4. To the Nation: In evaluating the full impact of the losses referred to, consideration should be given to the tax effect on the Federal Government. It could be reasoned that, at existing rates, past losses have indirectly cost the Federal Government more than $826,000 in unrealized revenue.

There is a second and greater national interest involved, however. Approximately 95 percent of the production of our main plant in Corning during the last war was keyed to the war effort. Companywide the percentage was about 80 percent. Among the important military products produced in the plants in Corning were radio al radar bulbs, optical glass, elbows for airplane fuel lines, pipig. ampoules for proximity fuses, metallized glass for electronic equip ment, laboratory and medical glassware, gas detector tubes, closcie plates for bombs, airfield lighting and signal ware, and thermometer tubing. Many of these products came from the completion of 17 wartime research projects which we were requested to undertake. Corning is presently cooperating with numerous Government agencies in significant research problems. These include the Atomic Energy Commission, Argonne National Laboratories, and the Signal Corps, Any interruption to research and production activities as a result of floods would constitute a bazard to the Nation's security program.

It is therefore earnestly requested that you authorize the proposer Monkey Run project at Corning.

Senator HOLLAND. Any questions?
Senator SPARKMAN. No questions.
Senator HOLLAND. Thank you, sir.

Mr. DECKER. Thank you very much.

Senator HOLLAND. All right, we will hear from Mayor Cole.

STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD F. V. COLE, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CORNING, N. Y.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to endorse the remarks Mr. Evans has made in connection with Monkey Run. I concur with ta article he has furnished the committee.

I would like to point out the constant threat against the econota: life of our conimunity of Monkey Run in its present state and arre the authorization of this project.

That is all of your time that I will take. Thank you.

STATEMENT BY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ON MONKEY RUN CREEK, CORNING, N. Y.

Monkey Run Creek rises in the hills south of Corning, N. Y., and flows norther ș about 2 miles to its confluence with the Chemung River, a tributary of the Suquehanna River. The total drainage area is 2.1 square miles. In Corning. Monkey Run flows through an open channel to Erie Avenue, and thence in i closed culvert under the Corning Glass Works to the Chemung River. gradient of Monkey Run varies from 5 feet per hundred feet in the upt reaches, to 4 feet per hundred through the city in open channel and 2 feet je“ hundred or less between the Erie Railroad and the river.

The city of Corning had a population estimated at 17,000 in 1946. The principu. industry is the Corning Glass Works which employs the major portion of workers in the city and surrounding area. The rural areas adjacent to Corning are de voted principally to dairy and crop farming.

Annual rainfall at Corning averages 33.53 inches, and has varied from 30 to 43.73 inches. During the period from 1855 to 1947, 50 floods are know to have occurred either on Monkey Run or on the Chemung River. Recent fl.have occurred in March 1942, December 1942, May 1946, April 1947, and June 147

The existing Federal flood-protection project for Corning was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1936 as a unit in the southern New York flood-control project, and was completed in 1942. Protective works consist of levees and concrete flood walls along the Chemung River, channel improvements on Cutler Creek, and appurtenant works. The existing project protects the city from overflow of the Chemung River. There is no existing Federal project for Monkey Run, but local interests have partially stabilized the banks by wood piling and stone masonry, paving, trash racks, and drop structures.

The gross area in Corning affected by floods in Monkey Run consists of approximately 130 acres on the south or right bank of the Chemung River. The area gooded includes both residential property and most of the south side business and industrial section, including hotels, stores, theaters, and banks, in addition to the Corning Glass Works. Average annual flood damages are estimated at $230,000, at 1948 price levels and development conditions.

The proposed plan of improvement provides for a flume and conduit to convey the flow of Monkey Run from the present improved channel above Sixth Street to the Chemung River immediately east of Pine Street, with auxiliary works consisting of storm sewer outlets and a pumping plaut. The total cost of the plan is estimated at $2,980,000, of which $2.370,000 would be Federal, and $610,000, nonFederal. Total annual carrying charges are estimated at $126,000. Average annual benefits are estimated at $230,000. The ratio of benefits to costs is 1.83 to 1. Local interests would be required to (a) furnish without cost to the United States all lands, easements, and rights-of-way necessary for construction of the project, including the relocation of all utilities which may interfere with the construction; (b) restore city streets and pavements over the flume and conduit including bridge slabs and superstructures where highways cross the flume; (c) contribute $250,000 in cash or an equivalent amount of construction or reconstruction work; (d) hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction works; (c) maintain and operate the works after completion, inluding the existing trash racks and debris basin, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army; (f) provide, operate, and maintain without cost to the United States adequate pumping capacity for disposal of storm waters draining through the property of the Corning Glass Works and not intercepted by the project; and (g) protect Monkey Run from any future encroachment or obstruction including waste disposal that would reduce its floodcarrying capacity.

Senator HOLLAND. We will now hear from Mr. Pinck.

STATEMENT OF GUY W. PINCK, DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, ALBANY, N. Y.

Mr. PINCK. I am sorry I am not able to give you a prepared statement. Senator Ives asked me if I were familiar with the Port Bay project. and I told him I was.

In brief, it is a very fine little bay, Port Bay. It is of little value today because it has no connection with Lake Ontario.

Boys and girls dig a channel across the sand bar and the first wave fill it up again.

This bay, if given adequate connections, will unquestionably develop into a great recreational center. The country around it is very fine. It is Wayne County, and very rapidly fine summer homes are being built over that section.

The State of New York some day will build a boulevard adjacent to this. It has been planned or in the fire for a long time.

Senator HOLLAND. This project is on Lake Ontario?

Mr. PINCK. Yes, sir.

Senator HOLLAND. And how far eastward from Buffalo?
Mr. PINCK. Buffalo is on Lake Erie.

Senator HOLLAND. I know that, but how far east?

Mr. PINCK. This is about 20 miles west of Oswego and lies between Oswego and Rochester. Rochester is a big city just to the west of it, probably 40 miles.

Senator HOLLAND. Rochester is west of this location?

Mr. PINCK. Yes, sir.

Senator HOLLAND. I see. We did not have a map on this.

Colonel MOORE. Here is the map.

Mr. PINCK. If you can see fit to see this built, you will get the thanks of a lot of people.

Senator SPARKMAN. It is about half way from the Hudson River to Lake Erie.

Senator HOLLAND. That is Buffalo over there and Albany on the other side on the Hudson?

Senator SPARKMAN. Yes, about half way.

Senator HOLLAND. Thank you very much, Mr. Pinck.

We will now hear from Colonel Moore on Port Bay.

Colonel MOORE. Mr. Chairman, the report on Port Bay, New York, as published in House Document No. 293, Eighty-first Congress, was authorized by an item in the River and Harbor Act approved March 2,

1945.

Port Bay, N. Y., is a landlocked bay on the south short of Lake Ontario about 21 miles west of Oswego Harbor, N. Y. It is separated from Lake Ontario by a narrow gravel and shingle barrier over which water flows only at high-water stages. The bay, which is irregular in shape, extends inland in a southerly direction about 2.3 miles and has a maximum width of 0.5 mile at its lakeward end.

The immediate tributary area consists of the westerly half of the towns of Wolcott and Butler and the easterly half of the towns of Huron and Rose-all within Wayne County, N. Y. The combined population of the four towns was 7,726 and of Wayne County 52.747 in 1940. The tributary area is limited by the proximity of the federally improved harbors of Great Sodus and Little Sodus Bays, 7 miles to the west and east, respectively. The village of Wolcott, on Wolcott Creek about 6 miles from Lake Ontario, with a population of 1,326 is the largest community in the tributary area. The permanent population is augmented in summer by seasonal residents of lake-shore cottages. Principal activities of the region are fruit growing and processing and a small amount of dairy and truck farming.

There is no Federal project for improvement of Port Bay. Local interests have expended about $5,000 since 1940 in unsuccessful attempts to construct and maintain a navigable opening through the barrier.

There is no water-borne freight traffic at Port Bay. Existing recreational boating and fishing traffic is confined to the bay proper except for those short periods when a temporary opening exists through the barrier. It is estimated that about 5 inboard and 250 outboard moto: craft, having a total value of $85,000, permanently base in the bay.

Terminal facilities consist of a few private landings for small craft. Local interests request provision of a channel, 6 to 8 feet deep and 60 to 80 feet wide, through the easterly end of the barrier separating Port Bay from Lake Ontario, protected by piers extending to deep water in the lake.

They claim that a harbor of refuge between Great Sodus and Little Sodus Bays is required, that a permanent outlet would promote owner

ship and use of recreational craft, and commercial fishermen would base there, and that other benefits would result, including an increase in business and land values and the alleviation of the stagnant condition of the waters.

The district engineer finds that Port Bay has all the features desirable for a small-boat harbor with the exception of a suitable entrance from the lake and a public landing. He recommends improvement of Port Bay by providing an entrance channel 8 feet deep and about 1,600 feet long from the lake through the easterly end of the barrier strip into the bay, protected on the lake side of the barrier strip by arrowhead breakwaters about 910 feet long, and having a width of 200 feet in the lakeward approach to the breakwaters and thence 100 feet to its inner end in Port Bay, subject to certain conditions of local cooperation.

The division engineer concurs.

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors concurs in the conclusion of the reporting officers that the proposed improvement is justified by the general public benefits. Port Bay in its present landlocked State is restricted in its use. Provision of an adequately protected entrance channel from Lake Ontario, generally in accordance with the plan of the district engineer, together with a public landing would extend and stimulate recreational craft use and provide a harbor of refuge for small boats. It recommends improvement of Port Bay in general accordance with the plan of the district engineer, subject to certain conditions of local cooperation.

In accordance with existing regulations a copy of the Chief of Engineers' proposed report was furnished the Governor of New York for comment. Officials of the State approve the recommendations as in the report.

In accordance with section 4 of Executive Order No. 9384 the report was submitted to the Bureau of the Budget for information as to the relationship of the proposed report to the program of the President. The Bureau of the Budget advised that there would be no objection to the submission of the report to Congress.

The Chief of Engineers after due consideration of these reports concurs in the views of the Board. He recommends improvement of Port Bay, N. Y., by provision of a channel 8 feet deep from water of that depth in Lake Ontario through the barrier strip to the contour of 8-foot depth in Port Bay, protected by arrowhead breakwaters about 910 and 915 feet long on the lake side of the barrier, with channel width of 200 feet in the lake approach to the breakwaters and of 100 feet for the remainder of the channel length; all generally in accordance with the plan of the district engineer and with such modifications thereof as in the discretion of the Chief of Engineers may be advisable.

The improvement is recommended subject to the condition that local interests contribute, in cash, 30 percent, not to exceed $200,000, of the first cost of constructing the channel and breakwaters, and agree to: (a) furnish without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, rights-of-way, and spoil disposal areas necessary for the new work and subsequent maintenance, when and as required; (b) hold and save the United States free from any damages resulting from construction and maintenance of the improvement: (c) provide and maintain mooring facilities including a public wharf; (d) establish a public body em

powered to regulate the use, growth, and free development of the harbor facilities, said facilities, including the public wharf, to be open on equal terms to all; and (e) make necessary alterations to the exist ing power transmission and distribution lien at the site of the proposed work.

The cost to United States for construction, as shown in the report, is estimated at $466,600.

The cost to local interests is estimated at $227,100, which includes $27,100 for lands, easements, and rights-of-way, public wharf, and the altering of a power transmission line, and a cash contribution of $200,000 toward the cost of construction.

The total cost of construction of the proposed improvement is estimated at $693,700.

The Federal annual carrying charges are estimated at $28,600, which includes $10,500 for maintenance of the channel and breakwaters. The non-Federal annual carrying charges are estimated at $9,800. The total annual carrying charges are estimated at $38.400 The district engineer evaluates the total annual benefits at $44,200, consisting of $29.700 for profits on the construction and maintenance of new boats, $13.500 for the recreational value of boating to the add tional passengers carried, and $1,000 for prevention of damages by lowering water levels in the bay. Based on the annual charges of $38.400 and the annual benefits of $44.200, the benefit-cost ratio is 1.15. The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors takes exception to the inclusion by the reporting officers of profits to the boatbuilding industry and to boat repair and maintenance yards as primary benefits warranting the expenditure of Federal funds. It considers, however, that the additional recreational value of the proposed facilities to the users is a primary general benefit, which would fairly be represented by a reasonable rate of return on their investment in recreational craft. On the estimated value of the new boats expected to be attracted to the locality by reason of the improvement, such a return, representing primary benefits to the users, would more than balance the elimination of derivative bentfits credited by the reporting officers.

Small boats navigating between Great Sodus and Little Sodus Bay are exposed to sudden lake storms. It was estimated that about 255 small boats were permanently based at Port Bay in 1947. The recommended improvement is not only economically justified but it will provide a needed harbor of refuge.

WATERWAY FROM INDIAN RIVER INLET TO REHOBOTH BAY, DEL.

Senator HOLLAND. The next project is the waterway from Indian River Inlet to Rehoboth Bay, Del. We will be glad to hear from you. Senator Williams.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN J. WILLIAMS, A SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

Senator WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, in the beginning I might say that I do not know whether this has been cleared by the Bureau of the Budget. It has been recommended by the Army engineers and I have been given to understand that either clearance with the Bureau of the Budget has been received or will be received within a few days.