Page images

Charles W. Gilley, Winchester coal operator, described his venture of shipping coal in his own barges down the Kentucky from Beattyville. He is now shipping 12,000 tons a month by river, he said, and expects to increase that amount in the near future.

Anticipating increased business, he said, he has bought more barges and expects to have them on the river next week.

River shipment of coal would be a great economic help to the area, Gilley said, but warned that the locks and dams must be improved and that the water supply should be insured by construction of flood-control dams in tributary streams by the Federal Government.


Speakers at both meetings today told of the emigration of workers from the area to industrial centers in other States. They agreed that “we are losing some of our best people because they can't make a living at home.'

A. W. Benning, chief clerk of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad shops, said Irvine once was a thriving community but 340 railroad men had lost their jobs since 1950 because of the slump in the coal industry.

“We are not in the coal field here," he said, “but we are so close to it that when they itch up there we scratch."

Speakers at both meetings today stressed the lack of labor trouble in the area.

I wish to thank both the Army engineers and the Appropriations Committee for making funds available for the continuance of these locks, and I sincerely hope that, pursuant to a resolution adopted last year by the House Public Works Committee, a report may be forthcoming to this committee where the present navigation facilities may be modernized.

Mr. HAND. Thank you very much.











[ocr errors]

Mr. HAND. The committee will next take up the Cleveland Harbor, and we will be glad to hear from Mr. Reynolds.

Mr. REYNOLDS. This project has been before the Congress for a number of years and has to do with the replacement of a number of railroad bridges and the widening of the river channel in order to move 600-foot ore carriers up the Cuyahoga River, as described in House Document 629 of the 79th Congress.

We have appeared before this committee a number of times in connection with this project and today we are appearing in connection with the recommended appropriation that was in the 1955 budget for $1,200,000, which will enable the Corps of Engineers to continue contracts with the railroad companies and they in turn with the bridgebuilders for the construction of four railroad bridges, Nos. 9, 1, 15, and 3, which are shown on the plat which is before you. The bridges in question are the ones marked in red. They are being constructed and there are funds available to carry on the work in 1954, and this $1,200,000 is the money that would be spent in the fiscal year 1955.

Mr. Hand. As I recall it, we are having a little difficulty on the basis of cooperation from the railroad companies.

Mr. REYNOLDS. No, sir. That has all been cleared up. The recommendation of this committee, requesting that the funds be cleared up between the Corps of Engineers and the railroads so that the corps could continue work on all bridges with the money already appropriated, has brought about exceptionally beneficial results.

The Corps of Engineers have followed the instructions of the committee and have made arrangements in connection with Cleveland bridges whereby the railroads agreed to divide the funds for 2 bridges so they might be used on constructing 4 bridges today. We are only asking for money that could be used in next fiscal year. I think that is the idea of the committee, that funds be spent in one year. So this money that is being requested is only to take care of work in the fiscal year 1955.

Mr. HAND. What is the status of the Republic Steel Co.; are they doing their share with respect to taking over the excavation and participating in the maintenance?

Mr. REYNOLDS. You are speaking of the flue dust?
Mr. HAND. Yes.

Mr. REYNOLDS. That matter, as I understand, is in process of negotiation between the Corps of Engineers and the Republic Steel Corp. and other steel companies.

Mr. HAND. You do not know whether there has been a satisfactory solution as yet?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I do not know whether there has been or not. We have with us as one of our witnesses Mr. Larson, who is chief engineer of Republic Steel, and possibly Mr. Larson would like to answer that question.

Mr. LARSON. As I understand the question is with respect to the participation in the dredging costs in the river. That is being negotiated, as Mr. Reynolds said. I am not too clear as to the state in which the negotiations are at the present time, and I cannot give you a definite answer.

Mr. REYNOLDS. All of the arrangements up to date have been of a very friendly nature between the Corps of Engineers and the steel company. Of course, it is not just one steel company, as I understand; this is a matter that applies to all the steel companies at Cleveland. So Republic is only 1 of the 3 companies that are involved in this particular phase of the dredging.

We have asked all of our witnesses to prepare statements and save the time of the committee, which we will file, and I would like the opportunity for our witnesses to make brief statements with regard to the project. Admiral Spencer, who is president of the Lake Carriers' Association, was here last Friday at another hearing and had

to return; so he has asked me to leave a copy of his statement to be filed in the record.

Mr. HAND. Without objection, that will be included in the record at the conclusion of this testimony.

EDITORS NOTE.— The statements referred to may be found beginning on p. 102.

Mr. REYNOLDS. In addition to our witnesses who wish to speak, we have Congressman Crosser from whom we would like to hear.

Mr. CROSSER. I think, everything considered, the biggest job I can do is to tell you how worthy these witnesses are who come from Cleveland to testify. They are telling the whole story better than I can tell it. But I would like to reemphasize, if necessary--although I do not think it is necessary--the absolute necessity of the appropriation they ask. It seems to me they have cut down the amount required a little too much, but they will be glad, I am sure, to have what is proposed here. It is not a big amount when you consider the magnitude of the undertaking, and folks in the country will be affected beneficially by what is done here.

I do not know of any port where there is a greater amount of commerce developed than right at the Cleveland Port and everything that is done to make it really workable for navigation purposes, the better it will be for the people of the whole country. This is not simply a matter to help Cleveland itself; we are doing something which I think will be of unquestionable benefit to the people of the country as a whole, and particularly in a time of stress like now.

You have not any idea of the amount of steel and metal of every kind that is brought down through the lakes and fabricated in one way or another, that goes into the war effort. And I tell you we can feel a lot more comfortable with such industry there rather than having it somewhere on the Pacific or Atlantic coast. It is an important thing.

I do not think it would add anything for me to go into the details. These gentlemen from Cleveland have the facts at their fingertips; although if you would like me to do it, I will be glad to do so. But I assure you that my friend Reynolds will take care of it and I need not vouch for him to you, because he is so well known. But I will assure you that he does not ask for anything that is not a worthy proposition, and I hope you give the application prompt and immediate attention.

Mr. HAND. The committee is very glad to hear from you, Congressman Crosser. Now, Mr. Feighan, we will be glad to hear from you.

Mr. FEIGHAN. I want again to express my appreciation of this opportunity to appear before you. I do not want to go into any lengthy detail with reference to the projects that are involved; because, in the first place, I know you are thoroughly familiar with them, having had them before you before and I think in your wisdom and good judgment you have been appropriating sufficient funds to enable the eventual construction of the work which, of course, requires a certain number of years.

I feel very confident that you will give very serious consideration to this and, as you have in the past, provide the necessary funds for its completion.

I thank you.

Mr. Hand. You can be sure the committee is well aware of the importance of Cleveland as a port.

Mr. CROSSER. I had intended to mention this fact, that practically every public agency without exception has 0. K.'d this. The Bureau of the Budget is 100 percent for it and I understand the President has personally expressed his desire for it. So there is no doubt about that angle at all and, speaking from a personal viewpoint, they are all friendly to it.

Mr. Hand. Who else do you want us to hear?

Mr. REYNOLDS. I would like to say that Congresswoman Bolton is ill and she will file a letter with the committee. And Congressman Bender had to be in Cleveland today, and he will file a letter. He had intended to be here.

Mr. Hand. We will be glad to have them file statements.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Now I would like you to hear from the executive assistant to Mayor Celebrezze, Mr. Harry Hobart.

Mr. Hobart. I thank you for the opportunity of appearing here not only in behalf of Mayor Celebrezze, but also the taxpayers of Cleveland.

We have not asked the Federal Government to do all of the spending of money. Cleveland itself has issued bonds to about the sum of $14 million, of which about $12 million has now been spent. We have approximately $2 million left, which we are still spending. We just awarded one other contract last week for the further completion of this project in which we have naturally been very much interested. And if you know Cleveland like we do, you would know that the issuing of $12 or $14 million worth of bonds is quite a proposition and the people must be pretty well sold, else they would not consent to issuing the bonds.

We have done another thing. We started last year, at the request of the Army engineers, to establish a system of port control. They felt somewhat as though we had a harbor which was not being used to the best of its possibilities for river commerce and, at their request, we set up this traffic-control arrangement which carried through last year and worked out not 100 percent, but very close to it. We propose to carry this on again this year, and I think we can do a better job of it than we did last year.

The time we saved was very material. Even with the present status of this project, we have saved some 40 or 45 minutes of transiting the river from the mouth to the head of navigation. If we can get the whole plan completed, which we hope, not before too long, we would add another 15 to 25 minutes to that saving, which is a very material saving considering the number of boats transiting the river. So we know from our experience up there that we can do a much better job when it is completed.

For that reason, we would like to have you give every consideration you can to giving us sufficient money to carry on for next year. That is about all I have to say. I have some extra copies of the statement here if you would care to have them, and thanks again.

Mr. Hand. Not at all; we are very happy to have you with us. We certainly will give very careful consideration to the project.

Mr. LARSON. My name is Leonard Larson; I am chief engineer of the Cleveland district plant of the Republic Steel Corp.

I have appeared before this committee before in behalf of this project, as I understand it and as has been indicated here, the committee is familiar with the statistics that have been presented from time to time on this project.

The Cuyahoga River, as I hope the most of you understand, is very vital to the steel industry of the country. Republic's largest plant is located on the bank of the Cuyahoga in Ohio, as well as the Otis plant of the Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., the American Steel, and the War Division of the United States Steel Corp.

Republic has over the past 3 years materially expanded its facilities on the river and increased their productive capacity approximately 40 percent, to the end that today we have a capacity capable of producing about 2,700,000 tons of ingots a year, and pig iron about 2.25 million tons. And the other two steel companies have also had a comparable expansion during the same period. The aggregate cost to the three steel companies I think can be conservatively stated as being in excess of $150 million, and the combined capacity now is 4 million and I am inclined to think a little more, tons of ingots per year.

The Cuyahoga River is vital in this program of getting the raw materials to these operations which, in the aggregate, require in the neighborhood of 12 million tons a year, or more. I am talking now principally about iron ore and limestone. We have completed these expansion programs, but we cannot realize on them fully until we get the kind of shipping facilities that can be afforded only through the water transport of these materials on the Cuyahoga River. That is evidenced by the fact that for the past few years the river has not been able to keep pace with these requirements, as evidenced by the fact we have had to deliver a high percentage of these materials at lake front ports and get them to destination by rail. That means higher cost and means crippling the operations because of the fact our facilities are not designed for handling rail shipments. And that presents a congestion in the operations.

Some of the improvements in this program have been completed, but it is very important that the needs have been growing faster than the relief that this program will in large measure afford.

We also in Republic have four inland steel plants-Youngstown, Canton, Mason and Warren. Our docks on the Cuyahoga River are equipped to handle iron ore delivered to those docks via boat and then reloaded and consigned to the plants via rail, which means a direct and lower cost way of getting ore to our inland plants. That, as well, has been of importance during the later years with the increased production.

We are faced with another situation, that is limestone of suitable quality that has been available by rail is nearing depletion and we are developing quarries in Michigan whereby we can get the stone only by boat. There are no rail connections to this plant. That means transporting by water which will further cut into the capacity for other shipments.

Mr. HAND. We are glad to have your statement, Mr. Larson. We are thoroughly familiar with it, having been going into it quite a little bit, and we have a good deal of sympathy, I think, for it.

If there is anything further you would like to add, we will insert it in the record.

(The following statements were submitted for the record:)

« PreviousContinue »