Page images
PDF
EPUB

EMERGENCY WORK General CHORPENING. As the chairman will recall, this work on the Arkansas River has always been defended as emergency work. It is not proceeding with the overall proposition of the navigation project on the Arkansas River. The work we are doing, we are doing so that it will tie into a navigation project if and when that should be directed by the Congress to proceed. Senator KNOWLAND. A perpetual emergency;

General CHORPENING. With emergency conditions existing on this stream, we had hoped that last year all of those that should be handled at this time would be taken care of. However, a more complete and more thorough survey and reconnaissance of the entire river has convinced us that there are more places that should be handled under this emergency procedure.

You can never be as certain of an estimate under the type of thing that we are doing here as we can be on a job where you are going to build a specific project, and you know the size of the structure and the other physical factors involved in the cost. I do feel, however, that we are submitting here today an estimate that is as realistic as an estimate ever could be under the type of situation that we have existing on that river.

Senator KNOWLAND. When you go from an estimate of $18 million to $25 million, that is a right substantial increase percentagewise.

General CHORPENING. It is, and it consists of new additional locations that we feel are emergent. I would like to point out that this is not an increase in the estimated cost of work at specific locations that we started in previous years. Actually, we are building those for slightly less cost than was estimated at the time we submitted those locations to the Congress. So this increase is not on work that we previously justified and secured funds for, but on new locations we now must consider adding to the emergency project.

I would feel we were negligent in our duty if we did not include these new locations under the emergency program.

AREA IN QUESTION

Senator KNOWLAND. Could you give the committee any rough estimate as to the percentage of the river that has been covered!

General CHORPENING. The percentage of the river in miles is not great. We do have a map here which shows the general areas where we have worked and where we propose to do work. We could figure that out in miles to give a percentage of that section of the river from just above Fort Smith to the confluence of the Mississippi, which is the area in question.

Senator KNOWLAND. All I am trying to get at is—for instance, last year it was not realized there were other areas where it might require emergency treatment, was it?

General CHORPENING. At that time we did not consider they were sufficiently emergent that we should include them in the estimate.

Senator KNOWLAND. What has happened between last year and this year that has brought this so vividly to our attention?

General CHORPENING. The Arkansas River is the type of a river, and there are some others—which has an alluvial bed, the banks are

unstable, and the river wanders considerably from its normal course.

Colonel Dixon. As General Chorpening has indicated, we have all the details here pertaining to locations that have been constructed, hat are being continued, and which we foresee in the future. I do Sont know how much detail the chairman does want to go into.

Senator KNOWLAND. I would suggest that if you could leave a copy of the details with the clerk, you do so, so we might have it. I do not ko that we necessarily have to have them go into the record at this

PROGRESS OF WORK AT FORT SMITH In regard to the work at Fort Smith, how has that work held up! Colonel Dixon. Very well, sir. The Fort Smith-Wilson Rock area :> a hard point to hard point proposition. That is a location where we are going into what should be a very good continuous revetment

fem. By continuous I mean that the entire section should become abilized, not that the revetment itself is to be continuous. With the Broer being expended there-and there is some money in this year's 4propriation for that also---we hope that the reach will be stabilized mpletely. In a sense, it also is a test section to establish that by ping from hard point to hard point the river can be stabilized. Beranse of its location near Fort Smith and other populated areas, *r feel it is necessary that we do a complete job in that area.

General ("HORPENING. That work was originally scheduled to proered over a number of years. We have been making good progress . connection with it. It was started upstream and is proceeding devenit ream. It involves the use of permeable dikes, some river straightening, and revet ment.

Senator KNOWLAND. You may proceed. Colonel Dixon. If I may add the unexpended balance information, 1. On June 30, 1953, the unexpended balance for the emergency bank abulization project was $917,115; the unexpended balance on Decemboy 31, 1953, was $3,066,192. We estimate that by June 30, 1954, op will remain unexpended only $414,800. Water KNOWLAND. Senator M«C'lellan, we have been proceeding et in your absence. We have covered the projects for bank stabistron work on the Arkansas River. If there is anything further a pou would care to bring out in the hearings, we will reopen the muurt at that point.

The questions we attempted to clear up was the increase in cost since 24 Tear on the Arkansas River and its tributaries, for emergency aktabilization work, the estimate of the cost last year was $18,852,

This year it is $25,302,000, which is about a $6 million increase. Tog heir pointed out that that was not due to an increase in the

of the particular projects they had underway but rather was **t about by the necessity of expanding the work; they testified "!!" zetual cost of the projects already underway was running a

Irlow their estimate. Tar- page 31 of the justification book. This was an expansion of the program of an emergency nature rather than an increase in the mat of the projects already underway. Serater SOOLELLAX. May I ask a few questions regarding that? Senator KNOWLAND. Yes.

Senator McCLELLAN. I understand what the chairman has just said, that instead of it now being estimated it will be about $18 million to complete the bank stabilization on the Arkansas River as envisioned last year, it would now take something like $25 million, is that correct?

EMERGENCY PHASES OF BANK STABILIZATION

General CHORPENING. We are considering here only the emergency phases of the bank stabilization on the Arkansas River. My testimony was that, since last year, we have determined the additional specific locations where work ought to be done and that should be included in that emergency proposition. Those considerations increased the emergency phase of the bank stabilization to the present figure.

Senator MCCLELLAN. My statement was correct if we qualify it to apply to the emergency work! General CHORPENING. Yes, sir.

Senator McCLELLAN. Is there any way to contemplate how much more emergency work of this nature might develop ?

General CHORPENING. Senator, we hope and we have tried to anticipate those emergency situations that either exist now or are developing. We hope this cost estimate will comprise the work that should properly be done on an emergency basis.

Senator McCLELLAN. You have only $3 million in the budget this year for that emergency work that you say now will require about $25 million. In other words, it would take 8 years at least to get the work completed on the basis of the present rate of appropriations; is that correct? That is, the emergency work.

Senator KNOWLAND. We have already appropriated $13,800,000, so if $3 million were given after this work is completed, there would only remain $8,400,000.

Senator MCCLELLAN. So the picture is not as bad as it appeared from the $25 million estimate. Much of that has been spent.

General CHORPENING. That is correct, sir.

ADDITIONAL FUNDS NEEDED

Senator McCLELLAN. What we will actually need to get all of the emergency work done that is now indicated and insofar as can reasonably be anticipated in the future is another $8,467,000 following this year's appropriation of $3 million ?

General CHORPENING. That is correct, sir.

Senator McCLELLAN. Where do you plan to spend this $3 million if it is appropriated! Have you a list of the projects there?

Colonel Dixon. Yes, sir. "Wilson Rock to Fort Smith.
Senator McCLELLAN. How much have you allocated to it?
Colonel Dixon. $1,100,000.

Senator McCLELLAN. What additional funds will be required to complete that project?

Colonel Dixon. $2,239,000, sir.

Senator MCCLELLAN. In other words, it should be completed, then, in a couple of years from now?

Colonel Dixon. Yes, sir.

Senator McCLELLAN. At the rate of present appropriations for it?
Colonel Dixon. That is right.
Senator McCLELLAN. Please go to the next item.

MCLEAN BOTTOM, ARK. Colonel Dixon. The next one is McLean Bottom, which is a specific area to which we propose applying $425,000 and which has had no money to date.

Senator MCCLELLAN. What is the nature of the work you will do there?

Colonel Dixon. It will be bank stabilization work. We intend to put in 12,000 feet of revetment on the right bank. The money, $425,000, would cover 5,000 feet of this needed 12,000 feet of revetment. This is a very dangerous location. There are four actively caving locations in this particular reach.

Senator McCLELLAN. What are the others?

HOLLA BEND CUTOFF, ARK. Colonel Dixon. The next one is Holla Bend Cutoff, to which we propose allocating $550,000. To date we have allocated $1,363,800. We expect the balance to complete this Holla Bend Cutoff will be $179,100.

Senator McCLELLAN. That is in addition to the $500,000 you are requesting this year!

Colonel Dixon. That is right.

ESTES PLACE, ARK. The next location is Estes Place. We intend to apply $100,000 to it.

Senator McCLELLAN. That is south of Little Rock?
Colonel Dixon. Yes, sir. We have a chart showing these locations.
Senator McCLELLAN. Is it south of Pine Bluff also?

Colonel Dixon. No, sir. It is between Little Rock and Pine Bluff. To date at Estes Place, we have allocated $306,000; and we expect that to complete the work at that location it will take another $807,000.

WARINGS BEND, ARK.
At Warings Bend we intend to apply $140,009 to that location.

Senator McCLELLAN. That is also between Pine Bluff and Little Rock?

Colonel Dixon. That is right, sir.

Senator McCLELLAN. Is that on the north or south bank of the river?

Colonel Dixon. Warings Bend is on the south bank. Estes Place is on the north bank.

New GASCONY, ARK. Other specific locations are below Pine Bluff. At New Gascony, we intend to apply $275,000 to revetment and $230,000 to dike construction.

Senator McCLELLAN. Does that project protect pipelines?

Colonel Dixon. Yes, and other utilities. We will also have $180,000 applied to Brunson Crossing dikes.

Senator McCLELLAN. May I inquire if the amount of the Budget is adequate to meet the real emergency conditions in the Arkansas Basin ?

Colonel Dixon. I would say this: The local people would like to hit all emergency locations as they see them. In certain areas we are taking a calculated risk. Three million dollars would do an efficient job.

Senator McCLELLAN. Actually, this $3 million is being applied to projects that have already had some allocation of funds to them.

Colonel Dixon. In part. There are certain new locations.
Senator McCLELLAN. How many new ones, two?

Colonel Dixon. McLean Bottom is a new one. Some of these are new locations. Below Pine Bluff we have been working in small segments. In other words, we are being hopeful that we could meet a situation with a certain length of revetment. We have found that it will require a little additional work upstream in this New Gascony reach. There are several small stretches of revetment involved.

Senator McCLELLAN. You do feel this is the minimum amount that should be appropriated this year?

General CHORPENING. Yes, sir.

Senator McCLELLAN. Did you request a greater amount of the budget?

BUDGET REQUEST Colonel Dixon. Our request to the budget was a total of $6,085,000. Senator McCLELLAN. Was that over ceiling? Colonel Dixon. The over-ceiling amount was $2 million. Senator McCLELLAN. $4,085,000 was what? Colonel Dixon. Within ceiling.

Senator McCLELLAN. Your within-ceiling request was cut by the budget $1 million plus ?

Colonel Dixon. $1,085,000.

Senator McCLELLAN. In other words, you felt that was the minimum you should have, $4,085,000, and the budget cut you to $3 million, or cut more than $1 million under your budget request within ceiling!

General CHORPENING. That is correct.
Senator McCLELLAN. I believe that is all, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ELLENDER. A while ago you testified that there were 22 projects that were selected for work and that 10 were new, 3 were the resumption of old work, and 9 were the continuation of projects that had already been started.

General CHORPENING. No, sir. There are 22 navigation projects in the budget. Of those 22, 10 are classified as new starts; although of that 10, 3 are actually resumptions.

Senator ELLENDERWhat method did you use to make this selection! What was the yardstick?

General CHORPENING. It was indicated to the Chief of Engineers by the Bureau of the Budget that it was desired to include some new starts in the budget.

« PreviousContinue »