He makes this statement: Virginia and West Virginia are both vitally interested in the production of coal, of which the supply is virtually inexhaustible. It means employment for a large number of miners; it means business for our railroads, and it means a return on hundreds of millions of tax-paying invested capital. From the standpoint of efficiency, from the standpoint of taxes, and from the standpoint of sound business principles, elecric power developed from steam coal is to be preferred in Virginia and West Virginia to a Government program of hydroelectric power. Obviously, the development of power from the five dams that are contemplated in the development in Virginia would put the commercial power companies out of business and you would seriously affect the business of mining and railroads. What is the answer to this flood-control problem? It seems to me from the records available from Government documents, that the answer is in the type of flood control developed by the Department of Agriculture. I invite the committee's attention to a letter from the Assistant Secretary of the Department of Agriculture, Seventy-eighth Congress, first session, House Document No. 269, presenting a report of a survey of the Potomac River drainage basin in Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Maryland pursuant to the Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936. The CHAIRMAN. We have considered that and have it in our files. I do not want to interrupt you. General OPIE. Permit me, sir, simply to invite your attention to the small cost of this project in relation to the large cost of the floodcontrol dam project. This report shows that over a 24-year period during which it is planned to develop this project it would only cost $2,030,353 of which the Federal Government would pay the modest sum of $859,189. I submit that if one fraction of the appropriations proposed for the great multipurpose dams were diverted to a program of this type in a short period of years you would have flood control that would produce value instead of destroying value. The advantages of this type of flood control, which includes reforestation on a large scale, reforestation of small farm timber tracts, ponds on farms, contour dams, and so forth, check dams, and a myriad of check dams which would cost a fraction of what these dams would cost, would hold back these waters. Is the committee aware of the relative flood control which would ensue from a project of this type in relation to flood control such as is proposed for the Potomac River drainage basin and the James River Basin? The engineers are on record showing that flood control in the Potomac River Basin by some 17 dams constructed would be only 17 percent. The flood control effects of a program of this kind would be up to 70 percent. The CHAIRMAN. The answer is we have adopted a soil-conservation project but we have not adopted the other. General OPIE. My contention and that of the chambers of commerce I represent and of the people of our country, sir, is that the flood-control idea, as submitted in these proposals, is simply a disguise for the nationalization of the power industry of this country, and if we nationalize that key industry we are going to have national 87116-46-7 ization and a change in our entire economics and in our political system. From a personal standpoint, and from that of many persons who think as I do, we have confidence that we can get along under any system of government, any system of economy. We have that much confidence in our own ability to adapt ourselves. The people of this country have never voted nationalization, or socialization, such as the English people have voted under an open program submitted by the Labor government. If this plan for the nationalization of the power industry were submitted to the people and it were approved by the people, I think that we would all abide by it. It has never been so submitted. The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have your statement. Mr. JACKSON. Would not this power be sold by the Army engineers to the private power companies? General OPIE. It does not so appear from the address of Mr. Olds. That does not seem to be included in the plan at all. In fact, there is an objection. Mr. JACKSON. I am not talking about Mr. Olds. I say that the Army engineers would be operating this dam. General OPIE. That is a question of policy which would be determined by the advocates of the nationalization of power. Mr. JACKSON. Do you have a surplus of power in Virginia? Mr. JACKSON. You have a surplus? General OPIE. Yes. Mr. JACKSON. In other words, I assume all your people in Virginia are getting power—you farmers? General OPIE. They are not, but they are in a position to do so, and as soon as, I am informed, materials and labor are available the commercial power companies will extend their lines to supplement the REA. Mr. JACKSON. Everybody that wants power can get it in Virginia? General OPIE. I think unquestionably under private enterprise in a reasonable time they can. Mr. JACKSON. What do you mean by "a reasonable time"? How long would it be? General OPIE. I take this view, that we cannot get everything we want overnight. A poor man cannot be a rich man overnight, and we cannot expect the millennium in a period of months or a few short years. I think that some of these gentlemen representing the electric power people could answer that question more specifically. The CHAIRMAN. We thank you very much for your appearance. Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I stated that Mr. Long, from the State planning board, might be here as a representative of the Governor, but I find that Mr. Morris is. He would like to present a letter later on to this committee, suggesting the possibility of lowering this dam. He does not care to make a statement, but he will send the committee a letter. The CHAIRMAN. His name is what? Mr. SMITH. Morris, but Mr. Raymond Long is the State planning commissioner, and the letter will be sent by him. The CHAIRMAN. I understand that we will now hear from Mr. Boozer. STATEMENT OF W. H. BOOZER, PRESIDENT, STAUNTON AND AUGUSTA COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Mr. BOOZER. I am president of the Staunton and Augusta County Chamber of Commerce. The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a statement with respect to the power situation and the flood-control situation in Virginia? Mr. BOOZER. I have, sir, a resolution presented by the Roanoke Chamber of Commerce. They asked me to read it. The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed. Mr. BOOZER. Thank you. I have a letter which I have written to the chairman and a resolution that I would like to insert in the record at this point. The CHAIRMAN. It may be inserted. (The material referred to is as follows:) STAUNTON AND AUGUSTA COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, Hon. W. M. WHITTINGTON, Committee on Flood Control, Staunton, Va., April 30, 1946. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. HONORABLE AND DEAR SIR: Attached is a resolution opposing Government competition with private industry, particularly in the field of electric power, which was passed unanimously by the board of directors of the Staunton and Augusta County Chamber of Commerce on April 29, 1946. Signatures of most of the directors are shown on a separate sheet. Your committee, we are confident, will give serious consideration to this important subject before making any recommendations. Respectfully, W. H. BOOZER, President. RESOLUTION OPPOSING GOVERNMENT COMPETITION WITH PRIVATE INDUSTRY Authorized and approved by the Directors of the Staunton-Augusta County Chamber of Commerce, April 29, 1946 Whereas the Federal Government proposes the development of multipurpose dams including power generation in connection with certain Virginia rivers in competition with private industry; and Whereas the multipurpose dams contemplated and proposed involve permanent inundation of whole towns and large areas of productive farmlands, highways, schools, churches, graveyards, railroads, all of which will have a major effect on the entire State economy; and Whereas it seems unwise for the Federal Government to spend large sums of money for power generation and transmission facilities when it is operating on a deficit budget, and at a time when all available labor and material are urgently needed for veterans' housing and reconversion; and Whereas we are unalterably opposed to any form of Government competition with the business and the industry of its citizens under any guise whatsoever, and Whereas flood-control dams can be built for a fraction of the cost of the multipurpose dams and would involve only periodic flooding of small land areas. Now, therefore, we, the directors of the Staunton-Augusta County Chamber of Commerce, whose signatures appear on the attached sheet, respectfully request the United States Government to defer approval of any flood-control dams involving power generation in Virginia until the facts concerning the individual projects, including the various flood-control methods, and the effects on the State economy, are widely publicized so that the citizens may be informed and given ample opportunity to express their views. April 29, 1946. Signed by 23 directors. Mr. BOOZER. I also have a photostatic copy of a petition signed by 25 citizens of Staunton County, pressing opposition to the development of the Federal Government multipurpose dams on various Virginia rivers which will generate power for sale in competition with private industry. The CHAIRMAN. It will be inserted in the record at this point. (The photostatic copy of the petition referred to is as follows:) STAUNTON AND AUGUSTA COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, Hon. WILL N. WHITTINGTON, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. HONORABLE AND DEAR SIR: Respectfully submitted herewith is a photostatic copy of a petition signed by prominent citizens of this community expressing opposition to the development by the Federal Government of multipurpose dams on various Virginia rivers which will generate power for sale in competition with private industry. The original of this petition has been sent to His Excellency William M. Tuck, Governor of Virginia. It is earnestly hoped that you will request deferment of approval of any program of flood-control dams in Virginia involving power generation until the citizens generally throughout the State can become informed of all the facts. Respectfully, W. H. BOOZER, Chairman, Staunton and Augusta County Chamber of Commerce. To The Honorable WILL N. WHITTINGTON, Chairman of the Flood Control Committee, House of Representatives. We, the undersigned citizens of the State of Virginia, understand that the Federal Government proposes the development of multipurpose dams on various Virginia rivers which will generate power for sale in competition with private industry; that the dams contemplated and proposed will permanently inundate whole towns as well as large areas of productive farm lands, highways, schools, churches, graveyards and railroads, all of which will have a tremendous effect on the economy of the entire State as a whole; and that other methods of flood control might be adopted, involving only periodic flooding of small land areas, on a much more economical basis than that of the proposed multipurpose dams. Therefore, being unalterably opposed to Government competition with the business and industry of its citizens under any guise whatsoever, and feeling that a program of this magnitude will vitally affect the economy of the entire State, we respectfully petition you to request deferment of approval of any program of flood-control dams in Virginia involving power generation until the citizens generally throughout the State can become informed of the facts relative to each individual project and the probable effects upon the economy of the State as a whole and its natural resources, and may have an opportunity to express their views in favor of or against such a program. The CHAIRMAN. We will now hear from Col. Hugh Everett, Jr. STATEMENT OF COL. HUGH EVERETT, JR., ASSISTANT BRIDGE ENGINEER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY SYSTEM Mr. EVERETT. I have a letter here signed by our chief engineer which I would like to introduce for the record. The CHAIRMAN. What is the point of the letter? Mr. EVERETT. The point is that we have just learned of this hearing on Tuesday. We have not had an opportunity to study the situation and find out exactly what is involved. We understand that this new dam will raise the water over our tracks 11 feet if there is a repetition of the 1942 flood. We want to go on record as opposing the authorization of this dam until the backwater matter has been investigated by independent, competent, and impartial engineers. That is the substance of it. The CHAIRMAN. That is your point? Mr. EVERETT. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. You understand that if your railroad is flooded, whether it has been heretofore flooded or not, and whether the water goes up 4 feet or 11 feet, the Government will raise that railroad or compensate you for damages, do you not? Mr. EVERETT. Predicated on a future flood? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. EVERETT. If flood ever comes, yes; but if the pool does not overflow, but a flood perhaps 10 years from now The CHAIRMAN. Congress cannot insure what is going to happen in the future. We may have another Noah's flood down here. We are talking about the overflows in the reservoir. If they affect you, inundate your railroad, whether it has been inundated before or not, under the law you would be compensated for damages. You may file your letter. (The letter referred to is as follows:) SOUTHERN RAILWAY SYSTEM, OFFICE OF CHIEF ENGINEER, Washington 13, D. C., May 2, 1946. Subject: Proposed improvement of Rappahannock River and tributaries in Virginia. Hon. WILLIAM WHITTINGTON, Chairman, Committee on Flood Control, House of Representatives. DEAR SIR: I understand your commitee is to consider the proposal of the United States Army engineers to construct a multipurpose dam on Rappahannock River between Remington and Fredericksburg at or near Salem Church, Va. When we were first acquainted with this proposal we were given to understand that the project would not increase the height of floodwaters in the vicinity of our crossings of Rappahannock River at Remington and the Rapidan River at Rapidan, Va. We have now been advised that after the dam is constructed as proposed a flood of the same intensity as the 1942 flood will result in overtopping our tracks at Remington by approximately 11 feet. The 1942 flood overtopped our tracks by about 3 feet at Remington. Southern Railway Co. was not formally advised of today's hearing and did not learn that the hearing was to be held until Tuesday of this week. We have, therefore, not had time to make a thorough investigation of how the dam will affect us. I understand the Army engineers claim that no additional flooding will result from the construction of the dam proposed, but in view of the conflict of opinion, Southern Railway Co. wishes to go on record as opposing any dam construction which might result in floodwaters reaching elevations higher than in the past, and also wishes to go on record as opposing the issuance of any authority for the construction of this dam until the backwater matter has been investigated by independent, competent, and impartial engineers. Yours very truly, J. B. AKERS. The CHAIRMAN. Is there anyone else to be heard? Mr. MOORE. My name is T. Justin Moore, counsel for the Virginia Electric Power Co. We have one witness on behalf of the power company, whom we wish to introduce, Col. F. W. Scheidenhelm, who is a distinguished hydraulic engineer and was one of the principal consultants on the Norris Dam. |