The report of the Board of Engineers was submitted to the Chief of Engineers. He concurred in the views and recommendations of the Board and in his proposed report recommends the modification of the existing project to provide for the construction of the seaway canal, with the additional provision that the United States construct a highway bridge to carry Louisiana State Highway 61 over the channel. The Chief of Engineers estimates the total cost at $67,000,000.

The Chief of Engineers furnished copies of his proposed report to the Governor of Louisiana and to the Bureau of the Budget for comment. The Governor of Louisiana stated that he favors the proposed improvement. The Chief of Engineers has not as yet received the comments of the Bureau of the Budget on his proposed report.

Senator MCCLELLAN. The Senate will meet at 11 o'clock tomorrow, I understand, and we can start early at 9:30, and if we will all be here, we will start on time and get another hour and a half tomorrow, which may enable us, or let us say that we hope it will enable us, to conclude on Monday, and maybe then we can try to get started on marking up this bill. We are very anxious to get this bill out.

Senator STENNIS. I suggest we come back tomorrow. (Discussion off the record.)

Senator MCCLELLAN. The committee will stand in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 12 noon, the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9:30 a. m. Saturday, August 27, 1949.)

FLOOD CONTROL-RIVERS AND HARBORS

SATURDAY, AUGUST 27, 1949

UNITED STATES SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE FOR FLOOD CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND HARBORS OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 9:30 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in room 412, Senate Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan presiding.

Present: Senators McClellan, Holland, Stennis, and Kerr.

Also present: Senator Russell B. Long; Lt. Col. Herbert C. Gee, Deputy Chief of Civil Works for Flood Control; and Henry M. Muller, assistant to resident member, Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, Corps of Engineers.

Senator MCCLELLAN. The committee will come to order. We have a statement from Congressman Lowell Stockman, of Oregon, in behalf of harbor improvements at Umatilla, Oreg.

STATEMENT OF HON. LOWELL STOCKMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

HARBOR IMPROVEMENTS AT UMATILLA, OREG.

Mr. STOCKMAN. I would like to ask this committee to consider including in the rivers and harbors bill, H. R. 5472, an item for greatly needed improvement of the harbor at Umatilla, Oreg. This is not a new item, but is simply a modification of an existing project, and is duly recommended in the comprehensive report on the Columbia River. The estimated cost is $416,250.

Although there is already a navigation project for 128 miles along the Columbia River in the vicinity of Umatilla-which provides for a channel 7 feet deep from Celilo Falls, Oreg., to Wallula, Wash., and for approach channels to the port developments at Arlington, Oreg., and Kennewick, Wash.-for some unexplained reason it does not provide for an approach channel to Umatilla. Here the docks are some distance away from the river channel, and the shoal areas and boulders between the channel and the docks make it necessary for the barges to be only partially loaded in order to come to the water front. This condition creates not only a hazard to vessels and life, but also considerably increases the cost of transportation.

The improvement I am asking in this amendment would remove these boulders and rocks between the channel and water front at Umatilla, and provide for a navigation channel 712 feet deep at present low-water datum.

94522-49-pt. 2- -8

903

This modification of the existing project on the river between Celilo Falls and Kennewick, Wash., has been recommended by the division engineer in his comprehensive report on the Columbia River Basin, and the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors has concurred in the recommendation, and recommended that the project be modified to provide a 72-foot depth between the navigation channel and the water front at Umatilla. A report on the Columbia River at Umatilla was originally authorized in 1947 by a resolution of the Committee on Public Works of the United States Senate, and a favorable recommendation in response to the resolution is included in the comprehensive report on the Columbia River Basin.

Umatilla is a very important port on this section of the Columbia River. It is a distributing point for petroleum products coming up the river and for grain going to market. The commerce on the section of the river under consideration increased from 34,668 tons in 1930 to over 820,000 tons in 1947. Umatilla County alone produces an average of 6,000,000 bushels of wheat a year, and this, along with the products of other adjoining counties, provides the large tonnage to be shipped out of this port.

The area commercially tributary to Umatilla has a population of 362,000 in 1940, and there has been an increase in population here, as in other parts of Oregon, where the rate of increase has exceeded that of the Nation in general in the ratio of approximately 3 to 1. With the population increase has come increased business activity with greater demands for better harbor facilites at Umatilla. Especially is this true due to the construction of the McNary Dam at this location. Not only is the activity great during the construction period, but will continue after the completion of the dam.

The area is to a great extent dependent upon water transportation. One of the greatest drawbacks to agriculture in the section is the present high railroad freight rates. The improvement of this harbor will give relief to the farmer and producer in reduced transportation charges.

The cost to the United States for construction is estimtaed at $416,250 in addition to which local interests at Umatilla will be required to provide adequate terminal facilities and make other improvements for the benefit of navigation at an estimated cost to them of $204,700. The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors found that the proposed improvement is justified in the interests of safety and convenience of established navigation. In addition to this they have evaluated the monetary benefits to accrue from the proposed improvement.

These monetary benefits will be derived from the ability to load barges of grain and petroleum to full capacity. They estimate that savings will accrue on over 588,000 tons and that the annual savings amount to $15,910. When compared to the annual carrying charges of $47,610 the benefit-cost ratio is 1.63.

The improvement is urgently needed, is very vital to not only Umatilla but to the extensive hinterland, and it is economically justified by a large margin. I urge that this item be included in the pending omnibus rivers and harbors bill.

STATEMENT OF ELMER B. STAATS, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET-Resumed

Senator MCCLELLAN. Will you come forward, Mr. Staats. Are there any further questions of Mr. Staats?

Senator LONG. I would like to ask Mr. Statts a few questions.

Senator MCCLELLAN. May I bring up one point, first, to follow through on something we discussed yesterday. I just want to ask them before we go any further.

Mr. Staats, in your letter of August 8, you refer to section 1, and you point out some objection to that section. Has that section been modified and changed to conform to the desires of the Bureau of the Budget?

Mr. STAATS. That section is now all right with us. It did contain certain study purposes which had not been approved.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Will you give your estimate to the committee of what the expense will be that is involved in carrying out this bill if it is passed?

Mr. STAATS. We have not been able to formulate any kind of a precise estimate as to what this survey would cost. We assume that most of the work will be done by the departments and agencies concerned. We have given some thought to that matter, but we have not known of any way by which we can give the committee any precise estimate. We do not think the cost will be very large.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Do you think that you could furnish the committee with some kind of an estimate?

Mr. STAATS. We will be glad to do that.

Senator LONG. I wonder if Colonel Gee could give us an estimate of the cost of making the Red River study which the Army engineers have just wound up and which they have been conducting since 1939. Colonel GEE. I could not give you that cost right now. Senator LONG. Could you give it to us roughly?

Colonel GEE. I do not know; somewhere in the neighborhood of, perhaps, $250,000. I am not sure that that is correct. I will confirm that figure later.

Senator KERR. That study would be available in toto to this commission if it were created; would it not?

Colonel GEE. That is correct, sir.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Does any member of this committee have any questions he would like to ask of Mr. Staats?

Senator LONG. I would like to ask some questions, if I may, Mr. Chairman, just to complete the record.

Senator MCCLELLAN. You may proceed, Senator.

Senator LONG. There are a lot of people interested in the idea of holding up the existing projects and studying them to see if, perhaps, some of the dams authorized might be located farther back in the hills and if thereby, instead of having 1 dam, we could have 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 dams. They are also interested in seeing if they could not find a broader yardstick for authorization which would give us a slightly different type of flood-control protection, where they could place more emphasis on power or irrigation.