Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

The Commissioners of the District recommend the passage of the bill, and their report is appended hereto and made a part of this report.

To comply with paragraph 2a of Rule XIII of the House of Representatives the change in existing law proposed by this bill is shown below. The proposed legislation will have the effect of striking out of the act of March 3, 1917, the language shown in black brackets and inserting the language shown in italics: Paragraph 6, act of March 3, 1917:

"For the protection of the health of the residents of the District of Columbia and the employees of the United States Government residing in Maryland near the District of Columbia boundary the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, upon the request of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, a body corporate, established by chapter 313 of the acts of 1916 of the State of Maryland, or upon the request of its legally appointed successor, are hereby authorized to deliver water from the water-supply system of the District of Columbia to said Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission or its successor for distribution to territory in Maryland within the Washington suburban sanitary district as designated in the aforesaid act, and to connect District of Columbia water mains with water mains in the State of Maryland at the following points, namely, in the vicinity of Chevy Chase Circle, in the vicinity of the intersection of Georgia and Eastern Avenues, in the vicinity of the intersection of Rhode Island and Eastern Avenues, [and] in the vicinity of the intersection of the Anacostia Road and Eastern Avenue, and in the vicinity of Forty-seventh and Fessenden Streets Northwest, under the conditions hereinafter named."

Hon. F. N. ZIHLMAN,

COMMISSIONERS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Washington, April 8, 1930.

Chairman Committee on the District of Columbia,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN ZIHLMAN: The Commissioners of the District of Columbia have the honor to submit the following on H. R. 9408, Seventy-first Congress, second session, entitled "A bill to amend the act of March 3, 1917, an act making appropriations for the general expenses of the District of Columbia," which you transmitted to them for their consideration and report.

This bill proposes to amend the act of March 3, 1917, making appropriations for the general expenses of the District of Columbia, by authorizing the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, upon the request of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, or upon the request of its legally appointed successors, to deliver water from the water-supply system of the District of Columbia to the said Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission or its successors for distribution to territory in Maryland within the Washington suburban sanitary district, and to connect District of Columbia water mains with water mains in the State of Maryland in the vicinity of Forty-ninth and Chesapeake Streets NW.

To supply water to Maryland at a connection in the vicinity of Forty-ninth and Chesapeake Streets NW. and at the same time provide adequate service for residents in the District of Columbia in this vicinity would require a connection from the 12-inch water main in Forty-seventh Street between Brandywine and Fessenden Streets. This main could be extended to Western Avenue, grade conditions permitting, through Fessenden, Davenport, Chesapeake, or Brandywine Streets, and in order to meet the needs of the District residents in this vicinity, the Maryland consumption would have to be limited to 100,000 gallons a day. To provide for the ultimate development which is to be expected in this vicinity would require a 20-inch connection from Forty-ninth and Upton Streets northward in Forty-ninth Street to Western Avenue; northeast in Western Avenue to Fessenden Street, and east in Fessenden Street to connect with an outlet in the 36-inch concrete main at Fessenden Street and Belt Road. Fessenden Street and Western Avenue are in public ownership, but Forty-ninth Street from Upton Street to Murdock Mill Road is not.

Pressure readings over a 24-hour period have been made in order to safeguard the interests of consumers in the District, and the limit of peak consumption for this proposed connection should not exceed 100,000 gallons per day until such time as the 20-inch main proposed for the ultimate development has been installed.

It is the opinion of the commissioners that this bill should be amended by striking out, on page 2, line 15 of the bill, the words "Forty-ninth and Chesapeake' and substituting therefor the words "Forty-seventh and Fessenden." This amendment, it is understood, will be satisfactory to the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Bureau of the Budget Circulars No. 49 and No. 273, the commissioners requested information from the Director of the Bureau of the Budget as to whether or not the proposed legislation would be in conflict with the financial program of the President. In reply the director states that, in so far as the financial program of the President is concerned, there would be no objection to the proposed legislation or to the recommended modification thereof, provided all expense of making the connection with the Maryland water system be borne by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. A copy of the letter of the Director of the Bureau of the Budget dated April 4, 1930, is inclosed herewith.

Very sincerely,

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
PROCTOR L. DOUGHERTY, President.

Hon. PROCTOR L. Dougherty,

APRIL 4, 1930.

President Board of Commissioners District of Columbia,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. DOUGHERTY: I have your letter of March 25, 1930, transmitting pursuant to the provisions of Bureau of the Budget Circulars No. 49 and No. 273, H. R. 9408, a bill to amend the act of March 3, 1917, an act making appropriations for the general expenses of the District of Columbia. The act of March 3, 1917, authorized the Commissioners of the District of Columbia to supply water to the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission at four designated points. The purpose of the proposed bill is to add a fifth point at Forty-ninth and Chesapeake Streets NW. You propose in your report to recommend this fifth point at Forty-seventh and Fessenden Streets NW.

You are advised that, in so far as the financial program of the President is concerned, there would be no objection to the proposed legislation, or to your recommended modification thereof, provided all expenses of making the connection with the Maryland water system be borne by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission.

Very truly yours,

[merged small][ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Mr. COUZENS, from the Committee on Interstate Commerce, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 12599]

The Committee on Interstate Commerce, having considered H. R. 12599, do recommend its passage, and file herewith copy of House of Representatives Report No. 1665 as its own views.

[House Report No. 1665, Seventy-first Congress, second session]

The Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 12599) to amend section 16 of the radio act of 1927, having considered the same, do report the bill back to the House with the recommendation that the bill do pass.

In compliance with the rules of the House there follow the present law and the proposed amendment. The matter inclosed in brackets represents that to be stricken out and the matter printed in italics represents the new matter to be inserted:

"[SEC. 16. Any applicant for a construction permit, for a station license, or for the renewal or modification of an existing station license whose application is refused by the licensing authority shall have the right to appeal from said decision to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia; and any licensee whose license is revoked by the commission shall have the right to appeal from such decision of revocation to said Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia or to the district court of the United States in which the apparatus licensed is operated, by filing with said court, within twenty days after the decision complained of is effective, notice in writing of said appeal and of the reasons therefor.

"The licensing authority from whose decision an appeal is taken shall be notified of said appeal by service upon it, prior to the filing thereof, of a certified copy of said appeal and of the reasons therefor. Within twenty days after the filing of said appeal the licensing authority shall file with the court the originals or certified copies of all papers and evidence presented to it upon the original application for a permit or license or in the hearing upon said order of revocation, and also a like copy of its decision thereon and a full statement in writing of the facts and the grounds for its decision as found and given by it. Within twenty days after the filing of said statement by the licensing authority either party may give notice to the court of his desire to adduce additional evidence. Said notice shall be in the form of a verified petition stating the nature and character of said additional evidence, and the court may thereupon order such evidence to be taken in such manner and upon such terms and conditions as it may deem proper.

"At the earliest convenient time the court shall hear, review, and determine the appeal upon said record and evidence, and may alter or revise the decision

appealed from and enter such judgment as to it may seem just. The revision by the court shall be confined to the points set forth in the reasons of appeal.] "SEC. 16. (a) An appeal may be taken, in the manner hereinafter provided, from decisions of the commission to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia in any of the following cases:

"(1) By any applicant for a station license, or for renewal of an existing station license, or for modification of an existing station license, whose application is refused by the commission.

"(2) By any licensee whose license is revoked, modified, or suspended by the commission.

“(3) By any other person, firm, or corporation aggrieved or whose interests are adversely affected by any decision of the commission granting or refusing any such application or by any decision of the commission revoking, modifying, or suspending an existing station license.

"Such appeal shall be taken by filing with said court within twenty days after the decision complained of is effective, notice in writing of said appeal and a statement of the reasons therefor, together with proof of service of a true copy of said notice and statement upon the commission. Unless a later date is specified by the commission as part of its decision, the decision complained of shall be considered to be effective as of the date on which public announcement of the decision is made at the office of the commission in the city of Washington.

"(b) The commission shall thereupon immediately, and in any event not later than five days from the date of such service upon it, mail or otherwise deliver a copy of said notice of appeal to each person, firm, or corporation shown by the records of the com mission to be interested in such appeal and to have a right to intervene therein under the provisions of this section, and shall at all times thereafter permit any such person, firm, or corporation to inspect and make copies of the appellant's statement of reasons for said appeal at the office of the commission in the city of Washington. Within thirty days after the filing of said appeal the commission shall file with the court the originals or certified copies of all papers and evidence presented to it upon the appli cation involved or upon its order revoking, modifying, or suspending a license, and also a like copy of its decision thereon, and shall within thirty days thereafter file a full statement in writing of the facts and grounds for its decision as found and given by it, and a list of all interested persons, firms, or corporations to whom it has mailed or otherwise delivered a copy of said notice of appeal.

"(c) Within thirty days after the filing of said appeal any interested person, firm, or corporation may intervene and participate in the proceedings had upon said appeal by filing with the court a notice of intention to intervene and a verified statement showing the nature of the interest of such party, together with proof of service of true copies of said notice and statement, both upon appellant and upon the commission. Any person, firm, or corporation who would be aggrieved or whose interests would be adversely affected by a reversal or modification of the decision of the commission complained of shall be considered an interested party.

[ocr errors]

(d) At the earliest convenient time the court shall hear and determine the appeal upon the record before it, and shall have power, upon such record, to enter a judgment affirming or reversing the decision of the commission, and, in event the court shall render a decision and enter an order reversing the decision of the commission, it shall remand the case to the commission to carry out the judgment of the court: Provided, however, That the review by the court shall be limited to questions of law and that findings of fact by the commission, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive unless it shall clearly appear that the findings of the commission are arbitrary or capricious. The court's judgment shall be final, subject, however, to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon writ of certiorari on petition therefor under section 347 of title 28 of the Judicial Code by appellant, by the commission, or by any interested party intervening in the appeal.

"(e) The court may, in its discretion, enter judgment for costs in favor of or against an appellant, and/or other interested parties intervening in said appeal, but not against the commission, depending upon the nature of the issues involved upon said appeal and the outcome thereof."

The purpose of the amendment is to clarify the procedure on appeal to the court from decisions of the Federal Radio Commission, to more clearly define the scope of the subject matter of such appeals, and to insure a review of the decision of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia by the Supreme Court.

This amendment was part of H. R. 11635, which unanimously passed in the House on April 30, 1930. Because of the urgent need of this legislation and the probability that consideration of H. R. 11635 will not be reached in the Senate, the amendment is offered as a separate bill.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »