Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

Operation and maintenance includes permanent appropriations totaling $73,879,780 since 1938.
Allotments made prior to Fallon, Nev., conference on July 27, 1907, were canceled, and summary allot-
ments issued. Original amounts are excluded from total column.

* Credit.

Distribution of allotments prior to fiscal year 1916, water conservation and utility funds, and com-
pensation increase. Not available by fiscal year.

NOTE.-Includes funds allocated from NIRA, PWA, and ERA; and allotments made to the Reclamation
Service by the Secretary of the Interior prior to fiscal year 1916. The column for "Emergency fund" above
refers to the appropriated emergency fund for irrigation and power systems. General administrative
expenses include appropriations previously titled "Salaries and expenses" and "General accounts." Bureau
of Reclamation total expenditures, 1902 through June 30, 1952: $2,533,171,692.

Mr. FENTON. Is there anything in the original act which says there is any limitation of time for this program?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. No, sir.

Mr. FENTON. It is a continuous program?
Mr. LINEWEAVER. Yes, sir.

Mr. FENTON. How about this rehabilitation and betterment program?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. I think it was in the 80th Congress when we had the very serious matter on several projects where maintenance had been held up; first, during the 1930's because of low incomes; then because of lack of material and supplies during World War II. We were confronted by the problem that the irrigation districts were unable to bring their projects up to proper operating conditions without overburdening the water users and affecting their ability to repay the construction charges. We came before the Appropriations Committee and then before the legislative committee with the facts and the act of October 7, 1949, was passed, and amended by the act of March 3, 1950, under which we must have repayment contracts for the amounts appropriated before the expenditure is made.

Mr. FENTON. I wish you would put in the record a list of the projects that you have had rehabilitated in this betterment program. Mr. LINEWEAVER. I will be glad to, sir.

Mr. FENTON. And why, and the amount of money involved, together with the information as to what period of time these projects are supposed to pay out or liquidate themselves.

Mr. LINEWEAVER. All right, sir; I will be very glad to do that. (The information requested appears on pp. 1399 to 1406.)

NEW POWER PLANTS

Mr. FENTON. I notice you have in your "new starts," certain figures in here and I notice a couple of projects that are going to require more powerplants.

Mr. LINEWEAVER. Yes, sir. I may say, Dr. Fenton, that is why I pointed out in the recommendations of Governor McKay that the American Falls powerplant has been eliminated and the Deer Creek powerplant on the Provo River was left in the estimate, and also the Koza power plant in the Yakima project in Washington. Both of those are small plants.

Mr. FENTON. What is the purpose of those plants?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. The Deer Creek plant is to take advantage of the work which was done on Deer Creek Dam which was constructed in the latter 1930's and provision was made then for the installation of a powerplant. I think the foundation of the powerplant is in, and the penstocks are in I know, and the installing of the powerplant has awaited negotiations between the Provo River Water Users Association and the Bureau as to the proper time to install the plant. There

has been a good deal of discussion over the years about it. So, the Secretary made a finding of feasibility last summer with respect to it and recommended the initiation of construction.

The Roza powerplant is the Roza main canal. When it was constructed back in the thirties, provision was made for capacity to provide power water for this powerplant, I think, at a cost of something like a million or so dollars. But the construction of the plant again has been a matter of negotiation between the Roza Irrigation District and the Bureau, and we think we are about at a point where an agreement has been reached.

Mr. FENTON. Will this produce surplus power or is this only for irrigation purposes?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. Both plants would assist the water users in taking advantage of the water without interference with the irrigation operations.

Mr. FENTON. Will this produce surplus power?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. Do you mean will the power be needed in the areas, or will it be surplus?

Mr. FENTON. What is the capacity of these plants, the generating capacity?

Mr. MCPHAIL. The capacity of the Roza plant is 10,000 kilowatts. It will nearly all be used during the irrigation season for irrigation pumping. There will be some surplus power during the nonirrigation season, which can be fitted into the general marketing system in the northwest area.

The capacity of the Deer Creek plant is 5,000 kilowatts and it would be used to some small extent for irrigation pumping, but primarily available for general marketing in the area.

Mr. FENTON. General marketing in the area?

Mr. MCPHAIL. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENSEN. The request is made for a powerplant on the Roza project in the amount of over $2 million. We discussed that item yesterday with Congressman Holmes when he was before the committee. Now, here is the thing that I think we have to consider so far as the expenditure of this nmoey for a powerplant on that individual irrigation project is concerned, and that is this: There is sufficient power now which can be used to do this pumping on the Roza project. That power can be purchased at a very low rate from the Bonneville Power Administration. In fact, it can be purchased for in the neighborhood of 2 mills per kilowatt. If someone can justify the expenditure of over $2 million for a powerplant for an individual irrigation project of this size, in view of the fact that this power can be purchased in adequate supply at a very, very low rate at this time, then I would like to hear them speak up and tell us how that expenditure can be justified.

Mr. MCPHAIL. Mr. Chairman, do you want us to go into the justification for that particular project at this time?

Mr. JENSEN. Well, of course, we know what the justification is, Mr. McPhail, and the truth of the matter is there is no justification for it that is at all in line with good business principles, as I see it. That power plant will be used to produce power to run the pumping plant for the Roza project during the irrigation season, after which time, if the powerplant is operated, it will, of course, produce power which will be turned in to the Bonneville grid system. But that power at present construction cost is going to be mighty high-priced power, much higher than the cost of producing power in the overall Bonneville area. Certainly I want to see to it that that very wonderful irrigation project, the Roza project, where I have been and seen with my own eyes, will get plenty of power, and they will get all the power they need at a postage-stamp rate from the Bonneville Power Administration without the expenditure of over $2 million. The estimate is what?

Mr. McPнAIL. $2.677,000.

Mr. JENSEN. $2,677,000. And we all know that the total cost will be possibly 50 percent more than that.

AMINISTRATION OF BOULDER CITY

Mr. FENTON. I have only 1 or 2 more questions on the general statement. You state that the procedure inaugurated under Secretarial Order No. 2650 dated July 27, 1951, "is a forerunner toward the ultimate objective of establishing Boulder City as a self-governing and self-supporting municipality under the laws of the State of Nevada." Has any progress been made towards Boulder City becoming a selfgoverning and self-supporting municipality?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. Yes, sir. We feel the first progress was made when we separated the strictly municipal expenses from the Boulder or Hoover Dam appropriation, so as to tag precisely what the city is costing. That was done under the directions of the Appropriations Committees.

Now, the question of legislation is one that has given us considerable trouble, and I do not feel we have made the progress on that we had hoped to make, because of differences of opinion as to how the city should be set up and how it should be financed.

Mr. FENTON. You certainly have had an awful lot of time since that place was organized.

Mr. LINEWEAVER. I certainly agree with you, and we run temperatures up almost every day at the Bureau on that problem.

Mr. FENTON. That is almost the biggest steal on the American taxpayers I know of, particularly people in the east, that we have to pay for their schooling out there, when municipalities in my own district have now gotten to such a low degree in being able to collect taxes to keep our school systems going, and I blame this kind of program for that situation. The continuing development of certain areas of this country with cheap power and that sort of thing detracts from the

populous eastern portion of the country in which our industrial development is being curtailed every day in the year. Then we in the East have to pay the taxes for people who go out there and derive their living from governmental projects. In other words, we in the East are giving ourselves a stab in the back by this sort of thing.

When we were out there in 1948 we thought we were going to have that thing remedied. It seems to me since Boulder Dam has been in operation they have had plenty of time to organize a municipal government to take care of their own welfare.

Mr. LINEWEAVER. We would appreciate any asistance that this committee can give us in expediting the legislation which is a prerequisite to straightening out that situation.

Mr. FENTON. Why does the Federal Government have to give those people authority to organize that municipality?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. Because the Government owns all the land; that is primarily the reason. And we have an obligation in regard to the protection and operation of Hoover Dam, with something like 1 million kilowatts of capacity, and the Government has a primary interest in it because it owns the land on which the city is located.

Mr. FENTON. If that is not socialistic, it certainly borders on being socialistic, in my opinion.

SETTLER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Then there is a request of $800,000, nonreimbursable funds, to inaugurate a program of agricultural services to farmers. Why is that necessary?

Mr. LINEWEAVER. The Department of Agriculture people are coming in at 2 o'clock. I would like to say that this request followed the direction of the Appropriations Committees in the conference report, and primarily it started with the Agriculture Subcommittee.

Mr. FENTON. Well, if that is not a duplication of effort on the part of this Government, I do not know what it is. Certainly the farmers out there are fully capable of handling their own affairs, I think. If these projects are as great as they have been pictured to this committee to be by people in the area, with the wonderful advantages derived from irrigation, I do not know why the Interior Department would have to go into seeing that we appropriate money in this subcommittee for agricultural purposes. It is a duplication of effort, in my opinion. That is about all I have at this moment.

EMPLOYEES AT HOOVER DAM

Mr. BUDGE. Mr. Lineweaver, following Mr. Fenton's remarks, how many employees do you have now operating the Hoover Dam and its related facilities, such as the schools and so forth?

30433-53-pt. 3- 3

« PreviousContinue »