Page images
PDF
EPUB

1

APPENDIX A.-GROUP I

Flood-control projects under construction or construction commenced, recommended for additional authorizations and allocations of funds as needed for immediate completion:

[blocks in formation]

Flood-control projects recommended by the Ohio Valley Improvement Associa tion for authorization in the flood-control bill of 1946:

[blocks in formation]

Flood-control projects recommended for construction as early as possible along with group I and group II projects.

[blocks in formation]

The Chief of Engineers, gentlemen, has made a general statement covering the Ohio Basin, and we have with us this morning Colonel Dunn, the division engineer-and your initials are what?

Colonel DUNN. Col. B. C. Dunn.

The CHAIRMAN. And your headquarters are where?

Colonel DUNN. Columbus, Ohio, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you, just for the record, briefly tell us how long you have been connected with the corps?

Colonel DUNN. Since 1910, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. When did you graduate from the academy?
Colonel DUNN. 1910, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And how long have you been connected with flood control?

Colonel DUNN. Well, I should say about two-thirds of my military service has been with river-and-harbor and flood-control work.

The CHAIRMAN. And prior to your assignment as division engineer in the Ohio Valley, what was your assignment with the corps? Colonel DUNN. I was in France 18 months, beginning January 1, 1944.

The CHAIRMAN. That is in World War II?

Colonel DUNN. Yes, sir; World War II. Since then I was on temporary duty in Washington after returning last July, and since the 1st of October I have been with the Ohio River division.

The CHAIRMAN, And prior to the war what was your assignment in the corps?

Colonel DUNN. In the North Atlantic division as division engineer, and before that I served in some six or eight districts in the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Colonel, you have with you an associate there will you now give us your official position and your name for the reporter?

STATEMENT OF COL. R. G. WEST, ASSISTANT DIVISION ENGINEER, OHIO RIVER DIVISION, COLUMBUS, OHIO

Colonel WEST. I am Col. R. G. West, assistant division engineer. The CHAIRMAN. How long have you been with the corps?

Colonel WEST. In a civilian capacity about 25 years. But at the advent of the war I was made executive officer of the Ohio River division, and then later assistant division engineer.

The CHAIRMAN. And you have been with the corps something like 25 years. You are not a graduate of West Point; you are a civilian, as I understand it?

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You are one of that great and valuable number of civilian engineers who was given assignments as district engineers and assistant district engineers during the war?

Colonel WEST. That is correct, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. When the men with the military training were abroad, as Colonel Dunn, engaged in the war and in combat service. Now, Colonel Dunn, you have already heard the facts, to which you have assented, that we have approved projects in the Ohio Basin aggregating substantially a billion dollars, and we have authorized

appropriations for that, and there are at present under construction or completed projects aggregating three hundred and forty-eight or three hundred and fifty million dollars. We would like for you to give us in your own way, as briefly as you may-if you have a prepared statement, that may be inserted in the record, but tell us generally the projects that have been constructed under the acts beginning with 1936 and the projects that are under way. With the general statement you will make, keep in mind I have asked these gentlemen both for and against the proposals to give their views.

You may proceed, sir.

STATEMENT OF COL. B. C. DUNN, DIVISION ENGINEER, OHIO RIVER DIVISION, COLUMBUS, OHIO

Colonel DUNN. By enactment of the Flood-Control Act of 1936, Congress recognized the serious flood problems which exist in the Ohio River Basin and authorized the construction of nine flood- control reservoirs on tributaries above Pittsburgh and five similar reservoirs in the middle part of the watershed. The act also authorized local protection works for eight cities and towns in the Wabash Basin and levees to protect certain farm lands in that area at 12 localities. Local protection projects for two cities in the Cumberland Basin were also authorized.

Work was just about to be initiated on these authorized projects when the great flood of 1937 occurred. Stages attained by this flood exceeded those reached during any other flood by as much as 9 feet at some localities.

The resulting damage was estimated at more than $400,000,000. The floodwaters had hardly subsided before the Corps of Engineers was ready to present to Congress a comprehensive plan which was designed to provide adequate protection for the entire basin. The projects included in the plan, comprising some 81 floodcontrol reservoirs and supplementary protection works at 196 cities and towns, estimated at present-day prices to cost about $1,021,266,000, are shown on the display map. The plan was approved in its entirety by the Flood Control Act enacted June 28, 1938. However, expenditures for carrying on accomplishment of the plan were limited by Congress to $75,000,000 for reservoirs and $50.300,000 for local protection works. This was in addition to specific authorizations contained in prior flood-control acts. Subsequent legislation has increased these authorizations to a total of $305,439,800 for reservoirs and local protection projects. Up to the present time work has either been completed or initiated on 31 reservoirs and 25 local protection works, at an estimated cost of $348,940,000. These projects are shown in black on the display map. Congress has appropriated for carrying out this work approximately $174,000,000, in various appropriation acts.

The wisdom of Congress in providing funds for flood-protection measures in this highly industrialized valley was fully demonstrated during the war, as the third greatest flood of record occurred on the river during that period in March 1945. During this flood the works thus far built fully demonstrated their effectiveness as measures in the national defense. For instance, had it not been for the protection works at Huntington which permitted continuing operations at the

International Nickel plant, it is entirely possible that the war might have lasted for a longer period. However, due to the fact that work on the plan was greatly restricted during the war period, the damages that resulted during this flood amounted to more than $34,000,000, although losses in the amount of $29,400,000 were prevented by completed works. Floods also occurred in the Wabash River Valley in 1943, and more recently, on the upper Cumberland in January of this year. These floods resulted in damages of $12,000,000 and $3,916,000, respectively. The aggregate damages from floods in the basin since 1941 are estimated at $81,000,000. The total losses in the basin in the past 40 years-1907 to date, inclusive-have amounted to more than $1,000,000,000, which is just about equal to the cost of the plan based on present-day prices.

It will be noted from the figures previously cited in regard to au thorizations and costs that, if work is to be initiated on any additional projects included in the plan other than the four shown in green on the map, it will be necessary for Congress to authorize expenditure of additional funds. The bill also, it is understood, may contain items which will authorize certain new projects, recently reported upon favorably to Congress by the Chief of Engineers, as units of the plan. These projects, which are shown in yellow on the display map, are as follows:

Barren River, Ky. and Tenn.: Port Oliver Ford Reservoir.
Chestnut Creek, Va.: Local protection at Galax, Va.

Wabash River and tributaries: 21 levee-improvement projects and 1 channel-improvement project.

Allegheny River, N. Y. and Pa.: Local protection at Olean, Al legany, and Portville, N. Y.

Mill Creek, Ohio: West Fork Reservoir.

I have here a list of the projects which have been suggested by the Chief of Engineers for possible selection in the event additional authorization, as mentioned above, is approved by Congress. The CHAIRMAN. What do they aggregate?

Colonel DUNN. They aggregate approximately $150,000,000, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And will you call them by name for the record? Colonel DUNN. Yes, sir. Burr Oak Reservoir, Ohio; Cagles Mill Reservoir, Ind.; Eagle Creek Reservoir, Ohio; Falmouth Reservoir, Ky.; Mining City Reservoir, Ky.; Rocky Fork Reservoir, Ohio; Stewarts Ferry Reservoir, Tenn.; Summersville Reservoir, W. Va.; Turtle Creek Reservoir, Pa.; and the Shenango Reservoir, Pa. That concludes all the new reservoirs contemplated, and we have also certain local protection projects.

The CHAIRMAN. What will those local protection projects aggregate?

Colonel WEST. The total aggregate for reservoirs and local protection is approximately $150,000,000, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The local protection projects and the reservoirs that you tentatively recommend?

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The local protection projects by name, if you give us those?

will

Colonel DUNN. Yes, Sir; Ashland, Ky.; Covington, Ky.; Dillonvale and Adena, Ohio; Hawesville, Ky.; Jackson (Cut-Off) Ky.; Lake Chautauqua and Chadokoin River area, New York; Latrobe, Pa.; Maysville, Ky.; Middlesboro (Yellow Creek), Ky.; Point Pleasant, W. Va.; Reevesville, Ill.; Roseville, Ohio; Russell, Ky.; Taylorsville, Ky.; Uniontown, Ky.; Wilcox, Pa.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Colonel, you feel that in the Ohio Basin there should be additional authorizations for approximately $150,000,000 at the minimum?

Colonel DUNN. The projects which I have named will cost about $150,000,000. With additional authorization beyond $150,000,000 we could initiate other projects.

The CHAIRMAN. And as you have already stated, all of the authorizations that have been made have been committed, and the works are now under way?

Colonel DUNN. Yes sir.

The CHAIRMAN. We are delighted to have your statement. With the consent of the committee, I will ask you with respect to two of these projects, first as to the Chestnut Creek project of Virginia.

CHESTNUT CREEK, VA.

The Chestnut Creek project, Colonel Herb, is contained in House Document 506, Seventy-eight Congress, second session, and it involves local protective works primarily for the protection of what community?

STATEMENT OF COL. E. G. HERB, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, CIVIL WORKS DIVISION, OFFICE, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS

Colonel HERB. Galax. Va., sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And this project consists of what?

Colonel HERB. It is a local protection works, Judge. It consists of levees, walls, channel improvement, and bridge reconstruction. The CHAIRMAN. And it is an estimated cost to the Government of what amount?

Colonel HERB. The first cost is estimated at $276,125, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And the local interests are required to furnish the rights-of-way and to make the necessary changes in highway bridges, and alteration to drainage facilities?

Colonel HERB. That is correct, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. In the report that is available to the members, the benefits of the proposed projects exceed the costs? Colonel HERB. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So it is economically justified?

Colonel HERB. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there anything further, except those matters outlined in it with respect to this project by way of summary?

Colonel HERB. No, sir. I think that covers it fairly well.

The CHAIRMAN. Representative Burch has already made a statement on behalf of the project. Are there any opponents of this project or any proponents?

(None.)

« PreviousContinue »