SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN REGION STUDY

Mr. PILLION. General MacDonnell, on page 7, the third project from the bottom, Sacramento-San Joaquin. The amount there is $50,000; $25,000 is asked for this year and $25,000 in the future. I note that the purpose of this study is to preserve the scenic values and to preserve and enhance recreational and related opportunities. There is no flood control involved, no navigation involved, no reclamation involved. What authority do we have to go in and make a study of this area purely for recreational purposes and for scenic and esthetic values?

General MACDONNELL. This, Mr. Pillion, is a cooperative study with the State of California. It would be incumbent on the State of California to include designs of detailed recreation areas, public parks and something of that kind. The purpose of this study is to evolve a plan in conjunction with the State so that they correlate the preservation of the natural and by and large now existing recreation resources, with the flood control program; to determine the effects on the flood control and navigation programs, both of which use the same areas; and to determine what costs might result from superimposing a plan of this kind and who properly should pay those costs.

The reason that this is carried as a Federal study is so that the Federal Government can be assured that the work proposed would not interfere with navigation nor would endanger the integrity of the levee systems.

Mr. PILLION. The lands are State lands and not Federal Government land.

General MACDONNELL. Some part of them are States, but primarily they are privately owned land.

Mr. PILLION. There is no intention to authorize the construction here of any Federal recreational facility?

General MACDONNELL. No, sir.

Mr. PILLION. Then, I might say perhaps the language is misleading. Perhaps the language should have read correlation of the scenic and recreational studies of the State of California with the navigational and flood control work of the U.S. Government. I think that would have been better language.

General MACDONNELL. I think it would have been better language, yes, sir.

ADVANCE ENGINEERING AND DESIGN

Mr. RABAUT. Advanced engineering and design are next.

LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH HARBORS

Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, $63,000 to complete. We will insert pages 12 through 14.

(The justification follows:)

LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH HARBORS CALIFORNIA WEST BASIN, LOS ANGELES HARBOR

(Initiation of Planning)

The project is located In Los Angeles Harbor, In the southern part of
LOCATION AND DESCRIP ION:
The plan of Improvement provides for dredging West Basin,
Los Angeles County, California.
including southwest slip, to a depth of 35 feet at mean lower low water.

AUTHORIZATION: 1960 River and Harbor Act

BENEFIT-COST RATIO: 2.3 to 1.

Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors are the largest commercial harbors in southern JUSTIFICATION: California. To keep up with the growth of the area, both the population and shipping, the harbors must keep expanding. The dredging of West Basin would result in increasing the accessibility of At the present time, there is a delay in land and wharf areas required for harbor expansion. entering and leaving berths, due to the existing channel depth of 30 feet. The proposed dredging Is necessary to provide full access for ocean shipping and to eliminate the hazard to navigation created by the shoal area in the center portion of the West Basin. The city of Los Angeles has constructed terminal facilities in the West Basin at a cost of about $5 million and has a program for constructing additional berths and shipping facilities in the Los Angeles Harbor over the next 15 years at an estimated cost of over $100 million.

Project: LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH HARBORS,

CALIFORNIA

-

WEST BASIN, LOS ANGELES HARBOR (Cont'd) It is advisable at this time to develop West Basin prior to further Improvement of East Basin because of the subsidence in East Basin. Average annual benefits are estimated at $151,000.

COMPLETED MODIFICATIONS LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH HARBORS, CALIF.

Work completed consists of a stone breakwater 11,152 feet long (San Pedro breakwater) extending
eastward from Point Fermin; a stone-and-earth detached breakwater 18,500 feet long (middle breakwater);
a stone-and-earth detached breakwater 13,350 feet long (Long Beach breakwater); an entrance channel
1,000 feet wide and 40 feet deep to outer Los Angeles Harbor, with a turning basin 3,500 feet long and
1,500 feet wide of the same depth opposite the end of pier 1, and enlargement of the entrance to the
Inner harbor by dredging to a depth of 35 feet a triangular area at the junction of the Inner harbor
with this turning basin; for Irregular anchorage areas (areas A and B) 40 feet deep adjacent to the 40-
foot-depth entrance channel; an inner-harbor channel (Los Angeles channel) 35 feet deep and 1,000 feet
wide, with a turning basin at its north extremity 35 feet deep; for a channel (East Basin channel) 35
feet deep and 650 feet wide extending from the turning basin to slip No. 5; a channel (Cerritos channel)
35 feet deep and 400 feet wide from slip No. 5 to a turning basin in Long Beach Inner harbor; a turning
basin 35 feet deep in Long Beach Inner harbor; an entrance channel to Long Beach inner harbor 35 feet
deep and 300 to 500 feet wide; a settling basin at the mouth of the Los Angeles River diversion channel,
the dredged material to be deposited on the beaches eastward therefrom to Belmont pler; a silt-diversion
channel (Los Angeles River) for the protection of Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors. The cost of these
completed modifications is $30,700,000 of which $30,364,000 is Federal cost and $336,000 is the amount
of local contributions.

REMAINING AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS - LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH HARBORS, CALIF.

A further modification in the 1954 R & H Act provides for deepening the East Basin to a depth of
35 feet. This modification is estimated to cost $954,000 of which work costing $485,000 has been
accomplished. Approximately 700,000 cubic yards of material remains to be dredged to complete this.
modification.

Project: LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH HARBORS

CALIFORNIA

WEST BAS IN, LOS ANGELES HARBOR (Cont'd) NON-FEDERAL COSTS: The costs to local Interests of complying with the requirements of local cooperation as set forth in the authorizing legislation is $110,000 for utility relocations.

STATUS OF LOCAL COOPERATION: The Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners furnished a resolution 15 December 1958 Indicating its willingness to meet the required local cooperation.

COMPARISON OF FEDERAL COST ESTIMATES: The current Federal cost estimate of $1,790,000 Is an Increase of $22,000 over the latest estimate ($1,768,000 - December 1958 base) submitted to This change" is due to inclusion of the cost of Preauthorization Studies. Congress.

Mr. RABAUT. Why is it necessary to undertake this new planning start at this time?

General MACDONNELL. This involves the dredging of the west basin of Los Angeles Harbor to provide a depth of 35 feet for deep draft vessels. They use the area for discharging and loading general products and movement to overhaul and repair facilities. As that basin now stands, there is a narrow channel dredged around the periphery of it to a depth of 30 feet. There is no way for a vessel to turn around or to maneuver within that channel. The purpose of this authorization is to remove the shoal area which covers the entire center of the basin.

Mr. RABAUT. How large is that?

General MACDONNELL. At the broadest dimension, sir, that would be about 1,000 feet, and perhaps 3,800 or 4,000 feet long.

Mr. RABAUT. What is the depth required?

General MACDONNELL. The depth in the peripheral channel is 30 feet. The objective is to get not only 35 feet in that area but in the shoal areas in between.

Mr. RABAUT. Are the shoals up high?

General MACDONNELL. Yes, sir; they have never been dredged.

ALAMO RESERVOIR, ARIZ.

Mr. RABAUT. The Alamo Reservoir. We will insert pages 16 and 17. (The justification follows:)