OMNIBUS RIVERS AND HARBORS AND FLOOD CONTROL BILLS-1965 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1965 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m., in room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Robert E. Jones presiding. Mr. JONES. The subcommittee will come to order. Colonel Young, you will present the first item, the Elizabeth River, N.J., for us, please. ELIZABETH RIVER, N.J. STATEMENT OF COL. CRAWFORD YOUNG, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS FOR ATLANTIC DIVISIONS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS-Resumed Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on Flood Control. This proposed project was added to the Senate bill during discussion on the floor and is, therefore, not included in the Senate committee report. The Elizabeth River Basin is located within Essex and Union Counties in northeastern New Jersey. The basin drains an area of approximately 23 square miles and has an overall length of about 11.9 miles. In 1960 the population of this thoroughly urbanized area was estimated at about 249,000. Industrial development is relatively high. There is practically no agricultural activity. Flooding in this basin is either of a fluvial or tidal nature or a combination of both types. Fluvial flooding usually occurs during the summer months and is caused by high-intensity rainfall of short duration, while tidal flooding is caused by hurricane-induced tidal surges. Mr. JONES. Will you point that section out? Thank you. Colonel YOUNG. The two greatest floods of recent record occurred. September 1954 and September 1960 resulting from Hurricanes Edna and Donna, respectively. There are no existing Federal improvements for flood control in the basin. Previous Federal projects have been limited to navigation facilities. The Chief of Engineers recommends the construction of channel. improvements, levees, floodwalls, an open flume, interior drainage facilities, reconstruction of bridges and approaches, and utility changes between North Avenue in Union, and the mouth of the Elizabeth River at Arthur Kill, a distance of about 4 miles. The total estimated cost is $12,200,000, of which $9,769,000 is Federal and $2,431,000 is non-Federal. Annual benefits are estimated at $655,600, and annual charges at $517,100 resulting in a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.3 to 1. Local interests are required to provide the usual items of local cooperation including provision of all lands, easements, and rights-ofway; making all necessary relocations excepting highway bridges; and preventing encroachment on improved channels and ponding areas. În addition, local interests are required to bear 30 percent of the first cost allocated to hurricane tidal protection, including a cash contribution presently estimated at $542,000. Local interests have indicated their willingness and ability to comply with the requirements of local cooperation. The comments of the State and Federal agencies are favorable. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to the submission of this report. Mr. JONES. Are there questions? Mr. HARSHA. Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. Mr. Harsha. Mr. HARSHA. I would like to ask you, Colonel, what was the flood level in the 1964 flood? The last one. Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir. Mr. HARSHA. The reason I want to know, what these improvements, how much they would drop that particular flood level lower. Colonel YOUNG. Sir, I will have to provide the flood level for the 1964 flood, for the record, if I may. The high water for the design flood is about 9 feet above normal. But I would have to provide the specific 1964 one for the record. (In 1964, in this basin, there were no floods that produced damages.) Mr. HARSHA. All right. Now, this construction will take care of an additional 9 feet of water? Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir; plus 2.6 feet for mean high tide, or 11.6 feet in the hurricane tidal influence area, which is the lower part of the project. Mr. HARSHA. And the annual benefit you have here; oh, yes, that is the amount of damages you estimated will be prevented by this construction. Colonel YOUNG. Yes, sir. Mr. HARSHA. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. Thank you very much, Colonel. We have with us this morning our colleague from the State of New Jersey, Mrs. Dwyer. Mrs. Dwyer serves on the Committee on Government Operations. She is a She is a principal of that committee and has spent a great deal of time and devoted a great deal of effort in helping us in the pollution problem, and has been most astute in water resource development, and we are delighted to have you this morning. Mrs. DWYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. STATEMENT OF HON. FLORENCE P. DWYER, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY Mrs. DWYER. Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee in support of the proposed hurricane flood protection project for the Elizabeth River in New Jersey. As recommended by the Chief of Engineers in a report transmitted to the committee by the Secretary of the Army, the Elizabeth River project carries an estimated total first cost of $12,200,000. The Federal cost is estimated, as you know, at $9,769,000 for construction, and the non-Federal cost is estimated at $2,431,000, including a cash contribution estimated at $542,000. The benefit-cost ratio is 1.3 to 1, and the project has been approved and cleared by the Chief of Engineers, the Bureau of the Budget, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the Public Health Service, and the New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development. Local interests, including the city of Elizabeth and the county of Union, are aware of the requirements of local cooperation and have indicated their ability and willingness to comply. These are the basic facts, Mr. Chairman, but they do not begin to reveal the extent to which our area has suffered from flooding of the Elizabeth River or the urgency with which our people view the need for protection. The river flows through Union Hill siding in Elizabeth County and when the river goes on a rampage, as it periodically does, the damages are extensive. Flooding has been both fluvial, resulting from heavy rainfall, and tidal, which was caused by hurricane winds pushing the water of the Arthur Kill up the river. According to the Corps of Engineers, the largest fluvial flood on record would, if repeated today, cause damages estimated at $3,700,000 based on 1964 prices, while the two biggest tidal floods would cause damages estimated at $1,700,000 and $1,320,000, respectively. The annual rate of flood damage averages $605,300. While the proposed project would include only the 4 miles of the Elizabeth River from North Avenue in Union to the mouth of the river in Elizabeth at the Arthur Kill, the area which would be protected is one of the most intensely populated and heavily industrialized in the entire country. More than a quarter of a million people and over 4,000 manufacturing establishments are located in the Elizabeth River Basin. Except for some park land, there is virtually no open space along the river. Flooding, therefore, not only causes severe property damage but interferes with vital transportation facilities throughout the Elizabeth area, including major north-south and east-west highways, thereby extending the harmful impact of floods to far beyond the immediate area. In addition, the threat as well as the reality of floods has served to perpetuate the deterioration of potentially valuable sections of Elizabeth adjacent to the river and to protect the development of the 40 acres of marshland at the mouth of the river. Conversely, completion of this important hurricane flood control project will, in addition to providing direct protection for property, encourage the rehabilitation of deteriorated areas, improve transportation, stimulate the development of the wasteland at the river's mouth, and generally contribute to the health, safety, appearance and all around utility of the river and its basin. This project, Mr. Chairman, has been a matter of priority concern to the people I represent for many years. It has had the strong and continuing support of the area's public officials, especially in the city of Elizabeth, the business community through the eastern Union County Chamber of Commerce, various newspapers, especially the Daily Journal of Elizabeth, as well as other people most affectedthose who live and work in the vicinity of the river. The basic authorization for the survey made by the Corps of Engineers was included by this committee and the Congress in the Flood Control Act of 1958. In 1961 and 1962, Congress earmarked funds for the survey in the public works appropriations bill, and this year we come to you for the authority to move ahead and begin the planning, design, and construction of this badly needed improvement. And as you know, the Senate has already added this appropriation into their bill. We believe we have a good cause as documented by the Corps of Engineers, and we are grateful for your consideration of its merits. Thank you very much. Mr. JONES. We can tell those people what a fine advocate you are, Mrs. Dwyer. Mrs. DWYER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. Mr. Baldwin. Mr. BALDWIN. I would like to commend Mrs. Dwyer for a very forceful and excellent presentation and the fine job she has done in representing the interests of her constituents in bringing the project to our attention. I am quite sure we will take into consideration the statements she has made. Mrs. DWYER. Thank you very much. Mr. JONES. Mr. Dorn. Mr. DORN. I want to welcome the lady from New Jersey to the committee and commend her for a very fine statement, and also say that those of us who have been associated with the textile industry appreciate your splendid cooperation in saving that industry. I want to thank you generally for that also. Mrs. DWYER. Thank you, sir. (Telegram from Robert A. Roe follows:) TRENTON, N.J., August 4, 1965. Re Elizabeth River, New Jersey, flood control project. Chairman, Committee on Public Works, We request the following statement be entered for the record on subject project: "The State of New Jersey concurs with the recommendation of U.S. Corps of Engineers recommendations for a program of flood control for the Elizabeth River from North Avenue through the city of Elizabeth to Arthur Kill as approved by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors and strongly recommends favorable action by your House Committee on Public Works. The flood damage potential of the Elizabeth River, which is the greatest of any of the urban streams of the State, has for many years been a matter of deep concern to the State of New Jersey. The State strongly endorses this flood control project for inclusion in the omnibus river and harbor and flood control bill." ROBERT A. ROE, Commissioner, State Department of Conservation and Economic Development of New Jersey. Mr. JONES. Colonel Page, you will take up the second item scheduled for today, and that is the increased general authorization for small navigation projects. Now, what will be your recommendations? I think we can get right to it. STATEMENT OF COL. REGINALD J. B. PAGE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CIVIL WORKS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS Colonel PAGE. All right, sir. Mr. JONES. Are you advocating the continuance of the $1 million annually? Colonel PAGE. We are. Mr. JONES. The $200,000 for navigation? Colonel PAGE. No, sir; we are advocating it be raised to $500,000 with an annual limitation of $5 million. Mr. JONES. Yes, sir. That concludes item No. 2, Colonel Page. Mr. BALDWIN. I do have a question, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. Mr. Baldwin. Mr. BALDWIN. The bill in which the increases are made is a bill which I introduced, H.R. 716, 89th Congress. The bill sets a limit of $1 million for navigation projects in order to bring it up to the same limit which is already in effect for flood projects of $1 million. It is my understanding at the present time that we have a limit of $1 million for flood control projects, $200,000 for navigation projects, and I think $400,000 for beach erosion projects. And, Colonel, it just seemed to me it would relieve some of the burden on this committee, from the standpoint of these smaller projects having to be jammed into omnibus bills, to increase the limit per project to $1 million for the navigation projects the same as flood control projects. For that matter, I do not see any reason why the same increase should not be made for the beach erosion projects. Would the corps have any objection if it were the considered opinion and decision of this committee to establish a comparable limit of $1 million for all, each one of these three groupings of projects? Colonel PAGE. No, sir. The corps would have no objection. Mr. JONES. That is a peculiar position for an agency of government to take, to agree to take extra money that they do not presently have. Colonel PAGE. The reason we suggested $500,000 was based on our experienced demand for these navigation projects, Mr. Baldwin. We would have no objection on either navigation or beach erosion projects to a $1 million limitation. Mr. BALDWIN. Thank you. Mr. JONES. Glad there is no reluctance on your part; FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION MONETARY INCREASE Colonel PAGE. The proposal on item 3 is to remove the present limitation of $1 million authorized for annual allotment to the flood plain information studies program. The basic legislation authorizes the Secretary of the Army to compile and disseminate information on flood and flood damages and to provide advice to local interests for their use in flood plain planning and regulation. Applications have been approved for 281 studies in 32 States and Puerto Rico with an estimated cost of $6,350,000 and an average cost of $22,000 a study. We have underway or completed 155 studies and expect to start another 4 in this fiscal year. The present backlog of $3,810,000 for |