Under provision (a) afore-mentioned which provides that users of the disposal facilities shall pay the United States a fixed unit toll for such use the cost of the project will be self-liquidating.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the amount of it?

Colonel FERINGA. It is briefly this. Norfolk Harbor is a harbor that is very large, busy, and congested. For instance, the coal mentioned just a moment ago amounts to 15,000,000 tons annually. There are many industries along here, Navy yards and what not. They have completely exhausted their spoil-disposal areas. Consequently, in the past, we have had to dump the spoil out into the Chesapeake Bay and there is only left a small disposal area which we can use with safety in Chesapeake Bay. Therefore, the spoil that has to be dredged to keep the channels open would not have to be carried way out into the Atlantic Ocean, and that increases the cost of dredging and handling of spoil to a very high figure.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have to use hopper dredges?

Colonel FERINGA. They dump it into scows. We do use hopper dredges, yes, sir, but in the inner harbor it is usually taken into scows, hauled to sea, and disposed of in that manner. They are self-dumping scows.

The dredging consists not only of the Government channels but the dredging in the slips by the owners of the wharves. The district engineer has proposed a plan whereby he will build a disposal area right close to the harbor. Here is the harbor and here is the disposal area. That disposal area will be diked, so that the spoil cannot escape into the surrounding waters. The barges will be dumped at this location and will be pumped from this location into the area.

We recommend the project as a self-liquidating project, because anyone who will dump in this area will be charged a pro rata cost per yard so that, eventually, the project will be liquidated; that is, the Federal Government will be reimbursed for every cent it has expended.

The cost of the project will be $5,100,000 and the annual cost of maintenance $690,000.

The CHAIRMAN. In the course of time it will produce valuable property?

Čolonel FERINGA. It will produce that; it will produce valuable property. The gentleman made some remark about there being damage. Some of the local oyster beds at this point will be damaged, but local interests have promised to make the land available and the United States would reimburse the oyster growers.

The CHAIRMAN. What kind of dike will surround it?

Colonel FERINGA. It probably will be a dirt dike fill which will be armored with rock.

The CHAIRMAN. Have we anything further?

Colonel FERINGA. Mr. Chairman, the report on St. Johns River, Fla.

ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLA., JACKSONVILLE TO LAKE HARNEY

The CHAIRMAN. St. Johns River above Jacksonville?

Colonel FERINGA. That is one of the few rivers in the United States that flows north.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it parallels the coast line.

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir. It starts down about halfway the State of Florida, flows north to Jacksonville, then makes practically a right angle turn at Jacksonville and flows into the ocean.

Colonel FERINGA. Mr. Chairman, the report on St. Johns River, Jacksonville to Lake Harney, Fla., is in response to a resolution adopted by the Rivers and Harbors Committee on August 25, 1944. It is also in response to an item in the River and Harbor Act approved March 2, 1945.

The St. Johns River, Fla., rises in the marshes of Brevard County, in east-central Florida, flows northerly 257 miles to Jacksonville, thence easterly 28 miles to the Atlantic Ocean. From the mouth to Palatka, mile 83, the river consists of a tidal lagoon, varying from one-fourth to 3 miles in width. Between Palatka and Sanford, mile 173, it consists of a series of lakes connected by reaches of wide, sluggish river.

The existing project for improvement of St. Johns River between Jacksonville and Lake Harney provides for a channel 13 feet deep and 200 feet wide from Jacksonville, mile 28, to Palatka, mile 83, thence 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide to Sanford, mile 173, on Lake Monroe, and in the side channel to Enterprise, and a channel 5 feet deep from Lake Monroe to Lake Harney, mile 198, by way of the Woodruff Creek cut-off, having a width of 75 feet in the cut-off and 100 feet in the remaining reaches.

Construction of the 10-foot channel from Palatka to Sanford and Enterprise, authorized by the River and Harbor Act of March 2, 1945, has not been undertaken. The estimated cost of work is $290,000.

The Intracoastal Waterway, with a project depth of 12 feet, crosses the St. Johns River 22 miles downstream from Jacksonville.

The water-borne commerce on the St. Johns River above Palatka during the 18 prewar years 1924 to 1941, inclusive, ranged from 72,117 tons in 1931 to 469,301 tons in 1937, and averaged 237,185 tons annually for the 18 years. The average annual number of passengers carried was 8,603.

The principal items were petroleum products, food products, canned fruits and vegetables, fresh fruits, and fertilizer.

In 1941, 8,157 vessels made round trips.

The area commercially tributary to the St. Johns River, Fla., Jacksonville to Lake Harney, includes all or parts of 15 counties in northeastern and central Florida. The population of these 15 counties was 764,869 in 1940, exclusive of the large winter transient population. The principal centers of population having over 10,000 inhabitants are Jacksonville, 173,000 inhabitants; Tampa, 108,390; Orlando, 36,740; Daytona Beach, 26,830; Lakeland, 22,070; St. Augustine, 12,090; and Sanford, 10,220.

The main pursuits are those pertaining to agriculture, horticulture, forestry, mining, manufacturing, fishing and catering to the transient population. The principal products of the area are citrus fruit, green vegetable, potatoes, watermelons, corn, peanuts, lime and phosphate rock, fullers' earth, livestock, poultry, lumber and other forest products, including naval stores.

Local interests desire a channel 12 feet deep at local mean low water and 125 feet wide where considered necessary from Palatka to San

ford and in the side channel to Enterprise. They point out that most of the shallow-draft vessels used on the 8-foot waterway before World War No. 2 are no longer available and a depth of 12 feet will be required for the vessels with drafts up to 11 feet proposed for use on the waterway in the postwar period. A depth of 12 feet between Palatka and Sanford would permit through shipments, including refrigerated barge service, between all St. Johns River points below Sanford, the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway and the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway.

The Board finds that a depth of 12 feet between Palatka and Sanford and in the branch channel to Enterprise is desirable in order to accommodate the craft with drafts up to 11 feet, and to permit through shipments between St. Johns River points and all points on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, and the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway.

Accordingly the Board recommends modification of the existing project for St. Johns River, Fla., Jacksonville to Lake Harney, to provide for a channel 12 feet deep at local mean low water and 100 feet wide from Palatka to Sanford, and in the branch to Enterprise. The Chief of Engineers concurs in the views and recommendations of the Board.

The improvement is recommended provided that responsible local interests give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of War that they will (a) provide without cost to the United States, all lands, easements, and rights-of-way necessary for the construction of the project and its subsequent maintenance, when and as required; and (b) provide and maintain, without cost to the United States, adequate terminal facilities when and as required, which shall be open to all on equal terms.

Costs and annual charges

10 foot project previously authorized__

Cost to United States increased depth to 12 feet--.
Additional cost of annual maintenance_
Additional annual carrying charges.

$290,000 463, 000

None

17,992

The Board is of the opinion that the postwar commerce on the St. Johns River will exceed the quantities that moved by water during the prewar years. With a depth of 12 feet shipments in the amounts shown in the tabulation below would use the waterway on which an average saving of at least 20 cents a ton would be realized over the cost of transportation by means of the authorized 10-foot channel. Estimated average annual postwar freight traffic on St. Johns River, Fla., above Palatka

The CHAIRMAN. That would correspond with all of these other inland intracoastal waterways?

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir. The annual carrying charges would be $17,992, and the ratio of cost to benefiits is as 1 to 7.1.

The Governor of Florida is in favor of the project. We have not had an opportunity to send the report to the Budget Bureau as yet. In brief, Mr. Chairman, what is proposed is this: we now have up and down the Atlantic coast, as you well know, and along the Gulf coast, starting from Apalachicola, Fla., down to Texas, a waterway that is authorized 12 feet.

The CHAIRMAN. Not only authorized but completed?

Colonel FERINGA. That is correct. And completed, except for the stretch from Jacksonville to Miami.

We also have authorized from Palatka to Jacksonville a waterway of 12-foot depth as a minimum, most of which is a natural waterway. We are authorized to construct the waterway and have not yet started it, although some funds are in the pending appropriations bill to construct it from Palatka to Enterprise, that is authorized, for 10 feet.

It is our recommendation that the Palatka to Sanford section be constructed to 12 feet so that this transshipment from one type of barge to another will not be necessary.

The CHAIRMAN. That is so near the channel authorized down to Miami, along the coast, that they parallel each other for a good many miles?

Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. It sems to me that is unnecessary.

Colonel FERINGA. We have studied that and when I was in the Jacksonville district it was surveyed. As I recall one survey route ran from Palatka east, tying into the Indian River, and we found that was not economically justified. Whether such a connection with the coastal waterway will come in the future, I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. How much traffic is handled on this? You gave the figures?

Colonel FERINGA. I gave the figure. On the Intracoastal Waterway, on the Atlantic, which would be comparable, I think, I have that in the book of graphs, which I have previously presented to the committee. The traffic on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway increased from 195,000,000 ton-miles in 1927 to a high of 1,322,000,000 in 1942, which was occasioned in large part by the type of traffic that would normally move on the deep ocean being forced into the inland waterways. In 1944 it is back to a more normal figure of 935,000,000 tonmiles.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. That, within itself, demonstrates the highly desirable features of an inland waterway.

Colonel FERINGA. Absolutely, Mr. Peterson. I might say that the only opposition that has developed to this report, was a rather able brief prepared by the railroad interests in which they deemed that the economies were not properly presented and that report was given cognizance of by the Board for Rivers and Harbors but after full consideration we are recommending the project favorably.

STATEMENT OF C. F. THEOBALD, WILMINGTON, N. C., REPRESENTING ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROADS, COMMITTEE ON WATERWAY PROJECTS, ZONE 3-TRAFFIC

Mr. THEOBALD. My name is C. F. Theobald; I am assistant to general freight agent of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., in Wilmington, N. C. My appearance here is not solely for the company named, but as a member of the traffic subcommittee for zone 3, of the committee on waterway projects, Association of American Railroads, in which capacity I represent all of the class I railroads in the territory subject, as to waterway improvements, to the jurisdiction of the division engineer for the South Atlantic division, Corps of Engineers, United States Army.

My experience in transportation matters covers a period of more than 26 years in railroad tariff and rate work, approximately the last 9 of which have been in the service of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. For the past 3 years, my duties have included, among others, that of analyzing the public benefits claimed to result from the execution of various waterway projects.

I attended the public hearings in Jacksonville and Sanford, Fla., on April 2 and 3, 1945, which form the background of the project for the St. Johns River, Fla., Jacksonville to Lake Harney, now being considered, namely the proposed deepening to a minimum of 12 feeu, of the channel in that river between Palatka and Sanford, Fla., including a side channel in Lake Monroe to Enterprise, Fla.

Thereafter, individual members of the committee of which I am a member including myself, collaborated in the preparation of a statement of 48 pages, plus certain attachments, which we filed with the district engineer at Jacksonville, Fla., under date of May 2, 1945, to demonstrate that the project is not economically sound. I have a limited number of copies of that statement, which I present here to avoid in the interest of time conservation, the repetition of the factual statements therein made.

Upon receipt of a copy of the public notice, dated September 8, 1945, from the division engineer, South Atlantic division, Atlanta, Ga., to the effect that he had recommended the execution of the project, our committee prepared a further statement which was filed under date of November 6, 1945, with the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, pressing our opposition to the project on economic grounds. Copies of this statement, together with the covering letter of transmittal to the Board and of its acknowledgement dated November 6 and November 8, 1945, respectively, are tendered here for the reason just mentioned, i. e., to conserve time.

From the Board's letter of November 8, 1945, I quote:

The brief will be made available to the individual Board members and I can assure you that the Board in its further study of the report will give careful consideration to the views expressed therein.

With all due respect to the Board, I submit that careful consideration could not have been given to our statements, because in our view such consideration would have led to a return of the reports to the subordinate officers for further study, and the matter would not be before you now.