Page images
PDF
EPUB

saw the library, one of the finest libraries, in Portville, to be found in western New York. On the lawn these priceless books were spread out to dry in the sun-thin books had become thick books.

I am only mentioning these things because I am vitally interested in preserving that fine spirit, their school systems and college systemis, and I shall appreciate anything that is done to see that these are taken care of.

The CHAIRMAN. We are delighted to have your help from the constructive statement, Mr. Allen, and I may observe, parenthetically, that if such devastation obtains at the very headwaters of the Mississippi River, you can imagine just what our troubles are down at the mouth of the Mississippi River.

Is Eagle Creek Reservoir the project that you are interested in, Senator!

Senator GUFFEY. Eagle Creek and Conemaugh Reservoirs.

The CHAIRMAN. The Eagle Creek and Conemaugh Reservoirs have been authorized?

Colonel DUNN. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You mentioned Conemaugh and Eagle Creekhave you the report covering Eagle Creek?

Colonel DUNN. Not the detailed report, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. For the information of the committee, that reservoir has been authorized. What is the estimated cost of it? What

are the type of improvements?

Colonel DUNN. The estimated cost is $11,200,000. Eagle Creek Dam is a rolled-fill embankment. The drainage area above the dam is approximately 95 square miles. The total capacity is 99,000 acrefeet.

The CHAIRMAN. That is in Committee Document No. 1, but is there a separate report covering that particular project in detail?

Colonel DUNN. Yes, sir; It is covered in the 308 report on the Beaver River.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the number of the report and date of it? Colonel WEST. The report is in progress and has not been submitted to Congress. However, the report does not affect the status of the Eagle Creek project.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the character of the land, and what is the size of the proposed reservoir?

Colonel DUNN. I do not have that, but will insert the data in the record if you desire.

The character of the land is as follows: Farm land about 35 percent; pasture land about 15 percent; wooded area about 15 percent; brush and wasteland about 35 percent. The capacity of the reservoir is about 99,000 acre-feet and covers an area of about 7,900 acres. The CHAIRMAN. I want this committee to know about it.

Colonel WEST. There are no towns or sizable communities in the reservoir area.

The CHAIRMAN. That project was approved in the Flood Control Act of 1938?

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. No construction has been started?

Colonel WEST. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Were funds ever appropriated for the initiation of the project?

Colonel WEST. For planning purposes only, sir.

Colonel DUNN. It is one that we are planning to work on with the new authorization.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, so much with respect to the Eagle Creek project.

BARREN RIVER, KY.

What about the report on the Barren River in Kentucky and Tennessee-the other contested matter here. That is House Document 765, Seventy-eighth Congress, second session, and I will ask you, Colonel Herb, to advise us and give us a syllabus or an analysis of that project and to tell the committee the estimated cost and what it consists of and the type of lands that would be required and the ratio of benefits to costs, keeping in mind, if I am correct in my recollection, that generally in the act of 1938 a reservoir was authorized along this stream, and that subsequently under a resolution a review report was called for either by resolution or by the Flood Control Act of 1941-I believe the act of 1941. And the proposal under consideration here is a modification of the adopted project in 1938 to provide for, as you state in this report, a dam that will not only provide for flood control but for the generation of power in response to what you state in this report is the request of the local citizens; is that right? Colonel HERB. Yes, sir; that is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. That project is located on the Barren River, a tributary of the Green River, and the Green River in turn flows into what river?

Colonel HERB. The Ohio River, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. That is right. And what is the general watershed of that protected area?

Colonel HERB. The watershed of the Barren River comprises about 2,100 square miles, of which about 1,700 are in Kentucky and approximately 400 in Tennessee.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, then, what populations are involved and what cities are interested in this proposed improvement?

Colonel HERB. The population of the basin is 120,000. The principal cities are Bowling Green, Ky., with a population of about 14,600; Glasgow, Ky., with about 5,800; and Franklin, Ky., with about 3,900. The principal industries are timbering, petroleum, clothing industries, and allied activities. Of course, they have farming in this territory, too.

The CHAIRMAN. When that project was authorized in the act of 1938, it was at an estimated cost of what amount?

Colonel HERB. Estimated cost of $5,169,000, sir. That was for flood control only with a reservoir capacity of 413,000 acres-feet.

The CHAIRMAN. So this is a modification of that project to provide

for a power pool over and abve the flood-control pool?

Colonel HERB. Yes, sir; and it is also in another location.

The CHAIRMAN. And the total estimated cost of the recommended project is what?

Colonel HERB. $17,100,000., sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee is interested in the statement of the Board of Engineers in this report to the effect that they are not advised as to the demand for power in that area. What information have you or what statement do you care to submit with respect to

that observation of the Board of Engineers in reviewing this project— and I read from paragraph 6, of House Document No. 765, Seventyeighth Congress, second session. [Reading:]

6. The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors concurring in general with the division engineer finds that the most suitable plan for the construction of Barren No. 2 Reservoir, or the advisability of building a hydroelectric-power project, cannot be determined with accuracy at this time. It, therefore, recommends that the Chief of Engineers be authorized to modify the storage allocation of the proposed Barren No. 2 Reservoir and to install facilities for power in the dam at an estimated cost of $9,700,000, provided that such modifications are found advisable at the time of construction.

That is a statement that rather disturbs some members of the committee in connection with this project, and I would like to have any statement that you or the Chief of Engineers care to make.

Colonel HERB. The recommendation to include power, Judge, comes from the Federal Power Commission, which I can give you. [Reading:]

Subject: Barren River, Ky. and Tenn.
Maj. Gen. E. REYBOLD,

Chief of Engineers, War Department,

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Washington, D. C., January 25, 1944.

Washington, D. C.

DEAR GENERAL REYBOLD: Reference is made to your letter dated September 2, 1943, transmitting copies of the reports of the district and division engineers and of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors on your Department's authorized survey of the Barren River, Ky. and Tenn. You request the comments of the Commission with respect to these reports at the earliest practicable date in order that the report of your Department may be completed and submitted to the Congress.

The district engineer recommended the construction of a multiple-purpose flood control and power project at the Port Oliver site on the Barren River, Ky., the project being known as the Barren No. 2 project. The dam would be a combination earth-fill and concrete gravity structure with gated spillways. The aggregate storage capacity below the top of the crest gates would be 1,748,000 acre-feet of which 482,000 acre-feet would be utilized for flood control, and 653,000 acre-feet of usable storage for stream-flow regulation and the development of power. The estimated cost of the project is $17,100,000 of which $9,700,000 would be allocated to power. The proposed installation is 50,000 kilowatts, and the district engineer estimates the average annual output at 105,500,000 kilowatt-hours.

The division engineer does not believe that the final determination with respect to the construction and use of the Barren No. 2 Reservoir should be made until further study has been made of the entire Green River Basin. He recommends, however, that the authorization to construct a project at the Barren No. 2 site be broadened to permit the construction of a multiple-purpose project which would include power. The Board concurs generally with the division engineer and recommends that the Chief of Engineers be authorized to modify the storage allocation of the proposed Barren No. 2 Reservoir and to install facilities for power, provided that such modifications are found advisable at the time of construction. The Commission has caused its staff to review the reports of your Department and the staff believes that a dam constructed substantially to the height proposed by the district engineer would permit the development of the potenialities of the site. The flood-control storage proposed in the project appears to be unusually large in comparison with other similar projects in the region. The staff believes, with respect to both flood control and power, that it would not be desirable to make final determinations with respect to the use of storage at this project until further study is made of the entire Green River Basin.

The district engineer, in his study of the economic feasibility of power at the Barren No. 2 project, used values of $12.50 per kilowatt for dependable capacity and 1.50 mills per kilowatt-hour for energy. Power from this project would be utilized in the same general region that the power from Wolf Creek would be marketed. Reference is made to the power-market study on the Wolf Creek project which was transmitted to your Department on September 29, 1941. In that report

it was recommended that $15.25 be used as the value per kilowatt of dependable capacity at the Wolf Creek project, and that 1.5 mills per kilowatt-hour be used for energy. The use of the Wolf Creek power values would be appropriate in the consideration of the economic feasibility of other hydroelectric projects proposed to be constructed in this region.

The Wolf Creek, Dale Hollow, and Center Hill projects are already under construction in this region by your Department. It is not possible, under present circumstances, to estimate accurately when the power from the proposed Barren No. 2 project could be utilized.

The staff is of the opinion that if it becomes desirable to construct the project for flood control prior to the time at which power-generating equipment should be installed, the dam should be built to the height required for its multiple-purpose use, with penstocks and other facilities that will permit the installation later of power-generating equipment. Under this plan, the crest gates would not be installed in the initial construction.

Based upon the reports of your Department and upon studies by the Commission staff, the Commisison believes that the Barren No. 2 project should, when constructed, be built for multiple-purpose use including power and, under this circumstance, would be a desirable unit in the multiple-purpose development of the basin. The Commission believes, therefore, that the present authorization of the project for flood control should be broadened to permit its construction and use substantially as proposed in the reports under consideration.

The Commission concurs in the view that further studies of the Green River Basin should be made prior to the final determination with respect to the details of the project, including the allocation of storage.

Sincerely,

LELAND OLDS, Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. So the Chief of Engineers is following the recommendation of the Federal Power Commission?

Colonel HERB. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And the benefits, this additional power is selfliquidating, so the project as a whole is a favorable one?

Colonel HERB. Yes, sir. The ratio of cost to benefits is 1 to 1.50. Mr. CHELF. I do not want to take up any additional time, but at this time I would like to call on Mr. Wilson Burks, who is the county superintendent of Barren County.

The CHAIRMAN. Give us your name and your business and your place of residence.

STATEMENT OF WILSON BURKS, SUPERINTENDENT OF BARREN COUNTY SCHOOLS

Mr. BURKS. My name is Wilson Burks. I am superintendent of the Barren County schools. My address is Glasgow, Ky.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you familiar with the document under consideration with respect to this project?

Mr. BURKS. I am.

The CHAIRMAN. That has been made available to you?

Mr. BURKS. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you speaking in behalf of or against this project?

Mr. BURKS. I speak against this project.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you represent the people and area above or below the proposed reservoir?

Mr. BURKS. Above.

The CHAIRMAN. You represent the people above the reservoir.
Mr. BURKS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have your statement.

87116-46--15

Mr. BURKS. I have here a representation from the Barren County Fiscal Court and from the City Council of Glasgow and the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce authorizing me to make the statements that I shall make.

The CHAIRMAN. You may pass those authorizations to the reporter, and they will be printed in connection with your statement. (The referred to documents are as follows:)

To Whom It May Concern:

GLASGOW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,

Glasgow, Ky., April 6, 1946.

At a meeting of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce held at its office on September 13, 1945, it was voted by the membership that a resolution be drawn opposing the proposed building of Port Oliver Dam on Barren River at a point a few miles west of Pageville, Ky., and a committee was appointed by the President to draft such a resolution and forward same to Senators and Representatives in Washington, the Governor of Kentucky, and to the Federal engineers in Louisville, Ky.

On October 11, 1945, the board of directors of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce as per above order met and adopted said resolution and forwarded same as per instructions of membership.

Having received notice that a hearing on the proposed dam would be held in Washington, D. C., on April 10, 1946, a meeting of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce directors was held at the office of its president on April 3, 1946, and by unanimous vote selected the following: Messrs. George H. Akers, W. H. Jones, Jr., and N. Wilson Burks to represent the chamber of commerce at the hearing on April 10, and present the reasons why said proposed dam should not be built.

[blocks in formation]

The City Councel of the City of Glasgow, Ky., met in regular monthly session in the city courtroom in the city of Glasgow, Ky., on April 2, 1946, and during this meeting of the council an open discussion was held relative to Port Oliver Dam in Barren County, Ky.

The city council being thoroughly convinced that a large majority of the citizens of Glasgow, Ky., are opposed to any construction or dam that would destroy our better agriculture territory in Barran and adjoining counties do, on motion by J. H. Webb and seconded by Chris Grinstead go on record as being opposed to the building of said Port Oliver Dam in Barren County, Ky. H. C. BIGGERS, City Clerk.

BARREN COUNTY FISCAL COURT

April terms, April 2, 1946

Whereas heretofore the Barren fiscal court has gone on record as opposing the construction of the Port Oliver Dam and whereas it has more forcibly been brought to the attention of the court that if this dam is constructed same will take 21,000 acres of land from Barren County and whereas the proposed construction of this dam will necessarily take from Barren County all of its bottom land and whereas said land that will be taken will destroy the most productive land of the county and whereas the actual operating expense of Barren County is now being carried on with a minimum of expense and the revenue derived by way of taxation including all of Barren County is barely sufficient to operate the county and whereas it has been brought to the attention of the court that if said dam is constructed its generating capacity per year will be less than

« PreviousContinue »