STATEMENT OF HON. H. R. GROSS, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM IOWA Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to submit a brief statement in support of the interim report for flood control on the Iowa and Cedar Rivers. As the Representative for the district in which the city is located, I am, of course, particularly interested in that part of the report recommending improvements for flood control at Waterloo, Iowa, and I am pleased that the project is included in the omnibus bill (S. 2300) passed by the Senate on July 27, 1965. To the best of my knowledge, there is no opposition to the project, which is of vital interest to the residents of Waterloo. Certainly none was expressed during the Senate hearings or on the Senate floor when S. 2300 was debated. The U.S. Corps of Engineers has found that the recommended work is economically justified and it has been approved by the Bureau of the Budget. Moreover, is is endorsed by many public-spirited individuals and organizations in Waterloo who have given much of their time and effort over the past several years to obtain protection from the devastating floods which have plagued the community. I believe it is important to note that the project will involve substantial local financial participation. The estimated cost is $18,650,000, of which $14.900,000 would be Federal, for construction, and $3,750,000 would be non-Federal cost. Officials of the city of Waterloo have given firm assurance of the city's ability and willingness to provide the needed local cooperation. I trust the project will receive the approval of the committee. STATEMENT BY CONGRESSMAN BERT BANDSTRA, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM IOWA Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I would like to urge support of legislation to authorize construction of a badly needed flood control project at Marshalltown, Iowa. Marshalltown is a city of about 23,000 population located in central Iowa, at the northwest corner of the Fourth Congressional District. The city is frequently subjected to flooding from both the Iowa River and a tributary, Linn Creek. These floods have been persistent and costly. Since June 1947, for example, six major floods have hit Marshalltown, either from the Iowa River or Linn Creek, causing a total of more than $750,000 in property damage to the community. This total excludes any damage from floodwaters that swept through Marshalltown again this spring, when residents were forced to resort to emergency measures to keep the high waters at least partly under control. This project would control flooding on both the Iowa River and Linn Creek. The Iowa River, which crosses the State in a southeasterly direction, flows along the northern edge of Marshalltown. It is a flood threat to about 725 acres of land. which includes homes, a swimming pool, a city park, and a sewage disposal plant. Under plans recommended by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, levees and floodwalls would be constructed along the south bank of the river to protect the low-lying area within Marshalltown from flooding. Work in the area adjacent to the Iowa River also would include installation of interior drainage facilities and construction of three ramps to carry traffic over the levee system. Linn Creek flows directly through Marshalltown, entering the city from the southwest and then winding northeasterly until it joins the Iowa River outside the city limits. Flood prevention work on Linn Creek is needed to protect about 500 acres of land used for commercial, industrial, and residential purposes. To control flooding in this area, the Corps of Engineers has plans for widening the creek channel and constructing levees and floodwalls along both banks. At some points, this work would be tied in with an existing but inadequate levee system. Further plans for this area call for installation of an interior drainage system, replacement of one bridge over Linn Creek, modification of five others, and construction of levees and floodwalls along a small portion of Ansom Creek, upstream from the point where it joins Linn Creek in the southeastern section of the city. From an economic standpoint, this project is highly justified. The average annnal benefits are estimated at $194,500, as against estimated average annual costs of $132.300. This produces a favorable benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.5 to 1. The total estimated cost for constructing the project is $3.1 million. Of this. $2,670,000 would come from Federal funds, leaving $430,000 to be financed locally. The Marshalltown City Council has approved local participation in construction of the project. In addition, the city would pay for maintenance of the flood control facilities, once the project is completed. The potential benefits of the project, however, go beyond those to be derived strictly from flood prevention. The economic value of the project, as calculated by the Corps of Engineers, is based solely upon the savings in property damage afforded by flood control. But there would be other benefits, impossible to estimate precisely. Among other things, the project would remove the dangerous hazards to public health that always accompany flooding, facilitate the orderly development of areas now under a recurrent threat from floodwaters, and avoid disruption of road and rail transportation. In short, the flood prevention facilities would aid the overall welfare and economy of Marshalltown. But the primary purpose of the project, of course, is flood control. From this standpoint, an early start on construction is essential. As I mentioned previously, Marshalltown, like many communities in Iowa, was forced to wage a battle this spring against floodwaters. During early April, the Iowa River in the Marshalltown vicinity rose more than 4 feet above flood level, and it was necessary for some residents in the northern area of the city to flee their trailercourt homes. Severe flood damage was avoided only by the prompt and energetic work of Marshalltown citizens, who built emergency flood dikes to hold back the rising water. The swift and efficient action of the city's residents merits high praise, but it does not in any way remove the necessity for proper and permanent flood control facilities. Instead, it underscores the need for beginning work on this project as quickly as possible. I am hopeful that this session of Congress will enact authorization legislation for this project, so that appropriations can be made promptly. Any unnecessary delay would prove costly, since construction costs are rising annually. Moreover, adequate flood control at Marshalltown is long overdue. The city is a progressive one, with an expanding population and economy. As the city grows, so will the need for flood protection. With these considerations in mind, I respectfully urge this committee to give its approval to authorization of the project. ZUMBRO RIVER, MINN. Mr. JONES. Next is Zumbro River, Minn. Zumbro River drains about 1,400 square miles in southeastern Minnesota and enters the Mississippi River about 70 miles southeast of St. Paul, Minn. High flows on the Zumbro River cause substantial flood damages in the reach from Kellogg to the mouth. The Chief of Engineers recommends improvement of Zumbro River below Kellogg for flood control at an estimated Federal cost of $975,000 subject to certain items of local cooperation. Local interests have indicated a willingness and ability to cooperate. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.3. The State of Minnesota and the Federal agencies favor the project. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to submission of the report to Congress. (The statement of Congressman Albert H. Quie follows:) STATEMENT OF HON. ALBERT H. QUIE, REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MINNESOTA Mr. Chairman, I welcome this opportunity to urge inclusion of the flood control project on the Zumbro River in my district in Minnesota in the omnibus rivers and harbors and flood control bill. ment 246 of the 88th Congress, a report of the Chief of Engineers to the Congress, The project is discussed in detail in House Docusubmitted on March 12, 1964. The objective of this project is channel improvement from Kellogg, Minn. to the mouth of the Zumbro River, and this will include the development of some levees. The estimated Federal cost of this project is $975,000, and local interests will be expected to provide land easements and rights-of-way necessary for the construction of the project. Local cooperation must also provide in cash an amount equal to 1.5 percent of the actual cost of construction, estimated at $15,000, for widening of levees to provide for roadway. In addition, there are other requirements which local interests are most willing to meet. As I understand, reports from State and Federal agencies on this project have been favorable, and that the Bureau of the Budget has made no objection. As the members of the committee are aware, we have had severe floods in Minnesota this spring, especially in the months of March and April. There was severe flooding on the Zumbro River. I surveyed the damage in the communities along the river and also witnessed the effect of the flood had on crops, farm buildings, machinery, fences, and local roads. There is a history of frequent flooding along the Zumbro River, and there appears to be no question that a reduction in flood stages might be obtained by channel enlargement below Kellogg. In view of the favorable recommendations of the Corps of Engineers and favorable comments of State and Federal agencies, as well as assurances of local cooperation, I sincerely hope that your committee will include the project in the omnibus rivers and harbors authorization bill which is now under consideration. MAUMEE RIVER BASIN, FINDLAY, OHIO Mr. JONES. Next is the Maumee River, Ohio. Colonel PINNELL. Page 178, sir. The city of Findlay is in northwestern Ohio on the Blanchard River, a tributary of the Auglaize River which flows into the Maumee River. Serious flooding occurs on the average of once every 5 years. The Chief of Engineers recommends construction of a local protection project at Findlay at an estimated Federal cost of $9,317,000 subject to certain items of local cooperation. Local interests have indicated a willingness and ability to cooperate. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.2. The State of Ohio and Federal agencies commented favorably. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to submission of the report to Congress. CHAGRIN RIVER, OHIO Mr. JONES. Next is the Chagrin River, Ohio. The Chagrin River drains 268 square miles in northeastern Ohio and flows into Lake Erie about 15 miles east of Cleveland, Ohio. In the lowermost reaches of the river, flooding is aggravated by the sandbar at Lake Erie and the uncertainty as to entrance conditions is a deterrent to navigation. The Chief of Engineers recommends improvement of the river mouth in the interest of flood control and small boat navigation at an estimated Federal cost of $2,200,000 subject to certain requirements of local cooperation, including a non-Federal estimated cost of $755,000. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 2.2. The Federal agencies favor the project. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to submission of the report to Congress. GRAND RIVER, GRANDVILLE, MICH. Mr. JONES. Next is the Grand River, Grandville, Mich. Grandville is on the left bank of the Grand River about 6 miles downstream of Grand Rapids, Mich. Parts of Grandville are flooded on the average of once a year with 10 major floods having occurred since 1900. The Chief of Engineers recommends the construction of a local protection project at an estimated Federal cost of $1,373,000 subject to certain items of local cooperation. Local interests have indicated a willingness and ability to cooperate. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.2. The State of Michigan and Federal agencies favor the project. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to submission of the report to Congress. Mr. JONES. Thank you very much, Colonel Pinnell. We agree with everything you say except the situation with the Bureau of the Budget. Colonel PINNELL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. The committee will stand adjourned until 10 tomorrow. (Whereupon, at 12 noon, the committee adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, July 28, 1965.) OMNIBUS RIVERS AND HARBORS AND FLOOD CONTROL BILLS-1965 WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1965 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE ON RIVERS AND HARBORS AND FLOOD CONTROL OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS, Washington, D.C. The joint subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:08 a.m., in room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Robert E. Jones (chairman of the Subcommittee on Flood Control) presiding. Mr. JONES. The subcommittee will come to order. Mr. McRae, we are pleased to have you with us this morning. You may proceed with the reports on the Mississippi and the plains region projects. STATEMENT OF ANGUS H. McRAE, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS FOR MISSISSIPPI VALLEY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. McRAE. The first project, Mr. Chairman, is the Mermentau River, which appears on page 47 of the Senate report. MERMENTAU RIVER, LA. The Mermentau River is formed by the junction of Bayous Nepique and des Cannes about 35 miles east of Lake Charles, La. There is need to enlarge the existing channel to afford the same barge accommodations as are available on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. The Chief of Engineers recommends enlargement and realinement of the channels above the intracoastal waterway at an estimated Federal cost of $2,690,000 including replacement of the highway bridge at Lake Arthur, subject to certain conditions of local cooperation. Local interests have indicated a willingness and ability to cooperate. The benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.6. The State of Louisiana and the Federal agencies favor the project; however, the Department of Commerce qualified its comments. The Bureau of the Budget has no objection to the submission of the report to Congress. Mr. JONES. Any questions? Mr. BALDWIN. Yes. The U.S. Department of Commerce qualified its comments? Mr. BALDWIN. In what way? Mr. McRAE. In connection with the bridge at Lake Arthur. They were not in agreement with us as to the cost allocation for the bridge; |