The Washington times., 1920-08-24
IT, s, OWNERSHIP
Of PEPCO URGED
CONTINUED from First Page)

CONTINUED from First PageD
nected with a power project. The
Commissioners have given carefui
consideration to the combined project
and have also given consideration to
the so-called Patuxent project.
PATUXENT PROJECT BETTER.
Considering alone the interests of
the District of Columbia, the Com
missioners are fully convinced that
the greater softness of the PatuXent
water is an advantage of very great
value. 1t has been estimated by
Allen Hazen that this greater soft
ness is worth for an, additional supply
of 100000 900 gallons, an additional
investment of four and one-half mil
lion dollars.
While the Patuxent project may
cost somewhat more than either of
the Potomac river projects thathavc
heretofore been considered, yet it is
believed that the differ
ence in cost will be considerably less
than the difference in value of the
completed water supply projects.
"a further and important advantage
of the Patuxent project lies in the
fact that it will be wholly separate
of supply. The present aqueduct has
stood successfully for sixty years, but
if it should be broken by some con
vulsion of nature or deliberately de-
stroyed by a public enemy, the city
would be in "A bad way. Two sources
of supply widely separated would give
an added assurance against any in.
terruption to this important service
and would permit repairs to be made
to either of the two lines of supply
without complete interruption of the
service.
"Some years ago Congress recog-
nized the desirability of treating the
water supply and sewage disposal
problems of the District of Columbia
as parts of a larger problem, includ-
ing territory outside of and surround
ing the District of Columbia. and
I 1thorized cooperation with the
Suburban Sanitary Com
of Maryland in the supply Of
V ater and in the disposal of sewage.
"This Maryland commission believes
that its interests will be better served
if the additional water needed by the
District Of Columbia is secured from
the Patuxent than from the Potomac.
II investigation confirms this state
mept, ii will form an added reason
for the selection OF the Patuxent pro-
ject as the interests Of all the terri
tory to be served should be consid-
cred
QUIZ BOWEN ON RIGHTS.
Bowen was closely questioned by
the members of the commits ssion as to
what rights the Washington Railway
and Electric Company had and how
they acquired them at Great Falls.
He said that about 1904 the Washing
ton Railway and Electric Company
had an engineer make an investigation
as to the advisable of using the
falls as commercial electric gen
orator.
The engineer reported adversely on
the project, he said, and the company
had not pursued the matter any fur
ther. He said that the company was
now holding II for the eventuality
that II coal became too expensive II
might be used.
He said that even with the Great
Falls on n working basis. that a
steam auxiliary would have to be
erected to take care of the situation
when water became too low in the
Potomac. He urged the development
of the water supply as independent
from the power supply, on account of
the pressing need for water here now
and the fact that the Potomac EIec-
trio Power Company, n subsidiary of
the Washington Railway and Electric
is now able to supply WASH
ington with all the current IL needs.
Bowen said that any action tho
would take would dupli-
cate the work OF the. electric light
company and be a waste of public
Secretary Payne. asked Bowen
what would confront the Government
in acquiring the site, and Bowen
said that nothing but compensation
to the electric light company for its
rights would interfere.
II guess the site would suddenly
become very valuable, II the Govern.