appropriate money over and above the present authorization within the next fiscal year, with the next 2 fiscal years.

Those are all of the questions I have.

Senator Jordan?

Senator JORDAN. Colonel Marshall, could you show me on that map up there just where this money is being spent, which one of those canals there?

Colonel MARSHALL. Mr. Riley will point this out.

Actually, it is the connecting link between the Hudson River and Lake Ontario.

It is the heavy black line. It is only a portion of the New York State Barge Canal system with which the Federal Government is involved.

The remainder of the New York State Barge Canal system, which proceeds westward to Tonawanda and north from Troy to Lake Champlain, is not a Federal project.

The Federal project is for the connecting link between the Hudson River and the Great Lakes, authorized by the 1935 and 1945 acts, where the State undertakes improvement raising the bridges, deepening between locks, improving the locks, and the Federal Government reimburses them.

Senator JORDAN. And that is the answer to my question.

That is between Oswego and Troy there. Approximately?
Colonel MARSHALL. Yes, sir.

Senator JORDAN. I have no further questions.

Senator METCALF. Senator Cooper?

Senator COOPER. I will ask you if there is not some distinction between the problems relating to this development and the comprehensive river basin plans of which the chairman has been talking.

I make this distinction and ask you if it is not a valid one, that the river basin plans, which were before us and the committee did reduce the amounts of authorization to a 1-year period.

In the case of those improvements they are undertaken by the Corps of Engineers while you do the work on this waterway?

Colonel MARSHALL. That is correct, sir.

Senator COOPER. They are large in their scope, most of them, and you have a very good reason to anticipate, once having been started, that if we refuse the authorizations for one year that you will secure authorizations when the bill comes before us the next year.

In the case of New York, New York does the work, and I mean the State of New York.

Colonel MARSHALL. The work is undertaken by the State based on approved plans, and we reimburse them.

Senator COOPER. And it is possible, and that it has a different situation in making these appropriations to the legislature and all of that, that they must have some showing so that Congress will act.

They do not have the same flexibility toward planning that the Corps of Engineers has?

Colonel MARSHALL. I think I might draw the distinction, sir, that at least the contractors in New York are assured of payment by virtue of the action of the State appropriation process.

Funds are available for those contractors, whereas we do not have that in some of our own river basin activities.

Senator COOPER. It is certainly not a reimbursement
Colonel MARSHALL. It might not be available-

Senator COOPER. Is it not correct that Senator Javits said that the estimated cost of these improvements, that were ascertained earlier, are not adequate and they are not correct, and there is a larger estimated cost now?

Colonel MARSHALL. Yes, sir. The original authorization was $27 million, and it was raised $1 million by the 1962 act to $28 million. And our present estimate is $34.5 million.

It has been higher as a result of price rises over the years since 1935. In recent years, however, the cost estimate has been decreasing as a result of the removal of some crossings.

For example, certain trolley and railroad bridges have been abandoned and dismantled so that they do not have to be raised; $34.1 million is our present estimate.

Senator COOPER. Thank you.

Senator JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, may I ask one other question?
Senator METCALF. Surely.

Senator JORDAN. Part of this money is required to do things that were not contemplated in the original act; that is, the raising of these bridges, and so forth. Is that not correct?

Colonel MARSHALL. No, sir. All of the programs of the 1935 and 1945 acts were authorized in the river and harbor bills, and it included raising bridges, deepening the lock sills, and deepening between locks. All of this was originally contemplated.

There has been a reduction in a number of crossings that had to be raised.

Senator JORDAN. Well, I misunderstood it. I am very glad that you cleared that up. Thank you.

Senator METCALF. Any other questions?

Thank you, Colonel Marshall, for your usual splendid statement. Colonel MARSHALL. Thank you, sir.

Senator METCALF. The next witness is Mr. Edward F. Crawford, a member of the New York Assembly, and chairman of the New York State Joint Legislative Committee on the Barge Canal.

STATEMENT OF EDWARD F. CRAWFORD, CHAIRMAN, NEW YORK STATE JOINT LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, NEW YORK BARGE CANAL

Senator METCALF. Mr. Crawford, we are very glad to have you here this morning from the great State of New York.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, on behalf of the committee and on behalf of our legislature, I want to thank the members of the committee for calling the hearing on this very important measure and for giving us an opportunity to appear here this morning.

I have already submitted to the committee the written statement of our feelings about this measure, and this morning I would like to supplement the written statement by a few minutes of some oral testimony to make just three points with the members of your committee with regard to this measure.

I was happy to see that Senator Jordan asked to have this Great Lakes-Hudson River Waterway identified on the map here.

Actually, what we have got involved besides just this 150 miles or so of canal is a great and a tremendous God-made and manmade waterway that links the vast part of New York, not only with Lake Ontario and with Lake Erie, but with the other Great Lakes which do not appear on this map, and allows for commerce between all of those ports on the Great Lakes, both in our own Nation and with our sister in Canada, with this port.

And I think it is one of the most tremendous waterways that we have any place in this world. And the development of it came, first of all, through a dream which one of the very early Governors of New York stated.

It had been referred to as "Clinton's ditch," but it was a tremendous influence in opening up the Midwest of our country.

Before we had railroads, before we had highways of any sort, people went out to those States in great numbers because water made their transportation possible.

And also we like to claim that it was one of the chief factors in making New York State, in the very early part of the 18th and middle part or, rather, the 19th century, the Empire State, and we are quite proud in New York State that this is probably the only part of the whole system of inland waterways which was initially built and continued to be maintained purely by State funds, without any contribution from the Federal Government, until these two programs of 1935 and 1945 were enacted by the Congress.

Now, no matter what improvements may be made in this Great Lakes-Hudson system, that part of the whole waterway is always going to remain because of the facts of Nature, and when I say "remain," I mean it is always going to remain the bottleneck of the whole system from New York out to the Midwest no matter what we do with it.

Recognizing the limitations that existed in a canal that was designed back in the very early 1900's and construction of which was commenced around 1904, the Congress in 1935 authorized this Great Lakes-Hudson River Waterway development.

Now, there were many parts that were spelled out in this program but the two salient things were making a minimum depth of 14 feet in the channels and raising the bridge clearances all along the way to a minimum of 20 feet.

And, as has been testified to here this morning, the Congress in 1935 put a ceiling of $27 million on that whole program and since then it has taken almost 30 years to get to the stage where we are today.

It has limped and jogged along, a lot of it because of fiscal policies of the State in hesitating to appropriate State moneys until the actual Federal moneys had been appropriated.

And we finally, through Governor Rockefeller and the legislature, about 3 years ago, got this logjam unblocked by the first instance of an appropriation of $15 million, and we have been moving along, thanks to the help of the Congress in reimbursing us every year, but we have been moving along in the past 3 years at a much more rapid pace than we had in the 15 or 20 years prior to that time.

Now, for all practical purposes, of this whole program the only thing we have got left is the matter of bridge clearances.

We started with 99 bridges and guard gates that had to be raised. Right now, at the present time, 46 bridges and all of the guard gates

have been raised. What we have left are 13 bridges that must be brought to that clearance of 20 feet.

Now, as you can see, and it is true of any type of a bottleneck operation, so long as you have got just one bridge that does not have that clearance of 20 feet, well, then everything that you have done before has not brought the benefit that the original program, designed in 1935, was intended to carry out except for what intermediate commerce might travel between the still remaining limited bridges.

Now, it has been testified to here before, that we have money available in New York State to go ahead to complete this program and all we need is for the Congress to remove this $28 million ceiling and, of course, to continue each year to reimburse us for the money which we advance, and certainly everybody can appreciate that it has only been through the attrition of time from 1935 until the present date, that has made unrealistic the original limitations of $27 million.

What has just happened to the American dollar in that period of time can account for our having to come here before you this morning and ask you to remove this limitation.

Again, gentlemen, I thank you very much.

Senator METCALF. Thank you. And, Mr. Crawford, your prepared statement will be made a part of the record.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF EDWARD F. CRAWFORD, CHAIRMAN, NEW YORK STATE JOINT LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON THE BARGE ('ANAL

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appear here as chairman of the New York State Joint Legislative Committee on the Barge Canal. The purpose of my appearance is to urge your committee to approve S. 1938, an act that would increase the ceiling limit on Federal funds which may be appropriated for improvement of the Great Lakes-Hudson River Waterway. My statement will be brief and I trust you will find that my position has merit.

The facts are these:

In 1935 Congress approved a long-range program (49 Stat. 1028, 1030) providing for channel deepening and the bridge raising on the New York canal. It was then determined that the overall cost of the program would not exceed $27 million, and an appropriation ceiling in that amount was established in the enabling legislation.

The work has been progressed to a point where it is 80 percent finished, The channel deepening has been completed. Thirteen bridges are still to be raised to fulfill the program, but this work cannot be undertaken within existing cost limitations since the $27 million ceiling figure has been reached.

The inability to finish the work within expenditure limits results from two factors: (1) curtailment of work during the war years and (2) inflationary costs.

These factors were inexorable influences which could not be foreseen or controlled. They should not be permitted to halt a project approved by Congress and meriting swift conclusion. If the work is stopped now, all the benefits envisioned at the time of its approval and the funds already spent in carrying the improvement to its present state of completion will be largely lost.

In 1962, your honorable body authorized a $1 million increase in the ceiling limit. It is now estimated that the remaining work can be completed by 1965 if a further increase of $6.8 million is approved this year.

New York State stands ready to move forward immediately; it has first instance moneys appropriated for completion of the work. All that is required is approval by the Congress of this bill.

To carry out the intent of the 1935 legislation and to reap the full benefits of the improvement program now so near completion, we urge approval by this committee of the $6.8 million increase.

22-904 63

Mr. CRAWFORD. May I add, Senator Metcalf, with regard to this matter of urgency and the figures that have been testified to was to the remaining limitation gap that is available to us here; Senator Cooper made a point in discussing this with the colonel, that you are dealing with several agencies here.

You have got the Federal Government, and you have got the State government, and while we have got the money actually appropriated as first-instance funds, our department of public works cannot plan or cannot contract for the work which remains until they know that there is authorization on the Federal statute books for a higher ceiling than what we have already existing.

In other words, today they cannot put under contract anything greater than $28 million.

And until that ceiling is removed, we will be stopped from the completion of our works, and we would like to move ahead even more rapidly in the next few years than we have been doing in the past 3 or 4 years since the old logjam was broken.

Senator METCALF. Senator Jordan?

Senator JORDAN. Just one question, Mr. Crawford:

Where does the commerce, the ships from the St. Lawrence Seaway that has been recently completed, where does that come down into the

Hudson there?

Mr. CRAWFORD. Well, this is our St. Lawrence Seaway here, directly through here.

There is some commerce between New York utilizing the Hudson River and going here at Troy into what we call the Champlain section of our Barge Canal northward to the Canadian border.

Now, here we come into the Richelieu Waterway that takes the commerce farther up to Sorel in Quebec here, where the Richelieu and the St. Lawrence meet.

But the limitations of the Canadian section of that canal are much more restrictive than our own main section.

We have got a draft of only 6.5 feet on the Canadian section while down here we have got 13 and 14 feet.

Senator JORDAN. Yes, but what I was trying to find out is this: The commerce that was opened up through the St. Lawrence Seaway now has to come down this canal to get into New York City. Is that correct?

Mr. CRAWFORD. Yes, sir.

Senator JORDAN. Your largest ships have a deeper draft than the ones that you were just talking about?

Mr. CRAWFORD. Much, sir. We have got a controlling depth in the St. Lawrence of 26 feet, and of course, the locks are much, much wider and much, much longer, and the bridge clearances are 125 feet in the St. Lawrence Waterway.

So that any commerce that originates back here, and is destined for New York City, must break bulk at Oswego if they started out in the largest vessels.

They would have to break bulk at Oswego and put it on smaller vessels to go to New York or they would have to go all the way out around the St. Lawrence or they would originate up here in vessels the size of which could navigate our canal once they got to Oswego. Senator JORDAN. That answers my question. Thank you.