have worked with REA considerably, and I just object to the methods that are being used by CEA. Mr. BARTLETT. How will the acquisition of Moose Pass hurt the city of Seward? Mr. HARDINGE. It is taking our load. In order to justify any project you must show the necessary load, and how it is going to benefit them I don't know. The only thing that came to me is we do not as yet have our Forest Service permit for our lines to mile 57 and it lies in between, but I have been assured since, just the other day, from Juneau that it will not interfere, that the Forest Service will go ahead and grant us our permit through Moose Pass regardless. Mr. BARTLETT. Do you know how many customers Moose Pass has now? Mr. HARDINGE. There is a potential of about 80. There are 56, I believe, hooked up at the present time. Mr. BARTLETT. Proceed, if you please. Mr. HARDINGE. I have the full detail all put together for you gentlemen on the whole thing so that I won't take the time. The whole project is there. Mr. BARTLETT. Do you have a written statement here? Mr. HARDINGE. It is a written statement, with six copies. Mr. BARTLETT. Without objection, the statement will be included in the record and the accompanying material will be incorporated in the file. (The statement referred to follows:) CITY OF SEWARD, Seward, Alaska, September 23, 1955. To: Congressional committee, Seward, Alaska, September 24, 1955. Re City of Seward Hydroelectric Federal power project No. 2171 GENTLEMEN: It is common knowledge the Chugach Electric Co-op, an REAsponsored organization has and is yet doing everything possible to obstruct this city's project and all other power developments in this area. They have grand visions of a monopoly. Since I worked with Lyndon Johnson on the beginning of REA years ago, I have always supported it for the purpose for which it was created; however, of recent years, certain people have deemed it considerably profitable to use the REA for monopolistic purposes. It was not the intention of the original REA to drive municipal power from the field, and I do not believe it is the present wishes of the Government to do so, therefore I humbly request you gentlemen to thoroughly investigate or cause to be investigated, the structure and reason for the actions of the Chugach Electric Co-op, and that they be ordered to cease and desist from the expenditure of public monies to interfere with and obstruct a public project such as ours. We have spent considerable tax money on developing this project and are about to begin construction of our distribution system, and the latest development is that they are trying to purchase a small plant at Moose Pass which is directly between our hydrosite and the city, and over 100 miles from their closest line, and could be for no other purpose than to block our distribution line from the hydroplant to the city. They cannot do this legally as a co-op, but are doing it through one of their directors. Any consideration you can give this matter will be greatly appreciated by the citizens of Seward whose tax money is invested in this project. Yours very truly, H. HARDINGE, City Manager. Mr. ANCHOR NELSON, Administrator, Rural Electrification Administration, SEPTEMBER 9, 1955. Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: At an adjourned meeting to the city council at 7 p. m., September 8, I was instructed to protest directly to you the use of public money in direct conflict with municipal projects. The city of Seward was issued a permit by the Federal Power Commission on May 9, 1955, for project No. 2171, a hydroproject on Crescent Lake, 32 miles from Seward, on which engineering is almost complete and all the plans for location of 69 kilovolt-amperes transmission and distribution line are in the hands of the Forest Service for their approval. Now it has been brought to the attention of the council that the Chugach Electrical Co-op of Anchorage has purchased the small light plant at Moose Pass, directly between our project and the city of Seward, and over 100 miles from their nearest lines, and directly inside our project. If you will contact Senator Lyndon Johnson, one of the fathers of REA, you will find that I personally have always supported the work of your agency, but I cannot ethically or otherwise approve of such action as taken by Chugach Electric, and would appreciate hearing from you at your earliest convenience. Yours very truly, H. HARDINGE, C. & M. E. City Manager. Mr. H. HARDINGE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRIUCLTURE, City Manager, City of Seward, Seward, Alaska. DEAR MR. HARDINGE: We have no knowledge of the purchase of the small light plant at Moose Pass by the Chugach Electric Association of Anchorage, about which you wrote us on September 9. No loan funds were advanced by this Administration for such purpose and if the purchase was made, it was made with the association's general and operating funds over which we exercise no direct control. We shall request further information from the Chugach Electric Association about this purchase and will write you again. Sincerely yours, FRED H. STRONG (For Ancher Nelsen, Administrator). SEPTEMBER 23, 1955. Mr. ANCHER NELSEN, Administrator, Rural Electrification Administration, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. NELSEN: Re my letter of September 9 and yours of September 19, I am enclosing a clipping from the Anchorage Daily Times of September 20, which clearly shows some of the subterfuge used here to bypass certain REA regulations as to acquisition. We are certainly not interested in interfering with CEA operations in their territory, and resent very much their encroachment in our project. Respectfully, H. HARDINGE, Mr. DAWSON. Mr. Chairman, I just make a suggestion that this statement that has been made ought to be pretty well publicized down in the Anchorage area. I don't recall anything being said down there about Seward having any interest in this Moose Pass power deal at the time it came up. Mr. BARTLETT. Not a word was said. You are right, Mr. Dawson. Mr. DAWSON. And I don't believe they realize the rights of Seward are being affected in any way. I don't know whom it should go to. Perhaps at least to the press down there and certainly to the CEA. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. MCFARLAND. Mr. Chairman, I notice that Mr. Hardinge also has a statement on river and harbor improvements. Were you going to say something about that? Mr. HARDINGE. Yes. Mr. BARTLETT. Go ahead. Mrs. Prost. It is my painful duty to be timekeeper, and I am sorry to announce that the time Mr. Hardinge has just expired. However, do you think you might be able to cover some of it in a minute or two? (Discussion off the record.) Mrs. Prost. I find our people witnesses have depleted in number, So you may proceed. Mr. HARDINGE. On the river and harbors, it is principally a repetition of what Reverend Malin said. I didn't know he was going to speak on that. I do think, since the Government is in the process of building a new courthouse and post-office building for the city of Seward, that it would be awfully nice if we could include the customs and immigration office accommodations in the courthouse. We have great possibilities here. I should also like to see some kind of arrangements with the Army engineers such as we have stateside I have just come from statesidewhereby we could get something on these tidelands down below and have some facilities there that are just wasted now. In other words, it is just the matter of a mud flat where, if we could have an Army engineer project something like they do on the Florida coast or east coast of some bulkheading and backfill, it would increase the harbor facilities of the city of Seward and help considerably. And it would not be too expensive a project the way it is laid. We have deep water. If it could be made, in that way we could build up the economy, you see, of the city of Seward. We already have a project with APW that, I will be frank with you gentlemen, I haven't gone into too far yet, but it has been kicking around with APW, that is, a paving project, for about 2 years according to the files. APW tells me there is no men for road work. Mr. DAWSON. I would say they made a very strong case down in Anchorage for an Anchorage harbor. If they go ahead with that, put the harbor in Anchorage, you would likely have a lot of space on your hands here, would you not? Mr. HARDINGE. No; we don't have the space now. The city has but one outlet; the railroad controls everything along the waterfront. Mr. DAWSON. I appreciate that. But I say, if a harbor is constructed at Anchorage and the boats go up to Anchorage and unload and they don't unload here only during times when you have an icefree harbor and they don't have, your business is going to fall off to the point where you might have some extra space here. 70969-56-7 Mr. HARDINGE. It is quite possible. It is quite possible. Mr. DAWSON. As a matter of fact, the superintendent of the railroad said that the prospects looked mighty dismal if that went through. So I don't know how you folks down at Seward feel about it. With the Haines oil pipeline going in from Haines up to Fairbanks, cutting off that source of supply, and the Gubik gas líne coming in from up the other direction, an Anchorage harbor coming in, you are going to find that the amount of material unloaded from Seward and Whittier is going to be diminished considerably. At least that is my opinion. Dr. DEISHER. I suppose we should have brought up this matter at Anchorage if interested in it. The Anchorage people have been trying to get a port in there for many years. They have tried everything they could think of, including statements that di ln't make a great deal of sense. Some studies were slanted very def.nitely. Engineering studies that we have read about-and I am not an engineer-have indicated that the idea of putting a port in there is not feasible because there are 5 months out of the year when it is impossible to use it, and the tides are so bad that when a ship goes up to Anchorage they have to go out into the open water and stand there for several hours just pumping out the tubing in the ship which cools the engines to get the mud of Cook Inlet out of their engines. I think before anything is done about this Anchorage harbor the ship captains, the men who use the harbor facilities, should be contacted about it, because they don't like the idea at all. It is hard to get into and so on, and I don't feel that anything they have in the way of a harbor, that they will get in the near future in the way of a harbor will interfere with our economy. Mr. DAWSON. We had testimony from the district engineer of the Army engineers. I asked him that very question, if these high tides wouldn't interfere and the anchoring of ships out there in the mud wouldn't be to their disadvantage, and he said it didn't seem to make much difference, if I remember his testimony. Dr. DEISHER. There isn't one person in the Territory with any degree of background I have heard say that. Reverend MALIN. However, I would suggest that you check the Army engineers and see if there isn't a difference of opinion existing there. I mean in Washington. Mr. DAWSON. We certainly intend to do that before we get through. Mr. HARDINGE. I would certainly be tickled to death to let my old friends, the Army engineers, decide it. I know we have a natural harbor here with 60 fathoms of water. We have no trouble with mud, not in 60 fathoms of water. Mr. DAWSON. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. BARTLETT. What is your view about the proposed seatrain operation? Or would you prefer some other witness answer that? Mr. HARDINGE. Mr. Bartlett, I would rather someone else that had gone into it further answer that, because I have not gone into the seatrain. I don't see how when you got wind there that blows a deck off the trestle at Whittier they are going to pull boxcars. Mr. BARTLETT. Thank you very much. (The statement submitted by Mr. Hardinge on river and harbor improvements follows:) CITY OF SEWARD, To: Congressional committee, Seward, Alaska, September 24, 1955. GENTLEMEN: The city of Seward could be a great asset to the Territory of Alaska and the United States with but small expenditures for improvement, since there is exceptionally deep water to within a few feet of the beach, and since the Federal project for a new courthouse and post office building has been approved, it is urgently requested that you consider and recommend that space be made available in this building for a customs and immigration office in order that Seward may be declared an open port. With the monopoly that now exists, merchandise can be consigned to Moose Pass at a lower rate than if they were received here, even though they must pass through here, this is a ridiculous situation. Also, I assure you that the people of Seward will do everything in their power to assist with the construction of a municipal dock or docks if the authorities in Washington would make available to them water frontage. Again, we have another unhealthy situation as the city is completely shut off from the waterfront by Federal land and tideland, at the very least they could turn over to the city at a reasonable figure the present so-called Army dock which was abandoned by the Army and will be abandoned and left to rot as soon as the railroad's new dock is complete or torn down, in order that Alaska Steamship Co. will not have competition. Also, small boat harbors are supposed to be maintained from gasoline funds, of which Seward certainly pays its share, but our harbor is so dilapidated it is pitiful. There is only one float of logs, and that is in a sinking condition. We have been promised a new float for 3 years, still nothing has happened. Now the Army engineers have a project approved for extending the breakwater, but we will not then have anything for boats to tie up to. These are the things that aggravate the city of Seward and justly so, as they are things over which they have no direct control or any control at all. They are a progressive people and are doing everything within their power to improve. They have voted oerwhelmingly for such things as the new high school just being completed, adequate electrical power, a new general hospital, and every other improvement put up to them. I assure you gentlemen that any consideration shown us will be appreciated, and any specific information on any project or any subject pertaining to the city of Seward will be forthcoming immediately. Very truly yours, H. HARDINGE, City Manager. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Nelson. Would you please give your name and business connection? STATEMENT OF PAUL W. NELSON, ADMINISTRATOR, SEWARD SANATORIUM, SEWARD, ALASKA Mr. NELSON. Paul Nelson, Administrator of the Seward Sanatorium. Mr. BARTLETT. Do you have a prepared statement? Mr. NELSON. I have. Mrs. PrOST. Since there are several people who are not appearing this afternoon Mr. Nelson will have approximately 15 minutes. Mr. NELSON. My statement is condensed to come within the time limits. Mr. DAWSON. Does your testimony relate to the mental health bill? Mr. NELSON. In some respects. |