Local cooperation: Provide all lands, easements, and rights-of-way for dredging Ybor Channel and for maintenance of this channel and Port Sutton Channel and turning basin including spoil areas and necessary dikes; hold and save the United States free from damage; provide terminal facilities; provide depths in vessel berthing areas and local access channels commensurate with projects; contribute to Ybor Channel project 1.7 percent of construction dredging cost presently estimated at $17,000. Hillsborough County Port Authority representatives stated that it would be willing and able to comply with these requirements. Comments of the State and Federal agencies: Department of the Interior: No objection. State of Florida : Favorable. Colonel MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, this project concerns improvement to two channels in Tampa Harbor, Ybor Channel, and Port Sutton Channel. The report was authorized by resolutions of the Senate Public Works Committee, adopted in 1958 and 1959, and two resolutions of the House of Representatives, adopted in April of 1959. Tampa had a population in 1960 of 275,000. A tributary area also had a population totaling 1,415,000. Tampa is a major distribution center for petroleum products, other commercial activities including phosphate mining and the processing, citrus crops, manufacturing, and tourism. Federal projects in Tampa Harbor provide for an entrance channel 36 feet deep and interior channels generally 34 feet deep. Total commerce in 1960 was 14,780,000 tons. Local interests desire deepening of Ybor Channel to 34 feet to permit operation of more fully loaded or large tankers and so its dimensions would be compatible with those in other Tampa Harbor channels. Local interests also desire Federal maintenance of the Port Sutton Channel, which was constructed by private interests in 1955. The recommended plan of the Chief of Engineers calls for modification of the present authorized Tampa Harbor project to provide for Federal maintenance of the Port Sutton Channel and to deepen Ybor Channel to 34 feet. Local interests would be required to provide the standard items of local cooperation. In addition, they must provide terminal facilities and adequate depths in berthing areas, and contribute to the Ybor Channel project 1.7 percent of the construction costs. Such contribution presently is estimated to total $17,000. Satisfactory assurances have been received from local interests that they would comply. Annual benefits for Ybor Channel, which are . comprised of $117,000 annually in transportation savings and $4,000 for land enhancement, total $121,000. For Port Sutton, the annual benefits, which consist of transportation savings and elimination of terminal costs, total $286,000. Annual charges for Ybor total $38,000 and for Port Sutton, $8,600. Estimated first costs for Ybor Channel is $1,015,000. The benefitcost ratio for Ybor Channel is 3.1 to 1, and for Port Sutton is 33.2 to 1. Comments from the State of Florida and the Department of Interior have been favorable, and the Bureau of the Budget has offered no objection to the submission of this report at this time, sir. Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. May I ask a question, Mr. Chairman? 90628-62-9 Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Auchincloss. They want an increase of 4 feet. Is that going to be satisfactory, do you think, for a length of time or sufficient? Colonel MARSHALL. I believe that 34 feet was selected- Colonel MARSHALL. The local interests' desire for 34 feet was based on the existing Federal project in the other channels in Tampa Harbor which are also 34 feet. The entrance channel is somewhat deeper to provide for a greater free-board beneath the ships. Based on our statistics on the tankers now using Tampa Harbor, their drafts vary from 30 to 3312 feet. The 34-foot depth appears reasonable, sir. `It is conceivable that deeper draft tankers will be used in the future. (The following was furnished for insertion :) TAMPA, FLA., September 6, 1962. CHARLES A. BUCKLEY, Member of Congress, Committee on Public Works, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.: People of Tampa Bay area support engineers request for dredging of Ybor Channel and additional harbor maintenance. Project badly needed. SAM M. GIBBONS, Democratic Nominee for Congress. Mr. BLATNIK. Any other questions? The next project is Pensacola Harbor, Fla. (The justification follows:) PENSACOLA HARBOR, FLA. Location: Pensacola Harbor is on the northwest coast of Florida, about 59 miles east of Mobile, Ala., and 103 miles west of Panama City, Fla. Authority: Resolutions of Rivers and Harbors Committee and Public Works Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, adopted November 20, 1945, and June 3, 1959, respectively; also River and Harbor Act approved March 2, 1945. Existing project: Provides for an entrance channel 32 feet by 500 feet, about 3.4 miles, from Gulf of Mexico to Pensacola Bay; two parallel approach channels each 30 feet by 250 feet by 3,700 feet, leading to opposite ends of Pensacola Harbor; an inner harbor channel 30 feet by 500 feet by 3,500 feet, parallel to the pierhead line; an approach channel 30 feet by 250 feet, about 1.2 miles, to the pierhead line opposite Muscogee wharf; and a channel 21 feet by 100 feet from Pensacola Bay to mouth of Bayou Chico, about 1 mile, thence 20 feet by 100 feet, about 4,400 feet terminating at a turning basin 20 feet by 500 feet by 500 feet. Present depths in Bayou Chico are 15 feet in outer channel and 14 feet in inner channel and turning basin. In 1958 and 1959 the entrance channel was enlarged to 37 feet by 800 feet, and an aircraft carrier mooring basin 35 feet deep, of about 1,200 acres, was dredged in lower Pensacola Bay at Navy expense. The Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, 12 feet by 125 feet, crosses the harbor entrance channel in the lower part of Pensacola Bay. Navigation problem: Controlling project depths and widths of existing channels place undue restriction on shipping and deprive Pensacola of a considerable amount of commerce that would otherwise move through the port. This situation is expected to become more critical in view of the trend toward construction and use of larger cargo vessels. Recommended plan of improvement: Provides for maintenance of entrance : channel from gulf to Pensacola Bay, about 5 miles, to 35 feet deep and 500 feet wide; maintenance of a channel along south side of aircraft carrier mooring basin, about 2.5 miles, to 33 feet deep and 300 feet wide; a bay channel 33 feet deep, 300 feet wide and about 2.1 miles long; parallel approach channels to opposite ends of inner harbor channel about 1.3 and 1.4 miles long, each 33 feet deep and 300 feet wide, and flared at the junctions with the inner harbor channel; and deepening the existing 500-foot-wide inner harbor channel to a depth of 33 feet and lengthening it to 3,950 feet. Benefit-cost ratio: 1.9. Local cooperation: Furnish lands and rights-of-way, also spoil disposal areas and retaining dikes; provide and maintain public terminal and transfer facilities; provide and maintain depths in berthing areas and local access channels serving the terminals commensurate with depths provided in the related project areas; and hold and save the United States free from damages. Local interests are willing to comply with the requirements of local cooperation. Comments of the State and Federal agencies: Department of the Interior: No objections. State of Florida : Favorable. Mr. BLATNIK. This is Pensacola Harbor, Fla.; House Document 528, 87th Congress. Colonel MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, this report concerns improvements to navigational channels at Pensacola Harbor, Fla. The study was authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1945 and by House Rivers and Harbors and Public Works Committees' resolutions adopted in 1945 and 1959. The report has been printed as House Document 528, 87th Congress. Pensacola is located on the northwest panhandle of Florida, 59 miles east of Mobile, Ala. The main port and terminal facilities are located about 8 miles from the entrance to Pensacola Bay. Pensacola Naval Air Station occupies a large area on the western shore of the bay near its outlet to the Gulf of Mexico. The population of the Pensacola metropolitan area in 1960 was about 200,000. The area directly tributary to the port comprises parts of northwest Florida and southern Alabama. Commerce in the port in 1960 was 792,443 tons. Some 2,469 trips in and out of the harbor were made by vessels of all drafts. Between 30 and 35 round trips each month are made by aircraft carriers based at Pensacola Naval Air Station. Existing channel dimensions are considered to be restrictive and do not permit fully loaded operation of modern, deep-draft freighters. Local interests have requested a depth of 37 feet in all channels and additional maneuvering space. The commander of the naval air station has requested that the existing project be modified to provide for Federal maintenance of channels recently constructed, using Navy funds. The existing Federal project provides for an entrance channel 32 by 500 feet, two parallel approach channels 30 feet deep, leading into Pensacola Harbor, and an inner harbor channel 30 feet parallel to the pierhead line, a 30 foot channel leading into Muscogee Wharf and a 21 foot channel in Bayo Chico. In addition to the foregoing, the Navy, in 1958 and 1959, enlarged the entrance channel to 37 feet by 800 feet and provided an aircraft carrier mooring basin 35 feet deep. The report of the Chief of Engineers recommends improvement of existing channels to provide for an entrance channel 35 by 500 feet deep, maintenance of the channel alongside the south part of the aircraft mooring basin at a depth of 33 feet, and then channels into Pensacola Harbor at a depth of 33 feet. The estimated first cost of the improvement is $424,000, all of which is Federal. Annual charges total $107,000, of which $1,000 is nonFederal. Annual benefits, comprised of transportation savings and maintenance savings, total $202,000. Benefit-cost ratio is 1.9 to 1. Local interests would be required to furnish necessary lands and rights-of-way, provide and maintain public terminal facilities and adequate depths in berthing areas and access channels and hold and save the United States free from damages. Officials of the city of Pensacola have provided assurances that they will comply with these requirements. Favorable comments on the proposed improvement have been received from the State of Florida and the Department of the Navy and Interior. The Bureau of the Budget has posed no objection to the submission of this report at this time, sir. Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. Mr. Chairman? Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. May I ask, Colonel : I notice the Department of Interior and the Department of the Navy stated they have no objections, while the State of Florida is favorable. Why is there a subtle difference between “no objection” and “favorable” or is there? Colonel MARSHALL. I would consider, sir, that a “no objection” report is innocuous. I would be glad to read the Department of the Interior's comment. Mr. BLATNIK. I think, Colonel, we could skip the Department of the Interior because, obviously, they would not be too directly involved and concerned and, naturally, would have no objection to this project but would you go down to the Department of the Navy's report. In view of the fact that in the benefits there is an annual maintenance saving to the U.S. Navy of $40,000, and that they have no objections, would you read their report? Colonel MARSHALL. They state, sir, that they are particularly interested in the proposed improvement. They recommend that authority be obtained to maintain the present 37-foot depth which they have dredged and which we did not adopt. So, in effect, the Navy said: “We want 37 feet.” We have not recommended the 37 feet. Consequently, they do not object to what we are doing, but I think they would prefer that we provided the 37-foot depth. Mr. BLATNIK. What depth are you proposing? Mr. AUCHINCLOSs. Welí, Mr. Chairman, in the previous project, we just considered the Department of Interior had no objection. It would indicate to me that the difference is the lack of enthusiasm. Colonel MARSHALL. I would say that that is a fair evaluation, sir. Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. Well, I have no more questions at this time. Mr. BLATNIK. We will go off the record at this point. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. BLATNIK. The hearings are recessed until 2 o'clock this after(Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., a recess was had until 2 p.m., this date.) noon. AFTERNOON SESSION Mr. BLATNIK. The Rivers and Harbors Subcommittee will please come to order, resuming public hearings on navigation projects. We will continue with the testimony of Col. Robert C. Marshall, with projects in the eastern section of the United States. This morning we concluded with the Pensacola Harbor, Fla. If the committee will turn to the top of page 3, the first project is Key West Harbor, Fla., Senate Document 106, 87th Congress. Colonel Marshall. KEY WEST HARBOR, FLA. STATEMENT OF COL. ROBERT C. MARSHALL, OFFICE, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS Colonel MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this survey review report concerns proposed improvements for navigation at Key West. The study was authorized by resolution of the Senate Public Works Committee adopted in 1951. Key West is an island off the southern tip of Florida, about 130 miles southwest of Miami. The existing Federal projects provide for a main ship channel 30 by 300 feet, a northwest channel in open water, an intracoastal waterway between Key West and Miami. Key West, at the northwest corner of the island, is the principal shrimp boat berthing area in the Florida Keys. Based on the only complete records now available, 28,000 boat landings were made in the Key West area in 1952. The shrimp fleet consists primarily of migrant boats which use Key West as a base during the season between November and June. Because present depths do not provide an adequate channel, the shrimp boats coming into the port incur damages and delay. Local interests desire provision of adequate depths and also protection to prevent damages caused by wave action. |