DISPOSAL OF INSTITUTE, W. VA., RUBBER PLANT COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY UNITED STATES SENATE EIGHTY-FOURTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON S. Res. 197 TO OPPOSE SALE OF GOVERNMENT-OWNED SYNTHETIC 72427 FEBRUARY 1 AND 2, 1956 Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking and Currency UNITED STATES WASHINGTON: 1956 CONTENTS Page Burnside, M. G., a Representative in Congress from the State of Burt, William I., president, Goodrich-Gulf Chemicals, Inc.. Byrd, Robert C., à Representative in Congress from the State of West Gwynne, John W., Chairman, accompanied by Joseph Sheehy, Marland, William C., Governor, West Virginia Neely, Matthew M., a United States Senator from the State of West Pettibone, Holman D., Chairman, accompanied by Leslie R. Rounds, Vice Chairman; Eugene Holland, executive director; Harold W. Sheehan, general counsel; and James Wainger, assistant general counsel, Rubber Producing Facilities Disposal Commission____ Reports, letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by- Blalock, Lohman & Kliewer, Houston, Tex.: Letter to chairman enclosing opinion by Covington & Burling, Washington, D. C........... Carter, E. A., president, West Virginia State Federation of Labor: Clay, Lyell B., city soliciter, Charleston, W. Va.: Telegram to Commerce Department: Business and Defense Services Administra- Federal Facilities Corporation: Letter to chairman, January 27, 1956.. Synthetic-rubber program, comparative balance sheet_ Comparative statement of operations and sales of facilities. Reports, letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by-Con. Fulbright, J. W., a United States Senator from the State of Arkansas. Table, summary of sales prices for GR-S synthetic-rubber pro- Letter to Attorney General, January 18, 1956- Letter to chairman, January 31, 1956. Opinion to Rubber Producing Facilities Disposal Commission.. Kee, Elizabeth, a Representative in Congress from the State of West Rubber Producing Facilities Disposal Commission: Letter to Representative Patman, January 25, 1956. Skeen, Benjamin W., secretary-treasurer, West Virginia State Federa- 8 Staggers, Harley O., a Representative in Congress from the State of West Virginia State Senate: Concurrent Resolution No. 6-- 8 DISPOSAL OF INSTITUTE, W. VA., RUBBER PLANT WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1956 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY, Washington, D. C. The committee met, pursuant to call, in room 301, Senate Office Building, at 10:05 a. m., Senator J. W. Fulbright (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Fulbright, Robertson, Frear, Lehman, Morse, Capehart, Bricker, Bennett, Bush, and Payne. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. This hearing is designed to look into the proposed sale of the synthetic rubber plant at Institute, W. Va., to Goodrich-Gulf Chemicals, Inc. Under Public Law 336 of this Congress, the proposed sale comes to the Congress for review, and becomes final unless either House passes a resolution of disapproval within 30 days. I ask that the report of the Disposal Commission, and the brochure discribing the plant be inserted as an appendix to the record. Our problem is not an easy one. I think there will be no question that putting the plant into operation would be desirable. The output would be helpful to the rubberconsuming industry, and the employment would be welcome in the area. In addition, the sale would yield the Government a substantial sum of money, and terminate the sizable maintenance costs. On the other hand, the Department of Justice has expressed serious concern over this sale. In the first place, before the Commission reached its decision to sell the plant to Goodrich-Gulf, the Department of Justice advised the Commission that a sale of that plant to Goodrich-Gulf or to Goodyear Synthetic Rubber Corp. would not best foster the development of a free competitive synthetic rubber industry, since such disposal would add significantly to the substantial position presently held by these companies in the field of synthetic rubber. Instead, the Department pointed out that a sale to other eligible bidders not engaged in making synthetic rubber would broaden the base of competition and would afford greater assurance to small business of an adequate supply of synthetic rubber. Furthermore, the Attorney General took the position that Were this a private tranaction rather than a sale by the Government subject to the review of the Congress, I would probably request a Federal court to enjoin consummation pending a determination of legality by the court under section 7 of the Clayton Act. With these persuasive arguments for and against the proposed sale, it may be that we should also consider the possibility of reopening the bidding, which would require new legislation and would involve some delay, but might in the long run be more satisfactory from all points of view. |