An Act to amend the Communications Act of 1934 in regard to protests of grants of instruments of authorization without hearing
PL 84-391 (H.R.5614), enacted 01/20/1956

Public Laws 
ENACTED DURING THE 
SECOND SESSION OF THE EIGHTY-FOURTH CONGRESS 
OF THE 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, January 3, 1956, and adjourned 
sine die on Friday, July 27, 1956. 
DWIGHT D . EISENHOWER, President; RICHARD M . 
NIXON, Vice President; SAM RAYBURN, Speaker oj the House of Representatives. 
Public Law 391 
CHAPTER 1 
AN ACT 
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 in regard to protests of 
instruments of authorization without hearing. 
grants of 
Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That subsection (c) 
of section 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, is 
amended to read as follows: 
"(c) When any instrument of authorization is granted by the Com-
mission without a hearing as provided in subsection (a) hereof, such 
grant shall remain subject to protest as hereinafter provided for a 
period of thirty days. During such thirty-day period any party in 
interest may file a protest under oath directed to such grant and request 
a hearing on said application so granted. Any protest so filed shall 
be served on the grantee, shall contain such allegations of fact as will 
show the protestant to be a party in interest, and shall specify with 
particularity the facts relied upon by the protestant as showing that 
the grant was improperly made or would otherwise not be in the 
public interest. 
The Commission shall, within thirty days of the 
filing of the protest, render a decision making findings as to the suffi-
ciency of the protest in meeting the above requirements; and, where it 
so finds, shall designate the application for hearing upon issues relating 
to all matters specified in the protest as grounds for setting aside the 
grant, except with respect to such matters as to which the Commission, 
after affording protestant an opportunity for oral argument, finds, for 
reasons set forth in the decision, that, even if the facts alleged were 
to be proven, no grounds for setting aside the grant are presented. 
January 20, 1956 
[H. R. 5614] 
C onununic ations 
A c t 
of 
1934, a-
mendment. 
66 Stat. 715. 
47 u s e 309. 
PUBLIC LAW 392-JAN. 26, 1956 
[70 S T A T . 
The Commission may in such decision redraft the issues urged by the 
protestant in accordance with the facts or substantive matters alleged 
in the protest, and may also specify in such decision that the applica-
tion be set for hearing upon such further issues as it may prescribe, 
as well as whether it is adopting as its own any of the issues resulting 
from the matters specified in the protest. In any hearing subsequently 
held upon such application issues specified by the Commission upon 
its own initiative or adopted by it shall be tried in the same manner 
provided in subsection (b) hereof, but with respect to issues resulting 
from facts set forth in the protest and not adopted or specified by the 
Commission, on its own motion, both the burden of proceeding with 
the introduction of evidence and the burden of proof shall be upon 
the protestant. 
The hearing and determination of cases arising under 
this subsection shall be expedited by the Commission and pending 
hearing and decision the effective date of the Commission's action to 
which protest is made shall be postponed to the effective date of the 
Commission's decision after hearing, unless the authorization involved 
is necessary to the maintenance or conduct of an existing service, or 
unless the Commission affirmatively finds for reasons set forth in the 
decision that the public interest requires that the grant remain in 
effect, in which event the Commission shall authorize the applicant 
to utilize the facilities or authorization in question pending the 
Commission's decision after hearing." 
Approved January 20, 1956. 
Public Law 392 
CHAPTER 2 
AN ACT 
tH» R
« 1*68] 
For the relief of the .lefEerson and Plaquemines Drainage District and certain 
persons whose properties abnt on the Federal Government's right-of-way 
for Harvey Canal in Louisiana. 
January 25, 1956 
Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the 
jeffersion^nd United States of America in Congress assembled, That jurisdiction is 
Dra^in^gV^Dis- hereby conferred on the United States District Court for the Eastern 
trict, La. 
District of Louisiana, New Orleans Division, to hear, determine, and 
render judgment fixing the boundary between the east right-of-way 
" 
• 
line for Harvey Canal (a segment of the Intracoastal Canal in Loui-
siana) , south of the eighty-arpent line, and the abutting properties 
and the easement, servitude and ri^ht of use for levee purposes adja-
cent to said right-of-way line, claimed by the Jefferson and Plaque-
mines Drainage District, and which said right-of-way was conveyed 
to the United States by act of sale from Harvey Canal Land and 
Improvement Company on March 10, 1924, and registered in the 
records of the parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana, on March 10, 
1924, in conveyance book 61, folio 443. In the determination of such 
matter all defenses of the United States based upon laches, lapses of 
time, statutes of limitation, prescriptive periods, and estoppel arising 
out of the issuance of permits for any activities or constructions along 
said Harvey Canal, are hereby waived. 
SEC. 2. Such suit may be instituted at any time within one year after 
the enactment of this Act by Jefferson and Plaquemines Drainage 
District or any of said abutting property owners, and any of said 
other parties may join or intervene in such action. 
Nothing in this 
Act shall be construed as an inference of liability on the part of the 
United States.