D. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE CITY OF HOMER

1. Approval of concept

A parcel of land within the tidelands of the Homer Spit will be required to contain the facility. It is requested that the City of Homer approve the concept of locating and operating this facility and agree to entering into a tidelands lease with Kodiak Lumber Mills so that preliminary engineering work can proceed. 2. Lease agreement

Through its administrative offices and its legal counsel, it is further requested the City proceed with the negotiations and execution of the lease agreement, within a reasonable time, subject to mutually acceptable terms, conditions, and safeguards for both parties.

Mr. FISHER. Representative Malone and Alex Shadura wanted to make a brief mention on another matter. Those are all of the witnesses. STATEMENT OF HON. HUGH MALONE, STATE REPRESENTATIVE OF HOUSE DISTRICT 11

Mr. MALONE. Thank you, Senator. I am Representative Hugh Malone, one of the two representatives from House District 11, which covers the western Kenai Peninsula and the western shore of the inlet. First of all, I would like to thank you for coming here today and bringing representatives of the corps along. I think this meeting provides an opportunity for the much needed inner face between the U.S. Congress and the people of the State of Alaska. Thank you very much for coming.

I don't have a lot of prepared testimony. I will keep my remarks brief. The subjects covered today include the need for harbor improvements in Kenai, Ninilchik, and Kasilof.

In the discussion of the problems or proposed problems of construction of the Homer Spit, what I would like to do is give you my point of view regarding the priorities of the discussion here today, not so far as any schedule goes, but as far as what I regard as important.

I think the most important topic discussed here today has been the need for harbor improvements at Kenai. We do have in Kenai heavy use of the harbor by the fishing fleet during the season. We do have cargo coming in and out. We have industrial operations in the harbor and plan to expand those operations.

The conflict that has already been testified to between the fishing vessels, between the industrial use of the harbor, must be resolved before if it is going to be used in the future, if expansion is to occur.

So I would say that as far as the different topics covered today that the most essential one to resolve is the question of the needed harbor improvements in Kenai. I concur with you, Senator, that the first step has to be acceleration of the needed sedimentation study and any other studies that are necessary to determine the location of a small boat harbor, which I regard as the second priority in the development of the harbor at Kenai.

Finally, to provide adequate draft for at least barges in Kenai, coming in and out, I have to agree with Bob who testified earlier that we will never see huge cargo vessels coming in and out of here.

However, we do have barge traffic now and the population in this area, in north Kenai, is something over 7,000 people, well over 50 percent of the population of the Kenai Peninsula resides in this area.

So you will have an increase in commercial transportation in and out of Kenai Harbor. That improvement I think is a necessity.

Second, you do have, it has been testified to and very adequately by Mrs. Banta and others, the extremely unsafe condition in the Ninilchik Harbor. Whether that is resolved by constructing an outside harbor at Ninilchik, or whether it is proven to be feasible to relocate the harbor of refuge in another point. I am not qualified to testify.

However, the situation in the Ninilchik demands attention and it is only through the grace of God that there hasn't been a major tragedy there so far.

Unfortunately, some of the communities in the district here are not represented today. The majority of the communities here are maritime

communities. The only exceptions probably would be in Soldotna, the Sterling area, Cooper Landing.

We have the areas of Seldovia, Port Gram, English Bay, Homer. Kenai, Kasilof, Ninilchik, Anchor Point-all of these areas are going to be subject to tremendous impact with the development of the Lower Inlet for production.

Whether that occurs in the next 2 or 3 years or 5 years or whether it occurs under Federal or State jurisdiction, I am sure the development is going to take place.

I think it is imperative that at that stage there are adequate harbor facilities to handle the traffic. I think we are going to see a multifold increase from the traffic that is existing and did exist during the development of the Upper Inlet in the middle ground shoal.

We don't have anything like the facilities that we need today to handle it. So the planning that is done, both by the State and by the corps, should take that into account because it will soon be upon us. Senator, I would like to ask one question of the representatives of the corps here. On the Homer Harbor area, what has become of the proposal to establish traffic lanes, sea lanes in and out of the Homer Harbor?

Lieutenant Colonel BAZILWICH. I can answer that. This was a study that we started here several years ago to establish a sea lane through Katchimac Bay because of the interference with the major shipping industries and the shipping boats.

We had several meetings on this, both at Homer and in Anchorage, and we are well on our way to a solution to this. When the Port and Waterways Safety Act of 1972 was passed and transferred this responsibility to the Department of Transportation, we had to pass all of our information that we had to them and they are now in the process of continuing that effort.

Hopefully, they will be able to use whatever we came up with and come up with a regulation that would be in line with what we have agreed to in some of our meetings.

Senator GRAVEL. Does that answer your question?

Mr. MALONE. I think it does; but you don't have a timetable set up regarding that.

Lieutenant Colonel BAZILWICH. No, I don't. I am sorry we didn't get this completed before we had to turn it over to the Department of Transportation.

Mr. MALONE. Thank you; again, I would like to thank you for coming. It is my personal observation that what the elected Members of the Government have to do as you are doing now is to get out and see the problems in the different areas of the country and I think you should be much commended on it, Senator. I hope the legislature will follow your example.

Thank you.

Mr. FISHER. Senator, one brief word from Alex Shadura.

Senator GRAVEL. Jack Werner, representing the city of Seward, could not be here. He said he would be submitting some testimony.

STATEMENT OF ALEX SHADURA, KENAI NATIVE ASSOCIATION

Mr. SHADURA. Senator, I would like to thank you in behalf of the Association and myself individually, and what I say here has nothing to do I was concerned and I thought that since there was, or seemed

to be, jostling between the areas of the Federal Government, and Mr. Malone mentioned a little bit about it, I was in the Governor's office and my duties besides the deputy director of the development, I was also supporting John Minson, who was the Governor's aide.

So I did special assignments that he couldn't handle. This particular one was a marine assignment. The Governor's office had numerous complaints from commercial fishermen, crab fishermen, shrimp fishermen, trawlers, and they wanted the reasons of safety and to stop the damage of gear. They asked what could be done.

I worked on this project 4 months. It started out prior to the time I came in, because 3 years ago the corps had an original hearing and in answer to the complaints that they had they had a hearing. Then the Governor was flooded with these complaints. So I was assigned to this job.

Through a lot of effort, finally in April through an old friend who was born in Seldovia, who now owns a tanker company in Los Angeles, who was able to solidify and consult all of the tankers and agree upon one spokesman, a Chevron tanker.

The corps was represented and we finally got an agreement between the tugboat companies and had one representative come in, the company's guard from Juneau, the Coast Guard from Anchorage, one of the ferry systems, so we had a State representative of the ferry system come in there because they were all involved.

We spent 4 months on that. I worked with Aurora Loss, who held hearings, the head of the permit section of the corps. After I was changed to a new assignment, I wanted to follow and see what was going on because I got people calling me and questioning me. I wanted to know what happened.

She said under this new act we will mention that the company's guard was responsible and you say now it is the Transportation Corps. Then they tossed the ball back to her, "No, you have been doing this work, so you go ahead and follow through with it."

That has been jostled back and forth.

These kinds of things can't be played with. The Government has to take the responsibility. If there are complaints from the citizens and the Federal Government, particularly between areas of Government, the responsibility has to be certain and somebody has to do the job.

As a consequence, that program is just hanging in the fire and as the colonel has just mentioned here, I think it should be looking forward to.

I have turned all of the documents, all of the copies of the letters between all of the factors, everybody involved and all of the hearings, the corps has a copy and the Attorney General. When I left I went to the Department of Community Regional Affairs. When that was established my office was transferred there.

I was no longer in the Governor's office. I transferred all copies and personally took them to the Governor's office. They were given to the Attorney General.

I just wanted to mention that. I think you should be aware that these problems exist.

Lieutenant Colonel BAZILWICH. The Coast Guard is in the Department of Transportation. They will be the agency who will act on this. They had, I believe, 1 year to implement program, the law that was passed in 1972. I will check on this further.

22-326 0-73—12

We are hopeful that they do come to a solution rather quickly, also. Mr. SHADURA. I just mentioned to some people, I won't mention the names, but I said when somebody gets drowned down in front of that spit down there because they aren't doing something about something that should be done, they can live with their own conscience.

There are some people who are responsible in Government who know about it in plain being.

Senator GRAVEL. Thank you, Alex.

Mr. FISHER. Senator, I was going to testify. Instead I am going to submit a statement later after I get approval of the Kenai Peninsula Bar Association. That is the last witness.

Senator GRAVEL. We will be happy to receive your testimony. We want to thank you personally for emceeing the hearing and arranging the appearance of witnesses. It is typical of your high standard of proficiency in civic activity.

We all want to thank you for your hospitality. [Statement of Mr. Fisher follows:]

STATEMENT OF JAMES E. FISHER, PRESIDENT, KENAI PENINSULA BAR ASSOCIATION

Senator Gravel, as Chairman of the Water Resources Subcommittee of Committee on Public Works of the U.S. Senate, I would like to thank you for holding what I believe to be a first U.S. Congressional hearing held on Alaska's Kenai Peninsula.

As the President of the Kenai Peninsula Bar Association, I would like to express to you a general view which our organization might advance on such water resources projects, developments would probably be a better term, because of general interest in rivers and harbors. It should be the view of our members that the fishing industry needs all possible assistance. The pressing demands for food in the United States and the world are becoming ever greater and greater. Anything facilitating the renewable harvest of such foods, as are represented by the fisheries of Alaska, is exceedingly important in the U.S. and the world today.

However, in developments undertaken by the United States, we are also concerned that such developments do not inadvertently cause damage to some of the very resources supposed to be enhanced. I personally cannot recall an instance of damage to fisheries resources of Alaska which may have resulted from activities of projects instituted in the rivers and harbors of this State. This may be due to the fact such projects have never been of a massive enough impact. While making this comment one thinks about the trans-Florida canal which might affect the entire climate and water table of the State of Florida. It is my understanding the project has been stopped.

Some of these comments are what can be interpreted as immediate environmental concern. Our organization is aware of such concern and views them thoughtfully. We also believe that concern for the environment can be incorporated into any project in such fashion as to avoid environmental damage. Such an approach of including all costs of environmental protection into a project provides the best logic.

Having stated generally this organization believes any activity assisting the fisheries industry throughout the Kenai Peninsula is important. We should not overlook the needs to service the potential for the depletable resources offshore in oil activities. For specific requests we defer to other witnesses who testified to you in greater detail regarding particular projects, such as the Kenai Small Boat Harbor which have been described to you in much greater detail.

Senator GRAVEL. I wish we could stay here longer. We have hearings in Fairbanks tomorrow, however, so we will take our transportation and go right to the airport.

The hearing is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Saturday, August 11, 1973, in Kotzebue, Alaska.]