286 DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL

 (3) Because of the lesser difficulties in construction.
 We further submit for purposes of comparison the following estimates of cost
 of sea-level and lock canals of different depths without and with interest during
 the period of construction, 6 years:

 Interest rates

 No Intent SXent
 Interest

 Cost of s-level canal:
 30-toot depth.............----..................------.....................----------....... $142,70k 000 $10 ,834,000
 3lot d.....................................................------------------------------------------.. 172,000000 12,700000
 Cost o lock canl:
 0-foot depth.--..-..-............-...--..-......----.......-- -- ..--.. 148, 1000 16 48 000
 35-oot depth..----..-.......--..........--.....-.....--------- ... 174, 80,000 195, 642,


 These estimates assume that all rights-of-way, flowage damages, and dredging-
 disposal areas will be paid for by local interests.
 In addition to the differences shown above, a further advantage of about
 $20,000,000 in favor of the sea-level canal results from capitalizing at 4 percent
 the excess annual operating cost of a lock canal over that of a sea-level canal.
 The foregoing estimates were made, using the plans of the War Department's
 special board, but with the following changes:
 (a) The straightening of the river at Palatka is to be deferred until war-
 ranted by shipping.
 (b) The berm between the top of the canal and the bottom of the spoil banks
 is reduced from 200 feet to 100 feet
 (c) Less expensive bridges.
 The estimates are further based upon present-day costs and upon the assump-
 tion that funds will be made available to the Army engineers at a rate to permit
 the project to be completed in 6 years.
 The board of review wishes to acknowledge the complete and excellent data
 contained in the report of the War Department's special board which made this
 report possible at this time. The board also wishes to state that the estimates
 of cost prepared by the War Department's special board and the Federal Emer-
 gency Administration of Public Works are not comparable because they were
 based upon different designs and the Public Works' estimates were made prior
 to complete investigation of the site and prior to the recent increases in con-
 struction costs.
 This board was not instructed to estimate the benefits accruing from the
 construction and operation of this canal. However, if it be assumed that the
 economic study made by the special board of Army engineers for a lock canal
 is sound and considering the lower maintenance and operating costs of a sea-
 level canal, the cost of a canal which would be Justified at 4-percent interest
 would be:
 Sea-level canal:
 0-foot depth (in 100 years)------------ ----------- $160,000,000
 35-foot depth (in 100 years)---------------------------- 177,000,000
Lock canal:
 30-foot depth (in 100 years)-------------------- 141,000,000
 35-foot depth (In 100 years) ----- ---------------- 157,000,000
 Unanimously submitted.
 WALTUm J. DooUGLA, Chairman.
 WAa DIParTIXT,
 WAmum T. HAwmmu,
 Colonel, Corps of Bngineers.
 BamON SOM1nvi.,
 Major, Corps of Bngineers.
 PUBuO WOKas ADMINIUTL NATION,
 CLuramm MODoNouGH,
 Director of B"ngeering.
 Fsasmao H. FowIrE
 Member, Board of Review.