Mr. WRIGHT. I would like to leave the hourly chart of this flood. The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Have you any pictures you want to leave? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Poulson, do you want to ask him any questions about Pensacola? Mr. POULSON. Yes. This last statement has clarified the picture more than was done this morning, but I would like to know, in your discretion, Mr. Wright, what is your primary object, thinking entirely of the power problem. Do you consider that the flood-control problem is as important? In other words, you had a contract, you stated, and you had to keep within a certain height, that you had to furnish power to war industries or defense plants, and you emphasized the importance of power to the war effort, and the like. In doing that, did you also consider the importance of damage from floods? Mr. WRIGHT. Yes, sir. Mr. POULSON. Which were you trying to accomplish? Mr. WRIGHT. We were trying to accomplish both of them. Mr. POULSON. I just was wondering how it was that in a territory like that, when the floods were coming along, for instance, at the very start that you didn't take a more conservative attitude of lowering that. You tried to stay up at all times at a height so that you could have that maximum height, so that you could furnish the maximum amount of power. You never, in any conservative way, would get below that. Mr. WRIGHT. Never below 745 unless I had to. Mr. POULSON. Well, what I am trying to get at; you were still thinking of the power. That was your first job, wasn't it? Mr. WRIGHT. I wouldn't say the first job. That was one of two jobs. I think that up until this flood, the previous flood heights of record could have been held and the channel kept with the Pensacola Dam operated at 745 to 755. There have been a lot of Mays and Junes and Aprils that didn't have any floods at all, or any rainfalls at all to amount to anything. If you had pulled down to 735 or 730, your power plants would have been closed down. Mr. POULSON. I appreciate that, but nevertheless it seems to me, like for instance the $300,000 you are planning to save, that is about what it was in a month, I believe you said—the amount of the difference was the amount of income per month. Mr. WRIGHT. I don't think you could have signed up any of the war power contracts we had unless we had the assured capacity that you could only get at 745. We have contracts calling for about 65,000 kilowatts, under which we are securing our revenue. I don't think you could serve any of those plants with only a guaranteed firm of 13,000. Mr. POULSON. In other words, we should not have such a small capacity for flood control, when we have a flood-control dam. I think that should be the primary purpose, and that is one of our problems in California. We have a certain group who are always wanting to make power the main purpose rather than flood control or irrigation. I imagine it goes back to a policy-making problem probably before you ever took the job. I was trying to get that clear. The CHAIRMAN. Any other questions by members of the committee? (There was no response.) The CHAIRMAN. The whole difficulty arises out of the fact that the Federal Government was trying to accomplish one thing, and the people of Oklahoma persuaded it, with or without pressure, to construct one reservoir, when a careful study and a careful report in which everybody here concurs, showed that there ought to have been three of them operating at the same time. Mr. WRIGHT. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. You have been going up there and trying to do the impossible thing. Mr. WRIGHT. I wish the other two had been built at the same time. The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it would have saved a good many arguments between you and Mr. Graham. (The report of reservoir operations at Grand River Dam project is as follows:) OFFICE OF SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR, REPORT OF RESERVOIR OPERATIONS Inter-office memorandum. To: Douglas G. Wright, special representative for the administrator. Subject: May 1943 reservoir operations and production. May 1943. 745. 43 745. 28 747.58 751. 32 754. 58 744. 42 745. 20 745. 02 Total precipitation at the power plant was 16.72 inches. The total at Quapaw on Spring River a few miles above the head of the reservoir was 23.03 inches. Joplin, Mo., reported 24.2 inches. Total rain during the previous 4 months was 7.78 inches. The record for the month was: The rainfall in the reservoir area exceeded all other records except June 1845, at Fort Scott, Kans., when 24.56 inches were recorded. Seven stations in Oklahoma recorded over 20 inches of rainfall during October 1941. EVAPORATION Total evaporation from the standard 4-foot tank was 5.458 inches. The estimated loss from the reservoir during the month was 13,060 acre-feet, or an aver age of 211 cubic feet per second. During April the loss was 288 cubic feet per second; March, 138 cubic feet per second; and February, 147 cubic feet per second. Wind movement over the evaporation pan totaled 2,710 miles, an average of 3.64 miles per hour compared with 4.08 miles per hour in April; 4.78 miles per hour in March; 3.96 in February; and 3.58 in January. RESERVOIR DISCHARGE Spillway gates were open from May 9 to 31. Total discharge through the gates was 4,367,960 acre-feet, an average of 70,451 cubic feet per second. Total discharge including the turbines was 4,785,220 acre-feet, or an average of 77,181 second-feet. Flood storage between elevation 745 and 750 is 245,000 acre-feet. would have been filled nearly 20 times from May 9 to 31. This storage Storage from 735 to 750 is 660,000 acre-feet. The dam is built to impound water to elevation 755. The planned capacity for flood storage available when the rightof-way above elevation 750 is obtained is 525,000 acre-feet. The maximum discharge through the gates during the first part of the flood was 123,000 second-feet at 4 p. m. May 10 plus 7,000 second-feet through the turbines making a total of 130,000 second-feet. The maximum discharge during the second part of the flood was 297,000 secondfeet through the gates and 7,000 through the turbines making an estimated total of 304,000 second-feet. A reduction may be made when the estimate is corrected for loss of head in the east spillway. The actual discharge was very close to 300,000 second-feet. WAR DEPARTMENT Throughout the flood period the Tulsa district office furnished all information available on stream stages and rainfall. Every effort was made to protect the Oklahoma Ordnance Works and property owners below the reservoir. WEATHER BUREAU The United States Weather Bureau at Kansas City gave timely forecasts of rain and storm conditions. Estimates of expected inches of rainfall were given. These were very helpful, but no one foresaw 24 inches of rainfall at the head of the reservoir. The rainfall of 7.20 inches on the 17th and 4.70 inches on the 18th at Quapaw, Okla., Joplin, Mo., and Columbus, Kans., flooded the Spring River and Neosho Rivers to twice any previous flow. The crest of the upper Neosho reached the Oklahoma-Kansas line on Saturday, May 22. This flow arrived after the local and higher crest entered the reservoir. The United States Weather Bureau at Topeka, Kans., reported rainfall and stream stages along the Neosho River. As usual the estimate of the time and crest stages were correct and necessary for the forecasting reservoir inflow. The stream gage and rainfall observers in the reservoir area really did a good job of reporting both rainfall and stream stages. When the storm is directly upon the reservoir area as this one, accurate rainfall reports are necessary. All observers were persistent in getting reports to the plant. Telephone lines were down, and service was at times very poor. The telephone employees especially at Vinita were very patient and frequently repeated reports. They surely made the best of a bad situation. TURBINE USE The turbines used 417,260 acre-feet, an average of 6,730 second-feet, compared with 5,546 second-feet in April, 4,421 second-feet in March, and 4,746 in February. INFLOW Total inflow was 4,791,280 acre-feet, an average of 77,279 cubic feet per second. Total inflow in April was 6,038 second-feet; 3,938 cubic feet in March, and 3,547 second-feet in February. The total reservoir inflow during the great October-November 1941 flood was 4,080,000 acre-feet from October 1 to November 9, a period of 40 days. The flood of this month covered a period of only 15 days from the 8th to the 23d. Total inflow in April 1941 was 1,474,000 acre-feet. The greatest previous flood volume was April 1927. The total at the Grove gage, now submerged, was 3,503,000 acre-feet. There were in fact three storms during the month of May 1943. The maximum inflow during the first part of the storm was 210,300 secondfeet from 10:30 a. m. to 1 p. m. May 10. The greatest inflow following the lull was 347,100 second-feet from 12 noon to 1 p. m. on May 19. POWER GENERATED Total electrical energy generated during May was 40,027,430 kilowatt-hours, an average of 53,933 kilowatts as compared with 49,693 kilowatts in April, 39,095 kilowatts in March. The previous high month was October 1942 with a total of 36,837,230 kilowatthours, an average of 49,512 kilowatts. Maximum day was 60,672 kilowatts on May 29. Minimum day was 39,681 kilowatts on May 6. Each kilowatt-hour required 450 cubic feet of water. Each cubic foot per second generated 8.059 kilowatts. Each kilowatt required 0.1251 cubic foot per second. For the month of May the average gross head was 112.54 feet. Average turbine use was 6,730 second-feet. Efficiency was 84.52. Calculated kilowatts is 54,200, compared with average watt-hour meter readings, 53,933 kilowatts. The CHAIRMAN. The very able judge from Oklahoma has suggested he would like to have made available to the committee this estimate of the engineers, Black & Veach, of Kansas City, with respect to the backwater effect of the Pensacola Dam. Is that agreeable with you? General REYBOLD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. You will be glad to do that as to the estimate with respect to damages? General REYBOLD. Yes; that will be made available, Judge. The CHAIRMAN. Let me say this, that I have found that before the Corps of Engineers recommends a reservoir, or a series of reservoirs, that they have gotten the benefit of the best talent in the United States. Secondly, before the Corps of Engineers constructs one of those reservoirs, it has been my experience that they get the benefit of the best advisory talent as to the type of construction, as to the spillway, and everything of that sort, because we have had some disastrous results in California. You had many deaths in your area in Los Angeles, Mr. Poulson, and we have had them elsewhere, because of im |