Evening star., 1937-06-02
NEW CODE WOULD
STRENGTHEN D, c,
LIFT REGULATION
Committee Reports Plan
Designed to Prevent
Accidents.
CITY HEADS TO HOLD
HEARING ON JUNE 22
Old Problem of Control Over Fed.
eral Elevators Is Again
Brought Up.


Brought Up.
Strengthening of the District eleva-
tor regulations, designed to prevent
any recurrence of an accident such as
occurred in March, 1896, causing the
death of l3-year-old Harvey CroWell
was proposed to the Commissioners to-
day by a committee of officials who
have worked for more than a year on
revision of the elevator code.
In its report, the committee also
raised again the old problem of who
should have control and inspection OF
elevators in Federal buildings, but left
the question unanswered. Instead. the
committee advised the city heads that
unless the President by executive order
gave the District power to make Fed
eral elevators conform to the District
code, the District building inspector
should be relieved of all responsibility
for Federal lifts.
Difficulties Explained.
Attached to the report was a lengthy
statement by John A. Dickinson OF
the Bureau OF Standards explaining
difficulties involved in any proposal to
permit the District to require that
Federal elevators conform to the Dis
trict Code.
The Crowell boy was crushed to
death in an automatic elevator in an
apartment building in the 1900 block
of Georgia avenue. The elevator had
landing doors at the various floors
which swung out into the halls. These
doors automatically swung shut when
person entered the elevator and
pushed the button, starting the car in
movement. While officials never were
able to determine exactly what hap
pened, it was assumed by some that
the boy was caught between the hall
way landing door and the car door
and was crushed when the cage was
put in motion.
Conformed to Regulation.
District elevator inspectors reported
during the ensuing investigation that
the elevator had been installed in
conformity with regulations. They
classed the elevator as "semi-auto-
matte" although other officials could
find no such provision in the present
code for passenger elevators.
Among other things, the huge docu-
rent containing the proposed revised
code makes definite and clear what
sre automatic elevators, Inserting new
definitions describing what is meant
by the control of an elevator.
The new code also makes more strin-
gent the rules about the limit of space
which may exist between the elevator
cage and the hoistway edge of the
landing threshold limiting it to 4
inches where the the elevators are
operated by licensed attendant and
solely from within the car.
This new section also provides that
for elevators having swing-doors on
the hall-landing, the doors shall be
as nearly flush as practicable, but in
no case shall the distance exceed one
half inch between the edge of the
cage and the hoistway edge of the
landing threshold. For sliding doors
at the hallway landing, the new code
would provide that the distance not
exceed pa inches
Plan Public Hearings.
Public hearings on the proposed
code will be held by the Commissioners
June % at pm, in the board room
OF the District Building. The docu-
ment is so long and the available
District funds for printing legal no
tices so limited, the Commissioners de-
cided they could not advertise the
document. Instead, it was released
to newspapers and interested parties
are advised they may obtain mimeo-
graphed copies by calling at the Dis
trict Building.
Inc code was prepared by a COM
mlttee composed of Capt H. S. Bishop
,r., Assistant Engineer Commissioner,
chairman; Col. John w. Oehmann,
inspector of buildings; Edward W.
Thomas, assistant corporation counsel,
and Dickinson, who is elevator code
expert OF the Bureau of Standards
The committee report revealed that
the building inspector has reported
his inability to issue periodic certifi-
Gates OF inspection showing that ele-
vators in buildings owned by the Fed
eral Government comply with the Dis
trlct regulations, when the plans for
such elevators have not been submit
ted for approval and when elevators,
IN many instances, do not comply with
the District regulations.
Last August 81, the report shows.
the corporation counsel ruled that the
District cannot enforce compliance
since the elevator code, passed by
Congress, cannot be construed to take
from the United States ANY preroga-
tive, right, title or interest to construct
or operate buildings on it's own prop
erty in the manner it desires"
Should Ask Order.
At that time the corporation counsel
told the Commissioners that if they
desired to assume jurisdiction over
Federal elevators they should attempt
to secure from the President an execu-
1--WE oroer requiring that plans Tor all
Federal buildings comply with building
and other regulations of the District
Passing this problem back to the
commissioners. the committee said:
This recommendation was ap-
proved by the Board of Commissioners
on September 4, 1896, but no action
to secure the executive order has been
taken to date"
Dickinson. in his appended report
said that the National Park Service
installs elevators in accordance with
the national code If it is physically
possible to comply with it. He added
that inspection by the District has
been requested by the Park Service as
. further check on inspections made
by the Federal forces. Where eleva-