CONDITIONS

Payment. Payment for bills covering electric power service rendered becomes due upon presentation of bill and it shall be made not later than the 15th day of the month following that in which service is rendered. The right is reserved to suspend service when payment is not so made.

Testing of meters.-The administration shall exercise due care to have all meters at consumer's installations function correctly, and in addition to the general inspection which is periodically made to determine the condition of all meters, it shall at any time, test at its own expense and on its own initiative, any meter which may appear out of adjustment.

When the customer questions the correctness of the meter and requests that it be tested, his request shall be complied with under the following conditions: If the meter is found out of order the cost of the test shall be at the expense of the administration, but if the meter is found correct within the limit stipulated by law, then a charge of $1 shall be paid by the customer.

Limitation. Under this schedule, adjacent or nearby dwelling units, even though owned or operated by the same party or parties, shall not be grouped for service under one single meter. Different buildings of the same residence or institution forming one operating or household unit may be included for billing purposes under one single meter.

Responsibility of customer. The customer shall be responsible for the safety of construction and maintenance of the electrical installation within his premises in accordance with the rules and regulations of Utilization of the Water Resources.

R-1. Table showing average cost to consumer per kilowatt-hour for various connected loads under Puerto Rico Irrigation Service flat rate and schedule No. 11 of the Puerto Rico Railway, Light & Power Co.-Motive power

Mr. LUCCHETTI. I asked to be allowed to insert in the record my comment to the Senate Joint Resolution No. 69, that was filed by Mr. Crawford in the record at the hearing of March 27.

Mr. COLE. What is the substance of that resolution?

Mr. LUCCHETTI. The resolution criticizes severely the action of the Utilization of Water Resources in the handling of funds that pertain to one system as regards the other system, and it went into detail. That is already in the record, and I believe it is only fair to allow me to insert my complete answer in the record. By the way, this answer was made in 1937 at the time the resolution was introduced.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that one of the statements you want to insert in the record?

Mr. LUCCHETTI. Yes.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I do not want to object, because I do not have any objection to it going in, but I simply filed the resolution that was passed by the senate down there, the substance of which separates the Isabela from the management of the Utilization of the Water Resources, and in the senate resolution they gave the reasons for doing so. Now, I understand Mr. Lucchetti wants to answer the resolution. So far as I am concerned, I do not have any further interest in it because here is a bill that calls for the bringing together of these utilities. The senate resolution decentralized and separated the utilities. The Governor has come along and even vetoed the new bill and one of the reasons given for vetoing it is indicated, which shows an apparent deadlock between the Governor and the legislature.

The CHAIRMAN. Of Puerto Rico?

Mr. CRAWFORD. Yes, and the legislature does not want to bring Isabela back into the picture and certainly Mr. Lucchetti has made. it very clear that he does not want to bring it back, since it is losing about $150,000 to $160,000 a year, which places a burden on the insular treasury.

And, as I said, the senate resolution made the separation and I offered this as an analysis as to why the separation took place. I am not personally interested in it. The senate has acted and the legislature has again acted, and the Governor has acted. But I have no objection to it going in.

Mr. LUCCHETTI. Mr. Chairman, that resolution was inserted in the record and contains very serious charges and at the time Congressman Crawford filed it I asked permission to file an answer and it was stated, yes, that I could. I think it is only fair to let the answer to that senate resolution go in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. And you have no objection?
Mr. CRAWFORD. I have no objection.
(The document referred to follows:)

The honorable the GOVERNOR OF PUERTO RICO,

La Fortaleza, San Juan, P. R.

May 3, 1937.

SIR: I have the honor to report on Senate Joint Resolution No. 69 of the first session of the Fourteenth Legislature of Puerto Rico, entitled:

"Joint resolution to ratify the administrative order of the commissioner of the interior, dated December 11, 1934, transferring the administration of the Isabela Hydroelectric Irrigation System back to the Isabela Irrigation Service Organization, empowering and authorizing him to transfer the administration of the Carite Hydroelectric System back to the Irrigation Service Organization of the South Coast, and for other purposes."

The preamble of this Joint Resolution No. 69 contains statements which cannot be accepted and set down as premises without first ascertaining their correctness, involving as they do serious accusations of misdirected processes of administration by the Insular Government in the conduct of one of its growing and most active enterprises, viz: The Irrigation Service of the South Coast and the Utilization of the Water Resources. These accusations are made in an attempt to justify the action which was taken by the commissioner of the interior, on December 11, 1934, ordering the separation of the management of the Isabela Hydroelectric System from that of the General System of Utilization of the Water Resources under which it had been placed on October 1, 1931, pursuant to Act No. 58 of 1928.

The records of this department as well as those of the auditor's office, are clear and complete in every detail and they should be in good faith examined and intelligently analyzed so that the significance and justification of every transaction may be correctly interpreted and its soundness verified, before judgment can be passed on statements such as those made in the 13 whereases of the aforesaid preamble.

Before making any comments on the purposes of this Senate Joint Resolution No. 69, let it be said that although it refers to questions which the administration has under its care, however, the proposed legislation was not prepared by nor was the administration consulted at any time prior to its introduction in the senate.

By this senate joint resolution it is sought to ratify the action which, as already stated, was taken adminsitratively by the commissioner of the interior on December 11, 1934, separating the Hydroelectric System of the Isabela Irrigation Service from the administration of Utilization of the Water Resources, under which it had been placed pursuant to the provisions of Act No. 58 of 1928. That separation was made effective on January 1, 1935.

The question of whether it was or it was not desirable, proper, and legal to make that separation after the consolidation had been effected in accordance with the provisions of law, or of whether or not that separation should continue indefinitely, I shall not attempt to discuss in this report. That is a matter that can best be determined through an examination of the records, and through a study of the operating conditions of both systems which will throw light on the advantages or disadvantages accruing from their consolidated or from their isolated operation.

All that the Senate Joint Resolution No. 69 provides for is the ratification of that separation of the Isabela Electric System from the System of Utilization of the Water Resources. Its title also calls for the separation of the Carite Hydroelectric System (which pertains to the Irrigation Service at Guayama) from the System of Utilization of the Water Resources, but nothing to this effect is contained in the resolution. In this respect the title is at variance with the resolution.

In conclusion and apart from what is stated in the preamble which is fundamentally objectionable, and should not be allowed to go into our statutes without first having those statements clearly investigated and verified, the writer wishes to say that the question of continuing the administration of the Isabela Hydroelectric System separated indefinitely from that of the General System of Utilization of the Water Resources, is one that should not be made compulsory through legislation, but rather should be left to the judgment of the administration to decide on the basis of economic justification.

For all above reasons it is respectfully recommended that Senate Joint Resolution No. 69 be not approved.

Respectfully,

JOSÉ ENRIQUE COLOM,
Commissioner of the Interior.

MAY 5, 1937.

The honorable the GOVERNOR OF PUERTO RICO,

San Juan, Puerto Rico.

SIR: In my report on Senate Joint Resolution No. 69, of the first session, fourteenth legislature, I made reference to statements contained in its preamble that cast reflections on the Government's administration of the consolidated operation of the Irrigation Service of the South Coast and Utilization of the Water Resources.

In connection with those statements, I have the honor to enclose herewith, for your information and whatever action you wish to take on the matter, memo

219245-40-21

randum that has been addressed to me by the Director and Chief Engineer of Utilization of the Water Resources, commenting on the statements made in that preamble.

Respectfully,

José E. COLOM, Commissioner.

MAY 4, 1937.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE COMMISSIONER OF THE INTERIOR

Subject: Statements made in the preamble of Senate Joint Resolution No. 69, first session of fourteenth Legislature of Puerto Rico.

Serious accusations are made in the preamble of Senate Joint Resolution No. 69 which passed both Houses of the last session of the legislature regarding the processes of administration followed in the consolidated operations of the hydroelectric system pertaining to the Puerto Rico Irrigation Service (South Coast) and the System of Utilization of the Water Resources.

Having been thus assailed, the Utilization of the Water Resources and the Irrigation Service of the South Coast deem it proper to provide an answer to those statements setting forth the facts as they actually are. I shall comment on each

one of the 13 whereases contained in that preamble in the same order in which they appear therein:

1. The Isabela hydroelectric system came under the administration of Utilization of the Water Resources on October 1, 1931, and not on October 31 as given in Senate Joint Resolution No. 69.

2. It is true that Utilization of the Water Resources underwent losses in the operation of the Isabela system, but those losses are known and estimated beforehand, as may be ascertained from the report which was submitted to the Executive Council of Puerto Rico during the month of September 1931 in connection with the consolidation that was effected on October 1, 1931. It was stated therein, however, and it was made very clear to the Executive Council that although Utilization of the Water Resources expected to lose money during the first 4 or 5 years, nevertheless it was its plans to so conduct the business in that District with its helping hand to develop the business in such a way that in subsequent years that loss could be recuperated. If Utilization of the Water Resources had not been interfered with in its conduct of the business at Isabela by the then Chief Engineer of the Isabela irrigation system and the then Commissioner of the Interior, who acted always, and for this I submit to the records, in opposition to the plans of Utilization of the Water Resources, the business at Isabela would have been conducted and developed exactly as they were planned and approved by the Executive Council.

3. To speak of "critical financial conditions of the Utilization of the Water Resources" is to dream of something that has not taken place. Fortunately Utilization of the Water Resources from the start of its operation in 1927 has never been in a critical financial condition.

4. It is not true, and for that I submit to the records, that the decision of any matters in connection with the operation of the Isabela hydroelectric system as a part of the general system of Utilization of the Water Resources was prejudicial to the interest and good operation of the Isabela organization. I forcefully challenge that statement and demand exact proof of it. The records in the files of the Department of the Interior and the records in the files of my office in Guayama speak for themselves.

5. There should have been no practical difficulties coming before the Commissioner of the Interior in connection with the operation of the Isabela system as part of the Utilization of the Water Resources system, if the Commissioner of the Interior at the time had consistently made clear to the then Chief Engineer of the Isabela irrigation system that the Isabela hydroelectric system had been placed under the direct care of the Director of Utilization of the Water Resources and that he should refrain from interfering with its administration. In other words, the Government of Puerto Rico by operation of law placed the Isabela hydroelectric system under and entrusted its operation to the Director of the Utilization of the Water Resources and this officer was the one responsible for its operation to the Commissioner of the Interior. However, the Commissioner of the Interior at the time insisted on giving participation to and listening to reports of the then Chief Engineer of the Isabela irrigation system and this was what brought some confusion, at least in the mind of the Commissioner, and caused him the supposed difficulties mentioned in this whereas.