SAMMAMISH RIVER, WASH. (Continued) The investment required of local interests in construction of the authorized NON-FEDERAL COSTS: project is estimated at $506,000, broken down as follows: $168,000 20,000 Total $506,000 It is Local interests are required to maintain and operate the project upon completion. estimated that the average annual expenditure for maintenance and operation will total $9,000. Local interests have stated they are prepared to furnish the items There is strong support for the project, and no opposition has been STATUS OF LOCAL COOPERATION: of local cooperation. expressed. COMPARISON OF FEDERAL COST ESTIMATES: The current Federal estimate of $1,160,000 is an increase of $40,000 over the latest estimate of $1,120,000 submitted to Congress. result of higher price levels. Mr. RABAUT. I have no questions. Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. Chairman, on Sammamish, what is the nature of this $302,000 non-Federal participation in this project? General STARBIRD. In the Sammamish project, sir, it was estimated there would be substantial land enhancement benefits, as well as direct flood protection benefits, and this project, drawn up according to the more recent procedures where a substantial local contribution is required, therefore required 21 percent of the total Federal cost to be contributed in cash by the local interests, as well as land, rights-ofway, and the like. LIBBY DAM Mr. RABAUT. Libby Dam, $1,350,000. Insert pages 25-B and 25-C of the justifications. (The pages follow:) LIBBY DAM, KOOTENAI RIVER, MONT. (Continuation of planning) LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: Libby Dam site is on the Kootenai River about 15 miles upstream from Libby, Montana, and 217.0 river miles above the confluence of the Kootenai with the Columbia River. The plan of improvement provides for a concrete gravity structure rising about 400 feet above bedrock, with a powerhouse at the downstream toe and will create a reservoir 95 miles long. This project will back water 42 miles into Canada to the tailwater of the Bull River Dam site, 5 miles upstream from Wardner, British Columbia. AUTHORIZATION 1950 Flood Control Act BENEFIT-COST RATIO: 1.2 to 1 for Initial Installation (Ratio for Ultimate Installation of 8 units not evaluated) SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL DATA Total Estimated Project Cost $324,500,000 JUSTIFICATION: The Libby Dam project is an integral unit of the Major Water Plan for water resource Flood storage provided by the project will aid in reducing flood Power will be development of the Columbia Basin. damages on the Lower Columbia River and on the Kootenai River downstream from the dam. realized from at-site generation and from controlled release of storage for power generation at downstream hydro plants. The project, in combination with Canadian storage and existing storage in the Columbia Basin, will permit control of the maximum flood of record on the Lower Columbia River (1894 flood with peak discharge of 1,240,000 c.f.s. at The Dalles) to less than 800,000 c.f.s. at The Dalles. Existing levees on the Lower Columbia could be made reasonably safe to handle this controlled flow. On the LIBBY DAM, KOOTENAI RIVER MONT (Cont'd) Kootenai River downstream from the dam, in combination with the existing levee system, flood storage provided by the project would practically eliminate flood damages along the Kootenai River in the Kootenai Flats Area, which extends about 70 miles downstream from above the town of Bonners Ferry, Idaho, to Kootenay Lake. In this area, levee systems protect 34,400 acres of fertile farm land in the United States, including the town of Bonners Ferry, and 17,500 acres in Canada. The area of leveed land flooded in the United States portion of Kootenai Flats amounted to 32,000 acres in 1948, 4,800 acres in 1950, 6,600 acres in 1954, and 17,000 acres in 1956. When included in a system consisting of projects now existing and under construction, Canadian storage, and with Kootenai-Columbia diversion as proposed in the treaty with Canada, the project would generate an average of 1,597,500,000 kwh annually at site and be credited with about 1,461,500,000 kwh annually at downstream plants. COMPARISON OF FEDERAL COST ESTIMATES The current Federal cost estimate of $324,500,000 is the same as the latest estimate submitted to Congress. Mr. RABAUT. Please explain this project, particularly the provision of the new Canadian treaty concerning it. General STARBIRD. The new Canadian treaty called for Canada to build some 15 million acre-feet of storage, for flood control and overall power use, and it called for the United States, simply stated, to deliver back to Canada half of the added power that would result there from. It also, however, carried provision that the United States could go ahead with the building of the Libby project. The Libby project would protect in the area just downstream from it, in the U.S. Bonner's Ferry region alone, an acreage of the order of 36,000 acres, which is flooded in part almost every year. Furthermore, Libby would contribute to the basic overall storage we need to reduce the maximum flood of record down to a level where it could pass safely within the lower Columbia levees. Lastly, it would firm up a substantial block of power, in part in Canada but in part in the United States. We felt that Libby was a very beneficial project for a long period of time but we could not proceed with it, because the backwater of Libby would extend into Canada. So as I say, a part of the treaty was the authorization of a goahead on Libby, and in fact the right-of-way, within Canada, is to be furnished by Canada. Mr. RABAUT. You received money in the supplemental this year for this project? General STARBIRD. Yes, sir. Mr. RABAUT. Are you going to have a carryover from it? General STARBIRD. Of the $350,000 appropriated we expect all to be obligated and only about $50,000 to be unexpended at the end of the year. Mr. JENSEN. What is the proposed diversion from the Kootenay River in Canada and what adverse effect does it have on power production at Libby and other affected hydroplants in the United States? What beneficial effects would this diversion have for flood control in the Kootenay River Basin in the United States and do we have to pay for such beneficial effects? You can either furnish the answer to these for the record. I will hand you these questions. Are the benefits of Libby's storage at downstream hydroplants included in the BC ratio determination? Will the downstream benefits from Libby be given priority preference, ahead of proposed Canadian storage? If not, what effect will the treaty with Canada have on the BC ratio of future corps' projects? (The information supplied follows:) Question 1. What is the proposed diversion from the Kootenay River in Canada and what adverse effect does it have on power production at Libby and other affected hydroplants in the United States? Answer. The Columbia River Treaty provides that Canada may at any time after the expiration of 20 years from the date the treaty enters into force divert not more than 1,500,000 acre-feet of water annually from the Kootenay River in the vicinity of Canal Flats, British Columbia, to the headwaters of the Columbia River. Flows of the Kootenay River downstream from the point of diver 70856 0-61-pt. 1 -23 |