« PreviousContinue »
There is another question I would like to ask, General, before you complete your main statement. On page 758 of the justification, under the item "Memphis Harbor,” you state that the city of Memphis is obligated to provide terminal facilities at an estimated cost of $28,650,000. How much of this work has been accomplished to date and what development, if any, is now taking place in this area !
General HARDIN. The estimate of cost to local interests is $28,650,000. The harbor authority at Memphis has expended several million dollars, according to my last information.
Senator ELLENDER. What does that mean, "several million dollars”? Have you got anything more specific to put in the record, because, as I understand, they were supposed to expend the amount I just indicated to you, $28,650,000.
General HARDIN. The building of their facilities progresses concurrently with our construction. The fill which we pump in there is the basis of their development. They have paved a substantial portion of that area for traffic to move over. They have extended roads, railroads, electric transmission lines, and sewer lines. They are currently building a public terminal facility which will be open to the public on a charge basis. I think construction is just getting under way. The exact amount of their expenditures I do not have, but I will try to obtain those for you.
Senator ELLENDER. Would you say that the work that has been done by the harbor authority is in keeping with their promise or their share of this work!
General HARDIN. I think they are keeping well abreast of the opportunities for developing. The latest figure they have spent is $2,275,576.44.
Senator ELLENDER. What percentage of the work has been completed by our Government !
General HARDIN. We carry that project
Senator ELLENDER. I can well understand it may not be possible for them to build structures until you complete your share of it, and hence the reason for delay; and I thought it might be appropriate to clarify that so as to show positively that the Memphis authorities have been carrying out their end of the program as far as possible and in keeping with their promise and also in keeping with what you have done. General Hardin. Yes, sir, I feel they are doing that.
Senator ELLENDER. You feel it would not be possible for them to do more than they are now doing!
General HARDIN. It would not be reasonable to expect them to do
Senator ELLENDER. Because the project has not advanced far enough, according to your statement.
General HARDIN. With the funds appropriated by the Congress for fiscal year 1954, the project from the Federal Government's responsibility is 46 percent complete. We expect to advance it with the amount in this budget, which is just an extension of that sewer to 49 percent. But there is no money in this coming budget for continuing the construction of the hydraulic fill on which local interests are building the dryland harbor and facilities.
Senator ELLENDER. In other words, where they could put up the buildings and things they needed. Up to now they have taken care of their portion of the bargain.
General HARDIN. And they are doing an adequate job on seeing that the project is used in a fashion which will also safeguard navigation interests.
OPERATION OF WAPPAPELLO DAM Senator ELLENDER. On page 759 of the justification, under “The Saint Francis River Basin,” I understand Wappapello Dam has been completed for a number of years and that the levees and channel improvements are still under way. To what extent can the Wappapello Dam be operated in accordance with the approved operation plan? If you do not have it for the record, you may furnish it later on and we will see to it that it is incorporated in the printed record.
General HARDIN. I will have to do that. (The information referred to follows:) The Wappapello Dam cannot be operated according to plan without flooding lands downstream and placing a strain on the inadequate levees.
Senator ELLENDER. You may proceed with your statement, if you have any left.
General HARDIN. I have no further general statement to make, but I will be glad to try to answer any further questions.
Senator ELLENDER. We will recess until 10:30 a. m., Monday morning when we will take up the Missouri River projects with General Potter.
(Whereupon, at 12 noon, Friday, January 29, 1954, the committee recessed, to reconvene at 10:30 a. m., Monday, February 1, 1954.)
CIVIL FUNCTIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1954
UNITED STATES SENATE,
Washington, DC. The subcommittee met at 10:30 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room F-39, the Capitol, Hon. Milton R. Young presiding.
Present: Senators Young, Thye, Mundt, Ellender, and Case.
MISSOURI RIVER DIVISION
STATEMENTS OF BRIG. GEN. W. E. POTTER, DIVISION ENGINEER; WENDELL JOHNSON, CHIEF, ENGINEERING DIVISION, MISSOURI RIVER DIVISION; AND H. COHEN, ASSISTANT CHIEF, PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT BRANCH, OFFICE OF CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
Senator YOUNG. The committee will come to order. The Chairman, Senator Knowland, asked me to take over this morning for a while. He is attending a meeting at the White House. General Potter, it is a pleasure to have you appear here and particularly since you come from my part of the United States. You have some real problems on your hands, but you will handle them all right.
General Potter, would you handle your items this way: As you start each project will you tell the committee what funds are unexpended as of June 30, 1953, unobligated as of June 30, 1953, the appropriation for fiscal year 1954, unobligated balance on December 31, 1953, unexpended funds on December 31, 1953, estimated obligated funds on June 30, 1954, and estimated unexpended funds on June 30, 1954.
If there have been any loans or borrowing to or from the project include that information also, if you will. General POTTER. Yes.
Senator YOUNG. Will you start with the navigation then proceed to flood control and then multiple-purpose dams.
General POTTER. Yes.
Senator Young. That will help us here follow our record a little easier. You may proceed.
General POTTER. Senator, it is always a pleasure to come back here because these appearances that I may before the Appropriations Committee are the highlights of my professional year. In order to lead into these projects I would appreciate it if I could make a very brief general statement to more or less round out the year's work for the committee.
Senator YOUNG. I think that would be well.
General POTTER. There are certain basic highlights that have been controlling in our operations this year, Senator Young. No. 1 was the Montana flood of May and June on the Sun River which caused about $10 million worth of damage in that State. About 2,000 acres were eroded
away in the many streams that were in flood during those months. The Fort Peck district immediately mobilized and went to Great Falls, then to Havre, and later to Glasgow and assisted the local citizens in fighting those serious floods.
Of interest in this particular flood is the fact that about 120,000 cubic feet a second came in to Fort Peck Reservoir, but due to the assistance of that reservoir we were able to prevent $13 million worth of damage from happening downstream, merely by closing the gates and permitting only 3,000 cubic feet a second to come out from that reservoir during the flood period.
Senator Young. How much water was in the dam at the time?
General POTTER. About 12 million acre-feet and it went up to about 15 million or 151/2 million. We collected 31/2 million acre-feet out of that flood.
Senator Young. How much capacity did you have left then?
General POTTER. About 4 million acre-feet, sir. The impoundment of that water, Mr. Chairman, enabled us to first show the people of the basin one of the great benefits of the system, even though Fort Randall is only partially complete and Garrison but just closed.
The chart that is now on the stand illustrates the operation of the system due to the fact that we were able to collect this 31/2 million acre-feet in this one flood. The top of the line, sir, is the flow of the Missouri River past Omaha and Kansas City during the extremely dry months of August, September, October, and the first part of November. I call your attention to the fact that the top of that line is almost level and represents 35,000 cubic feet a second.
During this summer we have been almost the only river in the Midwest and in the West which has had a normal sufficient flow. The lower part of that chart where it says “Flow without reservoirs" is what the flow would have been if Fort Peck did not have those 15 million acre-feet and the 316, that we gathered from this 1 flood and if Randall had not had a half million acre-feet for use in final control of the river.
If it had not been for that big flood we would have had past Omaha and Kansas City, which are just two key points—there are many other cities of course-as low as 9,000 cubic feet per second and the water over the water intake for the city of Omaha would have been just one-tenth of a foot on top of the intake.
CONTROL OF FLOOD
The darker area is the fine control that we were able to exert at Fort Randall. In other words, we could not get the water down from Fort Peck fast enough, it being 3 weeks away from Omaha. We then opened Fort Randall just a little bit more in order to keep more nearly level the constant flow of that river all the way to the mouth. Seventy percent of the water that went by Kansas City, Mr. Chairman, came from stored floodwaters at Fort Peck and 45 percent of the water going by St. Louis during the dry months came from Fort Peck. In fact, if it had not been for the floodwaters from Fort Peck the operation of the city of St. Louis, not only in navigation, which is very important for that big community, but also in water supply
and other functions, would have been seriously interfered with. The water from Fort Peck was important at Memphis and also at New Orleans, Senator Ellender.
Senator ELLENDER. That is because of salt-water encroachment? I am wondering what effect it had at St. Louis. It could not be salt water.
General POTTER. No, sir; low flow.
Senator ELLENDER. I am not talking about navigation. I am talking about water supply now.
General POTTER. Merely the fact that the river was low and the extent of pollution would have been much greater with that lower flow than it was with the higher flow.
Senator ELLENDER. You mean it would be more staggered?
Senator Case. You said that had it not been for this flow from the accumulated floodwater stored in the upstream reservoirs you would have only had one-tenth of a foot of water over the intake at Omaha during a portion of September and October
General POTTER. Yes.
Senator Case. Had there been a little fluctuation in that the entire water system and sewage-disposal system at Omaha would have been effected.
General POTTER. Would have been seriously interfered with and it would have been necessary I believe to cut down on the generation of electricity in at least one plant and such things as watering of lawns and washing of cars and the general luxury use of water would have had to have been seriously interfered with.
Senator CASE. Does that mean that it would have been lower than it was in the 1930's?
General POTTER. At times, yes.
Senator ELLENDER. Let me ask you this: If you should regulate this flow of water in the future in order to accommodate St. Louis and these other cities, to what extent would that decrease the generation of electricity at these various places ?
General POTTER. When the powerhouses on all of the dams are completed, Senator Ellender, a large part of this water will be sent through the generators on its way out of each dam and the generation at the lowest one would require just under enough water to give us 35,000 cubic feet a second.
Senator ELLENDER. Do you envision the time maybe when you may have to close some of these generators, that is, you would not get enough water to keep them running at full speed?
General POTTER. No, sir. The water adequacy report in the Missouri Basin which was finished 3 years ago shows that with the