This office has endeavored to estimate the over-all effect of this program in terms of east-coast delivery when completed and facilities are in operation. This estimate we have made in barrels per day, as follows: Barrels per day Overland movement to east coast as of June 20, 1942- Estimated required tanker deliveries____ Total--- 954, 000 275,000 200, 000 1, 429, 000 This would produce a surplus of 62,000 barrels per day over our estimated minimum rationed daily demand requirements for this calendar year of 1,367,000 barrels per day, which demand is expected to increase next year in the prosecution of the war program. Trusting that these statements will satisfactorily answer the inquiry of the committee, and assuring you of my desire to be of any further assistance possible upon request, I am, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR BAILEY: I received your letter of June 30, 1942, enclosing a copy of H. R. 6999, to authorize the construction and operation of a pipe line and a navigable barge channel across Florida, which is pending before the Committee on Commerce of the Senate, and requesting advice as to whether the enactment of this bill would be in accord with the program of the President at this time. I will discuss this question with the President at his earliest opportunity and will be pleased to give you a further reply when I have obtained his advice. Very truly yours, WAYNE COY, Assistant Director. WAR DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, Hon. JOSIAH W. BAILEY, Chairman, Committee on Commerce, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR: Reference is made to your letter dated June 22, 1942, enclosing a copy of H. R. 6999 and a copy of a letter from Mr. Joseph B. Eastman, Director of Defense Transportation, in which he states that before the canal proposed in H. R. 6999 can be considered worth while as a war measure the availability of adequate barges, tugs, and other necessary equipment should be assured, and also that necessary enlargement and repair of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway should be undertaken. You request the Department's views as to the probability of enlarging and repairing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in time to make the proposed canal worth while as a war measure. The authorized Federal project for the Intracoastal Waterway from the St. Johns River, Fla., to Chesapeake Bay at Norfolk, Va., provides for a depth of 12 feet. From Norfolk the route of the waterway traverses Chesapeake Bay to the federally improved Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, a deep-draft waterway connecting the head of the bay with the Delaware River. As authorized by Congress, a channel for deep-draft vessels has been provided in the Delaware River to Trenton, N. J. The barge canal across northern Florida proposed in H. R. 6999 would have a depth of 12 feet, and traffic utilizating such a canal could proceed northward along a protected route to Trenton. With the prospective increase in use of the Intracoastal Waterway channels for coastwise shipments, the Department recognized the importance to barge traffic of restoring the several sections thereof under Federal improvement to full project channel dimensions. From the St. Johns River to Norfolk a depth of 12 feet is now available except at scattered shoal areas where maintenance dredging is actively under way, and it is expected that a channel of 12-foot depth will be available throughout the waterway on or about August 1, 1942. The importance of an adequate Intracoastal Waterway along the Atlantic coast is appreciated, and you may be assured of the availability of a protected barge channel extending from the St. Johns River to Trenton for handling coastwise shipments. Very truly yours, E. REYBOLD, Major General, WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, June 29, 1942. Hon. JOSIAH W. BAILEY, Chairman, Committee on Commerce, United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR BAILEY: It has come to the attention of the War Department that there is now pending before your committee an act, H. R. 6999, to promote the national defense and to promptly facilitate and protect the transport of materials and supplies needful to the Military Establishment by authorizing the construction and operation of a pipe line and a navigable barge channel across Florida, and by deepening and enlarging the Intracoastal Waterway from its present eastern terminus to the vicinity of the Mexican border. The War Department is opposed to the enactment of that part of the act which provides for a pipe line from either Charleston, S. C., or Savannah, Ga., to the Tinsley oil field located in the vicinity of Yazoo, Miss. The Department's objection to that pipe line is that there is at the present time an acute shortage of all types of steel and new and used pipe of the size required to construct the proposed line from the State of Mississippi to the Atlantic coast, and every present known fact leads to the conclusion that this shortage will become more acute as the efforts of our armed forces increase against the enemy. It is estimated that for the line from the Tinsley oil field to Savannah, Ga., a distance of 580 miles, there would be needed approximately 41,600 tons of steel and 14 pumping stations to deliver 24,000 barrels of crude oil per day in an 8-inch pipe line; approximately 68,200 tons of steel and 14 pumping stations to deliver 45,000 barrels of crude oil per day in a 10-inch pipe line; and approximately 76,700 tons of steel and 14 pumping stations to deliver 66,000 barrels of crude oil per day in a 12-inch pipe line. If the line runs from the Tinsley oil field to Charleston, S. C., a distance of 635 miles, it is estimated that approximately 45,500 tons of steel and 16 pumping stations would be needed to supply 24,000 barrels of crude oil per day in an 8-inch pipe line; approximately 74,600 tons of steel and 16 pumping stations to supply 45,000 barrels of crude oil per day in a 10-inch pipe line; and approximately 84,000 tons of steel and 16 pumping stations to supply 66,000 barrels of crude oil per day in a 12-inch pipe line. Enough used or old line pipe, equipment, and terminal facilities can be made available from existing stocks to construct an 8- or 10-inch pipe line between Port St. Joe and Jacksonville, Fla. To obtain the necessary steel for the pipe and other facilities to construct the proposed pipe line from the Tinsley oil field to the Atlantic coast would require that the steel be diverted directly from its use in the production of material and weapons needed by the Army and Navy of the United States. The Department therefor recommends that the act be amended by striking out that part of line 23, page 2, which commences with the word "Provided," all of lines 24 and 25 on the same page, lines 1 to 6, on page 3, and so much of line 7 on that page as precedes the words "For the." There has not been time to ascertain from the Bureau of the Budget the relationship of the amendment proposed above to the program of the President. This letter therefore involves no commitment as to such relationship. Sincerely yours, HENRY L. STIMSON, Secretary of War. OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN, 'Hon. JOSIAH W. BAILEY, Chairman, Committee on Commerce, United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR BAILEY: You have requested in your letter of June 22, 1942, advice concerning the availability of barges, tugs, and other equipment to make the waterway proposed in the bill H. R. 6999 available in time to relieve the present pressure, with special reference to a letter of May 4, 1942, from the Director, Office of Defense Transportation. As you will recall, the views of the Maritime Commission with respect to the construction of barges for inland waterways were expressed in communications to Senator McKellar and to Congressman Woodrum in connection with the Independent offices appropriation bill, 1943, copies of which were placed in the record of the Rivers and Harbors Subcommittee hearings on S. 2426. In these views, the Commission pointed out that the primary responsibility of developing a program with respect to additional inland water transportation rested with the Office of Defense Transportation. The Director, Office of Defense Transportation, in his letter to you of May 4, 1942, indicated the necessity of assuring the availability of barges in connection with any enlargement or increased use of canals and waterways under S. 2426 (H. R. 6999). The Director also pointed out that the availability of critical war materials for additional barge and towing equipment is dependent on the judgment of the War Production Board, which must decide upon the allocation of limited stocks of materials to meet the many important demands. The Commission has under way the construction of barges, both wooden and concrete. These are of an ocean-going size and are not suitable for use on inland waterways, with the possible exception of 33 wooden barges (Camden type) which have a draft of 11 feet. There are under contract 50 barges, reinforced concrete, 6,000 tons deadweight, which we believe are suitable for the transportation of oil; 24 barges, reinforced concrete, 6,000 tons deadweight, suitable for general and bulk cargo and sugar; 26 barges, reinforced concrete, 5,500 tons deadweight, suitable for general and bulk cargo and bauxite; and 33 wooden barges (Camden type), suitable for general cargo. Bids have been invited, to be opened July 7, 1942, for very large wooden barges which will be suitable for coal transport. The Independent Offices Appropriation Act, approved June 27, 1942, contains a provision making $20,000,000 of the construction fund of the Maritime Commission available for the construction of barges and towboats for use on inland waterways and in coastwise transportation for the movement of petroleum products and other commodities. No construction program has been started under this item, principally because the Commission has not received any directive as to the number or type of inland barge equipment which should be constructed. Such a directive is considered necessary to insure construction only of the most urgently needed equipment and to insure the necessary priorities for required materials in line with the national war effort. It appears from the hearings before the Rivers and Harbors Subcommittee of the Committee on Commerce on the bill H. R. 6999 that the barge canal across Florida, proposed therein, would take 3 years to complete. So far as the barge movement contemplated upon completion of that canal is concerned, there is sufficient time for the development of a carefully considered program for the construction of the necessary additional equipment. It appears that the only possibilities, for the next winter, of increasing transportation of petroleum products to the east coast, in lieu of transport around Florida, lies in the construction of the proposed pipe line across Florida from Port St. Joe to Jacksonville (estimated to require 3 to 6 months) and a tankcar shuttle service across Florida with the use of either inland barges (or coastwise barges or tankers) from Jacksonville north. With respect to the barge equipment which may be necessary in connection with the proposed pipe line, the testimony of Maj. Gen. Eugene Reybold, Chief of Engineers, War Department, and Mr. J. R. Parten, Director of Transportation, Office of Petroleum Coordinator for War, indicates that the necessary inland barge equipment would be secured by transfer of steel barges from the Mississippi River or other waterways. With respect to the contemplated movement of residual oils by barge to Florida, shuttle tank car service across Florida, and barge on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, no data has been supplied as to the required number and type of barges and towing equipment. Without such data, no prediction is possible as to when equipment can be constructed, because of uncertainty as to availability of construction facilities and priorities for materials. Even for wooden barges, motive power supply is a very serious problem. There should be borne in mind the possibility of the resumption, in whole or in part, of Gulf coast-Atlantic coast service, possibly with some substitution of tank barges. Such service would have to be protected from the submarine menace, but it appears from the testimony before the subcommittee on H. R. 6999 that such ocean tanker service will be necessary this coming winter unless district No. 1 is to be faced with an acute shortage and stricter rationing of both gasoline and fuel oil. The completion of the proposed pipe line across Florida to Jacksonville and an increased tank car shuttle service across Florida to Jacksonville could be complemented by increased resumption of east coast tanker service, with the possible substitution of some tank barges. It does not appear that, even with the pipe line and the tank car shuttle service across Florida, tanker service around Florida can be eliminated if acute shortages are to be avoided for the coming winter. Sincerely yours, о E. S. LAND, Chairman. |