Colonel PARKER. Is that the so-called Kurtz scheme?

Representative JENKINS. It is the Kurtz testimony. Let's see about this. One more statement, and then I will leave it. It says:

Tennessee Valley Authority engaged the Bureau of Reclamation to design Norris Dam. This Bureau, through one of its engineers, reported that a reservoir for flood control alone with flood storage of 1,255,000 acre-feet could be built at the site of Norris Dam for approximately $7,150,000.

Colonel PARKER. I would like permission to answer that with just a very brief statement about this whole Kurtz proposal. It won't take more than 5 minutes, sir.

Representative JENKINS. I have a few more questions to ask. I must leave now anyhow, but I have a few more questions to ask, and I will ask them in the morning.

(Discussion had off the record.)

Representative JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I have to go. I have another subject that I will take up with him tomorrow.

Colonel PARKER. I wonder if I couldn't wait to answer in the morning, if you are going to be here. Will that be satisfactory? Representative JENKINS. Yes.

Acting Chairman SCHWARTZ. We will adjourn until 9:30 in the morning.

(Whereupon, at 4 p. m. the hearing was adjourned until 9:30 a. m., December 3, 1938.)

INVESTIGATION OF TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1938

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE INVESTIGATION

OF THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

The committee met pursuant to adjournment in room 357 Senate Office Building, at 9:30 a. m.

Present: Senator Vic Donahey, chairman, Senators Schwartz, Frazier, and Davis; Representatives Wolverton and Jenkins.

Chairman DONAHEY. You may proceed with the examination of the witness.

TESTIMONY OF COL. THEODORE B. PARKER-Resumed

Mr. BIDDLE. Colonel Parker, Mr. Jenkins asked you a question when we adjourned yesterday. Do you remember the question?

Colonel PARKER. I would like to have it repeated, if it can be done conveniently.

Mr. BIDDLE. Will you please read the question? (Record read as follows:)

Representative JENKINS. Let's see about this. One more statement, and then I will leave it. It says: "Tennessee Valley Authority engaged the Bureau of Reclamation to design Norris Dam. This Bureau, through one of its engineers reported that a reservoir for flood control alone with flood storage of 1,255,000 acre-feet could be built at the site of Norris Dam for approximately $7,150,000." Colonel PARKER. It is my understanding that I was to comment on that last statement of Mr. Jenkins.

CRITICISM OF COST ESTIMATES IN KURTZ FLOOD-CONTROL SYSTEM

The statement was, as I understand it, that storage to the amount of 1,255,000 acre-feet at the site of the Norris Dam could be obtained for $7,150,000.

I think that that is an example of the grossly underestimated cost in this proposed so-called Kurtz reservoir system for flood control. All of the estimates which we have been able to obtain of this system have been very materially higher than the Kurtz figures.

For example, referring to House Document No. 259, Seventyfourth Congress, first session, entitled "A Comprehensive Report on Reservoirs in the Mississippi River Basin," attached to a letter from the Secretary of War gives

Mr. BIDDLE. Are those Army Engineer figures?

Colonel PARKER. These are Army Engineers' figures. On page 40 there is reference to a reservoir at the then so-called Cove Creek site. This is on the basis of a storage of 1,800,000 acre-feet, and the total estimated cost is given as $22,000,000.

115943-39-pt. 11-17

4791

If that is reduced in proportion to the capacity, if that is reduced in the ratio of this 1,255,000 to the purported capacity of 1,800,000 we get an estimated cost of approximately $16,000,000 as compared to this figure of $7,100,000 just quoted.

Our T. V. A. engineers have also made an estimate of the cost of a similar reservoir at this site of about the same capacity and have arrived at an estimated cost of approximately $14,000,000.

You will note that although our estimate is approximately twice that referred to above, it is less than the Army Engineers' figure for a corresponding reservoir.

This Kurtz reservoir system, as I understand it, is composed of 19 reservoirs with a total capacity of about 6,263,000 acre-feet, and estimated by Mr. Kurtz to cost $81,133,600.

Mr. BIDDLE. Just a moment. The Kurtz system is, I understand, a flood-control system for the Tennessee River, and does not affect floods either on the Ohio or Mississippi, is that correct?

Colonel PARKER. That is my understanding. It is system which consists of reservoirs on the tributaries of the Tennessee, and is a partially automatic system in which the outflow from the reservoirs would not be entirely controlled by gates.

Such a system of reservoirs could have no beneficial effect on the Mississippi River, and in certain instances might have a detrimental effect. As regards this cost

Representative JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question

there?

Chairman DONAHEY. Let him finish his statement, and then you can ask him.

Colonel PARKER. Pardon me?

Chairman DONAHEY. He wants to ask a question at the conclusion of your statement.

Čolonel PARKER. That last statement referred to the possible function of these reservoirs.

Now, if the reservoirs, however, were completed as proposed, the cost would be very materially in excess of this $81,000,000, as is evidenced by an examination of estimates for similar reservoirs made by the Corps of Engineers, and recorded in House Document 259, recently referred to; and also in House Document 328.

These estimates of the Army engineers cover all but about four of the reservoirs proposed. Taking the assumed estimates and combining them with the estimates of T. V. A. engineers on these remaining four reservoirs, we obtain a total of between $140,000,000 and $150,000,000, as compared with the $81,000,000 given by Kurtz. One example of this difference in cost is the Cove Creek site referred to recently. Another example is the Fontana site, for which Mr. Kurtz gives an estimate of $11,000,000 for a storage of 380,000 acre-feet. Our estimate for that same storage at the same site would be $24,000,000 as compared with $11,000,000.

Such a cost would amount to about $63 an acre-foot for Fontana and would not be very economical flood storage.

Did you have a question?

Representative JENKINS. Just one question. Mr. Biddle asked you with reference to the Kurtz plan being a flood-control plan.

Now, I want to ask you this question. It is true, is it not, that the unified T. V. A. plan does not furnish any flood control for the French Broad or the Holston River or the Emory River?

POSSIBILITY OF CONSTRUCTION OF DAMS ON HOLSTON AND FRENCH BROAD RIVERS

Colonel PARKER. It is true that the unified plan does not furnish complete and adequate flood-control protection for Chattanooga, and therefore does not include some of the tributaries that you mention. Representative JENKINS. Well, that is not quite my question. I didn't ask you about Chattanooga. A lot of people live in Tennessee on these rivers besides those living in Chattanooga,

Now, let's have an understanding that your T. V. A. unified plan that you talk so much about furnishes absolutely no flood control for the French Broad or the Holston or the Emory Rivers.

Colonel PARKER. That is correct.

Representative JENKINS. All right. Now, isn't that also true that by far, that at least 75 percent of the flood damage in the Tennessee Valley, in the upper sections of the Tennessee Valley, 75 percent of the flood damage has occurred in these three rivers that have absolutely no flood protection at all.

Colonel PARKER. I am not aware of that fact at all.

Representative JENKINS. Will you dispute this statement? I read a statement here:

Tennessee Valley Authority unified plan provides no flood protection on the Holston River nor the French Broad River, which are two of the most important tributaries of the Tennessee River. On the Emory River, where 75 percent of the total flood damage on all tributaries occurs, and where 22 lives were lost in the 1929 flood, no protection is afforded by the Tennessee Valley Authority unified plan.

Colonel PARKER. It is true that does not provide such protection. It is also true that the unified plan does not provide complete floodcontrol protection for the upper Tennessee. It does not pretend to. Representative JENKINS. The 32-dam proposition would have prorided flood protection for that section.

Colonel PARKER. The 32 low dam scheme would provide no flood control protection of any kind.

Representative JENKINS. Well, it would provide the protection of what they call valley storage.

Colonel PARKER. We don't regard that as flood-control protection. Representative JENKINS. I know you don't, but nevertheless it has a very important effect, and is a very important factor in flood control.

Now, then, Colonel, if as I have maintained all along in order for you to have your power proposition developed, you would constitutionality have to have flood control and navigation as a basis. Now, if it is necessary to have a basis of flood control and navigation, your proposal does not give any flood control to 75 percent of the places that need it most, and it does not give any navigation to that section either, does it?

Colonel PARKER. No.

Representative JENKINS. That is all.

Colonel PARKER. May I read from page 23 of our report on the Unified Development of the Tennessee River system.

Representative JENKINS. You have answered my question. If the committee wants to hear a speech, all right.

Colonel PARKER. I think this is a more adequate answer:

Though not included in the recommended plan, for complete and effective navigation and flood control on the Tennessee and Mississippi Rivers, dams to provide substantial storage on the Holston and French Broad Rivers should be provided when their construction is justified. Preliminary surveys indicate that a reservoir having a capacity of about 900,000 acre feet may be feasible on the French Broad River near Dandridge, and that a reservoir of approximately the same capacity may be feasible on the Holston River at Mossy Creek. Certain other storage projects also may prove to be feasible, should they be required.

Representative JENKINS. They would have no power advantages, would they?

Colonel PARKER. Power advantage?
Representative JENKINS. Yes.

Colonel PARKER. There would be the possibility of adding power there; yes, sir.

Representative JENKINS. Would there be a bare possibility?
Colonel PARKER. No; I think it is a very good possibility.

Representative JENKINS. For instance, where would any dams be placed on these rivers that you have just read about?

Colonel PARKER. The site which I mentioned on the Holston is called the Mossy Creek site, and it would present a very favorable opportunity for the joint development of power and flood control. Representative JENKINS. That is not in your T. V. A. program. Colonel PARKER. It is not in this unified plan, but it is a possibility in our further extended program.

Representative JENKINS. That is all.

Mr. BIDDLE. Colonel Parker, referring to finding of facts, which is No. 43 of the court findings in the Eighteen Power Companies case. and the schedule incorporated in the finding, will you advise us the total reservoir volumes of acre-feet in Norris Dam? That question came up as to the exact amount of acre-feet.

Colonel PARKER. 2,020,000.

Mr. BIDDLE. Is that high or low?

Colonel PARKER. That is the amount which we have been relying on for that storage.

EFFECT OF MORELAND'S METHOD ON ALLOCATIONS TO POWER

Mr. BIDDLE. Colonel Parker, in discussing the allocation theory yesterday you gave us figures of allocation on the three-dam system. A witness, Mr. Moreland, of Jackson & Moreland, worked out a method of allocation under which he added the total cost of the estimates of the Army Engineers for navigation and flood control separately, and then deducted that total amount from the total investment of the T. V. A. in order to arrive at the net power investment. Will you, applying that system to your estimates of separate navigation and flood control, calculate the amount of percentage which, if the system of Mr. Moreland had been applied, would show the amount invested in power?

Colonel PARKER. Which system would you like that applied to? Mr. BIDDLE. The three-dam system.

Colonel PARKER. To the three-dam system?

Mr. BIDDLE. Yes. Take your figures-take first your separate total investment in navigation and flood control.