Projects OROVILLE RESERVOIR, CALIFORNIA (Cont'd) NON-FEDERAL COSTS: The State of California will construct, operate and maintain the Oroville Reservoir and will provide for specific reservation of flood control storage therein, to be operated for flood control in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army. Preliminary estimates indicate that local interests' cost for the development (dam, reservoir, and power facilities) will be $428,582,000 exclusive of any Federal contribution. The amual cost for maintenance, operation and replacements is estimated at about $4,400,000. STATUS OF LOCAL COOPERATION: The project has been authorized for construction by the State of California; construction is proceeding as the initial project of the California Water Plan. As of 1 January 1961, the State had obligated over $54,000,000 for advance planning, relocation of highways and railroad facilities, and for acquisition of real estate. During FY 1959, the State Legislature appropriated $83,000,000 for the water development program and authorized transfer of $172,000,000 from other funds to be made available for that purpose. In the November 1960 election the electorate of the State of California approved a bond issue in the amount of $1,750,000,000 to finance the California water development program, such funds to be applied principally to the Feather River Project. COMPARISON OF FEDERAL COST ESTIMATES: The current Federal cost estimate of $61,725,000 is an increase of $11,725,000 over the latest estimate ($50,000,000) submitted to Congress. The current estimate is based on estimates contained in the report on cost allocation studies now in draft form. The previous estimate was of a preliminary nature pending completion of the above-mentioned report. Mr. RABAUT. In the current year $50,000 was appropriated for continuing this study. Why do you now program only $25,000 for the year 1962 and $21,000 for a later time when it appears that it could be finished in 1 year at the current rate. General MACDONNELL. Mr. Chairman, our part of it is a limited field of interest confined entirely to flood control. As the State plans this very large multiple-purpose project involving power, municipal water, irrigation and flood control, they have a very massive design problem. They proceed at a pace accordingly. Our smaller interest, which is flood control only, has to be timed to coincide with theirs. Mr. RABAUT. In other words, you are pacing your activities to the needs of the State study. General MACDONNELL. We are keeping pace with their study since it would not be sensible for us to go very far ahead of them. Mr. RABAUT. I think that very well explains it. Mr. TABER. You have a 24 percent rise in the estimated Federal contribution, which is quite a jump. What assurances do we have that these increases will not continue and why does the Federal contribution rise at a much greater rate than the non-Federal costs? General MACDONNELL. Mr. Taber, last year the justification sheet did show an estimated cost of $50 million and it was stated that this was a preliminary estimate based on office data only, since we had just then started the study. However, at the time I appeared before you and testified last year, I stated that I felt the Federal contribution would perhaps be more in the neighborhood of $74 million. I find I was high in my oral testimony. Actually it is down about $12 million from what I testified last year. This figure that you have before you of $61,725,000 is taken from the draft of the final cost allocation report. It is subject to review, but I have confidence in it. SACREMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT Mr. RABAUT. Now, we have the Sacramento River bank protection project, $60,000. We will insert pages 26b through 26d. (The justification follows:) SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, (Initiation of Planning) CALIFORNIA The project provides for bank erosion control works and set-back levees within the limits of the existing levee system, along Sacramento River and its principal tributaries, in north-central LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: California. AUTHORIZATION: 1960 Flood Control Act BENEFIT-COST RATIO: 1.6 to 1 SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL DATA Other Costs 2,360,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $22,160,000 1/ Preconstruction Planning Estimate Appropriations to 30 June 1961 Planning Allocation for FY 1962 Balance to Complete Preconstruction Planning after FY 1962 1/ Estimate for initial phase contemplated during first 10 years of construction. The tentative estimate for ultimate remedial work is $100,000,000. Extension of bank protection beyond the initial phase will require report on advisability of proceeding with additional work and authorization of that work. 2/ Preauthorization studies costs only. The Sacramento River levee system was initiated as a purely local project and in many cases The levee system was adopted the levees were constructed close to the riverbanks without protective berm. as a Federal project in 1917 and it has been modified and expanded several times since that date, but no JUSTIFICATION: alignment has been made since the original conception of the project. major change in the basic levee Project: SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CALIFORNIA (Cont'd) JUSTIFICATION: (Cont'd) The levees are seriously threatened by erosion, and unless correction measures are taken levee failures will occur, causing catastrophic damage and the loss of many lives. Requirements for large Federal expenditures for flood emergency work would be largely eliminated. The area protected by the levees is over one million acres in which about 50 communities are located; value of land and improvements to be protected is about two billion dollars, and about 600,000 people live within the flood plain. The project is needed to maintain the integrity of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project so that it will continue to furnish the degree of protection for which it was designed, to reduce the costs of emergency repairs and downstream dredging, and to reduce land losses caused by erosion. Average annual benefits are estimated at $1,510,000 upon completion of approximately 30,000 lineal feet critical sites now existing or expected to develop in the next 10 years. of bank protection at NON-FEDERAL COSTS: Local interests are required to (a) contribute an amount in cash which when added to the cost of lands, easements, rights-of-way, and utility changes, equals one-third of the cost of each unit of the remedial work, a contribution presently estimated at $5,000,000; (b) provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements, and rights-of-way necessary for the proposed work and make all necessary relocations and alterations to roads, bridges, irrigation and drainage facilities, and other utilities; (c) maintain and operate the completed individual project units in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army; and (d) hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction works. The estimated first costs to local interests are as follows: Annual maintenance and operation costs are estimated at $59,000. In addition, for reaches where local interests request bank stabilization instead of the set-backs recommended by the Chief of Engineers, the local interests will contribute the costs over and above the costs of set-backs, and provide also the local contribution as indicated above. Project: SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CALIFORNIA (Cont'd) STATUS OF LOCAL COOPERATION: Local interests have advised the District Engineer that they are willing non-Federal funds. consideration. COMPARISON OF FEDERAL COST ESTIMATES: The current Federal cost estimate of $14,800,000 is an increase of $560,000 over the latest estimate ($1,240,000) submitted to Congress. This change is due to přice level increases of $470,000 and $90,000 due to inclusion of the cost of Preauthorization Studies. |