Page images
PDF
EPUB

COMPLETED MODIFICATIONS, SCARBORO RIVER

There is no previous project for the improvement of this waterway.

None.

REMAINING authorized MODIFICATIONS, ScarborO RIVER

Non-Federal costs.-The costs to local interests for compliance with the requirements of local cooperation as set forth in the authorizing legislation consists of a cash contribution of $10,000. Local interests are also required to construct a public landing estimated to cost about $5,000.

Mr. RABAUT. It appears from the justifications that one fish cannery is the only commerical enterprise that receives commerce through this channel. Are the commercial benefits just for one company? General FLEMING. The benefits that would result from this project are largely due to the fact that this cannery is in existence. It wants to expand. It cannot expand now economically because in order to use the cannery at this location they have to truck the fish products in from some distance.

Mr. RABAUT. What size cannery is that? We notice here this request is for $205,000.

General FLEMING. The estimated Federal cost is $205,000 and nonFederal is $15,000; $223,000 approximately. The benefit-cost ratio on that I have gone in and analyzed those figures, and the benefitcost ratio is 3.1 to 1.

Mr. RABAUT. Three point one to one?

General FLEMING. Yes, sir.

Mr. RABAUT. The justifications state that local interests are required to construct a public landing at a cost of about $5,000. General FLEMING. Yes, sir.

Mr. RABAUT. What kind of a public facility can be constructed for that amount?

General FLEMING. It is improvement of an existing facility which is there now, and it is a landing that can be built for that.

Mr. RABAUT. Is that $5,000 included in the $15,000 you just referred to?

General FLEMING. Yes, sir, cash contribution of $10,000.

Mr. RABAUT. Are local interests going to construct this improvement of $5,000 or do they expect the engineers to do it? General FLEMING. No, sir, they are going to do it.

Mr. RABAUT. Under your supervision?

General FLEMING. As a matter of fact, it has been done, sir.
Mr. RABAUT. It has been done?

General FLEMING. Yes, sir.

Mr. RABAUT. Did you have anything to do with supervising it?
General FLEMING. We approved their plans.

Mr. RABAUT. Are there any other questions on Scarboro River?

FALL RIVER HARBOR, MASS;

We will go to the next project, Fall River Harbor in Massachusetts. Without objection we will put pages 12 and 13 in the record. (Information referred to follows:)

FALL RIVER HARBOR, MASS. (35-FOOT MID-BAY CHANNEL) (NEW)

Location. About 50 miles south of Boston, Mass., on Mount Hope Bay, arm of Narragansett Bav.

Authorization.-1954 River and Harbor Act.

Benefit-cost ratio.-1.3 to 1.

[blocks in formation]

Channels: Deepening the midbay channel from 30 to 35 feet, 400 feet wic 3.5 miles long between deep water in Mount Hope Bay and the completed 3 foot channel at Globe wharf, Fall River.

Status (Jan. 1, 1956): Not started.

Completion schedule: May 1958.

JUSTIFICATION

Fall River Harbor is the major port of southeastern Massachusetts. It is I of ports in New England for which a 35-foot project depth has been authorized an is the only one in which the 35-foot depth has not been completed. Commer in 1954 amounted to 1,775,000 tons, mostly petroleum products.

Local industries produce textiles, rubber goods, refractories, stoves and bra bronze and silver products. A considerable area to the north is supplied wi petroleum products through the port by truck and pipeline.

Under previous modifications a depth of 35 feet has been provided in the upp part of the harbor. In order to realize the full benefit of the completed work the upper harbor and the benefits that could be attained from the project as whole, the 35-foot midbay entrance channel from deep water to the existing in proved channel is necessary and required at this time.

Fiscal year 1957.-Initiate dredging of the 35-foot midway channel under co tinuing contract. To provide for an orderly and economical rate of constructi with completioon in fiscal year 1958 as scheduled, $500,000 will be required fiscal year 1957 for application to this work.

COMPLETED MODIFICATIONS, FALL RIVER HARBOR

Work completed consists of a channel 35 feet deep, 400 feet wide, from de water in Mount Hope Bay to Tiverton Lower Pool and along the Tiverton sho to the Gulf Oil Corp. wharf; a channel from Globe wharf 35 feet deep, general 400 feet wide, about 4 miles long, to the wharves north of the bridges at the mou of the Taunton River; a 35-foot deep turning basin, 1,100 feet wide, $50 feet lo at the head of the Taunton River Channel; a channel 30 feet deep, generally 3 feet wide, along the Fall River waterfront adiacent to the 35-foot channel: and 25-foot anchorage 800 feet wide, averaging 2,300 feet long opposite the Fall Riv waterfront. The cost of this completed work is $2,637,000.

None.

REMAINING AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS, FALL RIVER HARBOR

Non-Federal costs.-There are no costs to local interests for compliance wi requirements of local cooperation for this modification.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has expended about $1,500,000 on the construction of a pier and storage terminal in Fall River Harbor. Including the costs of land acquisition and remaining construction, the total expenditures by the Commonwealth are expected to total about $2 million on this improvement.

Other local interests have expended about $200,000 on rehabilitation and improvement of terminal facilities and have plans to spend $100,000 for further improvements.

Mr. RABAUT. The planning report says commerce has been increasing at this harbor about 6 percent per year since 1946, but the tonnage dropped from 1,840,000 in 1953 to 1,775,000 in 1954, according to other corps' statistics. Are there any figures available for 1955? General FLEMING. No, sir, not yet.

Mr. RABAUT. Do you figure there has been a further drop?

General FLEMING. I do not know, sir. A large part of that tonnage is petroleum products and right now they are having a considerable amount of difficulty landing tankers in Fall River with full draft on the tankers.

Mr. RABAUT. Is it the new boats?

General FLEMING. No, sir, it is not the new boats, this is a 35-foot improvement and the great big ships could not go up anyhow.

Mr. RABAUT. They must be getting their oil tonnage in there some other way.

General FLEMING. Probably.

Mr. RABAUT. Or is there a fall-off of consumption up there?
General FLEMING. I do not know if there is a fall-off in 1955.

Mr. FOGARTY. I do not know about 1955, but we can expect greater tonnage, I presume, because we are in the process of building two refineries in that area which will mean a tremendous increase. General FLEMING. There was a steady increase the preceding years, there was this little drop in 1954, and whether it will come up in 1955 I do not know.

Mr. RABAUT. Is the benefit-cost ratio figured on current traffic or on a larger figure?

General FLEMING. In general, sir, it is figured on both. When you study an improvement like this, there are all sorts of claims advanced by local interests as to what will happen if you make the improvement. The survey report includes a very thorough analysis to wring the water out of some of those claims and get down to a reasonable expectation.

Mr. RABAUT. In view of the statement by my colleague, there probably ought to be an increase in tonnage.

Mr. DAVIS. The general's later statement makes it clear that the benefit-cost ratio is based on anticipated increases.

General FLEMING. On anticipated reasonable benefits with the water wrung out as much as we possibly can.

Mr. FOGARTY. On this particular point, these refineries I just made the point of, it was not known until 3 or 4 months ago whether they would be built or not. I presume this justification we have was prepared before that information existed.

Mr. RABAUT. This is new since the cost ratio was established.

Mr. FOGARTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. DAVIS. It will be interesting to see in the planning report whether that was taken into account.

General FLEMING. I doubt it, because this improvement was authorized in 1954, and the study was probably in 1952.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][graphic][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]
[graphic]
[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »