« PreviousContinue »
Mill Creek, tributary of Brazos River, Texas; in accordance with the report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors dated February 18, 1946, on file in the Office, Chief of Engineers;
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway in vicinity of Aransas Pass, Texas; in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 29, 1946;
Brazos Island Harbor and Gulf Intracoastal Waterway at Port Isabel, Texas; House Document Numbered_627, Seventy-ninth Congress;
Mississippi River Seepage, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin; House Document Numbered 515, Seventy-ninth Congress;
Mississippi River at Lansing, Iowa; Senate Document Numbered 192, Seventyninth Congress;
Mississippi River at Wabasha, Minnesota; House Document Numbered 514 Seventy-ninth Congress;
Mississippi River at Lake Pepin, Minnesota; House Document Numbered 511 Seventy-ninth Congress;
Mississippi River at Hastings, Minnesota; House Document Numbered 599, Seventy-ninth Congress;
Big Sioux River, South Dakota; House Document Numbered 561, Seventyninth Congress;
Cumberland River and tributaries, Tennessee and Kentucky; in accordance with the report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors dated February 18, 1946, on file in the Office, Chief of Engineers;
Illinois River at Peoria, Illinois; in accordance with the report of the Board for Engineers for Rivers and Harbors dated April 29, 1946, on file in the Office, Chief of Engineers;
Illinois Waterway and Grand Calumet River, Indiana and Illinois; in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 15, 1946;
Chicago River, North Branch of, Illinois; House Document Numbered 767, Seventy-eighth Congress;
Great Lakes Connecting Channels, Michigan; in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated February 20, 1946;.
Cleveland Harbor, Ohio; House Document Numbered 629; Seventy-ninth Congress;
Fairport Harbor, Ohio; in accordance with the report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors dated February 18, 1946, on file in the Office, Chief of Engineers;
San Diego River and Mission Bay, San Diego County, California; in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated May 8, 1946;
Napa River, California; House Document Numbered' 397, Seventy-ninth Congress;
Sacramento River, California; Senate Document Numbered 142, Seventyninth Congress;
Coos Bay, Oregon; in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 22, 1946;
Columbia River at Astoria, Oregon; in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 24, 1946;
Columbia River between Vancouver, Washington, and The Dalles, Oregon; in accordance with the report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors dated April 29, 1946, on file in the Office, Chief of Engineers;
Columbia River at The Dalles, Oregon; Senate Document Numbered 89, Seventy-ninth Congress;
Columbia River at Foster Creek, Washington; in accordance with the report of the Chief of Engineers dated April 9, 1946;
Honolulu Harbor, Territory of Hawaii; in accordance with the report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors dated April 30, 1946, on file in the Office , Chief of Engineers.
Sec. 2. The project for the Lavon Reservoir on East Fork of Trinity River, Texas, authorized in the River and Harbor Act of March 2, 1945, in accordance with House Document Numbered 533, Seventy-eighth Congress, is hereby modified to provide for conservation storage as may be determined, warranted by the Secretary of War upon the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers.
Sec. 3. That authority is hereby granted to the Port of Siuslaw, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Oregon, to construct, maintain, and operate, at points suitable to the interests of navigation, dams or dikes for preventing the flow of the waters of the Siuslaw River into Duncan Slough in Lane County, Oregon.
Work shall not be commenced on such dams or dikes until the plans therefor, including plans for all accessory works, are submitted to and approved by the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, and the Secretary of War, who may impose such conditions and stipulations as they deem necessary to protect the interests of the United States.
The authority granted by this section shall terminate if the actual construction of the dams or dikes hereby authorized is not commenced within one year and completed within three years from the date of the passage of this Act.
The right to alter, amend, or repeal this section is hereby expressly reserved.
Sec. 4. The Secretary of War may assign two retired engineer officers of the Army, with their consent, to active duty; one as resident or senior member of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors organized pursuant to the provisions of section 3 of the River and Harbor Act of June 13, 1902, as amended, and one as resident or senior member of the Beach Erosion Board organized pursuant to the provisions of section 2 of the River and Harbor Act of July 3, 1930: Provided, That such assignment shall not be made for a period extending beyond four years from the date of retirement.
SEC. 5. That there may be established in the Office of the Chief of Engineers a position to be filled by an engineer with not less than fifteen years' actual experience in the classified civil service on river and harbor or flood-control work of the Corps of Engineers; the salary for which shall be fixed, from time to time, by the Secretary of War upon the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers at not to exceed $12,000.
Sec. 6. The Secretary of War is hereby authorized and directed to cause preliminary examinations and surveys to be made at the following-named localities, the cost thereof to be paid from appropriations heretofore or hereafter made for such purposes: Provided, That no preliminary examination, survey, project, or estimate for new works other than those designated in this or some prior Act or joint resolution shall be made: Provided further, That after the regular or formal reports made as required by law on any examination, survey, project, or work under way or proposed are submitted no supplemental or additional report or estimate shall be made unless authorized by law: Provided further, That the Government shall not be deemed to have entered upon any project for the improvement of any waterway or harbor mentioned in this Act until the project for the proposed work shall have been adopted by law: Provided further, That reports of surveys on beach erosion and shore protection shall include an estimate of the public interests involved, and such plan of improvement as is found justified, together with the equitable distribution of costs in each case: And provided further, That this section shall not be construed to interfere with the performance of any duties vested in the Federal Power Commission under existing law:
Lynn Harbor, Massachusetts.
Mohawk and Hudson Rivers, New York, with a view to the elimination of the water chestnut.
Rondout Harbor, New York.
Cold Spring Inlet (Cape May Harbor), New Jersey, with a view to shore protection.
Delaware River between Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Trenton, New Jersey. Delaware River, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, Philadelphia to the
Pennypack Creek, a tributary of the Delaware River located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, with a view to providing facilities for light-draft navigation.
North East River, Cecil County, Maryland, from Church Point to Stony Run.
Lakes Cove, Honga River, Dorchester County, Maryland.
Tedious Creek, Dorchester County, Maryland, with a view to establishing such jetties as may be necessary.
Insley's Cove, Fox Creek, Dorchester County, Maryland.
Johnsons Creek, a branch of the Wicomico River, in Somerset County, Mary. land.
Patuxent River, Maryland, with a view to establishing a deep-water port at Benedict and a suitable navigation channel thence to Solomons Island.
Lake Placid, Shore Acres, Anne Arundel County, Maryland.
Harpers Creek, Mathews County, Virginia, and the channel connecting said creek with Mobjack Bay.
Aberdeen Creek, Gloucester County, Virginia.
At or near Hopewell, Virginia, with a view to the construction of a harbor for light-draft vessels.
Oregon Inlet, North Carolina, and Channel from Manteo to Oregon Inlet; particularly with a view to providing a depth of twelve feet to fifteen feet through the Ocean Bar Channel, thence a channel ten feet to twelve feet deep through the inlet to Pamlico Sound via Davis Slough, Old House Channel, or other more suitable route.
Harkers Point Basin, at Harkers Island, Carteret County, North Carolina.
Cross-Rock Channel between Wallace Channel and Sheep Island Slue, via Casey Island, Pamlico Sound, North Carolina.
Neuse and Trent Rivers, North Carolina.
Intracoastal Waterway, with a view to constructing a boat basin at or near Ocean Drive Beach, South Carolina.
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, with a view to establishing a harbor for lightdraft vessels.
Julington Creek, Florida.
West Palm Beach Canal, Hillsboro Canal, New River Canal, and Miami Canal, for the purpose of raising the water table in the area of Lake Okeechobee, Florida.
Boca Raton Inlet, Florida, including connection with the Intracoastal Waterway.
Saint George Sound at East Point, Florida.
Waterway from Saint Mary DeGalvez Bay, across Santa Rosa Peninsula, to Sound Bay, Florida.
Choctawatchee River, Alabama and Florida.
Arkansas River, from Little Rock, Arkansas, to Mississippi River via Grand Prairie.
Mississippi River at West Memphis, Arkansas, with a view to the construction of a harbor.
Hatchie River, Mississippi and Tennessee, in the interest of navigation and flood control.
Harbor at Springsteel Island, Lake of the Woods, Minnesota. Lake Taneycomo, Missouri. Lake De Pue in Bureau County, Illinois, and its connecting channels to the Illinois River.
Wisconsin River, Wisconsin.
Lake Superior shore line from Middle Island Point south to the mouth of Carp River with a view to providing a harbor for light-draft vessels.
Black River, Port Huron, Michigan.
Charlevoix Harbor, Michigan: The South Arm, with a view to the construction of a breakwater at or near East Jordan.
Leland Harbor, Michigan, with a view to shore protection.
West Fork of White River, Indiana.
Great Salt Lake, at or near Garfield, Utah, with a view to providing a harbor for light-draft vessels.
The coast of northern California from Point Pinos to the northern boundary of the State, including the San Francisco Bay area, with a view to the establishment of harbors for light-draft vessels. Harbor at Camp Pendleton, California, with a view to shore protection. Harbor at Anaheim Bay, California, with a view to shore protection. Harbor at Port Hueneme, California, with a view to shore protection. Drift Creek, Oregon. Duwamish Waterway, Washington. Deception Pass, Skagit Bay, Washington. Shilshole Bay, Ballard Locks, Seattle, Washington. Olympia Harbor, Washington. Harbor at Hydaburg, Alaska. Harbor at Angoon, Alaska. Channel to connect Oliver Inlet and Seymour Canal, Alaska. Tenakee Harbor, Alaska. Harbor at Pelican, Alaska. Harbor at Gustavus, Alaska.
Hilo Harbor, Hawaii, including consideration of a seawall to protect against tidal waves and excessive high tides.
Kawaihae Harbor, Hawaii.
By H. NEWLIN MEGILL. Senator OVERTON. I wish to say, by way of preliminary remarks, that I considered it advisable to have full committee hearings on the bill by reason of the fact that adjournment is contemplated within the comparatively near future, and there would be a delay if the bill were reported to a subcommittee for hearing and then reported back to the full committee and action taken thereon by the full committee.
I suppose there is no objection to that? [No response.)
This morning we first want to hear from the Chief of Engineers, After that we will take up new projects, projects which have not been approved by the House. On such new projects the proponents will be the first to speak, the opponents will be heard in rebuttal, and the proponents in surrebuttal.
On projects that have already been approved by the House and are in this bill, the opponents will first be heard, then the proponents in rebuttal, and the opponents in surrebuttal.
With respect to projects on which hearings have been held in the House I think it would be very well, in the interest of saving time, for those who are addressing themselves to a project to remember that full hearings were held in the House, and the hearings are printed and are accessible to the committee and that it is not necessary to repeat what they have had to say in the House hearings, either for or against the project under consideration. It will be well enough, however, to give a brief summary of either their opposition to or approval of a project, and then if there is any new matter which has been developed and which they wish to call to the attention of the committee, it would be well for them to go into that phase of the matter,
We will hear from General Wheeler. STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. R. A. WHEELER. CHIEF OF ENGINEERS,
UNITED STATES ARMY
Senator OVERTON. I think this is your first appearance before this committee, is it not, General Wheeler?
General WHEELER. Yes; before this committee, in my present position. I was here years ago as a junior officer of the Corps of Engineers.
Senator OVERTON. We are very happy to welcome you before the committee. We wish to extend to you our best wishes in your very high and very important position to which you have been assigned. The committee wishes to advise you that we will always be very happy to cooperate with you, and we know that we are going to get full cooperation from you and the Corps of Army Engineers.
You may proceed.
I am proud to present the projects included in the pending River and Harbor bill. As you know, the Corps of Engineers considers itself the consulting engineers of Congress and, more specifically, of the Committees on Rivers and harbors and Flood Control of the House and the Committee on Commerce of the Senate, and in presenting these reports it is discharging one of its most important functions.
As your consulting engineers, we have measured carefully both the costs and the benefits of all the projects in the pending bill, and our thorough analysis and study finds them worthy.
In 1927, Congress, with its usual foresight, instructed the Corps of Engineers to conduct a series of basin-wide siirveys, as authorized by House Document No. 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session, in order that the water resources of the United States would be used to enhance our national wealth. The reports which have been made to Congress as a result of these studies are known as "308" reports in acknowledgment of the authorizing act and are the basis for much of the comprehensive planning for the basin-wide, multiple-purpose projects which have resulted in the ensuing years. Thus, the Tennessee Valley development has followed the broad framework laid down by the "308" report for the Tennessee River Basin as published in House Document No. 328, Seventy-first Congress, second session. Similarly, the Bonneville Dam, the McNary Dam, and now the Foster Creek Dam, are progressive steps in the comprehensive development of the vast Columbia River Basin as outlined generally in House Document No. 103, Seventy-third Congress, first session. Again, as a result of these studies, the plan for the comprehensive development of the Savannah River and, as a first step, the construction of the Clark Hill Dam, was authorized in the Flood Control Act approved December 22, 1944. Other examples are available.
In the present bill, we take another step in the progressive planning initiated by Congress in 1927. As the major project, among the many important projects in the bill now before this committee, we present a plan for the comprehensive treatment of the Arkansas River, a stream