Page images
PDF
EPUB

Colonel FERINGA. I have the combined figure. That is the cost of production and the prime energy would have to be sold at more than the secondary energy for less.

Mr. RANKIN. You are charging the entire development up to power?

Colonel FERINGA. We are charging the major part to power. We also have the navigation benefits. The annual navigation saving would be $228,000, which would apply to 355,000 tons. The ratio of cost to benefit is 1 to 1.25. That is for the combined multiple purpose project.

The cost to the United States, the first cost, would be $51,511,000, and would cost $317,000 annually for operation and maintenance.

We did recommend, and what we again recommend, is the construction of the Blair Shoals site at an estimated cost of $21,000,000, the Frost Shoals site at an estimated cost of $17,000,000, and the construction of the reregulating dam at Columbia at an estimated cost of $12,000,000, plus channel improvement, which would make the total cost, the estimated cost of the project $59,548,000. The project is estimated at 1942 costs, which have gone up roughly, according to the Engineering News-Record, about 20 percent.

Mr. RANKIN. How far is this power development to be from the city of Columbia ?

Colonel FERINGA. It would be right at the doorstep and would fall in naturally with the vast Santee-Cooper development.

Columbia is right at the site, the dam site of the reregulating dam. Mr. RANKIN. Does Columbia own her distribution system?

Colonel FERINGA. I do not know, sir. In our cost we include the cost of transmission facilities, and as you know, by law we would be required to turn the power over to the Secretary of the Interior at the bus bars.

That explains it in brief, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Mr. Linton.

STATEMENTS OF JOHN S. LINTON, CHAIRMAN, WATER TRANSPOR

TATION COMMITTEE OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, COLUMBIA, S. C.; and W. N. MINER

Mr. LINTON. We appreciate very much letting us come up here and present our little grief that we may have and to tell you the advantages accruing to Columbia and the State of South Carolina, and I am going to ask Mr. Miner to take the floor and to give you the information that we have.

Thank you.
Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Mr. Miner.

Mr. MINER. In the interests of time, as has been indicated here, I have before me a statement which I will probably follow very closely and will only take just a few minutes.

There is one question that I would like, before bringing up this statement, to get into the record.

I believe that when the colonel was testifying he referred to the ratio of benefits as 1 to 1.25. I just wanted to have that checked with paragraph 127, page 58, Senate Document No. 189, Seventy-eighth Congress, which refers to a ratio of benefits to charges of about 1.31.

As stated to you, I represent the Chamber of Commerce of Columbia, S. C., which organization has, as one of its adopted objectives, water transportation from Charleston to Columbia via the Cooper River; the Santee-Cooper project, and the Congaree River; also, the development of additional hydroelectric power on the Broad and Congaree Rivers. These have been the subject of study and consideration by business interests and citizens of the city of Columbia, the county of Richland, and other sections of our State for the past 30 or 40 years.

Numerous sections of the country have had projects consisting of dams and power plants constructed along their rivers. As a result, these streams have been made navigable for shallow-draft vessels and the use of towboats and barges in the movement of a cast tonnage of commerce between seaports and inland cities, also for the movement of raw materials produced inland to industrial plants located at the seaports or on deep water in the vicinity of these ports. Not only have these projects proved of material benefit in lower transportation costs, but they have also contributed greatly to the industrial development of entire areas.

We believe that Columbia and South Carolina should receive certain projects as recommended by the Army engineers and others which will result in Columbia's becoming a port city on an inland waterway route, thus providing our city and all central and northern portions of South Carolina now served by rail lines from Columbia the benefits of lower transportation costs and cheap electric power which other States and sections are receiving.

On October 24, 1938, the Committee on Commerce of the United States Senate adopted a resolution calling upon the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors to make a comprehensive study of potential power development and water navigation projects within certain river basins in South Carolina. Specifically, this resolution directed that the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors determinethe advisability of improving existing conditions for navigation on the Santee and Conga ree Rivers so as to provide for navigation to Columbia, S. C., and for the development of hydroelectric power in that vicinity.

In December 1943 the Board of Engineers completed its study and reported its findings and recommendations to the Chief of Army Engineers. This report was studied and reviewed by the Federal Power Commission, the Chief of Engineers, and the Secretary of War before it was submitted to the Committee on Commerce and made public in 1944 as Senate Document No. 189.

A review of Senate Document No. 189 reveals that these agencies agree and recommend for construction a power dam at Frost Shoals and one at Blairs on the Broad River, a power and re-regulating dam on the Congaree River at Columbia, and channel improvements on the Congaree River from Columbia to the Santee Reservoir that would provide a channel 150 feet wide, 8 feet deep, plus 1 foot of overdepth.

There exists a need for water transportation between Columbia and Charleston. The great increase which has taken place in the volume of commerce moving over inland waterways in areas comparable with South Carolina is evidence of the need for this type of transportation.

With no attempt to here indicate all of the commodities which would logically move over this waterway when developed, we refer to a few of them, as follows: Stone now produced in the Columbia area would move to Charleston and thence through the intracoastal waterway to

Florida where there is no stone, and which logical market cannot now be served from South Carolina in competition with more distant quarries that enjoy water rates.

Pulpwood and other forest products in tremendous volume would move to manufacturing plants now located at Charleston, Georgetown, and Savannah. Fertilizer, petroleum products, asphalt, and cement are among the many commodities which would move up the waterway at large savings in transportation costs.

These three dams-Frost Shoals, Blairs, and Columbia-will produce 640 million kilowatt-hours of electric energy annually. Central South Carolina badly needs additional power for its growing population and industry.

At this point we desire to stress the fact, so forcefully pointed out in Senate Document No. 189, that the Clinchfield, Greater Lockhart, and Buckingham Landing projects are not recommended for construction, neither are they needed to provide water transportation to Columbia and additional electric energy. We also point out that the Columbia Chamber of Commerce joined with many other groups in the protest registered against consideration being given to the construction of the Buckingham Landing Project at a public hearing before the district engineer, held at Sumter, S.C., on August 28, 1945.

We respectfully ask that you include in the current omnibus river and harbor bill authorization to appropriate funds for the power dams at Frost Shoals, at Blairs, and the Columbia re-regulating dam, together with the deepening of the channel in the Congaree River as recommended by the Army engineers and others.

Mr. RANKIN. How much is produced by the Santee-Cooper?
Mr. MINER. I do not have those figures before me.

Mr. RANKIN. I spoke before a joint session of Legislature of South Carolina in favor of the Santee-Cooper project. How long will this waterway be from Columbia to Charleston?

Mr. MINER. I could give you a layman's estimate on that. But I would prefer to have Colonel Feringa give you that.

Colonel FERINGA. It is 57 miles.
Mr. RANKIN. You have no coal in South Carolina ?
Mr. MINER. No.
Mr. RANKIN. Or oil ?
Mr. MINER. No, sir; not yet.
Mr. RANKIN. So your coal and oil is all shipped in?
Mr. MINER. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. This would give you an inlet to the oil coming by barges from the fields to the south and southwest?

Mr. MINER. That is right.

Mr. RANKIN. One thing I notice that is prone to be overlooked, and that I think is one of the main commodities to be shipped on these barges is cottonseed products. Yesterday a member of this committee seemed horrified almost when I said every bale of cotton has 1,000 pounds of seed in it.

He could not understand why seed weighs more than the cotton.

Cottonseed has more food value per bushel than wheat or corn. There is a terrific demand all over the Northern States for cottonseed and especially cottonseed meal.

What will this cost, Colonel ?
Colone FERINGA. In the neighborhood of $60,000,000.
Mr. RANKIN. Sumter is not on the river?
Mr. MINER. No, sir.

That, Mr. Chairman, I think in brief covers the statement. If there are any questions that one might care to ask in connection with it, I will be glad to answer.

Mr. RANKIN. Columbia is almost in the center of the State?

Mr. MINER. Very definitely so. Within about 3 miles of the geographical center of the State.

Mr. Rankin. So these power dams would be somewhere in the center of the State of South Carolina ?

Mr. MINER. The one at Colombia would be almost in the definite center, and then the Blairs and Frost Shoals just a few miles up the river to the northeast.

Mr. RANKIN. All these dams would be within 150 or 200 miles of everybody living in South Carolina?

Mr. MINER. Approximately so; yes, sir.
Mr. RANKIN. What I had in mind was the distribution of this

power to be developed. We can transmit power 200 miles for eight-tenths of a mill per kilowatt-hour. We are paying 4.4 cents per kilowatthour wholesale in the TVA area. You would be at least on a par with us.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. At this point I would like to insert in the record a telegram from the Korn Industries, Sumter, S. C., requesting that action on the pending project be postponed until they and others be given an opportunity to be heard. Mr. RANKIN. What is their business? We cannot hold it

up

for everybody.

Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Another telegram from Sumter, and also another one of the same nature from the Hamilton Veneer Co., and Congressman Richards has made a similar request.

(T'he telegrams and letters referred to are as follows:)

ORANGEBURG, S. C., May 9, 1946. Hon. Hugh PETERSON,

Acting Chairman of House Rivers and Harbors Committee: We respectfully ask that action on legislation to improve Congaree River in South Carolina be delayed until the opposition has chance to be heard as gain would be far less than damage to timber and other natural resources.

HAMILTON VENEER Co.

SUMTER, S. C., May 9, 1946. Hon. HUGH PETERSON,

Acting Chairman of House Rivers and Harbors Committee: As manufacturer employing several hundred people in mill and factory depending upon hardwood forest in Wateree and Congaree River swamps we urgently request that action on pending project for power and navigation on these rivers be postponed until we and others vitally interested be given a hearing to present protest against such large expenditure of public money promising no corresponding public benefits but threatening destruction of valuable existing natural resources and established business and industry.

KORN INDUSTRIES, INC.,
J. E. LOGAN, Secretary.

[ocr errors]

KORN INDUSTRIES, INC.,

Sumter, S. C., May 9, 1946. Hon. Hugo PETERSON, Acting Chairman, House Rivers and Harbors Committee,

Washington, D. C. Mr. PETERSON : We have just sent you a fast telegram as follows:

"As manufacturer employing several hundred people in mills and factory depending upon hardwood forests in Wateree and Congaree river swamps we urgently request that action on pending projects for power and navigation on these rivers be postponed till we and others vitally interested be given a hearing to present protests against such large expenditure of public money promising no corresponding public benefits but threatening destruction to valuable natural resources and established business and industry.”

We this morning heard that you are conducting hearings on the Congaree River projects and as we are vitally interested in any action that may be taken in this matter we trust that we will be granted an opportunity along with other protestants to have a hearing before your committee before action is taken on these projects.

We have been conducting operations in Sumter and vicinity since 1920 and are very vitally interested in preventing destruction of our valuable natural resources in the hardwood forests and farming areas along these river bottoms.

We would appreciate hearing from you on this matter at your earliest convenience. Yours respectfully,

KORN INDUSTRIES, INC.,
J. E. LOGAN, Secretary.

SUMTER, S. C., May 8, 1946. Hon. HUGH PETERSON, Acting Chairman, House Rivers and Harbors Committee,

Washington, D. C. As counsel for South Carolina forest industries respectfully request that no favorable action be taken on project for improvement of Congaree river, S. C., for navigation, flood control, and power development purposes until we have had opportunity to present views in opposition and that hearings be postponed reasonable length of time. We are convinced that valuable timber resources will be adversely affected and that resulting damages will greatly exceed any possible benefits.

JOHN D. LEE.

ORANGEBURG, S. C., May 9, 1946. Hugh PETERSON, Acting Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We respectfully request that no action be taken on Congaree River improvements until opposition can be heard.

ORANGEBURG CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

COLUMBIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,

Columbia, S. C., May 7, 1946. To the South Carolina Delegation in the United States Congress.

GENTLEMEN : The Columbia Chamber of Commerce has as one of its adopted objectives water transportation from Charleston to Columbia, via the Cooper River which at present is a navigable stream, Santee-Cooper project, and the Congaree River. This form of transportation facility has been the subject of study and consideration by business interests and citizens of the city of Columbia, the county of Richland, and other sections of our State for the past 30 or 40 years.

Numerous sections of the country have made successful efforts to have projects consisting of dams and power plants along their rivers undertaken and financed by the Federal Government. As a result, these streams have been made navigable for shallow-draft vessels and the use of towboats and barges in the movement of commerce between seaports and inland cities, also for the movement of raw

« PreviousContinue »