Office includes among its responsibilities our relations with Canada and today we are here before you in connection with two international Commissions which deal with United States-Canadian relations: the International Boundary Commission and the International Joint Commission. Both of these Commissions have a very long record of excellent handling of United States-Canadian problems.

The International Boundary Commission was first established by treaty in the year 1908, and in accordance with the requirements of this treaty its principal duties are the maintenance

Mr. ROONEY. I do not think we are so much interested in that. We have been listening to this for coming onto 18 years. Tell us some

thing about the money involved.

Mr. REWINKEL. All right, sir.

This year we are requesting a total of $455,000 for fiscal year 1963. This represents an increase of $40,000 over fiscal year 1962 for the operation of the U.S. sections of these two Commissions.

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OF ALASKA BOUNDARY

You will note that under the International Boundary Commission we are requesting an increase of $9,100. The two chief components in this increase are a $5,000 figure for aerial photography of the Alaska boundary. This $5,000 is precisely one-half of the total estimated cost, and the Canadian Government, of course, will pay the additional $5,000.

VISTA CLEARANCE-UNITED STATES-CANADIAN BORDER

The second principal component in the increase is an $800 amount for chemical pellets which are to be used for vista clearance along the United States-Canadian border; that is, the New York-Quebec and the Maine-Quebec borders.

UNITED STATES SECTION

Now, coming down to the International Joint Commission, you will notice that for the section itself, the U.S. section itself, we are requesting an additional $1,900 for fiscal year 1963. The chief components of this increase are $910 for additional travel in connection with increased hearings and references before the Commission, and an additional $742 which represents expenses in connection with hiring hearing rooms and facilities to enable the Commission to take its testimony.

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE

Under Public Health Service, you will note an increase of $24,800 requested for fiscal year 1963. This increase is requested in connection with additional sanitation surveys which the International Joint Commission feels are necessary to undertake in emerging problem areas on the border.

Under the Geological Survey there is an increase

Mr. ROONEY. Before you get to that, what was the allocation of the Public Health Service in fiscal year 1961?

Mr. REWINKEL. $72,780.

Mr. ROONEY. That compares with $117,000 you are requesting in the coming year?

Mr. REWINKEL. In fiscal 1963, yes, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. What was the amount allocated to the Public Health Service in fiscal year 1962?

Mr. REWINKEL. It was $92,200, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. Why can you not get along with the same amount you have in the current fiscal year; to-wit, $415,000?

Mr. REWINKEL. The additional $40,000 for the two Commissions which I indicated, sir, is not only for the Public Health Service but it also represents

Mr. ROONEY. The Public Health Service item is $24,800 additional, over and above the 1962 figure of $92,200; is that right?

Mr. REWINKEL. Yes, sir. As I noted, the Commission feels that this year it will be necessary to undertake additional sanitation surveys in problem areas along the border. In order to undertake these additional sanitation surveys, additional personnel will be necessary on the part of the Public Health Service, especially scientists and laboratory personnel.

Mr. ROONEY. This all refers to the U.S. Public Health Service? Mr. REWINKEL. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. Do you have anything further?

Mr. REWINKEL. I merely wish to make one final observation, sir.

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

We are requesting an additional $4,200 for the Geological Survey. They engage in water gaging and streamflow data surveys on behalf of the Commission. The additional funds are requested this year to cover the collection of streamflow data in emerging problem areas, specifically, as an example, the Columbia River Basin and the Milk River Basin.

Mr. ROONEY. Looking at page 267 of these justifications, I do not find a single one of these projects having gone down in cost with the exception of the first two.

Mr. REWINKEL. Much of these expenses, sir, are continuing in that on these rivers we have gaging stations. This gaging equipment needs to be kept in operation on a regular basis and maintained.

Mr. ROONEY. Were the first two projects started before the others? Mr. REWINKEL. The first two on page 267?

Mr. ROONEY. Yes.

Mr. REWINKEL. May I refer that question to Mr. Roncalio?

Mr. ROONEY. Roseau, Pigeon Rivers, Rainy Lakes; Souris and Red Rivers?

Mr. RONCALIO. Those have been continuing dockets on the International Joint Commission.

Mr. ROONEY. How long have they been going on insofar as this allocation to the Geological Survey to the Department of Interior is concerned?

Mr. RONCALIO. Long before my coming, Mr. Chairman; I imagine 8 or 10 years.

The USGS has facilities for maintaining statistics in both countries and when hearings come up involving streamflow, lake levels, and matters of that kind, Mr. Williams is here if you want to go into that.

Mr. ROONEY. When are they to be completed?

Mr. RONCALIO. They are not to be completed under terms of the references because there are always matters coming up involving controversy and which, if not amicably and quickly settled, would be sources of irritation between peoples on the border.

Mr. ROONEY. What do you mean by the language on page 268 of these justifications where you say:

* The reduction of $1,000 results from an anticipated decrease in the data needs for the Roseau River Basin as flood studies are brought to completion. Mr. RONCALIO. That is true in that particular instance. I am referring, however, to matters like the Montreal-Sorrel-Champlain waterway hearings now coming in which will require more studies. I am referring particularly to Lake of the Woods, Minn., and some of those projects that will continue.

Mr. ROONEY. Are there any questions?

(No response.)

Mr. ROONEY. Thank you, Mr. Rewinkel and gentlemen.

Mr. REWINKEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, for this opportunity.

TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1962.

RAMA ROAD, NICARAGUA

WITNESSES

MISS KATHERINE W. BRACKEN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF CENTRAL AMERICAN AND PANAMANIAN AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF INTERAMERICAN AFFAIRS

GERALD W. RUSSELL, OFFICER IN CHARGE, TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS, OFFICE OF INTER-AMERICAN REGIONAL ECONOMIC AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

ROBERT E. IDE, ASSISTANT TO THE REGIONAL ENGINEER, INTERAMERICAN HIGHWAY REGION

Mr. ROONEY. The next item to which we shall direct our attention is entitled "Rama Road" and is to be found at page 75 of this committee print. The details with regard thereto begin at page 376 of the justification book. We shall insert at this point in the record pages 376 through 379 of the justifications.

(The pages follow :)

Summary of requirements, fiscal year 1963—Rama Road, Nicaragua, State

The agreement of April 8, 1942, between the United States and Nicaragua provides for the construction of the Rama Road. The completion of this highway will provide the Republic of Nicaragua with means of tapping a rich agricultural and mining region. In addition, a port for the capital city of Managua will be created once the highway is finished.

The agreement by the United States to contruct the Rama Road stems from conversations held in 1939 between President Somoza of Nicaragua and President Roosevelt. At that time, the Nicaraguan President asked that the United States undertake the construction of a sea-level canal across Nicaragua, a right which the United States obtained in the Bryan-Chamorro Treaty of 1914. The War Department recommended against the construction of the canal and also the construction of a barge canal using the San Juan River and Lake Nicaragua. However, agreement was reached on the construction of a road from San Benito to Rama as a substitute and on April 8, 1942, the U.S. Government stated in an official note that it would be willing to contruct a highway between San Benito and Rama, and to survey and recommend a route from Rama to El Bluff. The United States has since been released from the survey obligation.

As a result of the agreement of April 8, 1942, construction was begun early in 1943 with funds allocated to the Bureau of Public Roads, Department of Commerce from the "Emergency Fund for the President", in the amount of $4 million; work was suspended in June 1948, when the allocated funds were exhausted.

The $4 million allocated from the “Emergency Fund for the President” was insufficient to complete the project. The following additional authorizations were made to provide necessary funds to carry on this work: (1) The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1952 authorized $4 million, (2) the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1954 authorized $4 million, (3) Public Law 85-885 author

ized $4 million. Thus a total of $16 million has been authorized for this project to date. Of the total authorization $1,500,000 remains to be appropriated. The Department is proposing that the 87th Congress approve a new authorization bill for $850,000. This new authorization will enable this program to be completed.

At the suggestion of the Department of Commerce, a provision was made in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 74) placing the budgetary responsibilities for the project with the Department of State. Funds appropriated to the Department of State for this purpose are transferred to the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Public roads, for accomplishment of the work.

The Rama Road is designed to unite two sections which heretofore have been completely separated except by air transport or small boat traffic.

The distance from San Benito to Rama is 155 miles of which 136 miles of all-weather road has been completed. There remains to be constructed 19 miles of highway and eight bridges. Plans and specifications for the remainder of the highway now under contract are complete, except for the design of the Siquia River Bridge, the largest bridge to be built.

Program for fiscal year 1961

A contract was awarded in fiscal year 1961 and work will be completed in fiscal year 1962, for 14 miles of grading, drainage and gravel surface, extending from the end of the presently constructed all-weather road to the Siquia River. Program for fiscal year 1962

The $1 million appropriated for fiscal year 1962 will be used to award a contract for the six bridges within the 14 miles presently under construction. Program for fiscal year 1963

The $2,350,000 requested for fiscal year 1963 will be used by the Bureau of Public Roads for construction of the Siquia River Bridge, the single remaining small bridge and the final 5 miles of highway, thus completing the project. Justification

The Rama Road represents a partially fulfilled commitment of the U.S. Government. When this highway is completed, a port for the capital city of Managua will be created, since the Nicaraguan Government needs only to dredge the mouth of the Escondido River to allow oceangoing ships to proceed upriver to the town of Rama.

Completion of the Rama Road will cost $2,350,000. However, the unappropriated balance of $1,500,000 is sufficient only to cover the construction of the two remaining bridges. Authorizing legislation is pending for the additional $850,000 required to complete the final 5 miles of roadway. An appropriation for the full $2,350,000 will enable the Bureau of Public Roads to negotiate a package contract for the two bridges and the 5 miles of roadway, thus avoiding the added expense of separate negotiations and possible future increased costs. The area in eastern Nicaragua touched by the road is already benefiting, with the development of promising cattle, coffee, and mining industries. In addition, the augmented truck and bus traffic between Villa Somoza, Santo Tomas, Juigalpa, and Managua already has resulted in increased imports of U.S. vehicles, parts, petroleum and allied products. Daily scheduled bus service has been established as far as the road has been constructed. Creation of a port at Rama will facilitate shipping and lower costs on Nicaragua's imports and exports.

Feeder roads are being constructed by the Government of Nicaragua to furnish outlets from the developing rural areas to the Rama Road and from there to Menagua and other centers of population. While the United States is obligated to hear the entire cost of the construction of the Rama Road, the Government of Nicaragua has nonetheless expended approximately $4.8 million on this project. The prompt completion of this road will be one tangible way of assisting in the economic development of Nicaragua. Additionally, the prompt action by the United States with respect to the Rama Road will greatly influence the faith and confidence that Nicaragua and other countries in Latin America have in U.S. commitments.

Furthermore, and apart from the most important questions of integrity and policy, there exists a very real financial consideration; namely, that to date $14,500,000 has been appropriated for the construction of the Rama Road. This