Page images
PDF
EPUB

to assure flow control essential to the movement of barges for navigation purposes.

We are convinced that the development of the river to Atlanta for navigation is economically sound and is desirable from a business and industrial standpoint, and that it will result in actual savings in dollars and cents on the transportation bill of a vast industrial community. We are also convinced that the sooner the project is given favorable consideration by the Army engineers and by the Congress, the more relative benefit it will afford our people. Finally, we are convinced that the prompt completion of the Buford Dam is essential to the accomplishment of this navigational development, and the sooner the Buford Dam is completed the quicker and more economically can we proceed with the proposed development of the river between Atlanta and Columbus for navigation.

Mr. Hand. Judge Davis, you have given us a most interesting hearing. Thank you and your delegation for your appearance.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1954.

McNARY LOCK AND DAM

WITNESS

HON. HAL HOLMES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE

STATE OF WASHINGTON

Mr. HAND. We have with us Congressman Holmes from the State of Washington to make a statement on the McNary lock and dam. We shall be pleased to hear you.

Mr. HOLMES. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate very much having the opportunity to appear before you.

It is with pleasure that I remember going with you to McNary lock and dam from the city of Walla Walla, Wash., and going over the structure with you as it was being explained by some of the Army engineers who had arranged your trip. I am happy indeed that you had the opportunity of seeing this great structure and to know of your interest in requesting to see it.

The approved budget estimate for this project is $24 million. This will provide for a continuing construction of the project in an economical manner without delay of any of the power generating units. This is indeed a must and the bare minimum that will be necessary to keep such a program moving. I hope it is the wisdom of your committee, and I urge your committee, to approve the full amount. This project is nearing completion and the Pacific Northwest needs it badly. There would be no loss of power revenue to the Government if the $24 million is appropriated for the project.

The approved budget estimate for the Dalles Dam is $34,100,000. I hope your committee will grant at least this money to carry on the project which is well under way and greatly needed in the Pacific Northwest.

CHIEF JOSEPH DAM

The approved budget estimate for Chief Joseph Dam of $27 million will be absolutely necessary unless there is further delay. I urge your committee to grant at least this sum of money so that we may be able to move the project along as rapidly as possible in the face of a tough fiscal situation.

One of these projects is nearing completion; the other two are well under way and we would be pennywise and pound-foolish to not keep them on as sound and safe a production schedule as posible. I do urge your fine committee to give most careful consideration to at least the approved mentioned sums.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1954.

LITTLE SANDY-TIGART CREEK

WITNESS

HON. BRENT SPENCE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Mr. HAND. Mr. Spence, we will be glad to hear your comments on Little Sandy-Tigart Creek.

Mr. SPENCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

There is a project in my district that has a great deal of interest to the people there. It is the Little Sandy-Tigart Creek flood-control project.

There have been so many flash floods in that district which includes Boyd, Lawrence, Carter, Elliott, and Greenup Counties. There has been loss of life. They compute the loss to farmlands for the last 10 years has been about $212 million and the loss from floods entirely has been in total somewhere around $7 million. The town of Olive Hill has been devastated 2 or 3 times by the floods.

The Army engineers have said that the cost of preliminary examination will be $7,500. I have been told that if this is put on the eligible list that it will expedite their action; and I have come here today to ask the committee to put this project on the eligible list for an allotment for the purpose of making this preliminary survey.

Now, there is nothing in the budget about that. I think it can be done out of funds that are generally expended for this purpose and I would like to have the opportunity to file a statement on that subject.

Mr. Hand. We would like to have it Congressman. Thank you Mr. SPENCE. Thank you. (The matter referred to follows:)

very much.

STATEMENT OF BRENT SPENCE BEFORE CIVIL FUNCTIONS SUBCOMMITTEE, HOUSE OF

REPRESENTATIVES APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 16, 1954 Many of the residents of my district are very deeply interested in the proposed Little Sandy-Tygart Creek project in Boyd and Lawrence Counties, Ky. The people in the entire watershed of these two streams are greatly affected by flash floods which have inundated the lands in Boyd, Lawrence, Greenup, Carter, and Elliott Counties. The soil-conservation authorities in Kentucky have estimated that the damage to the farms alone in the area by floods during the past 10 years amounts to $2,442,781; and the total damage is estimated as $7,500,000.

The Army engineers have estimated that it will be necessary to expend $7,500 for the preliminary survey, but I am informed that they will be unable to give consideration to this matter at all until the project is placed upon the eligible list for an allotment which can be done by this committee.

On June 27, 1950, the Committee on Public Works of the House of Representatives adopted a resolution calling for a review of reports on the Ohio River and tributaries with a view to determining whether the recommendations contained in those reports should be modified with respect to flood control on Little Sandy River and Tygart Creek. A similar resolution was adopted by the Committee on Public Works of the Senate.

I earnestly request the committee to authorize the Army engineers to place this project on the eligible list and to proceed with the survey as soon as possible.

I desire to file with my statement a letter I have received in regard to this project from Colonel G. T. Derby, district engineer at Huntington, W. Va.

FEBRUARY 12, 1954. Hon. BRENT SPENCE,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. SPENCE: Reference is made to your letter dated February 4, 1954, in which you request information concerning the authorized preliminary examination report for flood control on Little Sandy River, Tygart Creek, and tributaries in eastern Kentucky.

Preparation of the flood-control report was authorized in 1950 by committee resolutions of the Senate and House with the scope of the report being limited by the House committee to a preliminary examination. The study was assigned to the district engineer of the Huntington district on August 3, 1950. The district engineer held a public hearing at Grayson, Ky., on October 25, 1950, at which time local people suggested the widening and straightening of certain streams of the two watersheds and the construction of a reservoir for the protection of Olive Hill. Following the public hearing a reconnaissance of the two watersheds was made by personnel of the Huntington district, after which the examination became inactive because of a lack of funds.

Little Sandy River, which has a drainage area of 780 square miles, rises near the southeastern border of Elliott County and flows in a northeasterly direction to its confluence with the Ohio River at Greenup, Ky. Tygart Creek rises near the southwestern corner of Carter County and follows a course parallel to the Little Sandy River to empty into the Ohio River opposite Portsmouth, Ohio. The two main streams as well as their tributaries generally follow very tortuous courses through rather narrow valleys. The two watersheds are predominantly agricultural with the principal urban centers being at Greenup, Grayson, and Olive Hill, Floods in the area result in frequent damages to farmlands, crops, and farm and urban improvements. Highways are frequently flooded resulting in losses in wages, business and transportation. Studies have not progressed sufficiently to permit the making of an estimate of flood damages or the selection of even a tentative plan of flood protection.

Limited appropriations for the flood-control program in recent years have precluded the reactivation of the Little Sandy-Tygart Creek report. Funds for this study were not included in the tentative list of studies for the 1955 program as recently submitted by the Chief of Engineers to the House Appropriations Committee; however, the Assistant Chief of Engineers for Civil Works has recently stated that careful consideration will be given to inclusion of the Little Sandy-Tygart Creek study in the program for fiscal year 1956, depending upon the appropriation and priority of other reports. You may be sure that the authorized study will be completed and submitted to Congress as rapidly as the availability of funds permits. Sincerely yours,

G. T. DERBY, Colonel,

Corps of Engineers, District Engineer. Mr. Davis. I have a statement from Senator Earle C. Clements, of Kentucky, and a letter from Congressman John C. Watts of Kentucky, concerning this project which I will insert into the record at this point.

(The matters referred to follow :)

STATEMENT OF SENATOR EARLE C. CLEMENTS IN SUPPORT OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR

COMPLETION OF THE PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF THE LITTLE SANDY RIVERTYGARTS CREEK SYSTEM IN KENTUCKY

This is a flood-control project in northeast Kentucky on the Little Sandy River-Tygarts Creek systems, which are tributaries of the Ohio River. Flood conditions in the region of the Little Sandy River-Tygarts Creek exceeded $7,500,000 over the 10-year period 1940–50. These figures are based upon estimates of the damage within the five counties of Boyd, Greenup, Lawrence, Elliott, and Carter, affected by the floods. Over one-third of the farms in the watersheds of Little Sandy River-Tygarts Creek suffered the ravages of the floods.

As a result of these recurring damages, soil conservation officials organized the group known as Little Sandy River-Tygarts Creek Flood Control Association to work for upstream flood control on the watersheds of Little Sandy RiverTygarts Creek. Public hearings held by the Corps of Engineers in 1950 at Grayson, Ky., aroused the interest and wholehearted support of the farmers and citizens in the area.

In 1950 the Committees on Public Works of both the House and the Senate adopted resolutions calling for a review of reports on the Ohio River and its tributaries with a view to determining whether the recommendations contained in those reports should be revised with respect to flood control on Little Sandy River-Tygarts Creek. Following this, the Secretary of Agriculture in 1950 stated his hope that a survey could be initiated on the two watersheds.

As you know, work was initiated on the preliminary survey pursuant to the resolutions of the Senate and the House Public Works Committees. This survey, however, was suspended because it did not meet certain criteria set forth in a Presidential directive for the curtailment of nonessential work during the Korean emergency. Inasmuch as hostilities in Korea have ceased, it would appear that this is an opportune time to finish the preliminary examination. The United States engineers have stated that only $7,500 is needed to complete this survey.

In conclusion, let me state that I am personally familiar with the severe flood damages suffered repeatedly by the people in this area and respectfully urge that you include $7,500 in the appropriations for the coming fiscal year so that the survey may be completed on the Little Sandy River-Tygarts Creek system.

JANUARY 28, 1954. Hon. GLENN R. DAVIS, Chairman, Subcommittee on Civil Functions, Appropriations Committee, House of Representatives,

Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: The citizens of the five counties drained by the Little Sandy River and its tributaries are gravely concerned over the continuing damage that has and is occurring in this watershed and are greatly interested in having the Corps of Engineers complete its preliminary survey of this project. It is estimated that this can be done for approximately $7,500. Work on this report was suspended in 1950 when it failed to meet the criteria set forth in a Presidential directive for curtailment of nonessential work. In 1952 there was no appropriation for the reneral investigations program, and the limited amount for the fiscal years of 1953 and 1954 did not allow the engineers to include this project in its program. This year with the Korean situation changed and the defense angle not as acute as before, I am hopeful that the lump sum made available to the Corps of Engineers for preliminary survey may be sufficient to permit this project to be considered for inclusion in its program for 1955.

Over a 10-vear period damages to corn, hav, cover crops ; loss in value to land by erosion of top soil and deposit of sand in place of land washed away; to roads, farm equipment, pastures and buildings as well as loss of hours to schools, churches and workers by the impassability of roads in these five counties has amounted to $2,642,981. I have been assured hv the Chief of Engineers that if funds are made available in this bill every effort will be made to complete the survey for this project. Sincerely yours,

JOHN C. WATTS.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1954.

PANAMA CANAL ZONE

WITNESSES

HOWARD E. MUNRO, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, THE CEN

TRAL LABOR UNION AND METAL TRADES COUNCIL, A. F. OF L., PANAMA CANAL ZONE

Mr. Hand. The committee will be glad to hear from Mr. Howard E. Munro, legislative representative of the Central Labor Union and Metal Trades Council of the A. F. of L. of the Panama Canal Zone, on problems relating to the Panama Canal.

Nr. MUNRO. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appear here today as the legislative representative of the Canal Zone Central Labor Union and Metals Trades Council. I have been an employee of the Panama Canal Company and lived in the Canal Zone since May of 1943; 3 months short of 11 years. At present I am on leave without pay from the Panama Canal Co.

The organizations which I represent are the central bodies of 26 unions affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. The membership of these unions are the United States citizens employed by the United States Government to operate and maintain the Panama Canal.

Before continuing I desire to thank the committee for the fair treatment accorded the employees of the Canal Zone when, as conferees on H. R. 5376, they agreed to maintain the allowable override on Canal Zone salaries at 25 percent and ordering an independent study made of the wages paid on the zone.

The management consultant firm of Booz, Allen and Hamilton was engaged by the Panama Canal Company to make this study. The report, with the company's recommendations, has been submitted to the legislative committees of Congress with copies to the Appropriation Committee as ordered. I respectfully request the committee to place the Booz, Allen & Hamilton Report and appendix in the record at this point. I am unable to supply a complete copy of the report and appendix as I have been unable to obtain one.

Mr. HAND. We have done that.

Mr. MUNRO. I have been informed that only sufficient copies were made to supply the congressional committees and for company officials.

Mr. Hand. I think the committee has a full copy of the report.

Mr. MUNRO. I have been informed by the chairman of the Panama Canal Subcommittee of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, Congressman John J. Allen, Jr., that the subcommittee will investigate the application of Public Law 841, 81st Congress, dealing with the Panama Canal Company, and will include the Booz, Allen and Hamilton Report. Hearings have tentatively been set to start the first part of March.

As it appears to me that the intent of this committee was to let the legislative committee of Congress review this phase of the Panama Canal Company operation, I will not burden you with further details other than to say the employees on the Canal Zone endorse the Booz, Allen & Hamilton report 100 percent and except to receive favorable action on its recommendations.

« PreviousContinue »