over 200 back and forth through this channel, that is, 400 trips through this particular channel I am mentioning. This bridge is a serious hazard, a very serious one. It is in a turn in the channel. It takes up the biggest part of our channel. The way the piers or abutments, as they are called, are laid out, we have to come into the bridge at a 40° turn and come out on the other end and make a 45° turn, all in a space of approximately 300 feet. With a ship that is 630 feet long that is pretty hard to do. Senator KNOWLAND. They must have built that in order to test the proficiency of pilots. Mr. KNUDSON. That is possible. I do not know whether they did or not. I was not around when they built it. I would like to take this opportunity to invite yourself and each member of your committee to be my guest aboard one of these ships to ride down with us and see the conditions that we operate under. I realize that you cannot always make it, but if you can, I would appreciate it if you would come along. Senator KNOWLAND. After your description of the bridge I want to be sure we make it on a clear day. Mr. KNUDSON. I went down there last week in a fog and did not see the bridge. I have a picture here that is attached to the statement submitted by the railroad showing a picture of this bridge and how we have to approach it and how we have to go through it and the turn we have to make. I would like to point this out to you, as to how we have to come in to it. We start through this bridge and immediately upon coming out the other side we get current on our starboard bow, and the balance of the current as we proceed through hits our port quarter. To make this turn in here we have to contend with 2 currents, 1 on the bow and 1 on our stern, both directly opposite to the way we want to move the ship. It is practically impossible, but we have been very, very lucky. I would like to see that we get an appropriation made to start construction of this new bridge and eliminate this hazard to navigation. So far there has been no appropriation made. We are prepared to proceed on our part, and the Government has not appropriated the funds. In addition, I would like to state this point: when we proceed down to Cities Service we are on that channel and it is only 30 feet deep, and we would like to see that get started quickly. If there is anything you could do for us we would appreciate it. Senator KNOWLAND. How much depth do you need? Mr. KNUDSON. At present we are running mostly two types, approximately 36-foot draft. We have 1 running 33-foot draft. There are 4 ships coming in operation that are 3612-foot draft, 720 feet long. But it is not possible for them to get through. Mr. HARVEY. Next is Mr. Roy Wheeler, Cities Service Oil Co., and former mayor of the city of Linden. STATEMENT OF ROY WHEELER, LINDEN, N. J., ON BEHALF OF CITIES SERVICE OIL CO. GENERAL STATEMENT Mr. WHEELER. I am representing Cities Service Oil Co. I have been formerly mayor of Linden for a period of 10 years. I have worked closely with an industrial association as well as the Eastern Union County Chamber of Commerce. I think I recognize the value of our only waterfront area which is the Kill van Kull. We have our heavy industry located along there, not only in the form of large oil and chemical industries now, but there is possible expansion of available waterfront property there. I think that the tax return is the lifeblood of, I know, our city, and, in fact, the returns back to the county in its proportionate amount constitute the second largest contribution to Union County. I feel that the ctizens and the Government certainly are going to benefit by this because it means that large industry will continue to expand their present facilities as well as new industries, therefore giving gainful employment and an overall return to warrant this expenditure. I am sure that it can corroborate what Mr. Harvey has said, and I appreciate the interest in having finally at least gotten started on this project because I had a committee for 10 years while I was mayor, and the mayor who preceded me, I believe, was in there for 8 or 9 years prior to that, so that I hope things can be expedited in a little less time than a 20-year period, perhaps in the 5-year basis that is set. Mr. HARVEY. Next is Mr. Geiger. STATEMENT OF A. J. GEIGER, ON BEHALF OF THE LINDEN INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION, LINDEN, N. J. GENERAL STATEMENT Mr. GEIGER. My name is A. J. Geiger. Mr. Chairman, as a representative of the Linden Industrial Association I just want to voice the sentiments of Mayor Wheeler and the other gentlemen from our area, that we all know that the area is continuing to develop commercially, and we urge that the Arthur Kill will keep pace with it. Thank you for your consideration. Senator KNOWLAND. Thank you for your appearance. STATEMENT OF H. R. ADAMS, SINCLAIR OIL CO. GENERAL STATEMENT Mr. ADAMS. I would just like to concur with the statement made by Captain Knudson as to the difficulty of the vessels going up through the bridge, and also due to the shallow water up through there. In fact, we have to wait for the tides to go up and proceed through the bridge. I have been running into that particular port for 25 years, and I have been in contact with the bridge, and I know all the difficul ties we have had with it. With the larger vessels that we are coming in with now and the deeper drafts it is a dangerous proposition, and to go through there you have to wait for the most favorable tides. It also necessitates the hiring of extra tugs which runs our costs considerably higher. Mr. HARVEY. The last witness is Mr. O'Connor from the Sinclair. Oil Co. STATEMENT OF JOHN M. O'CONNOR, SINCLAIR OIL CO. PREPARED STATEMENT Mr. O'CONNOR. My name is John M. O'Connor. I would like to add my approval to what has been said, and, of course, all the oil companies in this locality have made large investments, and since the tankers get larger and larger they need more draft and they need more room for maneuvering. So the proposed plan meets with our approval. Senator KNOWLAND. Thank you very much. Does that complete your group of witnesses? Mr. HARVEY. That completes our witnesses, Senator. Thank you very much. I also have a statement to file, submitted by the Maritime Association of the Port of New York, which I will submit for the record. Senator KNOWLAND. Very well. That will be made a part of the record. (The statement referred to follows:) THE MARITIME ASSOCIATION OF THE PORT OF NEW YORK, Re Deepening of Arthur Kill-New York-New Jersey Channel. Chairman, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Civil Functions, Washington, D. O. DEAR SENATOR KNOWLAND: I am writing to you on behalf of the Maritime Association of the Port of New York, an 80-year-old trade association comprised of approximately 1,400 members, all of whom are engaged in the maritime industry at the port of New York. One of the principal segments of the membership of our association consists of the owners and operators of both dry cargo vessels and tankers. Practically every major company operating a service at the port of New York in either of these categories is represented by membership in the Maritime Association. The Arthur Kill Channel located between Staten Island and the Jersey shore continues to be of utmost importance to the maritime interests at the port of New York. At the present time, authorizing legislation exists to provide a channel depth of 35 feet in a stretch approximately 6 miles long in the middle of Arthur Kill. This waterway is extensively used by deep-draft tanker vessels, in order to serve the industrial facilities existing along this waterway. A major portion of the waterborne commerce of the port of New York flows through this waterway. With the present trend toward larger and larger tankers with deeper drafts, it becomes more and more apparent that the authorized 35-foot depth is an economic necessity, both from the standpoint of safety and efficiency. It has been estimated that it would cost approximately $25 million to complete this improvement. We respectfully submit that an appropriation of $5 million for 5 successive years would bring this project to a definite conclusion. We also submit that the expenditure of upward to $50 million expended in the development of this waterway thus far provides a cogent reason for the Federal authorities to complete the project for, without its completion within a reasonably foreseeable time, the previous investment will in a sense have been largely wasted. We respectfully submit that your committee also give favorable consideration to an appropriation in order to commence the work of replacing the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad bridge, which constitutes an outstanding hazard and bottleneck in this waterway. As far back as 1949, the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad was ordered to reconstruct its bridge across the Arthur Kill, inasmuch as it was found to constitute a hazard to navigation. The official finding of the Government in this connection was reached under the provisions of the Truman-Hobbs Act. by the Corps of Engineers. Following this finding, and also in compliance with the act, plans for a modified bridge were submitted and approved, and estimates of the cost of the work and division of the benefits have been made. The estimated cost of the work is $8 million, of which it has been found that $7 million is to be borne by the Government and $1 million to be borne by the railroad company. We understand that the private interests involved stand ready, willing, and able to undertake the work required in order to remove this outstanding navigational hazard in one of the busiest waterways in the entire world. All that has been lacking these many years has been an appropriation under which the Federal aid, has been provided for statutorily, would be forthcoming. In conclusion, we respectfully submit, in the interest of commercial expansion and national defense at a time of emergency, that favorable consideration be given to the aforementioned requests for appropriations to complete the Arthur Kill Channel and also to commence reconstruction of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad bridge. Respectfully submitted. WILLIAM F. GIESEN, General Manager and Counsel. FIRE ISLAND INLET Senator KNOWLAND. Congressman Wainwright had requested permission to make a statement on Fire Island Inlet; however, due to a favorable change in the physical condition of the inlet, has submitted a letter. That letter will be placed in the record at this point. (The letter referred to follows:) STATEMENT BY CONGRESSMAN STUYVESANT WAINWRIGHT OF NEW YORK FIRE ISLAND INLET I would like to take this opportunity to thank the committee for allowing me to appear on behalf of the Fire Island Inlet Committee. The Secretary of the Army has sent me the following letter: Hon. STUYVESANT WAINWRIGHT, House of Representatives. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, DEAR MR. WAINWRIGHT: Reference is made to your letter of January 20, 1954, wherein you refer to our discussion of the previous week concerning the maintenance of a navigation channel at Fire Island Inlet, N. Y. The existing navigation project for Fire Island Inlet, N. Y., provides for the construction of a jetty and a channel 10 feet deep and 250 feet wide from deep water in the ocean to deep water within the inlet. The construction of the jetty was completed in 1941. The navigation channel has not been constructed: however, by reason of storm action of November 6 and 7, 1953, on the inlet there is presently available a navigable channel of alinement and dimensions essentially the same as contemplated in the project authorization. Maj. Gen. S. D. Sturgis, Chief of Engineers, informs me that the existing channel will hereafter be maintained as required, subject to the same criteria, including availability of funds, pertaining to other authorized navigation projects throughout the United States. I trust the foregoing information is adequate for your present needs in this. matter. With highest personal regards, I am Yours sincerely, ROBERT T. STEVENS, Based on the foregoing letter, it is my opinion that we need not press for action on this project during this session of Congress. However, we most cer ties we have had with it. With the larger vessels that we are coming in with now and the deeper drafts it is a dangerous proposition, and to go through there you have to wait for the most favorable tides. It also necessitates the hiring of extra tugs which runs our costs considerably higher. Mr. HARVEY. The last witness is Mr. O'Connor from the Sinclair Oil Co. STATEMENT OF JOHN M. O'CONNOR, SINCLAIR OIL CO. PREPARED STATEMENT Mr. O'CONNOR. My name is John M. O'Connor. I would like to add my approval to what has been said, and, of course, all the oil companies in this locality have made large investments, and since the tankers get larger and larger they need more draft and they need more room for maneuvering. So the proposed plan meets with our approval. Senator KNOWLAND. Thank you very much. Does that complete your group of witnesses? Mr. HARVEY. That completes our witnesses, Senator. Thank you very much. I also have a statement to file, submitted by the Maritime Association of the Port of New York, which I will submit for the record. Senator KNOWLAND. Very well. That will be made a part of the record. (The statement referred to follows:) THE MARITIME ASSOCIATION OF THE PORT OF NEW YORK, Re Deepening of Arthur Kill-New York-New Jersey Channel. Chairman, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Civil Functions, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR KNOWLAND: I am writing to you on behalf of the Maritime Association of the Port of New York, an 80-year-old trade association comprised of approximately 1,400 members, all of whom are engaged in the maritime industry at the port of New York. One of the principal segments of the membership of our association consists of the owners and operators of both dry cargo vessels and tankers. Practically every major company operating a service at the port of New York in either of these categories is represented by membership in the Maritime Association. The Arthur Kill Channel located between Staten Island and the Jersey shore continues to be of utmost importance to the maritime interests at the port of New York. At the present time, authorizing legislation exists to provide a channel depth of 35 feet in a stretch approximately 6 miles long in the middle of Arthur Kill. This waterway is extensively used by deep-draft tanker vessels, in order to serve the industrial facilities existing along this waterway. A major portion of the waterborne commerce of the port of New York flows through this waterway. With the present trend toward larger and larger tankers with deeper drafts, it becomes more and more apparent that the authorized 35-foot depth is an economic necessity, both from the standpoint of safety and efficiency. It has been estimated that it would cost approximately $25 million to complete this improvement. We respectfully submit that an appropriation of $5 million for 5 successive years would bring this project to a definite conclusion. We also submit that the expenditure of upward to $50 million expended in the development of this waterway thus far provides a cogent reason for the Federal authorities to complete the project for, without its completion within a reasonably foreseeable time, the previous investment will in a sense have been largely wasted. We respectfully submit that your committee also give favorable consideration to an appropriation in order to commence the work of replacing the Baltimore |