General REYBOLD. All the floods that I quoted in my general statement?

Mr. POULSON. Yes.

General REYBOLD. No, but we have information on that. Would you like to have it inserted in the record?

Mr. POULSON. Well, I think the rest of them will be interested in it.

The CHAIRMAN. How is that, Mr. Poulson? I didn't hear it.

Mr. POULSON. The total flood loss we have had, in dollars and cents, what it has meant to the country in the past 12 months; I was just wondering.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood the general would try to give us that more in detail as we proceed with the hearings. All right.

(The information on flood damage referred to is as follows:)

Preliminary investigations indicate that about 9,000,000 acres were inundated and that damages will total about $100,000,000.

Mr. Troutman, any questions at this time?
Mr. TROUTMAN. No questions at this time.
Mr. GRIFFITHS. No, thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. General, we are obliged to you, sir, and if you will come around here I will be glad for you to sit at the head of the table with me, and we shall proceed with General Robins.

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. THOMAS M. ROBINS, ASSISTANT CHIEF OF ENGINEERS

The CHAIRMAN. Will you state your name for the record?
General ROBINS. Thomas M. Robins.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your official position?

General ROBINS. Assistant Chief of Engineers.

The CHAIRMAN. How long have you been Assistant Chief of Engineers?

General ROBINS. A little over 3 years.

The CHAIRMAN. How long have you been with the corps? We won't ask you how old you are right now, but, generally, for the information of the committee

General ROBINS. 37 years.

The CHAIRMAN. 37 years a member of the corps. As the members of the committee know, General Robins has been adviser of the committee in previous flood-control hearings. General, we will be glad to have your statement at this time.

General ROBINS. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I should like to review briefly the progress made toward Nation-wide flood control, to outline the present status of the program authorized by Congress, and to report progress that is being made on advance planning in order that flood-control projects will be ready for their important place in post-war rehabilitation.

Beginning with the Omnibus Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, this committee has formulated and the Congress has passed 9 general flood control acts-in 1936, 1938, and 1941. Important supplements and amendments were also enacted in 1937, 1939, and 1940. This legislation has provided total authorizations of $930,400,000 for 485 projects located throughout the length and breadth of the Nation and in Alaska. For carrying on this large program Congress has

appropriated $551,900,000, of which $526,300,000 is for construction. Thirty-eight reservoirs and 92 local protection projects have been completed. Maintenance is being carried on where that work is by law a Federal responsibility. Elsewhere the completed projects have been turned over to responsible local interests for maintenance and operation as required by law. In short a very substantial beginning has been made on the task of providing safety from the ravages of uncontrolled flood waters wherever authorized by Congress.

But the war has brought the general flood-control program of construction to a virtual halt. In the Flood Control Act of August 18, 1941, Congress authorized 64 new projects and increased the money authority for 9 previously approved general plans for river basins. In approving that act, however, the President directed that no new flood-control projects should be undertaken unless they are of direct importance to the defense of the Nation. Under this policy the Berlin Reservoir project

The CHAIRMAN. What project was that?

General ROBINS. The Berlin Reservoir on the Mahoning River. The CHAIRMAN. In Ohio?

General ROBINS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. In the general Ohio, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh industrial area?

I see.

General ROBINS. Yes, sir; in the Youngstown area. The CHAIRMAN. Oh, the Youngstown area. General ROBINS. It was built for flood control and industrial water supply in the steel-producing Mahoning Valley in Ohio.

Local protection projects at Tulsa, Okla., and Prattville, Ala., are under way to protect important industries producing war materials. Three multiple-purpose dams were started early last year at the direct request of the War Production Board to augment the power-producing facilities in areas where power shortages were foreseen, and designs were completed for two additional flood-control and power projects. But the majority of the projects authorized in 1941 have not been undertaken because they have not been determined to have direct war importance, although they are unquestionably worthy and justified. The Department has followed the principle that the finding as to importance to the war of any given project should be made by the Federal war agency directly concerned with the facility protected.

In other words, the Engineering Department does not undertake to pass on the necessity to the war effort of the facilities for which protection is sought.

Not only has the war necessitated delay in starting many needed projects but it has forced the temporary suspension or curtailment of a great many other projects begun long before Pearl Harbor. The difficulty in securing steel and other items under the priority system forced the stoppage during the summer of 1942 of several projects which could not command sufficiently high priority ratings in the opinions of those charged with the responsibility for assigning priorities. As the year 1942 progressed the need for critical materials, manpower, and construction equipment became so acute that, in order to conserve these vital requirements for successful warfare, the W. P. B. late in that year directed the stoppage of all Federal public works except those projects needed for the war and those which were nearly completed or for definite reasons could not be stopped.

After reviewing the Department's flood-control program the War Production Board ordered the immediate suspension of 35 projects and the curtailment of 32 others to the minimum extent necessary for protection of the work in place. In carrying out this directive I am glad to say that we have been able in many instances so to arrange the work that the partially completed structures will provide substantial flood protection. At the present time the approved work needed to bring projects to safe stopping points is practically completed and, except for the war essential projects, construction on the general floodcontrol program has been practically stopped. These projects which have been stopped in the midst of construction are left in such condition that work may be resumed without delay at the end of the war or at any earlier date the situation may permit. In fact, many contracts have been merely suspended without formal termination and can be reinitiated by the same contractors on very short notice.

Investigations of rivers and streams for flood-control and allied water uses is an important part of the national flood-control program and there are many authorizations now in effect covering studies of flood-control problems in numerous localities. The survey program has, however, also been curtailed in accordance with instructions of higher authority and funds appropriated for that purpose have been impounded except in the case of surveys needed for integration of plans for areas. A number of reports were approaching completion when this policy became effective, and these are being completed, reviewed, and submitted to Congress as rapidly as practicable. The major investigations allowed to proceed are being carried forward without interference with the Department's war work and several of these will be completed in the field in the next few months. In all of its reports and investigations the Department gives careful and complete consideration to other water uses allied with flood control in order to develop multiple-purpose plans where desirable, and to be certain that projects recommended fit into the best over-all plans for development of the water resources of the streams under study.

Under authority already granted by the Congress, we are now designing many projects heretofore authorized so that they will be fully ready for actual construction work when the war ends. There will be no long period of preparation while a few engineers compute stresses and draw plans and workers stand idle. Our goal is to have projects on the shelf, as the President expressed it, ready for immediate advertising, when needed. I'm glad to report to you that already a number of projects are fully ready and others will soon be ready. These make a fine nest egg, but they are just a beginning. To keep flood control in its proper place in the public-works field will require many more completed designs and much concentrated engineering work in the coming months. The necessary funds for this work are carried in the War Department civil-functions appropriation bill recently passed by Congress.

The projects recommended by the Department in the reports submitted to Congress since the 1941 hearings embrace all variety of works, from small levee or channel-improvement projects costing a few thousand dollars to great multiple-purpose dam and reservoir projects to provide flood control and also collateral benefits from development of hydroelectric power, irrigation, and navigation. The

projects are spread throughout many States and localities. In fact, this diversity of type of construction and geographical distribution contribute greatly to the idea fitness of flood-control projects for the post-war public-works program. In general the smaller projects are located near the smaller communities where fewer returning soldiers will need employment. The large projects close to industrial cities can provide employment for large numbers of men now serving in the armed forces as well as for skilled and semiskilled workers who are now engaged in war industries. A detailed description of each recommended project before your committee awaiting authorization will be given as the hearings proceed, on the date scheduled for consideration of the region in which the project is located.

Authorization at an early date of the recommended projects which have accumulated since passage of the Flood Control Act of August 18, 1941, is necessary in order that advance planning of these projects can be undertaken. Also, in order that construction on a broad scale can be undertaken on flood-control work as soon as the war is over, it is necessary for Congress to increase now the authorizations for expenditures in the several drainage basins throughout the country. In this connection I should like to invite the attention of the committeee to the fact that the rising costs of construction make it impossible to design adequate projects within cost estimates prepared 2, 3, or more years ago. Whether or not costs will ever return to the levels we have been accustomed to using is conjectural, and I believe not susceptible of determination at this particular time. Also, the suspension of work on going projects has cost money and will result in increased total costs for the projects when completed after the war.

Your chairman and several members of the committee have said to me that they are anxious that flood-control projects needed to protect endangered war industries and establishments be built as quickly as possible. In most such cases coming to our attention the authorities already available are sufficient and the work has been undertaken. Instances have arisen, however, where flood-control authority is not available and it becomes necessary to seek authority and funds from military sources. Military funds are not always available and then precious time is lost. These situations suggest the possible desirability of a limited general authorization that will allow important protection for war establishments to be undertaken even though not specifically recommended and authorized in the established way.

An instance of that was cited by General Reybold in his testimony regarding the floods washing out the railroad in the vicinity of San Bernardino, Calif.

The CHAIRMAN. That was the floods of last winter?

General ROBINS. Yes, sir. We had no authority to go in there. There appears to be no way that funds can be provided from military sources to handle that situation, yet something ought to be done about it.

The CHAIRMAN. I wonder if that same thing isn't true in the recent May flood in the vicinity above the Pensacola Dam, for instance, or have you a sufficient report to be able to tell us whether transportation there was seriously interrupted?

General ROBINS. There probably will be some cases there, but in cases like pipe lines, for instance, oil lines, the Petroleum Administrator for War will have funds to restore that.

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed.

General ROBINS. I have concluded my general statement.

The CHAIRMAN. General Robins, for the information of the committee, regarding the projects that this committee is to investigate in the hearings scheduled, I am wondering if either you or Col. George R. Goethals, in charge of flood control in the office of the Chief of Engineers, at this point would read, and pass to the reporter a statement showing the name of the project or river and reference to the document on which favorable reports have been submitted to Congress since the passage of the Flood Control Act of August 18, 1941. Secondly, another statement or list showing the reports that have not been cleared but have been submitted to the Bureau of the Budget. Now, either you or Colonel Goethals, as you may suggest, may read that list, giving us the location of the river or project.

General ROBINS. I will ask Colonel Goethals to do that.

The CHAIRMAN. Col. George R. Goethals, in charge of flood-control projects in the office of the Chief of Engineers. Colonel Goethals.

STATEMENT OF COL. GEORGE R. GOETHALS, CHIEF OF THE FLOOD CONTROL BRANCH, OFFICE OF CHIEF OF ENGINEERS

Colonel GOETHALS. This is a statement showing the projects on which favorable reports have been submitted to Congress since the passage of the Flood Control Act of August 18, 1941 [reading]:

Favorable flood-control reports that have been submitted to Congress but not yet authorized

Report

Housatonic River, Conn., Mass., and N. Y....

Susquehanna River and tributaries, New York, Pennsylvania, and
Maryland.

Six Mile Creek, Logan County, Ark..

Fountaine Que Bouille (Fountain) River and its tributaries, Colorado. Mississippi River, Vicinity of Ste. Genevieve Levee and Drainage District, Mo.

Mississippi River, at and in the vicinity of Sabula, Iowa..

Galena River (Fever River), Ill. and Wis..

Illinois River, Ill..

Turkey River, Iowa..

Liberty Bend Cut-off, Kansas Citys, Kans, and Mo.

Short Creek and tributaries, Jefferson and Harrison Counties, Ohio.

Hocking River, Ohio, and in the vicinity of Athens, Ohio..

Cheat River, W. Va...

Youghiogheny River, Pa. and Md.

Conewango Creek and Davis Brook, N. Y.

Moose and Black Rivers, N. Y

Chittenango Creek and tributaries, New York.

Owasco Inlet, Owasco Outlet, and their tributaries, Cayuga and Tomp

kins Counties, N. Y.; Jericho Brook and Cold Spring Brook in Cayuga County, N. Y.

Ventura River, Ventura County, Calif.

San Diego River, Calif.

Kings River and Tulare Lake, Calif.

743,000

Palouse River and tributaries, Idaho and Washington.

Alkali Canyon, Oreg

Willapa River, Wash..

H. Doc. 452 (77-1)