10. Sealift, March 1966, p. 14; Command History, 1965, p. 121, MACV, RG 472, NACP; “AB&T Employees Perform Critical Tasks in Vietnam,” Sealift, August-September 1969, p. 6; Lawson P. Ramage, “Reminiscences of Vice Admiral Lawson P. Ramage” (Annapolis, 1970), p. 535.
11. Command History 1965, p. 119, MACV, RG 472, NACP; Testimony of General Frank S. Besson Jr. to U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Operations, Military Operations Subcommittee, August 4, 1970, p. 53.
12. On palletization and other changes, see Highlights, U.S. Naval Operations Vietnam, January 1966, OAB/NHC. Quotation is from author’s interview with Robert N. Campbell, June 25, 1993.
13. Author’s interview with William Hubbard, August 10, 1993; and Ron Katims interview, COHP; Baltimore Sun, January 22, 1966.
14. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and the War in Vietnam, 1960–1968, Part II, pp. 37–6 to 37–8; VVA, Record 33179; HQ MACV, Command History, 1965, NARA 472/270/75/32/6–7 Box 1, p. 231–2. Sea-Land had not been involved in the last major MSTS exercise before the Vietnam buildup, which was conducted entirely with breakbulk vessels; see Sealift, December 1964, p. 4, January 1965, p. 5, and March 1965, p. 13. A plan for container-ships to carry Conex containers is discussed in Alan F. Schoedel, “Viet Containership Plan Eyed,” JOC, January 26, 1966. The Okinawa contact is reported in Werner Bamberger, “Container Ships Sought for War,” NYT, May 26, 1966.
15. On Equipment Rental Inc., see Katims interview, COHP, and Operational Report-Lessons Learned for quarter ended July 31, 1966, Command Histories, 1st Logistics Command, USARV, RG 472, NACP. On Okinawa and Vietnam contracts, see Besson speech to National Defense Transportation Association Annual Transportation and Logistics Forum, Washington, DC, October 14, 1968, Historical Office, Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command; author’s telephone interview with Frank Hayden, former deputy head of contracts, MSTS, June 29, 2004; Department of Defense news release 458–66, May 25, 1966, Military Sea Transportation Service, Command History 1966, OAB/NHC, Washington, DC. “Ship Run Bid Refused,” Baltimore Sun, June 24, 1966.
16. Operational Report-Lessons Learned for quarter ended July 31, 1966, 1st Logistical Command, p. 16. Port delays are reported in Briefing Data Prepared in Conjunction with Secretary of Defense McNamara’s Visit to RVN, October 1966, General Records, Assistant Chief of Staff for Logistics, MACV, RG 472, NACP. Data on man-hour requirements are from Besson presentation to Association of the United States Army, October 10, 1966, Historical Office, Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command.
17. Memorandum from Donaho on inspection trip to Asia, August 2–20, 1966, in Command Files, MSTS, OAB/NHC; Financial and Statistical Report, MSTS, various issues, OAB/NHC; Logistics Summary for 5–20 August, 1966, General Records, Assistant Chief of Staff for Logistics, MACV, RG 472, NACP; Operational Report-Lessons Learned for period ending January 31, 1967, 1st Logistics Command, RG 472, NACP Logistics Summary, 15 December 1966, 1st Logistical Command, RG 472, NACP; Pacific Stars & Stripes, October 14, 1966.
18. Ramage, “Reminiscences,” p. 532; Werner Bamberger, “Navy Augments Shipping for War,” NYT, March 30, 1967; Sealift, May 1967, pp. 9–10.
19. Katims interview, COHP; Campbell interview; Logistical Summaries, June and September 1967, USRVN, RG 472, NACP; Sealift, October 1967, p. 20; “New Supply Concept Comes to Vietnam,” 1st Logistical Command Vietnam Review 1, no. 1 (1967).
20. Command History 1967, p. 772, MACV, RG 472, NACP; Vice Admiral Lawson P. Ramage, Remarks to Propeller Club of the United States, St. Louis, October 11, 1968, Command History, MSTS, OAB/NHC. On the feeder ships, see John Boylston, interview with Arthur Donovan and Andrew Gibson, December 7, 1998, COHP, Box 639.
21. U.S. Army Materiel Command, “Sharpe Army Depot,” November 1966; MSTS Area Commanders’ Conference, March 5–8, 1968, p. 92, Command Histories, MSTS, AOB/NHC; MSTS Area Commanders’ Conference, March 5–8, 1968, p. 102.
22. MSTS Area Commanders’ Conference, March 5–8, 1968, p. 47; Logistical Summaries, 1968, USRVN, RG 472, NACP; Operational Report-Lessons Learned, October 31, 1968, Classified Organizational History Files, 1st Logistical Command, U.S. Army Pacific, RG 550, NACP; Memorandum from COMSERVPAC to COMNAVSUPSTSCOMME, June 30, 1968, Classified Organizational History Files, Assistant Chief of Staff for Logistics, RG 472, NACP; Memorandum from Commander, MSTS, September 26, 1968, Organizational History Files, Assistant Chief of Staff for Logistics, RG 472, NACP; Memorandum for Record, Expanded Containership Service to RVN, December 31, 1968, Classified Organizational History Files, Assistant Chief of Staff for Logistics, RG 472, NACP; Joseph M. Heiser, Jr., Vietnam Studies: Logistic Support (Washington, DC, 1974), p. 199.
23. “Remarks of Malcom P. McLean” in MSTS, “MSTS/Industry Conference on Military Sealift, 12–23 December 1967,” Command History, MSTS, OAB/NHC; Classified Organizational History Files for the Quarter Ending 30 April 1968, 1st Logistical Command, RG 472, NACP; Bes-son testimony, August 4, 1970, p. 46.
24. Vice Admiral Lawson P. Ramage, Speech to National Defense Transportation Agency 22nd National Transportation and Logistics Forum, October 6, 1967, Command History, MSTS, OAB/NHC; “New Supply Concept Comes to Vietnam”; Besson remarks to National Defense Transportation Association, October 14, 1968, p. 13, and congressional testimony, August 4, 1970, pp. 73–75. The Joint Logistics Review Board’s recommendations were controversial and were carried out only in part; see, for example, the objections to merging the MSTS with the army’s port and trucking operations, in Edwin B. Hooper, “The Reminiscences of Vice Admiral Edwin B. Hooper” (Annapolis, 1978), pp. 472–474.
25. Frank B. Case, “Contingencies, Container Ships, and Lighterage,” Army Logistician 2, no. 2 (1970): 16–22. On containerization of ammunition, see “Operation TOCSA: A Containerization First!” Army Logistician 2, no. 5 (1970): 14, and Sealift, April 1970, pp. 14–16; Besson testimony, August 4, 1970, p. 47.
26. Military Prime Contract Files, July 1, 1965-June 30, 1973, Records of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, RG 330, NACP. On competitive bidding, see Ramage, “Reminiscences,” pp. 540–542. Sea-Land’s revenues are reported in ICC, Transport Statistics, Part 5: Carriers by Water, Table 4.
27. Katims interview, COHP; author’s interview with William P. Hub-bardjulyl, 1993.
28. MSTS Area Commanders Conference, March 1968, pp. 63, 92, 96; Review and Analysis, March 1968, Command History, 1st Logistical Command, RG 472, NACP.
29. Memorandum from C. F. Pfeifer, Inspector General, on Asia trip October 8–18, 1967, Command Histories, MSTS, OAB/NHC; Classified Organizational History Files for the Quarter Ending April 30, 1968, 1st Logistical Command, Records of U.S. Army Pacific, RG 550, NACP.
30. Jane’s Freight Containers, p. 309.
31. Jane’s Freight Containers, 1969–70 (New York, 1969), pp. 179–180; Mark Rosenstein, “The Rise of Maritime Containerization in the Port of Oakland, 1950 to 1970” (M.A. thesis, New York University, 2000), p. 95; memo, H. E. Anderson, Traffic Manager, Pacific Command, October 30, 1968, General Records, Assistant Chief of Staff for Logistics, MACV, RG 472, NACP.
32. Worden, Cargoes, pp. 150–153; Harlander interview, COHP.
33. Scott Morrison interview, COHP; “Sea-Land Keeps Port Schedule,” Baltimore Sun, March 18, 1968; Boylston interview, COHP; Rosenstein, “The Rise of Maritime Containerization,” p. 96.
34. Marad, Office of Maritime Promotion, “Cargo Data,” March 11, 1969.
Chapter 10
Ports in a Storm
1. Thomas B. Crowley, “Crowley Maritime Corporation: San Francisco Bay Tugboats to International Transportation Fleet,” interview by Miriam Feingold Stein (Berkeley, 1983), p. 33.
2. Census Bureau, Historical Statistics, Q495–496, p. 757; Roger H. Gilman, “The Port, a Focal Point,” Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 1958, p. 365.
3. Gilman, “The Port, a Focal Point” originally presented in 1956, should be seen as a call for just such involvement by government agencies; Gilman was d
irector of port planning for PNYA.
4. U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract 1951, pp. 590–591.
5. Seattle Port Commission, Shipping Statistics Handbook (1963); Erie, Globalizing L.A., p. 80.
6. Fitzgerald, “A History of Containerization,” pp. 48, 91–93.
7. Booz-Allen & Hamilton, “General Administrative Survey, Port of Seattle,” January 20, 1958, pp. VI-1-VI-12; Seattle Port Commission, “Report of the Marine Terminal Task Force to the Citizens’ Port Commission,” October 1, 1959, pp. 7, 12, 34; Burke, A History of the Port of Seattle, pp. 114–117; Foster and Marshall Inc., “Port of Seattle, Washington, $7,500,000 General Obligation Bonds,” May 4, 1961.
8. Erie, Globalizing L.A., pp. 80–88.
9. Woodruff Minor, Pacific Gateway: An Illustrated History of the Port of Oakland (Oakland, 2000), p. 45; Port of Oakland, “Port of Oakland,” 1957; Ben E. Nutter, “The Port of Oakland: Modernization and Expansion of Shipping, Airport, and Real Estate Operations, 1957–1977,” interview by Ann Lage, 1991 (Berkeley, 1994), pp. 51, 84, 139; Rosenstein, “The Rise of Maritime Containerization,” p. 45.
10. George Home, “Intercoastal Trade,” NYT, January 29, 1961; Nutter, “The Port of Oakland,” pp. 78–79. American-Hawaiian never received the government subsidies it sought to finance its ships.
11. Rosenstein, “The Rise of Maritime Containerization,” pp. 47, 69; Nutter, “The Port of Oakland,” pp. 79–80; Port of Oakland, “60 Years: A Chronicle of Progress,” 1987, pp. 17–18.
12. Erie, Globalizing L.A., p. 89; Walter Hamshar, “Must U.S. Approve All Pier Leases,” Herald Tribune, April 5, 1964.
13. Nutter, “The Port of Oakland,” p. 82; Rosenstein, “The Rise of Maritime Containerization,” pp. 98–104.
14. Ting-Li Cho, “A Conceptual Framework for the Physical Development of the Port of Seattle,” Port of Seattle Planning and Research Department, April 1966, p. 15; Arthur D. Little Inc., Community Renewal Programming: A San Francisco Case Study (New York, 1966), p. 34.
15. Rosenstein, “The Rise of Maritime Containerization,” pp. 65 and 85–86; Worden, Cargoes, 148; Nutter, “The Port of Oakland,” pp. 112, 120; Port of Oakland, “1957 Revenue Bonds, Series P, $20,000,000,” October 17, 1978, p. 15; Erie, Globalizing L.A., p. 90; Seattle Port Commission, “Container Terminals 1970–1975: A Development Strategy,” November 1969, pp. 1, 10.
16. Burke, A History of the Port of Seattle, pp. 116, 122; Erie, Globalizing L.A., pp. 85–89; Minor, Pacific Gateway, p. 53; Fitzgerald, “A History of Containerization,” pp. 91–93; Niven, American President Lines, pp. 250–251; Nutter, “The Port of Oakland,” p. 84.
17. U.S. Department of Commerce, Marad, “Review of United States Oceanborne Trade 1966” (Washington, DC, 1967), p. 11.
18. Executive Office of the President, Economic Stabilization Program, Pay Board, “East and Gulf Coast Longshore Contract,” May 2, 1972.
19. Alan F. Schoedel, “Boston Talks in Deadlock,” JOC, June 29, 1966, and “No Progress Reported in Boston Port Dispute,” JOC, November 22, 1966.
20. John R. Immer, Container Services of the Atlantic, 2nd ed. (Washington, DC, 1970), chaps. 14 and 15; Philadelphia Maritime Museum, “Delaware Riever Longshoremen Oral History Project: Background Paper,” Vertical File, ILA Local 1291, Tamiment Labor Archive, New York University; Longshore News, December 1969; Charles F. Davis, “Ports of Philadelphia Posts Impressive Record,” JOC, February 5, 1970; Bremer Ausschuß für Wirtschaftsforschung, Container Facilities and Traffic in 71 Ports of the World Midyear 1910 (Bremen, 1971).
21. Matson Research Corporation, “The Impact of Containerization on the U.S. Economy” (Washington, DC, 1970), 1:88–98.
22. Robert J. McCalla, “From ‘Anyport’ to ‘Superterminal,’ “in Shipping and Ports in the Twenty-first Century, ed. David Pinder and Brian Slack (London, 2004), pp. 130–134; U.S. Department of Commerce, Marad, “Containerized Cargo Statistics Calendar Year 1974” (Washington, DC, 1974), p. 7; Austin J. Tobin, “Political and Economic Implications of Changing Port Concepts,” in Schenker and Brockel, Port Planning and Development, p. 269. On Richmond’s brief experience as a containerport, see John Parr Cox, “Parr Terminal: Fifty Years of Industry on the Richmond Waterfront,” interview by Judith K. Dunning (Berkeley, 1992), pp. 181–183.
23. PNYA, Via—Port of New York, Special Issue: Transatlantic Transport Preview, (1965), pp. 12–16.
24. Anthony G. Hoare, “British Ports and Their Export Hinterlands: A Rapidly Changing Geography,” Geografiska Annaler, Series B. Human Geography 68, no. 1 (1986): 30–32; Fairplay, September 14, 1967, p. 5.
25. Wilson, Dockers, pp. 137, 309.
26. Ibid., pp. 181–191; Anthony J. Tozzoli, “Containerization and Its Impact on Port Development,” Journal of the Waterways, Harbors and Coastal Engineering Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers 98, no. WW3 (1972): 335; Fairplay, May 16, 1968, p. 51.
27. McKinsey & Company, “Containerization: The Key to Low-Cost Transport,” June 1967; A. D. Little, “Containerisation on the North Atlantic,” p. 61; Turnbull, “Contesting Globalization,” pp. 367–391.
28. “Developments in London,” Fairplay, November 17, 1966, p. 29.
29. Wilson, Dockers, p. 239; J. R. Whittaker, Containerization (Washington, DC, 1975), pp. 35–42.
30. Wilson, Dockers, p. 152; Fairplay, July 18, 1968, p. 9.
31. Morrison interview, COHP; “UK Dockers Accept Pay Offer,” JOC, March 23, 1970; Edward A. Morrow, “‘Intermodal’ Fee Stirs a Dispute,” NYT, April 8, 1968; “Shipping Events: Inquiry Barred,” NYT, July 26, 1968.
32. Hoare, “British Ports,” pp. 35–39; D. J. Connolly, “Social Repercussions of New Cargo Handling Methods in the Port of London,” International Labour History 105 (1972): 555. Connolly charges “the application of cargo handling technology” with “the decline of the traditional dockland communities, and consequently, the debasement of social life among the dockworkers concerned,” p. 566.
33. Turnbull, “Contesting Globalization,” pp. 387–388; Wilson, Dockers, pp. 243–244; Fortune, November 1967, p. 152.
34. Bremer Ausschuß für Wirtschaftsforschung, Container Facilities, pp. 48–51.
35. National Ports Council, Container and Roll-On Port Statistics, Great Britain, 1911: Part 1 (London, 1971), p. 31; National Ports Council, Annual Digest of Port Statistics 1974, Vol. 1 (London, 1975), Table 41; Henry G. Overman and L. Alan Winters, “The Geography of UK International Trade,” Working Paper CEPDP0606, Centre for Economic Performance, London, January 2004. Overman and Winters’s figures have been recalculated to exclude airborne trade.
36. Fairplay, April 3, 1975, p. 15, and April 17, 1975, p. 56; National Ports Council, Annual Digest. Overman and Winters attribute the shift in port performance to the changed pattern of British trade after 1973, and neglect the impact of containerization on the growth or decline of individual ports. See also Whittaker, Containerization, p. 33, and UK Department for Transport, “Recent Developments and Prospects at UK Container Ports” (London, 2000), Table 4. Department for Transport, Transport Statistics Report: Maritime Statistics 2002 (London, 2003), Table 4.3, provides 1965 tonnage figures for sixty-eight British ports, but data for Felixstowe are not available.
37. Katims interview, COHP.
38. Jane’s Freight Containers, p. 324; A. G. Hopper, P. H. Judd, and G. Williams, “Cargo Handling and Its Effect on Dry Cargo Ship Design,” Quarterly Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects 106, no. 2 (1964).
39. Bremer Ausschuß für Wirtschaftsforschung, Container Facilities; Fairplay, October 5, 1967.
40. Jane’s Freight Containers, pp. 303–309; Jane’s Freight Containers 1969–70, pp. 175–194; Daniel Todd, “The Interplay of Trade, Regional and Technical Factors in the Evolution of a Port System: The Case of Taiwan,” Geografiska Annaler, Series B. Human Geography 75, no. 1 (1993): 3–18.
41. Port of Singapore Authority, Reports and Accounts, 1964 and 1966.
42. Port of Singapore Authority, A Review of the Past and a Look into the Future (Singapore, 1971), p. 8.
43. Port of Singapore Authority, Reports and Accounts, 1968, p. 22.
44. Fairplay, November 7, 1974, p. 15; Containerisation International Yearbook; Gerald H. Krausse, “The Urban Coast in Singapore: Uses and Management,” Asian Journal of Public Administration 5, no. 1 (1983):44–46.
45. Containerisation International Yearbook; Krausse, “The Urban Coast in Singapore,” pp. 44–46; Port of Singapore Authority A Review, p. 19; United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Commercial Development of Regional Ports as Logistics Centres (New York, 2002), p. 45.
Chapter 11
Boom and Bust
1. Comment by James A. Farrell Jr., chairman of Farrell Lines, to New York World Trade Club, NYT, June 7, 1966.
2. Matson Research Corp., The Impact of Containerization, 1:151; McLean Industries, Annual Report, 1968.
3. Tozzoli, “Containerization and Its Impact on Port Development,”, pp. 336–337; Marad, “United States Flag Containerships,” April 25, 1969. Grace Line’s four biggest container-carrying ships, built in 1963–64, had room for 117 first-class passengers; see Jane’s Freight Containers 1969–70, p. 389. On the complexities of moving containers on breakbulk ships, see Broeze, The Globalisation of the Oceans, pp. 29 and 41.
4. The first newly built vessel designed solely to carry containers in cells was the Kooringa, constructed in Australia in 1964 for Associated Steamships. Kooringa carried containers of 14.5 tons or less—smaller than standard 20-foot containers—on a domestic route between specially built terminals in Melbourne and Fremantle. The ship had two gantry cranes for loading and unloading. Kooringa proved to be a dead end in the development of containerization, and lost any competitive advantage after the arrival of standard-size containers. The service was discontinued in 1975 after heavy losses. See Broeze, The Globalisation of the Oceans, p. 34, and The Australian Naval Architect 2, no. 3 (1998): 6. Roy Pearson and John Fossey, World Deep-Sea Container Shipping (Liverpool, 1983), pp. 247–253.
The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World Economy Bigger Page 39
