8
Mr. HUBBARD. We will now hear from our distinguished ranking
minority member, Norman Lent of New York.
Mr. LENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for scheduling these hear-
ings today to hear testimony on vessel damage claims, particularly
those in excess of $120,000 involving accidents outside the locks in
Panama Canal waters. Several issues appear to be involved: The
time it takes to resolve these claims is said to be excessive, and the
procedures unwieldly; the lack of judicial review and the propriety
of the $120,000 limit applied to claims which the Commission must
adjust and pay; and the accounting procedures by which the Com-
mission sets aside certain funds to meet potential liabilities.
The provisions in Public Law 96-70 governing vessel damage
claims have been in effect since October 1, 1979. They are pat-
terned after the procedures which were applicable when the
Panama Canal previously had been operated as an appropriated
fund agency, as it is today. In order to further examine the liability
issues raised, we will need to have the relevant facts on how vessel
damage claims were handled during the years immediately preced-
ing implementation of the Panama Canal Treaty, as well as since
the 1977 treaties took force. Pertinent facts will include the dates
of accidents occurring outside the locks and resulting in claims for
damages in excess of $120,000 each, the date the claim was filed
and in what amount, as well as the date and amount of the final
settlement. This information should clarify the issues and help us
determine if there is any need to amend the Panama Canal Act.
Without further adieu, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing
from our witnesses this morning on these issues involving vessel
damage claims.
Mr. HUBBARD. Thank you very much, Mr. Lent.
We will now call on Congressman Glenn Anderson of California
for any opening comments.
Mr. ANDERSON. No comments, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HUBBARD. Congressman Tauzin?
Mr. TAUZIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I understand it, ac-
cording to the act we are dealing with, section 1411 of 22 U.S.C.
3711, if the vessel is damaged within the locks, the Commission is
virtually the self-insurer since it has control of the vessel inside the
lock. Outside the locks is where the problem arises. As I under-
stand the problem, the Commission cannot settle the claim outside
the locks over $120,000. It must submit that claim to Congress.
When the claim is finally settled, it is final. There is no judicial
review.
Mr. Chairman, I want to express some concern about that proce-
dure at the onset of these hearings. It seems to me that asking
Congress to be in the business of arbitrating issues of contributory
negligence between masters and crew members of passengers even
of vessels outside the locks in cases involving $120,000 or more
places this Congress in a rather strange position. We can't get
through our business as it is with the pressing matters of budget
and appropriations every year. If we have to sit as a panel of arbi-
tration in issues involving the very technical and complicated
issues of contributory negligence on the seas, we probably are
never going to get any work done. It seems to me this is a judicial
matter. We ought to provide some mechanism for the Commission