Page images
PDF
EPUB

Non-Federal cost.-The estimated cost to local interests is

[blocks in formation]

Local interests are required to maintain and operate the project upon completion, at an estimated annual cost of $6,650.

Status of local cooperation.-The agency responsible for local cooperation is New York State Department of Public Works. Assurances of local cooperation were executed by the NYSDPW on 23 December 1965 and accepted by the District Engineer on 29 December 1965. The Town and Village of Rosendale furnished resolutions dated 6 July and 4 August 1960, respectively giving assurances that in concert with the State, they would meet all conditions of local cooperation. Acquisition of lands and easements is underway. The NYSDPW has given assurance that required rights-of-way will be available by February 1967.

Comparison of Federal cost estimates.-The current Federal cost estimate of $2,750,000 is the same as the latest estimate submitted to Congress.

Summary construction program (PB−1), fiscal years 1967 and 1968

[blocks in formation]

Mr. KIRWAN. This was a new construction start in 1965 in the 1966 bill. It was indicated last year that the project could be advertised in April of 1966. However, construction had not yet started as of last January. What is the status of this project? You just indicated a reduction in the request of $500,000.

General KOISCH. Sir, the right-of-way requirement involves a large number of parcels which, coupled with the fact that the real estate firm originally hired by New York State had gone bankrupt, has caused a delay in furnishing these requirements. The State indicates they hope to have the rights-of-way to us in October of 1967.

BELTZVILLE RESERVOIR, PA.

Mr. KIRWAN. $5,320,000 is budgeted to continue construction of the Beltzville Reservoir, Pa. We will insert pages 148 through 152. (The pages follow :)

BELTZVILLE RESERVOIR, PA.

(Continuing)

Location. On the Pohopoco Creek, a tributary of the Lehigh River, 5.2 miles above the mouth, about 4 miles east of Lehighton, in Carbon and Monroe Counties in northeastern Pennsylvania.

[blocks in formation]

Type, ungated, partially lined.

Design capacity, 46,400 c.f.s. at maximum pool elev. 667.0 feet.

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

JUSTIFICATION

This project will provide benefits for flood control, water supply, water quality control, and recreation. The reservoir will control the run-off from a drainage area of 97 square miles, including the 22 square miles controlled by Wild Creek Reservoir, which supplies water to the City of Bethlehem. The flood control storage will contribute to the flood stage reductions at the principal damage centers on the Lehigh River below Pohopoco Creek. These damage centers are Bowmanstown,Walnutport, Northampton, Hokendauqua, Catasauqua, Allentown, Bethlehem, Freemansburg and Easton, Pa. Combined operation of the proposed three new major flood control projects in the Lehigh River Basin, Beltzville, Aquashicola and Trexler, will result in a stage reduction of two feet at Bethlehem, Pa., for a flood similar to that experienced in 1955. This is in addition to the effects of the existing Francis E. Walter Dam.

Additional water supply is needed now in the Palmerton-Bethlehem and Trenton-Philadelphia areas. Stream flow augmentation provided by the Beltzville project would meet the water supply needs in the Palmerton-Bethlehem area until 1972. Combined authorized Delaware River projects would meet the water supply needs of the basin until 2010.

The Beltzville Reservoir will provide for a recreation pool of 950 acres. Ultimate capacity for 635,000 visitors annually is credited to the project. The recreation facilities to be constructed by local interests will provide additional capacity. The project is in Appalachia and, although not evaluated, use of the various labor trades needed during the construction of the project will assist in alleviating areas of substantial and persistent unemployment in Carbon, Luzerne, Schuylkill and Columbia Counties, Pennsylvania. After completion of the project, continued utilization of surplus labor in the above counties would materialize due to the recreational development, its use, and the tourist attraction afforded by the project.

Flood control_.

Breakdown of benefits

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

$332, 000

461, 000

219, 000

761, 000

44, 000

$1,817, 000

Fiscal year 1968.-The requested amount of $5,320,000 for continuation of construction will be applied to

[blocks in formation]

The requested amount is necessary for orderly progress on construction of interrelated features. Work on highway relocation, dam foundation and embankment together with outlet tunnel and control structures must proceed at a rate which assures readiness for stream diversion by May 1969. Any slippage in meeting this date will delay project completion.

Non-Federal costs.-Costs allocable to water supply, presently estimated at $6,000,000 are reimbursable. In addition, recreation facilities estimated at $1,300,000 will be provided by local interests.

Status of local cooperation.-Assurances furnished by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania regarding prevention of downstream encroachment and provision for recreation development were accepted 29 January 1965. A resolution of the Delaware River Basin Commission dated 24 March 1965, providing assurances of repayment of water supply and pollution control costs, was reviewed and found satisfactory by OCE 7 June 1965. A signed contract was forwarded for approval by Chief of Engineers on 22 November 1966.

Comparison of Federal cost estimates.-The current Federal cost estimate of $21,700,000 is an increase of $3,300,000 over the latest estimate ($18,400,000) presented to Congress. Changes due to price level increases total $600,000.

Other changes resulting in an increase of $2,700,000 are: Relocations ($305,000), for additional road relocation at Pine Run and upstream area of the reservoir; Dams ($1,970,000), for outlet works revisions and addition of a pervious drain due to test embankment results; Roads ($55,000), due to greater volume of earth work; Engineering and Design ($300,000), for additional design resulting from changed spillway foundation materials, road relocation, test embankment and outlet works revisions; Supervision and Administration $(70,000), based on additional construction costs.

Summary construction program (PB−1), fiscal years 1967 and 1968

[blocks in formation]

Mr. KIRWAN. This is one of the projects which has been involved in the stretchout, with a delay of 11 months in the oil pipeline contract. The completion date is now shown as June 1970, instead of June 1969, as shown last year.

What effect do you estimate this stretchout will have on the overall final cost of the project?

General KOISCH. No significant effect, sir.

REASON FOR COST INCREASE

Mr. KIRWAN. The total cost of this project is up $3.3 million since last year, or almost 20 percent. Please outline the causes of this cost increase.

General KOISCH. Changes due to price levels, sir, total $600,000. Other changes resulting in an increase of $2,700,000 are: relocations, $305,000; dams, $1,970,000, for outlet works revision; roads, $55,000 due to greater volume of earthwork; engineering and design, $300,000 for additional design resulting from changed spillway foundation materials, road relocation, outlet works revisions; supervision and administration increased $70,000 based on the additional construction

costs.

ROAD RELOCATION

Mr. KIRWAN. Why was it necessary to make the additional road relocation at Pine Run and upstream area of the reservoir at a cost of $305,000?

General KOISCH. I do not have readily available the answer to the question why. I will supply that for the record.

Mr. KIRWAN. All right.

(The requested information follows:)

Originally the Towamensing Township officials had agreed to abandonment of the route. However, subsequent reconsideration determined the relocation necessary for safety of the area and to avoid an unusually long school bus route. Also included in this increased cost of $305,000 is an amount for relocation of a Tidewater Co. oil pipe line in the upper reaches of the reservoir which was not included in prior cost estimates.

RAYSTOWN RESERVOIR, PA.

Mr. KIRWAN. $1,500,000 is budgeted to continue construction of the Raystown Reservoir, Pa. We will insert pages 162 through 167. (The pages follow:)

RAYSTOWN RESERVOIR, PA.

(Continuing)

Location. The project is located in Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania, on the Raystown Branch approximately five and one-half miles upstream from the confluence of the Raystown Branch with the Juniata River.

[blocks in formation]

Major improvements: Hawns Bridge Power Dam ($300,000); 1100 summer cottages; 300 farm sets and rural dwellings; 13 commercial units, 2 2 churches, 6 schools, 2 camps.

Dam:

Type: Earth and rock fill.

Height: 230 feet.

Length: 1,700 feet.

Spillway:

Type: 90 feet gated and 1,630 feet free overflow weir.

Capacity: (Maximum pool) 301,000 c.f.s. (total).

« PreviousContinue »