« PreviousContinue »
of course reduce our authorized backlog. I believe this new system will both simplify the situation and meet objections as to lack of congressional control, but again, these proposals are first steps only and need much further careful consideration and, eventually, legislation. We in the corps are most anxious that our active program be truly alive and that all the existing deadwood be cut out of the backlog.
Senator McCLELLAN. In other words, you want to get out of your bookkeeping and eliminate all of that which Congress may determine should never be constructed and get it off the books?
General STURGIS. Yes, sir. Senator McCLELLAN. That is so you will not have to keep account of it and take it into account when you make your program?
TOTAL ACTIVE AND DEFERRED PROJECTS
General STURGIS. For example, it accomplishes the objective which Senator Robertson questioned me about regarding the backlog. Naturally, there is a great deal of public scrutiny of this large backlog of projects, so we want to get it down to a healthy going group of projects. I can give you, informally, the correct figures, but approximately the way this would size up would be the number of active projects, 479, amounting to $4,915 million; and the deferred for restudy projects would be 151, amounting to $2,499,200,000.
Senator HOLLAND. That first is active and the second is deferred? General STURGIS. Yes, sir.
The number of inactive projects of which there would be 283, would amount to $1,075 million. Those total to the figure I gave previously of $8,489,200,000 now on the books.
Senator ROBERTSON. The last figure may be, for general purposes, called deadwood?
General STURGIS. Yes, sir.
Senator ROBERTSON. That may cause a little heartburn before we are finished.
General STURGIS. We realize that, but we are trying to do the very things that Congress as a whole desires that we do.
Senator MCCLELLAN. In other words, it is regarded as essential to good housekeeping that you clean out the deadwood ?
General STURGIS. Yes, sir.
As requested in the committee's report on last year's appropriation bill, reports showing the actual allocations of fiscal year 1954 operation and maintenance funds to individual projects as compared to the tentative budget allocations are being filed with the committee at the end of each quarter of the year.
Senator MCCLELLAN. In other words, you are showing the changes that you may make in the expenditure of maintenance funds. You are reporting that to the committee each quarter so as to show the changes you made from that originally contemplated at the time you submitted your request and at the time the appropriation was made?
General STURGIS. Yes, sir, under the necessity of meeting exigencies as they arise. It is the flexibility allowed us, but we are reporting the flexibility thus used.
Yearly all of the major deviations between the tentative and actual allocations apply to the navigation channel and harbor projects. These deviations result from our continuing review and reevaluation of the relative priority and urgency of dredging and structural repairs occasioned by the variable shoaling of project channels and by unforeseen repair requirements affected by storms such as the North Atlantic storm of last November. The individual project estimates for budget purposes are necessarily based on past experience and our best judgment as to requirements a year or more in advance of actual operations.
That is, as far as maintenance funds are concerned.
The corps desires and will make every effort to keep the amount of the deviations to the absolute minimum consistent with the necessity of adjusting the individual project allocations to insure that the funds being expended will produce the maximum possible benefit and an economically sound maintenance program.
STUDY OF WATERWAY AND HARBOR PROJECTS
In response to another request of the House committee, I have made a careful analysis of the economic justification of the 268 waterway and harbor projects now being maintained, in fiscal years 1953, 1954, and 1955, and a report thereon has been furnished the chairman of the committee. This study discloses that almost without exception the navigation projects included in the maintenance programs for the fiscal years 1953 and 1954 and the program to be considered by the committee for 1955 are economically justified; that is, the direct annual benefits exceed the annual charges, including interest on and amortization of, the capital costs as well as the annual costs of operation and maintenance.
If reasonable intangible and collateral benefits are considered, all of the 268 projects are economically justified. While the study covered only one-quarter of all of the authorized navigation projects in that it was merely on the study of ones requiring maintenance during those years, 1953, 1954, and proposed 1955—the remainder on which no maintenance is currently being performed will be made the subject of similar formal analysis, where appropriate, prior to programing maintenance work.
Further, those very few projects having borderline justifications at this time will be reexamined as changed conditions and navigation requirements dictate, and careful review of all work included in the annual maintenance programs will insure that the work is clearly justified. I have in mind making a study of possible classifications of the projects in maintenance status similar to the study I spoke of with regard to the backlog of authorized construction projects.
CONFLICTING STATUTES Also, the House Appropriations Committee report for fiscal year 1954 points out the conflicting statutes that exist with reference to local flood-protection projects. The 1936 Flood Control Act required
local interests to provide lands and rights-of-way and to maintain my. Iti and operate all flood-control projects. The 1938 Flood Control Act reversed that policy as it applied to reservoir projects and to channel- I improvement projects, but not for other local protection works. This change was retroactive so that it relieved local interests of obligations. The on projects authorized in the 1936 and 1937 acts in addition to applyingzhtrigh to new projects authorized in the 1938 act.
In the 1941 Flood Control Act, Congress recognized this discrep- Ing. I ancy in local cooperation requirements for local protection projects frs. Th and again required local cooperation for channel improvements for
ING. I local food protection. This change, however, was not retroactive and channel improvements constructed under authorizations contained in the 1936, 1937, and 1938 acts continued to be maintained with
ULAS. T Federal funds. The committee directed that the Secretary of the Army take necessary steps to turn these projects over to local inter
DINING. ests concerned for operation and maintenance.
In compliance with that directive, letters requesting local interests to assume maintenance have been dispatched to all local interests concerned in local flood-control projects which are currently being maintained with Federal funds, except the Red Lake and Clearwater Rivers project in Minnesota. In the case of this project special conditions exist that make it a general rather than local project.
Reports on local interests' willingness and ability to assume operation and maintenance are expected to be complete late this month.
Senator ROBERTSON. You were not surprised at that, were you?
Senator ROBERTSON. They will reject it as long as they think there is any chance for the Government to pay it, will they not?
General Sturgis. That appears to be true. The reports so far received indicate that local interests generally reject the proposal. Information concerning the need for legislation to accomplish the objectives of the committee will be furnished at the time that the complete report on this subject is presented.
The whole broad matter of the authorized survey program has long been a continuing question under active study by the Corps of Engineers. There are many angles to it which give me real concern and which are not susceptible to quick solution within the resources and authority available to the corps. For this reason, the subject might well be covered under the next section of these remarks having to do with problems not within our resources to solve.
However, since notable improvements have been made in this field under our own authority, I shall cover surveys here. Last year I made special pleas for full allowance of our budget request for the authorized survey program because we are everywhere unable to prosecute many investigations of badly needed projects, and the public is understandably interested in and pressing us very strongly for engineering and economic estimates.
Senator ROBERTSON. The Senate committee increased your funds for that purpose?
General CHORPENING. I believe that is correct. The total, however, that we received in this current fiscal year for general surveys was in the neighborhood of $1 million.
Senator ROBERTSON. It is my recollection that we went above the House.
General CHORPENING. That is correct. That has been true for several years.
Senator ROBERTSON. The House cut out Gathright and we put Gathright in. When Gathright went in, a lot of others went in that the House cut.
General CHORPENING. Those were planning funds.
General CHORPENING. Yes, sir; however, it has been generally true that this committee has allowed more survey funds than the House committee.
Senator McCLELLAN. We allowed, last year, about $2,850,000, did we not, for surveys?
General CHORPENING. That was for planning, sir.
Senator McCLELLAN. That is what the conferees finally reported, and that was the amount finally appropriated.
General CHORPENING. Yes, sir.
Senator ROBERTSON. The clerk has given me the actual figures on that survey money. The House allowed $685,000 and we allowed $1,400,000.
General STURGIS. As I believe will be brought out when the committee goes into the question of survey money, we are only going to have about 6 percent of the remaining cost of the surveys made available to us this year should the amount requested be approved. This will give you some idea of the backlog, and you can appreciate the tremendous pressure on us from all over the country for many excellent potential projects. Senator ROBERTSON. You mean 6 percent of what you
General CHORPENING. Six percent of the estimated cost to com. plete the surveys now in our hands on directives of the Congress.
Senator ROBERTSON. That is a little more than a new look; that is almost no look at all.
Senator McCLELLAN. It will take about 20 years to meet all of them.
General CHORPENING. In the meantime we will be getting new resolutions and directives for further surveys.
General STURGIS. The reports of this committee and the House committee took cognizance of the problem and of the studies then underway. The analysis we initiated this year of our heavy-survey backlog is nearly finished and will be complete before the end of this month, It follows the same pattern as the backlog study of authorized projects mentioned previously, and sets up categories of active surveys, surveys that need further study to determine their proper disposition and inactive surveys.
It is intended that this study and our proposals will be submitted to the Bureau of the Budget and the Public Works Committees for their consideration and action. The immediate result, as far as the Corps is concerned, will be a sizable reduction in that portion of the backlog for which funds will be currently justified.
However, reducing the backlog is only part of the solution. We are investigating and adopting measures for carrying out survey report work at less cost. During last summer and fall my office analyzed comments and suggestions made to this end by our division and district engineers. Last month we issued them a letter of instructions which should effect simplification of reports and considerable savings in cost. This is only a start. We will continue to make improvements to this end, without serious impairment of sound engineering and economic analysis; although careful coordination with the other agencies in the executive branch as well as with the committees of Congress may be required.
BEACH EROSION CONTROL
Another field of effort in which we take considerable pride is that of beach erosion control. It is principally a task in which our mission is to help others to help themselves by providing technical assistance in this highly specialized field. We attack the problem on two fronts: one a systematic program of research, called beach erosion development studies, designed to provide the basic knowledge required; and the other the production of reports on specific problem areas as a result of studies made in cooperation with States or State agencies.
Except for a brief period at the outset of the Korean war, we have heretofore been able to undertake promptly all cooperative studies requested which met the requirements of law. However, for the first time since 1930, action on future applications must be deferred pending anpropriation of additional funds. Employing the knowledge gained as a result of our development studies, we have been able to reduce the cost and shorten the time required for cooperative studies and to develop progressively improved techniques.
In addition to our laboratories which include facilities unequaled elsewhere, we have employed a number of the best equipped universities to aid us in this task. An incidental but important benefit of this program is the application of the knowledge gained to the problems of maintenance and improvement of our coastal inlets and navigation channels.
TECHNOLOGICAL PUBLICATIONS Our technical publications in this field have gained international as well as national prominence and we have established cordial relationships with technical groups and institutions having parallel interests throughout a large part of the civilized world.
I would like to say this is a very important field and one that is getting more and more into the public consciousness. We have scientists that have been developed and in our laboratory, and we pay them a relatively small amount of money. It is a tremendously good investment in a field that has not really the general investigatorv work going on anywhere in the United States to the extent we have. I would hate to see our laboratory reduced and those people go afield again, because it would be very difficult to get them back into the Government service. So for a little amount of money, we are getting a great service without requiring large appropriations from the Congress, because much of this work is done by means of information furnished to local communities.