STATEMENT OF A. E. BLAESS, CHIEF ENGINEER ILLINOIS CENTRAL SYSTEM, CHICAGO, ILL.; CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE OF ENGINEERS REPRESENTING MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROADS AFFECTED BY FLOOD-CONTROL PROJECT Mr. BLAESS. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am appearing here as chairman of the committee of engineers representing the railroads located in the Mississippi Valley and affected by this flood-control project. I merely wish to make a general statement applicable to all the railroads. I think there are one or two of the roads that desire to make statements on the situation as it affects their individual lines. There are a number of rail lines whose staffs have from necessity long been in contact with the Mississippi River flood situation, particularly as it affects the maintenance of continuous and dependable transportation service, universally recognized as an important element in the economic life of the community and Nation. The engineers of these rail lines have given much study and thought to this flood problem, not only as it affects the immediate interests of their properties, but also as it affects the prosperity and well being of the territories which those properties serve. After the flood of 1927 the chief engineers of these lines formed an engineering committee, of which I was selected chairman, to coordinate their thoughts and studies and to express their combined judgment upon certain general and fundamental principles of flood control. As one of its activities, this committee gave careful consideration to the adopted project set forth in the flood-control act of 1928, and formulated a memorandum of suggestions for its modification at such time as modification should be appropriate. This memorandum comprises a statement of nine general principles, each followed by a brief explanation, and covers four pages in all. I ask leave to file a copy of this memorandum for the record of the Flood Control Committee. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I move that Mr. Blaess be given permission to file his memorandum. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, that will be done. (The memorandum referred to is as follows:) SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS IN THE ADOPTED PLAN OF FLOOD CONTROL The following modifications of the adopted plan of flood control are herein recommended: 1. Elimination of fuseplug levees and substitution of weirs or controlled spillways. (a) A fuseplug levee is described as a relatively weak section of the levee designed to break from the action of the flood waters, in other words form a crevasse. The history of levee breaks on the Mississippi River is such that there is no way of determining how much water will escape through a crevasse. (b) A crevasse discharging a large volume of water into a floodway will erode to such a great depth that overflow will continue long after the necessity for diversion has passed, and since it will be impracticable to repair a crevasse in the fuseplug levees immediately after the water has receded to the proper level for overflow to cease, a diversion of water through the floodway will be permitted when it is unnecessary and undesirable. (c) There can be no control of diversion following the crevasse of fuseplug levees and there will be discharges at stages of the river much below that required for safety. Such diversion is undesirable for the reason that it would cause deterioration of the main channel below the point of diversion. (d) A fixed weir to take water from the river at a predetermined stage would appear to be more desirable as it would give a certain definite control of the stage of the river at which diversion occurs. By proper design it will limit the maximum diversion for maximum probable floods, and definitely establish the point of diversion permitting a definite limitation of the physical adjustments to conform to such necessary diversion. 2. Narrowing and, if necessary, dredging of diversion channels in the Boeuf and Atchafalaya Basins, the guide levees to be raised and the diversion channels cleared of trees and vegetation, and so maintained. (a) Uncleared and uncontrolled floodways or diversion channels are objectionable as it is impossible to estimate with any degree of certainty the depth or stage of water, the width of stream or even the location of the main stream in wide uncleared floodways. (b) The factors influencing the uncertainty of operation of wide uncontrolled floodways are the width, topography, vegetation, and developments which may take place during periods when the floodway is not in operation. (c) The maximum ultimate carrying capacity of a narrow defined floodway, cleared and maintained, can be determined with reasonable accuracy, and the discharge area completely utilized, thus limiting the land taken to the requirements, and at the same time reducing to the minimum the expenditures for the adjustment of property affected. 3. Levees should be of equal height and strength on both sides of the main river. (a) The adopted plan should provide that neither side of the river sacrifice any degree of protection to which it has been developed. 4. The raising of the taper levees north of the St. Francis River to full height and section. (a) The adopted plan should provide a levee line on the west side of the river to full grade and section from levee mile 183 to the end of the existing levee system eliminating the inferior levee section proposed to be 2.4 feet below standard levee grade. (b) Storage in the St. Francis Basin will have so little effect on maximum river stages (about 0.3 foot) that the retention of a low inferior levee section cannot be justified as a necessary factor or safeguard for the main river plan. 5. Proper protection of the backwater areas by the building of guide levees up the tributary streams, or other appropriate means. (a) Tributary backwater basins should be protected by guide levees along the streams or by other effective means, against increased inundation due to increase in backwater heights resulting from main river protection. These basins should be afforded the maximum degree of protection consistent with the plan as a whole. 6. The control of water diverted from the Mississippi River to the Atchafalaya. (a) The adopted plan provides for the removal of one or both of the sills in the Atchafalaya River which were completed in 1889. The purpose of these sills was to limit the maximum channel discharge of the Atchafalaya River to 200,000 second-feet and restrict the diversion from the Mississippi River. (b) Even with two of the six sills originally contemplated in place the cross sectional area of the Atchafalaya increased 37.5 percent in the 10-year period from 1917 to 1927, while the discharge capacity of the Atchafalaya has increased to approximately 500,000 second feet. (c) Diversion through the Old River outlet should be under definite control and made only when necessary to relieve the Mississippi River at critical stages. 7. Adequate freeboard in excess of 1 foot should be provided for levees. (a) A freeboard of only 1 foot for earth levees does not provide sufficient margin for protection. It will not compensate for the variations in the relationship between the various gages and other influences such as wave-wash, local variation in channel capacity, etc. (b) An ample levee grade line and a freeboard of at least 3 feet should be provided for all levees under the adopted plan. 8. Revision of the levee grades between Cape Girardeau and Birds Point, Mo. (a) The levee grades between Cape Girardeau and Birds Point as contemplated under the adopted plan are too low to provide protection against maximum probable floods. (b) This conclusion is based on a study of published records of the Mississippi River Commission pertaining to gage heights and volume of major floods, also on statements on "flood probabilities and possibilities" containe in the adopted plan, and supplement 29 United States Weather Bureau, October 18, 1927, table 10 and maximum flood possibilities, page 33. (c) The proposed 1928 levee grade line established by the Mississippi River Commission under the adopted plan is below and greatly out of agreement with records of the 1844 flood above Commerce, Mo. The 1844, 1882, 1883, 1912, and 1913 flood stages and estimated volumes so far exceeded 1927 in stage or volume in the vicinity of Cape Girardeau and Cairo that it is unsafe to use the 1927 records alone as a determining factor in establishing safe levee heights for a maximum probable flood in this locality. Also, the 1929 records indicate that errors exist in the 1928 grade line as adopted in the flood-control plan and which was fixed largely on 1927 records. 9. Extension of the plan to include that portion of the river above Cairo in which flood heights are increased by the adopted plan. (a) The official upper limits of the adopted plan of flood control are at Cape Girardeau on the west (Missouri) side of the river, and at Thebes on the east (Illinois) side, but no protection is afforded on the east side above the northwest corner of the Cairo District levee at Cache. (b) The effect of the levees provided in the plan south of Cape Girardeau extends upstream to the vicinity of Chester, Ill. (50 to 60 miles), in which portion of the river flood heights will be increased by the carrying out of the adopted plan. Protection against these increased floods should be included in the plan on both sides of the river above Cape Girardeau. A. F. BLOESS, Chief Engineer, Illinois Central System. Chief Engineer, Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. S. GOUCH, Chief Engineer, St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. Assistant Chief Engineer, Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. Mr. BLAESS. Although these nine points are all considered pertinent at this time, I will comment here only on the following: First: The execution of the adopted plan south of Cape Girardeau will have as one direct result the increase in height of the project flood for at least 60 miles by river above Cape Girardeau, or to the lattitude of Chester, Ill. Levee grades in Missouri and Illinois along this stretch of river have not been revised since 1914 and the levees are inadequate for this added burden or for a flood equal to 1927. It is recommended that new levee grades be established and that these levees be brought to the grade and section found appropriate for full protection. Second: The adopted project refers to the possible expediency of leaving certain sections of the front-line Mississippi River levees at a lower grade than the corresponding levees on the opposite side of the river, thus causing the inferior levees to be overtopped and 1 This report was approved in substance by Mr. Hadley prior to his death November 11. fail from the effect of the flood against which the project was designed to protect. It is recommended that levees be built, not to fail, but to stand, and that, as a fundamental principle of equality, such levees as are provided be brought to equal grade and section and provide equal protection, as respects the two sides of the river; and, to the extent that backwater areas are needed for storage, that this storage be provided by leaving sufficient unleveed openings at the mouths of the tributaries, rather than by planning for the overtopping and crevassing of front-line levees. It is also recommended that definite conclusions be reached as to the extent to which these backwater areas are necessary for storage from the viewpoint of material reduction in main river flood crests, and that where such storage value is found immaterial, levee protection along the tributaries be provided for these areas, which are flooded by the backwater of the Mississippi over continually greater areas and continually greater depths, as the general improvement of the front-line levee system proceeds. Where and to the extent that these areas may be found necessary as storage reservoirs to reduce the height of flood crests in the main river, suitable and just compensation should be made to lands and properties therein. Third: For reasons briefed in its memorandum, the railway engineers' committee recommends the elimination of fuse-plug levees and the substitution of fixed weirs or controlled spillways for the purpose of diverting from the present channel of the Mississippi such water as is to be diverted therefrom. To the extent that fixed weirs or controlled spillways are adopted for diversion we endorse the Markham report of 1935. THE MARKHAM PLAN OF 1935 With reference to the Markham plan of 1935, the railway engineers are not appearing in opposition; in fact, it is our judgment that this plan is an improvement over the adopted plan insofar as it applies to the passage of flood waters of the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico; but there are some features of the plan which in our judgment are not sufficiently comprehensive to provide adequately for the public convenience. One of the main national purposes involved in the protection of the valley is to maintain the integrity of adequate transportation facilities. It is our opinion that the recommendations with respect to such facilities, as developed in the testimony at this hearing, do not satisfy this basic principle. It is our opinion that the established highway and railroad crossings should be preserved in order that there may not be interference with established routes necessary for the uninterrupted flow of interstate commerce and of transportation service to local communities. The railroads are willing to cooperate with the Chief of Engineers with the view, if possible, of working out and reaching a mutually satisfactory plan and method of procedure in the execution of this project. However, we emphasize the necessity of maintaining uninterrupted and dependable transportation service at all times. This is particularly essential during flood-time emergencies. With reference to the suggestion that the determination of what transportation facilities crossed by the floodways are to be preserved. be left to the discretion of the Chief of Engineers, we feel that his views are and should be authoritative from the viewpoint of national defense and military necessity; but we question whether the burden of determining this question from the viewpoint of public convenience should be placed solely upon the Chief of Engineers. We suggest that it be determined either by the Congress or through the cooperative deliberations of all affected interests, including duly constituted administrative and regulatory bodies commonly exercising jurisdiction over important questions of this nature. PRESERVATION OF TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES It is our opinion that any relocations, adjustments, and modifications which are deemed necessary to preserve at all times uninterrupted transportation for the convenience of the public, and incident to the execution of the entire adopted project, including modifications, if any, should be deemed a part of the cost of the project to be borne by the United States. It is further our opinion that additional cost of maintenance, operation, and renewal, if any, should be deemed a portion of the cost of such readjustments, relocations, and modifications. Only in this way will there be completely fulfilled that express declaration of policy in the adopted project, avowing the intention to prevent, among other things, a repetition of dislocation of the economic life of the valley and interruption of interstate commerce (H. Doc. No. 90, 70th Cong., 1st sess, sec. 29). This concludes the general remarks I have to make applicable to the railroads our committee represents. I would like to make a few remarks pertaining specifically to the properties of the Illinois Central system lines, by whom I am employed. The Illinois Central Railroad system lines will be crossed by the Eudora Floodway between Shreveport and Meridian on their main east and west line through the Vicksburg gateway; so far as the treatment of that line is concerned, it is covered by the general principles outlined in this memorandum in the general statement I made applicable to all railroads affected. We will also be affected by the detention reservoirs recommended for the protection of the Yazoo Basin in about four different places; as to just what extent and where, we have, thus far, not been able to get the necessary details. I wish to state that we will be very glad to cooperate with the Army engineers with a view of working out a mutually satisfactory plan for relocating, raising, or adjusting our tracks and facilities at the several locations where required in connection with the construction of these detention reservoirs. We feel that the basic principles laid down in the general memorandum heretofore presented, which is applicable to all the railroads, should be likewise extended to cover whatever changes in railroad tracks and facilities are necessary in connection with the construction of these detention reservoirs. Most of that work will be in the vicinity of Grenada and between there and Greenwood, I think. |