Page images

storage that we will have in these big reservoirs we can span a drought such as the ones which we feel could be a 200- to 300-year drought and we will have enough water to carry on.

Senator ELLENDER. In other words you will have enough water to meet the situation that you have just talked about in the lower reaches of the Mississippi and also to produce the electricity that we are now contemplating will be produced through these dams?

Senator CASE. That is to produce firm power.
General POTTER. Yes.

Senator Case. Those will be the periods when there will be no secondary power or little secondary power.

General POTTER. It might be somewhat interfered with; yes.

To localize the sitnation in just one example, let me say that on the Kansas River, Mr. Chairman, at the city of Salina they have a powerplant which must have 33 cubic feet per second in order to operate. Only the operation of Kanopolis Reservoir, where we normally discharge 50 cubic feet a second, kept that power plant in full business all summer. If it had not been for Kanopolis, which was able to put out 50 cubic feet a second all summer long, that powerplant would have for 2 or 3 weeks at a time been on a short ration of water and hence on a short schedule.

Senator MUNDT. How about that low-water situation at Omaha. Had you not been able to let some water out of Fort Randall this year, would it not have been substantially worse?

General PcTTER. It would have fluctuated more wildly, because Fort Randall is less than a water-week away and enables us to keep very fine control of the level. What I am leading up to is this: That when we get all of the storage in these dams the Missouri Basin is going to be one basin where the newspapers can put big ads in saying “Come to our basin. We have plenty of water." " It may be almost the only basin in the country that will be able to say that. Maybe that is being a little too exuberant, but I think this year's operation has proved it.


The next highlight was the Floyd River flood which happened on the night of June 8, 1953. There was 11 inches of rain overnight. Overnight $26 million worth of damage was done and 10 lives were Jost. We were able to mobilize a considerable flood fight. We have repaired the channel to the city, inadequate though it is to do the ultimate job. As a measure of that inadequacy, the concrete-lined channel has a capacity of 26,000 cubic feet per second and the flood that came out was a 90,000-cubic-foot per second flood.

Due to the fact that we now have a million and a half acre-feet in Fort Randall which brings us up to the power pool and due to the fact that we hope to catch the end of the July rise in Garrison, it now being closed, we are going to be in a position to operate three reservoirs for low-water flow and for power starting in March, the month after next. In preparation for the operation of these reservoirs we have established in the Missouri River division a reservoir operation branch. We hold meetings after we have collected our data based on what we think the water-year is going to be.

As an example, in connection with this year's operation we called a meeting in June in my office at which all of the Federal agencies and the assigned representative of the governor of each State attended. We explained the proposal for the operation during the next year. They took the proposal home with all the data. We held our final meeting in August and came to a complete agreement as to how we would operate the reservoirs next year for each State based upon three conditions of water: Low, average, and high. We feel that this operation, this kind of management, with the people from the States being well familiar with the situations that confront us and them over the vears, will result in a standard operating procedure that will make the best use of this water for each State concerned. I say that advisedly because the operation of the river this year was only possible because of waters that came from Montana and Wyoming. Until we get Garrison filled up and Randall filled up, we are going to depend on those waters from those great Northern States.

As of now, they do not need those waters to the extent that we have them. We still have 13 million acre-feet in Fort Peck. The day will come when they will need them, and we hope that that day and the filling of the reservoirs will at least be coincident. As time goes on, the importance of the meetings to decide how we use that water will have greater and greater importance each year.


Senator MUNDT. At the low point this year, General, what was the percentage of depletion of water at Fork Peck!

General POTTER. We went from about 15 million acre-feet down to just under 12 million acre-feet. In the filling of Garrison Reservoir this next year, if we are lucky we can catch the Yellowstone flood at the end of July. If we are unlucky we will have to deplete Fort Peck and build up that pool.

Senator MUNDT. How much below 12 million feet can you go without imperiling the water development?

General POTTER. Down to about 5 million acre-feet if necessary. The power generators there can operate at full capacity on 6,000 second-feet. There were times this year when 2,000 second-feet were going into Fort Peck, and we were releasing 22,000 in order to keep 35,000 going by the lower river towns.

Senator Case. What you suggested there might, to people who are not familiar with the limitations of the O'Mahoney-Milliken amendment, suggest that the demands or the possible use of this water downstream would interfere with the supply expected to be available for the upstream States where the water originates. It is not true that the application of the so-called O'Mahoney-Millikin amendment to the Flood Control Act of 1944 assures to those upstream States whatever water is necessary for their beneficial consumption uses.

General POTTER. It very clearly says that, Senator Case. There is no doubt that the law means that the consumptive use of water in the States where is is generated has first priority.


[merged small][ocr errors]

The next highlight that I would like to indicate to the committee is the navigation situation on the lower river. For the first time we have contract carriers operating: We had five contract carriers operating this year. As the committee knows, the Federal Barge Line was sold, and they have commitments to operate on the river. The Sioux City to New Orleans line built, is still building, and will continue to build equipment designed for the Missouri River and are establishing their offices in Kansas City. We had over 150,000 tons of purely commercial traffic this year. That includes 1 million pounds of sugar to Omaha alone.

Senator THYE. General, before you go any further, was that upstream or downstream with your sugar?

General POTTER. The sugar was upstream, sir.

Senator THYE. I was wondering whether you had any sugar-beet movement there.

General POTTER. No, sir; we are not a beet country there, sir. Another item in the Kansas City area was considerable molasses from the gulf that was brought up there to make cattle cake. I feel that navigation is really starting and will continue because of the condition outlined on that chart. They are now assured of a steady river. We can guarantee 6 to 61, feet below Kansas City; next year, probably 7 feet, and about a half foot less to Omaha.

Senator ELLENDER. From where to where?
General POTTER. From Omaha to the mouth of the river.

Senator Young. Do you have any figures on the cost of possibly bringing navigation from Kansas City to Sioux City and what its yearly maintenance will be purely for navigational purposes ?


General POTTER. The river from Omaha to Sioux City, as you well know, was abandoned in 1949, but there is an item in the budget to go back into that work now. Navigation to Sioux City is authorized at 9-foot depth and will be available as soon as we are able to get back in that section of the river and put it in shape again.

Senator Young. You have a 9-foot channel now from Kansas City to Omaha ?

General POTTER. Nine-foot authorized channel, but it is only 612 to 7 .

Senator Young. How much more will it cost to bring it up to 9?

General POTTER. On each stretch of the river the figure is different. The remaining work from Kansas City to the mouth is $19 million, I believe; from Omaha to Kansas City, $30 million approximately ; and, from Sioux City to Omaha, in the neighborhood of $60 million.

CLERK's NOTE.-Based on the present estimated cost, the balances to complete the various sections are as follows: Omaha to Kansas City

$27, 891, 600 Kansas City to mouth

21, 622, 600 Sioux City to Omaha--

64, 820, 000 Senator Mundt. Did you give any figures on the movement of grain this year by navigation?

General POTTER. No, sir. Those figures are available and can be furnished the committee; but, due to the price differential between

Chicago and Kansas City, this was the first year that wheat has not moved downstream in rather large volume.

Senator Case. Do you not also have a study underway between Yankton and Sioux City?

General POTTER. There is a study underway; yes.
Senator Case. That is based on a 9-foot depth?
General POTTER. I believe it was a 9-foot channel; yes.
Senator CASE. What is the state of that survey?

General POTTER. I do not believe any date has been set on it, sir. It is more or less in abeyance, since the river from Omaha to Sioux City had no work done on it since 1949.

Senator Case. Are there funds currently available for that study? General POTTER. No, sir.

Senator CASE. Do you have some study money in the estimate for river and harbor surveys that could encompass that, or would that be a matter of allocation?

General POTTER. A matter of allocation.

Senator YOUNG. Would it be possible and feasible to change the upst ream dams like Fort Randall, Oahe, and Garrison so as to permit navigation sometime in the future if it was desired? Would it be a great undertaking, in other words, to provide navigation facilities at these dams?

General POTTER. It would be expensive, Senator. I have always felt that the kind of produce that we would move on those lakes, and there are 3 of them that are about 200 miles long, the bulk produce that we produce in the upper basin, would be subject to transfer around the dams from one barge system to another barge system until we got down to Yankton and then it would go into a final series of barges.

Senator YOUNG. It would be transfered around the dam itself.

General POTTER. Yes. I thought particularly of oil, for instance, that might move.

Senator CASE. I was discussing that particular subject the other day and it was suggested that both on oil and wheat it would be possible so far as downstream traflic is concerned to move it down in tubes over the face of the dam.

General POTTER. Yes, that is right; also what we call a Marine Railway could be used or a conveyor belt.

Senator CASE. You believe a conveyor belt for moving commodities up over the face of the dam is feasible in this area ?

General POTTER. The length of these pools, say, 100 miles plus, is long enough to justify the existence of a navigation facility.

Senator Case. Particularly when there is no parallel rail line?
General POTTER. Oh, yes.

Senator ELLENDER. General, reverting to navigation up to Omaha, will it be necessary to spend much money to maintain the channel tó 6 or 642 to 7 feet other than your ability to control the water so as to attain this depth from 6 to 7 feet?

General POTTER. Yes. Until we have arrived at the 9-foot depth and until all of the banks are stabilized the maintenance is a considerable amount, Senator Ellender.

Senator ELLENDER. Is it not a fact that by controlling the waters in the upper reaches of the Missouri, you can better maintain the stream, in a given location?

General POTTER. Absolutely.

Senator ELLENDER. Before that it would spread all over and it was possible for the river to change its course overnight?

General POTTER. Yes.

Senator ELLENDER. So you have lessened that so that the works you have put in now will be more or less permanent and will be of use for navigation.

General POTTER. It is the fluctuation of the water that ruins the channel.

Senator ELLENDER. I understand, but all of that has been prevented by virtue of this control that the Corps of Engineers has been able to effectuate in the past.

General POTTER. That is right, sir.

Senator ELLENDER. I do not want to anticipate you, General, but before you get through I wonder if you could tell us what the situation is as to each dam, how much completed and other pertinent information. If you cannot do it now I would like to have that in the record.

General POTTER. I have all that data here.

Senator ELLENDER. You have data for each of those dams that we are now working on, on the Missouri and tributaries on up to Fort Peck!

General POTTER. We will furnish a tabulation showing that, sir. (The information referred to follows:)

DAM AND PRESENT STATUS Fort Peck: This project is essentially complete including the present powerplant of 85,000 kilowatts. The second powerplant of 80,000 kilowatts additional is in the planning stage.

Garrison : This project is about 63-percent complete. Closure was completed in 1953 and first power is scheduled for April 1955. All major contracts for the dam are awarded except for the spillway stilling basin.

Oahe: This project is about 4 percent complete. Several earthwork contracts have been completed and one is underway. A contract for the upstream tunnels is underway. Closure is scheduled for 1958 with first power in late 1961.

Fort Randall: This project is about 75-percent complete. Closure was made in 1952 and first power is scheduled for March 1954. All major contracts for the dam have been awarded.

Gavins Point: This project is about 22-percent complete. All of the work on the dam has been awarded except for the powerhouse superstructure and switchyard which will be awarded later this year. Closure is scheduled in 1955 and first power in October 1956.


General POTTER. The last item I have, sir is on the general figure of obligations and expenditures. On June 30, 1953, we had unobligated $151/2 million; on December 31, 1953, $23 million; and we predict June 30, 1954, zero to $5 million unobligated.

As to our expenditures, on June 30, 1953, my unexpended balance was $67.9 million; on December 31, 1953, $67.2 million; and on June 30, 1954, $24.6 million. I would like to call the committee's attention to the fact that on December 31, 1953, we had spent all of my appropriation and from then until June, I will be running on the carryover and the carryover will be reduced to $24.6 million. We started out the fiscal year after appropriations with about $135 million. Our

« PreviousContinue »