Colonel WHIPPLE. The benefits were presented. However, at that time there was not a presentation of the cost allocation. The practice of discussing cost allocation before the committees upon the authorization or upon the initiation of the construction of a project has only been done in the last few years, and as a result of questions by the committee and the Bureau of the Budget. So we are now prepared to present the results of these cost allocations that we anticipate prior to the time we initiate construction. In the past that was not done.

At the time the McNary project was authorized the benefits were given as being preponderantly power benefits, but no estimate was given at that time as to how the allocations of costs might be made. Mr. MACK. That was left to later determination of the Federal Power Commission?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir. The law so specifies. In the case of projects elsewhere than the Columbia Basin there is generally no definite statutory definition as to who has the authority. The Bureau of the Budget in Circular A-47, which was put out on December 31, 1952, indicates that the cost allocation shall be made by the agency which will construct and operate the project.

Mr. MACK. Does this same rule apply to the Chief Joseph and The Dalles Dam?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. MACK. In other words, they are in the same category as McNary?

Colonel WHIPPLE. No, sir. The Corps of Engineers assumes when we are to construct and operate and maintain a project which we have defended before the Congress, and on which we have estimated the benefits, that we are the agency best qualified to make a cost allocation and should make it, unless there is specific statutory provision otherwise.

Mr. MACK. Are you saying, Colonel, that we have one law for the Pacific Northwest and another law for the rest of the country? Colonel WHIPPLE. I wouldn't say that in general, but as regards certain cost allocations, you most certainly have.

Mr. SCUDDER. Colonel, just getting back to this specific project, could you justify, or have you justified the ratio of benefits to the $43 million that is chargeable to navigation? Is the navigation going to be improved to a point where it is justifiable to spend $43 million on this improvement?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir. That is correct. I would like to give you the navigation benefits.

Mr. SCUDDER. Please.

Colonel WHIPPLE. To explain that to you. There are five different types of navigation benefits that are provided by this project. We consider naturally that this project in the first place will provide all of the navigation benefits of the two authorized dams, Kuttawa and Dover, and, therefore, should be credited as a minimum with the amounts of traffic which are developing on the existing channel. It has additional benefits in providing a better and deeper channel than the existing channel. It will eliminate one lockage, which is a minor but definite benefit in the saving of time for the barges. It shortens the route of this Cumberland traffic by 20 miles. Finally, it provides an alternate outlet, so that whereas a lock at either the Tennessee River

39263-54-vol. 1-32

or the Cumberland River—a single lock-would occasionally have to be shut down for maintenance for considerable periods of time, when you have alternate locks the traffic would always be flowing continuously through one or the other.

The combined navigation benefit is $3,239,000 a year and this is considerably more than is sufficient to justify the allocation of $43,360,000.

Mr. SCUDDER. Thank you very much.

Mr. ANGELL. You may proceed if you have any further statement, Colonel.

Colonel WHIPPLE. I believe I have given everything, sir, except the overall benefit-cost ratio of 1.43 to 1.

Mr. ANGELL. What was that overall ratio?

Colonel WHIPPLE. 1.43 to 1.

Mr. NEAL. Colonel, may I ask you a question in regard to this little canal. It is not long, is it? A mile or a mile and a half? Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. NEAL. That is the Grand Rivers, or what they call the Grand Rivers. You now have this one generating plant on the Tennessee. Is that it?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir, near Grand Rivers, Ky.

Mr. NEAL. And you are proposing to establish a generating plant near Grand Rivers, Ky.?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. NEAL. And by equalizing your water level you feel both can be operated continuously?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. ANGELL. Thank you, Colonel.

Mr. MACK. One question, sir. This high dam takes the place of two smaller dams, does it not?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. MACK. The smaller dams were previously authorized?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. MACK. How much was the monetary authorization for the two small dams?

Colonel WHIPPLE. The total estimated cost at the present time is $36 million.

Mr. MACK. For the first two dams?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. MACK. This high dam proposed then involves an increased authorization of about $125 million?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. MACK. Would approval of this automatically deauthorize the other two dams?

Colonel WHIPPLE. Yes, sir.

(The Corps of Engineers map of Cumberland River, Tenn. and Ky., is on facing page.)

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Colonel.

Mr. ANGELL. Thank you very much, Colonel Whipple.

We have Senator Kefauver here, who is very much interested in this project.

Senator Kefauver, I am sorry to have kept you here so long, but this is quite a large project and a very interesting one. We are very glad to have you here, sir.

39263 O - 54 vol. 1 (Face p. 484)

J

r

t

е

1

SS

P

STATEMENT OF HON. ESTES KEFAUVER, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

Senator KEFAUVER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to be over here with my colleagues, many of whom I knew so well in the House of Representatives not very long ago.

I appreciate this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, of saying a few words in support of this measure, which is unique in that it appears to have the support of almost everyone. That is unique because I think I have never known of a project of this sort which had the support of so many persons.

This Cumberland River, as you gentlemen of the committee, of course, know, is a stream of great importance to the States of Tennessee and Kentucky, and it has been in the process of development for quite a number of years. In the course of our studies of the lower Cumberland it was determined that we had an opportunity to abandon the previously authorized but unconstructed moderate high dams and replace them with one high multipurpose dam on the lower Cumberland, which is approximately in the vicinity of mile 30.5. At the same time, by the construction of a short canal we would be able to connect the Kentucky Reservoir on the Tennessee River with the reservoir resulting from the multipurpose dam on the Cumberland, thus effectively tying together these two important streams.

You gentlemen, of course, are considering the authorization of this alternate plan, which I understand would take the place of the previous authorization for the construction of the two lower dams.

Mr. Chairman, in connection with the construction costs my understanding is that the figure that was given a little while ago by Colonel Whipple as to the cost of the two lower dams was probably not the revised cost in the light of present-day construction expenses. I just want to say that I think it is of great importance that we utilize our opportunities here for building a high dam which will serve many purposes, rather than wasting the potential resources of the river with two small dams, which will serve only limited purposes.

The proposed dam on the lower Cumberland will serve navigation by maintaining the 9-foot channel which the overall plan conceives. Mr. Chairman, I am certain that most of your members of the committee have been to Nashville and perhaps to Clarksville and other cities on the Cumberland, and know that this is a river which has a great deal of navigation already and which has much larger and a very substantial navigation potential for the future.

Also, as I pointed out, it will provide a method of connecting the Tennessee with the Cumberland River, which will facilitate traffic. Mr. Chairman, this is the most unusual project that I know of in the United States. Two great river valleys, by the construction of dams that are justified, could be connected by a very short canal. There is a considerable amount of traffic and navigation originating on the Cumberland which goes to the Tennessee. As matters now

stand and as it would be under the lower and two smaller dams if they were constructed, that traffic has to go all the way to the Ohio River and back through the Kentucky lock and back down to the Tennessee. On the other hand, traffic from the Tennessee that is destined to some port on the Cumberland as to take the other trip around. So that this