of course, to the return on the Investment and some reason­able profit for the water. I enclose copy of letter which 1 am sending by air mall to Mr. Sexton today. lEBiMS $* Bennett oo - Mr. W. 8. Guild ) ~*th copy of Mr. Bracken’s let- Mr. Prank Strong ) ter and proposed rule of Commission Mr. Leo A. MoMamee Enel. \