1955 there was a total of $4,691,400, which had not been expended. The anticipated unexpended balance this year is $1,762,200, which is roughly a $3 million betterment. Mr. KIRWAN. Is that still considered a good estimate? General HOEFFER. Yes, sir. Mr. KIRWAN. The planning report says that the cost estimate includes $1,485,000 for contingencies. This seems out of reason now that the project is almost complete. Last year the estimate included only $916,600 and the project was not as near completion. General HOEFFER. That I think can best be explained by the fact that there are outstanding claims which we must provide for this year since we hope to complete construction. Mr. KIRWAN. Are there any other questions? BUFORD DAM, GA. The project we will take up next is Buford Dam, Ga., page 78, and we will put pages 78 and 80 in the record. (Information referred to follows:) BUFORD DAM, GA. (Continuing) Location. On the Chattahoochee River at mile 348.5, approximately 35 miles northeast of Atlanta, Ga., in Gwinnet and Forsyth Counties. Authorization.-1946 River and Harbor Act. Benefit-cost ratio.-1.05 to 1 for Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers project, of which Buford Dam is an integral unit. Fiscal year 1957.—The requested amount of $3,300,000 will be applied toComplete acquisition of lands in the reservoir area. Complete relocations____ Complete reservoir clearing_. Complete construction of the powerhouse, switchyard, and transformer yard_ Complete procurement of the turbines, generators, transformers, governors, and associated electric and miscellaneous powerplant equipment Initiate and complete reservoir access roads. Initiate and complete construction of recreation facilities. Initiate and complete utility building_ Engineering and design_-_ Supervision and administration_. Total $300,000 183,000 510, 000 1, 180, 000 200, 000 165,000 175,000 25,000 86,000 476, 000 3,300,000 The entire project is scheduled for completion in June 1957. Present schedules must be maintained in order that the first power unit may be placed on the line in December 1956 with others to follow in January and April of 1957. Non-Federal costs.-None. Mr. KIRWAN. The justifications indicate an estimated carryover of $1.6 million. Why is this project also behind schedule? Major GARRETT. Sir, the project is generally not behind schedule. We have had difficulties with reference to the generators there due to the Westinghouse strike. We anticipate now that the power-on-theline date for the first unit will be April 1957 instead of as shown in the justification sheet, December 1956, as a result of this strike. The carryover, however, is primarily due to favorable bids on construction items and a reduction in contingencies as a result thereof. Mr. KIRWAN. Is $1.6 million still a good estimate? Major GARRETT. The carryover as of June 30? Mr. KIRWAN. Yes. Major GARRETT. Unobligated, the estimate is $800,000 at the present time, sir. Mr. KIRWAN. What is the explanation of the increases of $1,253,000 contained in the supplemental? General HOEFFER. That is the result primarily of increased realestate acquisition costs. The acquisition of the real estate up in the vicinity of the town of Gainesville has been much more expensive than originally estimated. Mr. KIRWAN. When all other costs in connection with the project have either gone down or stayed the same from last year's estimate, why should the engineering and design costs go up $334,000? General HOEFFER. The explanation of that lies in the fact that in relocations, ordinarily the community, county, or State does the engineering, and they are reimbursed for the relocation costs including engineering. In this case we have certain relocations on which the local governing units are not in a position to do the engineering. We have to apply the charge to the engineering item rather than the relocation item. Mr. KIRWAN. Are there any questions? Mr. BOLAND. As the chairman mentioned, there is an amendment to the budget request for 1957 which adds $1,250,000 to this project. General HOEFFER. Yes, sir. Mr. BOLAND. Which brings the total request for 1957 to $4,550,000; is that right? General HOEFFER. $4,553,000 Mr. BOLAND. And I note the justification on page 78 on the line "Balance to complete after fiscal year 1957" is zero. That zero was inserted below the amount requested for 1957 which would apparently have completed the project, the $3.3 million? General HOEFFER. Yes, sir. Mr. BOLAND. Do you attribute the $1,250,000 to the fact that land was more costly? General HOEFFER. Yes, it was discovered after the data sheet was prepared. Mr. BOLAND. The only reason for the increase? Mr. BOLAND. Thank you. Mr. KIRWAN. Are there any further questions? HARTWELL RESERVOIR, GA. AND S. C. Next is Hartwell Dam, Ga. and S. C., page 84. We will insert pages 84 through 87 in the record. (Information referred to follows:) HARTWELL RESERVOIR, GA, AND S. C. (Continuing) Location.-On the Savannah River, Ga. and S. C., 305 miles above the mouth, 89 miles above Augusta, Ga., 67 miles above the Clark Hill Dam, about 7 miles below the confluence of the Seneca and Tugaloo Rivers, and about 7 miles east of the town of Hartwell, Ga. Authorization.-1950 Food Control Act. Benefit-cost ratio.-1.11 to 1 (initial installation) and 1.25 to 1 (ultimate installation). Dam: PHYSICAL DATA Type: Concrete gravity, flanked by earth embankments. Maximum height above stream bed: 204 feet. Length: Concrete section 1,948 feet; embankments 13,142 feet; saddle dike 2,575 feet; total 17,935 feet. Spillway: Type: Gate controlled, concrete gravity ogee weir with flip bucket. Design capacity (maximum pool): 565,000 cubic feet per second. Reservoir capacity: Power_. Flood control_. Total usable storage__ Power installation: Initial: 3 units at 66,000 kilowatts, 198,000 kilowatts. Presently planned: 3 units at 66,000 kilowatts; 198,000 kilowatts. Status (Jan. 1, 1956) Acre-feet 1,427, 600 295, 500 1,723, 100 The Hartwell project will be used to supply peaking power in Federal Power Commission power supply areas 21, 22, and 23, generally in the States of Georgia, South Carolina, and Alabama. The growth of power demand in these areas has been rapid in the past few years and is predicted to continue at a high rate as far as the market forecasts extend. In order to supply the future additional demand, a large amount of new generating capacity must be provided, and the utility companies are programing the construction of much of this capacity in steam-electric plants. A considerable part of the new load will be peak loads which can be most advantageously served by hydroelectric projects similar to the Hartwell project. The Federal Power Commission estimates that the Hartwell project, the best remaining undeveloped project for power in the Southeast, could be used to its full initial capacity to supply the market by the time it can be completed at the present programed rate. The Hartwell project will improve the power generation at the Clark Hill Reservoir by storing the flood flows and releasing more water during low flow periods. This will benefit the Clark Hill project by increasing the prime capacity and by converting annually a large amount of energy from secondary to prime energy, thereby increasing the annual power value. The operation of the Hartwell project will assure an increased depth of about 1 foot in the present river channel between Savannah and Augusta. The increased flow from Hartwell in low flow seasons will reduce the cost of providing the 9-foot navigation project to Augusta, recently authorized by Congress, and the annual maintenance thereof. Also, the coordinated operations of Hartwell and Clark Hill Reservoirs will eliminate frequent floods over a vast area of undeveloped valley lands below Augusta. These lands are among the most fertile in the southeastern United States and could be very productive. During a period of national emergency they would produce substantial added farm products. After construction of Hartwell, flooding which now occurs several times annually will be reduced to a frequency of once in 10 years. The Soil Conservation Service has estimated that the annual benefits from flood protection for these lands would be about $2 million if they were fully developed. The AEC Savannah River plant will also benefit from increased regulated flow and from reduction in temperature of its cooling water. Although neither the land benefits nor the AEC benefits are included in the economic evaluation, it is considered that they will be quite large. Fiscal year 1957.-The requested amount of $10,000,000 will be applied to- Complete relocation of Hartwell Railroad at Lightwood Log Creek___ Complete earth embankment except for terminal cones-- $3,664, 100 1, 193, 000 191,000 619, 800 845, 500 Complete procurement of sluice liners, gates, and guides- 1,500,000 136,600 500,000 100,000 150,000 600, 000 500,000 10, 000, 000 Initiate and complete access road to field office at construction site__ Supervision and administration___ Total______ The earliest possible completion of the Hartwell Reservoir project is essential in meeting the forecasted power requirements in the region including generally the States of Georgia, South Carolina, and Alabama. The Federal Power Commission, in addition to concurring in an increase in the size of the units from 60,000 kilowatts to 66,000 kilowatts, has proposed that an initial installation of 4 units be made as their market studies indicate that power demands of the region will absorb this additional output by the time the presently planned initial installation of 3 units is completed. In order to meet the power-on-line dates as scheduled it is imperative that construction proceed at an orderly and uninterrupted rate as scheduled. Non-Federal costs.-None. Mr. KIRWAN. The justification says the benefit-cost ratio for the ultimate installation is 1.25 to 1, and for the initial installation 1.11 to 1. Why is it planned to wait until 1972 to finish the ultimate phase when the initial installation is scheduled to be completed in 1962? Major GARRETT. Sir, the installation at Hartwell is presently under study. Actually, the power market will probably develop to such an extent that the remaining 2 units will be put in within the next 10 years, some time during that period. Mr. KIRWAN. The justifications before us say the fourth and fifth units will be put in in 1972. Major GARRETT. That is correct. Mr. KIRWAN. But from what you say that may be stepped up? The justifications say that the land-enhancement benefits will be quite large. Why should there not be some contribution from local interests toward the cost of the project? Major GARRETT. Sir, you are referring to the flood-control benefits? Mr. KIRWAN. I am referring to the fact that I see the estimated nonFederal cost is zero and there apparently are land enhancement benefits. Major GARRETT. Sir, there is no land enhancement in this project. We are claiming flood-control benefits in the amount of $100,000, benefits for navigation and benefits for power. Mr. KIRWAN. You say in the justifications that benefits from land enhancement will be "quite large." |