of Interior would be the authorized sales agency for the Federal Government. In Falcon we deliver the power at the busbar to a commercial firm. However, the sales are arranged by the Department of Interior.

CONTROL OVER WATER FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES

Senator HICKENLOOPER. So far as the use of the water is concerned that comes out of this reservoir for irrigation, who regulates that and who gets what proportion of that amount?

Mr. HEWITT. All water in the Rio Grande is divided in accordance with its source. We have in the United States title to all of the water which originates within the United States, plus one-third of the water which comes from five tributaries arising in Mexico above Falcon Dam, including the Conchos River which is the largest of the tributaries to which I refer. When this water is impounded in Falcon Dam or will be impounded in Amistad Dam, we know from our water accounting, which is accomplished by the U.S. Section and by the Mexican Section combined, and agree as to the ownership of this water, exactly how much water belonging to the United States and belonging to Mexico is in each of these reservoirs.

We then release water from these reservoirs, as requested by the State of Texas or by the authorized representative of the State.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. If we should use all the water that is allocated to us and Mexico does not use their portion of the water, it would just continue to flow down the river; is that correct?

Mr. HEWITT. If we use all of our water, and Mexico doesn't use all of hers, I imagine that Mexican water would be contained behind Falcon Dam, and would remain there until it was required for the use in irrigating the Mexican acres.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. And then to that extent it would not bring in additional acres.

Mr. HEWITT. No, sir; I don't think so, because there would be no additional water available to the United States.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. I mean additional acres in Mexico. Mr. HEWITT. Well, Mexico is, I would say, just about as limited as the United States is insofar as the supply of water is concerned. I don't believe that they can bring in additional acreage without taking out some of the acreage which they have under irrigation at present.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Well, if they impound this water on a reliable basis they would be in a different position so far as irrigation is concerned than they would if they could only use the water when it was in flood or coming down in volume and could not use it when it was dry.

Mr. HEWITT. The majority of the area which is under irrigation both on the U.S. side and on the Mexican side is below Falcon Dam. There may be on the Mexican side some additional acreage brought under irrigation below the proposed Amistad Dam. However, at the present time Mexico is using most of the water which is impounded in Falcon for the irrigation of the lower area.

METHOD OF OPERATION OF POWERPLANTS

Senator HICKENLOOPER. If a powerplant is built on the Mexican side and a powerplant is built on the U.S. side, the Texas side, how is

that going to be financed? Will the Mexicans go ahead and build that powerplant and then we give them a check for it or will we build the powerplant and the Mexicans give us a check for half of it?

Do we have supervisory control over the efficiency or the type of plant built on the Mexican side?

Mr. HEWITT. I can best explain that by explaining how we operate at Falcon. We have two separate plants there. We keep very careful records of what current is generated in our own plant and also in the Mexican plant. We total the amount of current generated each month, in fact, we do it every day. We divide the current generated by two, and we put our half on the wire to a commercial firm in the United States, and we get the proceeds for one-half of the current which is generated.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Is the same amount of current generated on the Mexican side as on the U.S. side?

Mr. HEWITT. What we attempt is to equalize the number of generator hours during which each plant operates. Now that is not always practical, but in the period during which these plants have been in operation, I would say that the number of generator hours operated by Mexico and by the United States probably do not differ by 1 percent.

MAINTENANCE COSTS

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Now so far as the supervision of this dam is concerned, and its maintenance and all that, who is to handle that? Mr. HEWITT. All of the facilities which are located on the Mexican side of the river will be maintained by Mexico. All of the facilities on the U.S. side of the river will be maintained by the United States. Senator HICKENLOOPER. And are we expected to pay any part of the maintenance on the Mexican side?

Mr. HEWITT. No, sir; we are not.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. So that the maintenance of the dam from the thread of the stream on into Mexico clear over to the end of the earth dam is to be maintained by Mexico; is that correct?

Mr. HEWITT. That is correct. That is the way we do at Falcon.

RECOMMENDATION AGAINST FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION OF A POWERPLANT

Senator HICKENLOOPER. In view of the Federal Power Commission's position that the dependable capacity for Amistad Dam would be zero and in view of your statement that the International Boundary and Water Commission feels bound by that position of the Federal Power Commission, it is a little hard for me to understand why you are supporting the building of a powerplant.

Simply because the House of Representatives put it in the bill, it would hardly seem that that would be a justification from an engineering standpoint or an economic standpoint or anything else.

Mr. HEWITT. I believe the State Department feels that the bill should be supported. We are a part generally under the control of the State Department so far as policy is concerned and I think we take our position from them.

The CHAIRMAN. Why does the State Department feel that way? Mr. OSBORNE. I may say, I don't believe that the State Department takes the position that we favor the construction of the powerplant by the Federal Government.

The CHAIRMAN. I can't hear you.

Mr. OSBORNE. I say I don't believe that I can state that the Department of State favors specifically the construction of the Federal powerplant. We don't disagree with the Federal Power Commission. However, we do feel that in supporting this bill we are supporting the dam. We want the dam to be completed. We are not attempting to pass on the federal power question.

FEASIBILITY OF CONSTRUCTION OF A GAS-GENERATING PLANT

The CHAIRMAN. Is it true that in this area there are vast quantities of natural gas available, just across the border in Mexico? Aren't very large amounts, in the number of 200 million or 300 million of cubic feet a day, being exported out of Mexico into the Texas Eastern Gas Transmission system?

Mr. OSBORNE. There is.

The CHAIRMAN. Wouldn't the gas-generating plant be most economical in that area, if you need power?

Mr. OSBORNE. I am not an expert on powerplants.

The CHAIRMAN. You don't know anything about that. Do you, Mr. Hewitt?

Mr. HEWITT. I am sure there is a considerable amount of gas being
exported from Mexico. They are shipping it all the way to New
York. It is coming across the Rio Grande at the present time.
The CHAIRMAN. Where does it come across?

Mr. HEWITT. There is one crossing in the vicinity of Reynosa.
The CHAIRMAN. It is not very far from there, is it?

Mr. HEWITT. It is not very far from there.

The CHAIRMAN. Pardon me, go ahead.

RECOMMENDATION AGAINST FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION OF A POWERPLANT

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Then if the Senate took out of the bill the provisions for the building of the powerplant, I suppose you would still support the bill?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Where the Federal Power Commission already takes a position that, in its own language, the dependable capacity of the power of the Amistad Dam would be zero, if the powerplants are built in connection with this dam, wouldn't it be just a short time until people would be over here asking to build steamplants?

We have seen that happen in the TVA.

Mr. HEWITT. I don't think there will be any

Senator HICKENLOOPER. The steamplant business is wagging the hydraulic end of the dog down there.

Mr. HEWITT. I think the REA have a steamplant in the area. However, there is no intention on the part of the International Boundary and Water Commission to request the construction of a steamplant.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. I know there is no intention on your part now but the TVA was sold to the country, too, on the basis that power would only be an incident to reclamation and a few things down there and they would only use the water that was otherwise going to waste. But now maybe 70 or 80 percent of the power produced down there is produced by steamplants built by the Government.

Mr. HEWITT. Our policy on this is that the production of hydroelectric energy is purely incidental to the use of water for irrigation purposes and flood control.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Well, from a practical standpoint, it is zero, isn't it?

Mr. HEWITT. No, I don't think so, Senator.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. I mean there are periods of time when the water will pour over there and you can turn turbines, but from the standpoint of producing firm reliable power

Mr. HEWITT. Firm power is possible, and if history repeats itself, during a considerable period of years. However in accordance with the standard operating procedure of the Federal Power Commission, they have to say that there is no firm power. We agree with that. But we do also believe that in the majority of years that there will be power which we can sell for an appreciable amount, and therefore we believe that there will in many a year be a capacity payment which will be far greater than the 10 mills per kilowatt-hour which has been given as the value of dump power generated by this proposed plant.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Well, without doubt you can produce power part of the time down there. But it is the part of the time when the water is low and the power can't be produced that generates the movement for the Government to come in and build steamplants and then more steamplants to produce so-called firm power. That is what apparently happens in these cases. And we ought to know what we are getting into.

Mr. HEWITT. Well, I can't prophesy, sir.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. You can't prophesy but we can use hindsight a little.

Senator AIKEN. How about predicting?

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Well, I don't know about that. I suppose we could.

But as you see it, is it fair to say that in fact, the only firm benefits that come out of this are flood control and a more reliable water supply for irrigation?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, that is correct on the basis of the Federal Power Commission formula.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Those are or could be classified as the reliable, long-range benefits that would come out of the construction of this dam.

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir. During the hearings before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, there was testimony from a local electric power company stating that they would or that they believed that without the construction of a Federal powerplant they could build a powerplant and use the falling water for power generation. They believed that the revenues from the use of falling water would amount to about $340,000 a year, which leads me to the belief that possibly the figure of 10 mills which is given as the basic figure by the Federal Power Commission, may be somewhat of an understatement.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. You mean it might be more than that?
Mr. HEWITT. Might be more than that.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. The cost would be more than that?
Mr. HEWITT. No, the revenue would be more than that.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. The revenue would be more than that.

HEIGHT OF THE DAM

Let me ask you this: This dam is calculated to be built at a certain height?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. If the power project were taken completely out of this bill, with no provision for power in connection with this dam, would you build the dam as high?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. You would build the dam exactly the same height; is that correct?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir; for flood control we need 2,110,000 acre-feet, and for conservation we need 3,550,000 acre-feet of storage.

Senator AIKEN. You say 2 million acre-feet?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir; for flood control storage.
Senator AIKEN. What area would be needed?

Mr. HEWITT. At maximum flood stage there will be 87,000 acres required in the United States and Mexico.

Senator AIKEN. That is what you would have to acquire?

Mr. HEWITT. That is both in the United States and in Mexico. Senator AIKEN. How much of that would be in the United States? Mr. HEWITT. There are 56,000 acres required in the United States.

COSTS FOR LAND DAMAGE

Senator AIKEN. I see. That is about 400-odd dollars for land damage that you anticipate if the land costs are $23 million.

Mr. HEWITT. Well, we are figuring total costs of land and relocations on that basis, yes.

Senator AIKEN. Is that based on the average value of the land down through there?

Mr. HEWITT. No, sir; it is not.

Senator AIKEN. I wouldn't think so.

Mr. HEWITT. But when you start relocating railroads, that is expensive.

Senator AIKEN. What is the situation there with respect to the railroads?

Mr. HEWITT. The Southern Pacific operates one passenger train each day each way, but there are many freights.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Carlson?

PROJECT'S BENEFIT-COST RATIO

Senator CARLSON. Mr. Chairman, just one or two questions. Those of us who live out in the Middle West where we construct large numbers of reservoirs are always concerned about the ratio of costs to benefits. You gave us that figure yesterday. What was it? Mr. HEWITT. I gave you an overall benefit-cost ratio yesterday of 1.6 to 1 on a 50-year basis, and 1.9 to 1 on a 100-year basis.

Senator CARLSON. In arriving at that ratio of benefits, how much did you allow for flood control?

Mr. HEWITT. The flood control benefits were $1,861,000.

Senator AIKEN. Annually?

Senator CARLSON. On a percentage basis what would that be? You have a ratio of 1.6 to 1.