Mr. PILLION. I note, General, that the preconstruction planning is $110,000, here. Is that not large for a project of $540,000?

General MACDONNELL. Of that, Mr. Pillion, $45,000 is the cost of the general investigation; the preparation of the documents on which it was authorized. This leaves $65,000 as advance planning costs.

Mr. PILLION. How much more detailed planning will there be over and above the $110,000, you are contemplating to expend as of now? How much more engineering and detail design will be required? General MACDONNELL. That will complete it, sir.

Mr. PILLION. That will complete all the design, completely?
General MACDONNELL. Yes, sir.

Mr. PILLION. Now, what are the chances of this municipality putting up its 20 percent of the cost? What are the chances of that?

General MACDONNELL. I think they are very good, sir. They have two sources. They can either borrow it from ne State, or they can get it from a bond issue. They are considering both.

Mr. PILLION. It just seems odd to me that we would advance $110,000 without nailing that down rather definitely.

General MACDONNELL. $45,000 of that was expended for the study prior to the passage of the 1960 act, which established the 20 percent. We had $20,000 for fiscal 1961.

Mr. PILLION. Evidently you are attempting, here, to guard against damages in connection with a flood that may occur once in a hundred years. Is that the ordinary standard by which you judge flood control preventions?

General MACDONNELL. Well, for an urban area, sir, we use what is known as the standard project flood, which means that you take the worst storm that could reasonably be expected, and consider that it happened under the worst circumstances, with the ground already wet from a previous storm, because in urban areas, of course, you are dealing with a question of loss of life.

In this case, the city of Ely is well aware that you cannot get standard project flood protection in that area. Actually, the protection is just about 40-year frequency.

LAS VEGAS WASH AND TRIBUTARIES, NEVADA

Mr. RABAUT. Now we will take up Las Vegas Wash and tributaries, Nevada.

We will insert pages 40 and 41 in the record. And I have no questions.

(Pages 40 and 41 follow :)

LAS VEGAS WASH AND TRIBUTARIES, NEVADA

(Continuation of Planning)

LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: This project is located in the vicinity of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas and
Henderson in Clark County, Nevada. The plan of improvement provides for two diversion levees, a deten-
tion basin with spillway, and an outlet channel In the Las Vegas unit; a detention basin with spillway
and an outlet channel in the Henderson unit; and a levee In the Power Line Road unit.

JUSTIFICATION: The project will provide flood protection to major portions of Las Vegas (population
63,500) and North Las Vegas (population 18,400), to almost all of Henderson (population 12,500), and
to a large part of adjacent developed areas. The areas subject to flooding, located in the largest
urban area in the state of Nevada, are occupied by intensively developed residential, commercial, and
Industrial properties, railroads, utilities, streets and highways. The overflow area consists of about
47,300 acres, with a total value of $660,000,000 and a population of 51,000. The project
would prevent over 80 percent of the total damages that may be expected to occur in the areas to be
protected. Extensive damage occurred in Las Vegas and its suburbs as a result of a relatively severe
flood in June 1955; the damages were estimated at $1,500,000. Under present conditions the authorized
construction would prevent about $1,880,000 in damages from a like storm. Benefits, consisting entirely
of flood damages prevented, are estimated at $1,010,000 annually.

Project: LAS VEGAS WASH AND TRIBUTARIES

NEVADA (Cont'd)

NON-FEDERAL COSTS: The investment required of local interests in construction of the authorized project is estimated at $5,400,000 broken down as follows:

SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL DATA

$7,020,000

2/ Preauthorization studies costs only.

Project: LITTLE DELL RESERVOIR, PARLEYS CREEK, UTAH

(Cont'd)

Floods predominantly

JUSTIFICATION:
by Salt Lake City), control all record floods below Mountain Dell Reservoir.
The project would, in conjunction with the existing Mountain Dell Reservoir (operated
It would prevent
by making available a minumum of almost 4,000 acre-feet of water annually.
serious flood damage in Salt Lake City and would offset impending municipal water supply shortage
and they may prevail for several weeks.
of snowmelt origin are characterized by prolonged high stages and flows in excess of channel capacities,
During the floods of 1922 and 1952 the capacity of the 13th
damages evaluated at $2,570,000 at that time.
Street conduit was exceeded for about 30 days. The flood of 1952 was the largest of record and
flooded some 75 blocks within the city. This amounts to about 1,000 acres, and the flood caused
from floods of the snowmelt type.
On the basis of current (1960) conditions this damage
would amount to about $3,100,000 all of which would be prevented by the project. Total damage from
$230,000 from flood control and $143,000 from water supply.
all floods during the past 50 years is estimated to be about $9,700,000, of which 65 percent resulted
Average annual benefits are estimated at $373,000, comprising

NON-FEDERAL COST: Local interests are required to assume the costs allocated to water supply functions.
with interest over a period not to exceed 50 years.
This cost is presently estimated at $2,400,000 (36.5% of the construction cost)and may be paid in a lump
sum prior to start of construction, in annual amounts during construction, or in equal annual payments
Also, local interests are required to assume at
least 20% of the cost (except costs of planning, design, and acquisition of water rights) of the com-
pleted project allocated to the production of local flood control benefits, payable either as construc-
tion proceeds or pursuant to a contract providing for repayment with interest within 50 years.
The
actual cost, or fair market value of lands, easements, rights-of-way, and work performed or services
rendered prior to completion of construction of the project, which are furnished by a non-Federal
entity, shall be included in the share of the cost to be borne by the non-Federal entity. Local
accomplish relocations, and maintain and operate the project after completion.
interests are specifically required to furnish all lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construction;

The estimated costs to local interests are as follows:

Lands
Relocations

Costs allocated to water supply
TOTAL

66,000 304,000 2,400,000

2,770,000 1/

1/ In addition, a cash contribution, or reimbursement, is required estimated at $590.000

The annual cost of maintenance, operation and replacement is estimated at $26,000.