Page images
PDF
EPUB

higher, 90 percent of the time, and the total releases for generation of energy in the United States are estimated to average 1,126,000 acrefeet annually. Power operation studies were made on the basis of development of power at the dam would be entirely subordinate and incidental to operations for control and regulation of waters for domestic and irrigation purposes. That one-half of the total quantity of waters released annually would be available to each country for the generation of hydroelectric energy. These studies indicate that the capacity would not be available 100 percent of the time due to water shortages but that a capacity of 75,000 kilowatts or more would be available 81 percent of the years, and a capacity of 100,000 kilowatts or more would be available 62 percent of the years. Senator MANSFIELD. All right. Now that means firm power. Mr. HE witt. It means firm power during those years, yes. Senator MANSFIELD. Based on the figures I gather it would be 80 or 90 percent of the time. Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir. Senator MANSFIELD. You used a figure 1.7 mills. Does that apply to kilowatts or kilowatt-hours? Mr. HEwiTT. The figure of 1.7 applies to kilowatt-hours.

EFFECT OF AMISTAD DAM ON GENERATING CAPA CITY AT FAILCON DAM

Senator MANSFIELD. Kilowatt-hours. What about the firming up of the power at Falcon? If Amistad is built, then you can have control of the water there. How much will that add to the generating capacity at Falcon? Mr. HEWITT. It will add considerably, I don’t have that figure, sir. I can supply it for the record if you would like. Senator MANSFIELD. It can be on the same basis, let us say, as Hungry Horse Dam which firms up 200,000 kilowatts for use in Montana, and at the same time, because of its reservoir capacity and storage capacities, furnishes an additional 700,000 kilowatts for Bonneville and Grand Coulee downstream. Mr. HEwiTT. Amistad Dam will increase the generating capacity at Falcon. Senator MANSFIELD. It appears to me that what you are placing before this committee is a pretty favorable picture for power generation. I would say it looks encouraging. And where would the revenues from the power funds go? Mr. HEwiTT. To the Federal Treasury. Senator MANSFIELD. Have you made any estimates that if this dam is built, and if there are two generators put in, and if it is used at, say, the capacity of 50,000 kilowatts a year over the average— and I think that is a conservative figure based on what your statements have been—what amount would go, say over a 50-year period roughly, into the general Treasury. Maybe one of your staff could do a little calculating. Mr. HEwiTT. I don't have the answer to that question, but I should be glad to supply it for the record, sir. Senator MANSFIELD. Because that would be one way that you would get repayment for the building of this multipurpose project because that is what it is. I think in that way there would be addi. tional justification for the building of a dam of this nature.

RECOMMENDATION AGAINST FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION OF A
POW ERPLANT

Senator CARLSON. The only suggestion I have to make to the Senator from Montana is that the benefit ratio goes up considerably when we eliminate the power.

Senator MANSFIELD. Yes, indeed.

The CHAIRMAN. That is what I don’t understand. The International Boundary and Water Commission recommended that the dam be built with only penstocks and then a private utility would have an opportunity to put in a powerplant if they wanted to. Didn't you so recommend?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, we did.

The CHAIRMAN. You still think that is a sound recommendation.

Mr. HEWITT. It is a good recommendation, I think.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think the committee would be wise to authorize the building of the dam with penstocks which would bring down the cost very considerably and which would put the ratio up to 2.3 instead of 1.6, wouldn’t it?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, don’t you think that is the wisest thing or the best thing to do?

Mr. HEWITT. My own personal viewpoint is yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, that is what I was trying to ascertain. We want to try to do the best thing for the country. If a gas plant is needed, we could perhaps authorize the building of that for a lower cost than for a hydro plant. And it would be firm, around the clock, wouldn’t it?

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. It wouldn't cost any more, or as much as the hydro, would it?

Mr. HEWITT. I can’t say about that, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean that where gas is available at the kinds of prices it is near the field, that is generally true, is it not?

Mr. HEWITT. I would think so, yes.

EXECUTIVE BRANCH POSITION ON POWERPLANT CONSTRUCTION

Senator MANSFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Osborne a question. He seems to be a little vague as to just what the position of the State Department is relative to Amistad. But I note that the State Department's comments on the House bill are as follows: While H.R. 12263 as passed by the House of Representatives on June 9, 1960, contains provisions that are not consistent with the recommendations made by the executive branch to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in its consideration of the matter, H.R. 12263 would accomplish the essential purpose. In the circumstances the Department recommends its enactment. Mr. Os Bo RNE. That is correct, sir. Senator MANSFIELD. You are for it? Mr. Os BORN E. We are for the dam. Senator MANSFIELD. And you would be for the building of the dam for power purposes as well as storage purposes? Mr. Osbor NE. If this is the decision of Congress. Senator MANSFIELD. What is the attitude of the Department?

Senator HICKENLoop ER. I would like to get a little better answer.

Senator MANSFIELD. So would I.

Senator HICKENLoop ER. He said: “If this is the decision of Congress.”

Senator MANSFIELD. Yes. What is the position of the Department?

Mr. OSBORNE. I think the position of the Department is as stated by Commissioner Hewitt. That we recommend this dam with penstocks.

STATE DEPARTMENT's SUPPORT FOR AMISTAD DAM

The House did not pass such a bill, and nothing has occurred to change our position. However, we are in favor of completion of the dam at the earliest possible moment. The CHAIRMAN. Why do you say that? What is so urgent about it? Mr. Os BORNE. Mr. Chairman, there are floods that occur in this area, flash floods which the Commissioner has described that take a tremendous loss of life on both sides of the river. The CHAIRMAN. How many people were killed there last year by floods? Mr. HEWITT. None last year. The CHAIRMAN. How many the year before? Mr. HEWITT. We have had two floods during recent years, 1954 and 1958. The CHAIRMAN. How many American citizens lost their lives? Mr. HEwiTT. I don't know how many have been killed in 1958. I don't think any on the American side. I do think that there were some on the Mexican. In 1954, however, there was some loss of life, two or three, I believe on the U.S. side and an uncounted number on the Mexican. The CHAIRMAN. Two or three on the American side. Were they drowned? Mr. HEWITT. They were drowned; yes, sir. On the Mexican side, however, the floods submerged the houses, that were built of adobe, the houses collapsed, and people were buried there and they don't know exactly how many were killed, but a great many. The CHAIRMAN. Did you start to say something about the Presidents Lopez Mateos and Eisenhower, when you were interrupted? Mr. Os BORNE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. What did you start to say? Mr. OSBORNE. I said at this meeting in Mexico the two agreed that action should be taken with regard to this dam as rapidly as possible to bring about its early completion. The CHAIRMAN. Did they agree that the powerplants should be in it? Mr. Os BoFWE. The question was not raised.

TREATMENT OF AMERICAN BUSINESSMEN IN MEXICO

The CHAIRMAN. Did the two Presidents discuss the treatment by the Mexican Government of American businessmen in Mexico at that same meeting?

Mr. Os Bor NE. I think the climate of relations between the two countries, including the effect of actions of the two Governments on investment, was discussed.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the President aware of the complaints of American businessmen regarding the expropriation of their private investments in Mexico? Mr. OSBORNE. I am sure he is aware of it. The CHAIRMAN. Are you aware of it? Mr. OSBORNE. Yes, sir; there have been no expropriations recently for which compensation was not made. There have been some threats of expropriations. The CHAIRMAN. Yes. They have been brought to my attention. There have been two or three cases, have there not? Mr. Os BORNE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. It is not formal expropriation; it is, rather, the squeezing them out of business, isn’t it? Mr. OSBORNE. I am not able to state that. The CHAIRMAN. It is not directly to this, but I was just wondering why you are so eager to please Mexico when they have shown recently a considerable tendency toward, I think, very arbitrary treatment of American private businessmen in Mexico. Mr. OSBORNE. I think that is a value judgment, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You are not aware of it. Mr. Os BORNE. I don’t believe The CHAIRMAN. What is your responsibility in the State Department? Mr. Os Bob NE. I am officer in charge of Mexican Affairs. The CHAIRMAN. You are. You are not aware of any complaints by American businessmen? Mr. Os BORNE. Yes, sir; I received complaints very recently. The CHAIRMAN. Have you done anything about them? Mr. Os BORNE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. What have you done about them? Mr. Osbor NE. We negotiate with the Mexican Government and in almost every case some satisfactory arrangement is subsequently worked out to the satisfaction of the American businessmen. The CHAIRMAN. I have two or three cases I had better discuss with you later. There are several businessmen I know who are dissatisfied. Mr. Os BoENE. I would be delighted. I don’t believe the cases are completed. The CHAIRMAN. No; they are not completed. Any other questions?

RELOCATION OF RAILROAD LINE

Senator AIKEN. Yes, what railroads would be flooded out? Mr. HEWITT. The Southern Pacific. Senator AIKEN. Is that the main line? Mr. HEWITT. The main line from New Orleans to El Paso. Senator AIKEN. That would have to be relocated. Mr. HEWITT. Yes, 12 miles. Senator AIKEN. According to the map, if it follows the valley, there would be quite a job in that. What percentage of the $23 million fund would be used in relocating the railroad? Mr. HEWITT. About $14 million, I believe, sir. Senator AIKEN. About two-thirds of it.

F.ECOMMENDATION AGAINST FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION OF A POWER PLANT

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hewitt, did the original bill H.R. 8080 provide for the recommendations of the International Boundary and Water Commission? Did that provide, in accordance with your recommendation, that the dam be built with just penstocks and no power

lant?

D Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir; that is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, that bill is more nearly in conformity with your recommendation than the bill that was passed by the House?

Mr. HEWITT. That is correct, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And more nearly in conformity with the recommendations of the Power Commission.

Mr. HEWITT. Yes, sir.

BENEFICIARIES FROM THE WATER

Senator AIKEN. You say that most of the beneficiaries from the water would be small landowners. Mr. HEWITT. That is correct. Senator AIKEN. Are there any very large landowners below the proposed site for the dam? Mr. HEWITT. I would like to ask you what you consider a large landowner? Senator AIKEN. Anyone who owns 10,000 acres. Mr. HEWITT. There are no large landowners under this definition. Senator LAUSCHE. Couldn’t we get a tabulation of what the holdings are of the large ones? Mr. HEWITT. I think that could be prepared. I have no idea just what the total number of property owners in the valley may be. If you consider the cities and their population you have, I would say, at least 700,000 people down there. Senator LAUSCHE. Well, I merely want to say that my judgment would be influenced by the facts with reference to who and how large are the beneficiaries of this irrigation service. That is, if it is the little fellow who is receiving it in an inconsequential way that would require one answer; if there are large holders that are to receive inordinate benefits, that would require another answer. The CHAIRMAN. Do you have those figures, Mr. Hewitt? ho HEWITT. No, sir; I do not have those figures. I can obtain them.

RELATIONSHIP TO TREATY OF POW ERPLANT AND OTHER PROVISIONS

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hewitt, was the Texas congressional delegation supporting the bill in the House which was introduced by Mr. Fisher, who is a Congressman from Texas?

Mr. HEWITT. I think so, sir.

Senator AIKEN. I might ask just one more question: Is it customary in building dams at public expense to provide free for the users water that is stored behind these dams? Is it customary in other parts of the United States?

The CHAIRMAN. Does the reclamation service do this?

« PreviousContinue »