Legal Document

363 U.S. 229 80 Supreme Court Reporter 1134 4 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 1186 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.GRAND RIVER DAM AUTHORITY. Number 503. Argued May 17, 1960. Decided June 13, Mr. Judge Lee Rankin, Sol. Gen., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Jess Larson, respondent. Opinion of the by Justice DOUGLAS, announced HARLAN. 1 Grand River is a nonnavigable tributary navigable Arkansas and flows through Oklahoma. Respondent was created Oklahoma Legislature to develop hydroelectric power on River. It is, use statutory language law creating it, 'a governmental agency body politic corporate.' Session Laws Oklahoma, 1935, chapter 70, Article 4, § 1, 82 O.S.1951 861. A report Army Corps Engineers, made in 1930, indicated that federal development at Pensacola, Markham Ferry, Ft. Gibson—all sites River—was not then economically justified.1 Respondent, following its creation proposed river plan these three sites. In 1939 Engineers recommended three-dam coordinated project as undertaking.2 Congress Flood Control Act August 18, 1941,3 incorporated into comprehensive basin. 2 Meanwhile respondent obtained license under 23(b) Federal Power Act4 build operate Pensacola completed it 1940. The took over operation this during World War II, after which returned 1946 started construction Gibson. has been an integral part regulation navigation, control floods, production tributaries. Congress, modifying basin,5 cleared way obtain from Commission Ferry. Thus operates Gibson farthest downstream, while two upstream projects. 70-acre tract owned condemned when built; flowage rights lands were acquired; payment relocation transmission lines. claimed more. demanded $10,000,000 'taking' water franchise electric energy site.6 Claims, reserving question amount compensation due, held divided vote liable. Ct.Cl., 175 F.Supp. 153. case here writ certiorari. 361 922, 292, 239. 3 Claims recognized if stream would be liable depriving another entrepreneur opportunity utilize flow produce power. Our cases hold such interest compensable because asserts superior authority Commerce Clause, Const. art. 8, cl. 3, or regulate there no 'property' sense Fifth Amendment navigation easement precludes private ownership flow. See versus Chandler-Dunbar Water Co., 53, 69, 33 667, 674, 57 L.Ed. 1063; Twin City 350 222, 224—225, 76 259, 260 261, 100 240. Government contends navigational servitude extends also waters, pre-empting state-created property least asserted against Government. view we take case, however, necessary reach contention. 1941 Act, already mentioned,7 adopted one work improvement 'for benefit destructive floodwaters' reservoirs That action protect 'navigable capacity' (United Rio Grande Dam & Irrigation 174 690, 708, 19 770, 777, 43 1136) within constitutional Congress. We State ex rel. Phillips Guy KF105 F3 Atkinson 313 508, 61 1050, 85 1487, objection could Denison Red River, nonnavigable, but Mississippi. stated, 'There reason why cannot, commerce treat watersheds key flood streams their tributaries.' Id., page 525, 1059. And see Appalachian Electric 311 377, 426, 291, 308, 243; Authority Grand-Hydro, 335 359, 373, 69 114, 121, 93 64. said supra, '* * tributaries streams.' pages 1059, 1060. added, 'It alone decide whether particularproject, itself more scheme, will have beneficial effect arteries interstate warrant it. determination legislative character.' 527, fact had multiple purpose irrelevant issue, id., 528—534, 1060—1063, expected pay way. 533, 1063. '(T)he ends other than served, may relatively lesser importance does invalidate exercise conferred Congress.' 533—534, cannot say record dam any less essential useful desirable viewpoint Dam.8 When appropriates either pursuant exercising established prerogatives beholden one. Plainly our decisions If sued damages failure grant project, claim something right withheld So exercises prerogative building itself.9 5 argues vested waters points seeks trace title Cherokees who, consideration agreement remove territory included received December 31, 1838, deed territory.10 By 15 March 1893, 27 Statutes-at-Large 612, 645, agreed Cherokee land allotted members nation severalty. argument divested entirely prior Oklahoma's admission 1907. Assuming, arguendo, true, respondent's advanced. dealing with Osage Indians stretch Brewer-Elliott Oil Gas company States, 77, 87—88, 60, 64, 67 140, said: 6 'The grows out government complete sovereignty question. she came Union public condition they then, bed become Osages, nothing equality states required permitted divesting title.' 7 remained them later given reference 25 April 26, 1906, 34 137, 146, granted light companies construct dams across purposes. acquire condemn prescribed situations 'subject approval Secretary Interior.' contained end proviso critical reading follows: 'Provided, all hereunder shall subject future Territory Indian situated.' But regulatory measure. did purport appurtenant lands. 1906 assertion possessed territory. Moreover, are shown passed Yet initial proprietor western others must derive title. Gerlach Live Stock 339 725, 747, 70 955, 966, 94 1231; Oregon, 349 435, 75 832, 99 1215. various grants conveyances statute certain appropriations domain machinery States. 747—748, 966 967; 446—448, 838—840. only reliance based 1906. As seen, measure might obtained; acquired now chain clear believe, nevertheless urged precluded principle construed favor lest enlarged include what expressly included. Pacific R. 353 112, 116, 77 685, 687, 693. 8 since gave decision Niagara Mohawk Corp., 347 239, 74 487, 98 686. merely treats 'usufructuary like rights,' U.S., 251, 494, making licensee compensate claimant them. Here claims Act; builds own account. 9 erred failing distinguish between appropriation frustration enterprise done prove prospective business lost. More Omnia Commercial 261 502, 437, 773, holds. stood make large profits contract steel company. Power, requisitioned company's entire production. Suit brought just compensation. Court, pointing many laws rulings reduce value individuals, noted appropriate ended his exploit contract. 'Frustration essentially different things.' 513, 439. Mitchell 267 341, 345, 45 293, 294, 644; Tennessee Valley Powelson, 319 266, 281—283, 63 1047, 1055—1056, 87 1390. No need here. 10 conclusion, business, contract, land, Clause do plans expectations resulted chose undertake account Amendment. 11 Reversed. H.R.Doc. 74th Cong., 1st Sess., Vol. 3. 107, 76th Sess. 55 638, 645. 49 846, 16 Code KF62 817, Annotated KF65 U5 817. 68 450. Severance damages, storage headwater benefits accruing unit, cost surveys, plans, specifications loss rights-of-way interconnection unit system distribution claimed. denied review denial sought Note 639, findings capacity elevation 554 582 reserved waters.' riparian involved, Kelly, 243 316, 330, 37 380, 386, 746, substance taking land. Willow 324 499, 507, 65 761, 766, 89 1101, narrowly confined holding Kelly case. Mills, Land (1924), 27.

Classification Label: 9