As a matter of fact, we are probably the greatest consumers of the products of America in the whole United States. In addition, we have an enormous area in the State.

It is one of our largest States and one of tremendous productivity. It is often argued that we rank either second or third in terms of dairy production, for example, in the United States. Our factories turn out something in the area of $1.5 billion of American exports, tremendously buttressing our Nation.

In addition, we are one of our Nation's greatest reservoirs of manpower.

My native city of New York, for example, with 8 million people, which people often write down as a den of iniquity, nonetheless contributes the most soldiers, sailors, and marines to the United States when we are in trouble, and the most get killed and the most get hurt from New York City.

So I say that with some feeling because it is not often that we come to this committee.

This is more or less the province of the West and South and so on and, God bless them. This is our country and we want it fortified and developed to the maximum.

We contribute most of the money and we are glad to do it, and we get a great deal from the rest of the country but they also get a great deal from us.

It is too seldom realized that we, too, like other States, participate in Federal programs and have to develop our State, and perhaps we could do it cheaper if we were an autonomous nation. We could be.

We are the Empire State, and we could do very well by ourselves, but we do not want to and we would never dream of any such idea. We fit in with our Nation and this is only one evidence of it.

I thank the chairman.

Senator METCALF. I thank the distinguished Senator from New York for a very fine and illuminating statement.

As a Senator from the Far West, I want to assure the Senator that we not only appreciate the fact that the 8 million New York citizens in New York City are consumers of our wheat, copper, and raw resources, but we understand the problem that he has presented.

He has always been most helpful to this committee and to all of the committees of the Congress in the development of all of the resources of the United States for the benefit of all of our country.

I am wondering only about the urgency of this program.

We have an adequate authorization for a year ahead.

Is that not correct?

Senator JAVITS. Apparently we do, Mr. Chairman, and if I may answer that question:

One, I would hope the Chair will give close attention to the other witnesses. I know Congressman Poage wants to fit in here

Senator METCALF. We will get him in here just as soon as you are through.

Senator JAVITS. I will try to finish very quickly.

So, we will have other witnesses on that score and, secondly, I understand that in New York we are solicitously situated in the sense that we cannot do our advance planning with confidence if the appropriation is not available, and if it is not available we will pay it.

22-904-63——2

But I think that, as men of honor, we would want to assure the State that, because it is in that position and willing to do it, that it is not going to be shortchanged.

And apparently our planning, in order really to do the job that needs to be done, most economically and efficiently, requires the foreknowledge that the authorization will be available, and that is the reason for the fact that we consider this measure urgent at this time.

Senator METCALF. This matter will be brought out in more detail by subsequent witnesses?

Senator JAVITS. It will.

Senator METCALF. Senator Jordan?
Senator JORDAN. No questions.

Senator METCALF. Senator Cooper?

Senator COOPER. Senator Javits, I understand the problems of the State of New York.

I understand that one of your problems here is substantially that the estimates which were made for the condition of this waterway, under the original act, are not now sufficient because of increased costs?

Senator JAVITS. Well, they have gotten obsolete for two reasons: One, the increased costs for 1963; and, two, the increased technology which dictates changes as, for example, the raising of the clearance of the bridges.

Senator COOPER. And to complete this, an appropriation or an authorization of $6,800,000 would be required?

Senator JAVITS. Exactly right. And I understand, too, Senator Cooper, that this is almost in complete substance borne out by the surveys of the Engineers.

Senator COOPER. You make the point that if this total sum could be authorized that it would enable the State of New York to plan its further improvements orderly, and even in a more economical way?

Senator JAVITS. Exactly. Exactly. We pride ourselves in the State on running a tight ship and, as far as the State is concerned, it has an enviable debt situation, as I think most everyone knows, and the reason for it is that the capability and the advanced planning and the willingness to undertake advanced commitments are all there.

Senator COOPER. The State provides the money and Congress reimburses it?

Senator JAVITS. Exactly right.

Senator COOPER. The State is reimbursed for its expenditures?
Senator JAVITS. Exactly right.

Senator COOPER. Well, I would say that here we do appropriate, or authorize, rather large sums of money for States all over the United States, in the West and South, including my State, and sometimes we maybe do not remember that such States as yours have many facets, such as rivers, parks, waterways, forests, and they, too, need improve

ments.

Senator JAVITS. I thank my colleague.

Senator METCALF. Thank you, Senator Javits, for a splendid state

ment.

Senator JAVITS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator METCALF. At this point in the record, the statement of Senator Keating and Congressman Robison will be incorporated. Senator Keating, I do not think, will be able to be here this morning.

(The statements follow :)

STATEMENT OF SENATOR KENNETH B. KEATING

As a cosponsor of S. 1938, I am pleased to concur in the statement of my colleague, Senator Javits, in support of this bill.

In 1935, the Congress recognized the importance of improving the 184-mile Great Lakes-Hudson River Waterway by authorizing the appropriation of $27 million for this purpose. Under this legislation, improvements included deepening between the locks to 14 feet below normal level, widening at bends and elsewhere, and increasing the overhead clearances at many bridges and other obstructions to 20 feet. However, the previously authorized work is only 80 percent completed and much work remains to be done. A uniform clearance of 20 feet would allow shipment of lumber, automobiles, ores, steel products, and other material vital to our national defense which are too large to be carried on State highways and railroad facilities. When deepening is completed, marine authorities estimate that they will be able to carry 10 to 15 percent more cargo per trip. Oil carriers would also be able to load to full capacity.

In 1962, the Congress acted to raise the authorization to continue this work from $27 to $28 million. Regrettably, this will not be enough to complete the job. Since the first authorization in 1935, costs have risen considerably, and the estimate made at that time is no longer valid.

Much remains to be done. Thirteen bridges must be raised, and, in many places, embankments must be sustained. Unless the work is completed all the money and labor which has gone into this project to date will be wasted for a single low bridge will obstruct the canal just as effectively as a dozen. Completion of the improvements will encourage industrial growth in upper New York State, particularly in areas where there is substantial and persistent unemployment. Thirteen counties in New York are eligible for area redevelopment assistance and the renovation of the canal would aid them greatly.

Because the State of New York realizes the importance of this work, the legislature, in 1961, provided first instance funds so that the work could continue. Under the present authorization limitation of $28 million, Federal funds to reimburse the State for this expenditure will not be available. It is my understanding that the Corps of Engineers has recognized the value of this project, and has asked that the authorization be raised by $6,500,000. With their support and your concurrence, I hope that the full $6,800,000, needed to complete this job will be authorized.

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD W. ROBISON, 33D CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I strongly support S. 1938, a companion bill to my own H.R. 7686. Twenty-eight years have now elapsed since the U.S. Congress authorized appropriations for needed improvements in the Great Lakes-Hudson River Waterway, including increasing the depth of the canal from 12 to 13 or 14 feet below normal pool level, widening it at the bends, and increasing the clearance under bridges and other overhead structures to 20 feet. These improvements were deemed necessary in 1935, and they are even more necessary today as barges have increased in size and now require more room, as they are usually towed in tandem.

Present estimates for this project require a $6.5 million authorization increase above the $27 million which was first authorized in 1935 and increased to $28 million in 1962. In view of the inflation that we have seen since 1935, I feel that this is remarkably little to ask.

It is my hope that the Army Corps of Engineers will soon issue a report which approves of these supplementary appropriations. New York State officials are solidly behind this project as well, and thus I urge that you transmit S. 1938 to the Senate with a favorable report.

Senator METCALF. The next witness is Colonel Marshall, who is testifying for the Corps of Engineers.

STATEMENT OF COL. ROBERT C. MARSHALL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, EASTERN DIVISION; ACCOMPANIED BY THERON C. RILEY, ENGINEER, PLANNING DIVISION

Senator METCALF. Colonel Marshall, it is good to have you again before the committee.

Colonel MARSHALL. Thank you, sir. I will be assisted by Mr. Riley of our office.

Senator METCALF. Mr. Riley, we are very glad to have you here. Colonel MARSHALL. In September of last year, I appeared here to testify on a comparable Senate bill (S. 3072) which proposed to increase the monetary authorization for the Great Lakes-to-Hudson River Waterway project by $8,700,000.

The basis for my previous testimony was a letter dated June 18, 1962, expressing the views of the Department of the Army. These views were to the effect that studies were underway to consider (1) the need for further improvement of the New York State Barge Canal system, (2) the question of transfer of ownership of the canal system, and (3) the need for raising the monetary authorization. Since these studies had not been completed, it was suggested that the committee defer action on S. 3072.

This committee has again requested the views of the Department of the Army with respect to S. 1938 which proposes an increase in monetary authorization of $6,800,000 for this project. However, the formal views of the Department of the Army and the Bureau of the Budget are not yet available and the views which I express today are those of the Corps of Engineers. Our present position is based on studies by the New York district engineer and recent information provided by the State of New York. The studies indicate that the improvements to the Great Lakes-to-Hudson River Waterway authorized by the 1935 and 1945 acts are economically justified and should be continued. The State of New York states that it is expediting the work with its own funds and is planning to complete the remainder of the project by 1965.

Monetary authorization totaling $28 million has been made available by the Congress to date. Our present estimate of the Federal cost of the project-at least as far as it pertains to that monetary ceiling is $34,500,000. Therefore, there appears to be a need for an increase in the monetary authorization amounting to $6,500,000. S. 1938 provides for an increase in monetary authorization of $6,800,000.

The present status of the project is as follows:

(a) All work under the 1945 act has been substantially completed at a Federal cost of $1,350,000.

(b) Work remaining to be done under the 1935 act entails raising or modifying 13 bridges and 1 guard gate plus some bank revetment. Through fiscal year 1963, Federal expenditures under the 1935 act totaled $24,613,500. The fiscal year 1964 budget request includes $380,000 for this project. Thus, by the end of fiscal year 1964, Federal expenditures under the 1935 act will total about $25 million.

(c) The State of New York reports that they have currently underway or obligated work totaling $4,321,000 and work planned in excess of $3 million.

Based on the foregoing, it becomes apparent that work to be performed by the State of New York under the 1935 act and subject to reimbursement by the Federal Government will be in excess of the presently authorized $28 million limit. Therefore, we do not offer any objection to the enactment of S. 1938.

That concludes my statement, sir.

Senator METCALF. Well, Colonel Marshall, again I ask you the question that occurs to me:

Is there an immediate urgency for this authorization?

Now, I remind you that we had before us these river basin authorizations recently, and this committee decided that we would authorize enough to keep these projects going for 1 year, and it would seem to me that, consistent with that policy, we have enough money authorized here to keep this going for 1 year and it could come back to us in another year.

We have apparently saved too many dollars in this past year by failing to authorize last year.

Colonel MARSHALL. I would agree, Senator, that at the present rate of appropriations only $25 million would be expended through 1964. We do not really expect a significant increase in appropriations in fiscal year 1965. However, of course, that is not entirely a matter of the budget request. It is conceivable that the budget request would be significantly greater than we now expect.

I must agree, Senator, that there is not as much urgency here as there are in many of the other basins.

Senator METCALF. The only reason for the enactment of this legislation was to have an authorization as a backlog to assure the State of New York that they will be reimbursed for this $4 million, or whatever it is, of work that they have now embarked upon?

Colonel MARSHALL. Yes, sir. In fairness to the position of the State of New York, as described by Senator Javits and as demonstrated by the State's legislative action, they have appropriated $15 million of what they call first-instance funds to be devoted to this project.

They have indicated their readiness and willingness to proceed at a much faster pace than they had formerly.

Where the average expenditure has been about $700,000 a year, now they are talking of significantly greater expenditures.

And on that basis the committee, I think, obviously would give consideration to the desirability of assuring the State that in view of the initiative that they have displayed that they will be assured of repayment.

But as far as time is concerned, based on the figures that we have and which I have stated, there are other basins on which the monetary authorization, as you know, has already expired, such as the Los Angeles River Basin.

Seven contractors are now on their own funds and there will be others. The Ohio River Basin

Senator METCALF. This committee is familiar with that situation and we were requested to authorize substantial amounts for a 2-year period, and we cut those back to a 1-year period and said, "Come back here again next year and talk to us about increasing the authorization."

The same reasoning occurs in this. It does not seem to me that there is a substantial likelihood that the Appropriations Committee will