Mr. WILLIAMS. Thank you.

Mr. ANGELL. Thank you, Mr. Williams.

Are the petroleum products incoming or outgoing cargo, Mr. Williams?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Incoming. I understand when the Navy begins fully to utilize their tanks they will bring it in and store it there, and use it as needed for the naval ships.

Mr. ANGELL. What does the general cargo consist of largely?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Largely lumber, cotton, cotton wastes, naval stores, and machinery.

Mr. ANGELL. Those are outgoing mostly, I presume.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is right. Incoming is fertilizer and general commodities of all kinds. But they are well diversified commodities flowing from the Midwest as well as the Southeast.

Mr. ANGELL. Are there any questions of Mr. Williams on my right? (No response.)

Mr. ANGELL. Any questions on my left?

Mr. MACK. How far to the north of Savannah is the Port of Norfolk?

Mr. WILLIAMS. About 500 miles.

Mr. MACK. How far to the south is the Port of Miami?

Mr. WILLIAMS. About 700 miles.

Mr. MACK. In other words, the Savannah River does serve a tremendous hinterland behind the city of Savannah that is not served by any other port?

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is right.

Mr. MACK. In this area being rapidly industrialized?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Very rapidly.

Mr. MACK. I know some of the pulp and paper corporations on the Pacific coast are now establishing additional plants in the South, and they tell me there is great industrial expansion there.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is right.

Mr. MACK. One other question. On page 13 of your report you mention a turning basin of 600 feet. I was not present at the early part of Colonel Milne's statement. Does this project provide for that 600-foot width in the turning basin?

Mr. WILLIAMS. It does provide for the 600 feet. Yes, sir.

Mr. ANGELL. Are there any further questions of Mr. Williams? Mr. SCUDDER. I was not here at the start of the explanation of the project, but I would like to ask [referring to the color map] is that portion that shows in light green the project under consideration? Colonel MILNE. That is correct, Mr. Scudder. On the small-scale map it is this portion, and on the enlarged map it is this portion. Mr. MACK. Where is the turning basin?

Colonel MILNE. It is just above the Georgia Ports Authority.
Mr. SCUDDER. The white spot.

Colonel MILNE. Yes, sir.

Mr. ANGELL. What are those buildings to the right there?

Colonel MILNE. This is the Georgia Ports Authority terminal.

Mr. WILLIAMS. It is a better picture than this picture here which

is an actual photograph of it.

Mr. ANGELL. Are there any other questions of Mr. Williams? (No response.)

Mr. ANGELL. Thank you, Mr. Williams, for your very fine state

ment.

Congressman Preston.

Mr. PRESTON. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, our next witness will speak very briefly to some of the navigation difficulties in the river. He is Captain Frank Spencer, who has spent a lifetime on the river and is chairman of the board of directors of the Pilots Association. At this time we would like to present Captain Spencer.

Mr. ANGELL. We are very glad to hear you, Captain Spencer. You may give your full name and title to the reporter, please.

STATEMENT OF CAPT. FRANK W. SPENCER, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF THE PILOTS ASSOCIATION OF SAVANNAH AND GENERAL MANAGER OF THE ATLANTIC TOWING CO. OF SAVANNAH

Captain SPENCER. My name is Frank W. Spencer, chairman of the board of the Pilots Association of Savannah, and general manager of the Atlantic Towing Co. of Savannah, Ga.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the navigation end of it is where my interest lies, that is, in getting the ships in and out of the port safely. With your permission I would like to point to the area and what our difficultes are in getting to the State Port.

Mr. ANGELL. You may do so.

Captain SPENCER. This is indicated as a new facility for the State of Georgia costing some $15 million. Here is where when the ships come in with an ebb tide current we have to swing the 500-foot long ships and bring them upstream nearly 2 miles stern first. When the ships come in head up a like operation has to take place. We have to move them downstream and swing them in this position. That is the reason for extending it to this 400-foot channel where we have now 300 feet. That is why we want to extend it to 34 feet with a 400-foot width.

When the ships are ready to go to sea we will swing them in there if this project is passed upon favorably, and swing them in the basin here, which eliminates that hazard of taking them all the way down stern first or upstream stern first, as the case may be.

There is one question you asked the colonel about the required width for navigation which I would like to answer. Ships 500 feet and 600 feet long heavily laden must have sufficient space between the hulls. Otherwise the suction will pull them together. It has happened with serious collisions which have taken place in various ports of the country. We hope to eliminate that by giving them a wide channel in this area and having a swinging basin to swing the ships in.

One point was brought out by the colonel that I attempted to bring to his attention after he testified, which is that the maintenance cost of Savannah for only 1 year has exceeded $1 million. It has been well under $1 million for a good many years. In fact, for all of the years. That is correct, is it not, colonel?

Colonel MILNE. That is correct.

The average cost of maintenance work for the past 5 years has been $854,000. However in 1953, the maintenance cost was $1,121,000.

Improvement of the entire 30 miles of channel has not been completed and maintenance funds have been limited in recent years, so that, although the estimated cost of maintenance of Savannah Harbor, Ga., is $1,500,000, as previously stated, funds are not allotted in this

amount.

Captain SPENCER. The maintenance cost was touched on by Mr. Williams. We are rather proud of the port of Savannah. We think it is a good investment for the Federal Treasury. We paid $4 million in customs duties and the Federal Government spends less than $1 million on our channel. So we think that is a good indication of what the port of Savannah means.

Most of the other points have been brought out by Mr. Williams and you have them in printed form before you. I think one very pertinent thing that would be of interest to you is that just last week the American Hall Line, which is a large operating concern between the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, as well as in other areas, wanted to bring a ship that was 620 feet long into the port of Savannah at the State docks. Due to the narrow condition of the channel we could not bring the ship in there. She had very valuable cargoes that they wanted to discharge at the terminal. It was a severe handicap to the port because we did not have the facilities to bring that ship in.

We have had ships 600 feet long in the port with a light draft, but this particular ship would draw 34 feet and we had notified that line that we could bring her in with safety.

I think I have touched on the pertinent points that have not been brought out by Mr. Williams so far as the volume of business is concerned and the activity on the riverfront is concerned and the tremendous increase in the manufacturing plants.

We estimate above the Seaboard Bridge and beginning at this point here the large Union Paper Bag Co. is, up to the sugar company there is something like $150 million in capital investments on the channel now.

I would be very glad, Mr. Chairman, if you and members of the committee wish to ask any questions as far as navigation is concerned. Mr. ANGELL. Thank you, Captain Spencer, for your excellent report.

Mr. Steed, do you have any questions?

Mr. STEED. No questions.

Mr. ANGELL. Are there any questions on my left of Captain Spencer?

(No response.)

Mr. ANGELL. If not, we thank you, sir.

Congressman Preston.

Mr. PRESTON. Mr. Chairman, we have utilized a little over 30 minutes, so we will conclude very rapidly in order to expedite the matters. before the committee.

We have with us the executive secretary of the Savannah District. Authority which is the local ports authority of the city of Savannah. He has prepared this brochure and will not be repetitious in what he has to say, but will call to the committee's attention one or two pertinent facts.

Mr. ANGELL. The committee will be very glad to hear you, sir.

39263-54 vol. 1-29

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. MCGOWAN, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, SAVANNAH DISTRICT AUTHORITY

Mr. MCGOWAN. My name is William H. McGowan, executive secretary of the Savannnah District Authority.

Mr. Chairman, on page 20 of House Document 110, I would like to call your attention to items 45, 46, and 47. Item 45 says that the Atlantic Refining Co. will commence construction of a $400,000 oil terminal early in 1952. That has been done.

Paragraph 46 says that the American Cyanamid Co. has recently purchased a large tract of land with the intention of building a chemical plant. That plant is under construction.

Paragraph 47 states that the Union Bag and Paper Corp. will build a multimillion dollar semichemical pulping plant. That plant has been built.

I wanted to call those facts to the attention of the committee to indicate the substance of the report and to show that the industrial development is going on.

I will be happy to answer any questions and I think our witnesses have covered the subject pretty fully.

Mr. ANGELL. Thank you, sir.

Are there any questions from members of the committee of Mr. McGowan, the executive secretary of the Savannah District Authority?

(No response.)

Mr. ANGELL. If not, we thank you.

Congressman Preston.

Mr. PRESTON. Mr. Chairman, that concludes the list of witnesses. We do have with us this morning in support of this request the acting mayor of the city of Savannah and the vice chairman of the Georgia Ports Authority, Mr. Peter Roe Nugent, who in the interests of time will not testify, but wants the record to disclose his interest and presence here today.

Mr. ANGELL. We are very happy to have you here.

Mr. PRESTON. We thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing us the courtesy of testifying in behalf of this requested project and appreciate your generosity in allowing us ample time to present our case.

We conclude by expressing the earnest hope that this committee will recognize the important economic aspects of this request and authorize it in order that we might proceed to seek appropriations to bring this hope into being.

Mr. ANGELL. Thank you, Congressman Preston. I am sure our committee was very happy to have you here and I appreciate your cooperation with the committee in hearing this very worthwhile project and in conserving the time of the committee:

Mr. PRESTON. Thank you, sir.

Mr. ANGELL. If there is no further testimony on this project we will proceed to the next one.

MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT LOUISIANA, MO.

Mr. ANGELL. The next project is the Mississippi River at Louisiana, Mo., which is House Document 251 of the 82d Congress.

We have with us our colleague, Congressman Cannon of Missouri, who is very much interested in this subject.

STATEMENT OF HON. CLARENCE CANNON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate the opportunity to be heard at this time and shall confine myself to a very brief

statement.

Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Cannon you may be heard first before the Army engineers. We know you are a very busy gentleman and have other meetings to attend.

Mr. CANNON. If it meets with the approval of the chairman and the committee. It is a very simple case.

The construction of lock No. 24 in the Mississippi River has created a pool which has raised the water level above the outlet of the city sewers of the two cities immediately above the dam. At Louisiana, Mo., which is about 75 or 80 miles above St. Louis, and at Clarksville, Mo., which is 64 miles north of St. Louis, the creation of the pool has not only brought the surface above the level of the outlet of the sewers below the city, but it has created a situation under which accelerated siltation occurs whereby the riverfront opposite these cities is choked with silt, clogging the sewers and isolating landing docks in use for more than a hundred years.

In both cases at each city, both at Clarksville and Louisiana, the result has been not only to dislocate the sewage system but to flood basements and to blow off manhole covers and create a very unsavory and very unsanitary condition, affecting the health of the entire community.

Louisiana is a city of 6,500 people. There is located there one of the big munitions plants of the Government, which is now being sold to private ownership, under which the plant will bring increased business activity and a denser population with corresponding additional demand for all public utilities.

The Board of Engineers after investigation have determined the appropriate amount of damage. Of course, the Government is exempted by statute and by a long line of court decisions from responsibility for any damage incurred in the improvement of navigation. But it has been the longstanding policy of the Government to be just and equitable in such matters, and where damage results directly from the improvement of navigation to make every effort to compensate the adjoining landowners and cities for the damage caused occasioned by the improvements.

The report of the Board of Engineers on the Louisiana case, indicates the exact amount of damage based on computations made in 1951, and which are of course now entirely too low due to increases in the cost of labor, materials, and all other factors. The Federal Government should pay to the city to compensate it in a measure for this damage to its water system at least and make it possible for them to build a pumping plant which will neutralize the situation.

There is not yet available reports on recommendations, if any, by the Board of Engineers in relation to the city of Clarksville. There the same damage has been inflicted and is now being inflicted, and