favorable. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to the submission of this report to the Congress. Mr. JONES. Colonel, it would be quite helpful to us if you would, before you commence the presentation of the project, give us the page where this project is listed in the Senate report. Colonel YOUNG. Page 68. Mr. JONES. Are there questions on this project? Mr. HARSHA. I notice in the report, Colonel, it states that the project channel dimensions are inadequate for existing deep draft traffic and precludes use of the larger vessels. As I understand it, this resolution authorizing the construction of this channel work was adopted by the House in 1957? Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir. Mr. HARSHA. When was the channel improvement actually made? Colonel YOUNG. Sir, the existing project was completed in 1960. Mr. HARSHA. When you made the proposal for the existing project did you not take into consideration any increase in channel traffic and the types and sizes of vessels that would use it? Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir, and this project provides an estimate of increased traffic and greater depths for the vessels planned for the future with greater drafts. Mr. HARSHA. But here you are a couple years after you have constructed the project and you are back in here wanting to widen and improve it to meet these problems of deep draft traffic and larger vessels. Mr. BALDWIN. I think the gentleman misunderstood this report. The authority of the survey resolution of 1957 was the authority to make the present study. The actual work, the existing project, was done as a result of an earlier authorization, earlier than this. It is not a matter of just 2 years, Mr. Harsha. The survey resolution of 1957 resulted in this report and when he refers to the existing authorized channel depth he is referring to something which was authorized by Congress before 1957, some time in the more distant past. Mr. HARSHA. I thank the gentleman. That does eliminate part of my questioning. Are you taking into consideration when you make these recommendations to Congress the increased size, probability, at least, of increased size of draft of vessels? Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir. Mr. HARSHA. No objection has been raised to any of this proposal which you are presenting to the committee now? Colonel YOUNG. Local interests have indicated their concurrence in our report, sir, and their willingness to provide the items of local cooperation. Mr. HARSHA. How much local participation and cooperation is there to be in this project? Colonel YOUNG. There is $1,540,000 of local cooperation required, sir, essentially major relocations of existing facilities such as pipelines underneath the existing channels. It is a considerable requirement for local cooperation. Mr. HARSHA. Is this the normal proportion of local and Federal cooperation? Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir; for this type of project. As I indicated, this is in the main the requirement for the relocation of existing utility lines and items of that nature. Mr. HARSHA. You said there is no opposition from anyone so far as you know. Is there objection on the part of any Federal agencies? Colonel YOUNG. No, sir. Comments of the other Federal agencies are favorable. Mr. HARSHA. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. Further questions? (The statements of Congressman James A. Burke and American Merchant Marine Institute, Inc., follow :) STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JAMES A. BURKE, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you and the members of the Subcommittee on Rivers and Harbors for the opportunity to appear before you to speak in behalf of the Weymouth, Fore and Town River project which was among the projects included in S. 2300 passed by the Senate and referred to your committee. It is my understanding that no opposition was expressed to the Senate nor has there been any expressed to this committee. I feel that this project is vitally necessary to the city of Quincy and the town of Weymouth in Massachusetts. Town River is a tributary waterway of the port of Boston and lies entirely within the limits of the city of Quincy. The Town River is a tidal river, approximately 2 miles in length and empties into the Weymouth Fore River at Quincy Point. This river is chiefly used for transportation of petroleum products and the annual tonnage traffic increases each year. The Quincy Oil Co. is located about 1% miles from the mouth of the river and has a 30 million gallon oil terminal, receiving over 50 tankers a year. Present depths of the Town River will not accommodate the large tankers now in use and necessitates the use of barges to transport the fuel to the terminal from the tankers. Increasing the depth to 35 feet and widening the river will provide adequate channel depths and widths for larger ships to carry the prospective commerce on the waterway as well as the existing commerce. Other oil companies as well as ship repair yards and the Quincy Electric Co. are located on the waterway in question. The latter will require the use of deep-draft traffic for receipt of fuel in line with construction of a new generating plant. The Weymouth-Fore River is the location of the General Dynamics/Electric Boat Division Quincy Yard which is one of the largest and most complete shipbuilding plants on the Atlantic coast. It is equipped with 12 launching ways and 3 mooring basins. Also on this river is the Boston Edison Co.'s Edgar Station and the Cities Service Oil Co. The benefit from the completion of this project will be felt by these concerns and assist in the population, industrial and commerical growth of the complete south shore area of which Quincy and Weymouth play a leading role. STATEMENT OF AMERICAN MERCHANT MARINE INSTITUTE, INC., IN SUPPORT OF WEYMOUTH-FORE AND TOWN RIVERS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BOSTON HARBOR, MASS. The report of the Chief of Engineers of the Department of the Army contained in House Document 247 (88th Cong.), as developed by the division engineer, New England division, and approved by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors and Secretary of the Army, would provide for (1) deepening the present 30and 27-foot channels in Weymouth-Fore and Town Rivers, respectively, to 35 feet, mean low water; (2) widening the channel in Hingham Bay generally from 300 to 400 feet; (3) dredging a 400-foot-wide channel above the Fore River Bridge; (4) widening Town River Channel from 250 to 300 feet with increased width on the bends; (5) enlarging and deepening to 35 feet the existing turning basin in Town River, and (6) dredging a 35-foot turning and maneuvering basin 52-529-65-pt. 1- 3 at the confluence of the two rivers in King Cove at an estimated cost of $12,500,000. The benefit-cost ratio for this improvement project is computed at 3.4 to 1. A number of member companies of the institute operate oceangoing bulk carriers to terminals on the above waterways. The AMMI presented a statement to the New England division engineer at a public hearing held in May 1960 in which we urged the deepening of the channels in Weymouth-Fore and Town Rivers to 35 feet; enlarging and deepening the turning basin in Town River to 35 feet and certain other improvements which are reflected in the report and recommendations of the Chief of Engineers as set forth in House Document 247. We submitted statistics revealing that savings in transportation costs would accrue as the result of the operation of deeper draft vessels on a 35-foot channel in the above waterways. One of the principal factors which determines the price of a product to the ultimate consumer is the transportation cost involved. Accordingly, any increase or decrease in the cost of transportation will have a corresponding effect on the consumer price structure. The AMMI, therefore, strongly recommends the authorization of the Weymouth-Fore and Town River improvement project as recommended by the Chief of Engineers in House Document 247. Mr. JONES. If not you may proceed with the next project. NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, N.Y. AND N.J. Colonel YOUNG. New York and New Jersey Channels, N.Y. and N.J. This is on page 50 of the report. The New York and New Jersey Channels comprise the waterway extending around the west side of Staten Island, N.Y., from lower New York Bay through Kill Van Kull to upper New York Bay. Of specific interest is the Kill Van Kull entrance to upper New York Bay, a length of approximately 1.1 miles. This entrance is one of the most important links in the waterway system of New York Harbor. The major difficulty to navigation is the insufficient width of this entrance channel for existing and prospective commerce. The Chief of Engineers recommends that the entrance to Kill Van Kull channel from the upper New York Bay be widened at an estimated Federal cost of $2,581,000 for construction and $20,000 annually for maintenance dredging in addition to that now required subject to certain requirements for local cooperation. Local interests have indicated a willingness to meet the local cooperation requirements. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 2.6 to 1. Comments of the State and Federal agencies are favorable. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to the submission of this report to Congress. (The statement of American Merchant Marine Institute, Inc., follows:) STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN MERCHANT MARINE INSTITUTE, INC., IN SUPPORT OF IMPROVEMENT OF KILL VAN KULL, NEW YORK HARBOR The Chief of Engineers, with the approval of the Secretary of the Army, has recommended the widening of the entrance to Kill Van Kull from upper New York Bay from 800 to 1,400 feet to a point near the intersection with the channel along the New Jersey pierhead line, thence narrowing to a minimum width of 1,000 feet at a point opposite Constable Hook, N.J., and thereafter converging into the 800-foot-wide channel in Kill Van Kull which is part of the New York and New Jersey channel system. The estimated cost of this improvement is $2,581,000. The benefit-cost ratio for the improvement is computed at 2.6 to 1. A considerable number of vessels operated by member companies of the institute navigate the entrance to Kill Van Kull in entering and leaving Newark Bay and the New York and New Jersey channels. Early in 1962 the AMMI asked In the New York division engineer to take steps to alleviate the traffic congestion in the entrance to Kill Van Kull by widening the entrance to 1,400 feet. October of that year, at the request of the division engineer, the institute and Maritime Association of the Port of New York jointly submitted a statement, including traffic statistics, to the district engineer which clearly showed that the foregoing improvement would contribute to safe navigation and help avert collisions in this crowded area. The institute, therefore, urges the authorization of this much-needed improvement. Mr. JONES. Are there any questions? Mr. JONES. If not we shall proceed to the next project. NEW YORK HARBOR (ANCHORAGES), N.Y. Colonel YOUNG. "New York Harbor anchorages," sir, on page 51 of the Senate report. New York Harbor, exclusive of its tributaries, consists of an outer harbor and an inner harbor separated by a natural deep strait called the Narrows. The total water area encompassed by the upper and lower bays and the Narrows is about 125 square miles. There are insufficient deep-draft anchorages available in both the outer and inner harbors to accommodate existing and prospective commerce. The Chief of Engineers recommends deepening of existing anchorages and provision of additional anchorages at an estimated Federal cost of $44,852,000 subject to certain requirements of local cooperation. Local interests have indicated a willingness to meet the local cooperation requirements. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.5 to 1. Comments of the State and Federal agencies are favorable. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to the submission of this report. However, the Bureau notes that the recommended plan of improvement is based upon projected growth in commerce as well as the significant increase in vessel size. The Bureau, therefore, states that it would expect that prior to any request for funds a suitable schedule would be developed to permit work to progress in phase with actual growth in harbor traffic and, further, that thorough consideration would be given to the use of hopper dredges in the accomplishment of the work. This will be done. Mr. JONES. Are there any questions? Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. Chairman, I have one question. It relates to both this project and the one preceding it. I notice in both of these New York Harbor projects, you have stated local interests have expressed a willingness to provide necessary lands, easements, and things of that type, but yet you have stated that there is no non-Federal cost estimate. How does that happen? Colonel YOUNG. In the case of New York Harbor, sir, we dump at sea so there are no lands or easements required for the disposal. Mr. EDMONDSON. Is spoil the only item you expect to be of cost to the local people? Colonel YOUNG. If there are other requirements they will provide them. In the case of those two projects there are none known at this time. Mr. EDMONDSON. No land requirements? Colonel YOUNG. That is right. Mr. EDMONDSON. For example, in the widening of the channel in the previous project, there is no land requirement known to exist? Colonel YOUNG. That is right. Mr. EDMONDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (The statement of American Merchant Marine Institute, Inc., follows:) STATEMENT OF AMERICAN MERCHANT MARINE INSTITUTE, INC., IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPROVEMENT OF NEW YORK HARBOR ANCHORAGE AREAS The improvements recommended by the Chief of Engineers in Senate Document 17 (89th Cong.) in anchorage areas in New York Harbor are as follows: (1) Deepen (a) the southern section of anchorage 21B (Red Hook Flats) south of the fairway for a width of about 2,000 feet and over an area of 145 acres, from the existing depth of 30 and 40 feet below mean low water to 45 feet below mean low water; (b) the middle section for a width of about 3,300 feet over an area of 187 acres from the existing depth of 30 and 40 feet below mean low water to 40 feet; and (c) the northern section for a width of about 3,900 feet over an area of 150 acres from the present depth of 30 feet below mean low water to 35 feet; (2) Expand anchorage 21B (Red Hook Flats) north of the fairway to an average width of 2,700 feet and extend the length to the Buttermilk Channel cutoff so as to encompass 446 acres, and deepen from a natural depth of 14 feet and over at mean low water to 35 feet below mean low water including the westerly 3,200 feet of the fairway; and (3) Deepen the entire anchorage 49C in Gravesend Bay over a width of about 2,300 feet and over an area of 334 acres, from a depth of 30 feet and over at mean low water to 47 feet at mean low water and change existing regulations to permit its use by commercial vessels and passenger liners when use of the anchorage by naval and military vessels will permit. The estimated cost of the above improvements is $44,852,000 and the benefitcost ratio is 1.5 to 1. The vessels of many of the 43 members companies of the AMMI utilize New York Harbor anchorage areas. The institute urged the improvement of these anchorage areas in a statement presented at a hearing held in March 1960 by the New York district engineer and in subsequent letters to the district engineer. We wish to call attention to the fact that nearly 30 years have elapsed since improvements were made in the above anchorage areas. During this period the total waterborne commerce entering and leaving the port of New York has increased about 70 percent and the annual number of arrivals and departures of vessels of deeper draft has increased greatly. The need for the above-proposed improvements in the New York Harbor anchorage areas is undeniable. The institute, therefore, strongly recommends the authorization of these im provements by Congress. Mr. JONES. If there are no further questions we shall proceed to the next project. TRED AVON RIVER, MD. Colonel YOUNG. Tred Avon River, Md., sir, page 69 of the Senate report. The Tred Avon River is one of numerous tidal estuaries branching out indirectly from Chesapeake Bay. Insufficient depths cause groundings and damage to vessels in addition to a considerable amount of time being lost waiting for favorable tide conditions. The Chief of Engineers recommends deepening of the existing channel and provision of a turning basin, at a Federal cost of $323,000 subject to certain items of local cooperation. Local interests have indicated a willingness to comply with the requirements of local cooperation. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 3.1 to 1. The State and Federal agencies have commented favorably. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to the submission of this report to the Congress. Mr. JONES. Are there questions? |