Our association feels that your suggested handling of waivers is good and wishes me to tell you that they will cooperate with you to the fullest extent and they also are very much pleased and grateful to Mr. Roosevelt, Mr. Giles, and yourselves in connection with the other matters discussed in our recent meeting. The next letter is from Mr. Max Harrison, president of the American Maritime Association and is addressed to Capt. M. I. Goodman and reads as follows:

DEAR MARTY: We were advised at a meeting of AMA member companies today that the owners have received your letter requesting comments on the proposed procedure governing the shipment of wheat and wheat flour to Soviet bloc countries. I have been ask to inform you that in accordance with our comments in Washington on Tuesday, the owners consider 30 days' notice insufficient to meet the shipping schedules and would like 60 days' notice. However, in light of the special circumstances in these deals, they would appreciate 45 days notice, if that is possible.

That was the only comment from AMA. It was not possible or we did not conclude that we could have 45 days' minimum notice in our waiver of procedure, rather it is 30 and on that point I would like to read the precise language in our waiver notice as it finally went out:

Exporters

and I quote

are advised that waivers will not be considered unless U.S.-flag ships have been given a reasonable period to meet the shipping schedule and in any event the shipping schedule for U.S.-flag ships shall extend over the same period applicable for other shipping but should not be less than 30 calendar days after the date of solicitation unless compelling circumstances require a shorter period.

In other words, we did not word this in such a way as to say that 30 days is all it should be but we stated it in such a way that there should be more than 30 days under the circumstances if that was indicated and certainly it should be the same as for foreign shipping and only if compelling circumstances indicated, should there or could there be less than 30 days.

This letter is from the Association of Ship Brokers & Agents, it is addressed to Captain Goodman and is signed by the president of that association, Mr. Glosky. It reads as follows:

GENTLEMEN: We have your letter of December 11 addressed to this association and we submit herewith our suggestions for a modus operandi designed to give American shipowners every reasonable opportunity to employ their own tonnage on any possible offer, if such tonnage is available at reasonable rates.

Over a century of experience has shown that the surest and most expeditious way to bring full cargoes and the ships to carry them together, has been a broker using his own individual efforts and methods, whatever they may be.

There is no daily shipping paper that is published on all our coasts. To attempt to assure the Maritime Administration that American-flag tonnage is not avail able at reasonable rates by such a method would be cumbersome, expensive, and time consuming.

We suggest the following procedure.

1. All requests for waivers will be filed with Maritime Administration. Such request shall give the following data:

(a) Date of tender.

(b) Shipping dates.

(c) Rates.

(d) Terms and conditions.

(e) Loading and discharge ports.

(f) Cargo tonnage offered.

(g) Full response, if any, to such tenders.

2. All requests for waivers will be immediately forwarded by the Maritime Administration to the New York Maritime Exchange, 80 Broad Street, New York 4, N.Y., for posting where they will be immediately available to all shipowners and the wire service. Brokers and principals to be identified whenever associated.

3. If, after 5 days from filing with the Maritime Administration, no suitable offer has been received from any American shipowner, the waiver will be considered granted.

All American shipowners belong to the maritime exchange, insofar as we know. That is the substance of the suggestions from the Association of Ship Brokers and Agents and, if you will note, the essence of his suggestions is that we do not rely on the publishing in newspapers but add in a posting in the exchange. We thought that a good suggestion and. it is accepted.

This letter is from Mr. W. P. Rathbone of the Columbia Steamship Co. and reads as follows:

GENTLEMEN: Thank you for your letter of December 11, enclosing a proposed draft of "Notice to Exporters and American Shipowners on Shipment of Wheat and Wheat Flour to Soviet-Bloc Countries" and requesting our comments or suggestions prior to its publication.

Our one suggestion would be to increase the period for U.S.-flag ships to have the opportunity to meet the shipping schedules if possible. From a review of our operations and chartering, it would appear that we would require perhaps 45 to 60 days to position our vessels.

The only suggestion that was made by this particular correspondent was for a period of 45 to 60 days to position their vessels.

This next letter is from Harold A. Thurston from Pocahontas Steamship Co. and is dated December 13, 1963. The letter reads as follows:

GENTLEMEN: We have reviewed the proposed draft of “Notice to Exporters and American Shipowners on Shipment of Wheat and Wheat Flour to Soviet-Bloc Countries."

We are in complete agreement with the procedures outlined and feel certain that you have devoted sufficient thought and effort to this project so that any mechanics you decide on will be acceptable to us.

There are other letters here and I am going to pick the ones that would be primarily interested in this particular business.

This letter is from Mr. Alfred Segal of the American Trading & Production Corp. The letter is dated December 16, 1963, and reads as follows:

GENTLEMEN: We acknowledge with thanks yours of December 11 to which was attached a proposed draft of “Notice to Exporters and American Shipowners on Shipment of Wheat and Wheat Flour to Soviet-Bloc Countries."

Our only comment is that we feel such regulation, in our opinion, covers the situation of waivers quite adequately.

The next letter is from Keystone Shipping Co. and is signed by Mr. Karl R. Kurz in which he made the following suggestion:

As a suggestion, we believe that the exporter, in applying to the Maritime Administration for a waiver of the 50 percent U.S.-flag requirement, should also have a certification by at least one recognized dry-cargo or tanker-chartering broker stating that the entire available American-flag steamship charter market has been canvassed and this statement to be supported by a list of the steamship owners and agents who were actually contacted. This information would serve as a doublecheck for the Maritime Administration to substantiate the nonavailability of American ships and thereby protect the American-flag steamship business.

The next letter is from Mr. A. E. Fridberg of the Matson Navigation Co. and the Oceanic Steamship Co. The letter is addressed to Captain Goodman and reads as follows:

The procedure as outlined in the attachment to your memo would seem to cover, adequately, requirements for any necessary notification/investigation prior to granting of waivers.

The next letter is from the States Steamship Line and is signed by Mr. R. G. Jubitz, vice president. The letter is dated December 16, 1963, and their only suggestion was as follows:

The only suggestion we have is that we feel it would be more equitable if the reasonable period for notice to arrange freight was increased from 30 to 45 days. Next is a letter from Alcoa Steamship Co. signed by W. L. Hamm and he stated as follows:

We do not have any comments, but we do appreciate and thank you for the opportunity to make comments in advance of publication.

The next letter is from the vice president of Moore-McCormack Lines who is Mr. D. B. Geddes. The letter is dated December 16 and is addressed to Captain Goodman. Mr. Geddes said:

We have studied this draft carefully and can advise you that Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc., is in complete accord with the procedures outlined therein. May we thank you for your continued efforts on behalf of the Americanflag shipping industry.

This letter is from Mr. H. B. Luckett, vice president of American President Lines. The letter is dated December 17 and is addressed to Captain Goodman. The letter reads, as follows:

We are in full accord with the wording and intent of this notice. Its implementation and enforcement should assure maximum participation by American carriers in the movement of grains and allied products to Soviet-bloc countries and, at the same time, not prove unduly restrictive to the movement in general. We have no constructive suggestions relative to the procedures outlined. Next we have a telegram from the United States Lines Co. which reads, as follows:

Reference your letter December 11 our opinion your proposed draft of notice to operators and American shipowners on shipment of wheat and wheat flour to Soviet-bloc countries will adequately protect our interests.

There is also a telegram from the American Mail Line Ltd., reading as follows:

Reference your letter December 11, enclosing proposed draft notice to exporters and American shipowners on shipment of wheat and wheat flour to Soviet-bloc countries, we have no comments or suggestions to offer as outlined procedures appear adequate.

The next letter is from the States Marine-Isthmian and is signed. by E. A. Terres, vice president. The letter is dated December 17 and is addressed to Captain Goodman. Mr. Terres stated:

The proposed draft seems to contain all the safeguards that would be required to protect U.S.-flag carriers.

The next letter is from the Bloomfield Steamship Co. and is signed by Wiley R. George, president. The letter is dated December 17 and is addressed to Captain Goodman.

Mr. George states:

The proposed notice is clear and understandable and announces a practical procedure to support the Government's policy relative to the participation of U.S.flag ships in these movements, and should be sent to all interested parties.

This letter is from Farrell Lines and is signed by the vice president, John C. Gorman. The letter is dated December 18 and is addressed to Mr. Goodman.

We believe that your proposed draft advising of the procedures to be followed meets the situation. We concur.

The next letter is from Mr. Joseph G. Barkan of the Prudential Lines. The letter is dated December and is addressed to Mr. Good

man.

Mr. Barkan stated:

We are of the opinion that the proposed system outlined in your attachment clearly sets forth the procedures to be followed.

Those, ladies and gentlemen, are the responses that we received generally from representatives of shipping companies and shipping associations.

We also received some responses and reaction from grain exporters. I will summarize all of these by simply saying that the grain exporters as a group did not have any specific suggestions to make about the procedures. They did point out, however, that the specific requirement was going to make it difficult for them to negotiate sales and there are these few specific suggestions.

From Drayfus Co., the 30-day provision subject to different interpretations, they suggest we clarify that. They say the procedures may be workable provided guidelines include ceilings on demurrage

rates.

From Cargill:

We believe the rules are workable if certain points are clarified or stipuated, including limitation, ship availability 45 to 50 days after solicitation.

That is within a specified period of time and Cargill suggested 45 days as the very maximum. It is rather strange that we have a grain exporter apparently "in collusion" with the shipping industry.

STATEMENT OF EARL SHEPARD, VICE PRESIDENT, ATLANTIC COAST, SEAFARERS INTERNATIONAL UNION

Mr. SHEPARD. For clarification would you let us know-we came in a little bit late-would you tell us what these communications are about and the date they stem from?

Mr. GILES. I am citing responses to our notice to the proposed waiver of procedure. All these communications were received in December. Mr. SHEPARD. These are all dated in December?

Mr. GILES. That is right.

Mr. SHEPARD. These are in response to a proposed notice you made? Mr. GILES. Yes, in December.

Mr. SHEPARD. What date was that?

Mr. GILES. I am sorry, we have got to move along. We will clarify this before you leave.

Mr. Tennant will you be available to assist him in clarification on this?

I am simply putting out our waiver procedure-in December it was adopted officially-I am simply putting this forward to answer some questions e about our waiver procedure.

Mr. SHEPARD. You answered the question. It was December 7, I believe?

Mr. GILES. It was December 11.

All right, Continental Grain Co. made no specific suggestions on waiver procedure. They did make some comments on the require ments about the 50 percent U.S.-flag shipment as being an obstacle in trying to make sales.

It was against that background, gentlemen, on January 7 that we issued our final notice of procedure.

I believe that is now in the record.

The only substantial sale, the only sale to the Soviet Union in which this agency has been involved has been the sale of the Continental Grain Co. You are familiar with that, the amount of the sale and the developments for the past month or month and a half.

We had a great deal of discussion about various points. Initially we put out only our waiver of procedure and then we put out our guideline rates, per ton rates. We did not specify any terms or conditions that enter in a charter such as, insurance, loading and unloading, overtime and all the many points that could come up. We suggested both to exporters and shipowners that as those matters came up, we hoped they would be able to resolve them between themselves and we would not have to pass on those points, at least no more than absolutely necessary.

By January 17 there were many items in controversy between Continental Grain Co. and shipowners. On that date we published terms. and conditions for tender for solicitation of U.S.-flag vessels for shipping wheat as related to the Continental shipments. That is generally known and has been made available to the press and shipowners previously.

I would like to put that in the record because it is involved in this specific case.

Charterers will entertain offers at rates not in excess of those published by Marad for vessels in the 15,600 to 30,000 DWT for cargo class. Vessels not exceeding 32 foot draft on arrival are preferred; but appropriate consideration will be given to larger vessels and vessels exceeding 32 foot draft. The terms and conditions applicable thereto are attached.

Commodity: Wheat in bulk.

Loading port: One/two safe berths, one safe port U.S. gulf; charterers' option one/two safe berths, one safe port United States north of Hatteras, Albany and New York excluded.

Discharging port/s: One, option two safe U.S.S.R. Black Sea ports (Odessa/ Iljichevsk counting as one port).

Rate of loading: 6 WWSHEX NORPAC-5 WWSHEX US GULF/USNH, unless used and if used actual time to count.

Rate of discharge: Receivers to discharge cargo at the average rate of 2,000 metric tons per weather working day of 24 consecutive hours, with Sundays, official and local holidays and Saturday afternoons (unless Saturday already a holiday, in which case entire day not to count) excepted, whether used or not but actual time used to count provided vessel can deliver at such rate.

Demurrage/despatch: $1,500/$750 loading port; $2,500/$1,250 discharging port. Charterers to pay demurrage and collect despatch at loading port; at port/s of discharge receivers to pay demurrage and collect despatch.

Freight payment: Freight fully prepaid and payable in New York within 7 days after release of original onboard bills of lading to charterers in New York. Other conditions: Shifting time between berths at loading port counting as laytime but all expenses to be for owners' account.

Tendering: Regular Baltimore form C tender clause.