Section 4 confers upon the various authorities all ordinary corporate powers, such as legal status for suing and being sued; right to use corporate seal; to adopt, amend, and repeal bylaws; to purchase, lease, condemn, or receive by government such real and personal property as deemed necessary; and to enter into contracts and agreements in the exercise of the powers conferred upon them by law. The following headings will indicate in a general way the scope of activities contemplated, which, in general, are similar to the functions and activities of the present Tennessee Valley Authority: "Coordination and integration of plans, projects, and activities" (sec. 5). "Submission of plans to the President and the Congress" (sec. 6). "Preparation of plans" (sec. 7). "Powers and duties of an authority in the case of projects and activities which are, or may be, entrusted to such authority" (sec. 8). NOTE-For example: The Columbia Valley Authority would take over the Bonneville project on the Columbia River in Oregon. "Disposition of water and water power" (sec. 9). "State compacts" (sec. 10). "Approval of private projects" (sec. 11). "Construction of dams by, or on behalf of, the United States" (sec. 12). "Purchase and audits" (sec. 14). "Reports and accounts" (sec. 15). "Condemnation proceedings" (sec. 17). The bill covers 49 printed pages and is in 20 sections. It is of course of vital and primary significance to the public utilities, privately owned and operated, but is probably of equal significance in its possible effect upon present municipally owned and operated utility companies. It is also of vital importance to the coal industry of the United States in its probable effect of greatly reducing present markets for coal. Beyond the immediate effect, however, upon public-utility companies, coal companies, and coal-carrying railroads, it is obvious that the measure, if enacted and put into complete operation, will vitally affect the industries of the country generally in a number of important respects: (1) Taxes: There can be little question about the extraordinary expenditures which will inevitably flow from the creation of these authorities and the adoption of plans and projects to be recommended by them. (2) Stream pollution: This subject has received almost continuous investigation and treatment by such agencies as the Corps of Engineers of the War Department, the Public Health Service, and other established agencies and has been constantly investigated by qualified committees of Congress and has been the subject of legislation over a long period. The effect of drastic governmental action in this field is obvious. To confer upon the authorities created under the proposed act any jurisdiction over this subject without ample safeguards and opportunity for other agencies of the Government having knowledge of, and interest in, the matter would seem extremely unwise. (3) State compacts: At the present time any compact between two or more States with respect to matters affecting their inhabitants must receive the consent of Congress before it can become effective. Under this bill Congress delegates to the various authorities established the power to approve or disapprove compacts among the States themselves. Such compacts therefore, instead of receiving congressional scrutiny with the opportunity for other sections of the country which may be vitally affected by taxation or otherwise, to present their views and participate in a decision, under this proposal the authority "within whose geographic region the projects or activities contemplated by such agreement or compact are to be carried out" would have final authority to approve State compacts which might vitally affect the industries of the country not only in that area but in other areas. This might result also in approval of costly projects which the Congress would later be called on to finance. Theoretically, of course, Congress might refuse to make the appropriations, but the only opportunity for the rest of the country to make its objections would be in connection with the matter of appropriations. (4) Approval of private projects: Under section 11 of the bill it is provided that "no dam, appurtenant works, sewer, dock, pier, wharf, bridge, trestle, landing, pipe, building, float, or other or different obstruction or polluter affecting navigation, the use of navigable waters, flood control and prevention, the public lands, or property of the United States, shall be constructed, or thereafter operated or maintained, over, across, along, in, or into any navigable stream or any tributary thereof, except in accordance with plans for such construction, operation, and maintenance which shall theretofore have been submitted to and approved by the authority within whose geographic region such obstruction or polluter is to be constructed, operated, or maintained." As a practical matter this transfers to the various authorities absolute control over matters heretofore within the control of various established agencies of the Government with experience and knowledge which could be acquired only after many years of dealing with the practical problems involved. The industries of the country at the present time are familiar with the agencies in question, have established relations with them, and in many instances such agencies are headed by people who have intimate knowledge of the practical industrial problems involved. There is no guaranty whatever that such would be the case under this bill. (5) It is to be noted that under section 11 of the bill, providing for approval of private projects, the authorities are not only empowered to veto the construction of dams, etc., for power companies, but that any private manufacturer who desired to provide facilities for the generation of electrical energy for his own manufacturing operations would be equally dependent upon the authority. Thus it would be possible for the authority, in pursuance of a policy of protecting its own market, to decline to approve any private projects either for public utilities or for private industrial establishments and compel the purchase of power from a Government project. This utter dependence of industry upon a Government agency for industrial power is perhaps one of the most serious objections to the bill from the general viewpoint of the manufacturer. Of course, it may be argued that private manufacturers may not now build dams and power plants for their own uses without public approval. That is true but under this bill the approval would have to be secured from a competitor-not merely a Government agency dispensing permits under general rules applicable to everybody. Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, THE GEOMETRIC TOOL Co., Chairman, Committee on Rivers and Harbors, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: I have been reading Senate bill 2555 which I think is now in hearing before the Rivers and Harbors Committee of the House of Representatives of which you are the chairman. There is one feature of the bill, particularly, which I am troubled about. It is section 11 wherein it is proposed that all private structures of any kind, including docks, dams, sewer discharges, pipe, piers, wharfs, bridges, landings, etc., etc., proposed to be built in a navigable river, must first receive approval, not of the Army Corps Engineers in the district as at present but of the new authority which it is proposed shall be set up to administer all provisions of the bill. My fear is that the authorities provided to be set up under the act will be politically constituted, thus bringing into the picture political considerations of every request that might be made, to the end that we will substitute selfish supervision of these important matters for the totally objective consideration now enjoyed under the Army engineers. I believe no one would deny that the best engineering judgment is necessary in deciding matters having to do with the use of our navigable streams. Political considerations should not enter into these decisions. Army engineers are objective-minded and finely trained. They have no interest in any project except that of the public. Their decisions, in the past, have been fair and generally satisfactory. My hope is that you will be able to amend the bill as now proposed to require that the authorities established under the act must continue to permit the Army Corps Engineers to decide questions involving the use of our navigable streams as defined under section 11 of the proposed act. Not only would such a change, in my judgment, insure fairer and more practical decisions but it would also insure that the present speed of getting decisions, a very important consideration, would not be lessened by the introduction of political factors. Yours very truly, JAMES W. Hook, President. Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, SOUTH JERSEY PORT COMMISSION, Chairman, House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The undersigned South Jersey Port Commission is an agency of the State of New Jersey exercising the authority of the South Jersey Port District, embracing seven tidewater counties on Delaware River and Bay (population of the District, 1930 U. S. Census, 740,013). As a public agency concerned with the development and operation of marine terminals, improvement of rivers and harbors, safeguarding of navigation, and furtherance of commerce and industry, this Commission is directly interested in these and other subjects included in two bills now before your honorable committee: H. R. 7365, by Mr. Mansfield, "To provide for the regional conservation and development of the national resources, and for other purposes"; and H. R. 7392, by Mr. Rankin, "To provide for the creation of conservation authorities, and for other purposes." The bills are somewhat alike, each aiming to set up seven regional authorities to take over throughout the country the work for or incidental to the promotion of navigation, the control and prevention of floods, the safeguarding of navigable waters, reclamation of public lands and various other activities now carried on by the War Department and other agencies of the Government. H. R. 7365 gives each authority a single head, while H. R. 7392 provides that the authority shall be directed and controlled by a board of three directors, appointments to be made by the President. The field covered by these bills is so vast and the activities of the authority thus set up so extensive and varied that it is not our purpose to enter into a discussion of their merits as a whole, but rather to confine this communication to the features which directly concern this Commission and with which we are familiar. We refer particularly to river and harbor improvement, port development, navigation, flood control, abatement, and prevention of stream pollution, and to the furtherance of commerce between the States and with foreign countries. In this field the proposed legislation would be a step backward; an adventure in political control where politics should have no foothold; impeding rather than furthering commerce; and opening the door to needless administrative expense and waste. The splendid record of the Corps of Engineers, United States Army, in the conduct of river and harbor improvement, flood control, and other public works, speaks for itself. This Commission from its own experience in this field gladly testifies to the high purpose, fidelity to the public interest, and unsurpassed technical ability of the Corps of Engineers. It would be a gigantic blunder for the Congress to abandon the policy which has been in effect for a century or more and from which the Nation has benefited so greatly in the improve ment of its waterways and development of its commerce. As you well know, Mr. Chairman, a number of bills have been introduced in Congress in the past few years aimed directly or indirectly at a change in the present system whereby the Corps of Engineers has the responsibility and the direction of the public works so long committed to its charge. All those measures failed in the storm of public opposition they aroused. One of those bills was H. R. 11011 (1932) providing for the establishment of a new Government agency to be known as the "Public Works Administration." This agency was to have charge of certain governmental construction work, but not to include river, harbor, and flood control work. In speaking on the floor of the House, on April 27, 1932, with reference to this bill, the Honorable Joseph J. Mansfield is quoted as saying: "Experience shows that the distinguished men who have filled the important post of Secretary of War have ably carried out their duties in the matter of river and harbor administration. To change the administration of these works from a high Cabinet officer to a bureau chief, with express authority in the bill to either ignore or override and set aside the findings and conclusions of the Corps of Engineers, would soon lead to a disgraceful political situation, fai more reprehensible than the so-called pork barrel' practices that prevailed before the present system was perfected." These remarks, it would appear, may apply as well to the two bills now before your committee: H. R. 7365 and H. R. 7392. Civilian control and political influence are to supplant the disciplined technical ability, the non partisan attitude, and the judicial fairness of the Army engineers in the great public works upon which vast sums of public funds are to be expended. Certainly such legislation is of the "pork-barrel" order and not in the public interest. New and unnecessary restrictions upon the development of waterway facilities for commerce and industry are set up in these bills. Attention is directed particularly to H. R. 7392, section 11 (a) which provides that no dam, appurtenant works, sewer dock, pier, wharf, bridge, trestle, landing, pipe, building, float, where the use of navigation is affected, shall be constructed, operated, or maintained without the approval of the district conservation authority created by the bill. This Commission is an agency of the State of New Jersey and operates marine terminals. If it plans to build an addition to a wharf or other works on the waterfront the plans are submitted to the State board of commerce and navigation and a permit granted by that body, exercising the authority of the State. The plans are then submitted to the War Department, which in the exercise of Federal authority grants its permit. Yet the improvement cannot be made unless this new Federal Conservation Authority passes upon the plans and grants permission. This is mere circumlocation and unnecessary red tape. It means additional expense and delay and its effect will be to retard improvements on our waterways. If the public interest is to be served, let waterways improvement, flood control, and allied works be carried on by the highly trained engineers of the Army, free from civilian dictatorship and political "pull." The Congress, under the existing order, in response to local demands, can and does initiate and/or authorize waterways, surveys, and improvements, giving directions to the War Department to be carried out by the Corps of Engineers. These bills now in your committee practically deprive Congress of initiative in this field by setting up an executive authority to do all the planning, reporting solely to the President, who in his discretion may or may not pass the plans along to the Congress. This scheme is likely to delay necessary local improvements, dull the initiative of private enterprise and discourage commerce on our navigable waterways. To use a common expression, the whole scheme of regional authorities is "cock-eyed". We respectfully request that your committee do not take favorable action upon H. R. 7365 or H. R. 7392, or any similar legislation. We shall be glad to express our views at greater length if desired by your committee and notice is received of a public hearing which we may attend. Very truly yours, UPTON S. JEFFERYS, Secretary. PHILADELPHIA PIERS, INC. Philadelphia, Pa., July 20, 1937. Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman, House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Upton S. Jefferys, secretary of the South Jersey Port Commission, wrote you on July 15 requesting that your commission do not take favorable action on H. R. 7365 and H. R. 7392. A copy of Mr. Jeffery's letter has been sent to us, and this is to advise you that we fully concur in the views expressed in his letter. Yours very truly, L. T. HOWELL. THE PORT COMMISSION OF THE PORT OF BEAUMONT, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON RIVERS AND HARBORS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Will you please file with your committee the following letter: We understand that there is at present before the Committee on Rivers and Harbors a proposal to create regional authorities throughout the country and invest these authorities with, among other things, the present jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers of the Army over Rivers and Harbors and flood-control work. The Army engineers, by training and long experience, are experts in the construction, maintenance, and operation of waterway and flood-control projects, having conducted these services since the foundation of the Government. To dispense with the services of or curtail same would result in disastrous results. In the interests of the public there should be no divided authority. The senior engineers of the United States Army rank above the average in skill and are better equipped for flood-control and river and harbor work. A careful study of the achievements of the Army engineers over the past will reveal that the records are full of results. No other agency could have accomplished what the Army engineers have done, such as the Panama Canal project, the Wilson Dam, the present building of the Fort Peck Dam, which, when completed, will create the largest artificial reservoir in the world. Any number of projects have been designed and constructed by the Army engineers, such as our National Capitol, the Library of Congress, the Francis Scott Key and the Arlington Memorial bridges, and numerous others, all of which has been done at a considerable lesser cost than could have been done otherwise. To commit these important public works, so vital to the welfare of the country, to any political body, board, or bureau, bound and limited by no obligation other than that which they owe to the power that appoints them. would indeed be a grave mistake. In view of the unparalleled record of skill, achievement, and patriotic public service, the Beaumont Port Commission respectively urges that you "keep the Army engineers on the job." Yours very truly, BEAUMONT PORT COMMISSION, By O. L. CAYWOOD, Port Director. NEW YORK, N. Y., July 16, 1937. Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman, Committee on Rivers and Harbors, House of Representatives: This will confirm our understanding of the conversation which the office of the Merchants Association had with you today to the effect that H. R. 7365 will not transfer from the Board of Army Engineers to the Atlantic Seaboard Planning Agency control of operations in New York Harbor. Members of this association have been apprehensive that such a transfer might follow. We have taken steps to inform them of your interpretation. If it is the intent of the measure to continue the Board of Army Engineers in control of harbor operations we respectfully suggest a clarifying amendment to that effect be introduced in the bill. This suggestion carries no implication of approval or disapproval of the bill as a whole. THE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION OF NEW York, Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, PHILADELPHIA, PA., July 16, 1937. Chairman, Committee on Rivers and Harbors, House of Representatives: The Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association informed that certain contemplated legislation may take the work of rivers and harbors improvements away from the Corps of Engineers, War Department, wishes to enter its protest against such legislation. The association has gone on record several times against the transfer of rivers and harbors work from the Corps of Engineers and still holds to that position. It believes the work has been well and economically done and should not me transferred to any other agency that might become politically controlled. ATLANTIC DEEPER WATERWAYS ASSOCIATION, |