nah River and its tributaries and the people of these counties are vitally interested in the proposals now before your committee, and naturally I am greatly concerned about what action you shall take following these hearings.

The proposed project can be justified for its benefits to flood control, navigation, national defense, recreation, and electrical power. There are a number of witnesses here today who will testify before your committee on each of those justifications. Most of them have traveled over 500 miles in order to be here, and rather than duplicate or reiterate their statements and efforts, I shall not enter into a discussion of those justifications. Therefore, it shall be my purpose largely to summarize the situation as I see it and request that I be permitted to file a supplementary statement summarizing the justifications as above enumerated and have it inserted in the record following my remarks this afternoon.

The first authorization of the Congress was 22 years ago when it authorized the engineers to make a comprehensive study and survey of the Savannah River Basin with the idea of effecting flood control and promoting navigation on the river. The engineers were 7 years in making the survey; they made their report in 1935. That report is before you in detail. Between 1935 and 1944 the report was studied by representatives of the Department of Interior, the Federal Power Commission, the War Department, and one or more special committees at the request of the President, and the records show that without exception the engineers' report and recommendations were all definitely and wholeheartedly approved. Then on December 22, 1944, the Congress itself approved the report of the engineers in toto.

The justifications show that the engineers were very methodical in their recommendations in the program of development. In this hearing, I think it sufficient to say that they recommended a reservoir be constructed on the river near Clark Hill, S. C., and this be done first. They next recommended a reservoir be constructed on the Savannah River near Hartwell, Ga. More recent reports of the engineers show that their plan was to have these two projects developed together or simultaneously in order that each may contribute to the efficiency and effectiveness of the other. The former at Clark Hill is now well under way of construction and as I now understand the purpose of this hearing is to ask this committee simply for an authorization that the construction of the Hartwell Reservoir be undertaken when the justification will warrant the necessary appropriation. I understand, further, that no appropriations are now being requested and before any can be requested for this particular purpose an authorization will have to be provided for by this committee. It is a program that Congress has approved; it is one that has been justified and in the line with the policy of our Government and the Congress and we feel that the authorization will be logical, and we confidently trust you will have no difficulty in giving favorable consideration to this request.

(The following supplemental statement was subsequently submitted by Representative James B. Hare:)

SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JAMES B. HARE, THIRD DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, IN BEHALF OF AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HARTWELL DAM ON THE SAVANNAH RIVER

Four years ago the Congress of the United States recognized the possibilities for the comprehensive development of the Savannah River Basin. This recog

nition was translated into legislation in the approval of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (78th Cong., 2d sess.). It approved the construction of the Clark Hill project and a general plan for the development of 10 additional multipurpose projects. The first of these dams, Clark Hill, is now in process of construction.

WHAT IS IT?

The prposed Hartwell Dam is a multipurpose project which will serve the people of Georgia and South Carolina in the following ways:

(a) Flood control and soil conservation.

(b) Navigation.

(c) Recreation.

(d) National defense.

(e) Power.

WHERE IS IT?

The site is on the Savannah River, approximately 10 miles from Anderson, S. C., 30 miles from Abbeville, S. C., 40 miles from Greenville, S. C., 30 miles from Athens, Ga., and 80 miles from Augusta, Ga. It is 7 miles east of Hartwell, Ga., and some 7 miles south of the point where the Tugaloo and the Seneca Rivers meet to form the Savannah River.

WHO SAW ITS POSSIBILITIES?

The vision of an integrated basin development had long been held by progressive-minded Georgians and South Carolinians, but the Engineer Corps of the United States Army in 1934 made the first official presentation of the integrated plan. In 1944 the Chief of Engineers submitted to the Secretary of War a report which proposed a comprehensive plan of development. The Seventy-eighth Congress, second session, approved this report as published in House Document No. 657.

WHAT TYPE OF PROJECT IS PROPOSED?

The plan for this site provides for a gravity-type concrete dam across the river valley, including a powerhouse and gravity-type concrete spillway. The concrete dam will be connected with the high ground on each side of the river by rolled-earth dikes. Dam, dikes, and spillway will carry a roadway across the valley.

At full power pool the reservoir would extend 7.1 miles up the Savannah River to the confluence of the Tugaloo and the Seneca Rivers; 41 miles up the Tugaloo to within about 2 miles of the existing Yonah Dam; 27 miles up the Seneca to the mouth of upstream Little River, S. C., thence 2 miles up Little River and 7 miles up the Keowee River and 8 miles up Deep Creek.

WHAT OF THE AREA AND ITS PEOPLE?

Increased use of natural riches is indicated by the fact that the rise in value of manufactured products in South Carolina and Georgia was $147,000,000. In 1910 it was $315,000,000, in 1946 it was $2,644,000,000. Since the war over 2,000 new industries have come into the area. Farm cash receipts show a healthy agricultural economy in which the old 1-crop system is being displaced

by a multicrop system, with tobacco, peanuts, livestock, and pulpwood being sources of cash income to the farmer as well as the traditional crop, cotton. Farm income has risen from $162,000,000 in 1900 and $397,000,000 in 1930 to $736,000,000 in 1946.

HARTWELL FLOOD CONTROL AND SOIL CONSERVATION

The problem

The principal need for flood control in the Savannah River Basin is the lower valley, downstream of Augusta. These rich bottom lands are now flooded during the growing season on an average of four times per year, with resulting annual losses to the timber and livestock industries. As a consequence these lands at present have little or no economic value.

The Spartanburg, S. C., regional office of the Soil Conservation Service has determined the character and use of the bottom lands in the Savannah River Valley and has reached the conclusion that these lands, if protected from frequent floods, would be highly productive. It is estimated that more than 200,000 acres of these bottom lands can be used for agricultural purposes, either in cultivation or pasture; but can the Hartwell project remove the flood menace? The method of flood control

Positive flood control by reservoir operation requires that the reservoir be kept empty so as to store the surplus water during floods. Contrariwise, navigation and power dictate that the reservoir be kept as full as possible so as to augment the low flows of the river during the dry season.

The Clark Hill project will probably operate primarily in the interest of navigation and power and while its operation will reduce the frequency of flooding the bottom lands, from four times each year to an average of once every 14 years, it will not permit the full development of the potential value of the lower valley.

The Hartwell project will provide a large volume of storage and its operation can justifiably be in the primary interest of flood control. This would reduce the frequencies of damaging floods to an average of once in 20 years. What then, would be the monetary value of this flood control?

Evaluating flood control benefits

If the valley lands are reclaimed by reducing the frequency of flooding to once in 20 years, thus permitting the cultivation of these lands, it has been conservatively estimated that the annual benefit to be derived can be evaluated at $10 per acre. The total acreage which would be benefited is about 200,000

acres.

Considering then the reduction in annual flood damage and the enhanced value of the land, a benefit of $2,000,000 annually is possible as a direct result of the operation of the Clark Hill and Hartwell projects.

Prorating this annual benefit between the two projects will depend upon the method of operation of each project. Under any system of operation, it is reasonable to assume that not less than half of the annual benefit must be assigned to Hartwell. Capitalizing this annual savings at 4 percent, $25,000,000 of the initial cost of the Hartwell project should be allocated to flood control.

Present

HARTWELL AND NAVIGATION

Little or no through navigation is visualized on the Savannah River above Augusta, Ga., but below Augusta the river is navigable and commercial barges are now engaged in transporting petroleum and clay products in volume.

The Government some years ago instituted a 6-foot depth navigation project on the Savannah River below Augusta. This depth, however, exists only about 60 percent of the time because of dry seasons which affect the flow. The Clark Hill project will so regulate the flows of the river that a 7-foot depth will be available at all times. The influence of Hartwell on this channel will be beneficent and merits our attention.

Future

The Hartwell Reservoir with its great storage will further regulate the flow of the Savannah River, decreasing the average flood heights and increasing the low water depths in the river below Augusta. The resulting effect will be a sustained 8-foot channel depth.

The Corps of Engineers has reported favorably on the construction of a 9-foot channel on the Savannah River below Augusta at a cost of $3,000,000. This cost is inclusive of the benefits derived from Clark Hill but does not take into consideration the favorable effect on the cost picture that would be produced by Hartwell. It is interesting to examine the advantages of Hartwell from this standpoint.

Evaluating navigation benefits

Because of Hartwell there will not be as many open channel works required to increase the depth from 8 to 9 feet as from 7 to 9 feet. This will save in initial cost.

Secondly, the effort and cost to artificially maintain 1 depth will not be as great as to maintain 2 additional feet. maintenance cost.

additional foot of This will save in

It is estimated that the savings in the cost of channel work will be $1,000,000 and the savings in annual cost of maintenance, $100,000. Capitalizing the annual savings in maintenance and addding to this the savings in initial cost we find that the Hartwell project will benefit navigation to the extent of $4,000,000.

HARTWELL AND RECREATION

The "pursuit of happiness" cannot be neglected in the over-all summation of our project. While the project will be attractive to the people of South Carolina and Georgia (5 million population) we are considering its recreational attractions within a hundred mile radius of the project. Within this radius the population of North Carolina has been excluded because of competitive lake and park districts in that area. Within the 100-mile zone there are 2.18 millions of persons. It encompasses the larger cities of Atlanta, Greenville, Spartanburg, Greenwood, and Athens.

Site advantage

It is worthy of notice that the Hartwell project is contiguous to some of the most popular vacation lands in America. The northern sections of Georgia and South Carolina and western North Carolina have for generations been sought by the southern vacationer for rest, health, and diversion. Modern highways now bring into this section thousands of tourists annually from all parts of the United States. The Hartwell project is in the foothills of the "Smokies," a range of unparalleled scenic beauty. The providing of a lake resort in this general section of the country will add greatly to its tourist attractions.

The market

According to Department of Labor statistics about $25 per person will be spent on recreation on the basis of the per capita income of the people in the area. This means therefore that there should be about 50 million recreational dollars expended in which Hartwell will share. Hartwell is well adapted to recreational development because there is only a small fluctuation in the level of the lake due to power demand.

Evaluating recreational benefits

It is interesting to note that on the Tennessee Valley Authority lakes, a recreational industry valued at $5,000,000 annually has developed. This is represented by vacationers' subsistence, boat rentals and operations, fishing gear, etc. If 4 cents of the per capita vacation dollar in the zone is spent at Hartwell, a $2,000,000 industry will develop at the site. It is impossible to accurately evaluate those intangible benefits that will accrue to the area population in health and morale because of access to a large body of water and the recreational opportunities incident thereto, however, it is conservatiely estimated that $2,000,000 of the initial cost of the Hartwell project may be allocated to recreation.

HARTWELL AND THE NATIONAL DEFENSE

The simple facts in this proposition are:

(1) No coal is mined in Georgia or South Carolina in commercially significant amounts.

(2) Commercial petroleum production does not exist in these two States. In addition to this, there are serious doubts as to the inexhaustibility of this product. (3) These basic fuels, upon which rests a large part of the economy of this area, must be imported.

(4) In the late war great expenditures and considerable hazards had to be undertaken to continue the flow of these materials into the area.

(5) We have seen in the coal industry how a large portion of our industrial plant can be paralyzed because of operating difficulties in the coal fields.

The area is invaluable to national defense and the installation of this powerproducing resource will lessen dependence on outside sources.

Acting Chairman Seavey of the Federal Power Commission, in a letter to the President on March 29, 1939, said:

"Meritorious water-power developments are of special significance to national defense they provide a source of dependable power which would almost certainly be of great value in a war emergency. Power from Clark Hill project would thus be available for supplying the increased power load during war as well as the expanding market in the region of the project. It would make possible the establishment of war industries in that region, or, in the alternative, would provide power for transmission, by relay, to distant industrial centers." We believe the same reasoning applies to Hartwell now.

HARTWELL AND POWER

The Hartwell project will provide 177,500 kilowatts of installed capacity resulting in 384,000,000 kilowatt-hours of annual energy.

Is this additional power needed in the area? Can it be used? We say that it is and can. The facts speak for themselves.

Electric requirements

Business Week says:

* the demand for electric power is now touch and go in many parts

of the United States" (July 31, 1948).

*

the Nation's appetite for power seems almost insatiable" (April

margin between power supply and power demand (in the Southeast) will be very thin next year" (December 4, 1948).

The Federal Power Commission, in its "Power Market Survey-Southeastern Region" (March 1947), has considered this question by analyzing the past, present, and estimated future power requirements. From this report we find that the demand for electric power has increased greatly in the past 10 years and the evidence points to its continued growth. Let's look at the record.

What about the power supply?

In Georgia and South Carolina there is at present an installed capacity of 1,510,787 kilowatts. However, installed capacity is quite different from assured capacity. From installed capacity there must be deducted the effects of stream flow variations, developed storage, load characteristics, methods of operation, and reserve capacity to assure continuity of service. New plants are now proposed and building in the area which will improve the present deficiency of assured capacity.

Future electric energy consumption, as estimated by the Federal Power Commission, indicates that large increments to existing capacity will be needed.

These estimates assume full coordination (i. e., interconnections of sufficient capacity and adequacy of transmission voltages) within the two areas but partial coordination among the several power supply areas in the Southeastern region. Based on recent preliminary studies, the Federal Power Commission has stated that the foregoing figures will be revised considerably upward because of the rapid growth in the use of electric power.