Mr. STONE. I understand that this would not affect us in normal times. However, the thing that has alarmed us is what might happen in floodwaters similar to the 1937 and 1942 floods. In 1942 the tracks. of the Southern Railway through Remington were covered so that the service was disrupted from 8 o'clock one afternoon until 6 o'clock the next afternoon.

The CHAIRMAN. I can understand your situation.

Mr. STONE. It did do a considerable damage during 1942 and also during 1937.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions by members of the committee? If not, thank you very much for your statement.

Your next witness, Mr. Smith.

Mr. SMITH. The next witness is Mr. C. A. Utz, who is chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County.

STATEMENT OF C. A. UTZ, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY

Mr. UTZ. My name is C. A. Utz. I am chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your occupation in addition to being chairman of the board of supervisors?

Mr. Urz. I am a one-horse farmer up there.

The CHAIRMAN. Where is your farm located?

Mr. Urz. Down at Barbersville, in Orange County.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that in the reservoir site?

Mr. UTz. No.

The CHAIRMAN. How far away?

Mr. Urz. I am 12 miles away from Orange.
The CHAIRMAN. On what stream?

Mr. Urz. I am not on any stream.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. What facts do you have in connection with this proposal, in addition to those that have been submitted, that you would like to bring to our attention?

Mr. Urz. I would like to substantiate what Mr. Williams has said. I am very much interested in this reservoir at Rock Hill. As you proceed from Rock Hill down the stream that river soon becomes the line between Madison and Orange. I recall in 1942 all the losses along those streams.

The CHAIRMAN. What stream would the Rock Hill Reservoir be on? Mr. Urz. That is on the Rapidan.

The CHAIRMAN. Still way over there?

Mr. Urz. I would say it is about 40 miles from Rock Hill to the upper reaches of that bank up there. I think a reservoir there would give us wonderful support. I know there would be some objections in general. I know the farms up there.

The CHAIRMAN. That would be above the proposed reservoir? Mr. Urz. Yes, sir. I think over a period of years it would be a good investment.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that land similar to the lands further down the Rapidan?

Mr. Urz. Similar. There are good farms along there.

By lowering the dam at Fredericksburg we will get protection for many years. I think I can speak for Orange County as a whole. The CHAIRMAN. If that reservoir is lowered there, without the generation of power, are you prepared to give us a reasonable estimate as to whether or not the cost would be in excess of the benefits? Mr. Urz. I think over a period of years it would be taken care of. The CHAIRMAN. You think it would?

Mr. Urz. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have had your statement.

Mr. SMITH. That concludes the list of witnesses who have been selected.

I would like for the record to note that there are here about 200 citizens of Culpeper and Fauquier Counties who selected these genlemen to speak for them. It is impracticable for everyone to speak. That concludes the statements of our witnesses.

The CHAIRMAN. We will now hear from Mr. Cecil L. Reid.

STATEMENT OF CECIL L. REID, HYDRAULIC ENGINEER,
FREDERICKSBURG, VA.

Mr. REID. I am a hydraulic engineer and live in Fredericksburg, Va.

The CHAIRMAN. For whom do you speak, and what interests do you represent?

Mr. REID. I represent my own interests as a citizen of Fredericksburg. I was asked this morning to represent the residents of Staunton County who will be flooded from their homes.

The CHAIRMAN. From the area above?

Mr. REID. From the area above.

The CHAIRMAN. You do not represent anyone in the city of Fredericksburg other than yourself?

Mr. REID. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You have heard the statements made here, and as an engineer you are familiar with the reports of the Chief of Engineers.

Mr. REID. To some extent. I have not had an opportunity to study

all of it.

The CHAIRMAN. As an engineer, you state generally there is a dam and there is a power development above it intended to generate power and protect Fredericksburg.

Mr. REID. I have known it for 40 years.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any facts, economic or engineering, that you have to present to us that have not been presented by the office of the Chief of Engineers, or any other witness that preceded you? Mr. REID. I have.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you a prepared statement?

Mr. REID. I have some notes which I will be glad to turn over to the stenographer after I get through.

The CHAIRMAN. You may give us the high points without repeating any facts submitted to us.

Mr. REID. I will do that. Before I start in with this, at a recent hearing Mr. Marshall King, the mayor of Fredericksburg, in my absence here-and he had ample opportunity to notify me, because I see him every day-came before this committee and told this committee

and filed a letter with the committee that he had written to the planning board or to the Governor of Virginia, I do not know which, and in his statement here he said that I was about the only one opposed to this thing in Fredericksburg, and that I was opposed to it on account of my interest in the power company, or my connection with the power company. I would like to disclose to this committee the interest that my family has in the Virginia Electric Power Co. I own four shares of stock in a company which owns stock in the Virginia Electric & Power Co. The value of those four shares of stock is $159 as of last night. Assuming that one-third of it is invested in the Virginia Electric & Power Co., I have a $50 interest. My wife and I have many times that invested in Fredericksburg.

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have your statement in connection with the merits of the proposal.

Mr. REID. I charge Mr. King with that, and in the past I have been connected with some power company. I have also been connected with other engineering work for banks, trustees, individuals, and in all my years I have never accepted a fee, either in whole or in part, that was paid by any man who had ever been convicted of a felony or who had served time in the penitentiary for any cause, and I have never had a business associate who ever stood indicted by either the Federal or State courts.

The CHAIRMAN. We are interested in the merits of this problem. I say with all due deference that I think you wrote the chairman of the committee with respect to the statement of the mayor, and the chairman responded to you that there was no reflection on you.

Mr. REID. As I recall it, and I do not have the letter with me

The CHAIRMAN. Pardon me, I will say now that there was no reflection on you or on any other citizen of Fredericksburg made by the mayor, and when he was asked if there was any opposition my recollection is he stated there was opposition. He may have mentioned your name, but he cast no reflection on you.

You may proceed to discuss the merits of this controversy, if you will. Mr. REID. I am interested in and in favor of flood control of the Rappahannock River and its tributaries, as well as of other streams, where such control will benefit the country as a whole, and where the benefits to be derived are comparable to the reasonable cost of such control and where such control does not present an element of danger to those who live below the dams erected to provide the control.

I am opposed to the proposed development located 4 miles above the corporate limits of the city of Fredericksburg for the following

reasons

The CHAIRMAN. Give us the high points, and I will give you permission to file a statement.

Mr. REID. It is not in condition to file.

This development is essentially a power development and the floodcontrol and other so-called related benefits are in a ratio of approximately 90 percent power and 10 percent other benefits.

The top of the proposed power pool, as stated in the report of the Army engineers, is placed at elevation 240 for the purpose of the report, but it states that this is not a fixed maximum for the top of the power pool, but that it may be at some greater height, say, 245. The letter from the Federal Power Commission advises further study with a view to raising the pool level above elevation 240.

It is plainly stated on the drawings that the maximum height of the water at the dam is to be elevation 257 and not 240; that is, during flood. This latter elevation is about 200 feet above 80 percent of the city of Fredericksburg and is 157 feet above 99 percent of the city.

No automatic spillway is provided on this dam. Instead there is provided a number of gates which will have a discharge capacity of 545,000 cubic feet per second, or four times the maximum flood that they ever had at Fredericksburg. This capacity would undoubtedly be used to such an extent as would be necessary to protect the structure itself, and if it were ever improperly used it would most certainly destroy Fredericksburg.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it your view that from an engineering standpoint this proposed dam is not sound?

Mr. REID. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. What kind of dam would you propose?

Mr. REID. A dry dam, if you wanted flood control; a dam with a hole in it that will pass water and only store the excess-without

power.

The CHAIRMAN. Where are there any such dams? Where have you ever constructed one of those dams?

Mr. REID. I have never constructed any of them.

The CHAIRMAN. Where is there one like that in the country?

Mr. REID. The most successful one in the country is the Miami Conservancy District.

The CHAIRMAN. You are aware that since the Miami Conservancy District and dams were constructed there following the flood of 1913 that all engineers who have testified before this committee, and the engineers of the country generally, have advised that the present construction is a vast improvement over the type of construction that was built by Mr. Morgan in the Miami Conservancy District. Do you take issue with other engineers?

Mr. REID. As you know yourself, we have had one experience out on the Pensacola Dam where we had this combination proposition, and they used the storage space for power. When they opened those gates you know what happened.

The CHAIRMAN. I am familiar with the Pensacola situation. It is very important that those dams be properly constructed and properly operated.

Mr. REID. I am not questioning the type of construction.

The CHAIRMAN. You brought out the point about the defect in the construction and that there should be an opening in the dam for the normal flow without the gates.

Mr. REID. I think that would be better.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there anything else? I get you on that point. Mr. REID. Even without considering the backwater curve, this dam would inundate about 33,000 acres at elevation 257 and would render useless thousands of other acres.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean the dam at the elevation proposed in the new report?

Mr. REID. At 257 elevation, which they show as the maximum point on the dam, it would overflow between 33,000 and 34,000 acres. The CHAIRMAN. You understand if they do the Government is liable. Mr. REID. I do not know. They may have to pay for it, but a lot of people would die before they were ever paid. They ran the people

out of the hills below Fredericksburg and none of them have ever gotten their money yet, and that was a war measure.

The drawing which purports to show the proposed pond is misleading. The map as drawn shows the pond with the water at the dam at elevation 240 and not the maximum pool level at the dam, much less the backwater curve during a flood. This is plainly shown, since the map of the pond indicates that the pond lacks several miles of backing water to Remington, Va., while with the assumed maximum pool level of 257 at the dam, the water would be backed beyond Remington and would be raised 5 feet at Remington, to which elevation would have to be added the floodwater and the necessary fall to make that water flow to the dam at Salem Church.

The proposed dam will not prevent erosion except to that land which will be permanently flooded. There has been practically no erosion below Fredericksburg, and, as a matter of fact, there have been some sand deposits on a few acres below Fredericksburg.

To a layman it would appear that there would be developed 54,500 kilowatts and that there could be delivered 50,690 kilowatts of that amount. Also, that this development would provide 153,070,000 kilowatt-hours of energy, of which 145,417,000 kilowatt-hours would be delivered for sale.

I think that the above statements are correct, but what kind of kilowatt-hours are these, and how dependable would this power be?

It is stated that the minimum flow will be regulated to 770 cubic feet per second and that this will produce 8,100 kilowatts continuously, but it is also stated that of this 770 cubic feet per second, 400 of it will be released continuously, leaving only approximately 370 cubic feet per second which can be used as needed during any time of the day desired.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me understand you now. Would you favor the construction of this Salem Church Reservoir if the construction were engineeringly sound and if it provided for the generation of power at an elevation of 240, or do you oppose it under any circumstances? Mr. REID. At its height, because it will drive the farmers out of their homes and ruin many places,

The CHAIRMAN. What height do you favor the dam to be built to? Mr. REID. I think that we should have flood-control dams, one about a mile above the small present dam; one at the junction of the rivers to cover up to the same elevation of 200. I do not know about the terrain above that, but I do know the terrain from Fredericksburg to Remington. I am probably the only man in Washington today who has seen every foot of this land on both sides of the river.

The CHAIRMAN. You would advocate a substitute by constructing additional reservoirs above and the development of power in any of them?

Mr. REID. If they wish it.

The CHAIRMAN. I think we get your viewpoint. Are there any other points that you would like to make?

Mr. REID. Quite a few of them.

The two dams will produce 65,963,000 kilowatt-hours of deliverable primary energy. At minimum head the plant would be capable of producing only 34,650 kilowatts of deliverable capacity, and after allowing for the continual release of 400 cubic feet per second could only produce this capacity for 2 hours and 43 minutes per day, or