Page images
PDF
EPUB

2. Havre, Mont.

Construction of the Bull Hook unit was initiated during September 1953. The amount of $700,000 in the budget estimate for fiscal year 1955 now before Congress will complete the construction of the Bull Hook unit and permit construction to be initiated on the levees and drainage facilities of the Milk River unit. Based on the amount included in the President's budget for fiscal year 1955 there would be a further requirement, after fiscal year 1955, of $369,800 for completion of the Milk River unit. 3. Libby Reservoir, Mont.

No action has yet been taken to resubmit this project for approval to the International Joint Commission. It is anticipated that it will be resubmitted as soon as certain domestic questions involved in the construction of the project have been settled within the regular channels. 4. Fort Peck Dam, second powerplant

Funds in the amount of $220,000 are contained in the budget estimate now before Congress for fiscal year 1955 for advance engineering and desigu on the second powerplant. 5. Billings, Mont.

Funds in the amount of $25,000 are included in the fiscal year 1955 President's budget estimate for initiation of advance engineering and design. The total cost of design studies required prior to initiation of construction is estimated at $46,400.

through rich meadows or directly toward farm buildings where now only a normal flood would complete the damage. There is no use in attempting rehabilitation of farmland or buildings until this situation is corrected.

REPORT UNDER CONSIDERATION I understand that plans for a flood-control project at Great Falls are under consideration in an interim report now being prepared relative to conditions of flooding caused by the Sun River. With the extensive development in both the lower Sun River and Missouri areas in Great Falls, particularly since the destructive 1953 flooding, it seems to me that any reasonable preventive program can have ample justification and it should not be delayed." Something needs to be done in the immediate future to prevent flooding in the years to come.

The tentative allocation of $15,000 is not sufficient action on the part of the Government as I see it. Activating a flood-control project at Great Falls should not be put off, the sooner actual work can be started, the better. No one knows when another flash flood on the Sun River will ravage the area again.

There are other power and flood-control projects in Montana of considerable merit and I feel that should receive the proper attention from the appropriation committees.

FORT PECK DAM

The second powerplant at Fort Peck Dam and the flood-control project at Billings are among those projects in the Nation set aside to receive funds for the initiation of advance engineering and design in the budget estimate now before Congress for fiscal year 1935. It is my hope that the planning work on these projects will go right along and will not be delayed so that actual construction can be started in the near future. The second powerplant at Fort Peck Dam will be a great asset to the production of hydroelectric power in the Missouri River Basin.

PLANNING FUNDS REQUIRED Flood-control projects have been authorized as various sites through. out Montana, but as yet they have not received any sufficient amount of funds with which to begin the planning work. The sites designated for future flood-control projects are at Missoula, St. Regis, Harlem, Miles City, and Saco, Mont. A report from the Corps of Engineers shows that the majority of the funds for these projects, with the exception of the Missoula-St. Regis area will not be allocated until some time after fiscal year 1955. I sincerely hope that it is not the intention of the Appropriation Committee to postpone the allocation of funds indefinitely. (The following information was supplied :)

MISCELLANEOUS DATA ON CIVIL-WORKS PROJECTS IN THE STATE OF MONTANA 1. Great Falls, Mont.

The amount of $15,000 has been tentatively allocated to the completion of the interim report on food control of the lower Sun River at Great Falls. Mont.. from funds in the fiscal year 1955 budget estimate now before Congrpes, five general investigations. It is anticipated that the interim report can he coupleted with these funds in fiscal year 1955.

2. Havre, Mont.

Construction of the Bull Hook unit was initiated during September 1953. The amount of $700,000 in the budget estimate for fiscal year 1955 now before Congress will complete the construction of the Bull Hook unit and permit construction to be initiated on the levees and drainage facilities of the Milk River unit. Based on the amount included in the President's budget for fiscal year 1955 there would be a further requirement, after fiscal year 1955, of $369,800 for completion of the Milk River unit. 3. Libby Reservoir, Mont.

No action has yet been taken to resubmit this project for approval to the International Joint Commission. It is anticipated that it will be resubmitted as soon as certain domestic questions involved in the construction of the project have been settled within the regular channels. 4. Fort Peck Dam, second powerplant

Funds in the amount of $220,000 are contained in the budget estimate now before Congress for fiscal year 1955 for advance engineering and design on the second powerplant. 5. Billings, Mont.

Funds in the amount of $23,000 are included in the fiscal year 1955 President's budget estimate for initiation of advance engineering and design. The total cost of design studies required prior to initiation of construction is estimated at $46,400.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Columbia River local protection, Idaho, Ore- | Local protection projects in 35 locations, 2 of which are in
gon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming. the State of Montana and for which no funds have been

appropriated to date. These 2 projects are: (1) Missoula;

and (2) St. Regis River.
Harlem, Mont.

Authorized by the 1936 and 1944 Flood Control Acts. Plan

of improve nent provides for construction of a cutoff
channel and a levee system to protect areas subject to

flooding in Harlem, Mont.
Miles City, Mont.

Authorized by the 1950 Flood Control Act. General plan

for flood control and related purposes in the Yellowstone
River Basin provides for local protection along the Yel-
lowstone River and its tributaries. Billings and Miles

City are a part of this overall plan of flood protection.
Saco, Mont.

Authorized by the 1936 Flood Control Act. Project pro

vides for levees and related works on Beaver Creek at Saco, Mont.

[blocks in formation]
[graphic]

1 As of July 1, 1953. ? For advance engineering and design. • For advance engineering and design on units not located in State of Montana.

Senator MANSFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator KNOWLAN). I have a letter from Senator Murray urging appropriations for the Havre, Mont., project. That letter will be placed in the record at this point.

UNITED STATES SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE,

March 9, 1954.
Hon. WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND,
Chairman, Army Civil Functions Subcommittee,

Senate Appropriations Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: Noting that your subcommittee is presently holding hearings on civil functions appropriation items, I should like to bring to your attention my interest in the appropriation item recommended for the Havre, Mont., floodcontrol project,

As you know, the Congress has heretofore appropriated nearly $800,000 to carry forward the construction of this unit whose estimated Federal cost exceeds $2 million, The Bureau of the Budget has recommended an item in the amount of $700,000 to continue construction during the next fiscal year. The benefitto-cost ratio of this particular project is 2.9 to 1, and I think the record will show the extreme urgency of completing this unit that is so vital to the control of the Bull Hook and Milk Rivers that for many years have caused extensive damage in and near the city of Havre.

All mrmbers of the Montana congressional delegation have made numerous appearances before the congressional Appropriations Committees, and I am sure I need not go into detail in attempting to impress upon the members of your subcommittee our concern about this problem. The record is replete with factual data with respect to flood damage that has occurred in the Havre area during the past years.

It is my sincere hope that your subcommittee will give the most careful and sympathetic consideration to the anpropriations requested to further the work on this flond-rontrol project, and I shall be most happy to provide your subcommittee with any additional information that might be desired. Because of the fact that there is a recognized need for this flood-control unit, and in view of the extensive testimony that has been given in past years on this subject, I feel it is unnecesrary for me to take any of the committee's valuable time in appearing personally before you in behalf of the project, but I respectfully request that this letter he entered in the record of the committee's hearings on this project, Sincerely yours,

JAMES E. MURRAY. Senator KNOWLAND. I would like to place in the record at this point a letter from Senator Morse concerning the need for funds for Oregon projects. (The letter referred to follows:)

UNITED STATES SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,

March 4, 1954.
Hon. WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Army Civil Functions,
Committee on Appropriations,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR KNOWLAND: Administration budget recommendations for the fiscal year 1955 for Army engineers civil works projects in the State of Oregon are sho k'n ly inadequate, in view of the present economic distress in the State, and the great need for low-cost electric power.

DELAYS AT THE DALLES AND CHIEF JOSEPH

The President's recommendation of only $34,100,000 for continuing construction of the Dalles Dam on the Columbia River, when $58 million was requested by the Carns of Inrineers to keen the work on schedule, will result in a 1-year postponement of initial power generation.

dni v frim Nover her 1957 to No emher 1958 in the initial power generation will result in the following power losses: 183.000 kilowatts in 1958; 312,000 kilowatts in 1959 and 1960-a total of 807,000 kilowatts through 1960.

42592-5496

« PreviousContinue »