ANNUAL REPORT FOR TIDE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30 CHIEF OF ENGINEERS U.S. ARMY CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO RIVERS AND HARBORS, FLOOD CONTROL, BEACH EROSION CONTROL, AND RELATED PURPOSES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS VOL. 2 OF TWO VOLUMES SPECIFIC PROJECT DATA ANNUAL REPORT, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1966 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS U.S. ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES IN TWO VOLUMES Vol. 2 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1966 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVSION & DISTRICT BOUNDARIES soe RIVER & HARBOR THE ALASKADISTRICT, so FLOOD CONTROL HEADQUARTERS.ANCHORAGE ALASKA. IS INCLUDEDIN L.EGENDO THE NORTHPACIFICDIVISION OF HAWAII THE STATE AND ITLANDS IN THEPACIFIC AREINCLUDED IN ) A A s HONOLULUDISTRICT. OCEAN PACIFIC DIVISION. ar Ao . * 0a o*mr. Yat- WITH HEADQUARTERSAT HONOLULU. H AWAII CONTENTS NEW ENGLAND DIVISION .................................... 1 NORTH ATLANTIC DIVISION: New York, N.Y., District ..................................... 129 Philadelphia, Pa., District ................................... 215 Baltimore, Md., District ..................................... 255 Norfolk, Va., District ....................................... 323 SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION: Wilmington, N.C., District .................................... 365 Charleston, S.C., District .................................... 403 Savannah, Ga., District ...................................... 415 Jacksonville, Fla., District ................................... 429 Mobile, Ala., District ......................................... 481 LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY DIVISION: New Orleans, La., District .................................... 533 Vicksburg, Miss., District ..................................... 603 Memphis, Tenn., District ..................................... 615 St. Louis, Mo., District ....................................... 621 SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION: Galveston, Tex., District ..................................... 645 Fort W orth, Tex., District ..................................... 699 Albuquerque, N. Mex., District ................................ 739 Little Rock, Ark., District .................................... 763 Tulsa, Okla., District ....................................... 795 MISSOURI RIVER DIVISION: Kansas City, Mo., District .................................... 845 Omaha, Nebr., District ........................................ 887 0HIO RIVER DIVISION: ....................................... 925 Nashville, Tenn., District ..................................... 935 Louisville, Ky., District ...................................... 963 Huntington, W. Va., District ................................ 1011 Pittsburgh, Pa., District .................................... 1047 NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION: St. Paul, Minn., District ...................................... 1089 Rock Island, Ill., District ..................................... 1131 Mississippi River between Missouri River and Minneapolis, Minn. 1155 Chicago, Ill., District ......................................... 1167 Detroit, Mich., District ...................................... 1227 Buffalo, N.Y., District ....................................... 1297 U.S. Lake Survey ........................................... 1343 SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION: Los Angeles, Calif., District .................................. 1351 San Francisco, Calif., District ................................ 1409 S Sacramento, Calif., District .................................. 1449 ACIFIC OCEAN DIVISION: Honolulu, Hawaii, District ................................... 1509 NORTH PACIFIC DIVISION: Portland, Oreg., District ..................................... 1525 Seattle, W ash., District ....................................... 1597 Walla Walla, Wash., District ............................... 1635 Alaska District ........................................... 1665 Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors ........................ 1685 Mississippi River Commission .................................... 1689 Coastal Engineering Research Center ............................. 1743 California Debris Commission ..................................... 1747 Waterways Experiment Station .................................... 1757 Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses ....... 1759 Investigations and supervision of projects under Federal Water Power Act .................................................... 1761 Miscellaneous Civil W orks ........................................ 1763 III NEW ENGLAND DIVISION * tThe New England Division, an operating division with both dis- rict and division functions, comprises all of New England except estern Vermont and small portions of Massachusetts and Con- necticut along their western boundaries, and includes small por- tions of southeastern New York, all embraced in the drainage basins tributary to Long Island Sound and the Atlantic Ocean east of the New York-Connecticut State Line. It also includes Fishers Island, N.Y. IMPROVEMENTS Page I Page Navigation Navigation-Continued . Andrews River, Mass .... 3 38. Thames River, Conn ..... 53 2. Boston Harbor, Mass..... 3 39. Warwick Cove, R.I....... 54 4. Branford Harbor, Conn.... 7 40. Wells Harbor, Maine .... 55 4. Cape Cod Canal, Mass... 8 41. Weymouth-Fore and Town 5. Chatham (Stage) Harbor, Rivers, Boston Harbor, M ass. ................ 11 57 6. Mass.................. 7. Cohasset Harbor, Mass. Connecticut River below 12 42. Wickford Harbor, R.I. . . 58 43. Reconnaissance and condi- 8 Hartford, Conn. ...... 13 tion surveys .......... 60 8. Cuttyhunk Harbor, Mass.. 16 44. Other authorized naviga- . Gloucester Harbor and An- tion projects ......... 60 10. nisquam River, Mass.. 17 45. Navigation work under . Green Harbor, Mass .... 19 special authorization ... 63 11. HamptonHarbor, N.H .... 20 Alteration of Bridges 12. Hyannis Harbor, Mass. 21 3 Isle of Shoals Harbor, 46. Authorized bridge altera- 14 Maine and N.H........ 22 tion .................. 63 1* Josias River, Maine ..... 23 Beach Erosion Control 16. Kennebec River, Maine .. . 24 47. Cliff Walk, Newport, R.I. 63 17. Rennebunk River, Maine 26 48. Hampton Beach, Hampton, N.H ............... 27 64 17. Machias River, Maine ... 19. Marblehead Harbor, Mass. 28 49. Wallis Sands State Beach, 29 Rye, N.H........... 65 20. Menemsha Creek, Mass. 21. Mystic River, Mass .... 30 50. Inspection of completed 31 beach erosion control 22. Narraguagus River, Maine projects .............. 65 Newburyport Harbor, 23 Mass. ................ 32 51. Other authorized beach erosion control projects 66 24 New Harbor, Maine ..... 34 25, New Haven Harbor, Conn. 35 52. Beach erosion control work under special authoriza- SNiantic Bay and Harbor, 26 Conn ................ 37 tion .................. 67 276. Owls Head Harbor, Maine 38 Flood Control 28. Pawtuxet Cove, R.I ..... 39 53. Blackstone River Basin, 29. Pig Island Gut, Maine ... 40 Mass. and R.I........ 67 39. Plymouth Harbor, Mass.. 41 A. Lower Woonsocket, R.I. 67 831. Portland Harbor, Maine .. 43 B. West Hill Reservoir, Portsmouth Harbor and M ass. ............ 69 Piscataqua River, Maine 54. Connecticut River Basin, 82. and N.H............. 44 Vt., N.H., Mass. and Providence River and Har- Conn............... 69 33. bor, R.I . ......... .... 46 A. Ball Mountain Reser- Provincetown Har bo r, voir, Vt............ 72 34. Mass ................. 47 B. Barre Falls Reservoir, 384. Royal River, Maine ...... 49 Mass............. 73 36. Salem Harbor, Mass .... 50 C. Birch Hill Reservoir, Scarboro River, Maine (be- M ass. ............. 73 tween Prout's Neck and D. Chicopee Falls, Mass.. 74 37. Pine Point) .......... 51 E. Claremont Reservoir, Searsport Harbor, Maine . 52 N.H. .............. 76 2 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Flood Control-Continued Flood Control--Continued F. Colebrook River Reser- A. Blackwater Reservoir, voir, Conn......... 104 76 N.H. .............. G. Conant Brook Reser- B. Edward MacDowell voir, Mass ....... Reservoir, N.H ..... 105 H. Gardner, Mass ...... 78 C. Franklin Falls Reser- I. Gaysville Reservoir, Vt. 79 voir, N.H ......... J. Knightville Reservoir, D. Hopkinton-Everett Res- Mass . ............ 107 80 ervoir, N.H....... K. Littleville Reservoir, 58. Mystic, Conn......*** 108 Mass............ 80 59. Narragansett pier, Rhode L. Mad River Reservoir, *.. 109 Island ............ Conn. ............. 81 60. New Bedford, Fairhaven, M. North Hartland Reser- 110 and Acushnet, Mass.. 111 voir, Vt. .......... 82 61. New London, Conn ....... N. North Springfield Res- 112 62. Pawcatuck, Conn........ ervoir, Vt ......... Point Judith, R.I........ 113 83 63. 0. Otter Brook Reservoir, 64. Saint John River Basin, N.H. .............. 115 84 Maine ................ P. Sucker Brook Reser- A. Dickey-Lincoln School voir, Conn......... 85 Reservoirs ......... Q. Surry Mountain Reser- Stamford, Conn......... 116 65. voir, N.H........ Stratford, Conn......... 118 R. Three Rivers, Mass. .. 86 66. 87 67. Thames River Basin, Conn., 118 S. Townshend Reservoir, R.I. and Mass ........ * V t. ............... A. Buffumville Reservoir, T. Tully Reservoir, Mass.' 88 Mass. ............. U. Union Village Reser- 89 B. East Brimfield Reser- 120 voir, Vt........ voir, Mass......... V. Victory Reservoir, Vt. 90 91 C. Hodges Village Reser- 121 W. Westfield, Mass. 91 voir, Mass ........ 55. Fox Point Barrier, Nar- D. Mansfield Hollow Res- ragansett Bay, R.I .... 122 92 ervoir, Conn ....... 56. Housatonic River Basin, E. West Thompson Reser- 123 Conn............... voir, Conn ........ A. Ansonia-Derby .. . .. . 93 Reser- 96 69. F. Westville B. Black Rock Reservoir . Inspection of completed C. Danbury ........... 96 125 97 flood control projects ... 123 D. Derby ............... voir, Mass........". E. East Branch Reservoir 98 124 68. Westerly, R.I.......... F. Hall 99 Meadow Brook 70. Scheduling flood control 126 Reservoir ......... reservoir operations .... G. Hancock Brook Reser- 71. Other authorized flood con- 126 voir............. 100 72. trol projects ......... H. Hop Brook Reservoir' Flood control work under I. Northfield Brook Res- 101 121 special authorization .. . ervoir ............. J. Thomaston Reservoir . 102 General Investigations 103 73. Surveys................ 121 57. Merrimack River Basin, N.H. and Mass .... 74. Collection and study of 121 103 basic data .......... ** RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 3 r 1. ANDREWS RIVER, MASS. abo atiOn. On Nantucket Sound within town of Harwich, Mass., eodut 85 miles southeast of Boston, Mass. (See Coast and Eistic urvey Chart 257.) Wide, exten Project. Provides for channel 6 feet deep, 75 feet Sound toeing about 2,900 feet from deep water in Nantucket haruo a pPublic marina, two jetties on east and west sides of Pla oentrance, and a 3-acre maneuvering and anchorage basin. feet Of reference is mean low water. Mean tidal range is 3.7 other and maximum range, due to combined effect of wind and of Whieaus es, is6.5 feet. Estimated project costs are $332,000, authoriz non-Federal costs are $166,000. Existing project was Chi ofzed under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the wilfl b dngineers on May 2, 1966. Construction of west jetty Lo deferred pending positive demonstration of need. ofco cooperation. Local interests must contribute 50 percent bilitytruction cost, estimated at $166,000; assume full responsi- ~ai all project cost in excess of $500,000; construct and berth a a public marina of at least 50 slips, a public landing with areas commensurate with channel depth, access roads, parking hold 9and other public use facilities open to all on equal terms; rihtsofed States free from damages; provide easements avlhta'-way for construction and maintenance and for aidsand to general ion upon request of Chief of Engineers to be required in and neePubhic interest for initial and subsequent disposal of spoil costs ossary retaining dikes, bulkheads and embankments or the harborf Such works; regulate the use, growth and development of equa te acilities with understanding they will be open to all on State rms. Town has authorized bond issue of $150,000 and Teras appropriated $100,000. erminal facilities. None. Work: It nsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new Plans andneering studies, by hired labor, and preparation of Co dispecifications were commenced. Cofpleition at end of fiscal year. Planning is about 10 percent 11lete Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1 196 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 eWork. D~rprO~iated. 8rorae$2,675 $15,153 $3,200 $5,873 $26,901 2,567 2,414 15,303 3,376 23,660 Locat 2. BOSTON HARBOR, MASS. 'Yithi o. Harbor includes all expanse of tidewater lying frotnt line from Point Allerton to Point Shirley and extending about 4 ,t line westward to mainland. This comprises an area of Geodtc . square miles, exclusive of the islands. (See Coast and Prev_Survey Charts 246 and 248.) Dort foiousprojects. For details see page 1743 of Annual Re- Ahal o 15, page 81 of Annual Report for 1917, and page 63 of llaReport for 1938. 4 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Provides for: (a) A channel 40 feet deep in general, but 45 feet deep through rock, 900 feet wide, widening at the outer end to 1,100 feet from the sea to President Roads through Broad Sound; (b) deepen main ship channel to 40 feet extending from President Roads to about 200 feet north of Mystic pier No. 1, Charlestown, generally 600 feet wide with suitable widening at the bend opposite Commonwealth pier NO1 5, and 600 to 900 feet in the upper reaches, length about 51 miles; deepening to 40 feet that part of the approach channel to U.S. Navy drydock at South Boston between main ship chan- nel and U.S.. Harbor line. (c) an anchorage area 2,000 feet wide, 5,500 feet long, and 40 feet deep, on north side of Pres0 ident Roads;. (d) extension of President Roads anchorage 700 feet to north and 500 feet to west at a depth of 40 feet and dredging an area to 35 feet lying west of anchorage; (e) deeP ening to 40 feet that part of approach channel to U.S. Navy dry-d dock No. 3 at South Boston between main ship channel and U.S. harbor line; (f) a channel 35 feet deep along same line as 40-foot main ship channel in the following manner: Adjacentto westerly side of 40-foot main ship channel through Broad Sound 600 feet wide, a distance of about 2 miles; adjacent to noitherY side of 40-foot main ship channel from President Roads to abrea t Fish pier 600 feet wide, a distance of about 3 miles; adjacent to westerly side of 40-foot main ship channel from abreast Fort Point Channel to Mystic River and Charlestown Bridges and en- trance to Chelsea River, having widths varying from 100 to 1,000 feet, a distance of about 2 miles; (g) a channel 2 miles longd s feet deep, and 1,200 feet wide from sea to President Roads through Broad Sound by a less direct route than the 35- and 0' foot channels; (h) a channel 27 feet deep and 1,000 feet wi,a from Nantasket Roads to President Roads known as "NarroWs Channel, 3 miles; (i) a channel 15 feet deep, 300 feet wide, and 550 feet long through the bar which extends from north head of Long Island to Nixes Mate Shoal, known as "Nixes 1Mate" or "Nubble" Channel; (j) a channel in Chelsea River 30 feet deep and generally 200 feet wide, from mouth of river, at head of 35-foot channel in Boston Harbor, to a point about 1 mile uP stream of Chelsea Street Bridge, a distance of about 2 miles, thence a channel 8.4 feet deep to Boston & Maine Railroad Bridge 150 feet wide, a distance of about one-half mile; (k) Reserved Channel 35 feet deep and 430 feet wide extending about 1 niler from 40-foot main ship channel to L-Street Bridge; (1) For Point Channel, 23 feet deep and 175 feet wide from its entrance in Boston Harbor, about four-fifths of a mile to Dorchester Ave nue (old Federal Street) Bridge; (m) seawalls of coursed stone and riprap protecting the most exposed headlands and islands (n) a channel 12 feet deep and 150 feet wide from mouth of Weir River to Steamboat wharf at Nantasket Beach; and (o) a channel in Chelsea River 35 feet deep, generally 225 to 250 feet wide below Chelsea Street Bridge and 250 to 430 feet wide above bridge, with a turning and maneuvering basin 35 feet about deep, generally 800 feet wide and 1,000 feet long, ending 500 feet below upstream limit of existing 30-foot project. A RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 5 depths are referred to mean low water. Mean range of tide is Ch9feet Light, and 9.5 feet at Commonwealth pier, in Bostonand ChseaatCreek, in Fort Point Channel. Extreme range is about 4 feet greater. Federal cost of new work for completed oject was 23,809,333. A 300-foot width of project at upper foot channel, on East Boston side, which was included in 40- depcha,nnel extension authorization, was dredged to only 35 feet for" This remaining portion is to be restudied and excluded from is $438,0uu. oregoingcost of project. Estimated cost (1957) of this portion Eisting project was authorized by the following: A4te Work authorized Documents and reports Mar, 2 1825 June i 14:1880 Preservation of islands by seawalls. Weir River (Nantasket Beach Channel) 9% ft. deep, 100 ept.19,1890 ft. wide to Steamboat wharf at Nantasket. Weir River (Nantasket Beach Channel) 9% ft. deep, 150 July25, 1892 ft. wide to Steamboat wharf at Nantasket. Weir River (Nantasket Beach Channel) from mouth of Weir River to Steamboat wharf at Nantasket Beach 12 A* 5 51886 , ft deep, 150 ft wide. Fort Point Channel............. ................... H. Ex. Doc. 206, 48th Cong., 2d sess. Annual Report, 1885, p. 513. Channel 15 feet deep from Long Island to Nixes Mate Shoal Annual Report, 1887, p. 517. July 13,1892 (Nixes Mate or Nubble Channel). Clhannel 27 feet deep from Nantasket Roads to President Annual Report, 1893, p. 766. Mar, 3.1899 Roads. For 30-foot channel from sea to President Roads through H. Doe. 133, 55th Cong., 2d seas. Broad Sound by less direct route than 35- and 40-foot Annual Report, 1898, p. 885. Juel3,1902 channels. For 35-foot channel from sea to Boston Naval Shipyard, 1H. Doe. 119, 56th Cong., 2d sess. Chelsea and Charles River Bridges. r Annual_ Report, 1901, p. 1096. .... ,amat irom project of removal of1 inns Ledge at outer uthorizeud by ULie or tEngieers Au..30,1352 8 1917 entrance. Mar. 11, 1913. Depth of 40 feet (45 feet in rock) in Broad Sound Channel.. H. Doc. 931, 63d Cong., 2d sess.11 19352Present project dimensions of channel from President Roads I. Doe. 244, 72d Cong., sletsess. to Commonwealth pier No. 1, East Boston and anchorage Do ... * Present area north side of President Roadls. project dimensions of that part of approach channel Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. to U.S. Navy drydock No. 3, at South Boston between 29, 74th Cong., 1st sess. , 1937.,Main Ship Channel and U.S. harbor line. lsea River Channel, 30 feet deep.......................Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. t . oee 177191940 24, 75th Cong., 1st sess.1 1 Reserved channel 30 feet deep.............. ......... H. Doo. 225, 76th Cong., 1st sess. 1940 Abandons seaplane channel authorized in 1940 River and lar- Public Law 420, 78th Cong. Mar 2 453 F bor Act (11. l)oe. 262, 76th Cong., 1st sess). JuIy24, 1 Extension of 40-foot channel.......... .................... H. Doe. 733, 79th Cong., 2d sess.I1 July 3 196 Extension of President Roads anchorage.................... ..Doc. 244, 80th Cong., Ist sess. 0 8 Reserved channel 35 feet deep, 430 feet wide, extending i H1.Doe. 349, 84th Cong.1 0- 23 I962CMilefrom 40-foot main channel to L St. 1962Chelsea River Channel and Maneuvering Basin 35 feet deep.. H. Doe. 350, 87th Cong., 2d sess.l Contains le- Mat ans latest published maps. See also Annual Report, 1911, p. 1178 (seawalls and Nixes a thonnel) and Annual Report, 1903, p. 770 (Fort Point Channel). a rrized in part by Public Works Administration, Sept. 6, 1933. Portion deferred for restudy. LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with bo. 1,ermninal facilities. There are 183 wharves and piers in har- not including Mystic, Weymouth Fore, and Town Rivers, lich are reported elsewhere. In addition, there are four ferry 8s and two car floats. Of the terminals, 28 are publicly owned, 13 are open to public use, 77 have mechanical-handling facilities, all 57 have railroad connections. Facilities are considered ade- oate for existing commerce. For a full description of channel Cilities in Chelsea River refer to House Document 350, 87th 0 1gress, 2d session (See Port Series No. 3, Port of Boston, Mass., dated 1956). Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, 6 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 new work: Operations consisted of continuing work by contract, which provides for construction of a channel in Chelsea River 35 feet deep, generally 225 to 250 feet wide below Chelsea River Street Bridge and 250 to 430 feet wide above bridge, with a turn- ing and maneuvering basin 35 feet deep, generally 800 feet wide and 1,000 feet long, terminating about 500 feet below upstream limit of existing 30-foot project. About 1,425,000 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed. Work was completed in May 1966. Regular funds, maintenance: Dredging in the 40-foot main ship channel, by joint contract with above construction of Chelsea River Channel, was completed early in November 1965. Approx- mately 669,500 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed. Costs were $358,000. Snagging and clearing operations, by cond tract, were in progress. Patrol boats made two trips weekly, and special trips as required, disposing of floating debris; and noting and reporting observations of oil pollution. Costs were $3,97to Dredging, by joint contract with Mystic River, Mass., project t restore project depth in the 35-foot Mystic River turning basin, was commenced early in April 1966 and substantially completed June 30, 1966. Approximately 92,900 cubic yards of ordinary material was removed. Costs were $190,800. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed in May 1966 with the construction of Chelsea River 35-foot chan- nel and maneuvering basin. Controlling depths at mean low water were: Broad Sound 40-foot channel, 38 feet (1966); main 40-foot ship channel to pier No. 49, Charlestown, 38 feet in left outside quarter, 38.5 feet in left inside, 38.6 feet in right inside, and 37.2 feet in right outside quarter (1966), approach to Navy drydock No. 3, 40 feet (1938); President Roads anchorage, 40 feet (1963) ; extension of President Roads anchorage, 40 feet (1963); Broad Sound 35-foot channel, 36 feet (1966); Broad Sound 30-foot channel, 30 feet (1952) ; main 35-foot ship channel, 31 feet (1965) ; Narrows Channel, generally 27 feet with exception of an encroachment 300 feet into northerly limit of channel if vicinity of "Narrows Light," a depth of 13 feet in this sho (1959); 6.2 feet in southerly section of channel in vicinity of Georges Island (1959); Nubble Channel, 15 feet (1963) ; Chelsea River, 35-foot channel from J. P. McArdle Bridge to Chelsea Street Bridge, 35 feet in center half of channel width, 35 feet in northerly and southerly quarters, respectively; from Chelsea Street Bridge to the maneuvering basin 35 feet in center half of channel width, 35 feet in northerly quarter and southerly respec- tively; 35 feet in 35-foot maneuvering basin (1966), 8 feet in 8.4-foot channel (1936) ; reserved channel, 34 feet (1964) ; Fort Point Channel, 20 feet in center half of channel width, 12 feet in easterly quarter, and 13 feet in westerly quarter (1955); 3 5 -foot channel at upstream end of 40-foot project at confluence of Mystic1 River, Chelsea River, 35 feet, (1966) (31 feet in 35-foot channe at entrance to Charles River (1963) ; and 12-foot Nantasket Beach Channel-Weir River-6.7 feet (1960). RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 7 Total Federal cost for existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Total Regui pul . Works ............... .. $21,843,224 $4,105,313 $25,948,537 1,030,806 erg s reief ....................................... relief........................................ 1,030,806................ 935,303 ............... 935,303 Total.. ... ...................................... n I II -. A I AM AA. . 27,914,646 I I 23,809,333 14,105,313 Excludes $17,767 I I r I contributed funds. Cost and financial statement ear Total to .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 APpropriated.......... ........................ $35,000 $550,0003$1,114,000 2$25,458,083 eatenancee*............ ........................ 10,015 186,652 1,318,706 25,274,456 A ropriated.......... $16,071 $896,129 55,771 766,727 259,094 34,216,999 o ............ *t... ..........40,800 714,320 244,582 244,58 .. 307,903 624,625 4,123,192 123_____-_______-________ s1 neludes 1 $1 465 123 for new work and $17,879 for maintenance for previous projects. eCludes $935 303 emergency relief funds and $1,030,806 public works funds. eludes $17,767 contributed funds. 3. BRANFORD HARBOR, CONN. fLocation. On north shore of Long Island Sound, 5 miles east 2 New Haven Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 217) fr, Xisting project. A channel 8.5 feet deep and 100 feet wide fro, Outer harbor to upper wharf in Branford Harbor, about 2.3 .1les. Plane of reference is mean low water. Mean tidal range is ,9 feet, and maximum range, due to combined effect of wind and her causes, is 10 feet or more. Federal cost of new work for Co1Pleted project was $9,537. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reportsl ne31902 Channel between upper and lower wharves in the river......II. Doc. 100, 56th Cong., 2d sess., and r* 2 .Annual Report for 1901, p. 1188 , 1907 Channel at the mouth of the harbor...................... Specified in act. 1F'or latest published maps, see H. Doc. 1292, 64th Cong., 1st sess. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. hTerminal facilities. Facilities, comprising two wharves near ead of the harbor and one at mouth of river, are considered dequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, Maintenance: Dredging, by contract, to restore project depths in the 8.5-foot channel was commenced in mid-July 1965 and com- pleted late in October 1965. Removed about 93,236 cubic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed S1907. Controlling depths at mean low water were 8.5 feet (1965). 8 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Totalto Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 New work: $g,537 Appropriated............................... Co~t Coat. ............... ......... .... ......... . ..... ...... .... ......... .. .... ... 9, Maintenance: 21000 -12,169 4001'828 Appropriated.......... 49945 ......... $221,000 -5 2,169 496,9 Cost............121 20...3..........912,175 4. CAPE COD CANAL, MASS. Location. This waterway is a sea level canal; extending from head of Buzzards Bay, Mass., to a point on Cape Cod Bay about 15 miles southeast of Plymouth Harbor, Mass. In general direc tion canal trends from Buzzards Bay easterly to Cape Cod B~Y. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 251 and 1208.) Existing project. Provides for purchase of Cape Cod Cana, including a 600-foot stone jetty and a 3,000-foot stone brea0 water at east end of canal at a cost to United States of $11,500,00 : for an open canal 32 feet deep at mean low water, *Wh widths of 540 feet in land cut, 500 feet in a 1strajge channel in Buzzards Bay to Wings Neck, and 700 feet be- yond Wings Neck, mooring basins consisting of a basin h south side of Hog Island channel 4,000 feet long, wtl widths varying from 0 to 400 feet, 32 feet deep at mea low water, and a basin at Sandwich 3,260 feet long with widths varying from 0 to 385 feet, and 25 feet deep at meal low water; construction of two fixed highway bridges with holet zontal clearance of 500 feet, and a vertical clearance of 135 fe at mean high water; construction of a vertical lift railroad bridge with a 500-foot span and 135-foot clearance above mean 1ih water when span is raised; an improved lighting system; ,othr accessory and minor features which may be deemed necessa and to be in accordance with plans approved by Chief of Enoeei neers, which include a dike extending southwesterly 10,700fee from Stony Point, a dike between Hog and Mashnee Islanda t dike between Hog Island and Rocky Point, a small East boat1, Basin, 13 feet deep at mean low water on south bank of clnalt an extension to the East Boat Basin covering an area of aboe 4.3 acres, to 8 feet deep, and a small West Boat Basin 18 feoet deep at mean low water on north bank of canal; a harbor.d refuge for small vessels by dredging a channel 150 feet wide and 15 feet deep at mean low water into Onset Bay and to town Wh at in village of Onset; for enlargement of 15-foot turning basinet town wharf mean deep below and for lowanwater, anchorage basin located contiguous of about to16 proposed acres, 8y1 - 5 foot channel and turning basin. total Land cut is 7.7 miles long, and with approach channels, tod length of canal is 171/2 miles. Mean range of tide in Cap e Cod Bay at Cape Cod Canal entrance is 9.4 feet and in Buzzards B1Y 4 feet at Cape Cod Canal entrance. Mean range of spring ti is about 13 feet in Cape Cod Bay, and 6.5 feet in Buzzards I3 ' Federal cost of new work for completed project was $31,885,2u0 y RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 9 Uding $11,500,000 purchase price of canal and properties chipWere taken over by United States on March 31, 1928. beriorrehabilitation of stone breakwater was completed in Octo- cob 963. Major rehabilitation of Bourne Highway Bridge was pleted in December 1965. Existing project was authorized by the following: ActsWork authorized Documents 211927(see 2). ............ Purchase canal from Boston, Cape an. H. Doe. 139, 67th Cong., 2d sess. Cod & New York Canal Co., in accordance with contract dated cld July 29, 1921, executed by that 1cudedinPrpnh Stratio company. ublie Works Adminis- Construct 3 bridges and widen canal H1. Doe. 795, 71st Cong., 3d sees. une26 ,gram, ept. 6, 1933. to 250 feet. riain 1 (Permanent Appro- Operation and care of works of im- Do. Act). pepeal rovement provided for the funds from War Department appropria- dtr't inpe r A dm s tions for rivers and harbors. rUo i r Adminis- Construct a mooring basin............ Do. i4dednPr-ram, Air. 29, 19:15. gramMI .mergency Relief Pro- Dredging and bank protection........ Do. Aug.3 1Y 28, 1935, . 135 .............. Existing project for main canal Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. a2,1945 adopted. sess. 15, 74th Cong., slet .............. 15-foot channel and turning basin in H. Doe. 431, 77th Cong., 1st sess. S3,1958 Onset Bay. ................ Extend East Boat Basin for an H. Doe. 168, 85th Cong. area of about 4.3 acres to a depth of 8 feet. foLocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual costs 9 4all requirements under terms of project authorization were $1.432 which includes a cash contribution of $115,432. Local 1 rteests have constructed a marina at East Boat Basin. Trerminal facilities. There are four terminals on the canal. of , are privately owned, one used for receipt and freezing St. and two for receipt and storage of oil. Fourth terminal is 1ote, owned by Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and on Pier, of urth bank canal at Bourne Neck. Terminals are adequate for DOrses for which they are used. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance, reg- ular funds. Dredging by Government-owned hopper dredge Goethals to restore project depth to 32 feet mean low water in the Canal Land Cut, Hog Island and Cleveland Ledge Channels was Commenced April 20, 1966, and completed May 5, 1966. Removed 84,500 cubic yards (credited) of ordinary material at a cost of $118,926. Work, by contract, for removal of boulders in Cleve- land Ledge Channel continued and was completed in January 1966. Contract costs were $7,100 for fiscal year. Paving shop areas by contract, was commenced July 14 and completed July 21, 1965. Contract costs were $7,168 for fiscal year. Inclosure to tenib rson railroad bridge, by contract, was commenced in Sep- cieler 1965 and completed June 30, 1966, except for minor de- was cies. Contract costs were $63,758 for fiscal year. Contract I awarded for furnishingZ1riprap for repairs to slopes and dikes. Oelive 196 ry was commenced in December 1965 and completed in May trat Contract costs for 6,532 tons of stone were $21,859. Con- awarded for painting railroad bridge and modifica- lab o Were tjoes elevators on railroad bridge. Work performed by hired and costs: Condition surveys-$55,245; railroad bridge, 10 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tower and signal system $65,794; roads, highways, bridges, grounds, piers, utilities and project equipment-$165,19 2 ; repairs to maintain dikes, canal banks and dolphins-$46,89 9 . Real estate activities cost $2,428. Maintenance of public recreation facilities and areas cost $18,978. Traffic passing through canal was regulated by marine traffic controllers and canal patrol and tug boats at a cost of $247,882. Major rehabilitation: Operations, by contract, for rehabilita- tion of the Bourne Highway Bridge comprise replacement of curbs and one 5-foot lane of bridge decking on each side of road- way, removal of central traffic marker, removal of damaged concrete sections, repair to expansion joints and necessary struc- tural repairs. Work continued and was completed in December 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was corn" pleted in February 1965, with completion of construction of recre-' ational facilities. Canal is crossed by two high-level highway bridges and a vertical-lift railroad bridge; one of which, Bourne Highway Bridge, is being rehabilitated in order to preserve struc- tural strength and extend its economic life. Minor rehabilitation work on breakwaters was commenced in September 1962 and completed October 1963. Canal in landcut from easterly en- trance to station 430 has a minimum bottom width of 480 feet, except opposite State pier where width is 450 feet. From sta- tion 430 to Wings Neck (Hog Island Channel) width is 500 feet and beyond Wings Neck (Cleveland Ledge Channel), 700 feet. Controlling depths at mean low water entering from Cape od Bay were: in canal land cut 31.4 feet in middle half of channel 31.7 feet in left and 32 feet in right outside quarters, Hog Island Channel 32 feet in middle half of channel, left and right outside quarters, in Cleveland Ledge Channel 32 feet in middle half of channel, left and right outside quarters (1966); 6 feet in east mooring basin (1966) ; 9.5 feet in east boat basin, and 8 feet in east boat basin extension (1964); 24.1 feet in west mooring basin near Hog Island, south side near steel dolphins (1966) ; 25 feet at State pier, channel side (1965) ; 17 feet west boat basin (1959)- 14 feet in Onset Bay channel from Cape Cod Canal to town wharf and turning basin at town wharf (1964) ; 8 feet in Onset Bay east and west anchorage (1964). Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ ~Total to 1962 1963 1904 1965 1966 June 30, 1961 New work: Appropriated .......... $306,000 -$30,000 -$44,830 -$1,018 .. 2$31,88,1200 Cost................. .107P3 245,786 -$14,60 l,03 31:885,200 Maintenance: 10,753 245786 17,756 46,563............ 3 1, Appropriated.......... 1,497781 882,862 896,214 082,293 8980,652 24,181,91 1,63:07 Cost............. 24084,850 24084, CMos Minor t :. rehabilitation: 1,631,070 1,023,874 927,078 904,985 963,111 Appropriated.......... 320,000 80,916 ............ -916 ............ 112 Cost .. .......... 6,942 373,248 16,498 -4,576 ........ 392, Major rehabilitation: ......... Appropriated..........*.* ........ .38,000 400,000 700,000 157,000 1,290000 C * ......... ...... ..... 7,688 412,335 711,337 158,706 1, Sincludes $6,188,157 for new work from public works funds and $4,849,740 for new work from emergency 2 Excludea reliefcontributed $115,432 funds. funds. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 11 5. CHATHAM (STAGE) HARBOR, MASS. 16Location. At northeastern corner of Nantucket Sound, about p 0es east of Hyannis Harbor, Mass., and 66 miles south of wn Covastnceto aHarbor at northern extremity of Cape Cod. (See at a Geodetic Survey Chart 1209.) Previous project. For details see page 73, Annual Report for 1942. loExisting project. An entrance channel 10 feet deep at mean hW Water and 150 feet wide from Chatham Roads into upper harbor. Mean and spring tidal ranges are 3.6 and 4.6 feet, re- SlectivelY. Federal cost of new work for completed project was p$258Mo)6, exclusive of amounts expended under previous project. Project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 456, 77th Cong., 1st sess.). f ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual costs in all requirements under terms of project authorization, includ- required non-Federal contributions, $43,500. noterminal facilities. There are two commercial wharves on or h side of inner harbor open to public use subject to owners' Coenience. Facilities are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, Maintenance: Operations consisted of dredging, by contract, a .e 0-foot channel through Harding Beach and construction of a from Harding Beach to Morris Island. Work was in progress July 1,1965 and completed July 21, 1965. Approximately 21,822 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed and 506 tons of stone placed, making a total of 361,822 cubic yards of material, 1,806 tons of stone placed, and 691 timber piles placed and fur- 11 hed under the contract. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of existing proj- ect Was initiated in September and completed in October 1957, ith dredging of a channel 10 feet deep and 150 feet wide from tht depth in Chatham Roads to upper harbor. By 1961, a break in barrier beach connecting Morris and Monomoy Islands caused Federal Channel to fill in completely. Local interests 1red an emergency channel to obtain 8-foot depth in June 1962 and performed additional dredging in 1963. Minimal 1-naltenance dredging by the Federal Government in April and A Y 1964 provided access to inner harbor for 1964 boating season. a e w 10-foot channel through Harding Beach and Jdike from Harding Beach to Morris Island wasconstruction of iJly 1965 Controlling depths at mean low water completed in were 10 feet e 1 0-foot approach channel and 10-foot inner channel, except ab shoaling to 9.0 feet along south limit of inner channel for undt 250 feet (1965). Federal costs for project from regular Inlids were $258,816 for new work and $603,410 for maintenance. I ddition, $43,500 expended from contributed funds for new 12 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Appropriated work:26 ........ 6 Cost .................. ... . ..... . ... . .... . . .. . . ... . ... . .. 75 266:706 Maintenance: Appropriated........... $19,236 $12,000 $85,391 $472,928 $60,000 733686 Cost.................. 15,374 8,000 93,253 462,712 23,659 686, Includes $7,889 for new work and $83,276 for maintenance for previous project. Excludes $43,500 contributed funds for new work. 6. COHASSET HARBOR, MASS. Location. On shore of Massachusetts Bay, about 16 miles south- east of Boston Harbor and 37 miles northwest of eastern entrance to Cape Cod Canal. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 242 and 1207). Previous project. For details see page 60, Annual Report for 1904. Existing project. An anchorage area about 18 acres in inner harbor 7 feet deep, and channel 90 feet wide, 8 feet deep from anchorage area to outer harbor. Project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 425, 76th Cong., 1st sess.). Fed- eral cost of completed new work was $131,988, and $30,000 non- Federal. A project authorized under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on October 12, 1965, provides for construction of anchorage areas 6 feet deep with 3.9 acres in Cohasset Cove, 3.3 acres west and south of existing anchorage, and 5.4 acres in Baileys Creek-total anchorage space 12.6 acreS. Estimated cost for anchorage basin is $220,000, of which non- Federal costs are $97,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed work wherein local cash contribution was $30,000 and local interestS were required to make available for public use a wharf and land- ing facilities. For project authorized under section 107, local interests must contribute in cash 44 percent of the first cost of the project, presently estimated at $97,000, to be paid in a lump sum before initiation of construction, subject to final adjustment after actual costs have been determined. Provide lands, easementS, and rights-of-way for construction and maintenance of project. Continue to operate and maintain the existing public landings, open to all on equal terms. State and town appropriated local share of costs. Assurances have been received. Since 1910 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts dredged within the project area, and provided an 8-foot channel, a 6-foot anchorage area, and an 800-foot breakwater at a cost of $116,192, of which $42,692 was contributed by local interests; other than the Commonwealth., Terminal facilities. There are 10 wharves in the harbor, 2 of which are open to the public, and 5 are equipped with marine rail ways. They are considered adequate for present activities o harbor. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, neW RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 13 Work. Engineering studies, by hired labor, were commenced and were in progress on June 30, 1966. 9Condition at end of fiscal year. Entrance channel 8 feet deep, 90 feet wide and an anchorage area 7 feet deep for an area of about 18 acres in the inner harbor were completed in To complete the project requires construction of the July 1960. additional .6-acre anchorages. Preparation of plans and specifications for this work is in progress. Commonwealth of Massachusetts has Provided an 8-foot channel, a 6-foot anchorage basin, and an 800- fOeot breakwater. Controlling depths at mean low water were 5.0 feet in entrance channel and 6.4 feet in the basin (1963). Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $161,988 for new work, and $2,371 for maintenance. In addition, $30,000 were expended from contributed funds. _ ~Cost and financial statement Y 16A2al Total to .. . __._e .. . . . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New &popriated work $250 $1500 $2,500 A rPopriated .......... 2 4 .. ( i] $ Z.. _ 2i1 $15,500.........$13,000 .$171,088 $171,988 Malatena.c . ...... e . ... ropt . 2,113 .... 2,604 ........ 66,619 10,843 $1,252 165,419 2,371 ,go ~ted ..---------------------------------- -------- 2,371 .......... ........... 2,371 fornudes 10,000for new work for previous projects. Excludes $30,000 contributed funds 7. CONNECTICUT RIVER BELOW HARTFORD, CONN. N Location. Has its source in Connecticut Lake in northern ew Hampshire, flows southerly 380 miles and empties into Long Island Sound at Saybrook, Conn., 14 miles west of New London. bartford, now head of commercial navigation, is 52 statute miles, by channel, from mouth. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 215, 266, 267.) Prevzous project. For details see page 1754, Annual Report for 11 and page 120, Annual Report for 1938. ViEightmile River, Conn., elimination as separate project: Pro- ides for a channel 8 feet deep and 75 feet wide from deep water i"Connecticut River to Hamburg and for turning basin of same pePth, 150 feet wide, approximately 300 feet long at Hamburg. aroject was adopted by River and Harbor Act of 1910. Costs and expenditures were $9,000 all for new work. In accordance With River and Harbor Act of 1950, project for Connecticut River beow Hartford was modified to include project for Eightmile Rilver, which was eliminated as a separate project. Aforemen- tia ned act also provided for an anchorage basin 6 feet deep and about 6.5 acres in area in upper cove at Hamburg. 3 0 0Zsting project. A channel 15 feet deep at mean low water, , 1 feet wide from mouth to Lyme Railroad bridge, about 3.4 52 es,and thence 150 feet wide to Hartford, a total distance of traniles, channel obtained by dredging and construction of dikes, j ing walls, revetments, and accessory works; two riprap stone etties at mouth of river, tops to be 5 feet above high water and 6 feet Wide, easterly one about 2,300 feet and westerly about 2,750 14 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 feet long; for a training dike about 3,700 feet long at Hartford, and for anchorage 11 feet deep about 12 acres, and one, 6 feet deep about 17 acres, in North Cove, Old Saybrook, with an entrance channel 11 feet deep and 100 feet wide; for a channel 8 feet deeP, 75 feet wide about 1.5 miles long from Connecticut River to Hamn burg; a turning basin of same depth 150 feet wide and 300 feet long at Hamburg; in Essex Cove-channel 10 feet deep, generallY 100 feet wide and about 4,400 feet long from existing 15.foot Essex Shoal Channel off Essex Reef to and northward along Essex waterfront, then to existing 15-foot channel near northern end of Essex Shoal, anchorage of about 15 acres 10 feet deep in southern part of area bounded by 10- and 15-foot channels, and anchorage of about 19 acres 8 feet deep in northern part of area bounded by 10- and 15-foot channels; in Wethersfield Cove-channel at entrance 6 feet deep, generally 60 feet wide, and 30-acre anchorage 6 fee deep. Mean tidal range is 3.5 feet at mouth, and at summer stage is about 1 foot at Hartford. Maximum tidal range at mouth due to wind or other causes, is 8 feet or more. At Hartford usual rise due to spring freshets is between 16 and 24 feet above mean lOW water. Maximum recorded freshet at Hartford (Mar. 35.5 feet above mean low water.. Below Middletown the 1936) wa eight of crest of freshet decreases rapidly. STotal cost of new work for completed project is $1,384,221, of which $130,410 is non-Federal. Dredging' 6-foot channel, turning basin, and anchorage area at Hamburg to 6 feet deep, about d. acres in area in Eightmile River portion of project is considered inactive and excluded from foregoing estimate. Estimated eral cost of this portion (1956) is $57,000. Major rehabilitatOFe will be required for five bank revetments on Connecticut below Hartford, Conn., from Glastonbury Upper Bar, mile R42"ve Claybanks Upper Bar, mile 49. Studies are in progress. Late approved estimated Federal cost of rehabilitation is $640,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents I pro+ June 10, 1872 Jetties at the mouth..................... Present project dimensions plo9 Mar. 3, 1881 The Hartford dike by Chief of Engineers , D. oris .......................... -- .. . . . .. . .. . .. . ............. Present project dim ens ions1? June 25, 1910 Channel and turning basin in Eightmile River lDoc. 327, 60th Cong., nineers in 1t tBess. 188. Feb. .............. H[.by Chief of 27, 1911 Present project dimensions of channel over Mar. 2, 1919 Dikes, training walls, and revetments ...... Saybrook bar.... 11. Doc. 1294, 61st Cong., 3d se Aug. 30, 1935 Present project dimensions of channel and I. I)oc. 132, 65th Cong., 1st se. training walls, revetments, and accessory additional dikes, II. Doc. 49, 73d Cong., 1st sess. May 24, 1937 Park River declared nonnavigable....... works. ........... Mar. 2, 1945 Channel and anchorages, North Cove, Old Saybrook.. ltr. Sec. War, Apr. 21, 1937. -. May17,19502 Channel, anchorage, and turning basin, E:ightmile . Julyc4, 1960 River..... If. fo, 666,'80th Con.. 2d sees. sec. 107 Channel and anchorage in Essex Cove:............... . .. Chiefof Engineers Oct. 18,1961 Channel and anchorage in Wethersfield Cove............. Chief of Engineers Nov. 15,1960. Contains latest maps. SInactive. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Cash contributio by local interests were $67,500 for North, $36,671 for EsseX, ad $26,239 for Wethersfield Coves, respectively. Terminal facilities. On both Connecticut and Eightmile Rivert there are two or three wharves at each of river towns, one o RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 15 11rin each town being open to public use. At Hartford and bank I own there is about one-half of wharf frontage along west 0b river. Facilities adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new Work: Operations, by contract, were comprised of improve- ment dredging for construction of an anchorage 11 feet deep about 12 acres, and one 6 feet deep about 17 acres, in North Cove, Old Saybrook, with an entrance channel 11 feet deep and 100 feet wide. Work was commenced in June 1965 and completed early in September 1965. About 464,340 cubic yards of ordinary material were remroved, making a total of 536,340 cubic yards removed. Maj rehabilitation: Engineering studies were in progress for Ia~ulding five bank revetments on Connecticut River below Uartford from Glastonbury Upper Bar, mile 42, to Claybanks Pper Bar, mile 49. eular funds, maintenance. Condition surveys of Essex and etnersfield Coves were conducted in August and September 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed ortember 1 965 with the construction of additional permanent Waotk and dredging channel and anchorage in North Cove, Old as ok Conn. The 15-foot channel from mouth to Hartford Iartcompleted in 1937. Saybrook jetties and training walls at artford Clay Banks, and Sears Shoal were completed in 1915. olae dikes and timber spurs at Pistol Point, Glastonbury, Press 2u 1Naubuc, Cys Hollow, and Clay Banks were completed in atpre ad those at Wethersfield in 1947. Timber-pile dikes br (8rinc were completed in 1940 and at Press Barn, Glaston- bee (including two piers), and Gildersleeve Island reaches have vet revetted. Repairs to jetties at Saybrook and repairs to re- tr aent at Glastonbury were made in 1960. Studies were in roess for major rehabilitation of five bank revetments from G lonbury Upper Bar, mile 42, to Claybank Upper Bar, mile 49. frorn of commercial navigation is at Hartford, 52 miles by channel cor outh. Adam at Holyoke, Mass., 34 miles above Hartford, water ely interrupts navigation. Controlling depths at mean low are generally 12.5 feet for mid-channel widths to Hartford (162a64) except 14 feet for mid-channel width at Rock Landing ~ayr 14.5 feet for mid-channel width at Saybrook Outer Bar and ad 'r ok Shoal (1964) ; 15 feet in 15-foot channel at Haddam Is- tarC (1962), Sears Shoal, Sears Shoal Upper, Calves Island li\aub romwell Bar, Dividend Bar, Pistol Point Bar, Essex Shoal, t uc Bar Paper Rock Shoal, Cobalt Shoal (1964) ; 11 feet in 6 feanete channel to North Cove; 11 feet in 11-foot anchorage and et in 6-foot anchorage (1965) ; 5.5 feet in entrance channel to chathersfleld Cove and 6 feet in anchorage (1965) ; 8.0 feet in 8flel at Essex Cove, 10 feet in 10-foot anchorage and 8 feet in Alilo(t anchorage (1965). 4.5 feet in channel and basin in Eight- Cosiver (1965); 1 to 6 feet in anchorage at Hamburg (1946). for ts for existing project from regular funds were $1,253,811 flew Work, which includes $9,000 of completed new work (ex- ~roject) transferred from Eightmile project, $3,585,728 for nailene'c'wihicue$900ocopeenewok(x $130 ,4, and $28,302 for major rehabilitation. In addition, 10expended from contributed funds. 16 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year................ Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 19661 New work: Appropriated.......... $103,000 -$30,000 $10,000 $380,000 -$45,000 25154,268 Cost.......... ........ 9,796 52,090 1,024 Maintenance: 62,760 269,157 Appropriated.......... 277,742 3,807 3952 076 282,350 22,055 2,257 3:952076 Cosat............ .... 235,580 46,018 72,434 231,971 2,257 3 Major rehabilitation: Appropriated . *.28*302 ......... 60 o ..... 60,000 ... ....... Cost.................. ............ 3,176 9,554 15,572 SIncludes $287,374 for new work and $366,348 for maintenance for previous projects. 2 Includes $9,000 expended for new work for subproject "Eightmile River, Coon." CONTRIBUTED FUNDS year ................ Fiscal 1962 1963 Total to 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 New work:$13041 Appropriated.......... $103,000 ... 6..... . $7,500 Cost.................. ... 130410 2,856 $58,731 $41413 8,900 $58,600 8. CUTTYHUNK HARBOR, MASS. Location. At eastern end of Cuttyhunk Island, at western el trance to Buzzards Bay, about 14 miles south of New Bedford Harbor, Mass. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 297.) Existing project. A channel generally 75 feet wide and feet deep from outer harbor to westerly terminal in Cuttyhul"10 Pond, about 3,500 feet; an anchorage in inner harbor 10(fee deep, 900 feet long, and 800 feet wide; and maintenance of exist" ing jetties and stone dikes. All depths refer to mean low water. Mean and spring tidal ranges are 3.4 and 4.2 feet, respectivelY Existing project was authorized by 1937 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 81, 75th Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Spoil-disposal areq for maintenance will be furnished when required. Total actu costs for all requirements of local cooperation under termnso project authorization including required non-Federal contribU tions, were $11,643 for new work, and $50,000 for maintenance STerminal facilities. Two town wharves of timber and pile coll struction, having total berthing space of 400 feet, are opento public use. No mechanicalhandling facilities are available. Facilities are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, maintenance: Adjustment in funds was made. Condition survey of 10-foot channel and anchorage was made in October 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project pleted in 1939. Controlling depths at mean low waterwas are colD geo erally 8.5 feet in 10-foot anchorage (1962) and 9.4 feet in 10-foo channel (1965). RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 17 - Cost and financial statement calYear Total to ...............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 New Work - a prated............... roit ed **$27 ..... ........ .. . .... 167 Matea,.. * .............. ........ ...... ........ . ....... .... ........ 27,167 .opriated.......... -$4,500 $28,500 $249,000 $12,181 $469 729,568 ................. 5,605 67,928 10,509 256,676 2,932 729,668 ludes $11,643 for new work and $50,000 for maintenance from contributed funds. 9.GLOUCESTER HARBOR AND ANNISQUAM RIVER, MASS. A oat Gloucester Harbor is at southern extremity of Cape A , about 23 miles northeast by water from Boston Harbor. baseSquam River is a narrow tidal waterway extending across wio Cape Ann from Gloucester Harbor on south reach ay0on northside, a distance of approximately 4side to Ips- miles. A of a of this waterway, at Gloucester Harbor end, for a length and out 1,800 feet, is known as Blynman Canal. (See Coast Survey Chart 243.) forpGreodetic 1ei u s projects. For details see page 1740 of Annual Report 9, and page 50 of Annual Report for 1937. 1i b iestlng project. Gloucester Harbor provides: (a) A rub- struone breakwater 2,250 feet long, surmounted by a super- tubbl ure of dry walls of heavy split stone inclosing a core of reo stone from Eastern Point over Dog Bar to Cat Ledge; (b) 15 fet of three ledges in inner harbor, 1 to 12 feet and 2 to 4 to 18 depth at mean low water, and five ledges in outer harbor, a tota feet and 1 to 25 feet depth at mean low water, aggregating to 15 f of 2,206 cubic yards, place measurement; (c) removal sgtrt eet deep below mean low water of ledges and boulders ob- 1Wh1g approach to wharves between Harbor Cove and Pews el a ,near head of inner harbor; dredging to same depth chan- dee eding past wharves and dredging Harbor Cove to 10 feet bor at mean low water; (d) an entrance channel into Inner Har- Wide. Ofeet wide and 20 feet deep, with a turning basin 600 feet dee (e) an access channel, 200 to 250 feet wide and 20 feet al along waterfront to northwest of Gloucester Fish pier; (f) Ct channel, 200 feet wide and 20 feet deep, along water- 1 cess 650 t southeast of Gloucester Fish pier; (g) an access channel (h) 300 feet wide and 16 feet deep extending into Smith Cove; eet a n access channel, varying from 500 to 100 feet wide and 18 dovedeep, along waterfront west of Harbor Cove and into Harbor e tra(i) an anchorage of about 5 acres, 15 feet deep, east of feet dce to Harbor Cove; (") an anchorage of about 10 acres, 16 olateeep, opposite entrance to Smith Cove; and (k) removal of Ve td rock shoal adjacent to entrance channel south of Harbor eet d 24 feet deep. Annisquam River provides for a channel 8 to eeP at mean low water 60 feet wide from Gloucester Harbor ~id ston & Maine Railroad bridge, 100 feet wide from railroad ay, to mouth of river, and 200 feet wide across bar in Ipswich tra eIcluding removal of a ledge near Gloucester Harbor en- 8feet and a dredged anchorage area about 17 acres in extent and deep at entrance of Lobster Cove. Project depths refer to 18 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 mean low water. Mean range of tide in Gloucester Harbor is8 feet; extreme range is 12.6 feet. Mean range of tide in Annisquao River is 8.5 feet; extreme range is about 10 feet. Federal coS new work for completed project was $1,250,593. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Aug.11, 1888 Remove ledges and boulders, and dredge in Gloucester Annual Report, 1887. p. 503. Harbor. 2d sess Aug. 18,1894 Construct breakwater at entrance to Gloucester Harbor from H. Ex. Doc. 56,48th Cong., . Eastern Point to Round Rock shoal, and Annual Report, 1885, P.534, June 13, 1902 Termination at Cat Ledge of breakwater authorized by act Annual Report, 1902, p. 89. of Aug. 18, 1894. June 25, 1910 Remove 8 ledges in Gloucester Harbor..................... H. Doe. 1112, 60th Ipo. Cong., 2d Aug. 30, 1935 Dredge in Annisquam River and removal of a ledge in Rivers and Harbors Commttee Gloucester Harbor near entrance to Annisquam River. 39, 72d Cong., Ist sees.st Mar. 2, 1945 Dredge 8-foot anchorage area in Lobster Cove, Annisquam H. Doe. 329, 77th Cong., st. River. Oct. 23, 1962 Entrance channel into Inner Harbor 20 feet deep. and turn- H. Doe. 341, 87th Cong., 2d sess. ingbasin. Access channel 20 feet deep along waterfront to northwest of Gloucester Fish pier. Access channel 20 feet deep along waterfront southeast of Gloucester Fish pier. Access channel 16 feet deep into Smith Cove. An access channel 18 feet deep along waterfront west of Iar- bor Cove and into Harbor Cove. A 5-acre anchorage 15 feet deep east of entrance to Harbor Cove. A 10-acre anchorage 16 feet deep opposite entrance to Smith Cove. Remove isolated rock shoal adjacent to entrance channel south of Harbor Cove to a depth of 24 feet. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual costs for all requirements of local cooperation amount to $25,000 cash co tribution. and Terminal facilities. In Gloucester Harbor, 75 piers t' wharves, 90 percent of which are used in some connectoF sh the fishing industry. Of these, two are owned by the city. pier is owned by Massachusetts and leased to city. All others a o privately owned, and not available to the public. There are aer two commercial wharves on east bank of Annisquam V",te There are no railroad sidings available. Facilities are adequa for existing commerce. e Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fundS,5 work: Improvement dredging in Gloucester Harbor, by controet was completed in July, 1965. Operations were comprised of ide struction of: an entrance channel into inner harbor 300 feet s and 20 feet deep, with a turning basin 600 feet wide; an ac eso channel 200 to 250 feet wide and 20 feet deep, along waterfront tode northwest of Gloucester Fish pier; an access channel 200 feet wide and 20 feet deep along waterfront southeast of Gloucester e* pier; an access channel 650 to 300 feet wide and 16 feet deep toe tending into Smith Cove; an access channel varying from 500bor 100 feet wide and 18 feet deep, along waterfront west of ija15 Cove and into Harbor Cove; an anchorage of about 5 acre o feet deep, east of entrance to Harbor Cove; an anchorage of about 10 acres, 16 feet deep, opposite entrance to Smith Cove; and re- moval of isolated rock shoal adjacent to entrance channel south of Harbor Cove to 24 feet deep. About 1,010 cubic yards of rock and 152,498 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed. i' quantities are subject to survey. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 19 Maintenance. Operations were commenced early in July 1965, by contract, for dredging the 8-foot Annisquam River and Ipswich Bar Channels. Approximately 19,536 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed, and work completed October 29, 1965. Federal costs were $58,505. Repair of Dog Bar breakwater, by contract was commenced November 15, 1965. Operations were suspended in January 1966 pending favorable weather; were re- sumed late in February 1966, and completed March 24, 1966. Ap- proximately 10,916 tons of stone were placed. Federal costs were $96,420. Condition at end of fiscal Vear. Existing project was completed 191 Y 1965. Controlling depths over ledges in outer harbor in e9 .ere 18 to 25 feet; in 1965-20 feet in 20-foot inner harbor eIra.ce channel and turning basin; 20 feet in 20-foot north chan- bor; 20 feet in 20-foot south channel; 16 feet in 16-foot inner har- iQanchorage; 18 feet in 18-foot channel to harbor cove; 16 feet a1e6 foot anchorage at entrance to Smith Cove; 15 feet in 15-foot el forage east of Harbor Cove; 7.6 feet in Annisquam River chan- ,os Ipswich Bay to Gloucester Harbor; 8 feet in Outer Bar, ederah Bay (1965) and 8 feet in Lobster Cove anchorage (1958). 59 r l costs for existing project from regular funds were $1,250,- $25o r new work, and $617,226 for maintenance. In addition Sexpended from contributed funds. Cost and financial statement Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30. 19661 .... $177,000 $323,000 $25,000 $1,282,850 7.................. 7,050 395,532 42,161 1,271,593 M"Clrtopnated eJend .......... $11,759 -$4,544 1,782 92,877 103,336 617,226 84,231 5,878 1,782 9,668 186,545 617,226 "v$e-~ l ,000 for new work for previous projects. Excludes $25,000 contributed funds 0 10. GREEN HARBOR, MASS. ofcation. On west side of Massachusetts Bay, within the town 0f Plarshfield about 30 miles southeast of Boston and 9 miles north -lYouth Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 245.) tra tIng project. Provides for channel 6 feet deep (8 feet at aternce), 100 feet wide extending about 4,000 feet from deep Iir to h ead of navigation, with small turning basin at upstream it 5-acre anchorage near Town pier, 6 feet (leep; sealing, re- at eeng part, and a 200-foot extension of existing wvest jetty 4 ratio1n + 12, with dike to beach berm at elevation +14 feet, are sg east jetty to elevation +14. Estimated project costs ig$290,00 excluding $26,000 for aids to navigation, but includ- ab, $25,000 for sport fishing facilities. The Federal share of the cot.Project cost is $231,500, and the local share, including cash 3. bution and local costs on sport fishing facilities, is $158,500. l Sn, project was authorized under section 107, 1960 River Locarbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on December 15, 1965. I2cooperation. Local interests must provide a cash con- 20 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tribution of 40 percent of project construction cost; bear all costs of operation, maintenance and replacement of off-site facilities required for jetty sport fishing; provide and maintain berthing area, floats, piers, slips, and similar marina and mooring facilities outside of Federal project limits, as needed for transient and local vessels, as well as necessary access roads, parking areas and othl needed public-use shore facilities upon and available to all on eqtl terms; continue to maintain and operate existing Town pier Wito berthing depths commensurate with Federal all equally; provide title to existing jetties and anchorage, opentO all necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construction and future mainte nance of project, including suitable spoil disposal areas with neceS sary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor.gl the United States free from damages; and provide adequate o9 project facilities for jetty sport fishing. Formal assurances tha these conditions will be met were requested May 20, 1966. Terminal facilities. Major terminal facility is Town pier. in village of Brant Rock. Facility is a bulkheaded, earth-filled lan" ing and parking area about 290 feet wide, extending harbor. A marine service is south of Town pier; and 210 feet Ito for recreational craft has been developed on south side of a facilty harbor near head of navigation. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, gye work: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were commenced.o Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning is about 5 perl complete. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 Totailto 1963 1964 1965 1966 june New work: Appropriated...... .. .. $2,500 $14,500 .. Cost............... 1,968 1 $8,000 18 ,59 $,67 $1,776 1,028 $ 11. HAMPTON HARBOR, Location. On New Hampshire seacoastN.H.13 miles Portsmouth IHarbor, 5 miles north of mouth of Merrimack sou1th 0of tiver at Newburyport, Mass. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1206.) Existing project. Extending north jetty 1,000 feet, raising outer 300 feet of south jetty and constructing a 180-foot sprto high ground, and dredging to provide a channel 8 feet deep feet 150 feet wide across entrance bar. Mean tidal range is 8.3 onee and spring range is 9.5 feet. Federal cost of new work for cod pleted project was $200,000. Existing project was authorized ob Public Law 86-645, section 107, and the Chief of Engineerso February 18, 1964.cs Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total costs for cash contribution were $193,761. Terminal facilities. There are six piers in Hampton ierbo ,rbOr State of New Hampshire maintains two pile and timber Pe one in Hampton about 1,500 feet north of entrance and ofe ip Seabrook one-half mile south of entrance. Hampton pier has RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 21 oh Walkway to a float that has depths of 4 to 6 feet. Seabrook ler has no float and a water depth of about 3 feet at outer end. x0th. landings are open to public. Facilities are adequate for extng commerce. worPerationsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new aenrk: Payment and final computations were made for improve- 0,M3 4 redging of Hampton Harbor, completed in 1965. About cost ' cuic yards of material had been removed, by contract. Venruction no"lber stone jetties, by contract, was completed in No- 1965. of Placed about 32,667 tons of stone (23,767 for I.Jetty, and 8,900 for south jetty). a tenance, regular funds: Condition survey of 8-foot channel C conducted in April 1966. i ,ndtion at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed 5.9 f'eraber 1965. Controlling depths at mean low water were inentrance channel (1966). Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 4ew'ork: cotst .................... $1,000 $10,000 $189,000 $200,000 .... .......... 54 1,790 150,42 $46,831 200,000 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 196 June 30, 1966 tributed. *..*$200,000 -$6,239 $193,761 ................... 63,185 40,676 193,761 ton 12. HYANNIS HARBOR, MASS. 1aataion. On south shore of Cape Cod about 16 miles west of (See MMtass., and 20 miles northeast of Vineyard Haven, Mass. _io.ast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1209.) abolt 0 Pn!roject. A stone breakwater 1,170 feet long, lying area be .7mile off shore, dredging to 15.5 feet deep in protected 150 chind breakwater; a channel 12 feet deep with widths of elland 100 feet in outer and inner harbors, respectively, an r rage area 12 feet deep and about 5 acres in area adjacent to I uearbor channel north of Harbor Bluff; and a riprap jetty e00feet long extending south from Dunbar Point. All depths oo mean low water. Mean spring tidal ranges in outer Wor oare 3.1 and 3.7 feet, respectively. Federal cost of new pleted r completed project was $484,499. Breakwater was com- t5 In 1882. A survey revealed that top of the structure was 4eVefeet below authorized project elevation in some places and Sto rel Y deteriorated. Minor rehabilitation was required to re- o re the breakwater to designed purpose of providing a harbor Wate uge. Federal cost of completed rehabilitation of break- Was $129,757., 22 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following.: Acts Work authorized Documents. Mar. 2,1827 Breakwater .................................. 8. Doo. 32, 18th Cong., 2d sess. July 11, 1871 Present dimensions of breakwater................ .... H. Doc. 63, 41st Cong., 2d sess. Aug. 5, 1886 Dredging behind breakwater............................. 1. Ex. Doc. 96, 48th Cong. sess. (co Mar. 2, 1945 Channel, anchorage and jetty............................ H. lDoe.98, 77th Cong.,st s (o tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual cos, for all requirements of local cooperation under terms of the proi ect authorization amount to $103,001, cash contribution. e* addition, Commonwealth of Massachusetts and local interestse pended nearly $235,000 in extending breakwater to shore,ya dredging channels in outer and inner harbors; and $52,000 e~ pended by local interests for construction of a riprap jetty 1,00 feet long extending south from Dunbar Point.er Terminal facilities. There are two town wharves in the inner harbor. One has a bulkhead frontage of about 800 feet. Other private landings are available. Facilities are adequate for exist ing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fun' maintenance: Operations consisted of dredging, by contract,as the 12-foot channel, outer harbor and lower bay. The work was performed in July 1965, and during the process about 16,060 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co pleted in November 1959. Breakwater was completed in 184 and dredging behind breakwater in 1906. Rehabilitation W necessary to restore breakwater to its designed purpose of pro- viding a harbor of refuge. Restoration was completed .I e vember 1961. Construction of 12-foot channel and anchorag was initiated in May and completed in November 1959. CoWg monwealth of Massachusetts constructed the jetty extendina south from Dunbar Point in 1962. Controlling depths at neoo low water were 11.5 feet in 12-foot channel; 11 feet in 1 2.fo anchorage (1965); and 12 to 16 feet in protected area bend breakwater (1914). Cost and financial statement Totalt Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June. . New work: 4 499 Appropriated...................................................................... 484 99 M CCost... ontna.................. .................................... ......... . .. .. .. .. 3,691 Maintenance:113,691 Appropriated.......... ........................ $53,250 $906 113,691 Re b a tion:st*.*.*.*...* .*................................. 6 ,420 47,736 12 Appropriated.......... -$5,243 .......................... 129, Cost...... ...........116,329.. ........................... ....... 1Excludes $103,001 expended for new work from contributed funds. 13. ISLE OF SHOALS HARBOR, MAINE AND N.H. l Location. A group of islands in the open sea about 6 miles northeast of Portsmouth Harbor, N.H. Three of them, SmuttY RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 23 hose, Cedar, and Star Islands, are so situated that, with the shoals oelnecting them, they afford a small harbor of fair depth, open (o)ato the west and northwest, known as Gosport Harbor. (See s and Geodetic Survey Chart 330.) forev us projects. For details see page 1739 of Annual Report 8tg sYnose sid ting project. Three rough-stone breakwaters: One from Island westwardly 240 feet to Malaga Island on north SidtOf harbor; one extending southeastwardly 700 feet from westtynose Island to Cedar Island; and a third extending south- rotWardly 530 feet from Cedar Island to Star Island, affording Secton from the southeast and south. Mean range of tide is co8*eet and the extreme 9.9 feet. Federal cost of new work for Udl e te d project was $39,238, exclusive of amounts expended 191r previous projects. Existing project was authorized by to ver and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 1122, 60th Cong., 2d sess.). calcooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. There is one wharf near the hotel on Star beld which is used to accommodate a passenger steamer plying Sutleei Portsmouth, N.H., and the Island during 3 months of the te Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, main- cotiee: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were initiated and ued preparatory to issuing invitations for bids for repair of breCwater from Star Island to Cedar Island. S1Ondition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed $111913. Total costs for existing project from regular funds were 1 963, of which $39,238 was for new work and $70,725 for 11tenance. Cost and financial statement lyear11963 964 196 1966 Total to Ioalt 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 e ork. "topriated................ .............. ........................$80,691 . ....... ......... e. ........... ....... ............ ............ 80,691 prop°riated*52 1, 39 ............ $77,000 147,440 • ........ ~52 1,2:39 ............ 285 70,725 des $41,453 for new work for previous projects. o 14. JOSIAS RIVER, MAINE Cov ocation. A small river running through Flat Pond to Perkins 30 'iWhich is the harbor for Ogunquit, a village on coast of Maine Chriles southwest of Portland. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey at1205.) orstin5g . oproject. A channel 5 feet deep and 40 feet wide in ehas River from that depth in Perkins Cove to and including ohor age basin of same depth and about 3.2 acres in area in Flat det; and5 extension to Flat Pond anchorage over area of 1 acre at rah of feet. Project depths refer to mean low water. Mean oa e of tide is 8.7 feet and spring range is 10 feet. Federal cost eta work for completed project was $115,565. Existing proj- Was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of March 2, 1945 24 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 (H. Doc. 227, 76th Cong., 1st sess.) and July 3, 1958 (HI.Doc.377 85th Cong., 2d sess.). Latest published map is in project doCU ment. . Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual cos- for requirements of local cooperation under terms of project ai thorization amount to $26,813 for non-Federal cash contributio' In addition, local interests have expended $35,000 on complete project. 1l Terminal facilities. There are four wharves in the harbor~.ac owned by the Ogunquit Village Corporation and open to the pu e free of charge. Three of these wharves are in Flat Pond andil e in Josias River between Flat Pond and Perkins Cove. The villa. corporation also erected a pile-and-timber bulkhead backed with earthfill, on northerly shore of the river. Easterly end of th s bulkhead is about 300 feet below the footbridge from which p it extends about 490 feet along northerly bank of the riverto50 Flat Pond. A marine railway capable of handling boats up feet long is immediately east of the bulkhead. SOperations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, a1 d tenance: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were initiateda continued preparatory to issuing invitations for bids for dredgins 5-foot channel and anchorage. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in 1VIie r 1960. A channel 5 feet deep and 40 feet wide in the Josias e from that depth in Perkins Cove to and including an anchor basin of the same depth and about 3.2 acres in area in Flat Ponde was completed in 1951. An additional anchorage area about one acre to 5 feet deep in extension to the existing 5-foot Flat pdin anchorage basin was initiated in November 1959 and completeet March 1960. Controlling depth at mean low water is 1.3 the from Perkins Cove to the basin area, and generally 5.0 feet jfn le anchorage basin, with the exception of 4.0 feet in small shoa area, and along channel edge (1966). Cost and financial statement . ... _,,,oa6Totalto . Fiscal year .............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jun New work: $115665 Appropriated........................................... ..... . ... 115:6 Cost.................. ............ ....................... ... Maintenance: 33, Appropriated.......... ............ ............ ........ . .. ... $31,2504456 Cost....... ............................... .......... 2,413 1Excludes $26,818 contributed funds for new work. 15. KENNEBEC RIVER, MAINE Location. Drains a large number of lakes and minor strea and flows from Moosehead Lake about 150 miles southerly d discharges into Atlantic Ocean about 25 miles east of Portla" (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 288, 289, and 314.)915 Previous projects. For details see Annual Report for and Page 52 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A channel 27 feet deep and not less ththa 500 feet wide, extending from mouth to bridge at Bath; thence t RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 25 Gardiner a channel not less than 150 feet wide, 17 feet deep at roPel a ock Shoal, at foot near of Swan l ft Lovejoy Narrows, head Island, of Swan18Island, feet deep through decreasing to ifeet deep at Gardiner; channel west of Swan Island 100 feet dfeet,12 feet deep, except at upper shoal, where depth was to be 15 ,; and channel 125 feet wide and 11 feet deep from Gardiner strean ., to Augusta, at head of navigation. Section of river in1 1 ded in project is about 44 miles long. Work includes dredg- dceprock excavation, and two riprap training walls. Project oths refer to mean low water. Mean tidal range is 8.4 feet at aUth of river, 6.4 feet at Bath, 5.3 feet at Richmond, 5 feet at gret n er, and 4.1 feet at Augusta. Spring tides are about 1 foot cosrt oer at mouth and about 0.5 foot greater at Augusta. Federal of 9,onew work for completed project was $1,090,529. Portion oProject for dredging 27-foot channel from Bath Iron Works a "P. to 0.6 of a mile above bridge at Bath is considered inactive th 4 excluded from foregoing costs. Estimated cost (1954) of isPortion is $129,500. Existing project was authorized by the following: Aets Work authorized Documental a~1 Channel between Augusta and Gardiner, Maine............ H. Doc. 262, 56th Cong., 1st sess. 2, 197Channelb Ot. 4 1913 Chanel below Gardiner, Maine........................... . Doe. 321, 59th Cong., 2d sess. S17: 1940 27'IChannel west of Swan Island................ . ...... H. Doc. 716, 62d Cong., 2d sess. -foot channel from mouth of Bath... ............... S. Doo. 55, 77th Cong., let sees. ain the latest published maps. ercal cooperation. None required. ing eanal facilities. Wharves suitable for landing or load- oallore well,atandBath, Woolwich, Augusta. Of the 24Richmond, wharves atRandolph, Gardiner, Bath, 5 are publicly Pair and 19 privately owned, about one-third are in poor re- at and little used. Rail connections are available at 19 wharves hit h - Depths alongside range from 12 to 25 feet. At other All b~aamed above there are 16 wharves in usable condition. bUAl one are equipped with mechanism for handling passengers l regt. Those open to the public on equal terms are two at .eowell and one each at Randolph and Augusta. None is pub- co1 Wned. Facilities are considered adequate for existing erce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, maintenance: Work, by contract, for removal and disposal of all material, except ledge rock, to a depth of 27 feet mean low water, suspended in December 1964 and resumed and completed Au- gust 25, 1965. Approximately 14,400 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed. Condition survey of Doubling Point and Crloaf Island was conducted in February 1966. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. ot h lng depths at mean low water in Kennebec River from a Shoalto Doubling Point were 27 feet (1961) with exceptions of 11area along northerly limit of channel northwest of North and a Loaf Island having a controlling depth of 21.0 feet (1966) Shoal area along left outside quarter of channel east of Lee 26 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Island with a controlling depth of 24 feet (1962), 21.1 feet from Doubling Point to Bath Bridge (1966) ; 13 feet from Abagadasse Pomint to Gardner-Randolph Bridge (1942); thence, 7.5 feet!i middle portion of 11-foot channel from Gardner to Augusta, e cept shoaling to 5 and 5.6 feet along right outside and left outSie quarters respectively (1963). Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $1,090,529 for new work and $498,192 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: $1,59 940 Cost Appropriated. ........ .. $I,99:40 ...... Maintenance:49 Appropriated.......... $680 $211 $89,578 Cost..................680 $4,645 $4,3984981 211 17,826 3,957 26,838 1 Includes $509,411 for new work for previous projects. 16. KENNEBUNK RIVER, MAINE Location. Source of Kennebunk River is in central part O York County in southwestern Maine. Stream flows about 3 miles southeasterly and discharges into Atlantic Ocean about 3 miles southwest of Portland, Maine. (See Coast and Geode.c Survey Chart 1205.) SExisting project. A. stone breakwater on easterly side of moutl of river about 550 feet long, a pier or jetty on westerly side mouth about 290 feet long, a wharf about 700 feet upstreamfroa shore end of breakwater (transferred to Treasury jetty on east bank a short distance farther upstreamin a1936)' cla1 el 8 feet deep and 100 feet wide extending 1,700 feet'from1deet water to town landing, thence 6 feet deep over a width of 100 fet for 2,300 feet and a width of 75 feet for remaining 2,000 feeto project limit; an anchorage, 4 acres in area, on west side 6 channel and an anchorage, 2 acres in area, on east side, each feet deep; and extension of west jetty by about 300 feet, suPP%e mented by construction of a sand fence. Mean tidal range is feet: extreme 13.5 feet. Federal cost of new work for subst tially completed project was $315,259. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 2, 1829 Aug. 14, Repair of pier on east side of channel entrance. 1q76 Deepening at.Wading Place and Mitchells Point .......... Sept. 19,1890 Jetty at Wading Place........................... Annual Report 1875. p. 115. 1st seo . x.. . De. 1 .36, 51st Cong.. 4 7. Oct.23, Oct. 1962 8-foot 23,1962 8-foot channel........................................... channel... H.and Doe.Annual Con.189 Report 459, 87th -,2d sep . (cor ." 6-foot channel. -foot channel. tains latest published map' -foot anchorage, west side of channel. 6-foot anchorage, east side of channel. Extension of west jetty, and construction of sand fence. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual cash contribution for all requirements amounted to $90,000. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 27 pr7e minal facilities. There are 22 landings, 16 of which are Pli-vate ,bic& railwa public, 2 yacht clubs, 1 hotel, and 2 boatyards. Marine t eay facilities include two of 15-ton capacity, and one of 10- ageb~Pacuity. There are 4 berths and 10 moorings. Open stor- S oat buildring, repairs, and supplies are available for pleasure stru1mercial craft. Public landing, of granite block con- 9trutio 1 h falis on, has unloading facilities which include two tackle and transo arms; and is used by fishing craft to transfer catches for 0 ortation. Facilities are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds new work: Operations consisted of completing work in progress on June 30, 1965, in the 6- and 8-foot channels, 6-foot anchorages, and construction of a sand fence. Approximately 12,074 cubic yards of material were dredged, making a total of approximately 120,- 074 cubic yards removed by contract. Condition survey of the Co0 c area was conducted in March 1966. Condition at end of fiscal year. Jetty extensions are complete. lie ging contract is complete, but the final settlement is under arotatioyn. anr, requiresToremoval complete project with slightly reduced anchorage of a rock at entrance to west anchorage deatda sand shoal on west side of entrance channel. Controlling id6eps at mean low water were 7.5 feet in 8-foot channel; 5.7 feet a OIeoot channel; 5.7 feet in west anchorage, and 6 feet in east -chrage(1966). Year ZF N D JLAI GI Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS o Total to ..... 1962 1963 1961 1965 196 June 30, 1966 priated .................. $17,000 $5,000 $222,000 $10,000 $337,584 enanee:.... ...... ............ 14,024 6,092 158,426 53,133 315,259 C opiated . $13,000 -83 110 2,717............ 170,137 . ..... 1,628 11,289 110 2,717........... 170,137 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS . 1Total 1962 to . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 buted. . $........... $90,000 .17,610.77,22559,615..... 61. 17. MACHIAS RIVER, MAINE 10th tiofn. Project is at head of navigation, about 6 miles from eodeto f river and Machiasport, Maine. (See Coast and x. iSurvey Chart 304.) deDthstinM9project. Adopted in 1873. Provides for removal to 1/2-foot hoalfelow than of Middle Machias Rock ledge, and removal of several to provide a channel 6 feet deep and not less the h00 feet wide from deep water near East Machias bridge to cost arves at Machias. Mean range of tide is 13 feet. Federal a new work for completed project was $32,000. 28 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. There are two known wharves and a boat- yard. Facilities are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, maintenance: Adjustment in funds was made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- pleted in 1876. Controlling depths at mean low water: in 6- foot channel, 1.2 feet in middle half, and plus 2.1 feet and 0.3 feet in left and right outside quarters, respectively (1963). Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated...................... ............... ....... . ..... . ... ........ $32,000 Cost.. ............ ................................................ 32,000 Maintenance: Appropriated...................... $52,240 $479 -$4,300 -15,884 32,666 Cost.....................2...... 736 10,739 10,060 .. 32,666 18. MARBLEHEAD HARBOR, MASS. Location. On Massachusetts coast about halfway between Cape Ann and Boston, 14 miles northeast of Boston Harbor, and 11 miles southwest of Gloucester Harbor. (See Coast and Geo- detic Survey Chart 240.) Previous projects. For details see page 38, Annual Report for 1945. Existing project. Abandonment of existing project and in lieu thereof a project be adopted to provide for a stone breakwater 1,200 feet long with a top width of 10 feet at elevation plus 20 extending northwesterly from Marblehead Neck. Latest ap- proved estimate is $2,600,000, and includes a cash contribution of $702,000. Existing project was authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 516, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Latest published map is in project document. Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash 27 percent of first cost of construction, estimated to be $702,000 (July 1965); to furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance, including access for a contractor and his equipment to construct breakwater from land; provide assur- ances that existing public landings will be maintained and open to all on equal terms; and hold the United States free from damages. Town Meeting of March 21, 1966, considered a pro- posed bond issue for the town's share of the project cost. Failing to obtain a required two-thirds vote for passage, the issue was defeated. Local interests held a special Town Meeting on June 27, 1966, to reconsider the project. The vote was unfavorable and the issue was defeated. Terminal facilities. There are three commercial landings of marginal granite and concrete-wall construction on town side of harbor; all have extending gangways and wood floats, unloading facilities, and supplies are available. There are 2 public landings open to all on equal terms; 7 yacht club floats, 14 private floatS for recreational landing; and 6 boat yards. Marine railway and RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 29 rnechanical-handling facilities are available. Facilities are con- sidered adequate for present requirements of commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Engineering studies, by hired labor, for construction of breakwater. Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning was suspended. Fed- eral costs for existing project from regular funds were $43,682, all for new work. Project will be classified as inactive. Cost and financial statement Fiscale Total to a year* .............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: A p .riated.............................. ... ...... ..... 5,10 - 85,000 $45,000682 Maintenance: ... 191 18,491 43,682 . .. . . ............ piate d. .............. Appropriated .. . .. 09.1584 . . ............ .... ............ 18 *s... .................................. . 584 x Maintenance for previous project. 19. MENEMSHA CREEK, MARTHAS VINEYARD, MASS. Location. On the south side of Vineyard Sound about 13 miles southwest of Woods Hole, Mass. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1210.) Existing project. Provides for entrance channel 10 feet deep and 80 feet wide between jetties to and including anchorage basin 10 feet deep in wide northern portion and 6 feet deep in narrow southern end, and channel 8 feet deep and 80 feet wide through Menernsha Creek to deep water in Menemsha Pond, about 1.1 miles front entrance, and for maintenance of existing jetties. All depths refer to mean low water. Mean and spring tidal ranges at en- trance are 2.7 and 3.4 feet, respectively. Cost of completed proj- ect was $56,926, for new work, exclusive of $12,500 contributed by local interests. Existing project was authorized by River and Hlarbor Act approved March 2, 1945. Latest published map is in Project document (H. Doc. 365, 76th Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and local interests have expended over $202,000 for improvements and maintenance of Menemsha Creek and its entrance.. 'IIl Terminal facilities. The town wharf on the basin has a bulk- headed frontage of about 600 feet. Other public and private landings are available. Facilities are adequate for existing com- Inerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, main- tenance. Operations consisted of dredging, by contract, in the 10-foot jetty entrance channel, 10-foot north anchorage area and 8 -foot channel to Menemsha Pond. Work was commenced early in September and completed September 30, 1965. Approximately 53,853 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed i 1950. Controlling depths at mean low water (1965) were 10 feet in the 10-foot entrance channel; 8 feet in the 8-foot channel 30 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 to deep water in Menemsha Pond; and 10 feet in the 10-foot an- chorage and 6 feet in the 6-foot anchorage. Cost and financial statement Totalto Fiscal year............... .1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 19661 New work: Appropriated........... .............. . . . ............. .... .$56926 Cost............ Maintenance: Appropriated...................... $3,146 $1,683 $7,439 $74,642 207,118 Cost............................ 3,146 1,683 7,100 74,481 206,618 1 Excludes $12,500 contributed funds for new work. 20. MYSTIC RIVER, MASS. Location. Rises in Mystic Lake, Mass., flows southeasterly 7 miles and empties into Boston Harbor near Boston Naval Ship- yard. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 248 and Geological Survey Chart, "Boston".) Previous projects. For details see page 1743 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 59 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Provides for channel 35 feet deep, extending from limit of 35-foot channel of Boston Harbor at Mystic River Bridge to approximately 300 feet downstream of Malden Bridge, having widths varying from about 940 feet at its lower end, to about 1,060 feet at a point about 1,200 feet below the Maldel Bridge, thence decreasing to 150 feet at its upper limit; channel 20 feet deep from head of existing 35-foot channel to a point 800 feet above Malden Bridge, with widths decreasing from 150 feet at lower end to 75 feet through drawspan, thence increasing to about 340 feet to form turning basin above bridge; channel 6 feet deep and 100 feet wide from Boston & Maine Railroad (western division) bridge to about 2,500 feet above Wellington Bridge, about 1 mile, and thence 4 feet deep, gradually narrowing from 100 to 50 feet at upper end for about 2 miles to head of commercial navigation at Craddock Bridge in Medford. Project depths refer to mean low water. Mean range of tide is 9.6 feet at Mystic River Bridge, 9.6 feet at Wellington Bridge, and 9.3 feet at Craddock Bridge. Extreme range is 13.7 feet. Federal cost of new work for completed project was $3,097,054, exclusive of amounts ex- pended for previous projects. Existing project was authorized by?the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports July 13,1892 Improve upper Mystic.. . ...... ........ ... Annual Rep)rt, 1891, p. 672. June25, 1910 Improve channel downstream from mouth of Island End 11. Due. 1086, 60th Cong., 2d seas. River to 35-foot channel of Boston Harbor. Aug.30, 19351 Improve channel upstream from mouth of Island End River Rivers and HarborsCommittee Doc- to city playground at Charlestown. 33, 74th Cong., 1st sess. June 20,1938 Improve channel upstream from city playground at Charles- H. Doc. 542, 75th Cong., 3d sess. town to a point 800 feet above Malden Bridge. May 17,1950 Improve channel from upper limit of 35-foot Boston Harbor H. Doc. 645, 80th Cong., 2d sees? channel to Malden Bridge. 1 Also Emergency Relief Act of 1985. 2 Contains latest published map; a map showing entire river is in H. Doc. 2108, 64th 25 seas. Cong RIVERS AND HARBORS NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 31 Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. In section of river benefited by 35-foot channel project there are on the south bank four wharves consist- ing of substantial stone or wooden bulkheads filled solid, aggre- gating over 4,000 feet of berthing space; also a lumber terminal, the largest of its kind on the Atlantic Coast, equipped with most modern mechanical appliances, has railroad connections and oc- cupies 4,400 feet of waterfront. On north bank of river there is a large wharf used for receipt and shipment of oil on extensive Scale; and adjacent thereto an extensive terminal used in connec- tion with an iron works. There are several other wharves down- stream of Malden Bridge and on west bank of Island End River Used for receipt and shipment of coal, coke, tar, oil and in connec- tion with a generating plant. None of the above is publicly owned or opened to general public use. In 20-foot channel section on southl bank there are 1,850 feet and on north bank 1,235 feet of available dockage; none of which is publicly owned, two are open to public on payment of charges. Facilities are considered ade- quate for existing commerce. tenance: Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, main- tenance: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were completed and contract awarded for dredging the 35-foot channel from Boston Harbor to Malden. Operations were commenced June 6, 1966, and were in progress on June 30, 1966. Approximately 291,700 cubic yards of ordinary material have been removed. Work is substantially completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed i. June 1958. Controlling depths at mean low water in Mystic ~ilver: 35-foot channel from Mystic River Bridge to upstream 11lit of Federal project, 28.9 feet in middle half; 28.0 and 27.6 fet in left and right outside quarter respectively (1965). Total 4ederal costs for existing project from regular funds were $3,768,- 43, of which $3,097,054 was for new work, and $671,389 for aintenance. ________ Cost and financial statement Yeal Total to Year ... ... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 19661 New Work: . APpropriated.......... t.o ............... ........................ .. ........................ $3,222,777 aintena.c:..... . .................... 3,222,777 3,222,777 Dropriated.......... ............ $3,623 $115 $2,039 $490,000 714,652 3,623 115 2,039 457,019 681,671 Includes $125,723 for new work and $10,282 for maintenance for previous projects. Lo 21. NARRAGUAGUS RIVER, MAINE Location. Rises in Eagle Lake and flows south-southeasterly for about 49 miles where it empties into Narraguagus Bay and the Atlantic Ocean, and is about 10 miles west of Jonesport and 25 miles east of Southwest Harbor. Bar Harbor is about 20 miles to the west and Machiasport about 25 miles to the east. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 305.) Previous projects. For details see Annual Report for 1907. 32 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Abandonment of existing project and in lieu thereof a project to provide for construction of a channel 11 feet deep and 150 feet wide from deep water in Narraguagus Bay to Wyman; thence 9 feet deep and 100 feet wide to Milbridge, with widening opposite Milbridge for an anchorage; and thence 6 feet deep and 100 feet wide to proposed town landing downstream from highway bridge, with widening near landing for an anchor- age. River is tidal up to Cherryfield, about 6.8 miles above the mouth with tidal ranges of 10 to 14 feet at mouth and 3 to 7 feet at Cherryfield. Federal cost of new work for completed project was $534,285. Existing project was authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 530, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. There are four major wharves fronting on the Narraguagus River. One is on east bank, a short distance downstream of highway bridge, two are on west bank in Milbridge, and the fourth is near mouth of river at Wyman. All are prl- vately owned and in fair condition. No storage or repair facil- ities are available. Diesel oil and gasoline are obtainable by tank truck delivery. Fish pump facilities are available at upper dock at Milbridge and at Wyman dock. .Local interests will provide and maintain a public landing at Milbridge. Facilities are ade- quate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Improvement dredging, by contract, of the project channels and anchorage, suspended November 26, 1964, due to technical difficulties, was resumed September 13, 1965. Operations were continued and completed early in February 1966. Removed about 348,200 cubic yards of material. Rock was encountered during the dredging process. Condition at end of fiscal year. 'Project was completed February 4, 1966, except for rock encountered in area. Controlling depths at mean low water were 10.0 feet in 11-foot channel and anchor* age; 9.0 feet in 9-foot channel and anchorage; 6.0 feet in .-foot channel; and 6.0 feet in 6-foot anchorage (1966). Federal 6 costs for existing project from regular funds were $534,285, all for neW work. Cost and financial statement Fiscalyear.62 Totalto Co 1963 1964 t.......... .. .... ... ... '.. ... .18200 1966 June 30,196 New work:64 Appropriated Maintenance: ,450°0 . Appropriated......... .. $500,000 15,242 -$8,000 182,456 $46,000 336,687 $6092 605, 3 08 Coat. Cost ................................. , ........ 308 SIncludes $71,644 for new work and $3,081 for maintenance of previous project. 22. NEWBURYPORT HARBOR, MASS. Location. On south bank of Merrimack River, about 2.5 miles above mouth, and about 48 miles by water north of Boston. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 331.) Existing project. Two jetties, one projecting 4,118 feet frofl RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 33 the north shore, the other projecting 2,445 feet from the south 1hore, converging until 1,000 feet apart, then extending seaward 000 feet parallel to axis of channel; partially closing Plum Island Basin by a timber dike; channel 12 feet deep and 400 feet Wide through bar, thence 9 feet deep and 200 feet wide to and including a widened turning basin in front of wharves. Mean ange of tide is 7.9 feet at the bar and 7.8 feet at Newburyport. pederal cost of new work for completed project was $565,225. Portion of project for continuous channel from sea to wharves at Nwewburyport, 15 feet deep and 200 feet wide to and including a idened turning basin in front of wharves is considered inactive ad excluded from foregoing cost for new work. Estimate (June 1955) was $106,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports 880 Construction of rubblestone jetties..................... 1n . . . ar' 25.1910 Dredging the bar at entrance to harbor..... Annual Report 1910, p. 59. Mar. 2,19451 Dredging channel from sea to wharves and a widened turning H. Doe. 703, 76th Cong., 3d seas. basin. S156.and 12-foot channel and basin inactive. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Sixteen wharves extending along a front- ag of about 3,500 feet of south bank of Merrimack River elow highway bridge and one small pier on north side of river. erminal facilities are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, Maintenance: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were continued for repairs to north and south jetties. Design memorandum and Planning were completed. Engineering studies were initiated for extending the existing jetties at the entrance to the harbor sea- Ward. Costs were $15,051. Condition survey of 12-foot channel Was conducted in April 1966. Government-owned hopper dredge Lyman was employed at Newburyport Harbor from May 3 to May 16, 1966, removing shoals in the 12-foot outer bar channel. Ap- proximately 50,000 cubic yards of ordinary material were re- moved. Costs were $50,933. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed l August 1958, with the improvement of 12-foot channel and OUter harbor. North jetty was completed in 1914; south jetty Was completed, except for a length of about 30 feet at its outer end, in 1905. These jetties are in poor condition and rehabilita- tiOblis essential. Plum Island basin was partially closed in 1883 1 Construction of a timber dike. North Rock was removed in 1901. Controlling depths at mean low water were about 9 feet in the harbor from inside jetties to wharves at Newburyport (1958) ; 6.5 feet over the bar at entrance to harbor (1966) ; 9 feet 1I turning basin in front of wharves (1957). 34 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year. .... ....... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.................................... $565 225 Cost ........... ....... ............................... 565:225 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $10,801 $3,754 $44,020 $18,353 $53,959 466,700 Cost................... 48,978 3,754 34,049 3,339 78,944 466,700 23. NEW HARBOR, MAINE Location. A small harbor on easterly side of Pemaquid Neclk, about 15 miles southwest of Rockland Harbor, Maine. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 313.) Existing project. An anchorage area of about 3 acres, 12 feet deep in the outer portion of the harbor and anchorage area of about 3.5 acres, 6 feet deep, over the inner portion of the harbor. In addition, a project authorized under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on August 27, 1964, provides for 3.6 acres of anchorage area 6 feet deep. Federal cost of new work for completed project was $118,620. Existing project was authorized by 1905 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 167, 58th Cong., 2d sess.) and section 107, Public Law 86-645. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual costs for all requirements under terms of project authorization, includ" ing required non-Federal contributions, $7,015. Terminal facilities. There are about 20 privately-owned small wooden sheds on or adjacent to timber piers projecting out to mean low water, or to the existing Federal project; with the majority located on north side of harbor. In addition, there are four piers with sheds on north side of Back Cove that are in use when tides permit. Facilities are considered adequate for preS* ent commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Dredging 6-foot channel in Back Cove and 6-foot anchor- ages in New Harbor; and removal of ledge rock to a depth of 7 feet in entrance channel, Back Cove, was commenced late in No- vember 1965 and completed in March 1966. ApproximatelY 28,961 cubic yards of ordinary material and ledge to depth of 7 feet were removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project authorized under sec- tion 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, was completed in March 1966. All work authorized before 1964 was completed in 1905. Controlling depths at mean low water were 6 feet in upper and 11 to 18 feet in lower harbor (1965) ; 6 feet in 6-foot anchorage ex- tension (1966) ; and 6 feet in 6-foot Back Cover anchorage (1966). RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 35 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS aFi.ca *y. Fiscal YTotal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,to New work: A ffopriated.......... ................... $12,000 Mteai *.................. .......... . ..... . . . $105,000 $8,800 $118,620 Appropriated ............................. ... 1,707 Mainteonance: 14,081 92,332 118,620 1,7 ................. Coat .................................. 308 ............ 12,874 308.. .. . ...... 874 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year ............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Total June 30, to New Work: Contributed............ ... ............... . $8,000 ........... $8,000 ......... 1,006 $6,009 7,015 24. NEW HAVEN HARBOR, CONN. Location. On north shore of Long Island Sound, about 67 miles to east of New York City. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 218.) projects. For details, see page 1755 of Annual Previous Re- Port for 1915 and page 127 of Annual Report for 1938. fexisting project. A main channel 35 feet deep, 400 to 800 eet Wide, from Long Island Sound to Tomlinson Bridge; two aduchorage basins below Tomlinson Bridge of 16- and 15-foot dePths; a pile-and-riprap dike about 4,200 feet long, to contract tidal flow at Fort Hale bar; a channel 12 feet deep and 100 to 150 feet Wide, from southwest corner of 16-foot anchorage basin via City Point and West Haven wharf front to Kimberly Avenue ridge; thence 12 feet deep and prevailing width of 75 feet up Vest River to about 600 feet upstream of Kimberly Avenue 13idge, and an anchorage basin 6 feet deep in West River opposite Mars wharf; a channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep from 15- foot anchorage basin toward Brewery Street, about 300 feet; a Winnel in Quinnipiac River 22 feet deep and 250 to 400 feet de toa point about 1,000 feet above Ferry Street, thence 16 .et deep and 200 feet wide to Grand Avenue, with turning basin iR. deep, 200 to 800 feet wide, and 700 feet long at mouth of 1iver; a channel up Mill River 12 feet deep, 200 feet wide to Junction of two branches above Chapel Street, thence to Grand Avenue, 100 feet wide in East Branch and generally 125 feet Wide in West Branch; and removal of certain obstructive rocks in Morris Cove. Mean range of tide is 6.2 feet at entrance to harbor, and 6.3 feet at Long Wharf Light. Federal cost of new Work for completed project was $3,873,620. The 22-foot channel id turning basin portion is to be restudied and excluded from egoing cost estimate. Estimated cost (1960) of this portion is $98,000. 36 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Aug. 2, 1882 Sandy Point dike..................................... Plans neers,approved by a Board of EnD Oct. 2. 1882. Mar. 3, 1899 The 16-foot anchorage basin June 2 ,1910 .... Brewery Street channel, removal ofrocini Moriioocnd . c.82,56thCong.,1st . ses present project dimensions 11.De. 1159,60thCong.12dsees. of 15-foot basin. e and e t July 25, 1912 Present project dimensions of channels in Mill River ......... HI. Doe. 26, 62d Cong., 1st seSs. ~chorage Do...... Present project dimensions of West River channel and an- H. Doc. 535,62d Cong., 2d sees. July 3,1930 18- and 16-foot channels in Quinnipiac Aug. 30, 19351 25-foot channel River............. H. Doc. 686, 69th Cong., . 2d sess. Mar. 2, 1945 30-foot .... l)oc. 479, 72d Cong., 2d sess. channel and ancho ag and present location of 16- foot anchorage. I. Doe. 307, 76th Congo.,2letes July 24, 1946 35-foot main channel, elimination of 30-foot anchorage, pres- H. Doe. 517, 79th Cong., ent location and extent of 16-foot anchorage 2d seas.(con channel and turning basin in Quinnipiac and 22-foot 2 tains latest map). Aug. 16, 1949 Brewery Street channel declared nonnavigable.River. Aug. 9, 1955 Abandonment of upper end of West River. Also Public Works Administration, Quinnipiac River 22-foot channel Sept. 6, 1933. and turning basin deferred for restudy. Local cooperation. Requirements, as applied to nel, were met, and assurances furnished 35-foot chat l that requirements for 22-foot channel and turning basin in Quinnipiac River will be met. These assurances were approved by Chief of Engineers on June 2, 1947. Bulkhead spoil areas for 35-foot channel cost loca interests $160,000. Estimated cost to local interests heads for construction of Quinnipiac River 22-foot channelof bulk" is $50,000. Terminal facilities. Port of New Haven waterfront facilities; 48 are within city is served by 53 and 5 in West Haven. Improved waterways limits of New Haven, along which facilities are located include West within port area bor, West and East Branches of Mill River, Main Iar River channels. Facilities are all privatelyRiver, and QuinniPiac with exception of city wharf. Depths alongside owned and operated piers and wha rves range from 35 to zero feet at mean low water. half of the facilities have rail connections Nearly which connect with New York, New Haven either on or at rear and most are accessible by paved streets. & Hartford Railroad have mechanicalhandling facilities, six Nineteen wharves wharves li use upon agreement with the owners. Facilities are open to pu for existing commerce. are adequate (For further details, see Port and Ter- minal Facilities of Southern New England No. Operations and results during fiscal year.4 revised in 195.) maintenance: Engineering studies, by Regular funds, 12-foot West River Channel to Grande hired labor, for dredgig Mill River from turning basin to upperAvenue Bridge and 12.fo limits, East Branch were completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project Controlling depths at mean low water were: in is complete channel, 500 feet wide, 33.5 feet in westerly 35-foot outer quarter, remaining three-quarters (1964); in 35-foot channel, 35 feet i 400 feet wide, 34.7feetin westerly quarter, 35 feet in remaining quarters (196n4); in 35-foot inner channel, three erlot ainm 500 feet wide, 34 ,rie al, 31.2 feet in westerly quarter, eryqure (1964); 35-foot channel, 800 35 feet feet wide, 33 infeet in RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 37 Westerly 3 quarter, 35 feet in remaining three-quarters (1964); 5-foot channel 800 to 500 feet wide, 30.3 feet in middle half, 35 feet in westerly quarter, 34 feet in easterly quarter (1964); thence 19 feet to Tomlinson Bridge (1957); 12 feet in West River to Kimrberly Avenue Bridge and 9.6 feet to 600 feet upstream of fe dge (1963); 12 feet in Brewery Street Channel (1963); 11.9 leet in~Quinnipiac River Channel to Ferry Street Bridge. Thence C10feet to Grand Avenue Bridge (1963); 12 foot Mill River cannel, 5.7 feet in middle half, 6.8 and 3.6 feet in easterly and Westerly quarters respectively, to junction (1966);7.6 feet in Iower half and 3.8 feet in upper half of East Branch (1966) 4.8 eet inWest Branch age (1963); 12 feet in(1966); 6 feet in West Haven 6-foot anchor- 15-foot anchorage (1957); 0 to 35 feet in 1 6 -foot anchorage (1960). Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $3,873,620 for new work and $3,216,603 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Fiseal Total to Year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 New Work: APProPriated ............ roptena e............ ...... ........................................... 2$4,205,246 .. 4,205,246 APpropriated.......... ............ $160,980 $405,041 $11,890 $194,568 3,430,956 95,680 359,530 98,021 12,785 3,249,173 Includes$331,626 for new work and $32,570 for maintenance for previous projects. ncludes $290,877 National Industrial Recovery funds and $59,207 public works funds. 25. NIANTIC BAY AND HARBOR, CONN. Location. On north shore of Long Island Sound about 5.5 miles West of entrance to New London Harbor and 9 miles east of mouth of Connecticut River. .Existing project. Provides for channel 8 feet deep, 100 feet ide from deep water in the bay to the highway bridge; thence 6 feet deep, 100 feet wide to deep water south of Sandy Point. stimated project cost is $100,000, of which non-Federal costs are $50,000. Existing project was authorized under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on August 24, 1964. bLocal cooperation. Local interests must provide a cash contri- bution of 50 percent of the project construction cost; provide, maintain and operate an adequate public landing or wharf with Provisions for sale of motor fuel, lubricants, and potable water oPen and available to the use of all equally; provide and main- tain, access channel to and berthing area at required public anding, having depths commensurate with Federal project chan- 1,el depth of 6 feet; provide lands and rights-of-way for construc- tion and future maintenance of project including suitable SPoil-disposal areas with necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads and embankments therefor; and hold the United States free from damages. Local interests indicated that above requirements could be met; however, State Legislature ended session in June 1965 without appropriating funds for project. Terminal facilities. Three major concentrations of boating 38 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 facilities at Niantic Village, Smith Cove and between the bridges and vicinity of Mago Point are located in the harbor. These facilities include pile and timber piers with berthing slips, dry storage for boats, launching ramps for small craft; wharves, open moorings, a 20-ton railway, 6-ton crane, and 4-ton travel lift. Operations and results during fiscal year. Revocation of funds was made pending more favorable action on local cooperation. Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning for project construce tion is about 75 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.............................. $11,000 $40,000 -$42,769 $8,231 Cost........... ................ ......... 1,116 7,115 . ... 8,231 26. OWLS HEAD HARBOR, MAINE Location. In town of Owls Head, 65 miles northeast of Port- land and 4 miles southeast of Rockland, Maine. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 209 and 310.) Existing project. Provides for construction near Dodge Point of a short breakwater of wooden cribs filled with stone to protect vessel traffic within the harbor. This project was authorized inl Executive Document 67, 52d Congress, 2d session, adopted in 1852. The breakwater was not maintained and no longer exists. House Document 467, 69th Congress, 1st session recommended abandonment of the existing project. Federal cost of breakwater was $17,897. A project authorized under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on February 3, 1966, provides for an anchorage basin 6 feet deep over an area of 8 acres. Estimated cost for the anchorage basin is $150,000, of which non- Federal costs are $6,000. Local cooperation. None required for breakwater. For pro.j- ect authorized under section 107, local interests must contribute in cash 4 percent of the cost of the work, presently estimated at $6,000, to be paid in a lump sum before commencement of coln- struction, the final allocation of cost to be made after the actual costs have been determined. Provide lands, easements and rights- of-way for construction and future maintenance of the improve- ment and for aids to navigation upon request of Chief Of Engineers to be required in the general public interest for subse- quent disposal of spoil, necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor or the costs of such retaining works. Hold the United States free from damages. Provide and maintain an adequate public landing and insure that the general public will al- ways have access from shore to Federal project over a dock or float with berths and any necessary channels 6 feet deep throughout project life. Assurances that these conditions will be met have been received. Town has appropriated full amount required for local contribution. Terminal facilities. There are two fish wharves, boat service RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 39 facilities and a private landing float in the harbor. Facilities are Considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new Work:. Engineering studies, by hired labor, were commenced and Were in progress at the close of the fiscal year. 1 Condition at end of fiscal year. Breakwater was completed in 1858. Preparation of plans and specifications for construction of anchorage is in progress. -.- Cost and financial statement I'iscal Year................Total to Year1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. SCost .... ated.......... APPropria ............ $1,000 $10,000 $28,897 Maintenance: 783 2,518 21,198 Appropriaated .......... .......... 162 o*t .......... .......... ... ........ 162 27. PAWTUXET COVE, R.I. Location. A small indentation on west shore of Providence gver, a tributary of Narragansett Bay at mouth of Pawtuxet Iver, a small stream in central Rhode Island. (See Coast and Qeodetic Survey Charts 113 and 278.) deep Existing project. A channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep from water to head of cove, with a turning basin near upper end; and an anchorage of about 14 acres, 6 feet deep, south of entrance channel, with a sheltering dike, 2,200 feet long, constructed to 12 feet above mean low water, on east side of anchorage. Mean tidal range is 4.5 feet; extreme 7.5 feet. Federal cost of new work for completed project was $295,208. Project was authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 236, 87th Cong., 1st sess.). a'Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual costs for all requirements of local cooperation amount to $295,208, cash contribution. Terminal facilities. There are several wharves, two boat Yards and one marina in the cove. Wharves are generally pile and timber construction with ramps and floats for boat servicing. Loat yards are engaged chiefly in repair, hauling, and storage of recreational craft. There are no hauling facilities at the marina, its use confined to mooring craft during recreational season. Serv- ice and supplies are available at this facility. Local interests Will provide and maintain necessary mooring facilities and util- 'ties including two public landings with suitable supply facilities, oPen to all on equal terms; regulate use of harbor with facilities also open to all on equal terms. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Separate contracts were in progress for improvement dredging and for construction of sheltering dikes. Improvement dredging of the 6-foot channel, turning and anchorage basins was completed early in September 1965. About 207,195 cubic yards of material were removed under this contract. Rock was en- countered during the dredging process and contract for its removal Was awarded. Work was accomplished in April 1966. Shelter- 40 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ing dike was completed early in October 1965 and a length of 2,300 feet attained. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed in April 1966. Controlling depths at mean low water were 6 feet in 6-foot channel from deep water to head of cove, 6 feet in 6-foot turning basin, 6 feet in 6-foot 14-acre anchorage (1966). Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30. 1966 New work: Appropriated................................. $18,000 $282,000 .. $300,000 Cost......................... ............ 16,500 158,441 $120,267 295,208 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Contributed............... ...... .$300,000 . $300,0 Cost................... .................... 209,609 $85,599 295208 28. PIG ISLAND GUT, MAINE Location. Off the Maine seacoast southeast of Jonesport, about 168 miles northeast of Portland, Maine, and bounded to the north by Pig Island and to the south by Great Wass Island. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 304 and 1201). Existing project. A channel 80 feet wide, 6 feet deep front Alley Bay to Eastern Bay through Pig Alley Gut and a 5.5-acre anchorage, 6 feet deep, inside the Gut. Federal cost of new worl for completed project was $191,753. Existing project was au- thorized under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on July 10, 1964. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. No commercial landing facilities in vicin- ity of Pig Island, although there are several small landings on Great Wass Island. In Beals Harbor there are several privately owned wharves; and in Moosabec Reach, to the east of the har- bor, there are two wharves, one public and one private. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Construction, by contract, of channel 80 feet wide, 6 feet deep; 5.5-acre anchorage; and removal of ledge rock to a depth of 7 feet, was continued and completed in October 1965. Approxi- mately 60,181 cubic yards of ordinary material, and 1,878 cubic yards of ledge were removed, making a total of 68,381 cubic yards of ordinary material and 1,878 cubic yards of ledge removed by contract. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed in October 1965. Controlling depths at mean low water were 6.0 feet in 6-foot channel from deep water in Eastern Bay 4,500 feet upstream to Alley Bay, except 5.8 feet at bend east of anchorage; 6.0 feet in 6-foot anchorage (1966). RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 41 Cost and financial statement ......... . to Total Year***........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork: APPropriated.......... $1,500 $14,500 $10,000 $164,000 $1,753 $191,753 ........ 240 1,962 12,519 43,214 133,818 191,753 29. PLYMOUTH HARBOR, MASS. Location. Harbor is 45 miles by water south of Boston. Its Outer anchorage, the "Cow Yard," is common to Plymouth, Dux- ury, and Kingston. (See Coast Geodetic Survey Chart 245.) Previous projects. For details, see page 1746 of Annual Re- Port for 1915, and page 72 of Annual Report for 1938.. Existing project. Provides7 for: (a) Protecting by riprap sections of Long Beach damaged by storm of November 1898, and restoring Eel River to its former course; (b) dredging a channel 18 feet deep at mean low water and 200 feet wide, increased at entrance and on curves, from the bay to town wharves, formerly in areas south of State pier, a distance of about 2.5 miles, with a suitable turning basin at inner end; (c) dredging a channel 150 eet wide, 15 feet deep at mean low water, extending northwest- erly about 0.3 mile from a point off site of northerly Craigs wharf (now State pier) with a turning basin 300 feet square, and of same depth, at its northwesterly end; (d) maintenance of area dredged to 18 feet deep below mean low water by the Common- Wealth of Massachusetts, connecting 15-foot channel with 18-foot channel in vicinity of State pier; (e) a rubblestone breakwater extending 1,400 feet easterly from a point north of Town wharf, anld thence southeasterly for 2,100 feet; an anchorage 8 feet deep and 60 acres in area inside breakwater; and elimination of authorized 18-foot anchorage from existing project; (f) recrea- tional development, to provide for sport fishing from breakwater, consisting of stone causeway about 360 feet long from westerly end of breakwater to land, guard rail along top of breakwater and causeway, footbridge spanning a navigation opening through reakwater, and public access, parking and sanitary facilities for SPort fishermen use. Mean range of tide is 9.6 feet; extreme range is 13.7 feet. Total estimated project cost is $2,642,000, of Which $593,000 is non-Federal cost. Major rehabilitation of Long t3 each dike will be required. Total estimated Federal cost of this Work is $550,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports mar.. 8 a 3,1899 4, 1913 Beach protection............... Dredging 18-foot channel .............. ...... .. ..... Annual Report for 1899, p. 1089. . I. D)oc.1194, 62d Cong., 3d ses. 221922 Dred ing 15-foot extension, including turning basin..... .. H. Doc. 996, 66th Cong., 3d sees. ct.23 1962 Rubblestone breakwater. Anchorages are 8 feet deep inside H1.Doe. 124, 87th Cong., 2d sess. breakwater. Elimination of authorized 18-foot anchorage from existing project. S9,1965 Recreational development Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed work. Contributed funds of $108,000 were expended. For modification 42 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of project authorized in October 1962, local interests must con- tribute 20 percent of first cost of construction; maintain existing public landings open to all equally and provide all necessary moor- ing facilities in anchorage; to furnish lands, easements, rights-of way for construction and future maintenance; and hold the United States free from damages. In addition, modification of project provides for sport fishing facilities for which local interests are required to contribute 50 percent of cost for recreational featUres with credit tor value of basic supporting facilities; provide public right-of-way to facilities; provide, operate, and maintain parking and sanitation facilities; and regulate use of sport fishing facil- ities. Estimated costs to local interests are $465,000 cash con- tribution and $20,000 for recreational supporting facilities, a total of $485,000. The 1966 Legislature appropriated necessary State funds; and town voted town's share of project cost at a town meet- ing in March 1965. Terminal facilities. There are three wharves of pile and tim"- ber construction; one is owned by the State, one by the town, and the third by Plymouth Yacht Club. State and town wharves are open to public use. In addition, there are six boatyards with marine railway facilities along waterfront, equipped for boat building and repairs.- Local interests will maintain existing pub- lic landings open to all on equal terms, and provide all necessary mooring facilities in anchorage. 'Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, neW work: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were continued for construction of a rubblestone breakwater and an anchorage 8 feet deep. Planning was completed, and contract awarded for dredging anchorage and breakwater foundation area. Condition at end of fiscal year. All work authorized prior to 1962 is complete. ,To complete project there remains construeC tion of a rubblestone breakwater and an 8-foot anchorage. Plan ning for this work is complete. Dredging anchorage is under contract. Controlling depths at mean low water were: in -foot channel-15 feet from deep water to Plymouth Channel Light No. 11, thence 14 feet to State pier (1964), 15 feet in 15-foot channel and turning basin to town wharf (1964). Federal costs for ex- isting project from regular funds were $234,995, new work, and $694,448 for maintenance. In addition, $108,400 expended from contributed funds, of which $108,000 was for new work, and $400 for maintenance, all on work completed prior to 1962. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year ............... 1Total to Fica yea........ . 6 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,19661 New Cost work:.... ............ ,.. .......... I.. ..... C ropriate........****..... .......... I $35,000 ,o3............ } o° °,, 'o 60'2i $300,000 $712,218 Maintenance: ........... 10611 $15,378 20,395 423,6 Appropriated... ....... $151S $18,955 169,430 -1,445 696461 Cost ..................1 151 4,218 22,767 159,955. 696461 1 Includes $188,647 for new work and $2,013 for maintenance for previous projects. $108,000 expended for new work and $400 for maintenance from contributed funds. Excludes RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 43 30. PORTLAND HARBOR, MAINE Location. On southwestern coast of Maine about 100 miles 1ortheast of Boston, Mass. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey hart 325.) foPrevious projects. For details see page 1736 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 40 of Annual Report for 1936. fei" project. An entrance channel 1,000 feet wide and 45 stia from iet deep deep water in Casco Bay to a line about oppo- Site Fort Gorges, and a maneuvering basin and anchorage 45 feet dep in existing House Island anchorage area; a channel 35 feet deep over varying widths from Fort Gorges to Boston & Maine cailroad bridge; a turning basin 35 feet deep near upper end of thannel; an anchorage 30 feet deep opposite the eastern end of the city and a channel 30 feet deep into Back Cove; for rock ex- Cavation to 14 feet deep between Grand Trunk and Tukey's a-ridges, and a channel 12 feet deep and 300 feet wide to a point fabout 2,500 feet upstream from Tukey Bridge; a breakwater 900 ieet long at Spring Point, and one 2,000 feet long south of the nner harbor entrance; and maintenance of Soldier Ledge Chan- nel in Hussey Sound at a depth of 40 feet. Project depths refer to mean low water. Mean tidal range is 8.9 feet, and extreme range is 10.2 feet, although variations as great as 16 feet have been observed under storm conditions. Federal cost of new work for completed project was $8,066,774. Existing project was authorized by the following: A...e Work authorized Documents J 24.1836 Breakwater on southerly side of mouth of inner harbor...... 11. Doc. 491, 23d Cong.,1st sess. June 3 1866 Extension of breakwater. Ma .1896 Dredging to 30 feet over greater part of inner harbor........ S. Doc. 271, 54th Cong., 1st sess. r "1905 iSUndry. Extension of 30-foot depth up Fore River to Boston & Maine .. Sciil) 1 . bridge and in channel of approach to Back Cove. uly25,1912 30-foot anchorage; 14feet at entrance to Back Cove; restore 11. Dec. 489, 62d Cong., 2d seas. 12-foot depth in Back Cove and 30-foot depth in approach Aug. 8, 1117S19171as welldepth 35-foot as in in lower partpart of harbor. lower of main harbor and channel of 11. Doe. 71, 65th Cong., 1st seas. approach, and remove 2 obstructing ledges in main Mar. 2 channel. . 2,1945 35-foot anchorage, approximately 170 acres in area northwest H. Doc. 560, 76th Cong., 3d sess. Do of House Island. * . Maintain Soldier Ledge Channel in Ilussey Sound, at H. Doc. 730, 79th Cong., 2d sess. July depth of 40-feet. Y 24, 1946 Deepen 30-foot channel to 35 feet, 35-foot turning basin I. Doc. 510, 79th Cong., 2d ses. Aug.13,19 easterly of Vaughan Bridge; breakwater at Spring Point. . 1957Abandonment of upper end of 12-foot channel from 2,500 Public Law 126, 85th Cong., 1st sess. Oct. 23 feet upstream of Tukoy Bridge to head of Back Cove. 71 Stat. 344. .162 Entrance channel 45 feet deep from deep water in Casco H. Doe. 216, 87th Cong., 1st seas. Bay to a line opposite Fiort Gorges. A minaneuvering basin and anchorage 45 feet deep in existing House Island an- chorage area. temOva of one ledge inactive. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. There are 51 waterfront facilities, of Which 3 are not used. Five wharves are publicly owned, 3 by the i S. Government, 1 by State of Maine, and 1 by city of South ortland. Mechanical-handling facilities are available at 15 harves. Railroad connections have been made to 29 of them. P"acilities are adequate for, existing commerce. (For further details see page 13, II. Doc. 216, 87th Cong., and Port Series 1 for 44 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Ports of Searsport Harbor and Portland, Maine, and Portsmouth, N.H. (revised 1952).) Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Improvement dredging, by contract, in the 45-foot House Island anchorage and maneuvering basin were continued; sus- pended in August 1965; then resumed in September 1965; were continued and substantially completed in June 1966. Approx- mately 2,345,000 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed, making a total of 2,392,000 cubic yards removed, by contract. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was substan" tially completed in June 1966. Dredging of the 45-foot House Is- land anchorage was in progress. Controlling depths at mean low water were in 45-foot main channel: 44.6 feet in middle half, 45 feet in easterly and westerly quarters, respectively, from deep water in Casco Bay to Spring Point Light, thence 42 feet in easterly quarter and 45 feet in remaining three-quarters (1965); 35 feet ill 45-foot House Island anchorage (1960) ; 34 feet in 35-foot channel from limit of 45-foot channel to abreast the State pier (1960); and 33 feet to Portland Bridge (1959) ; 35 feet in 35-foot Fore River Channel to upstream limit of Federal project (1963); 35 feet in turning basin near head of channel (1963); 27.5 feet 1in 30-foot anchorage off east end of city of Portland (1959); 18 feet in 30-foot approach channel to Back Cove (1945); 13 feet i 14-foot channel between Grand Trunk and Tukey Bridges (1945) ; 8 feet in 12-foot Back Cove Channel (1945). Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $8,066,774 for new work, and $1,545,963 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement year............... Fiscal Totalto 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriated.................... $250,000 $900,000 $1,790,000 $1,085,000 1$9,1 23,710 Maintenance: 123,387 16,927 1,338,553 2,181,632 18,7 659,20' Appropriated.......... $4,000 380,446 -2,277 48 1,5 45, 963 Cost................. .1,042 369,053 12,074 48 1,5 45,963 1Includes $692,435 for new work for previous projects. 31. PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER, MAINE AND N.H. Location. Piscataqua River forms a portion of boundary be- tween Maine and New Hampshire. Mouth of this river is called Portsmouth Harbor. It is 45 miles northeast of Boston Harbor, Mass., and 37 miles southwest of Portland Harbor, Maine. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 229 and 329). Previous project. For details see Annual Report for 1892. Existing project. Removal of ledge rock areas in vicinity of Gangway Rock, southwest point of Badgers Island and Boiling Rock to 35 feet deep; widening 35-foot channel at bends by re- moval of ledge rock areas in vicinity of Henderson Point, Gang- way Rock, Badgers Island, Maine-New Hampshire Interstate Bridge and Boiling Rock; and extending channel from above Boil- ing Rock to a point about 1,700 feet above Atlantic Terminal Sales RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 45 dock in Newington generally 400 feet wide, and 35 feet deep below maean low water with maneuvering basins above Boiling Rock and at head of project; channel 6 feet deep, 100 feet wide from Little tarbor through Rye-New Castle drawbridge, then northerly be- tween mainland and Leach's Island to deep water in vicinity of hapleigh and Goat Islands, channel 75 feet wide, 6 feet deep up agamore Creek to public landing on downstream side of Saga- tIore Avenue bridge and anchorage strip, 6 feet deep, 75 feet wide, totalling 3 acres, adjacent to channel in Sagamore Creek. Exist- in project was adopted by 1954 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 56, 82d Cong., 2d sess.). River and Harbor Act of 1962 (H. Ioc. 482, 87th Cong., 2d sess.) modified existing project for widen- a1g and extending the 35-foot channel. Section 107, 1960 River autl Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers December 23, 1965, athorized construction of the 6-foot channels and anchorage. lest approved estimate of project cost is $5,222,767, of which 7,500 non-Federal contribution. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed work. roModification authorized in 1965 local interests must provide a Cash contribution of 37 percent of the project construction cost ($92,500) ; provide, maintain, and operate two public landings or Wharves with provisions for the sale of motor fuel, lubricants, and Potable water open to all on equal terms; one landing to be ad- gacent to the natural deep water anchorage area south of the eapleigh-Goat Island Bridge, the other on Sagamore Creek lo- cated downstream of Sagamore Avenue Bridge; construct and aintain at the public landings, piers, floats, mooring facilities and berthing areas with depths commensurate to the Federal project; PrVide necessary access roads, parking areas, and other needed blic-use shore facilities and services open to all on equal terms; Provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construction and aauitenance; hold the United States free from damages; and make 'U. utility and other relocations or alterations as required for Project Purposes. Assurances that these conditions will be met have been requested. City has submitted plans for one of the two reqired landings for approval. Plans for second landing are in Pgress. baTerminal facilities. Waterfront terminals are chiefly on south vk of Piscataqua River in Portsmouth and Newington. U.S. Savy Yard is on opposite bank at Kittery, Maine. Eighteen tiers, wharves, and landings represent available terminals for Used for the ~tdling commercial activities. commerce. port's waterborne Navy Yard is not On Maine side of river are a tow1 landing and two docks. On New Hampshire side there are ieterminals, 6 of which include a public landing, 2 docks, 3 facil- Ile used for vessel mooring and landings, are at Portsmouth. Teaddition, there are a number of private recreational boat docks. erminal facilities are considered adequate for existing com- Blerce. (See Port Series 1 for Ports of Searsport and Portland, Maine, and Portsmouth, N.H.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Operations, by contract, for extending and widening 35- foot channel were continued and completed late in January 1966. 46 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Removed approximately 76,867 cubic yards of rock and 132,231 cubic yards of ordinary material, making a total of 548,231 cubic yards of ordinary material and 114,067 of rock removed by con- tract. Federal costs were $1,306,866. Plans for removal of rail- road engine from the project channel were completed; contract awarded, and the work accomplished in March 1966. Federal costs were $31,175. Engineering studies in conjunction with preparation of plans and specifications were conducted for con- struction of 6-foot channels and anchorage. Federal costs were $29,765. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 94 percent complete. Removal of ledge rock areas in the 35-foot channel were completed in 1891. Widening and extending the 35-foot channel, except for removal of sand shoal 400 feet upstream of Interstate Bridge, and removal of railroad engine from the harbor were completed in 1966. To complete the project requires constructiofn of 6-foot channel and anchorage area. Controlling depths at mean low water were 35 feet in 35-foot channel, except 3 3 .0-foot shoal area 400 feet upstream of New Hampshire-Maine Bridge in left half of midchannel. Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $4,934,002, all for new work. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: 833 Appropriated.......... ............ $140,000 $700,000$1,500,000 $1,585,000 $5,224396 Cost............................ 130,682 39,370 2,136,7661,453,735 5,064. SIncludes $130,393 for new work for previous project. 32. PROVIDENCE RIVER AND HARBOR, R.I. Location. Formed at city of Providence by junction of see- konk River and two small streams which rise in northern Rhode Island. It is tidal and flows southerly in a deep channel between broad flats about 8 miles, emptying into Narragansett Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 278.) Previous projects. For details see page 1750, Annual Report for 1915, page 96, Annual Report for 1936, and page 111i, Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Provides for approach channel 35 feet deep at mean low water and generally 600 feet wide through river from deep water of Narragansett Bay opposite North Point on Popa squash Neck to turn below Fields Point, 8.1 miles, and thence with same depth, and of width ranging up to 1,700 feet to Fox Poit, excluding a marginal strip 75 feet wide channelward of estab- lished harbor lines, about 2.6 miles; channel 40 feet deep, gen' erally 600 feet wide from deep water in Narragansett Bay ju south of Prudence Island Light to turn below Field Point at Prov1 dence, thence up to 1,700 feet wide to existing project limit at Fox Point, with easing of bends to minimum radius of 5,000 feet, excluding marginal strip 75 feet wide channelward of established harbor lines; channel 30 feet deep and 150 feet wAide, tendit northeastward from upper end of existing project to vicinityo RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 47 1bdia Point at mouth of Seekonk River. Mean tidal range is about 4.6 feet and maximum range, due to combined effect of Wind and other causes is 8 feet or more. Latest approved esti- mate of project cost is $16,222,233. .Existing project was authorized by 1937 River and Harbor Act c Doc. 173, 75th Cong., 1st sess.); and 1965 River and Harbor ( . Doc. 93, 88th Cong., 2d sess.). Local interests must hold the United States ree fromcooperation. SLocal damages to the construction works and maintenance of Ploject, and provide and maintain depths in berthing areas com- mensurate with those in related project areas. Assurances for uncompleted work have not been requested. Fully complied with for completed work. Terminal facilities. There are 27 water terminal facilities Serving port of Providence. Three-fourths of all facilities have railway connections. Four facilities are owned by city of Provi- dence and two by State of Rhode Island. Facilities are adequate f"r existing commerce. (For details see Port and Terminal Fa- c 'itiles of Southern New England No. 4, revised in 1952.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new Work: engineering studies by hired labor in conjunction with treparation of plans and specifications were initiated and con- tilnued for construction of 40- and 30-foot channels. Contract for goring and probing of channel bottom was awarded and the work n progress. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 14 percent complete. Channel 35 feet deep, 600 feet wide was completed in 1949. To complete the project there remains construction of 40- aid 3 0-foot channels. Planning is in progress for this work. head of commercial navigation is at Fox Point. Controlling depths at mean low water were 35.2 feet in 35-foot channel to atubnstick Neck Reach except for shoaling to 32.5 feet on east limit feetbend (1963) ; then 34.7 feet in middle half of channel and 32.7 oeft in left outside quarter and 32.3 feet in right outside quarter O Channel to Bullock Point Reach; then 34.2 feet in middle half of 'ullock Point Reach and 25 feet in left outside quarter (1963); ,.O5feet in right outside quarter of 600-foot wide channel (1963) ; the 35 feet from Sabin Point to head of harbor at Fox Point (1960). Federal costs for existing project from regular funds Were $2,333,783 new work, and $1,814,331 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement kisYea Total to .............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 19661 Ne Wr -.-- C roriated.......................................................... $165,000 $6,248,645 ai elrla......................... ...... ...................... 11,550 6,095,195 CD 0 oPriated.......... $422 $9,353 S $93,353 ............ 1,302 2,464,467 .. ......... 422 9,33 3,353............ 1,302 2,464,467 lirctudes $3,761,412 for new work and $650,136 for maintenance for previous projects. 33. PROVINCETOWN HARBOR, MASS. Location. In the bight at northern extremity of Cape Cod, 48 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 40 miles southeast of Gloucester, 24 miles northeast of Cape Cod Canal and about 40 miles southeast of entrance to Boston Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 580 and 1208.) Previous project. For details see page 1746 of Annual Report for 1915 and page 86 of Annual Report for 1931. Existing project. Provides for preservation of point of land forming the harbor, a rubblestone protection dike 5 feet wide at top and 15 feet above mean low water, 6,150 feet across House Point Island Flats from Steven's Point to Wood End, and a stone breakwater to elevation 15 feet above mean low water with a top width of 10 feet commencing at a point about opposite Monument wharf, approximately 3,000 feet from shore and extending 3,000 feet northeasterly. Mean range of tide is 9.1 feet and spring range is 10.6 feet. Total estimated project cost is $4,017,000, of which non-Federal costs are $760,000. The 300-foot extension of Long Point beach protection and bringing it up to grade where necessarY portion is considered inactive and excluded from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost (1954) of this portion is $45,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents June25, 1910 Rubblestone protection dike across House Point Island H. Doc. 821 61st Cong., 2d sess. Flats from Stevens Point to 1 Wood End and extension of Long Point beach protection. June30,1948 Offshore breakwater about 3,000 feet long.................. H. Doc. 600 80th Cong., 2d ses. 1The 300-foot extension of Long Point beach protection portion is inactive. Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash 50 percent of total cost of construction of breakwater but not to ex- ceed $760,000, and agree to hold the United States free frog damages. Assurances that these conditions will be met have not been received. STerminal facilities. Developed waterfront of Provincetown 1 approximately 11/2 miles in extent and mostly privately owned. There are seven piers in this area which handle entire commerce of harbor. None of the piers has railroad connections. Facili" ties are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, neW work: Study of project at authorized site determined to be uW favorable. Hired labor is studying possible relocation of proposed breakwater nearer shore. Design memorandum has been initi' ated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about T percent complete. To complete project there remains construec tion of stone breakwater 3,000 feet long and 300-foot extension Of Long Point beach protection. Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $156,928 for new work, and $140,020 for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 49 Cost and financial stat ement Fiscal .............. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New Work: $700 $20,000 $383,154 M Cpropriated..................... S .$15,000 ........ enance*.5,185 $8,752 1,469 9,869 372,729 ...... ............... PPropriated. ........................ 1,197 37 140,020 I s..ncu e .21.. or............ ............ ........... 1,197 37 140,020 IclOdes $215,801 for new work for previous project. 34. ROYAL RIVER, MAINE Location. Situated 11 miles north of Portland, Maine, in Yar- .Outh Village. Royal is a small coastal stream which empties 11to Casco Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 315.)' IXivsting project. Adopted by Congress on March 3, 1871, r ovides for enlargement of channel through bar at Gravel Point, 00 feet wide, 4.5 feet up to head of commercial navigation at armouthl, and removal of several ledges near village of Yarmouth. odopted by 1882 River and Harbor Act, provides for construction Of 1 9 5-foot rubblestone jetty opposite Wolfe's Point, and dredging Chanel 4.5 feet through obstructed channel. Authorized by the Calef of Engineers April 27, 1965, under section 107 of 1960 River iad Harbor Act, as amended in 1965, provides for channel 8 feet deep), 80 feet wide from State channel in Casco Bay to commercial Wharf at Yarmouth and anchorage of 8 acres, 6 feet deep down- tream of Interstate 95 Highway Bridge. Mean range of tide is l. feet and spring range is 10.4 feet. All depths refer to mean low Water. Estimated project cost is $288,700, of which non- lederal costs are $88,000. Local cooperation. None required for authorizations of 1871 ad 1882. Under authorization of 1965, local interests must con- ribute 28 percent of first cost of 8-acre anchorage construction; assunle full responsibility for all project costs in excess of $500,- 000; hold United States free from damages; provide lands and Rats-of-way, including suitably diked spoil disposal areas needed i' construction and maintenance of project; and maintain exist- Public landing with necessary roads, parking areas and other 2Ng needed public-use shore facilities available to all on equal terms. Assurances furnished by town and State August 23 and Septem- ber .1, 1965, respectively. Cash contribution of $94,000 has been received, of which $13,000 was in lieu of furnishing spoil disposal aea dikes. Terminal facilities. Area is well connected with other sections tate. Interstate Route 95 passes over Royal River and con- sf liects with U.S. Route 1 just north of Yarmouth. Town has con- tructed public landing and launching ramp immediately below idge on north bank. There are two boatyards equipped with floats, marine railways and launching ramps. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were initiated and com- leted for construction of 8-foot channel and 6-foot anchorage. were issued. Ws 50 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. All planning prior to construe- tion is complete. To complete project there remains constructionl of 8-foot channel and 6-foot anchorage. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 Total to 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $2,500........ . $14,500 Aoiat $8,000 $215,0009 $261 Maintenance:.................. 31 $1,983 10,257 4,845 20473 Appropriated... . 10 ,80 29...................... JI" Cot .................... .... 29................... 35.1 SALEM HARBOR, MASS. Location. On north shore of Massachusetts Bay, about 12 miles by water generally north of entrance to Boston Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 240 and 1207.) Previous projects. For details see page 1741 of Annual Report for 1915. .- e Existing project. Provides for a channel 32 feet deep and ge* erally 300 feet wide, widened to 400 feet at bends and at inner end; extending about 1.5 miles from deep water in outer harbor to point about 1,500 feet from Salem Terminal wharf, locally dredged approach channel of same depth leading where it jo'n to wharf. Project also provides for a channel 10 feet deep in South 300 feet wide at 10-foot depth in harbor, gradually narrowing River, 200 feet at a point opposite outer end of Derby wharf, to feet wide to a bend at outer end of Derby wharf, thence thence 150 90 feet wide to turn near inner end of Derby wharf, and thence 50 feet wide to upstream end of Pickering wharf, east side of Derby wharf, 8 feet deep, for a branch channel on feet long, widening into a basin of same100 feet wide, and about qOd depth, 500 feet long an 200 feet wide. Project depths refer to mean low water. Meal range of tide is 9 feet and extreme range is 12.7 feet proved estimate of Federal cost for new work Latest aP clusive of amounts expended on previous projects. is $1,562,058, eof project for dredging south river channel 10 feet deep and Portionl 90 feet wide to the bend near central wharf, thence 50 feet wide to uP stream end of Pickering wharf is considered inactive and excluded from foregoing cost. Estimated cost (1955) of this $72,000. Existing project was authorized by the portion March 3, 1905 (H. Doc. 303, 58th Cong, following 2d sess.); July o, 193 (H. Doc. 112, 70th Cong., 1st sess.) ; March 2, 1945 76th Cong., 3d sess.); July 3, 1958 (H. Doc. 31, 85th (H. Doc. 701 Cong., s sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with except for inactive and incompleted portions of project, which were authorized in 194 subject to the conditions that local interests furnish assurances that suitable landing facilities, open to all on equal terms, provided and maintained and that they will hold the United will e free from claims fordamages that may result from:the channel State improvement. Public landing is estimated to cost $30,000. For mal assurances have been requested. Costs to local interests for SRIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 51 o portion of the project were about $485,000 for required ieted Coperation. oPerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new ark .Engineering studies, by hired labor, were performed for Wega~Ilonal improvements on east side of Derby wharf. Studies Were about 50 percent complete in June 1966. Chaegular funds, maintenance: Condition survey of South River Cannel was conducted in August 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 94 percent M Pete. ChaO To complete the project there Thae 1 0el and anchorage basin on the eastremains dredging of the ooe -foot channel has been partly dredged,side of Derby wharf. the section to a point POsite Derby Wharf Light was dredged in 1906. This same secti Nwas restored to project depth in 1915. Dredging of ordi- Dletidaterial in 32-foot channel was commenced in May and com- eJulyinNovember 1959; and removal of rock was commenced in feet Cand completed in August 1960. Controlling depths were 29.5 basfin 3 2 -foot channel (1964) ; 0-0 to 1 foot in 8-foot channel and upbs (1939) ; 5.4 feet in 10-foot channel (1965); 1.0 to 5.7 feet to fostreamrn end of project at Pickering wharf. Total Federal costs fe xisting project were $1,473,768, of which $1,416,066 was for Work and $57,702 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Yal Year Totalto ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 19661 Newwork.__-____ Aork. (P ropriated.. .. Main it .. .. ............ ..... ... .... .......... $12,000 $1,473,426 an .e: ....................... ........... ....... ... 7,009 1,468,435 oprated... $10, 189 $26,01 $4,3 34 .2,805 57,702 10,189 ........ 26,981 4,3 84 ............ 2,805 57,702 ludes $52,369 for new work for previous projects. 36. SCARBORO RIVER, MAINE (BETWEEN PROUTS NECK AND PINE POINT) Ition. A small and generally shallow stream about 21/) long which rises in town of Scarboro, Maine, and empties )rth end of Saco Bay, immediately west of Prouts Neck. It Yiles by water southeast of Portland, Maine. (See Coast eodetic Survey Charts 231 and 1205.) 3ting project. A channel across the bar 200 feet wide and deep at mean low water, and a channel 2,400 feet long, et wide and 6 feet deep at mean low water, leading to an 'age of the same depth 1,350 feet long and 300 feet wide, .1etty 800 feet long at tip of Pine Point. Mean range of 8.8 feet and spring range is 10.1 feet. Federal cost of new .or completed project was $392,635. Existing project was "ized by 1950 River and Harbor Act and Chief of Engi- March 8, 1960. Latest published map is in project docu- (. Doc. 69, 81st Cong., 1st sess.). Scooperation. Fully complied with. Total costs for all ements of local cooperation under terms of project authori- including required non-Federal contributions, were $10,000. 52 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Terminal facilities. There is one wharf of pile and timber conl struction on Scarboro River, extending northerly from Pine POintl almost to southerly limit of anchorage. Facility is owned bY town of Scarboro and considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, maintenance: Operations were comprised of dredging, by contract of 8-foot bar entrance channel, 6-foot channel to anchorage, an 6-foot harbor anchorage. Work was commenced in November 1965 and completed in February 1966. Approximately 32,577 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co-1 pleted in May 1962. Dredging entrance channel and inner har- bor basin was completed in October 1956. Channel across bar later shoaled and shifted until controlling depth in best channe1l was plus 0.1 foot. Because of excessive shoaling rate, projeC design was modified under authority delegated to Chief of Eng. neers to include construction of a jetty at harbor entrance Construction of jetty was commenced July 1961 and completed May 1962. Controlling depths at mean low water were 6 feet 1 8-foot entrance channel (1965), 5.8 feet in 6-foot channel and1 to 6 feet in 6-foot anchorage (1965). Federal costs for existin project from regular funds were $382,635 for new work, and $336,338 for maintenance. In addition, $10,000 contributed fundso expended for new work. Cost and financial statement to Total 19 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June3A New work: Appropriated.......... $64,065 $1,296..9 . Mainteance:342 178,347 [ 1,2061......92 3 Cost........... 3 Appropriated .......... 221 61 31 7,807 $3'33 Cost ............... .. 115,891 113,277 29 4,328 100:278 1Excludes $10,000 contributed funds. 37. SEARSPORT HARBOR, MAINE Location. On westerly side of Penobscot Bay about 30 Mnil from entrance, 28 miles northeast of Rockland, and 4 miles eas of Belfast, Maine. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 311.) Existing project. An access channel 500 feet wide, 35 feet deep to deepwater piers at Mack Point, Searsport Harbor, Maine, Wl a turning basin of same depth and a maximum width of 1,500 feet Project was authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act (1. JoC' 500, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Federal cost of new work for the cor" pleted project was $572,568. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Estimated costs to local interests for berth improvements are $60,000. Terminal facilities. There are four usable wharves at Sears port, one is a town landing. There are three wharves of timibel pile construction at Mack Point, which is the center of commerc l development of the port. Two of these wharves have railro. connections, and all have mechanical-handling facilities. Ter nal facilities are adequate for existing commerce. See Port $e' RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 53 ties 1 for Ports of Searsport and Portland, Maine, and Ports- fouth, N.H. (revised 1952). Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, regular fds: Final costs were paid for all work incident to construction of Project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project wascom- Plet19ed in October 1964. Controlling depths at mean low water 335 ,64) were 34.6 feet in 35-foot access channel; 34.7 feet in -foot turning basin, except 31.3 feet near northwesterly limit. Cost and financial statement al Y Total to ......... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NOW work: ted............. .. $13,000 $1r3on $638,000 -$80,000 $1,588 $572,568 11,055 8,842 650,668 2,103 6.572,568 38. THAMES RIVER, CONN. tL ocation. A tidal estuary varying in width from 400 feet to ree-fourths of mile, extending from junction of Yantic and Isletucket Rivers at Norwich, Conn., 15 miles southerly to Long 5and at New London. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart fPrevious project. For details see page 1754 of Annual Report S1915, and page 118 of Annual Report for 1938. feV, isting project. Provides for channel 25 feet deep and 250 feet Wide to 0upper end of Bartlett Crossover, thence to Norwich enerally 20 feet wide, with increased widths at bends, through fong Reach, and at head of navigation, total distance of 8.6 miles; 35r Widening channel opposite submarine base by average of about Pil feet with depth of 20 feet, construction of 5 training walls of ileand stone or riprap, with tops at mean high water, aggregate le1th 13,800 feet, located respectively at Monhegan, Trading ,tve, Long Rock, Rolling Mill and Norwich, and removal of ob- ructions in Shetucket River at Norwich. Plane of reference is 3.ean low water, mean tidal range being 2.6 feet at New London, Sinfeet at Norwich. Maximum range, due to combined effect of d and other causes, is 7 feet or more. Federal cost of new Work for completed project was $1,323,571, exclusive of amounts ePended on previous projects. Slight widening of channel at 1-PPer end of Long Reach is considered inactive and excluded from regoing costs. Estimated cost (1954) is $31,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Act Work authorized Documents and reports e 221882 Training walls.. . ...... ............... Annual Report 1882, p. 606. "Ie25,1910 Traningalls............... Ja. 21 Removal of obstructions in Shetueket River.... .. H. Do. 397, 61st Cong., 2d ses. J 3 1927 Channel 18 feet deep above Allyns Point..... ........ H. Doe. 107, 69th Cong., Ist sess. 1930 Present project dimensions of channel up to Allyns Point.... Rivers and Harbors Committee Dog. 14, 71satCong ., 2d sess. 30,19351 Present project dimensions of channel above Allyns Point.... Rivers ad Harbors Committee Doc.18, Aug a4r. 2 74th Cong., let sess. 2,1945 Increased width opposite submarine base, 20 feet deep ....... H. Doe. 367, 7th Cong., let sess.2 a ht Widening of channel at upper end of Long Reach Inactive. ntains latest published rnap. 54 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Wharves along river and at Norwich are mainly bulkhead type, both with and without pile aprons. Faci ities considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, main- tenance: Dredging, by contract, in 25-foot channel from Smith Cove to Allen Point was started in February and completed in April 1966, removed about 237,388 cubic yards of ordinary ma- terial. ete. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complet Training walls were completed in 1906, except the upper ende- the Rolling Mill dike, which is replaced by adjacent shore improvey ments. Training walls are in fair condition. Widening oppOS't submarine base was completed in 1940 by the Navy Departmert Head of navigation is at Norwich, about 15 miles above the mouth Controlling depths are 31.5 feet from New London Highw Bridge to Smith Cove (1963), thence 23.5 feet in left outside quarter, 24.3 feet in middle half and 25.0 feet in right quartert. Bartlett (1966) ; then 19.2 feet in left quarter, 25.0 feet in middve half and 23.0 feet in right quarter for 10,200 feet upstreand Allyn Point (1966); 15 feet in left and right outside quarters ane 21.2 feet in middle half to Stoddard Old Dock Lt. (1962), thenc 5 10.8 feet in left outside quarter, 19 feet in middle half and i3-E feet in right outside quarter to Mohegan Dike Lt. (1962), thence 8.5 feet in left outside quarter, 23 feet in center half and 20.2 feet in right outside quarter to Rolling Mill dike (1962), thence 15 feet in left outside quarter 18 feet in middle half and 11 feet in ril t outside quarter to upstream limit of Federal project (1962)' Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $1,323,571 for new work, and $1,239,618 for maintenance. Cost and fincncial statement Total t6 1 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 New work:$ 91 Appropriated... ........................................................ $1,471 9 Cost.......1,471, aintenance: 60 M Appropriated.......... ................................................ $272,200 1 , 24 Cost........................... .................................. 271,812 1, 1Includes $148,348 for new work and $36,596 for maintenance for previous projects. 39. WARWICK COVE, R.I. Location. Ten miles south of Providence, R.I., in city of War- wick. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 278). n e Existing project. Provides for an entrance channel 6 fee deep, 150 feet wide, into and through the lower portion of the cove, then 100 feet wide, 6 feet deep, to the head of the cove and four anchorage areas, 6 feet deep totalling 13 acres; 2 acres in vicinity of Oakland Beach Park, 5 acres on each side of the channel in lower part of the cove and 1 acre at head of cove. Estimated project cost is $321,400, of which non-Federal costs are $160,700. Existing project was authorized under section 107, RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 55 1960.R a 1965 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on May 21, Local i 'vr W l cal cooperation Fully complied with. Formal assurances Of received in September 1965. Required non-Federal funds S$160,750 have been received; and, in addition, local interests aexpended $10,000 for sand placement, Oakland Beach. Work was conlplished by hydraulic dredging in conjunction with project conlstrucet.o Wic ermnal facilities. There are 10 commercial marinas in War- it. Cove that have berthing facilities for 700 boats; the major- ty are on west side of cove. Most of the docks are constructed adw ood floats and wood pilings. Services provided include dry Als A,s Wettherestorage, fuel,private are many water, docks power hoists and truck access. and piers that jut into the Oe way from both shores. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Engineering studies, by hired labor, were continued and completed; contract was awarded. Construction was commenced late in March and work was in progress on June 30, 1966. Re- moved about 117,000 cubic yards of ordinary material for existing project construction. At request and expense of local interests, 52,000 cubic yards of sand were placed, by hydraulic process, on Oakland Beach. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 55 percent Omlete. Construction to complete the project is in progress. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS year. Fiscal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 .. _...__ e Work: C oriated.............. $2,500 $15,000 $137,500 $5,750 $160,750 ..................... 7,790 10,270 85,441 103,501 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Year. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 work: Contributed.. ..... .......... . ......... ................... $160,750 $160,750 73,148 73,148 L 40. WELLS HARBOR, MAINE ab °cation. In town of Wells at mouth of Webhannet River .l st 20 miles northeast of Portsmouth Harbor and about 34 le southwest of Portland Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic vey Chart 1205.) 75 xisting project. Repairs to an old Government pier about feet long, made of cribwork ballasted with stone extend- in Seaward from Drakes Island; and anchorage basin 7.4 acres tenarea and 6 feet deep; a channel 100 to 150 feet wide, ex- ba ding from deep water in the Atlantic Ocean to inner end of uI, with seaward section 8 feet deep, and harbor section 6 56 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 feet deep; and two converging stone jetties, one extending 940 feet easterly from Wells Beach and the other 840 feet southerly from Drakes Island, separated so as to provide a clear opening 400 feet wide, and for revetment of seaward face of tip of Wells Beach. Project depths refer to mean low water. Mean range o. tide is 8.7 feet and spring range is 9.9 feet. Highest tide is esti mated as 13.5 feet above and lowest tide as 3.5 feet below plane of mean low water. Federal cost of new work for substantially completed project was $310,834. Existing project was author- ized by act of June 10, 1872, for repairs to Government pier; and by 1960 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 202, 86th Cong., 2d sess' contains latest published map) for anchorage basin, channel and jetties. Extension of the Wells Beach jetty to a total length o 2,240 feet and extension of Drakes Island jetty to a total lengt of 3,065 feet, and dredging a 300- by 450-foot settling basin so of the anchorage, was authorized by the Chief of Engineers ol September 20, 1965. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total costs to date for cash contribution were $194,296 and local interests approprid ated about $150,000 for construction of a public landing and auxiliary harbor facilities, of Terminal facilities. None in Wells Harbor or any portion. o Webhannet River. Full utilization of Wells Harbor will require provision and maintenance of moorings and a public landing With suitable supply facilities and utilities. Operationsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, ain - tenance: Engineering and design studies, by hired labor, for ex-* tension of jetties into deep water and construction of settling basin were completed and contract awarded for a 1,300-foot e%, tension of south jetty and a 1,225-foot extension of north jettYn a southeasterly direction; both jetties to run parallel and exten to 10.0 feet below mean low water. Operations, by continuig contract, were commenced late in March 1966 and continued About 50,000 tons of stone were delivered, of which 34,900 were placed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was subst" tially completed in June 1963. Dredging of channel to sea a. settling basin, and extension of jetties remain to complete the proJ ect. Controlling depths at mean low water were 2.1 feet in 8.foo entrance channel; 2 feet in 6-foot channel; and 0 feet in 6-foo anchorage (1965). Cost and financial statement _ _ REGULAR FUNDS to Total Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,196 New work: 0 973 Appropriated.......... $262,500 $88,000.. $1,01.5........ $3 83 Cost ......... ........ 86,796 225,998 -$1i4,353 11,600 "-$7,235' 3 Maintenance:|A4 380 Appropriated .......... .... ......... 130,658 340,000 9,722 485, Cost.. .......... ..... 11,375 65,122 241,419 322, RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 57 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ... 1962 I 1963 1964 1965 1966 41. WEYMOUTH-FORE AND TOWN RIVERS, BOSTON HARBOR, LMASS. Location. Weymouth-Fore River rises in Braintree, Mass.,'and SoidWs northward 7.5 miles to empty into Hingham Bay on south Toe of Boston Harbor. It is tidal for about 6 miles of its length. tiwn River is a small tidal stream about 2 miles long, lying en- rlY Within the city limits of Quincy, Mass. It is a tributary of Vey4nouth-Fore River into which it empties about 2 miles above the1outh. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 246.) urevious projects. For details see Annual Reports and page 19388 ers, respectively: 1907-65, 1915-1745, 1932-64, and ~ 67, and 69. arxisting project. (For details of completed work under sep- Rr4ble projects for Weymouth-Fore and Town Rivers see Annual RePort for 1961, pages 24 and 26.) Adopted by 1965 River and -~obor Act (H. Doc. 247, 88th Cong., 2d sess.), provides for: 1roMining Weymouth-Fore and Town Rivers, Mass., into a single feeject and modifies for construction of channel 35 feet deep, 37 Ioa in rock, and 500 feet wide from deep water in Nantasket dsand along the southerly half of the Boston Harbor "Nar- feets channel, through Nantasket Gut, then 35 feet deep and 400 lerally to leWide of Weymouth-Fore mouthlimits River, then 35 feet deep, within of existing project to Weymouth-Fore ,,Ver Bridge, then 35 feet deep and generally 400 feet wide to iDer limit of existing project; channel 35 feet deep and 300 feet ide, increased from 400 to 550 feet at bends, from mouth of oWn River to existing turning basin in Town River; turning and Inaeuvering basin 35 feet deep at confluence of the two rivers in b'ng Cove; enlarging and deepening to 35 feet the existing turning basin inTown River; 6 acres of 8-foot anchorage to compensate bh that part of an existing local small-boat anchorage that would si Usurped by widening 35-foot commercial channel; and dimen- chns of 15-foot channel, 100 feet wide, continuing from end of euanel to point just below Quincy Electric Light & Power Co. p_.station, completed before 1965, remain unchanged. Latest ap- crOved Federal cost estimate for new work is $12,510,000, ex- Cusive of $6,031,853 for new work completed before 1962 and a°lounts expended on previous projects.. j oLocal cooperation. Fully complied with for completed work, o0l.Federal contributions were $439,832. Assurances for 1965 Vifdification have not been requested. Local interests must pro- aCe lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construction and 1Ia1ntenance; hold United States free from damages; make neces- ry alterations to sewer lines or other obstructive features; pro- ,eand maintain depths commensurate with channel depth in 58 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 berthing areas and local access channels serving the terminals, and maintain the enlargement of small-boat anchorage. Estimated costs to local interests for sewer modification and land acquisition are $1,540,000. Terminal facilities. There are nine wharves in Weymouth Fore River, all grouped near the head of the Federal improvement. Construction consists mainly of pile and timber piers extending from timber or concrete bulkheads. There are 6,092 feet of berth' ing space available. Six of the wharves have railroad connections and mechanical-handling facilities. Three of the wharves are used in connection with a large shipyard, 2 with oil terminals, 1 with an electric generating plant, 1 with a large soap manufactur ing plant, and 2 with yacht clubs. On the south bank of ToWn River are 8 wharves, 3 of which are used for boat building and e repair work, 3 used for receipt of petroleum products, 1 for r - ceiving and storing lumber, and 1 for receiving scrap materials' On the north bank of the river is a yacht building and repair yard. There are no publicly owned wharves. Facilities are considered adequate for the present needs of commerce. (For further de-s. scription of terminal facilities, see Port Series No. 3, Port of Bo ton, revised 1956.) Operationsand results duringfiscal year. None., Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 68 percent complete. All work adopted before 1965 is complete. No wvork has been performed on construction remaining to complete the project, which will require dredging of 35-foot channels, turning and maneuvering basin, and anchorage areas. Controlling depths at mean low water were: Weymouth-Fore River 30 feet in 3 0 -foot channel (1960). Town River-26.3 feet in 27-foot channel from junction of Weymouth-Fore River to downstream end of Baker' basin (1962), thence 27.0 feet to end of 27-foot project (1960) 14 feet in 15-foot channel (1953); 22.0 feet in 24-foot turning basin (1960). Federal costs for existing project from regular funds were $6,031,853 for new work, and $425,742 for mainte- nance. Contributed funds of $440,237 were expended for ne work. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 11666l Junea, to196 New work: Appropriated..................................... ...................... $6792 3 Cost......... . ........ ................................................ 792, Maintenance:,443,669 Appropriated... ......... - -- -.. .... ........ $42 443,59 Cost.................. . . . . . .. 42 1 Includes for previous projects $735,900 -ornw r n 5 0h Fore River; and $25,000 for new work and $12,577 newworan $5250maintenance-Weyr oltl 0 maintenance Town tributed funds expended $100,000 Weymouth-Fore River; and $340,237 TownRiver.xcludes River. CO 42. WICKFORD HARBOR, R.I. Location. On west shore of Narragansett Bay, about 20 miles south of Providence, R.I. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 236 and 353). Previous projects. For details see following Annual Reports: 1873-page 972; 19 00-page 1261; 1943-page 112. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 59 ha~5tsting project. Two riprap breakwater at entrance to outer polor,one from Sauga Point about 1,130 feet long and one from feet ePoint about 825 feet long, and maintenance of channel 9 th beep at mean low water, 60 feet wide with enlargements at tho ends, up to wharves at Wickford, completed under a previous roiect In addition, a project authorized under section 107, 1960 196er nd Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on February 7, 2,6 , provides for channel 12 feet deep, 100 feet wide, and about 0 feet long into Mill Cove. Mean tidal range is 3.8 feet and Spring range is 4.7 feet. Federal cost of new work for the com- e project was $217,110. Existing project was authorized by sect and lHarbor Act (S. Doc. 141, 79th Cong., 2d sess.) and lver Lion 107, Public Law 86-645. fo ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual costs au all .requirements of local cooperation under terms of project C thorizt' of $49r0zatio94nwere $59,347, which included a cash contribution doerminal facilities. There are 4 boatyards, 2 marinas, 5 large Ski'ng areas, and numerous individual private and public bearves. s, These provide the area with wet and dry storage beilth mechanical handling facilities and marine railways. Fa- 0es are adequate for existing commerce. 190erations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new ork, Adjustment in funds was made. COtndition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- in September 1963, except for final grading of spoil dis- tosaltd area completed in September 1964. Controlling depths at anO 6 e low water were 12 feet in 12-foot Mill Cove channel (1964) ; yeet In 6-foot Mill Cove Anchorage (1964) ; and 8.3 feet in 9-foot qikford Cove channel for middle half, 8.2 feet in left outside ho)rter, 8.9 feet in right outside quarter, except 6.3-foot shoal on li.'i limit near bend and shoaling to 7.1 feet channelward of west ul" at bend (1965). Federal costs for existing project from reg- -a"s UUnds were $217,110 for new work and $47,500 for mainte- ce. In addition, $49,094 expended from contributed funds. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS a .e.a Total to Ya'.. . .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1955 June 30, 19661 Miprated .......... $6,000$111,000 -$1,000 S -$11,500 15,123 $233,410 nt ce:*.............. llrpitd.... 4,968 45,570 46,371 2,215 253 233,410 orated ......... 283 49 30,570 15,705 ............ 47,500 ..... 283 49 1,305 44,970............ 47,500 l udes $16,300 for new work for previous project. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS • 1962 Total to 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juno 30, 1966 ork: tribute............. ............ $40,000 . .. ...... ...... .. $65,000 ...................... 11,557 $12,670 $i20 . -$253 49,094 60 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 43. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Date Date Name of project survey Name of project sudrvey conducted Connecticut: Duck Island Harbor............... Massachusetts: Dec. 1965 Oct.1965 Cross Rip Shoals ................. Dec.1965 Greenwich Harbor............. Mar. 1966 Duxbury Harbor............ Oct. 1965 Guilford Harbor.............. Apr. 1966 New Bedford and Fairhaven Harbor.. Oct. 1965 Milford Harbor.......... ....... May 1965 Pollock Rip Shoals................ Oct. 15 M ystic River...................... Apr. 1966 *** Rockport Harbor ............... Jun June 1966 Oct. 965 New London Hiarbor....... ........ Mar. 1966 Norwalk Harbor.................. Mar. 1966 Vineyard Haven Harbor...........Sept. 1965 Stamford Harbor.... .......... May 1966 Wareham Harbor........... .... .Nov. i965 Westcott Cove....... ...... Feb. 1966 Wellfleet Harbor.................Dec. 1966 Westport Harbor and Saugatuck River. Mar. 1966 Winthrop Harbor................. M New Hampshire: Nov. 1965 Maine: Bar Harbor.... ............. Cocheco River..................Dec. 196 June 1966 Exeter River..................Feb. 1966 Bass Harbor.... ............. June 1966 Little Harbort ............ ..... Dec. 1965 Camden Harbor................... June 1966 Rye Harbor .................. Cores Harbor.... ............ July1965 Rhode Island:M Lubec Channel.... 966 ........... Mar. 1966 A ponaug Cove.................. ar. 1965 Northeast Harbor................. June 1966 Block Island Harbor of Refuge...... July 1965 Penobscot River..... Pepperell Cove............... ......... June 1966 Jan. 19F6 Coasters Island Harbor............. Great Salt Pond, Block Island....... July Ju 6 Rockland Harbor................. May 1966 Newport Harbor................. Oct. 1965 Southwest Harbor....... ...... Mar. 1966 Pawcatuck River ................... Oct. 1965 Tenants Harbor................... Mar. 1966 Sakonnet Harbor................ Oct. York Harbor...................... Dec. 1965 New York: r .65 Hay West Harbor...............c. 1 1___ 44. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 196 full report d Name of project see Annual Report 9 ~ .rtiopaesd for- Construction rten S103 Apponaug Cove, R.I.1 ...... 3 ....................... 1964 25156,874 73 Bagaduce River, Maine . . .4 5................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 1912 28,000 1,04 Bar Harbor, MaineS 1932 3041 Bass Harbor Bar, Mainel.............. .. . .. .. ...... . ................... ............... 406,591 6. . . . . . . . . . 1920 4,076 Bass Harbor, Maine Beals Harbor, M ainel....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1965 188,859 1, 1 1959 7184,880 4,4 Belfast Harbor, Mainel... .......................... 1954 39,561 Bellamy River, N.H.1 3 4 .......... ..... 1897 34,643 . *. "3 Beverly Harbor, Mass. ................................ 1951 8197,565 73 Block Island Harbor of Refuge, R.I.S..".... ................. 19(13 576,856 16 Boothbay Harbor, Mainel 4 .. ............ ........ 1,429,1 Bridgeport HIarbor, Conn.................................. 1953 18,000 1965 94,111,366 1 ,555 Bucksport Harbor, Mainel....... ....................... 1907 18,421 , Bullocks Point Cove, R.I.1 ............. ................ 1960 10170,902 Buttermilk Bay Channel, Mass.1................................. 36, 1960 31,676 111g, Camden Harbor, Mainel ............ 1960 72,400 Canapitsit Channel, Mass.l 4 . . . . ........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . 1899 9,113 . . 33 Cape Porpoise Harbor, Maine 1954 12175,037 11 Carvers Harbor, Vinalhaven, Mainelt*........................ Cathance River, Mainet 34...................... Clinton Harbor, Conn.1. ................................. ...... 203,589 21,000 ... **.. 1372,405 6,9 13,11 Coasters Island Harbor, R.I........ ............ 1911 5,500 Cobscook Bay, Mainet 3 4 ..... . . ... 1866 4,173 . .. .. ". g Cocheco River, N.H.1 3 4 ................................... 1913 119,089 Connecticut River (above IHartford), Conn.14............. .... 1932 (15) 31,707 ..... Cores Harbor, Mainel......... ..................... 1954 Cotuit Harbor, Mass.14... . . . ............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 1962 8,541 . . '.... Criehaven Harbor, Mainel . 1939 40,776 44;6 Cross Rip Shoals, Nantucket1 Sound, Mass.l......................... 1954 24,2(0 490 Damariscotta River, Maine 4............ ......... 1906 5,000 See footnotes at end of table. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 61 OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS-Continued For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance i -- . i i orches uroughare, Mainel 4................................. 16 ................ . 1916 $40,000 nekiesdyand Neponset RItiver, Mass. ...... 1963 94,584 $179,594 Sxb Conn.1............ ,rbor, a rbor, Mass.. ................. 1953 367,298 352,918 " 1961 17384,297 5,119 tJ3thbaYHarbor, Maine .. ........................ S6,500... . . 17,238 .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1953 . . . stprIl ar bo aine 1964 18638,675 Wae 1XteRive Harbor, iver Mass.l Mass. .............................. 1943 1915,614 3,738 1948 21,759 2064,616 erver N I.1 4 1913 27,454 2,135 l uth Ilabor M ass........................................ 1963 4 438,201 804,236 verAile rg re r rMasl .. ............. er Harbor, Coni.5............ ............... ............... 1965 2 123,763 27,568 34,223 1553 35,490 rest r Mainel 22 1935 25,788 41,404 rees d Blok Island , R. .............................. 1963 189,037 122,452 re Wi 11.1.1. wiifr tarrbo Co Conn.l. arbor, Con........... ........................................ 2,000 8181,741 23137,222 71,178 129,389 ay( t Iver, Mainel 4........................... 1896 30,963 180 8i~~rarbor, Ii her's 11....................... e rb r 's Island, N.Y... 1931 8,401 1,869 IiRabr, Mass.l SHarbor, Mainel..8 ...................................... 1957 28,204 1954 19,000 55,163 Mc River, Conn. ........ ...................... 1961 24859,691 452,196 Iver,Mse1..e 1 1950 5,618 2,166 lg at Throu hfare, Maine.. 1959 137,653 966 ire r [( Plymouth), .orth Mass........... ............... 1895 8,940 t15 10,221 ivaror,N. 428 hM1 1913 19,980 Sl r, Woods Hole, Mass. ................ 1909 133,227 4,947 Itt ~ler reo l, . aodssHol ... .. ...... :1kei. . . .............. .......... ......... . . . . . 1906 18,000 .. 1956 26211,367 onel, b~Me.................. 1956 533 13,460 1922 2979,866 45,097 ine .................................. r, aM4aine.... ...... 1949 a[adau earor .............. 1962 3014,000 iver 4 ass.1........................................ 8,989 Sa rbaro,Cor , Meass. 14..... ..................... ............. ...... 1950 ti I r,n a .M ... ........... ..................... 1953 17,000 92,.359 115,425 154,958 1940 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S darbor of Refuge), Mass. 31132,435 61,484 1964 3248,166 199,035 1964 at r, Maine. 1 114,000 ................ ........... . 12,803 1930 Ri brr , onMa nl. .......... 33160,982 76,899 1957 l l Rir CoMaineln........................................ 34456,826 347,540 1965 Tav ,d n a Rbrakw aand . a Fairhavenvr Fairhaven ter, ontnnectic bor,Mass... Harbor, Mass.S............ utl .............................. . . . . ......................... . 1,686,918 . . . . . . . 636,559 . . . . . . . . . . 1953 Si i arbor, bk Conns ........................ Connecticut ................. .. 1,242,246 40,254 1950 . .3 ... .. . ... ... ... 567,974 232,081 1954 OrthusS rbor, d tior o projectf rge) Ma . ine.. . . . . ..... 1.I.1.................................. 498,828 39,601 1953 c t ve MH aie l2r, 3onn 138,942 3 162 1954 . ............ . ................. 1964 35368,612 841 232 6,384,394 ........ 3::€ 1935 v r , M ain e , ................................ oive RIraiden.. 6 .. ........ 8150,000 .............. 12185,430 349,503 ....... 1963 ca, ,oer' R, .......... ....................292,020 375,349 1965 ch or r ae..... power aial . 171,323 ....................... 1,757 1963 ,lkU.t, -•o(Harbor'ofi'fug)" ,adPointJ'udith'Pohndl.:: 3,500 217 1892 ~ukI'rbor,**a ;oet D hlaR.I.h anbcals (Harbor MNantucket nhals, n.I of . .. Sound, Nantucket a*00a Refuge) Sound, Ms.1 arnd Point Mass. .................... .. Judith 382488,430 1 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,083,504 Pondi. 1,181,655 844,353 .. 1964 5,000 1882 Maine. ' d 3IslndHarbor, ove .................................. 20,000 718 1883 ind Harbor, MMaine aine4..1 ........................... 4........................ 642 : 1882 nt R Mainet ................ ........................ 119,844 rk Maine.3............................ bor, 1 391,948,462 3,415 1960 Ro ver, aorbot R.I.i....... Maine . .............................. 23................................... 32,000 182 1915 :kl, hrd arbor, b Ma oVer, n.1 3 ..................... M ainel4 ... . ......................... .................. 1905 22,000 ;ke15Rbr,N.H......22................................. bar . ............ .........................1965 or,M ainel.. 40130,342 183 .r ... .. Coaines .. 12531,716 180,152 1959 Io Ot iX ' M ainel......... .... . ......................... r, 41179,550 14,404 1950 1 a riv, R[.I. . 42588,478 24,421 1962 . 11y(Harbor of Refuge) Cape Ann, Mass.6 44l.... 38,427 1909 1,925,553 15,926 1922 rdl cRier, Mainel 3 4 .......... ................ 35,000 122 1915 aoa ay(Harbor Conn.1... . . ......... 1960, ..................... 45284,760 12,611 1954 46337,789 785,194 1963 4789,593 .. ,,. . . . . HarborM othrd arbor, Conn... aine. . ..................................... ........ . . .....,... .... ........ 1962 4837,714 49180,042 171,581 1,041 arMaine tl ........... ................. 1964 50767,681 366,972 arborConno4............... 1915 6 33,000 3,712 0la)n Hr Conn.5.."............... ............. 1959 39,874 47,407 1961 2,543 . . , ... 8 fOotnotes at end of table. 62 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS-Continued last Cost to June 30, 1966 Forreport_______________ full Name of project see Annualport Report Construction Operation d for- maintenance Sullivan Falls Harbor, Mainel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1914 $19,871 ........ Taunton River, Mass........................................... Tenants Harbor, Maine 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. 1948 271,396 3221 11920 18,750 1 344 Union River, Mainel 3 22 . ....... 1912 146,855 178 VineyardWeamHroMs........... Haven Harbor, Mass.*......... 1943 27,186 '258 Wareham Harbor, Mass.. ......................... .18 1896 95,997 P5,997 Warren River, R.I.1 .80...........180 5,000.g Wellfleet Harbor, Mass.1......... .......................... 159 2146284 .5'1 Westcott Cove, Conn.1... ........ .............................. 164355,960 30'873 Westport Harbor and Saugatuck River, Conn... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1956 19,308 20 Westport River, Mass.4 84.................................... 1942 .............. 2 23 3....... Weymouth Back River, Mass....... ......................... 1944 1248,740 Hilson Point Harbor, Conn.l 4 .................................... 1895 54,177 ...... 0 Winnipesaukee Lake, N.H.1. ................. 1952 7,500 ' 48 Winthrop Harbor, Mass.1........................ ............... 1895 8,992 Wood Island Harbor, Maine, and P oolat Biddefordtl.... ... . 1957 55135,612 ....... g Woods Hole Channel, Mass.1 ....... ............................... 1940 230,000 20944 York Harbor, Mainel ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1962 56195,654 1 Completed. SCosts of $137,583 for local cooperation requirements, which includes $104,583 cash contribu tion. Local interests did not complete construction of public landing. Abandonment recommended in HIf.Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess. No commerce reported. Completed except for inactive portion. SAuthorized by the Chief of Engineers (Public Law 86-645, sec. 107). 7$47 revoked in 1960. SExcludes $100,000 contributed funds expended. SExcludes $147,887 contributed funds expended. 10oExpended fiscal year 1961-$1,505 Federal funds and $1,130 non-Federal funds; a total o $123,757 non-Federal contributed funds expended on project. 11Fiscal year-a minus $126 accrued expenditure incurred; $126 revoked. 12 Excludes $20,000 contributed funds expended. .a Excludes $6,600 contributed funds expended. l Inactive. M Estimated cost of project $12,900,000: expenditures limited by law to $1 million. W Portion of project inactive. 17 Excludes local cooperation requirements of $100,000, consisting of $35,000 cash contribU tion, $13,000 for public wharf, and $52,000 for additional construction costs. ot Local interests completed construction of fish hoist in fiscal year 1965. Excludes $141, 630 other contributed funds. 19Excludes $10,000 contributed funds expended. 20 Excludes $5,000 contributed funds expended. 51 Excludes $35,000 contributed funds expended, Improvement adequate for commerce. 23 Excludes $25,500 contributed funds expended. Sb Excludes $222,010 contributed funds expended. "s H. Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess., recommended eliminating maintenance dredging. 2 Fiscal year 1957-revoked $1,044; $89 for new work expended. 2 Improvement to be restudied. 2 Under State maintenance. SExcludes $62,000 contributed funds expended. so Excludes $114,327 expended for rehabilitation; breakwater repaired in 1962. 1 Excludes $46,500 contributed funds expended. 2 Excludes $11,380 contributed funds expended. 33 Excludes $14,000 contributed funds expended. UbExcludes $211,649 expended for rehabilitation; jetty repaired in 1963. 8 Excludes $34,500 contributed funds expended. 3 Work discontinued in 1937. Facilities transferred to War Assets Administration. 87 Town Meeting of March 26, 1966, voted tion; authorizing the borrowing of $16,000 favorably on major requirement of loca and acceptance of gifts to the town of cooe. $6,000; indicating plans for provision of a public landing. M Excludes $1,926,000 Federal funds for rehabilitation and $17,587 contributed funds. ies 3 Excludes about $225,000 expended by local interests on terminal and transfer facil tes# Authorized work remaining on project is comprised of an incomplete and an inactive portiO 40 Excludes $61,338 contributed funds expended and $81,548 other contributed funds. SExcludes $19,892 contributed funds expended. 42 Excludes $21,928 contributed funds expended. 43 Commerce included under Tiverton Harbor, R.I. 44 Abandonment recommended in H. Doc. 411, 64th Cong., 1st sess., and in River and Harbor Committee Doc. 3, 65th Cong., 1st sess. a Excludes $69,976 contributed funds expended. Excludes $67,792 contributed funds expended. 47 Excludes $2,663 contributed funds expended. SIncludes $37,714 emergency relief funds. Excludes $18,525 contributed funds, of which $1,785 was for$7,501 work contributed outside approved Excludes funds project. expended. BEACH EROSION CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 63 OTIHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS-Continued SOWud ofes$169,636 contributed funds expended.I 2 denof S tonington voted March 6, 1961, not to participate in project. Project is inactive. ,5lde $32,000 contributed funds expended. - eludes it $21,000 contributed funds expended. Eu local cooperation. Improvement to be restudied. 1g udes $2,000 EXcludes $32,161 contributed funds expended. contributed funds expended. 45. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Fiscal year Study identification cost Uner.Harbor, Gouldsboro, Maine, navigation improvements.............. .................... $11,734 a lcove, R.., breakwaters and dredging............... o ckport, Mass... ............................... ..... ............................................... 361 'arkerR P 'isbury,Mass.... . .................................................. 1,717 Red Brook , Newbury, Mass............ ........................................... .. 502 S . , a..rbor nourne, ware ee,,oo jBranford, ConnMass.......... ........................................... ........................................... ..... ...... 4,375 7,260 ver, Warren, R . ........................................................ 8,910 46. AUTHORIZED BRIDGE ALTERATION Cost to June 30, 1966 For last Name of project full report see Annual Construction Operation and Report for. maintenance ChelseaStreet Highway Bridge ............... ....... ...... 1962 2$137,038 .......... .ornoleted xcludes $8,602 contributed funds. 47. CLIFF WALK, NEWPORT, R.I. it Location. In Newport, R.I., about 25 miles south of Providence, so0t es the Atlantic Ocean near mouth of Narragansett Bay on oath side of Aquidneck Island, and extends 3.5 miles southward 'west end of Newport (Eastons) Beach to and around Lands ad and thence northward to east end of Bailey Beach. (See Coast Geodetic Survey Coast Charts 236, 353, and 1210.) for6sting project. Provides for construction of improvements s hore protection at Newport, R.I., extending 18,000 feet from est end of Newport Beach to east end of Bailey Beach; consisting sloaterinittent reaches of backfill, dumped riprap, stone mounds, P'De revetment and breakwaters; concrete toe walls, seawalls and 4rPet walls; grading and surfacing Cliff Walk and providing rainage therefor. Mean range of tide is 3.5 feet and spring oge is 4.4 feet. Latest approved estimate of cost is $1,400,000, ized hich $986,000 is non-Federal. Existing project was author- e by 196 5 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 228, 89th Cong, 1st . Latest published map is in project document. a! Ocal cooperation. Local interests must obtain and submit for roval suitable easements, leases, or other proof of continued acet of passage along walk of general public, and satisfactory ces,s for construction and repair; assure public ownership or Col trol and its administration for public use during economic life 64 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of project; contribute 58.2 percent of estimated first cost of con- struction of all shore structures for protection against erosionf bY waves and currents below upper limit of computed wave runup and contribute 100 percent of estimated first cost of restoration ad filling of land, repair, construction and drainage of walk, and cor" struction of portions of shore structures above limit of wave runUP, estimated to cost $810,000; maintain suitable existing structures for protection of walk; assure maintenance and repair of walk; provide easements and rights-of-way; and hold United States free from damages. Assurances that these conditions will be met have not been requested. Operationsand results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning has not been started' 48. HAMPTON BEACH, HAMPTON, N.H. Location. On shore of New Hampshire facing Atlantic Ocea between Hampton Harbor and Great Boar's Head, is a public beach in town of Hampton owned by State of New Hampshire and town of Hampton. It is about 12 miles south of Portsmouth N.H., and about 40 miles northeast of Boston, Mass. (See Coast and Geodetic Chart 1206.): Existing project. Provides for Federal participation amount of one-third of first cost of construction in plan of Pro 0 tection and improvement, which comprises direct placement il sand to a 150-foot width, 5,200 feet of beach north of Haverhill Street, with an added 25-foot widening along 1,250 feet of north- ern end of fill area (River and Harbor Act of 1954-H. Doc. 325, 83d Cong., 2d sess.). River and Harbor Act of 1962 (H. D0c. 416, 87th Cong., 2d sess.) modified existing project to authorie Federal participation in. costs of constructing an impermeabl groin about 235 feet long and periodic nourishment of the beach for an initial period of 10 years 'from year of first nourishmen. operation with such Federal participation to be a Federal contri bution of one-third the first costs of groin construction and beach nourishment work. Mean range of tide is 8.3 feet, and spri range is 9.6 feet. Federal cost of new work for completed projecl was $260,868. 9 Local cooperation.' Fully complied with. Funds of $136,09 were received and expended for current work; and $249,546 e pended by local interests for beach widening and placementO sand completed in 1955.n Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Beach restoration, by contract, was commenced in October and completed in November 1965. Approximately 169,359 cubic yards of sandfill were placed by hydraulic process. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was complete in November 1965,. BEACH EROSION CONTROL-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 65 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year Fiscal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work. ApPropriated ......... ............................. $134,000 $2,095 $260,868 ........ .................................... 11,635 124,460 260,868 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS seal Year, Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966. New work. Contributed..... ............ ....... 148.........$14810 $148,100 .................. ........................ 11,618 $124,477 136,095 S 49. WALLIS SANDS STATE BEACH,RYE, N.H. ofcation. In the coastal town of Rye, N.H., about 4 miles south of Portsmouth Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1206) e isting project. Federal participation to extent of 70 per- aet Of first cost of construction for about 800 feet of the beach to st, 0-foot width by direct placement of suitable sandfill and con- tuction of an impermeable groin about 350 feet long. Mean oflge of tide is 8.6 feet and spring range is 9.9 feet. Federal cost of ew Work for completed project was $65,131. Existing project Co authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 416, 87th ng., 2d sess.). Latest published map is in project document. Oocal cooperation. Fully complied with. orerationsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new o rk: Audit was completed and settlement of full Federal share completed work was made. by nf dition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed the State of New Hampshire in October 1963. Cost and financial statement Iseal Year Total to .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Newwok DOriated....... ......... ....................... $91,476 -$26,345 65,131 ............................... .......... 60,832 4,299 65,131 XC1uIdes $435,942 expended by local interests. 50. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS Wlscal year costs for inspection of beach erosion control projects folre $1,332, regular Federal funds. Inspection was made at the fowing beaches on dates indicated: Connecticut-August 1965 urial Hill, Calf Pasture, Guilford Point, Hammonasset, Jen- ti pgs, Lighthouse Point, Middle, Prospect, Sherwood Island State Auk; August and September-Silver to Cedar; Massachusetts- alUust-Plymouth Town, Revere, Wessagusset; New Hampshire A-Uugust-Hampton; Rhode Island-August-Sand Hill Cove; Rust and September-Misquamicut., 66 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 51. OTHER AUTHORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30,1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report for.. Construction Brant Rock Beach, Marshfield, Mass......1961 2 .......... Burial Hill Beach, Westport, Conn. .1........019 2 . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . Calf Pasture Beach Park, Norwalk, Conn. I 1958 95638 I Clark Point, New Bedford, Mass2 ... .... 1964 Compo Beach, Westport, Conn. .............. ................ 196344 Cove Island, Stamford, Conn.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I i 1962 447 31 Cummings Park, Stamford, Conn.2............................... I 1961 26 Greenwich Point Park, Conn................................. I Guilford Point Public Beach2 .(Jacobs I . . . . . Beach), . . . . Guilford, . . . . . . . . Conn.2 . . . . ............ . .. .. .. .. .. 1959 20 Gulf Beach, Milford, Conn. 721303 Hammonasset Beach, Madison, Conn2 .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 1958 8163183 Jennings Beach, Fairfield, Conn.2.. 2 .•... . . ............................ . . ... .. . ... .. .. .. . . .. .. . 1956 1014'401 Lighthouse Point Park (area 9), Conn. 1956 113:30 Lynn-Nahant Beach, Mass........... .6. Matunuck Beach, South2 . . .Kingstown, . . . . . .R.I.12................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .. .. i ..................... Middle Beach, Conn. i....... ......... Misquamicut Beach, Westerly, R.I.1.i'.---. . 19 1414:1 NapatreeBeach, Conn.16... . .. ................................. iafOO Narragansett pier, R... . .. ..................... North Hampton Beach, North Hampton, N.H..... ............. ..... ...... "i7i04' North Scituate Beach, Scituate, Mass.. .................... 1963 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prospect Beach, West Haven, Conn. 1961 ............ .... is Provincetown Beach, Provincetown, Mass..... ................. 1958 Quincy Shore Beach, Quincy, Mass....... ................... 1961 Revere Beach, Mass........ .. 1962 Sand Hill Cove Beach, R.I.2'.' .......................... 1957 Sasco Hill Beach, Fairfield, 1959 2 . . . . . Conn.2............ ........... .. .. Seaside Park, Conn. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 1961 Sherwood Island State 2 . .Park, Conn.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . 1958 Short Beach, Conn. 1959 Silver Beach to Cedar Beach, Coon.................. .... Southport Beach, Conn.2.................... 1964 Thumpertown Beach, Eastham, Mass..... ............. . 1960 Town Beach, Plymouth, Mass...... .. ..................... 1961 Town Neck Beach, Sandwich, Mass......................... 1964 Wessagusset Beach, Weymouth, Mass....................... 1961 Winthrop Beach, Mass........ 2 . . ............ 1963 . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . 227176,838 Woodmont Shore, Milford, Conn. 1960 II SExcludes $11,620 expended by local interests. Completed. Excludes $168,089 expended by local interests. 4Excludes $95,762 expended by local interests. 5 Excludes $53,771 expended by local interests. SExcludes $31,941 expended by local interests. Excludes $42,606 expended by local interests. SExcludes $326,366 expended by local interests. 9 Excludes $120,179 expended by local interests. nl Excludes $28,802 expended by local interests. 11Excludes $7,735 expended by local interests. 1UProject is to be included in Point Judith water resources development plan authorized W 1962 River and Harbor Act. 13Excludes $17,620 expended by local interests. 14 Excludes $29,024 expended by local interests. 5 Additional Federal participation will be required based on Public Law 87-874. 16 Project inactive. 17Excludes $240,819 expended by local interests. 1 Excludes $1,242,880 expended by local interests. 19Excludes $142,965 expended by local interests. 2 Excludes $82,000 expended by local interests. 2 Excludes $46,518 expended by local interests. 2 Excludes $329,921 expended by local interests. = Excludes $372,802 expended by local interests. 24 Project completed at no cost to Federal Government by using fill from Federal navigation improvement at River. bousatonic " Excludes $35,263 expended by local interests. : Excludes $38,528 expended by local interests. 2 Excludes $353,134 expended groins, construction of which is by local interests. Work remaining consists of three additiot deferred until it is determined that they are necessary. 28Excludes $111,679 expended by local interests for new work for all requirements Of local cooperation and $118,216 expended for work beyond scope of project. ,2 Excludes $270,695 expended by local interests. 80Excludes $10,981 expended by local interests. FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 67 52. BEACH EROSION CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION teach erosion control activities pursuant to section 103, Public Law 87-874 Toa (preauthorization). aotal costs to date were $5,019 for Oak Bluffs Town Beach, athas Vineyard, Mass. S 53. BLACKSTONE RIVER BASIN, MASS. AND R.I. Wvtorks covered by this plan consist of a dam and reservoir on stl, River and local protection works at three cities on Black- reone River. Flood Control Act of 1944 authorized plan for a reservoir on West River and local protection works at Worcester, Mass., and Woonsocket and Pawtucket, R.I., substantially in ac- cordance with House Document 624, 78th Congress, 2d session. lood Control Act of 1960 authorized a local flood protection Project at Lower Woonsocket, R.I., substantially in accordance With Senate Document 87, 85th Congress, 2d session. Following n idual projects comprise authorized plan. _ _.Reservoir _ Miles Federal Estimated cost Narne above of IHeight mouth Type Reser. voir - _______- - Nearest city Black- (feet) capaity Con- Lands stone (aere fee't) struction and Total River damagesl '55t Hill- Worcester, Mass. 25.8 51 Earthfill.... 12,400 $1,360,000 $940,000 $2,300,000 highway, railroad, and utility relocations. eludes Local protection projects Miles Estimated cost above Location mouth of Type of structure Blackstone Construe- Lands and Total River tion IdamagesI WOrcester Mass asoket ....... 48 Diversion tunnel and channel. $4,781,000 2$1,179,000 $5,980,000 ower er Woonsocket, et,1R......... . 1.I.4... 15 Channelilmprovement........ Floodwall ,conduitsandchan- 3,740,100 31,069,000 4,809,100 8,150,000 1,000,000 9,150,000 Patuk .......... 2 nel improvement. Floodwall et, .................. 202,000.............. 202,000 a. cludes -relocations. a~$58000 Federal; $1,021,000 non-Federal. 4 0.000 Federal: $769,000 non-Federal. individual n ative, report for cost revised details. in 1954. 53. A. LOWER WOONSOCKET, R.I. Location. On Blackstone River and tributary Mill and Peters f Vers in city of Woonsocket, R.I. (See Geological Survey map lackstone, R.I.) .~,'Xistingproject. Lower Woonsocket local protection project WillConsist of three independent flood protection units: O cial District Unit will provide 2,960 feet of earth dike and cohCrete floodwall along left bank of Blackstone River. River foannel will be excavated for about 600 feet adjacent to dike and Odwall. Confinement and discharge of Mill River floodflows 68 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 to be accomplished by improvement of 1,700 feet of Mill River channel, supplemented by construction of 3,010 feet of earth dike and concrete floodwall and 1,150 feet of twin-barreled pressure conduit. Similarly, 400 feet of channel improvement, construce tion of 1,020 feet of earth dike and concrete floodwall and 1,180 feet of pressure conduit will serve to confine and discharge flood- flows of the Peters River. Interior drainage will be handled bY constructing a pumping station with a capacity of 119,400 galloS per minute. SHamlet District Unit will consist of removal of Hamlet Danm, 2,000 feet of channel improvement, and 3,100 feet of earth dike with a 75-foot section of concrete floodwall along right bank of Blackstone River. A pumping station with a capacity of 58,800 gallons per minute will discharge interior drainage. Bernon Unit will provide removal of Bernon Dam and excav~, tion of 250 feet of Blackstone River channel in vicinity of dafm. Latest approved estimated cost for new work is $8,150,000 for construction and $1 million for lands, damages, and relocatiOS- a total of $9,150,000. Existing project was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 87, 85th Cong. 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and rights-of-way; relocate roads and utilities; hold the United States free from damages; and operate and maintain project after coM" pletion. In addition, a cash contribution of about 16.1 percent of construction cost is required owing to enhancement benefits to be realized. Total estimated cost for all requirements of local coOP" eration is $2,312,000. Assurances were received and local interests are participating in construction cost as required. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Conl struction of project under a multicomponent contract continued and was 97 percent complete. Contractor earnings were $2,952,100, including $538,600 financed from local funds. Condition at end of fiscal year. Total project is 95 percent complete. Construction was initiated in December 1963 and is continuing. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS _ t Total Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $264,000 $200,000 $850,000 $2,300,000 $2,760,000 748,6 81:9 16,3 Cost................. 77,652 252,188 539,020 2,745,1002,567,734 6,1 FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 69 OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal Year. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. I I -- I Contributed .......... -o t ....... ....... $11,398 $647,778 -$167,176 ... ... ............ $49?,000 10,713 12,752 . $82,205 142,830 $209,620 458,120 53. B. WEST HILL RESERVOIR, MASS. Location. Dam is on West River, Mass., 3 miles above its bcifluence with Blackstone River and 2.5 miles northeast of Ux- aldg e lass. (See Geological Survey maps-Blackstone, Mass. nd .1., Milford, Mass., and Grafton, Mass.) a Jisting project. A rolled-earthfill dam 2,400 feet long with aa'naximurm d channel height of 51 feet above streambed. An ogee spillway constructed through a rock knoll on west abutment. Out et Consists of three gate-controlled conduits through spillway section. Reservoir has a flood control storage capacity of 12,400 of 2'eet, equivalent to 8.3 inches of runoff from its drainage area equ2 9square miles. Conservation storage of 3,000 acre-feet, tVale nt to 2 inches of runoff, is authorized. Dam is con- agtructed to allow for future raising to provide conservation stor- fo. ,Estimated cost is$1,360,000 for construction and $940,000 fo ands and damages including highway and utility relocations, i ed al of $2,300,000 for new work. Existing project was author- ' by cal 1944 Flood Control Act (H.Doc. 624, 78th Cong., 2d sess.). l:lies cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1944, ap- erOperations and of tions consisted results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Op- ordinary operation and maintenance. condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for t"1ruction of additional recreation facilities. Work on con- i~,ung contract for dam and appurtenant structures was initiated une 1959 and completed in June 1961. Cost and financial statement calYear Total to .... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Spropriated..........$47,000 $14,100 $2,000 $1,000 $1,600 $2,289,424 ................ alritenancee 93,036 65,206 3,315 1,506 2,251 2,288,492 c ropriated.......... 13,475 17,685 19,452 20,788 21,758 100,264 ....... 13,454 ..... 17,164 19,890 20,934 21,319 99,807 54. CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN, VT., N.H., MASS., AND CONN. Location. Works covered by this project are a series of dams j reservoirs on tributaries of Connecticut River in Vermont, fe Hampshire, and Massachusetts, within a radius of 230 miles i11tHartford, Conn., and local protection works at several cities he basin. actXisting project. Flood Control Act of 1936, as amended by tof May 25, 1937, authorized construction of 10 reservoirs on t'iutaries of Connecticut River in accordance with plans in oUse Document 412, 74th Congress, 2d session, as the same may 70 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 be revised upon further investigation of 1936 flood. Flood Control Act of 1938 approved a general comprehensive plan for control of floods and other purposes in Connecticut River Valley, as set forth in House Document 455, 75th Congress, 2d session, and authorized $11,524,000 for construction of local flood-protection projects i1 the plan. Act of October 15, 1940, modified act of June 28, 1938, to provide additional protection at East Hartford, Conn., as set forth in House Document 653, 76th Congress, 3d session. Act of August 18, 1941, modified comprehensive plan approved in 1938 to include improvements recommended in House Document 653, 76th Congress, 3d session, and House Document 724, 76th Con1* gress, 3d session, with such further modifications as may be found justifiable in discretion of Secretary of the Army and Chief of Engineers. Latter act also authorized to be appropriated addi- tional $6 million for local protection works and $10 million for reservoirs. Act of October 26, 1942, further modified plan bY including construction of Gully Brook conduit at Hartford, Conn. Flood Control Act of 1944, authorized expenditure of $30 millio in addition to previous authorization for comprehensive plan aP" proved in 1938 and modified plan by directing specific considera- tion of an alternative plan of Vermont State Water Conservatio Board instead of Williamsville Reservoir in West River Basi Vt.; directing consultation with affected States during course o investigations and transmission of proposal and plans to each affected State for written views and recommendations for reser* voir projects heretofore authorized for construction at Cambri d g e - port, Ludlow, South Tunbridge, and Gaysville, and resubmission of projects or modifications thereof to Congress; and rescinded authorization for construction at Sugar Hill site. Flood Control Act of 1950 modified project for flood control at Hartford, Con"" authorized by Flood Control Act of 1938, as amended, to include Folly Brook dike and conduit. Flood Control Act of 1954 modi- fled plan for flood control in Connecticut River Basin to provide for construction of a reservoir on Otter Brook at South Keene, N.H., in lieu of any reservoir or reservoirs heretofore authorized. This act further modified plan for West River Basin of Connectv cut River in Vermont to consist of three reservoirs at Ball MOun" tain, The Island, and Townshend sites, in lieu of plan of eight reservoirs authorized in Flood Control Act of 1944. Flood Conh trol Act of 1958 modified plan for flood control in Connecticut River Basin to include construction of Littleville Reservoir o Middle Branch of Westfield River, Mass., and Mad River Reser" voir on Mad River, above Winsted, Conn. Flood Control Act of 1960 included authorization in Connecticut River Basin of Plq for flood protection on Chicopee River, Mass., substantiallY i accordance with House Document 434, 86th Congress; plan for flood protection on Westfield River, Mass., substantially in accord ance with Senate Document 109, 86th Congress; and plan for flood control and related purposes on Farmington River, COn' substantially in accordance with House Document 443, 86th Con" gress. Following are reservoirs and local protection works proposed for construction in modified comprehensive plan: Danms and reservoirs SEstimated Reservoir Federal cost Miles above Name Nearest city mouth of Height Type capacity Connecticut River (feet) (acre-feet) fdamagesl Construction Lands and Total Vermont: 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0 O Victory 3 .. . . . . . .. . . BarrJohnsbury................. St. e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306.0 234.5 90 105 Earthfill...................... d o....................... 106,000 32 ,600 $3,840,000 3 ,138,000 $1,180,000 2, 302 , 000 $5,020,000 5 , 440 , 000 South Tunbridge 2. . .. . . . . ..... ..... Union Village . . . . . White River Junction.......... 228.4 170 ..... do....................... 38,000 3,131,700 908,300 4,040,0000 Gaysville 2 . . .. . . . . . . . North Hartland 2 . . . . .... . . . . . Rutland...................... ................. White River Junction .......... 246.8 211.7 192 Concrete..................... 185 Earthfill...................... 115,000 11,912,000 8,088,000 71,400 6,180,000 950,000 20,00,000 7,130,000 O Ludlow .... 2 . . . . . . . . . . Rutland...................... 211.8 118 ....do........ .............. 23,900 2,532,000 3,158,000 5,690,000 191.3 120 ..... do....................... 50,600 4,890,000 2,050,000 6,940,000 North Springfield 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Springfield.................... Brockway ... Bellows Falls................. 182.0 122 ..... do....................... 37,700 4,801,000 5,899,000 10,700,000 The Island.................. 3. . . . . . . . . . . Brattleboro................... 189.6 100 ..... do....................... 19,400 3,670,000 1,110,000 4,780,000 Cambridgeport2 . .. . . . . . .. . . Bellows Falls.................180.3 101 ..... do....................... 21,600 4,078,000 1,092,000 5,170,000 Ball Mountain 2 ..... ........ . Brattleboro................... .... 178.2 265 Rockfill-earth................. 54,600 10,235,000 350,000 10,585,00 Townshend ..... . do.......................168.3 133 Earthfill...................... 33,200 5,455,000 1,870,000 7,325,000 New Hampshire:.. Sugar H4...............Woodsville....................280.9 3 . . . . . . . . . .. . . 163 .. ..................... 91,600 3,500,000 3,385,000 6,855,000 West Canaan 2 ........... .... Lebanon..................... 233.8 80 ..... do....................... 51,000 3,471,000 5,589,000 9,060,000 Claremont ...2. . . . . . . .. .. Claremont.................... 202.4 138 ..... do....................... 78,400 11,020,000 3,800,000 14,820,000 Surry Mountain 2. . ... .......Keene........................ ..... 174.4 86 d.....do. . ......... 32,500 2,245,000 385,000 2,630,000 Otter Brook .. . do do... .......... 171.2 133 .do....................... 18,300 2,751,600 1,378,400 4,130,000 Honey Hill4.. .............. do................ ........ 168.9 65 ..... do....................... 26,200 2,662,000 1,398,000 4,060,0000 Massachusetts: 153.3 56 ..... do....................... 49,900 1,545,000 3,075,000 4,620,000 Birch 2 Hill2...............Gardner...................... .. . . .. .. 1,551,600 Tully Athol........................ 148.7 62 ..... do ................. 22,000 1,183,600 368,000 Barre Falls2... 2.. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. Worcester.................... 130.2 62 Rockfill-earth................. 24,000 1,928,800 39,000 1,967,800 Knightville2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Northampton.................. 102.8 160 Earthfill.. .................... 49,000 2,488,800 821,200 3,310,000 Littleville 3. . . . . . . . .. . . .do........ .102.0 150 ..... do....................... 32,400 5,897,000 1,143,000 7,040,000z < West Brookfield 2 ............ ... Worcester................... 100.5 30 ..... do....................... 33,000 3,422,000 5,568,000 8,990,000 Conant Brook ... Springfield.................... 122.0 85 Rockfill-earth.................. 3,740 1,810,000 990,000 2,800,000t=4 Connecticut: 2. .. .. .. ... Colebrook River 2.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . Winsted....................... 116 0 do.. .............. 223 ..... 98,500 8,445,000 5,955,000 14,400,000 Mad River 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . do................ ....... 120.0 178 Earthfill....... ..... .... 9,700 3,230,800 2,210,000 ,440,800 Sucker Brook ..... do....................... 118.5 68 ..... do..................... 1,480 1,862,000 6278,000 2,140,000 1Includes highway, railroad, and utility relocation. 2 For details see individual report. * Inactive; cost last revised in 1954. 4 Alternate site to be selected. Cost has not been revised on current price basis. b Non-Federal $670,000; Federal $1,540,000. 6 Non-Federal cost. 72 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local protection projects Miles Estimated cost above Location mouth of Type of structure Connecticut Construe- Lands and Teotal River tion damagesl Northampton, Mass ......... 94 Wall and levee.............$960,000 $150,000 $1, 110,900 Hoyoke, Mass.......... .... 85 ..... do.................3,418,000 150,000 3 568 000 Springdale, Mass............ .84..... do................... 757'000 3 700,000 57 000 Three Rivers, Mass. 98 . do........ do..... ... .. 1,550,000 735,000 2 285,00 Chicopee, Mass.... 3 . .80 ... o.................1,738,000 250,000 1 988000 Chicopee Falls, 3Mass. ..... 83. do.................2,580,000 60000 2,6840,944 Westfield, Mass. ........... 85 ..... do .................... 5,382,000 1,058000 6 440900 Riverdale, Mass........... . 80 ..... do.................1,138,000 50 000 1 188,04 Springfield, Mass.....7..........do..... ...... .' 932,000 272000 1,2041,0 West Springfield, Mass. ... 76 ... o.....do .... .. .... 41,579,000 30:000 1 60990 Winsted, Conn.............. 115 Channel improvement....... .245,500 30 000 4975500 East Hartford, Conn......... 52 Wall and levee............. 2,135,000 270900 2, Hartford, Conn.......... ....... 52 ... ,.do.................., 26,929,100 1,149,600 8078,700 STo be borne by local interests. Also includes local interests portion of relocations. 2Includes $835,000 Public Works Administration funds. 8 For details, see individual report. 'Includes $245,000 Public Works Administration funds. 54. A. BALL MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR, VT. Location. Dam is on West River, 29 miles above its junction with Connecticut River at Brattleboro, Vt. It is 2 miles north Of village of Jamaica, Vt. (See Geological Survey map for London" derry, Vt.) Existing project. A rock and earthfill dam, 915 feet long at its crest, 265 feet above riverbed. A chute spillway with a con* crete weir 235 feet long was constructed in right abutment. A reinforced concrete-lined tunnel under dam was constructed a an outlet works and is controlled by hydraulically operated gates from a gate tower at intake end. Reservoir is operated for flood control purposes and has a storage capacity of 54,600 acre-feeq equivalent to 6 inches of runoff from its drainage area of 17 square miles. Estimated cost for new work is $10,235,000 fo construction and $350,000 for lands and damages, a total of $10,585,000. Project is a unit of comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Connecticut River Basin and par authorized by 1944 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aP' plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: NOr* mal operation and maintenance activities. Remedial work at i" take tower, by contract, was commenced in August and complete in October 1965. r Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for construction of additional recreation facilities. Construction 0 dam and appurtenant works was initiated in May 1957 and coD' pleted in November 1961. FLOOD CONTROL-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 73 -Cost and financial statement 1cal Year .Total to .... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork-, ropriated.......... $111,000 $12,000 $3,388 . . ..... $10,535,238 aitenance: .......... ppropriated.......... 466,968 37,572 4,163........................ 10,535,238 rorated . ..... 21,702 36,000 35,204 $48,201 $81,582 233,182 ... 22,381 34,689 36,694 31,429 59,756 194,453 54. B. BARRE FALLS RESERVOIR, MASS. oiL°cation. Dam is on Ware Mres above confluence of WareRiver in town of Barre, Mass., 31.9 and Swift Rivers. It is 13 miles, northwest of Worcester, Mass. (See Geological Survey maps- re., Mass., and Wachusett Mountain, Mass.) st 88~ 5 ing project. Dam, of earth and rockfill construction, is §ifleet long with a maximum height of 62 feet above streambed. i rlway is concrete chute-type with a crest length of 60 feet con rght abutment of dam. Outlet works, including a reinforced de crete conduit and gate structure, are founded on bedrock un- tor left 'abutment. Included in project are three dikes:with a Sadd length of 3,215 feet and a maximum height of 48 feet in redles in rim of reservoir. Flood control storage capacity of frservoir is 24,000 acre-feet, equivalent to 8.2 inches of runoff o drainage area of 55 square miles. Reservoir is operated as Cunit of a coordinated system of reservoirs for control of floods in nnunecticut River Basin. Completed cost of new work is $1,928,800 for construction and $39,000 for lands and damages Exiuding highway relocation, a total of $1,967,800 for new work. 0 sting project was authorized by 1941 Flood Control Act (H. -c.724, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). lieocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- aOperationsand results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Ordi- ary Operation and maintenance activities. tCondition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Con- strucetion of dam and appurtenant works was initiated in May and completed in May 1958. Cost and financial statement Ncal Total to ear, .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 "wWork. ClPoropriated.......... $1,795 .... .... .... $1,967,819 aloaten, ......* ....... 5,228 ................ 1,967,819 004 .. opated.. . . . . 2 ,5 aop ated.......... 24,250 $53,748 $27,877 $30,000 $46,532 257,179 ............ 24,323 62,625 28,898 29,623 46,100 256,052 54. C. BIRCH HILL RESERVOIR, MASS. tiLocation. Dam is on Millers River,27.3 miles above its june- n With Connecticut River. It is 1.3 miles east of South Royal- o, Mass., and 7/2 miles northwest of city of Gardner, Mass. 74 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 (See Geological Survey maps for Royalston and Winchendon, Mass.-N. H. and Templeton, Mass.) SExisting project. Dam is rolled-earth type with a dumped rock shell. It has a top length of 1,400 feet, a top width of 25 feet, and is 56 feet above riverbed. Spillway consists of three concrete weirs in two natural saddles and an abandoned railroad cut northwest of dam. Main weirs have a crest length of 720 and 350 feet, respectively, and the weir in the railroad cut has a crest length of 23 feet. Outlet works are on rock at right end of dam and consist of an intake channel 1,500 feet long, a gate structure with a gatehouse directly above, and an outlet channel 1,150 feet long. Outlet works are controlled by four 6- by 1 2 foot roller gates mechanically operated from gatehouse above. Bes- ervoir is operated for flood control purposes and has a storage capacity of 49,900 acre-feet, equivalent to 5.3 inches of runlo from its drainage area of 175 square miles. Estimated cost of new work for project is $1,545,000 for construction and $3,075,000 for lands and damages, a total of $4,620,000. Project is a unit o0 comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Con necticut River Basin which was authorized by Flood Control Acts of June 22, 1936, as amended, and June 28, 1938. (I. Doc. 455, 75th Cong., 3d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 193 applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con" struction of two comfort stations. Operations continued and wer, completed late in August 1965. Operations, by contract, for cond struction of roads, parking and beach areas were commenced early in March and completed in June 1966. Maintenance: Ordl nary operation and maintenance activity, and contract .Ws awarded in June 1966 for repairs to intake structure. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except fo construction of additional recreational facilities. Construction Of dam and appurtenant works was initiated in June 1940 and co"' pleted in February 1942.. Cost and financial statement Total tc Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1 0o6 New work: Appropriated.......... Cost...,67 Cost................. $36 ...31,894 6,6704................ ......... $45,382 38 $70,000 72,504 28 ' 4,29 4,284 4, Maintenance: 30,882 51,150 55,000 52 Appropriated.......... 26,582 28,252 Cost................. 23,433 30,946 29,054 53,265 31,95650 t)3,64' 54. D. CHICOPEE FALLS, MASS. Location. Chicopee Falls local protection project is on left (east) bank of Chicopee River in city of Chicopee, Mass. (See Geological Survey map for Springfield, North, Mass.) Existing project. About 1,400 feet of concrete floodwalls and 3,620 feet of earth dikes along left bank of Chicopee River extend ing between Chicopee Dam and high ground at lower end of prop' FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 75 erty Owned by U.S. Rubber Co. Right bank excavated along OWstream half of project to provide additional waterway steeded because of encroachment on channel resulting from area con- aret'ction of dike on left bank. Surface drainage from large high area above plants is intercepted into river by two gravity outfall dYstents. Two pumping stations dispose of surface runoff, in- dustrial Process water, sewage and seepage collected in low area duriing flood stage. Latest approved estimated cost for new work rIs $2,580,000 for construction and $60,000 for lands, damages, and relocation, a total of $2,640,000 for new work. Existing project Was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 434, 86th Co., 2d sess.). SLocal cooperation Local interests must assume at least 20 oercent of cost (except costs of planning, design, and acquisition Of ater rights) of completed project, payable either as construc- t'Wil proceeds or pursuant to a contract providing for repayment oft Interest within 50 years. Actual cost, or fair market value Of lands easements, rights-of-way, and work performed or services relidered prior to completion of construction of project, which are furnished by a non-Federal entity, shall be included in share ofcost to be borne by non-Federal entity. Local interests must furanish lands and rights-of-way for construction; provide sewer and utility alterations for construction and operation, including oIstruction of a water intake and extension of a low dam for furnlishing water to U.S. Rubber Co. as a replacement for existing facilities; maintain and operate works after completion; and tlernit no encroachment on improved channels or on ponding areas or, ifponding areas or capacities are impaired, provide Substitute storage capacity. Total estimated costs for all require- lents of local cooperation are $470,000 including $30,000 for Ads, $30,000 for relocations, and $410,000 cash contribution. surances accepted and all requirements are being fulfilled. 0 Aperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Contin- ing mlticomponent contract for project construction including rel'cations was completed, and final payment was made to con- tractor . Final contract amount totaled $2,131,173. iwCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was Sl"atedin October 1963 and completed in July 1965. Remaining consists of completing audit of local costs to determine final costrkSharing. cost Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year. ............acal1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Total to June 30,1966 Work . ACPrOpriated.......... $125,000 $175,000$1,155,000 $775,000 -$37,000 $2,193,000 . .......... 38,618 188,3901,149,462758,160 30,831 2,165,461 76 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total 96 Fiscal year........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30. .. . I I I - _ ... ____. _. _I , _1 1 New work: 0 Contributed.................. $65,000 $197,200 $174,000 $436 2 415,616 Cost...................................221,332 203,516 -- 9,232 _.__. ___... x Cash for construction only. Excludes $9,400 expended for land condemnation. OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Totalto Fiscal year...............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 une I -- . . ____. ____.. _I. . .. --- I- _._.. 30,1966I New work: 25,184 Contributed... $4,200 $17,000 s3,984. $2. IS Cost.......... ............ 3,995 10,205 7,918 $3,066 54. E. CLAREMONT RESERVOIR, N.H. Location.: Dam will be on Sugar River, 7 miles above its june tion with Connecticut River and 1 mile southeast of ClarenOlt N.H. (See Geological Survey Map for Claremont, N.H. - - v t Existing project. Based on restudy report dated Januar 1965, the project would provide for a rolled-earthfill dam 2,79 feet long and 138 feet high with spillway and outlet structures 1 left abutment. Reservoir would contain 68,400 acre-feet floo control storage and 10,000 acre-feet of joint-use seasonally-oper" ated storage for flood control and recreation, a total of 78,4 acre-feet equivalent to 6 inches of runoff from its tributary drail" age area of 245 square miles. Project would be operated as unit of comprehensive plan for flood control and related purposes in Connecticut River Basin., Latest approved cost estimate for new work is $11,020,000 for construction and $3,800,000 for land and relocations, a total of $14,820,000. Existing project ,a authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act as modified by the Flood Control Acts of 1941 and 1944.. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 193 applies.- Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Co33 tinued restudy of project to determine economic feasibility al multipurpose potential under existing general authorities conditions. Condition at end of fiscal year. Restudy is 96 percent cof1 plete. Restudy is being fully coordinated with local, State, and Federal agencies. Cost and financial statement Total to mFiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juno 30, 1I66 New work: Appropriated..................... $30,000 ..... .$2,286 :239,01 Cost.............................. 5,924 $16,494 $6,528 1,323 237:06' 54. F. COLEBROOK RIVER RESERVOIR, CONN. Location. Damsite is in town of Colebrook, Litchfield CountY; Conn., on West Branch Farmington River about 3.9 miles UP FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 77 Streamn from its confluence with Still River at Riverton, Conn., .ad about 1.5 miles upstream from Goodwin (Hogback) Dam. (SeeGeological Survey map for Winsted, Conn.) roi sting project. Construction of a combined earth and froeet ed dam 1,300 feet long with a maximum height of 223 feet above streambed. An earth dike 1,240 feet long and 54 feet hgh will prevent reservoir overflow into Sandy Brook. let way will be chute type with a crest length of 205 feet. Out- t w ill consist of a rock tunnel 10 feet in diameter. Control tower will contain three, 4 by 8 feet hydraulic gates to regulate reservoir discharge. Capacity of reservoir will include 11,000 acre-feet of existing water supply storage in Goodwin Dam Reser- Vo-r pool, 30,700 acre-feet of new water-supply storage, 50,800 acref-eet for flood control storage, 5,000 acre-feet for fish and Wil,5lfe purposes and 1,000 acre-feet dead storage, a total of 98,500 acre-feet equivalent to 15.5 inches of runoff from its drain- age area of 118 square miles. Latest approved estimated cost for da Work is $8,445,000 for construction and $5,955,000 for lands, raages and relocations, a total of $14,400,000 for new work. o6ject was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 443, th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Water supply contract was signed by illrford Connecticut Metropolitan Water District., Repayment Act.: be made in accordance with provisions of 1958 Water Supply lAct. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Multi- Colonent continuing contract for construction of dam and ap- Ptrtenances is continuing. Principal operations consisted of com- eting tunnel, placing concrete in intake tower and inlet structure, 0 Cavating cutoff trench and placement of d(lam embankment. ofntractor earnings totaled $1,277,000. Contracts for relocation bOf Route 8 were awarded by respective States under a reim- b rsable contract with Federal Government. State of Con- necticut awarded contract in October 1965 and construction is 56 Corcent complete. Fiscal year earnings totaled $1,618,600. 19nraonwealth of Massachusetts awarded contract in January ea66 and construction is 25 percent complete. Fiscal year ecrnings totaled $310,000. Miscellaneous utility contracts are derway and land acquisition advanced to 85 percent completion. Condition at end of fiscal year. Total project is 33 percent lete and construction is continuing. D1 Cost and financial statement tiseal Yea Tota! to S ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work. 0 ropriated.......... $49,000 $225,000 $290,000 $550,000$3,680,000 $4,794,000 22,350 161,899 367,977 506,120 3,603,830 4,722,176 54. G. CONANT BROOK RESERVOIR, MASS. to Location. Site is in south central part of Massachusetts in 0V of Monson. Damsite, across Conant Brook, is about 2 miles 78 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 southwest of community of Monson. (See Geological Survey map for Monson, Mass.) Existing project. Dam will be of combined rolled-earthfill and rockfill construction, about 1,050 feet long, with a maximum height of 85 feet above streambed. A concrete ogee spillway, 100 feet long, and a spillway channel on right bank will carry res- ervoir overflow around dam. Flood control capacity of reservoir will be 3,740 acre-feet, equivalent to 9 inches of runoff from drainage area of 7.8 square miles. Latest approved estimate cost for new work is $1,810,000 for construction and $990,00 for lands, damages, and relocation of roads and utilities, a total of $2,800,000 for new work. Existing project was authorized b, 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 434, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 1ult i component contract for construction of dam, highway, and aP" purtenances was continued and is 92 percent complete. PrinciPal operations consisted of completing road relocation, spillway wals and weir and initiating placement of dam embankment which i continuing. Contractor earnings totaled $705,300. Contract for relocation of town of Monson water supply facilities was col " pleted in June 1966. Condition at end of fiscal year. Total project is 95 percent complete. Construction of dam, highway relocations, and aPPUr tenances was initiated in June 1964 and is continuing. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscaml year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1 New work:00 Appropriated.......... $50,000 $155,000 $350,000t$1150,000 f1,090000 $2,753 Cost............... .. 31,730 158,185 216,898 1,191,0921,064,449 2,692 54. I. GARDNER, MASS.f Location. Along Mahoney and Greenwood Brooks in cityd Gardner, Mass., about 60 miles northwest of Boston, Mass., an 25 miles north of Worcester, Mass. (See Geological Survey 19 for Gardner, Mass.) Existing project. A 935-foot long dam with a 60-foot spill waY and outlet works at north end of Wright's Reservoir; a 970-foo flanking dike along west shore of reservoir; strengthening existia outlet structure at Wayside Pond on Mahoney Brook; providiO two pipe outlets at Upper Wright's Reservoir; widening ad deepening 700 feet of Mahoney Brook which includes construction of a 45-foot concrete spillway, two earth dikes totaling 680 feet long and channel excavation and realignment; and removal o several channel obstructions. Latest approved estimated cost for new work is $460,000 for construction and $35,000 for lands, da r" ages and relocations, a total of $495,000. Lands and relocations are a local cost. Project authorized by section 205, 1948 Floo Control Act, as amended. FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 79 aLocal cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, as roaecl ded , applies. In addition, local interests must prevent en- olin achment in flood plain of the stream and establish channel lines Within limit of the improvement. Fully complied with. total costs were $20,000 for lands and $15,000 for relocations, a total Of $35,000.and OPerations results during fiscal year. New work: Com- Peted construction. Operations consisted of placing stone slope Protection removal of channel obstructions and miscellaneous Cnodition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was initiated in August 1964 and completed in October 1965. There recaius claim. correction of minor deficiencies and settlement of pending Cost and financial statement Year ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 .... . . Newwork. corated... . $20,000 $22,000 $50,000 $327,470 $8,000 $458,500 23,735 21,892 28,649 322,516 55,119 458,060 udes $15,000 contributed funds. 54. I. GAYSVILLE RESERVOIR, VT. ocation. Dam would be on White River one-half mile south- West of Gaysville, Vt. and about 32 miles above the Connecticut r. (See Geological Survey Map for Randolph, Vt.) dam isting project. As presently conceived provides for earthfill 29,20 With 77,800 acre-feet of operational flood control storage, 8 0 acre-feet of conservation storage, and a permanent pool ,of ree ,000 acre-feet reserved in the interest of fish and wildlife, atereation, and efficient gate operation. Project would be oper- td as a unit of comprehensive plan for flood control Pturposes in Connecticut River Basin. Latest approvedandcostrelated esti- ter for new work is $11,912,000 for construction and $8,088,000 a ands and relocations, a total of $20 million. Existing project ~s authorized by 1936 Flood Control Act as modified by Flood 0trol Acts of 1938 and 1941. Local cooperation. Dependent upon results of current restudy. ti Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- ofted restudy to determine need and economic justification Of Modifying project under existing general authorities for full 'Ptile-use development of the site. le1Ondition at end of fiscal year. Restudy is 60 percent com- Fe e. Restudy is being fully coordinated with local, State, and Ieral agencies. Cost and financial statement r* al ea Total to 1962 1963 1164 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work.-__________-_ _ _ cosroriated.............. .. ..................... $20,000 $30o,ooo o,ooo ........... .. ...................... ............ 8,571 23,077 31,648 80 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 54. J. KNIGHTVILLE RESERVOIR, MASS. Location. Dam is on Westfield River, 27.5 miles above it junction with Connecticut River. It is 4 miles north of toWn of Huntington, Mass., and about 12 miles west of city of North- ampton, Mass. (See Geological Survey may for WesthamptD, Mass.) Existing project. Dam is hydraulic earthfill type with a dumped rock shell and a downstream rock toe. It has a top length of 1,200 feet, a top width of 30 feet, and 160 feet above riverbed. Spillway is a curved concrete weir 410 feet long, on rock ina saddle at right end of dam. Outlet works are in right abutment and consist of an intake channel 280 feet long and a 1 6 -foot diameter tunnel through rock. Tunnel is 605 feet long and controlled by three 6- by 12-foot broome gates mechanicallY operated through a control tower from a gatehouse above. Pro vision has been made for future installation of a penstock for development of power at the site in accordance with a request by Federal Power Commission. flood 1 1 Reservoir is now operated for feett control purposes and has a storage capacity of 49,000 acre-feet. equivalent to 5.6 inches of runoff from its drainage area of 164 square miles. Estimated cost of project is $2,488,800 for co" struction and $821,200 for lands and damages, a total of $3,3101 000. Project is a unit of comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Connecticut River Basin which waVs authorized by Flood Control Acts of June 22, 1936, as amended! and June 28, 1938 (H. Doc. 455, 75th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 193 applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Ordi' nary operation and maintenance activities. Contract for repa ir5 to service bridge and minor repairs to retaining wall wasco pleted in September 1965. Minor electrical repairs were made Jy separate contract. Bids were issued for repairs to intake channel. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except o construction of recreational facilities. Construction of dam d appurtenant works was initiated in August 1939 and completed December 1941. Cost and financial statement g Total Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June3 New work: Appropriated........... ........................................... 34 Cost .................. '....................... , oV,29 Maintenance: Appropriated..........$38,175 $33,750 $29,998 $61,504 $77,000 87',7 Cost................. 30,076 41,204 30,713 41,126 64,332 54. K. LITTLEVILLE RESERVOIR, MASS. Location. Dam is on Middle Branch of Westfield River 1 mile above its confluence with main stem of Westfield River and 25' miles above confluence of Westfield River with Connecticut River' in town of Chester. (See Geological Survey map, Chester, Mass FLOOD CONTROL-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 81 lo 01is.ting project. A rolled-earth and rockfill dam, 1,360 feet Crete C th a maximum height of 164 feet above streambed. Con- stot chute spillway is on east bank of river. Reservoir has a total faorge capacity of 32,400 acre-feet, of which 23,000 acre-feet is et flood control, equivalent to 8.2 inches of runoff from controlled of 11trainage area of 52.3 square miles. Remaining 9,400 acre-feet Sstorage, equivalent to 3.4 inches of runoff, is for future water uPPlY. Littleville Reservoir will be operated in conjunction with t 0 lo htville Reservoir when flows on Westfield River are expected t ceed channel capacity. It would also be operated in conjunc- t"lo Withother existing or proposed reservoirs to reduce flood- fal On lower Connecticut River. Littleville project was Ctorized as a single-purpose flood control project by 1958 Flood oYrl Act (S. Do.17, 85th Cong.). Under provision of title 1a this act (Water Supply Act of 1958) city of Springfield, ud furnished assurances for participating in cost of project cluding Provisions for future water supply. Estimated cost of Work is $5,897,000 for construction and $1,143,000 for lands teri es, nd ramages, including relocation of a highway, utilities, ceme- structures, a total of $7,040,000 for new work. 1938Oal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, 199and title III, Water Supply Act of 1958 applies and fully I'idwith. sPeratjions and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- strction of dam and appurtenances by multicomponent contract 105.continued and completed. Contractor's earnings ad Final contract amount totaled $4,509,905. Also were $192,- in progress bui completed, eress. gb.ulding by contract, were reservoir clearing, conversion of to operator's quarters, and construction of road and facilitng. Contract was awarded for construction of recreational oaciies. ol 1966.wasMaintenance: Work June 30, commenced early in June and was in progress Ordinary operation and mainte- C activity. co uqPlete. at end of fiscal year. onditionConstruction Existing project is substantially of dam and appurtenances was initiated er a multicomponent contract in June 1962 and completed in etember 1965. Construction of recreational facilities is in r 0ress. Cost and financial statement cal year Total to .9..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New'Work. b oat ... ated.......... $375,000 $2,180,000 $2,100,000 $1,936,000 $158,000 $7,040,000 .oropri MaAtenance' 865,182 2,003,204 2,044,864 1,889,815 334,321 6,909,367 Cotopriaated.......... ..... ...................... 9,417 26,997 36,414 ... ..... ........... ........... 9,417 26,953 36,370 54. L. MAD RIVER RESERVOIR, CONN. j -ction. Dam is on Mad River, 2.3 miles upstream from its unCtion with Still River (a tributary of Farmington River), a 82 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 major tributary of Connecticut River. (See Geological Survey Map-Winsted, Conn.) Existing project. Dam is rolled-earthfill type with rockfil slope protection. It has a top length of 940 feet, a top width of 25 feet accommodating a gravel access road and a maximum height of 178 feet above streambed at center line of dam. Project includes a dike 2,340 feet long with a top width of 25 feet and a maximum height of 60 feet across two saddles in left abutment. Outlet works, on right bank, are founded on bedrock and consist of a, ungated 45-inch-diameter circular conduit 923 feet long. SP i1l way is on a rock knob on left abutment between dam and dike. The weir is a low concrete ogee section founded on bedrock and 340 feet long at spillway crest elevation 983. Reservoir has a storage capacity of 9,700 acre-feet equivalent to 10 inches of run-" off from its drainage area of 18.2 square miles. This sto ra ge includes a 10-acre permanent pool with a capacity of 188 acre feet. Remaining storage will be used for flood control. Projec functions as a unit of coordinated system of reservoirs for floo control in Connecticut River Basin. Total project cost for neW work was $3,230,800 for construction and $2,210,000 for highWfaY relocation, lands and damages, a total of $5,440,800 for new work. This total includes $670,000 in local costs for land and daragesl Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and rights-of-way other than highway relocations, zone channel through damaged areas to prevent further encroachments, hold the United States free from damages and maintain and operate the project. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Cora pleted installation of hydrologic radio gage. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Construec tion of dam and appurtenances was initiated in June 1961 an completed in June 1963. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year............... Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriated...........$2,075,000 $1,696,000 $35,000 $3,000 $557 $4,770 Coat...............2221,967 1795:003 31,881 7,033 1,088 4,770 54. M. NORTH HARTLAND RESERVOIR,VT. Location. Dam is on Ottauquechee River, 1.5 miles aboveits junction with Connecticut River and 1 mile northwest of NortD Hartland, Vt. Reservoir extends upstream 5.5 miles. (See Geo' logical Survey map for Hanover, N.H.-Vt.) Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam, 1,520 feet long, 1 feet above streambed, providing a total storage capacity of 71,400 acre-feet. A side-channel spillway with a concrete weir 450 feet long provided on left bank. Outlet consists of a 14-foot-diamnete tunnel cut through rock and located in left bank, a concrete intake and gate-operating tower, and hydraulically operated contro FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 83 gates. An outlet channel returns discharge to main stream below daf. An earth dike 2,100 feet long with a maximum height of 52 feet is across a saddle south of main dam. Drainage area a trolled is 220 square miles or practically all of drainage area of Ottauquechee River. Reservoir is operated as a unit of oordinated system of reservoirs for flood control in Connecticut forer Basin. Latest cost estimate for new work is $6,180,000 hir eonstruction and $950,000 for lands and damages (including w iway and utility relocations), a total of $7,130,000 for new Ac-k Existing project was authorized by 1938 Flood Control L,as modified by 1941 Flood Control Act. Plies.ca cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- aOrerationsand results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Ordi- ary Operation and maintenance activities. consdition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for dotruction of additional recreation facilities. Construction of amWas initiated in June 1958 and completed in June 1961. ----- Cost and financial statement Year Total to .. ........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Neww0 k. IA ' proriated........ ....... ... $ ,000 $15,628 ................... ..... 7,068,589 Maintenane............. $119,511 108,128 22,200 ....................... .. 7,068,589 opriated.......... 22,302 29,283 31,910 $47,401 $37,901 185,801 ........ .. 21,851 29,572 32,077 44,022 41,293 185,763 S 54 N. NORTH SPRINGFIELD RESERVOIR, VT. on Black River, 8.7ocation. its isjunction Dam er iles above ConnecticutVt., of Springfield, in townwith River, and 3 miles Ldlo West of Springfield, Vt. (See Geological Survey maps- glow, Vt. and Claremont, N.H.) a " sting project. A rolled-earthfill dam 2,940 feet long with scIaximumr height of 120 feet above riverbed. Side channel SllWay in left abutment of dam has a crest length of 384 feet. e discharge channel, about 425 feet long, connects side channel cton to a short basin which has a length of 200 feet. Outlet horks consist of an approach channel, 735 feet long, a 12.75-foot iteshoe-shaped concrete conduit, 604 feet long, and discharges Si,Spillway basin. Three hydraulically operated 5- by 12-foot e gates in intake structure are provided to control releases. a servoir has a flood control storage capacity of about 50,600 ere feet. Drainage area controlled is 158 square miles, or 77 eraent of total drainage area of Black River. Reservoir is op- conted as a unit of a coordinated system of reservoirs for flood is'rol in Connecticut River Basin. Cost estimate for new work for construction and $2,050,000 for lands and dam- o9s ,050,000 ag$ including highway, cemetery, and utility relocations, a total of ,100,000 for new work. Total includes an estimated $160,000 o cal share of additional recreation facilities to be constructed. osting project was authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act as ofied by 1941 Flood Control Act. 84 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, aP' plies. Local interests must also bear 50 percent of future recrea tional development in accordance with 1965 Federal Water Project Recreation Act. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: plan' ning for recreational facilities was initiated. Bids were received for construction, but were excessive and were rejected. Funds were diverted to other needy projects. Maintenance: Ordinall operation and maintenance activities.r Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except fo construction of additional recreation facilities. Construction o dam was initiated in May 1958 and completed in November 1960 Cost and financial statement 1 l. F i.a 92 1 63 1964 1 95 1T ota to6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jun e 30, 196 New work: 9990 Appropriated.......... $187,740 -$7,000 -$255 ............ $8,000 6, 2 Cost............... 177,391 66,074 2,338 ............. 5,536 6,7 Maintenance:348 Appropriated.......... 22,543 30,217 35,646 $39,000 39,062 18 86 Cost................. 22,571 29,792 36,487 36,002 42255 54. O. OTTER BROOK RESERVOIR, N.H. Location. Dam is on Otter Brook, 2.4 miles upstream fro n it$ junction with The Branch, which flows 2.5 miles to Ashuel0 River at Keene. (See Geological Survey maps-Keene, N.f* Vt., and Monadnock, N.H.) Existing project. Dam is rolled-earthfill type with rock slope protection. It has a top length of 1,288 feet, a top width 0 25 feet, accommodating a paved access road, and a maxil1mu' height of 133 feet above streambed. Outlet works, on right bal are founded on bedrock and consist of a 6-foot diameter horse shoe-shaped conduit 540 feet long controlled by three hydraulicaly operated slide gates. Spillway is in a natural saddle in rg abutment, separated from dam by a rock knob. Weir is a 'o concrete ogee section founded on bedrock and 145 feet long A spillway crest elevation 781. Reservoir operated for flood contro purposes, has a storage capacity of 17,600 acre-feet, and perrt nent storage capacity of 700 acre-feet totaling 18,300 acre- feet equivalent to 7.3 inches of runoff from its drainage area of 41 square miles. Project is operated as a unit of a coordinated sY" tem of reservoirs for flood control in Connecticut River Basi% Cost estimate for new work is $2,751,600 for construction~ $1,378,400 for lands and damages, including highway relocation' a total of $4,130,000 for new work. Existing project was author ized by 1954 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 P plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Co pleted a contract for construction of additional recreation fac" ities. Maintenance: Ordinary operation and maintenance tivities. FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 85 condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for dco"truction of additional recreation facilities. Construction of cod and appurtenant works was initiated in September 1956 and ompleted in August 1958. Cost and financial statement FloealyerTotal to I........ 1962 ... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 work. NewApro'priated Sost e d*...... ............$32,000 $16,400............ .. $4,062,519 ainteane .......................... 20,702 15,841 $1,731. $8i508 4,060,901 C ropriated .. $100,896 28,347 27,092 28,644 29,057 276,285 .......... 45,100 83,259 28,109 28,61 28,970 276,191 54. P. SUCKER BROOK RESERVOIR, CONN. CLocation. Damsite is about 2 miles southwest of Winsted, feet .,on Sucker Brook, in town of Winchester, Conn., about 400 1 Upstream from the brook's entrance into Highland Lake. cutk er Brook is a subtributary of Farmington River in Connecti- Con.)lver Basin. (See Geological Survey Map for Winsted, a X'sting project. Dam will be a rolledbearthfill structure with tlergth of 1,160 feet and a maximum height of 68 feet above aqeamrbed. A concrete uncontrolled chute spillway, 60 feet long, cada spillway channel will be constructed at northeast end of for carrying reservoir overflow around the dam into High- be 1 Lake. Capacity of reservoir, for flood control storage, will ceptA480 acre-feet, equivalent to 8 inches of runoff from the inter- ested drainage area of 3.4 square miles. Latest approved cost for te for new work is $1,862,000 for construction and $278,000 ielud ocations and lands and damages, a total of $2,140,000; total es local costs tioodi fications of $278,000 for lands and relocations including to Highland Lake Dam, and a $95,000 cash contribu- S Existing project was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act oc. 443, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). eocalt cooperation. Local interests shall assume at least 20 per- 'nof the cost (except costs of planning, design, and acquisition Oroe ater rights) of completed project, payable as construction te eeds or pursuant to a contract providing for repayment with laerest within 50 years. Actual cost or fair market value of rens easements, rights-of-way and work performed or services by ered before completion of construction, which are furnished to 11on-Federal interests, will be included in the share of the cost vid e borne by non-Federal interests. Local interests must pro- at lands and rights-of-ways for construction; hold the United coates free from damages; maintain and operate all works after Strepetion; establish encroachment lines along Highland Lake struam beyond which, in the direction of the waterway, no ob- Coti on or encroachment shall be placed unless authorized by La ecticut Water Resources Commission; and modify Highland D're amrn in a manner satisfactory to the Chief of Engineers to ride additional flood protection for Winsted, Conn. Total es- 86 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 timated cost for all requirements of local cooperation is $373,000. Assurances have been requested. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con" tinued and completed advance engineering and design. Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning is complete. Re- maining work consists of awarding a multicomponent continui contract for project construction. Cost and financial statement Total to6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 96 New work: 00 Appropriated.......... ........................ $90,000 $45,000 $275, 000 3414 Cost... ..................... 7,893 6............ 61,631 108,590 54. Q. SURRY MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR, N.H. Location. Dam is on Ashuelot River, 34.6 miles above its j u lC tion with Connecticut River and 5 miles north of Keene,8-* (See Geological Survey maps for Keene and Bellows Falls, -Vt.) Existing project. Dam is rolled-earth type with a dumPe rock shell and a downstream rock toe. It has a top length Of 1,670 feet, a top width of 30 feet, and 86 feet above riverbed' Spillway is at right end of dam and of open side-channel tYPe with a low concrete weir 338 feet long. Spillway dischard channel is in rock cut and 2,000 feet long. Outlet works, in right abutment, consist of a 748-foot-long intake channel an 4d 10-foot-diameter, horseshoe-shaped tunnel through rock. tunnel is 383 feet long and discharges into spillway chaln Outlet works are controlled by two 4-foot 6-inch by 10-foo broome gates mechanically operated through a shaft from ni gatehouse above. Reservoir is operated for flood control pt poses and has a storage capacity of 32,500 acre-feet, equivalen to 6.1 inches of runoff from its drainage area of 100 square mile$ Estimated cost of new work for project is $2,245,000 for constr" tion and $385,000 for lands and damages, a total of $2,630,00 Project is a unit of comprehensive plan for flood control ad other purposes in Connecticut River Basin which was authorize by Flood Control Acts of June 22, 1936, as amended, and Jane 28, 1938 (H. Doc. 455, 75th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aP" plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Co1" tract for construction of parking area to supplement existing rec" reation facilities continued and was completed in September 1965 Contractor earnings totaled $800. Contract for constructionl.O comfort station was awarded; contractor has mobilized his et11P ment; and construction was in progress on June 30, 1966. MIl tenance: Ordinary operation and maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except fo construction of additional recreation facilities. Construction d dam and appurtenant works was initiated in August 1939 a completed in June 1942. FLOOD CONTROL-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 87 Cost and financial statement alyea Total to . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Work: NewAppropriated ..... ostopriated.......... $629,000 $20,000.. $9,514 $20,000 $2,422,316 ntenance: a lProlpriated .......... 451,498 126,689 $64,924 19,860 1 3 3,925 ,7 2,404,235 oPrated ......... . 28,153 36,561 28,034 28,674 35,471 508,677 .....27,800 33,927 30,912 28,895 35,283 508,424 Lo 54. R. THREE RIVERS, MASS. i a ti n . Local flood protection for community of Three Rivers Pa confluence of Quaboag, Ware and Chicopee Rivers in town of lapfer in south central part of Mass. (See Geological Survey lap fior Palmer, Mass.) DowXsting project. Remove New England Power Co. Dam and oChWer station superstructure on Chicopee River; deepen and widen Chcopee River above this dam and at mouth of Ware and Quaboag sti'ers; remove Bridge Street Bridge in Three Rivers and con- Utre- a new bridge at this site; construct a new span at Main terat Bridge; alterations riptions to existing sewerstoand railroad bridge in Three Rivers: al- utility lines affected by the work; araeppng for bank protection; and disposal of excavated waste Ier1 als along banks at mouth of Ware and Quaboag Rivers. wit ove about 5,200 feet of river channel to a minimum bottom lt of 80 feet and a maximum of 200 feet. Latest approved 3t5 estimate for new work is $1,550,000 for construction and br-,000 for lands and damages including removal of highway ae, construction of a new highway bridge, alteration to high- 000 ridge at Main Street and to sewer system; a total of $2,285,- (~ xisting project was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act ( oc. 434, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). iotocal cooperation. Items for construction required of local higrests without cost to the United States include: removal of WaYWay bridge at Bridge Street, construction of a new high- 1Y bridge at Bridge Street, alterations to highway bridge at ai. Street, and extension of existing sewers into the river. In frdtion, they must furnish lands and rights-of-way necessary 14 Work; obtain permission for the United States to remove New c gland Power Co. dam and powerhouse superstructure on Chi- aPee River and two buildings which obstruct the improvement; at"lermit no encroachment on the improved channel, including ~oferway areas provided under bridges. Local interests must 91rib.bute not less than 20 percent of project cost, except costs of as'lfling, design, and acquisition of water rights payable either reconstruction proceeds or pursuant to a contract providing for repayment with interest within 50 years. Actual cost or fair Mar et value of lands, easements and rights-of-way and work to ormned or service rendered shall be included in share of cost te e borne by non-Federal entity. Total estimated costs for all WitUirements of local cooperation are $735,000. Fully complied Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Multi- 88 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 component contract for construction of project, includinga r nhigh way bridges, continued and was completed. Contractor e ing were $461,900, including $185,100 financed from local funds. ted Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was initia in January 1964 and completed in May 1966. Alterations ae extension of railroad bridge was completed in May 1966. eL maining work consists of determining final contract quantite and costs. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fisca! year.............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 9 New work: 000 Appropriated..........$50,000 $275,000 $485,000 $435,000 $305,000846 Cost................. 30,945 67,403 333,349 751,506 357,643 OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 19661 New work:3 Contributed........... ..... .$400,000 $170,000 ............ $13,000 5 0153 Cost............ ............. .......... 84,228 $281,961 203,964 54. S. TOWNSHEND RESERVOIR, VT. Location. Dam is on West River, 19.1 miles above its jlunctlo with Connecticut River at Brattleboro, Vt., and about 2 miles es of Townshend, Vt. Reservoir extends upstream about 4 i (See Geological Survey maps-Saxtons River, Vt., and Lodl derry, Vt.) t Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam, 1,700 feet long crest, 133 feet above streambed, and providing a total stora capacity of 33,200 acre-feet for flood control purposes. A s channel spillway with a concrete weir 438.9 feet long, having.t discharge capacity of 200,000 cubic feet per second, in left ab.oc ment. A reinforced concrete conduit under dam and on. 111 comprises outlet works and is controlled by mechanireA operated gates from a gate tower at intake end. Drainage aet controlled is 278 square miles gross and 106 square miles 1e Reservoir is operated as a unit of a coordinated system for flood control in Connecticut River Basin. Estimated cost of neW r is $5,455,000 for construction and $1,870,000 for lands and da0 ages including highway relocations and utilities, a total $7,325,000. Project was authorized by 1944 Flood Control Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 A plies.ded Operationsand results durinq fiscal year. New work: Awardc a contract providing for expansion of existing parking and bes areas. Work was initiated in March and completed early in Jul 1966. Contractor earnings were $46,100. Maintenance:or nary operation and maintenance activities. for Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except f construction of additional recreation facilities. Construction FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 89 coarp a appurtenant dart and ap u t n tworks was initiated in November 1958 and pleted in June 1961. Cost and financial statement eal ,ear. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Cp5EOPriated,,., -$50,000 $21,000 -$7,276 $1,000 $51,853 $7,205,245 Maintonape 67,519 75,661 -6,364 853 61,303 7,204,548 0 pIlated, 22,396 25,803 29,722 34,937 48,000 172,735 22,307 26,428 29,753 32,245 42,835 164,805 54. T. TULLY RESERVOIR, MASS. tion Dam is on East Branch of Tully River, 3.9 miles its Junction with Millers River. It is 1 mile north of le, Mass., and 31/2 miles north of Athol, Mass. (See Geo- Survey map for Royalston, Mass.-N.H.) sting Project. Dam is rolled-earth type with a dumped hell. It has a top length of 1,570 feet, a top width of 30 1d 62 feet above riverbed. Spillway is on rock in a saddle 800 feet from left end of dam and is a low, concrete weir, et long. Spillway approach channel is 600 feet long and rge channel is chute type 1,775 feet long. Outlet works, in utrent, consist of a 6-foot-diameter tunnel through rock. 1Is 274 feet long and controlled by two 3-foot 6-inch by Slide gates mechanically operated through a shaft from a )Use above. Outlet works intake and outlet channels are Ld 580 feet long, respectively. Project was constructed with 1oI for future raising for inclusion of power at site. Res- is perated for flood control purposes and has a storage .tY of 22,000 acre-feet which is equivalent to 8.3 inches of from its drainage area of 50 square miles. Cost of com- project is $1,183,600 for construction and $368,000 for lands alnages, a total of $1,551,600. Project is a unit of compre- le Plan for flood control and other purposes in Connecticut 3asin which was authorized by Flood Control Acts of June 36,.) .. 5s as amended, and June 28, 1938 (IH. .. Doc. 455,..75th ...Cong., . al cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- rations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Ordi- Peration and maintenance activities. ition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Develop- Ofrecreational facilities at project site was postponed pend- cision relative to raising the dam to provide water supply e. Construction of dam and appurtenant works was initi- 1 March 1947 and completed in September 1949. 90 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement I Total to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 1 N ew . . ork ................ New work: Appropriated.... . .$1,51:613 Cost...................... ... 155 " Maintenance:...9........ Appropriated..........$24,117 $28,307 Cot................. 23749 $31,676 $29,031 $32,498 28:311 30,900 3230 30,295 32,495 54. U. UNION VILLAGE RESERVOIR, VT. bove Location. Dam is on Ompompanoosuc River, its junction with Connecticut 4 miles arth River. It is one-fourth mile nor. of Union Village, Vt., and 11 miles north of White River J tion, Vt. (See Geological Survey maps for Strafford, Vt., Mount-Cube, N.H.-Vt.)ed Existing project. Dam is rolled-earth type with a dulrr rock shell. It has a top length of 1,100 feet, 0 feet, and a maximum height ofr170 feet. a top width of30O from right end of dam and is chute Spilway -feet isabou with a low, curved 400-foot long concrete weir. Approach type channel chute are 1, 00 0 and 1,130 feet long, respectively. and diS I'd folood rorol rom an are in left abutment and consist gaeos abve Reeroi Outlet is o ,ot diameter tunnel through of a 1,236-foot-long 1. d --rock. Outlet works are controll ted two 7-foot r 6-incha cof~e by 12- T2u foot nmis..7 snt roome gates mechanically through a shaft from a gatehouse above. •e Vt¢p oPe6ted for flood control purposes and has Reservoir is oper 000 acre-feet, wahich is equivalent to 5.7a storage capacity of a' drainage area of 126 square miles. Estimated inches of runoff fro1t is $3,131,700 for construction and cost of proect, $908,300 for lands and damgfeos atotal oof $4,040,000. pli~cal Project oopratin. Sctin is aunit ool of4405n7 hAdn3 1298 " comprehensive flood control and other purposes in Connecticut Plancl was authorized by Flood Control River Basin W- camended, and June 28, 1938. (H.Doe. ActsCn of June221936 Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood 445, 75th Cong., 2desl Control Act of 193. plies.. Operations and results during nary operation. and maintenance fiscal year. Maintenanceordi" activities; and awarding 3all tract providing amendd a .... and. for resurfacing cmleted Coin June 50.--S Work was initiated in May andaccess roads and parking completed early in June' Contract earnings were $11,600. Conditionat end of fiscalyear. Project 4317 33 construction of recreation facilities. 8 is complet initiated in March 1947 and completed Construction of da nAr oprat... 326 .-. p in e June r m1950. l~ n - ,393-,.. Co.s.t and financialstatement Fiscal"------- year............... '---------------- -'-- 1Total966 ------- 1964 16 1965 16 1966 96 June uo3 ' New Awork: ppropriated ...... . . . .. .. . ... . . . .. . . . ....... ........ . .. . . 6 4,f010, $4101O'69 Cost............ Maintenance: ' ........................ .. ........................ Appropriated ...........$260822 ,878.20,592.45,77...01 $46 55' FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 91 S54. V. VICTORY RESERVOIR, VT. Juncoton. Dam will be on Moose River, 7.4 miles above its Johnsbn with the Passumpsic River and 11 miles northeast of St. xiurY, Vt. (See Geological survey map for Burke, Vt.) Mrovide 'gf rproject. Based on current restudy the project would Storae f' o multiple-purpose development providing reservoir tarthfill or flood control, flow regulation, and recreation. A rolled- acity ofam would impound a reservoir with total storage ca- Sdraina 106,000 acre-feet equivalent to 30.5 inches of runoff from acrefaiage e area of 75 square miles. Of the total capacity, 42,000 flood e Would be inactive, 40,000 acre-feet would be reservedfor J Control, recreation, and flow regulation based on seasonal for tloose, and the remaining 24,000 acre-feet would be reserved also be control. Seasonal releases from the joint-use pool would cost estitilized to benefit downstream powerplants. Approved tion andlate for new work (July 1965) is $3,840,000 for construc- a total $1,180,000 for lands and damages including relocations, reh $5,020,000. Project was authorized as a unit of com- cut five Plan for flood control and allied purposes in Connecti- and 1 er Basin by 1936 Flood Control Act as modified by 1938 . Local ood Control Acts. cost llCooperation. Local interests would be required to share Woith allocation of applicable project purposes in conformance O erten t legislation and policies. Amount not yet determined. tiluedrtons and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- Iterestetudy of project. Preliminary report being reviewed by Cotd Federal and State agencies. an itttion at end of fiscal year. Restudy will be submitted as gatio er"11 report on the Connecticut River comprehensive investi- ortStudy has advanced to final stages of completion and agecies.1 be submitted upon receipt of comments from other Cost and financial statement Year. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 tated . ... ......... $65000........ $65,000 ..... . . ...... $168,446 ............ ..... ............ 13,085 $35,276 $13,276 165,083 . 54. W. WESTFIELD, MASS. lo Project is in city of Westfield, Mass., on Westfield ed tle Rivers. (See Geological Survey map for West Spring- oi I. project. Construction of flood control structures tnhe Westfield and Little Rivers. Westfield River pro- 7,200 s composed of 7,000 feet of channel improvement, ti - eet. of levees, one street gate, one sandbag structure, one et9station with 50,000 gallons per minute capacity, two 0 Sists areas and two gated conduits. Little River protection V a of 9,500 feet of channel improvement, 15,050 feet of eatd floodwalls, one street gate, three storage areas and ate and one ungated conduits. Latest approved cost es- 92 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 timate for new work is $5,382,000 for lands and damages and fo construction and $ 058,00 relocations, Existing project was authorized by 1960 a total of $6,f440,000 Flood Control Act Doe. 109, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). sLocal cooperation. Local interests tpoii percent of cost (except costs of planning, must assumepat lesti of water rights) of completed project, design, and q so struction proceeds or pursuant to a payable eitherao O ment with interest within 50 years. contract providing for Pke Actual cost, or fair mr0 vlue lnds easaments, rights-of-way, and w orperformd wservices rendered prior to completion of construction which are furnished by a non-Federal entity shall of proje d in share of cost ,tobe borne by be incl tded non-Federal entity.3 Local ests must provide lands and rights-of-way 0d operationof project, including lands for construction hold the United States free from damages; f or pumping storage PonIa maintain and operaed allworks after completion; permit no encroachment channels orion pond areas and, on ipr , e are impaired, provide substitute ifstorage pond areas or capaci alent p..umping capacity promptly capacity or eqte States; and contribute to the Uni without cost to the te struction cost which is presently ted States 5.8o percent f mated cost of ,lands and damages estimated at $312,00058000. Formal assurances that these conditions and relocations is $1e re quested September 22, 1964. would be met werest provision of assurances by the Voters at city elections voted a0 wealth of Massachusetts for city of Westfield to the C participation in sharing the Federal costs of the project. Operations and results pleted advance engineeringduring fiscal year. New work: and design and plans tions. Due to lack of approval by voters of city of and ecife c project was classified as "inactive" Westfield, the on December 20, 1965.: Condition at end of fiscal year. for expiration of authorization is September Project is inactive. Dat 22, 1969. S Cost and financial statement FisCal year... . .. i s ca p. 1962 b e f d s a g n us l to 1963 1964 dtion. D e at concrete hurrsicnan 1965 barie 1966 acrossp J ro New work: App$5000a$14............. 0 ~540 34l 000 $125,000 Cat.20,834163:160 $270,000 -$65,000 108,736 168,421 506 45,583 55. FOX POINT ]BARRIER, NARRAGANSETT BAY, Rolo Location. On Providence River Providence, .I. (See Geological at Fox Point, in city0 Survey map for Provide Existingnce project. A concrete dence River:and earth-dike land hurricane barrier acrosS and west ends. Barrier is 700 sections to high ground feet, Concrete feet long and dikes total 2,200 ti river p^-section tanand-barri gate barier .P includes tumCture, and atiepumping wals to station, dikes. a pigsaioar river-sltp Pumping tionhas fiv pup 0 capable of discharginig upstream stor'm FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 93 whe 1 0 river gates are closed. River sluice gate has three 40- by DiaOOttainter gates. Gate passage is capable of discharging tiM alu floodflow from behind barrier. A canal formed by a ciolher panel wall was constructed to provide continuance of IO"g water to upstream powerplants. City streets passing tOsgh dikes were gated for closure at times of hurricane flooding. coast approved cost estimate for new work is $14,909,000 for $16,truction and $1,134,000 for lands and rights-of-way, a total of $3,67 ,3,000. Total cost includes local costs for all lands and a Was ,0 cash contribution for construction. Existing project Con authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 230, 85th 0.,Ocal1st sess.)."f... .. " . . . aocal cooperation. Local interests must hold the .United aft e s free from damages, maintain and operate improvement includ mpletion, and contribute in cash 30 percent of total cost, costs ing lands, easements, and relocations. Total estimated Sfor all requirements of local cooperation are $4,813,000. Oerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- tiu ed_ construction of barrier and appurtenances and irnpletd all work except for minor deficiencies. Work on these co"Or deficiencies, by contract, was in progress. Planning for aistruction of log boom was completed. Total fiscal year earn- re1 on barrier contract were $1,093,000 of which $887,800 were e lar funds and $205,200 contributed funds. Corondition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was essentially i .P1eted in January 1966. Correction of minor deficiencies is Corogress. Barrier contract was initiated in July 1961 and COl1eted in January 1966. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS alY " [arTotal to . . . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, Nvw ork Co..'riated .......... $2,735,000 $2,502,000 $1,366,000 $1,491,000 $1,440,000 $11,230000 8 . .......... 2,433,3762,592,2591,531,4751,741,883 831,263 10620108 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS p 0 wTotal to 1 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NwWork. T ributed........... $716,500 $855,000 $690,000 $600,000 $378,000 $3,679,500 ........ 551,836 889,232 557,028 746,176 283,521 3,467,793 Cash for construction only. Excludes $245,000 expended to date for land condemnations. 56. HOUSATONIC RIVER BASIN, CONN. Authorized improvements in Housatonic River Basin are com- ised of seven flood control reservoirs on tributaries of the th gatuck River, principal tributary of Housatonic River, and 1iee local protection projects, two of which are along Naugatuck con er and one on Still River. Naugatuck and Housatonic Rivers verge 12 miles above mouth of Iousatonic River. 94 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing plan was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Dec. 22,1944 Construct Thomaston Dam and Reservoir H. Doc. 338, 87th Cong, July 3,1958 I tsesl Construct HallMeadow Brook and East Branch "Dam'and" H. Doc. 81, 85th COngt, Reservoir. July 14, 1960 Consteuct Hop Brook, Nrtlifield Brook, Hancock Brook, H. Doc. 372, 86th Cong., 2da.S and Black Rock Dams Oct. 23,1962 Construct Ansonia-Derby and Reservoirs. local protection project on Nauga. H. Doc. 437, 87th Cong., 2dBess Oct. 27, 1965 tuck River. Construct Danbury, Conn., and Derby, Conn.-local pro- H. Doc. 324, 88th Cong., 2d sea tection projects. Coordinated system of reservoirs and local protection will be operated to reduce floodflows in the Housatonic projet River Dams and reservoirs1 th of Height Type capacity stuck (feet) (acre-feet) Construction Lands and Total rer damages2 O Hall Meadow.................... Torrington, Conn.......... 41.0 73 Rock and earthfill............. 8,620 $1,840,000 $1,290,000 $3,130,000 East Branch..........................do.... ............. 43.7 92 Earthfill...................... 4,350 1,435,000 31,290,000 2,725,000 O 30.5 142 Rockand earthfill............. 42,000 6,340,000 7,900,000 14,240,000 Thomaston..................... .... do...................... 30.6 118 Earthfill...................... 2,432 1,810,000 1,000,000 2,810,000 Northfield.............................do................... 29.0 154 ..... do...................... . 8,700 3,887,000 2,753,000 6,640,000 Black Rock..................... Waterbury, Conn.......... Hancock Brook..................do...................... 25.0 57 .....do...................... . 4,030 1,412,000 2,518,000 3,930,000 Hop Brook..................... .... do...................... 15.9 97....do....................... 6,970 2,000,000 3,340,000 5,340000 1 For details of projects, see individual reports. 2 Includes highway, railroad, and utility relocations. a Cost of lands borne by local interests. z Local protection project C' Miles Estimated cost above Location mouth of Type of structure Housatonic Construc- Lands and 1 Total River tion damages $960,000 z Ansonia-Derby, Conn.... ............................. 13.0 Wall, levee, channel improvement and pumping stations.......... $10,000,000 $10,960,000 Danbury, Conn... ............................ 56.0 Walls, channel improvement and bridge replacement............ 1,980,000 1,400,000 3,380,000 Derby, Conn.................................... .... 12.0 Walls, levees and pumping station........................3,360,000 260,000 3,620,000 To be borne by local interests. Includes relocations. to 96 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 56. A. ANSONIA-DERBY Location. On Naugatuck River in cities of Ansonia Derby, Conn., about 2 miles upstream from confluence and tuck and Housatonic Rivers. (See Geological Survey map for of Nauga* Ansonia, Conn.) Existing project. Construction of about 8,700 feet of dikes, 6,450 feet of floodwalls, and 6,100 feet of along the Naugatuck River. Four pumpingchannel stations impro with ve'mtoe tot capacity of 161,250 gallons per minute would be constructed to discharge interior drainage. Other appurtenant structures consist of 5 railroad and 4 street swing gates. Would also be provided along Beaver Brook tributary Protection would ' feet of dikes, 250 feet of floodwalls, 1,300 feet ofconsisting of 1,70 ment, and 1,300 feet of 8- by 1 4.5-foot reinforced channel concrete improve" Dikes would be rolled-earthflll with rock slope protection cond it side and seeded topsoil on tops and landside on river slopes. dikes varies from 10 to 30 feet. Floodwalls would be reinforced eigh1t Of concrete with height varying from 10 to 30 feet. Width nel improvement ranges from 120 feet for a length of 1,500 of chan" feet to 240 feet for a length of 4,600 feet along Naugatuck River, a i1 10 feet alongBeaver Brook. Latest approved $10,000,000 for construction and $960 ,000 cost estimate a for lands, armages, and relocations, a total of $10 ,960,000 n na for new work. This total i" cludes local costs of $960,000 for lands and relocations. E-oisti, project wasauthorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (I. Do., 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must provide rights-of-way for construction, including relocations; lands hold and the United States free from damages; maintain and operate all worl"' prevent encroachment on improved channels and ponding and provide effective storage or pumping capacity if inpaired- rea Estimated costs to local interests are $750,000 for lands and $210,000 for relocations. New work: o 1965 T h s ot s~ 1966r. Operations , and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, work: Continued advance engineering neW and design. Condition at end of fiscal year. Advan e engineering and sign is 85 :percent complete. Remaining pleting design and, awarding a multicomponent work consists of cor continuing co tract for construction of project. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year....... Total to6- 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June130,1 New work: ........ 7000010 $600 Appropriated. Cosat.... $73000 $175,000 $352,000 4502' .......... ..... ... 72319 160581 312340 56. B. BLACK ROCK RESERVOIR Location. Damsite is on Branch Brook from its confluence with Naugatuck River about 2 miles upstreaOn and Watertown, Conn in towns of Thonato l ton, Conn.) ... /(SeeGeoloIsuvy '(eGelgclSremafoTor afr"ThIias FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 97 tng project. Construction of a rolled-earthfill dam 933 g and a maximum height of 154 feet above streambed. Ontrolled chute spillway 140 feet long will be in right abut- A 4-by 5-foot reinforced concrete conduit constructed in 1ng right bank will provide control by means of two 3- by Ydraulically operated gates. Reservoir will be about 1.8 ug and provide storage capacity of 8,700 acre-feet, includ- 0acre-feet for recreation pool, equivalent to 8 inches of from its tributary drainage area of 20.4 square miles. ction of project requires relocating 1L9 miles of State road rcation of a 36-inch local water supply line and appurtenant es. Latest approved cost estimate for new work is $3,912,- construction and $2,728,000 for lands and damages, in- roads and utilities relocation, a total of $6,640,000. Project thorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 372, 86th 2d sess.). Scooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- tlowever local interests must establish encroachment lines .eam of dam to permit efficient reservoir operation. State ion requires establishment of such lines. at'ions and results during fiscal year. New work: Design relocation was completed by State of Connecticut under albursable contract with Federal Government. Construc- tract was awarded by State in May 1966 and work pro- to 7 percent completion. Design of dam continued. Land l.on was initiated and continued to 50 percent completion. ion agreement was signed with city of Waterbury for de- .lunicipal water supply line and attendant facilities. ion at end of fiscal year. Project is under construction tPercent complete. Remaining work includes awarding t's for relocation of water supply line and construction of d recreational facilities. Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 Total to 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 .. ............ $50,000 $192,000 $55,000 $400,000 $697,000 19,066 158,079 10,599 391,163 677,907 56. C. DANBURY ion. On Still River in city of Danbury, Conn., about 45 outthwest of Hartford. (See Geological Survey map for 7,Conn.) ;*lU project. Improvement of about 7,000 feet of Still "hannel including some 1,900 feet of channel relocation, ttent sections of low concrete retaining walls, replacement erailroad bridges and one highway bridge and removal of te road bridge. Approved cost estimate (1966) for new $1,400,000 for lands including relocations and $1,980,000 Struction, a total of $3,380,000. Total includes local costs ),000 for lands and $355,000 for relocations, a total of 98 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U.S. ARMY, 1966 $740,000. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (1* Doc. 324, 88th Cong., 2nd sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must provide all lands, ease- ments, and rights-of-way for construction, including lands for spoil disposal, storm water pondage and collector ditches togethe with necessary changes to sewage systems, highway bridges and roads, railroad track except railroad bridges and approaches, an other utilities; hold the United States free from damages; main tainm and operate all works after completion in accordance wit regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army; prevent en croachment on improved channels and on ponding areas and i capacity of latter is impaired, provide equally effective storage pumping capacity or both. Estimated cost to local interests $740,000. Formal assurances will be requested during final de- sign. Operationsand results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project has not been started. 56. D. DERBY Location. At confluence of Naugatuck and Housatonic Rivers in city of Derby, Conn., about 35 miles southwest of Hartford and 12 miles north of Long Island Sound. (See Geological Survey maP for Ansonia, Conn.) Existing project. Construction of system of earthfilled levee and concrete floodwalls extending about 1,950 feet along the ban of Housatonic River and about 3,300 feet along Naugatuck River. System would also include flood gates at railroad crossings and a pumping station near the confluence of the two rivers to handle interior drainage. Dike along Naugatuck River ties into lower end of Ansonia-Derby project presently under design. Approved cost estimate (1966) for new work is $260,000 for lands including relocations and $3,360,000 for construction, a total of $3,620,000. Total includes local costs of $245,000 for lands and $15,000 for relocations. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Ac (H. Doc. 324, 88th Cong., 2nd sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must provide all lands, ease- ments, and rights-of-way for construction including land for sp.oil disposal, storm water pondage and collector ditches together w ith necessary changes to sewage systems, highway bridges and roader railroad track except railroad bridges and approaches, and othe utilities; hold the United States free from damages; maintaln and operate all works after completion in accordance with regula tions prescribed by the Secretary of the Army; prevent encroach ment on improved channels and on ponding areas and if capacitY of latter is impaired, provide equally effective storage, punmping capacity, or both, without cost to the United States; and prevent encroachment within 20 feet of the top of the west bank of NaUg tuck River at proposed channel widening upstream from highwa0 bridge at Derby. Estimated cost to local interests is $260,000. Formal assurances will be requested during final design. Operationsand results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project has not been started. FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 99 Location 56. E. EAST BRANCH RESERVOIR of cation. Dam is in city of Torrington, Conn., on East Branch augatuck River, 3 miles above its confluence with West EXI* (See Geological Survey map for Torrington, Conn.) ' 700 sting project. A rolled-earthfill dam 92 feet high and 70 feet long with a chute spillway in right abutment of dam. Works include a 36-inch-diameter, ungated, concrete con- futet stora ounded on bedrock. Capacity of reservoir for flood control frorage is 4,350 acre-feet, equivalent to 8.9 inches of runoff voi controlled net drainage area of 9.25 square miles. Reser- V0ir Willre II vll reduce flood discharges mainly in upper Naugatuck Thr above Torrington and along reach of river above authorized ect .astoln Reservoir. Total cost of new work for completed proj- Of% a$1,433,800 for construction and $1,290,000 for lands, rights- cost and relocation of highways, a total of $2,723,800. Total th"-icludes local cost of $840,000 for lands. Project was au- s~szed by 1958 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 81, 85th Cong., 1st rial cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and tai 'Of-way; hold the United States free from damages; main- thro and operate project after completion; and zone channel als ugh damage areas to prevent further encroachments. Act Stat Provides highway relocation costs shall be borne by United of los. Fully complied with. Total costs for all requirements 0Oal COoperation were $840,000. l~terations and results during fiscal year. New work: Com- stallation of hydrologic radio gage. ued Co"dition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. 196g3 truction of dam and appurtenances was initiated in March i and completed in June 1964. Road relocation was initiated uly 1962 and completed in October 1963. Cost and financial statement al ear .Total to ... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 I eNWork. r ia toP ted .......... $250,000 $646,000 $889,000 -$15,000 -$1,164 $1,883,836 173,076 639,331 954,727 69,205 569 1,883,836 56. F. HALL MEADOW BROOK RESERVOIR ojcation. Dam is on Hall Meadow Brook, 0.4 mile above its luence with Hart Brook to form West Branch of Naugatuck er .in city of Torrington and town of Goshen, Conn. (See C0 91cal Survey maps-West Torrington, Conn. and Norfolk, 1 isting project. A rock and rolled-earthfill embankment onon all'Membankment 1 eadow Brook, about 5 miles above Torrington with outlet irks founded on rock in right abutment, with at maximum it of 73 feet above streambed; a dike in a saddle east of dam to a maximum height of 47 feet; a concrete spillway adjacent fr)Vest abutment of dike; and a diversion canal with spillway r Reuben Hart Reservoir to Hall Meadow Brook Reservoir. 100 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Reservoir has a capacity of 8,620 acre-feet, including 220 acre" feet for recreation pool, equivalent to 9.40 inches of runo ff from controlled net drainage area of 17.2 square miles. Reservoir will reduce flood discharges mainly in upper Naugatuck River above Torrington and along reach of river above Thomaston Reservoir. Reservoir is a unit of a coordinated system of reservoirs for tlood control in Housatonic River Basin. Total cost of new work for completed project is $1,841,200 for construction and $1,290,000 for lands, rights-of-way, and relocation of highways a $3,131,200. Total cost includes local cost of $570,000 fortotal o lands. Existing project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (14 Doc. 81, 85th Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands rights-of-way other than highway relocations; zone channel ed through damage areas to prevent further encroachments; the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate hold project. Fully complied with. Total costs for all requirements of local cooperation were $570,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: pleted installation of hydrologic radio gage. Con" Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Construc tion of dam and appurtenant structures was initiated in March 1961 and completed in June 1962. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 196 6 $1,0000 $8,0 125000. 1965 june30, 16o Total t New work: Appropriated... $1 2002000 $80,000 $2 0 200 Cost.............. $3,000 $200 $2 6100 1:409,420 93,572 05,824 39,529 60 $ 56. G. HANCOCK BROOK RESERVOIR Location. Dam is on Hancock Brook Conn., about 3.4 miles above its confluence in town of Plymo'Ih with Naugatuck River (See Geological Survey map for Waterbury, Conn.) Existing project. A rolled earthfill dam d A maximum height of 57 feet above streambed. 630 feet long and A chute sp0ll'a with a concrete ogee weir, 100 feet long, in right let works consist of an ungated, 3- by 4-foot abutment.o ued 6-inch reinforced concrete conduit founded on rock on ri 0ght o strean, bank of z ervoir, which is entirely within town of Plymouth, .extendup H ancock Brook about 11/ miles Conn., W and about1.3 mnilesl Todd Hollow Br, ook, principal tributary of Hancock Brook. will provide a flood control storage capacity of 4,030acre-feet equivalent to 6.33 inches of runoff from tributary drainage areq of 12 square miles. Latest approved cost is $1,445,000 for construction and $2,510,000 estimate for new wor- ages including relocation of roads and railroads,for lands and dam a total of $3,9551 000. Existing project was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 372, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). LocalHowever, plies. cooperation. Section 2, "Flood Control Act of 1938.aP local interests are specifically required to estah" FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 101' lish yroachment lines downstream of dam to permit efficient )lrOperation. Assurances have been received. atzons and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: ork consisted of continuing construction of dam, highway ons and railroad embankment under a multicomponent tal All work was substantially completed. Contract earn- taled $407,400 during fiscal year. Contract for placement 'Qad ballast and ties was continued and completed in August Maintenance work consisted of normal operation and main- activities. ~ton at end of fiscal year. Total project is 96 percent t Construction of dam, highway relocations, and railroad ent initiated in July 1963, was substantially completed e966. In progress were utility relocations, and grading .remaining spoil area. Also remaining to complete the ' s construction of recreation facilities. Cost and financial statement Pi:elYer2 11119 Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ewI%_ . Coar ated S$141,000$460,000$1,520,000 $1,279,000 $474,800 $3,955,013 156,833 399,541 1,331,379 1,311,055 518,836 3,782,977 Approprated. .......... 5,419 5,419 . ... ......... 5,418 5,418 S 56. H. HOP BROOK RESERVOIR on. Damsite is on Hop Brook in city of Waterbury and ofiddlebury and Naugatuck, Conn., about 1.4 miles up- ofconfluence of Naugatuck River and Hop Brook. (See al Survey map for Waterbury, Conn.) In'project. Construction of a rolled-earthfill dam about long with a maximum height of 97 feet above streambed., tbout 404 feet long with a maximum height of 33 feet will' Saddle in left abutment. A chute spillway with a broad- Weir 200 feet long will be founded on rock 1,200 feet north- eft abutment of dam. A 3- by 5-foot reinforced concrete constructed along left bank of brook will control flows by f two 3- by 4-foot hydraulically operated gates. Reser- out 11/2 miles long, will be in towns of Middlebury and lck and city of Waterbury, Conn., and provide storage Sof 6,970 acre-feet, which includes 120 acre-foot recrea- lequivalent to 8 inches of runoff from tributary drainage 16.4 square miles. Construction of project requires relo- :1.8 miles of State Route 63. Latest approved cost esti- new work is $2 million for construction and $3,340,000 "rights-of-way, and relocation of roads, a total of $5,340,- isting project was authorized by,1960 Flood Control Act 372, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- lowever local interests must establish encroachment lines' eam of dam to permit efficient reservoir operation. State )n requires establishment of such lines. 102 . REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 19 6 6 Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Construc- tion of road relocation, administered by State of Connecticut un- der cost-reimbursable contract with Federal Government, was initiated in July and continued to 70 percent completion. Con" tractor earnings totaled $1,100,600. Multicomponent contract was awarded for construction of dam and appurtenances. Work was initiated in December 1965 and continued to 14 percent con- pletion. Principal operations consisted of excavating in outlet works, spillway, and conduit areas; and placing concrete in walls and previous fill in dike area. Contractor earnings total $180,000. Land acquisition continued to 65 percent completion. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is 53 percent comnplete. Remaining work consists of completing current contracts and awarding contract for recreational facilities. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: 0 Appropriated..................... $50,000 $125,000 $440,000 $2,300,000 $2,91 80 Cost............... ............ 30,049 122,899 442,706 2,213,532 2, 56. I. NORTHFIELD BROOK RESERVOIR Location. Dam is on Northfield Brook about 1.3 miles upstrea 1 from its confluence with Naugatuck River, in town of Thornaflston, Conn. (See Geological Survey map for Thomaston, Conn.) Existing project. A rolled-earth-fill dam, 810 feet long and a maximum height of 118 feet above streambed. A chute spillwaY, with an ogee weir, 72 feet long, on rock in left abutment of dal. Outlet works consist of an ungated 36-inch reinforced concrete conduit founded on rock on right bank of stream. Reservoir 's about 1.2 miles' long, within towns of Thomaston and Litchfield, Conn., and will have a flood control storage capacity of 2,432 acre- feet,' equivalent to 8 inches of runoff from 5.7 square mile draing e area. Latest approved cost estimate for new work is $1,810,000 for construction and $1 million for lands and damages, includif roads and utility relocations, a total of $2,810,000. Existing pro ect was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 372,86th Cong., 2d sess.)., Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aP plies. However, local interests must establish encroachment lines downstream of dam to permit efficient reservoir operation.As surances have been received. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con"* tinued and completed construction of dam and appurtenances Contract earnings during fiscal year totaled $67,600. Design a recreation facilities was in progress. Maintenance: Normal op eration and maintenance activities. Condition at end of fiscal year. Total project is 94 percent con, plete. Construction of dam and appurtenances was initiated i May 1963 and completed in October 1965. Remaining to complete the project is construction of recreation facilities. FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 103 Cost and financial statement .. salYear Total to ear............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30. 1966 New work. ot.. $150,000 $360,000 $1,040,000 $1 206,000. .. .. $2,810,000 Malatenane.... ... 126,136 249,407 1,006,218 1,129,919 $94,122 2,642,985 os riated . .... 3,417 8,636 12,053 .......... ... ........ 3........... 1, 8. 12,053 56. J. THOMASTON RESERVOIR tioa tion. On Naugatuck River about 30.4 miles above its junc- ton, C 1lHousatonic River and about 1.6 miles north of Thomas- Ge~o~onon. Reservoir extends upstream about 6.4 miles. (See eoltc.al Survey map for Thomaston, Conn.) long ting Project. A rolled-earthfill and rock dam 2,000 feet capacrising 142 feet above streambed and providing a storage chameity of 42,000 acre-feet. Spillway consists of an open side gists of constructed in rock and a low concrete weir. Outlet con- bleetp a concrete conduit. Control is accomplished by gates railcanically operated through a shaft from a house above. operaag e area controlled is 97 square miles. Reservoir is doerCted for flood protection of Waterbury and other communities $6,3 'sreamn 4 on Naugatuck River. Cost for new work was ages .000 for construction and $7,900,000 for lands and dam- of "'luding highway, railroad, and utility relocations, a t6tal Cof$14l240,000. Existing project was authorized by 1944 Flood Loca Act (H. Doc. 338 77th Cong., 1st sess.). apl1ies cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1944 NeOPerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: a w ork consisted of construction of hydrologic radio gage. D'lenance work consisted of ordinary operation and mainte- e activitiess tio 0 ition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Construc- coplt dam and appurtenant works was started in May 1958 and leted in November 1960. "- . Cost and financial statement lyear Total to ....... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Ne Work: Apr c o Pated. ..... -$63,000 -$35,000 $6,442 $35,000 $4,583 $14,243,167 tenance:.............. .92,387 40,144 8,157 31,890 7,849 14,238,306 M ropriated**22,917 22,851 26,223 27,570 43,382 160,818 ....22,897 23,093 26,162 27,280 35,145 152,228 57. MERRIMACK RIVER BASIN, N.II. AND MASS. an trk s covered by comprehensive plan are on Merrimack River CoStrl tributaries in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. F lood Co Atrol Act of 1936 authorized construction of a system of flood flood hreservoirs in Merrimack River Basin for reduction of heights in Merrimack Valley. Flood Control Act of 1938 104 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 approved general comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes as approved by Chief of Engineers pursuant to pre, liminary examinations and surveys authorized by act of June 22, 1936, and modified project to provide in addition to construction of a system of flood control reservoirs, related flood control work which may be found justified by the Chief of Engineers. All operations pertaining to flood control in Merrimack River Bas' are now carried on under and reported under projects for individr ual units of comprehensive plan referred to above. No further expenditures are contemplated under general project for flood control in Merrimack River Basin. For final cost and financial summary, see Annual Report for 1946. Following reservoirs and related flood control works were prO- posed for construction under comprehensive plan: Reservoirs Miles above Res- Estimated Federal cost Name Nearest ervoir mouth of Height Type capacity city Merri- (feet) (acre- mack Con- Lands Total feet) struction d River af damagesd j Franklin Falls ..... Franklin, 118.2 140Earthfill.... -- 154, 00 $6,250,000 $1,7 2 N. H. Blackwater ....... Concord, 118.8 75 ... 1,319,70 do....... 46,00( 766,700 553,000 N. H. Hopkinton- 2 ... do ..... 87.3 115 ... do....... Everett 4 157,30(12,525,000 8,700,000 21,225,00 Edward Mac- 2 Keene, 161.3 67 ... do....... 306,000 2,035, Dowell N.. H. 12,80(1,729,000 Mountain Brook3... .do....... 79,000 774,0 167.8 50, ..do....... 5,30( 695,000 6 ,000 1Includes highway, railroad, and utility relocations. For details see individual report. A dam has been constructed at site by private interests. Cost has not been revised or cur rent price basis. SSubstituted for Bennington and Beards Brook. Distance and height are for Everett D Distance and height for Hopkinton Dam are 118 miles and 76 feet, respectively. Local protection projects Miles EFstimated Federal cost above Td a Location mouth of Type of structure Constru-c. Lands and T Merrimack tion damages ' os River Nashua, N.H.2.. a.wrence,'Ms. 4 355Wall and levee.......$270,000 $3, 2: North Aor.do............. 4(1680,000 Lowell, Mass.3... ................... 4 58 39 do....... 4909000 ....... do.490,600 * I To be borne by local interests. Completed. For last full report, see Annual Report for 1950. 8 Completed. For last full report, see Annual Report for 1945. 4 Cost last revised in 1954; inactive. 57. A. BLACKWATER RESERVOIR, N.H. Location. Dam is on Blackwater River, N.H. 8.2 miles above confluence with Contoocook River and 118.8 miles above nmoutheO Merrimack River. It is in town of Webster, just above villag 0, Swetts Mills, 12.5 miles by highway northwest of Concord, e (See Geological Survey maps for Penacook and Mount Kesarg Existing project. Dam is rolled-earth type with a dumped roc blanket on upstream face and a downstream rock toe. It FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION ' 105 fe. ledgth, including spillway, of 1,150 feet, a top width of 39 ae alsid vmaximum height, above riverbed, of 75 feet. There ivelenve earth dikes on west side of reservoir with respec- A1urnithsof 335, 170, 735, gravi height of 29, 16, 40, 9, and 240 feet and a respective maxi- and 18 feet. Spillway is concrete, , lha nn type 240 feet long and has a 160-foot-long approach Ilspi Iand a 4 0 0 -foot-long discharge channel. Outlet works are 3fot Way and consist of three conduits, each controlled by a froa a-inch by 5-foot 3-inch slide gate hydraulically operated to1tai agallery within spillway. Dam and appurtenant work to r1ia 16 -foot diameter penstock intake and were constructed lIeservoide for future raising and inclusion of power at site. capacity is operated for flood control purposes and has a storage runo'f of 46,000 acre-feet which is equivalent to 6.7 inches of cost of ron its drainage area of 128 square miles. Completed and da~roject is $766,700 for construction and $553,000 for lands ~e ve ages, a total of $1,319,700., Project is a unit of compre- i'ver P an for flood control and other purposes ini Merrimack lodife la s which was authorized by 1936 Flood Control Act, and Local - 1938 Flood Control Act. aplies cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 Ope~ai, : har atiOns ' and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Ordi- Gdiration and maintenance activities. 19Upet'0onof strlution at -damY3 end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Con- 1940 of dam and appurtenant works was initiated in May i completed in November 1941. Cost and financial statement 1962.. Total to .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 erk: .... ...... .. $1319,746 oprate ........... 1,319746 * . $15,393 $19,456 $68,847 $18,478 $28,478 257,305 ** 13,553 20,603 17,585 69,154 29,791 257,295 ?'7*B. EDWARD MACDOWELL RESERVOIR, N.H, ookca.ion. Dam is on Nubanusit Brook, a tributary of Contoo- oo'g ver one-half mile upstream from village of West Peter- Evey *'N.1., and 14 miles east of Keene, N.H. (See Geological .laps "i for Peterboro and Monadnock, N.H.) oiak nproject. Dam is rolled-earth type with a -dumped a a tanket on upstream face and a downstream rock toe.,s It 11W ) length of 1,030 feet, a top width of 25 feet, and a maxi- sst egt of 67 feet. Outlet works in west abutment of dam 7e eOf an intake structure, a 7-foot square conduit which is Sallone g and controlled by 3- by 7-foot slide gates mechani- O ,erated through a control tower from a gatehouse above, L lling basin emptying into pool of Verney Mills Dam. 0 -a yia low, concrete weir, 100 feet long, with a 1,900-foot broach channel, a 3,080-foot long discharge channel, and 106 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, a 2,540-foot long protective dike to guide spilway rge Spiliway is in a natural saddle on north side of reservoircha 3 miles from damsite and discharges into Ferguson Brook. abole$ ervoir is operated for flood control purposes and has capacity of 12,800 acre-feet, equivalent a ,storav to 5.5 inches of runoff fro its drainage area of 44 square miles. Estimated is $1,729,000forconstruction cost of new Wo and $306,000 for lands anive ages,. a total of $2,035,000. Project plan for flood control and other purposes is a unit of comrn hli'e Basin which was authorized in Merrimack fled by 1938 Flood Control Act. by 1936 Flood Control Actan? Name "Edward MacDowell pa" was adoptedby section 206, Flood Control Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Act of 1950. Control Act of 9 3 applies. siOperations and results during fiscal year. Operations cop sistediofordinary operations and maintenance activities.t for Condition at end of fiscal year.- Project is complete excep of amconstruction of additional recreation dam, -andappurtenantworks was facilities. Constructiof initiated in March 1948 d completed in March 1950. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year 2............... 1964 1965 1966 JuneAo0,66 New work: Cost ropriated ........ Maintenance: .... Appropriated.****.... . 231 ... ... ... ... ... ... .. .. .. ,...... .. . .. ... .... .. .. . $51753 ... ... ... .. ....... .. $2,of6 :014," Cost.. 25,5 $27,149 $25,187 27,605 30 45,890 25,641 27,787 57. C. FRANKLIN FALLS RESERVOIR, N.H. Location. DaR is on Pemigewasset River, N.H., main tri tli Merrimack Riveroo N.Hof , nd about 2/2 miles upstream of F er, N.H.) (See Geological Survey maps for Penacook and Holder Existing project. Dam is rolled-earth type rock shell. It has a top length of with a dul ped feet, and 140 feet above riverbed. 1,740 feet, a top width ol' abutment and is a low, concrete Spillway is on rock 146 feet. Spillway approach and discharge weir with a crest length oirt channels are in ebt. and rock cut and are 1,785 and let works are on right bank 900 feet long, respectively0. e channel 840 feet long, and twoof22-foot river and consist of an horseshoe-shaped cogls each 542 feet long and each controlled by four broorne 0t operated through a control tower from a gatehouse above.tl lentworks also have a stilling basin and an outlet channel tl purplengths of 20an50afeet Reservoir is operated for flood co0W lent to and has as orage capacity mlent to 2.9 inchesof of 154,000 acre-feet, etIe runoff from its drainage mie.Estimated cost of project area of 1,000os is $63500frcntrucop includs and $1,760,000f ,7a for lands . oandproject is $6,305,000 for constro inclus damages, a total of $8,065,000.cilities an esimated $55,000 as local share of recreation f I?+vL %a"114 FLOOD,0NTP.0T,__._NVW T 24.'1V LV N(:TA 171V..rflT A M NT) T)TVTSTfN Ll .'JT7TIT T1V07 17 to be con . e L flood constructed. Project is a unit of comprehensive plan for as auttrol and other purposes in Merrimack River basin which loo uthorized by 1936 Flood Control Act and modified by 1938 ocdlontrol Act. liesa cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- ecreatLocal interests also required to bear 50 percent of future proje on al development in accordance with 1965 Federal Water ~eR -ecreation Act. of defatons and results during fiscal year. New work consisted coudefclency judgement resulting from July award on real estate nary nation case. Maintenance operations consisted of ordi- lan peration and maintenance activity. In addition, master Conorreservoir development was completed. const iton at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for aDutcrton of recreational facilities. Construction of dam and ln Oct nant works was initiated in November 1939 and completed Oer 1943. Cost and financial statement F al1er Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Nlew mock 4aj r riated . ...... ....... $21,000 -$5,000 $8,284 $7,950,487 13,666 1,899 8,720 7,950,487 $56,198 111,097 $68,386 41,003 43,610 52,248 53,553 815,811 57905 65,629 52,049 814,011 57. D. HOPKINTON-EVERETT RESERVOIR, N.H. tion. Hopkinton Dam is on Contoocook River, N.H., 17.3 ibove its junction with Merrimack River and about one- ile upstream from village of West Hopkinton. Everett "on Piscataquog River, N.H., 16 miles above its junction rerrimack River and about 1.3 miles southeast of village of eare. Two interconnecting canals were provided to enable reservoir areas to function as one. (See Geological Sur- Ps for HIillsboro, N.H., and Concord, N.H.) tan project. Included in overall project are 2 dams and s, 4 dikes and 2 interconnecting canals. The 790-foot tOpkinton Dam on Contoocook River is rolled-earth con- Tn With a maximum height of 76 feet. Outlet works are ed in dam. A spillway is in a saddle 1.8 miles east of West tton. Two dikes with a total length of 9,600 feet and a ut height of 77 feet are included in this portion of project ereservoir saddles. Everett Dam on Piscataquog River feet long of rolled-earth construction with a maximum of 115 feet and a concrete spillway adjacent to dam. Out-. ks are included in construction. Dikes for closing reser- addles, totaling 6,400 feet long and with a maximum of 50 feet, are a part of this project. Reservoir formed ns has a capacity of 70,800 acre-feet in Contoocook River anld 86,500 acre-feet in Piscataquog River Basin, a total of 0acre-feet equivalent to 6 inches of runoff from a gross 108 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 drainagearea of 490 square miles. totaling 17,000 feet long and varyingTwo interconnecting canal to 160 feet, have been constructed and in arebottom widths fronm 120 of sufficient cause storage areas to function as a single unit of a capacity to system of reservoirs for control coordinted of floods in Merrimack River Basin., Cost estimate for new work tion and $8,700,000 for lands is $12,525,000 for constrtlc of roads, railroads, cemeteries, and damages, including relocation Existing project was authorized and utilities, a total of $21,225,000 by 1938 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 689, 75th Cong., 3d Local cooperation. Section 2,sess.). Flood Control Act of 1938 applies. , Operations and results during pleted~~~ pleted ''remedial /~~ fscal ye-ar reedalsecal. measures,by contract, year. New v,. New wol- work:".- in Co" at canal No. 2; provd o. water, supply, by contract, for recreation laneous land acquisit on. Maintenance: facilities; anId miscel Normal operation a maintenance activities. Condition at end of fiscal year Project correction of minor deficiencies. Construction is complete except for appurtenant works was initiated in November 1959 of two dams atd and completed in December 1962. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year........... 19621963 1964 1965 1966 Ju alt .T0 1963 1064 1965 1966# New work: 21 Cost .................. A gpporaed ,391 Total to . 120 $2 $5,160,000 2 167 193 565 000 18 $:2880 $95,786 $51 000 $21,22396 518,899 288,269 63, 21,21$5,0W00 Appropriated4..........4, 927 29 300 30 ., . . . .5 55,336 59,769 ,1,203 ,ost. , 51,645 55,382 59,731 58. MYSTIC, Location. In towns of Groton andCONN. Stonington, Conn., 0lt miles southwest of Boston, Mass., -aboUt Conn., (See Geological Survey and 60 miles east of BridgeP Existing project. Hurricanemap for Mystic, Conn.) a 3,200-foot main barrier with protection project would cons iS tO a 75-foot across Mystic Harbor, a 2 ,000-footnavigation boat opending opening barrier with a siael dikes opening totalt at26MasoneIsland Causeway tion with arlinorg and supplemental ea:o 2,650 feet. Barriers would tiApproved armor stonimate facing on ocean side be earthfill conste ewith estimate (1966nd)is $3,290,000 and riprap onbbaY nd $370000 fApproved • $3pro70et for constructio n w000 lands, " t U'lOl for authotal , "( of $3M,660,00 for new work. EA t,11"- project was authorized b. y ,1962 Flood Control Act (H. Exst 87th Cong., 2d sess.).dand Doc.4 Local cooperation. Local interests rights-of-way for construction must: (a) Provide lands er" and future maintenance; form necessary alterations (b) P f construction cost with ns,and and relocatiore rlctos; . maintenance; (c)bearr 3 30 pereof ( construction costwiates ,redit allowed for (a) 0 percehold theUnited States free from damages; and (b); (d) p erate all works except- navigation and (e) maintain and OlP ainterests are $70,000, aids. Estimated costs to for lands and a $728,000 cash contributloc, FLOOD CONTROL-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 109 adverationsand results during fiscal year. New work: Initiated Con engineering and design.1 sign .oni at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering and de- lleti 10 percent complete. Remaining work consists of com- or cadvance engineering and design and awarding a contract 'struction of the project. Cost and financial statement ear. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork ated ............ ... .. ...................... $60,000 $60,000 .. ............ ............... ......... ............ 19,395 19,395 59. NARRAGANSETT PIER, RHODE ISLAND of Pr 'on. In town of Narragansett, R.I., about 30 miles south 1 dence and 5 miles north of Point Judith, R.I. (See Geo- oial Survey map for Narragansett pier, R.I.) r n project. Multiple-purpose plan combines features for .ojeneprotection, beach erosion control, and navigation. ba c consists of raising and widening about 3,000 feet of ad.41with sandfill to an elevation 14 feet above mean sea level, sde ttaling 3,500 feet of precast concrete pile wall on the land a1 0the beach berm to elevation 16.5 feet above mean sea level u00 feet at 17.5 feet above mean sea level. Four rock groins o4d exos etard sand movement. A rock revetment would protect ould h eadland near the "Towers" and an earthfill land dike mr a]revent flooding of protected area from the rear. A sand i ernil2 and rock lance jetty, together with shore protection and sand measures would be provided to retard beach erosion. aretio in Narrow River as a source of fill, together with 9channel Se and construction of a mooring basin would com- $2 avigation aspects of project. Latest approved estimate is $249 ,000 for construction and $160,000 for lands, a total of 0o ,000 for new work. Estimate includes local costs of $160,- Was r lands and a $662,000 cash contribution. Existing project caouthorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 411, 87th If" 1st sess.). c'l cooperation. Local interests must: (a) Provide lands riaghts-of-way for construction and future maintenance; (b) e0enecessary alterations and relocations; (c) bear 33 percent of the lUCtion cost with credit allowed for (a) and (b); (d) hold ollited States free from damages; (e) maintain and operate erks, except navigation channel, mooring basin, jetty, sand thrr and aids to navigation; (f) assure public ownership of ater Upon which Federal participation was based; (g) control oLPollution to safeguard bathers; (h) prevent encroachment iy0 .e Canonchet and Little Neck Pond; (i) provide necessary 9 facilities, utilities and public landing; and (j) construct elltaintain any bulkheads required for construction and main- e. Estimated costs to local interests, exclusive of self- lting costs, are $160,000 for lands and a $662,000 cash 110 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 contribution, a total cost of $822,000. Formal assurances that these conditions would be met were requested At a special Financial Town Meeting held on November 12,1965, October 20, 195, the townspeople overwhelmict.ngly voted against financial participatof in the project. Operations and results during fiscal tinued advance engineering and design. year. New work: Co by voters of town of Narraganset, Due to lack of approval project was classified as active" on November 3, 1965. project was classified as Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning is about complete. Project is inactive. Date for expiration of 72 percent authoriza tion is November 12, 1970. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 0,1966 New work -- _1966 A at coppropriated . ... ..... ........... .". ...........$ 0 0 $50,000 , 0o $60,000 FO,000 t a 5.....81572,217 37,558 60. NEW BEDFORD, FAIRHAVEN, AND ACUSHNET, MASS. Location. Main harbor barrier Fadikes and wallsarbor in vicinity of is across New Bedford ad Palmer Island. Supplemlentad dikesandFairhavre provided in Clark Cove area forand NoFairhaven. (See Geological Survey maps offor New BedfO- Newec, forMass., and Coast anew Bedford South, Marion, and MaExisting proectand Geodetic Survey Sconticut Neck and toExisting project. A , 4 ,500-foot Charts 249, 252, and 1210. wand toees anclude earthfill dike, with rock fa a top width of 20 feet. A gated wide, is included in section of barrier opening, 150 feet Fairhaven mainland to accommodate navigation. between Palmer Island and gation opening in barrier accomplished Closure of naV crete abutments and sill founded on by sector gates with con of 90 feet, a central angle of rock. Each gate has a radit's 60 degrees, feet. Gates will be opened and closed and a total height Of d pinion drive. Controls will be arranged by means of a rack aqn onrated singly or simultmen so that gates can be oP aneously from either of two control houses onsetion of barrier bet. Two gated conduits will be constructed il section of barriero bestin tween New Bedford shore and Palmer wide by 9 feet two separate conduits side by side, each Island, ofhigh 6 feet wide by 9 feet high. These emptyrock conduits will permit emerge- facing ofPoowill rn above barrier. A dike extension of earthfill rock facing will run south for Nhit dike of earthfrier. 3 ,600 feet from western end Closure to high ground will be effected by 1,000 of liar dike of eClarethfill with rock f acing running feet. of Clark Cove 2area onsists of 5,800 feet westward. Protectio inkerunnin dikerunning 2o700 feet across of earthfill, rock-faced alto high groundeast head of Clark Cove, then south shore Of cove for about 2,400 earthfill with roundill be accomplished feet. At west end, closure similarthfi with100 by a dike constructed 0O rockkefacing, 600 feet long and similar dike 100 feet lo ng. :The 3 at east end will be cost ,100-foot long Fairhaven bdle proved constructed of new estimate for earthfill workwith rock facing. Latest aP is $17,785,000 for constructiOn' FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 111 d$475,000 for lands, right-of-way and relocations, a total of and260,000. This total includes local costs of $475,000 for lands 41o relocations and a $6,523,000 cash contribution. Existing 8roject was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 59, 5th Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute 30 percent tal irt cost including lands and rights-of-way; contribute capi- for value of annual maintenance and operation ($1,520,000) ao1ain1 harbor barrier; hold the United States free from dam- b s; and maintain and operate improvement except main harbor thrrier after completion. Total estimated costs for all require- an 1sof local cooperation are $6,998,000. Assurances received l ocal interests are contributing as construction proceeds. tiPu rations (nd results during fiscal year. New work: Con- coiep construction of barrier and appurtenances. Contract was of ba ieted except for minor deficiencies. Completed demolition tr,sCrationIingsof and related gates. work. Contract was awarded for elec- Separate contracts for planting trees and , robil' and electrical modifications were awarded. Contractors st"ized in June 1966. Contractor earnings for barrier con- Were on were $1,430,600 during fiscal year, of which $705,000 cae regular funds and $725,600 contributed funds. Barrier be- eise fully operational in 1966 and maintenance was required for d~ gency repairs to the east gate and one dolphin resulting from Clges caused by two separate vessels. ap dition at end of fiscal year. Construction of barrier and Jan rtenances was initiated in October 1962 and completed in D~utlary 1966, except for minor deficiencies. Construction of Junee1964. 14g station was initiated in October 1962 and completed in Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS year 'eal 3Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork: d.......... Hae~i 20, 0 ..... .... 0 tpit. *.... "alatenanc'e' $375,000 338,654 $1,380,000 $4,779,000 $3,298,000 $808,000 $11,220,000 1,425,112 4,779,539 2,950,337 854,884 10,917,073 S ro triated.............................................. ............199,500 199,500 ............ ........ ............ ............ ............ 144,683 144,683 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS c " al Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1066 June30,19661 1w Workia CPropruated...................... $1,300,000$2,400,000 $2,530,000 $320,000 $6,550,000 ......... ............ 1,300,0002,397,3181,980,209 839,489 6,517,016 s for construction only. Excludes $116,260 expended to date for land condemnations. 61. NEW LONDON, CONN. Soocation. In the city of New London, Conn., about 45 miles 1 east de4ce, of Hartford, Conn., and 50 miles southwest of Provi- R.I. (See Geological Survey map for New London, Conn.) isting project. Hurricane protection project consists prin- 112 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 cipally of two barriers. Bentleys Creek barrier will be 2,900 feet long with a 20-foot stop-gated navigation opening. A pumPi station will be provided to discharge sewage effluent during hurl cane tides and Bentleys Creek area will be utilized as ponding aro for interior drainage when navigation gate is closed. Top , ' barrier will be at 22.0 feet mean sea level. Shaw Cove barrier will be 1,900 feet long with a 45-foot stop-gated navigation ope ing to accommodate existing channel. A storm water Pum1Pij station will be located behind the barrier to discharge interi. drainage. Top of barrier will be at plus 18.0 feet mean sea 1eve Both barriers will be rock-faced earthfilled structures and closull of gated openings will be effected by overhead cranes A sna earthfilled dike 140 feet long will be provided to close a lowlY1 area near Smith Street. One 50-foot street gate, a 3 0foot ra , road gate and 168 feet of reinforced concrete wall complete tie protection plan. Latest approved estimate is $5,640,000 for cO struction and $560,000 for lands and damages, a total of $6,200 000 for new work. Total includes local costs of $560,000 fo lands and a $1,300,000 cash contribution. Existing project we authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 478, 87th Col" 2d sess.)., ~..cooperation. Local ,.. ~ ~ Local caa int erests must: interests (a) Povd ladre" (a) Provide and rights-of-way for construction; (b) make alterations andit locations; (c) bear 30 percent of construction cost with cre allowed for (a) and (b); (d) hold the United States free fro damages; and (e) maintain and operate all works. Estimi ad costs to local interests are $560,000 for lands and relocations a cash contribution of $1,300,000, a total of $1,860,000. AsV ances will be requested during final design.Ad Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: vance engineering and design continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering and de sign is 75 percent complete. Remaining work consists of co0 pleting design and awarding a multicomponent continuing co tract for project construction. Cost and financial statement Totsto Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 196 1966 June 6 New work:3 , Appropriated ................... ........... Cost ............ . ... ............ I..$40,000 ............. .6,730 $100,000 $170,000 96,980 ,...o. 137,399 1. . 62. PAWCATUCK, CONN. Location. At Pawcatuck in town of Stonington, New Londo County, Conn., on west bank of Pawcatuck River which is aco10 mon boundary line for States of Rhode Island and Connectict'4 It is about 15 miles east of New London, Conn., and miles west of N ewport, R.I., (See Geological aboutfo Survey map Watch Hill, R.I.) Existing project. Consists of 1,915 linear feet 940 linear feet of concrete wall, two 44- by 8-foot of earthfill dive) vehicular ge FLOOD CONTROL----NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 113 With .P"umnping station. Dike is rock faced on top and river slope, hijga gravel blanket on landward slope. Protection begins at origh ound south of Cottrell plant, extends along waterfront to bahanoundary of Bostitch plant and then ties into railroad em- ele ent West of Mechanic Street. Dike portion has a top an ation of 17 feet above mean sea level, a top width of 12 feet, tated de slopes of 1 on 2 both sides, except 1 on 1.5 where necessi- ofrotby encroachment limitations. Wall forming northern end level ctive works has a top elevation of 17 feet above mean sea linute APpurtenant structures consist of a 24,000 gallons per VehicIl Pumping station on grounds of Cottrell p!ant and two ass ar gates crossing Mechanic Street, one at railroad under- orthSsouth of Cottrell plant and the other in protective alignment DrojectoBostitch plant. Total cost of new work for completed dareag is$858,400 for construction and $62,000 for lands and elu,.rights-of-way and relocations, a total of $920,400. Total $214 1s local costs of $62,000 for lands and relocations and a 960'] cash contribution. Existing project was authorized by Local od Control Act (H. Doc. 212, 86th Cong., 1st sess.).. $276 ,1 00 cooperation. Fully complied with. Final costs totalled roieations and results during fiscal year. New work: Audit of fialized .costs,including local credits, was completed and all costs itrc at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Con- 19630co Was initiated in June 1962 and completed in September Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS eal r 1962 1963 164 1965Total to 1962 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 r d ........... $623,000 -$7,000 -$3,000 -$3,476 $644,311 ... 71,418 $521054 17,345 168 -348 644,311 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS N ew ....... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jun 1966 eWork June..0,.1966 ed o riat .......... $218,500 .. -$4,394 $214,106 .. 35,364 $73679i i .i$3,852. ' $1,243 - 23 214,106 c63. POINT JUDITH, R.I. Scation. In towns of South Kingstown and Narragansett, (e Ithode Island Coast about 40 miles south of Providence. t elogical Survey maps for Narragansett pier and Kings- iting project. Multiple-purpose plan combines features for ,cane protection, beach erosion control, and navigation. Hur- ahefeature, extending 3.5 miles along the shore, incorporates earth erosion phase and consists of constructing 15,150 feet of Srock and beach-filled dikes in varying cross-sectional com- 114 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 binations; a 2,000-foot breachway control structure consistinga 1,650 feet of rock dike, two 100-foot concrete abutments 150-foot ungated navigation opening; a and( 2,200 feet of precast concrete pile bulkhead; 650-foot rock revetment two groins; and r3i' ing and widening 8,400 feet of existing tion of an additional six groins State beach. Constrl demonstration of need. Top elevationwill be deferred pending positivo elevation 14 to 22 feet mean sea of structures ranges fro level. consists of straightening and deepening Navigation aspect of P 1 from 15 to 20 feet abOlt 5,700 feet of entrance channel (150 feet 20,000 feet of channel (100 feet wide); deepening abOU wide) to Wakefield from 6 to Lfeet; providing a new 10-foot channel about 2,200 feet Little Comfort and a new 8-foot channel long t Harbor; providing new 8-foot anchorages 2,200 feet long into SlD Snug Harbor with areas of 8 and 5 acres at Little Comfort ad respectively; and enlarg ing to 16 acres and deepening to 10 feet the existing Harbor anchorage and to 13 acres and 11 acre 11er Wakefield anchorage. Latest approved 8 feet the existing 7 ac construction and $985,000 for estimate is $6,115,000 fo lands and damages, a total 0 $7,100,000 for new work. Total includes costsr lands and a $1,215,000 cash contribution. local costs of $985, 0 costs to local interests totaling $310,000 Self-liquidatl landings, and spoil disposal areas for beach facilities, publ Existing project was authorized are not included in project cos by 1962 Flood Control Act Doc. 521, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests and rights-of-way for construction must: (a) Provide land and future maintenance; () make necessary alterations and relocations; of construction cost with credit (c) bear 31 perce t hold the United States free from allowed damages; for (a) and (b) ; ( erate all works except navigation channels, (e) maintain and o anchorage areas an aids to navigation; (f) assure public which Federal participation was ownership of shore UPD tion to safeguard bathers; (h) based; (g) control water pol" provide and maintain moril facilities and utilities, including public landings at Snug H1arbO and Wakefield open to all; (i) construct headstirequired for construction and and maintain any bu. facilities at East Matunuck State maintenance; (j) provid development; and (k) annually inform Beach to support recreationl provement will not provide any substantial the public that the iW surges higher than elevatio n of September 1938 protection from oce, hurricane. Est mated costs to local interests, exclusive of are $985,000 for lands and a $1,215,000 self-liquidating costs of $2,200,000. Assurances will be cash contribution, a tot Operations and results during requested during final design' fiscal year. New work: Con tinued advance engineering and design. SCondition at end of fiscal year. sign is 55 percent complete. Remaining Advance engineering and de" work pleting r design and awarding a multicomponent consists of co# continuing con" tract for project construction. FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 115 Cost and financial statement 64. SAINT JOHN RIVER BASIN, MAINE the I°prehensive plan for water resources development within Sobasin is comprised of a4ol Reservoirs on thethe multiple-purpose Dickey and Lincoln upper St. John River. Projects were anUorized by Flood Control Act of 1965 substantially in accord- ce With plans included in report of Department of Interior and j psof Engineers dated August 1964 which is supplement to Y 1963 report of International Passamaquoddy Tidal Power mj eet and Upper St. John River Hydroelectric Power Develop- Reservoirs Estimated Federal cost Miles Reservoir Nearest above Height Type capacity city mouth of (feet) (acre-feet) Lands St.John Construction and Total River damages rickey Dickey.. 300.0 340.0 Ea:thfill.. 8,080,0001 .d:. 28.0 8 .. do... 52,500J 64. A. DICKEY-LINCOLN SCHOOL RESERVOIRS -4ocation. On Upper St. John River near town of Dickey, fle, about 340 miles north of Boston, Mass. (See Geological gvey map for Allagash, Maine.) be67 iSting project. Plan consists of Dickey and Lincoln School k servoirs functioning as a single coordinated unit. Dickey Dam, 'asSt. John River immediately above its confluence with the Alla- lol River, would be rolled earthfill structure about 9,200 feet et With maximum height of 340 feet. Five earthfilled perim- re dikes acting in conjunction with the dam would impound a. 2)9ervoir with total capacity of 8,080,000 acre-feet of which co 0,000 acre-feet would be actively utilized for power and flood 88600 l purposes. Reservoir area. at maximum operating level is p,.0: acres and its upper reaches extend into the Canadian daVince of Quebec. Power facilities would be provided in main 960 consisting of 8 units at 95,000 kilowatts each for total of 0, 000 kilowatts. Two low level outlet tunnels each 24 feet in aeter would be provided in the dam for stream diversion d,,r- OTconstruction. An ungated concrete chute spillway with 500 flowtcrest length would be in the right abutment to discharge flood- s. Drainage area controlled is 2,725 square miles. bLincoln Dam, 11 miles downstream from Dickey Dam, would heja rolled earthfill structure about 1,290 feet long with maximum tlght of 87 feet. Dam would be operated to impound and reg- 4e discharges from Dickey Dam to maximize benefits at down- 116 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 stream hydroplants. Power facilities would include a poweverhoutts on the right abutment containing two units at 17,000 kloxgae each for total of 34,000 kilowatts. Spillway structure woutld be in left abutment and consist of a concrete chute spillway 160 to long topped by four 30- by 40-foot taintor gates. In additioflt drainage area controlled by Dickey Dam the Lincoln School P would control an additional 1,360 square miles. Installed capacity totals 794,000 kilowatts for the Dickey-Lincoln School devlAP ment. Plan was authorized by the 1965 Flood Control Act.A proved estimate (1966) for new work is $8,600,000 forI including relocations and $210,100,000 for construction, a total $218,700,000. Local cooperation. None required. ce Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Adva engineering and design was initiated and continued. Contpect were awarded and completed for aerial photography of proe area and preliminary subsurface foundation explorations.. f arate contracts were awarded for photogrammetric maPP let' the project area, and to obtain cross sections of the St. John Nt2eS between the Lincoln School site and Grand Falls Canada. r. representatives participated in conferences with Canadian Gove ment representatives in the drafting of proposed treaty be the respective nations governing the sharing of benefits from anth operation of the project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction plannin about 10 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Tot1 t1096 Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 june 30, New work: Appropriated........... ............. ............ ............ $780,000 420' Cost........... ............ ...................... 420,251 65. STAMFORD, CONN. Location. In Fairfield County on north shore of Long Sound, about 30 miles east of New York City and 20 miles so west of Bridgeport, Conn. (See Geological Survey map for Sta ford, Conn.) Existing project. This hurricane protection project will co sist principally of three structures: East Branch barrier toes consist of 2,850 feet of earthfilled dike, with rock faces an e It will extend across East Branch at a point about 1,000 feet aill its mouth-about 900 feet north of Ware Island. Barrier ldt have a top elevation of 17 feet above mean sea level, a top W.ief of 20 feet, and a gated opening, 90 feet wide where the barrte crosses existing navigation channel. A 45,000 gallons per mletie pumping station will be in navigation gate structure to pre excessive ponding during flood stages. West Branch protete on east bank of West Branch, will consist of 1,340 feet of concrtl wall, 160 feet of sheet pile bulkhead wall, and 2,950 feet of e"rO filled dike. Dike will be constructed with rock facing on top FLOOD CONTROL--NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 117 uvslope and either rock or seeded topsoil on landward slope. elev t ormring northern or upper half of protection have a top AppI on 17 feet above mean sea level, and a top width of 10 feet. Dumptenant structures will include a 229,500 gallons per minute wate 'g station to handle storm runoff and discharge of cooling willer dcuring periods of gate closure. Westcott Cove protection osist of 4,400 feet of earthfilled dike with rock facing on top cand two PeaWard slopes and seeded topsoil on landward slopes and ilute mng stations with total capacity of 85,500 gallons per eO:stru Latest approved estimate for new work is $9,755,000 for ti0s action, and $1,745,000 for lands and damages and reloca- 000 fa total of $11,500,000. Total includes local costs of $1,705,- $2,625r lan(ds and relocations and a cash contribution of Co 000. Existing project was authorized by 1960 Flood rca Act (H. Doc. 210, 86th Cong., 1st sess.). ithen cooperation. Local interests will provide lands, ease- drain and rights-of-way; make modifications to existing storm lrotage system which may be required to obtain full benefits of setecti on plan, all necessary modifications to existing sanitary shaew facilities required to prevent entry of tidal-waters, and all gaes alterations and additions to or relocations of any build- 0 and utilities made necessary by construction of project; bear iag ecent of total first cost, estimated at $3,450,000 and consist- f cost of items listed above plus a cash contribution esti- fated ailt at $1,745,000; contribute in cash, in lieu of cost of annual whi enance and operation of tidal portion of East Branch barrier amotlults to be operated and maintained by the United States, an aol presently estimated at $880,000; maintain and operate aheks after completion with exception of tidal portion of East rae barrier and aids to navigation; and hold the United States areb r oM damages. Assurances received and cash contributions eit deposited as construction proceeds. S4erations and results during fiscal year. New work: ri"olplonent contract for construction of project continued. Dal operations consisted of excavating bypass channel, con- fr 11g cofferdams at intake and discharge structures of Hart- qo ectric Light Co. and navigation gate east, constructing at it rainage and utility relocations, pouring tremie concrete tfo a e structure, placing concrete at Dyke Lane pumping sta- t0 2 initiating embankment operations. Contract advanced 4i ercent completion. Contractor earnings totaled $2,827,700 $969 fiscal year, of which $1,858,600 were regular funds and C 100 contributed funds. ka dition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project started 65 and is 41 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS ................ 1962 1Total 1962 1903 1964 1965 1966 June30,to 118 REPORT OF TIHE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 9 66- Totalo Fiscal year............. .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: Contributed........... ....... ............ $280,000 $2150,000 $1,23000030, Cost.................................... 129,247 31,159 1,141,414 x Cash for construction only. Excludes $138,610 expended to date for land condemnnation** 66. STRATFORD, CONN. Location. In town of Stratford, Fairfield County, Conn north shore of Long Island Sound about 50 miles northeast of eO York City and 13 miles southwest of New Haven. (See Geologic Survey maps for Bridgeport and Milford, Conn.) Existing project. Hurricane protection project providesf0 about 3 miles of earthfilled levees around the Great Meadows ar of town and a system of earthfilled levees and concrete floodW ap about 21/2 miles long along the west bank of the Housatonic Rive' and the shoreline of Long Island Sound north of Stratford Pol Appurtenant structures would include a conduit structure il" barrier crossing Lewis Gut to permit continued flow of the " through the barrier during normal periods, ramps to bring ro way elevations up to desired protection grade at dike crossings o existing roadways and four pumping stations to discharge seWa effluent and interior drainage during flood periods. Approe cost estimate (1966) for new work is $320,000 for lands includil, relocations and $6,980,000 for construction, a total of $7,300,000 Total includes local costs of $210,000 for lands, $110,000 for rel0' cations and a cash contribution of $1,870,000. Project was thorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 292, 88th Cong., sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, ea ments and rights-of-way for construction and operation of proJ' ect; make all changes, alterations and relocations of buildiTI' highways and utilities, and modifications to sewerage and drais19e facilities made necessary by construction of the project; bear 30 percent of total first cost of project with credit allowed for valute of lands and relocations; hold United States free from damI e due to construction works; maintain and operate all works ,fte completion and prevent any encroachment on ponding areas whic would decrease the effectiveness of the improvements, and, if 1i~' paired, provide substitute storage capacity or equivalentpumn9 capacity. Total estimated cost to local interests is $2,19000' Formal assurances will be requested during final design. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project has not been started. 67. THAMES RIVER BASIN, CONN., R.I., AND MASS. Works covered by this plan are a series of dams and reservoir on tributaries of Thames River in Massachusetts and Connectic tj within a radius of 45 miles from Norwich, Conn. and a chaInel enlargement on Shetucket River where it discharges into Than e$ River at Norwich. Flood Control Act of August 18, 1941, FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 119 nl for a system of reservoirs and channel improvements River Basin in accordance with House Document 885, ress, 3d session, and authorized $6 million for initia- artial accomplishment of project. Flood Control Act )er 22, 1944, authorized completion of approved plan. trol Act of July 14, 1960, authorized project for West Reservoir, substantially as recommended in Senate 41, 86th Congress, 2d session. 1g individual projects comprise approved plan: Reservoirs Name Estimated Federal cost Nearest city Miles Reservoir above height Typeo capacity mouth of (feet) (acre-feet) Con- Lands Thames struction and Total River damagesl B lle Webster, 74.5 55 Earthfill. tt,10 Mass. ... 13,000 $1,281,000 $3,144,000 $4,425,000 elfiel o... ... 74.4 66 ..... do.. .. 12,700 2,229,000 841,000 3,070,000 S uthidge, 82.8 55 ..... do... 30,000 1,300,0005,720,0007,020,000 ° A on oth put.do...... 75.2 80 ..... do... .. 11,000 2,230,0003,400,0005,630,000 try Wi~lirtanti'. 59.3 70 ... . .... do.. Roel d onantic, 41.6 94 ..... do... .. 25,600 4,795,0001,750,0006,545,000 1°o Conn. .. 36,900 4,434,0005,066,000 10,100,000 0vera ...do ...... 40.0 70 ..... do... .. 52,000 4,110,0002,340,0006,450,000 Maohester, 47.0 80 ..... do... .. 16,800 3,777,0001,123,0004,900,000 a , lu hi.. h -..... o-.- .... iretaise railroad and utility relocations. t cost ate revised i 1954. report. edlvidual Local protection projects 67. A. B3UFFUMVILLE RESERVOIR, MASS. Dam is on Little River, 1.3 miles above its junction Oh River and 8 miles northeast of Southbridge, Mass. extendsupstream about 1.7 miles northerly and 1.9 ~rly- (See Geological Survey maps-Webster, Mass. and Leicester, Mass.) Project. Dam is rolled-earth type with rockfill slope It has a top length of 3,255 feet, a top width of 20 -aximum height of 66 feet above streambed. A com- ay and outlet founded on firm bedrock is in the right, t mrent. Spillway is concrete overflow type, having 220feet and a peak discharge capacity of 29,800 Pe second. Outlet consists of three 3- by 41/-foot rovided with sluice gates. Gates are electrically oper- 120 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ated from control house on right abutment. An earth dike 610 feet long is at south end of reservoir, 23/, miles from spillwaY' Reservoir capacity totals 12,700 acre-feet (11,300 acre-feet for flood control purposes and 1,400 acre-feet permanent storage)I equivalent to 9 inches of runoff from its drainage area of 26 square miles. Estimated cost of project is $2,229,000 for col, struction and $841,000 for lands and damages including highwAY relocations, a total of $3,070,000. Project is a unit of compre- hensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Thames River Basin which was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1941 Doc. 885, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Co:no pleted construction of parking area to supplement existing recre3 tion facilities. Maintenance: ordinary operation and maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for construction of additional recreation facilities. Constructio"d dam and appurtenant works was initiated in September 1956 a completed in June 1958. Cost and financial statement otal to TI Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 196 New work: $2,99603 Appropriated.......... $6,750 $28,350 $16,000 .. 2998,603 Coi .................. 6,059 15,77 24,354 $6,929 , 882s Maintenance: 2,8 805 3,5 969 208212,0 Appropriated.......... 28,015 . 27,486 22,550 28,353 30,685 31,058 29,674 29,609 27,658 27,7514 21 53 Cost......... Cot.... ...... 67. B. EAST BRIMFIELD RESERVOIR, MASS. Location. Dam is on Quinebaug River, 64.5 miles above its confluence with Shetucket River and 1 mile southwest of village o Fiskdale, Mass. (See Geological Survey maps-Whales, 1Mass and Conn., Southbridge, Mass. and Conn., East Brookfield, V Ss., and Warren, Mass.) Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam 520 feet long, 55 feet above streambed. Dam provides a flood control storage capac't of 28,800 acre-feet and an operational storage capacity inches of 1,20of acre-feet, a total of 30,000 acre-feet, equivalent to 8.3 runoff from its controlled drainage area of 67.5 square miles. Chute-type spillway with a crest length of 75 feet is in the right7ls or south abutment. Outlet works consist of intake, with stop 10 facilities; gate structure with two 6-foot 3-inch by 11-foot gates and controls; a 10-foot 6-inch horseshoe-shaped conduit, abo"t 230 feet long; a stilling basin and service bridge. Reservoi is operated as a unit of a coordinated system of reservoirs for control of floods in Thames River Basin. Latest cost estimate for new work is $1,300,000 for construction and $5,720,000 fo lands and damages including highway relocations, a total o $7,020,000. Existing project was authorized by 1941 Flood Con" trol Act (H. Doc. 885, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 121 apple cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 fO~perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Made IVain yent for recreational facilities constructed last fiscal year. Contance: Ordinary operation and maintenance activities. constd tion at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for da truction of additional recreation facilities. Construction of cor a'nd appurtenant works was initiated in May 1958 and pleted in June 1960. Cost and financial statement ............ 19 1962 11 to Total 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 S or: Mitopriated " . $135,000 $18,000 $17,436 $31,700 $15,000 $6,890,078 204,874 85,986 16,554 34,652 1,157 6,871,484 Ctopriated. 21,072 25,000 27,458 22,582 33,020 159,056 20,888 25,125 27,270 22,935 32,961 158,980 67. C. HODGES VILLAGE RESERVOIR, MASS. n. Dam is on French River, 15 miles above its conflu- Quinebaug River, at Hodges Village in town of Oxford, 'out 5 miles north of Webster, Mass. (See Geological Webster, Mass., and Conn., Leicester, Mass., Worcester ass., and Oxford, Mass.) W project. A rolled-earthfill dam 2,140 feet long, 55 e streambed, with a concrete overflow section. Dam a flood control storage capacity of 12,800 acre-feet. area controlled is 31 square miles. Reservoir, at spill- elevation 501, extends about 3 miles upstream and lies 1 town of Oxford, Mass. Included in project are four es necessary for closing saddles in reservoir perimeter. dikes have a total length of 2,600 feet and maximum 35 feet. Reservoir is operated as a unit of a coordinated 1 reservoirs for flood control in Thames River Basin. st estimate for new work is $1,281,000 for construction 14,00 0 for lands and damages including highway, rail- utility relocation, a total of $4,425,000. Existing proj- uthorized by 1941 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 885, 76th Sess.) cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 1Ons and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: New Isisted principally of minor administrative expenses. nce consisted of ordinary operation and maintenance. on at end of fiscal year. Project is essentially com- u3struction of dam and appurtenant works, initiated in 58, was completed in December 1959. 122 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 Tiotal to 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated ........- 12,870 -$7,800 Cost........... $17,342 ... . .. $4,421 $4... ,813 41972 4,039 23,811 4 687 $90 4,420,912 Appropriated... ..... 21,327 Cost................. 23,603 26,590 24,000 21,201 23,425 26,950 23,867 25,956 151 152 25,966 151;004 67. D. MANSFIELD HOLLOW RESERVOIR, Location. Dam is at Mansfield Hollow, Conn.,CONN. on Natchaug River, 5.3 miles above its confluence with Willimantic is 4 miles northeast of city of Willimantic, Conn. River. It ical Survey maps for Spring Hill and (See Geolog- Existing project. Dam is rolled-earth Willimantic, Conn.) type with a dumped rock blanket on upstream face. It has a spillway, of 12,422 feet, a top width of 15 top length, including height of 70 feet. There are also five earthfeet, and a maximum and one earth dike south of dam having a respective dikes north of darn 190, 830, 464, 257, 766, length of height of 12, 55, 15, 11, 8,and 104 feet and a respective maximum and 12 feet. Spillway is in river chan- nel and is concrete, gravity type with a crest Outlet works are in spillway and consist length of 690 feet. controlled by a 5-foot 6-inch by 7-foot of five conduits, each operated from a gallery within spillway. slide gate hydraulically Reservoir is operated for flood control purposes and has a storage acre-feet which is equivalent to 6.1 capacity of 52,000 inches of runoff from its drainage area of 159 square miles. Estimated is $4,110,000 for construction and $2,340,000 cost for project ages, a total of $6,450,000. Project for lands and dam- plan for flood control and other purposes is a unit of comprehensive which was authorized by 1941 Flood in Thames River Basil Control Act (H. Doc. 885, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, applies, Operations and results during fiscal year, for recreational facilities. Contract was New work: Planning awarded for construc" tion of comfort station. No work was done and nated. At request of Connecticut contract termi State Department of Health, plans will be revised. Maintenance: maintenance activity; and planning was Ordinary operation and completed for resur- facing top of dam. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project for construction of additional is complete except recreation facilities. of dam, initiated in 1949, was completed in May 1952.ConstructiOfl Cost and financial statement Fiscal year..... ....... 1962 1963 6 964 1964 1965 1965 Total to 1966 I nne 30.1966 FLOOD CONTROL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 123 67. E. WEST THOMPSON RESERVOIR, CONN. SLocation. Dam is on Quinebaug River in town of Thompson, Conn. Site is in village of West Thompson, 2 miles upstream from city of Putnam, Conn. (See Geological Survey map, Put- nam, Conn.) 1xistingproject. Dam is a rolled-earthfill structure 2,550 feet ag with maximum height of 70 feet above streambed. A side Channel spillway with a 320-foot L-shaped concrete weir is in ight abutment. .A 600-foot long dike with a maximum height of t9 feet is northeast of dam., Reservoir overflows will discharge through a side channel spillway in the west (right) abutment. Da 1m impounds a reservoir 6.3 miles long with a surface area of 1,250 acres. Reservoir provides a flood control storage capacity of 25, (00 acre-feet, equivalent to 6.5 inches of runoff from its net drainage area of 74 square miles, below Westville and East Brim- eld Reservoirs. In addition, a 200 acre permanent pool with Storage capacity of 1,200 acre-feet is provided for recreational ctivity. Latest approved cost estimate for new work is $4,795,- 000 for construction and $1,750,000 for lands, damages and road elocations a total of $6,545,000. Existing project was author- ZeId by 1960 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 41, 86th Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 allies.. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: cew work consisted of completing multicomponent contract for Construction of dam, road relocations, and appurtenant structures, ecept for minor completion items. Contractor earnings were $t66,000 during fiscal year. Contract was awarded for demoli- tion of bridge. Maintenance work consisted of ordinary opera- til and maintenance activities. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of dam, road re- locations, and appurtenances was initiated in August 1963 and essentially completed in October 1965. Minor completion items o1 the dam and construction of recreation facilities remain to cOmIlete the project. _Cost and financial statement .......... Year 1962 103ta194 1l5 1966 June 30,166to ea ........... 192 1 3 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 k: wat ropriated.......... $150,000 $405,000 $2,135,000 $2,865,000 $900,000 $6,545,000 Mai .................. tne: tens 68,632 470,572 2,103,135 2,737,710 875,399 6,255,448 since: ropriated.... .............................................. 20,877 20,877 Coat 20,877 20,877 67. F. WESTVILLE RESERVOIR, MASS. cLocation. Dam is on Quinebaug River, 56.7 miles above its sofuence with Shetucket River, in towns of Sturbridge and uthbridge, Mass., and 1.3 miles west of center of Southbridge. (See Geological Survey maps-Southbridge, Mass. and R.I., and ast Brookfield, Mass.) existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam across main river 124 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 channel, with a maximum height of 78 feet above streambed. Concrete spillway section is on north abutment. Reservoir has flood control storage capacity of 11,000 acre-feet, equivalent to 6.5 inches of runoff from controlled net drainage area of 32 square miles. Reservoir is operated as a unit of coordinated system of reservoirs for flood control in Thames River Basin. Estimated cost of new work is $2,230,000 for construction, and $3,400,000 for lands and damages (including relocation of highways, utilities, cemeteries, and structures), a total of $5,630,000. Existing proY ect was authorized by 1941 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 885, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 193S applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fundS: New work consisted of finalizing road relocation agreements and minor land acquisition. Maintenance consisted of ordinary eration and maintenance activities. Repairs to road and guard oP, rail, by contract, were commenced in October and completed i November 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. All new work is complete cept construction of- recreational facilities. Construction ex" dam and appurtenant works was initiated in April 1960 and Of completed in August 1962. Cost and financial statement Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 Total tO 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 work: New Appropriated..........$1,225,000 $75,000 $67,577 $13,000 $35,000 $5 Maintenance: .2,087,533 670,931 113,008 47,732 33,574 5,579, Appropriated.......... 5,569 20,750 24,259 Cost................. . 26,120 40,435 111,011 5,569 20,698 23,996 26,432 40,383 11 68. WESTERLY, R.I. Location. In town of Westerly, Washington County, R.I. abolt 45 miles southwest of Providence. (See Geological Survey ,1 aP for Watch Hill, R.I.) Existing project. Multiple purpose project incorporating hurr" cane protection, beach protection, and related recreation features Project would consist of raising and widening over 3 miles of eV isting beach with sandfill, constructing a low backup dike or revetment of rock along backshore of beach, rock 0 gated structure to control water levels in W groinsa nd innapaug p ond Thirty-four groins are presently planned, of which 31 would be deferred pending demonstration of positive need. Approved estimate (1966) for new work is $210,000 for lands and $ coSt 000 for construction, a total of $5,700000 (includes local 90, costs0 $210,000 for lands, $230,000 for construction of shore facilities Winnapaug Pond, and a cash contribution of $1,475,000) t ect was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc.)85, PrOJI 89 h Cong., 2d sess.). Localrights-of-way, ments, cooperation. Local interests must provide all lands, eaSe and spoil-disposal, pondage, and borrO FLOOD CONTROIL---NEW ENGLAND DIVISION 125 es for construction of the project, and recreation facilities on drainapaug Pond; make alterations and relocate sewerage and tuaiage facilities, buildings, utilities, highways, and other struc- the toMlade necessary by the construction; bear 33.6 percent of ca~,total first cost, with credit allowed for value of lands and relo- tioll ns; hold the United States free from damages due to construc- copfPe the project; maintain and operate all the works after retary etion in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Sec- sh0r Of the Army; assure continued public ownership of public ate and public use of private shore upon which Federal partici- Dubl01n in beach erosion control is based, and its administration for rlic use during the economic life of the project; and provide and tiolalai suitable facilities at public beaches to support the recrea- S.al development of the beaches; assure continued public owner- -and use of recreation areas upon which Federal participation aecreation is based and provide and maintain suitable appurte- be lifefitsfacilities to the and their extent necessary administration for realization of evaluated for public use during economic ie Ofthe project; protect against encroachment that portion of wt e laschaug Pond included within the tro e r areas may be available for storage project in order that the of surface runoff; con- tro Water pollution to the extent necessary to safeguard the health for -e bathers; construct and maintain any bulkheads required areare~tention of dredged materials discharged to spoil-disposal thea from the initial construction; and at least annually inform viPUblic and those affected that the improvements will not pro- tio0 any substantial protection from ocean surges higher in eleva- 10 alhan that which occurred in September 1938. Total cost of iCaIl bcoperation is estimated at $1,915,000. Formal assurances W e requested during final design. Cerations and results during fiscal year. None. ondition at end of fiscal year. Project has not been started. SINSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS a accordance with provisions of Flood Control Act of 1936, as f"keded, local flood protection works constructed with Federal o are transferred to local interests to operate and maintain. ti insure comp)liance with regulations prescribed for their opera- rInd at maintenance regular inspections of the following proj- A..iWere made during fiscal year: Connecticut: October 1965 and Er ' l 1 9 66-Hartford, Norwalk, Torrington (East and West a ches) ; November 1965 and April 1966-Pawcatuck, Winsted, jNorwich; November 1965 and May 1966-East Hartford; a ermber 1965 and June 1966-East Branch, Hall Meadow Brook bhl ad River Reservoirs, and Waterbury-Watertown; Maine: to er 1965 and May 1966-Cherryfield; Massachusetts: Oc- 1 er 1965 and April 1966-Ware and West Warren; November and April 1966-Canton, Worcester; November 1965 and W 1 9 66-Chicopee and Chicopee Falls, Fitchburg, Holyoke, ow Springfield; November 1965 and June 1966-Haverhill, ll, Northampton, Springfield, Three Rivers. New Hampshire: 1t N er 1965 and May 1966-Farmington, Lincoln. November and April 1966-Keene; November 1965 and May 1966- 126 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Nashua. Rhode Island: November 1965 and June 1966-Woo i socket. Vermont: November 1965 and April 1966-Weston. Fiscal year cost was $16,000. Total cost to June 30, 1966, was $101,877. 70. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIONS :A coordinated system of flood control reservoirs was estab7 lished in each of the five major flood producing basins in NeW England Division. During periods of floodflows regulation o reservoirs is fully coordinated within each basin dependent upOn its location in the basin, its storage capacity and origin of flood. Due to record drought conditions that prevailed in many parts of New England, there was no significant regulation of flood control reservoirs during the fiscal year. Releases were made from co0' servation storage at the East Brimfield Reservoir in the Thames River Basin to augment low flows from July through October 1965. 71. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report for- Construction Operation ao maintenanc Andover Reservoir, Conn.1................ ...... Beards Brook Reservoir, N.H.1 2................................. Bennington Reservoir, N.H.1 2................................... 1949 ........ $78,000. 1949 205,000. • Brockway Reservoir, Vt.1....................................... 1946..1 Cambridgeport3.. Reservoir, .. ... Vt................ .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ .............. Canton, Mass. 3 ... Cherryfield, Maine 4..........................................1963 1964 5$167,357 ..... 203,000 Chicopee, Mass............................................... 1954 71,433,600 Clyde, R.I.8.............................................. ... 1948 8,800 Cocheco River, N.H.4...................................... 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 1963 183,100 East Hartford, Conn. 3 ....... ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . 1951 92,135,000 . ... Hartford, Conn.3 . ............................. . .......... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 1960 116,094,100 Holyoke, Mass. 1953 123,418,000 Honey Hill Reservoir, 3 . . . . . .N.H.1.......... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ................... . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . 1949 92,000 Lowell, Mass. 1945 490,600 Ludlow Reservoir, Vt.1........ ........................ Mountain Brook Reservoir, N.H.'1 13. ............................ 949 ... 57,000 Nashua, N.H.3........................................ 1950 14270,000 North Andover and 3Lawrence, . . . . . . . Mass.l . . .................... ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1949 20,000 .... Northampton, Mass. 3.......... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 1950 960,000 .. .... Norwich, Conn. 1960 1,209,600 . Pawtucket, R.I.1 ................. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . 199................. Pontiac diversion, Rhode Island 1948 24,200 Riverdale,Mass.3.............. .............................. 1952 151,138,000 South Coventry Reservoir, Conn........: ..................... 1951 96,000. South Tunbridge, Springdale, Mass.3..Vt....... . .. . . . . . . ........................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. SpindaeMas. 1952 15...... 700,000 .. 70,000 Springfield, Mass.............................. 1950 16932,000. Sugar HillReservoir, N. ...... ... .. : 1946 The Island Reservoir, Vt.10................... .............. Torrington, East Branch, Conn.33 4....8........................... 963 ..... 389,200 Torrington, West Branch, Conn. 4..... ........... 1963 228,300 Wareham-Marion, 3 Mass...... 1965 81,715. Ware, Mass. 4 ............ ............ . 1963 400,000 Waterbury-Watertown, Conn.3 4......................... 1963 263,300. West Brookfield Reservoir, Mass. 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1948 67,000 West Canaan Reservoir, N.H...1........................... 1948 92,000 Westport, Conn.1....................................... 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 1905 29,634 West Springfield, Mass. 3 1954 181 00 West Warren, Mass. 4 ..... .... ......... 1954 11334.200 Williamsville Reservoir 3. . . . . V . . ..b'.....**.......................... . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1949 146,500 Winsted, Conn. ... 194 246,500 .. . Woonsocket, R.I.3 ...... ................................. 1962 214040,000 Worcester diversion, Massachusetts3................................ 1962 224,939,500 . Footnotes continued next page GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-NEW ENGLAND ,DIVISION 127 ative. 0k-olEverett substituted for Beards Brook and Bennington. SUthize I by Chief of Engineers. elai ed $89,132 contributed funds. Final cost dependent upon settlement of outstanding es Dleted except for inactive portion. 8t)(cludes $385 contributed funds. Includes $295,000 Public Works Administration funds. Deridborization expired due to failure of local interest to furnish assurances within 5-year 10 ues $7,637 contributed funds. _X.I.,udrestudied. 1 lclues $ 835 ,0 00 Public Works Administration funds and $2,781,100 contributed funds. a A .udes $24,447 contributed funds. 1 a was constructed at site by private interests. 1iPles $327 contributed funds. cldes u6 $25,000 contributed funds. 17 u es $5,350 contributed funds. 18 ernate site to be selected. 4, des $245 000 public works funds. live. The Island, Townshend, and Ball Mountain Reservoirs were substituted. 1 tudes $411,000 contributed funds. 18(cludes $224,500 contributed funds. dCcules $79,300 contributed funds. 72. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Plood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Fiscal Study identification year cost ,av er Brook, Keene, N.H. ................................... $3,493 River Lancaster, N.H. ....... k awe ............................. 4,931 O Wk River, Colebrook, N.H .................................. 1,720 jard River, Uxbridge, Mass ............................... 10,667 W o sbury, Vt.. ....... ................................. 44,172 W i r,IVV t,. Hartford, Vt. .. .................................. ................................................... 5,763 2,263 blerqency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) tioPederal costs for fiscal year were $41,463 for advance prepara- 01of flood control and coastal emergencies. vs, 73. SURVEYS of scal year costs for surveys from regular funds were $690,226, 0N vhich $114,037 was for navigation surveys; $238,769 for flood e~a1e l surveys; $4,929 for beach erosion surveys; $267 for hurri- 1," Surveys; $14,746 for coordination surveys, including Passa- U Oddy review study; and $317,478 for comprehensive basin -veys. 74. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA 8 vision Engineer is the U.S. representative on Saint John and bet Croix River Engineering Committee. Hle is also U.S. mem- tio n Saint Croix River Board of Control. Annual inspec- Dr 8 are made of conditions on these two rivers and a continuing 0tran of compilation of basic hydrologic information is carried Q1elyDivision i touch engineer's representatives during past year kept with developments in the two basins and cooper- With their Canadian counterparts assisting in development ' ota sins resources. Total costs for fiscal year were $1,986. Pl COsts to June 30, 1966, were $10,635. 1.0od plain studies comprise compilation and dissemination, - responsible local request, of information on floods and po- 128 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tential flood damages, including identification of areas subject t inundation by floods of various magnitudes and frequencies, a"d general criteria fior guidance in use of flood plain areas;'an engineering advice to local interests for their use in planningt amehliorate flood hazard. Total costs for fiscal year were $57,521. Total costs to June 30, 1966, were $285,138. Completed flood plain studies • " .. Date costl~ Location Requesting agency completed Assabet River from Westborough to Concord, Water Resources Commission, Common- Mass. June 1966 3l,6 wealth of Massachusetts. Byram River and shore area, Greenwich, Conn. Water Reoouces Commission, State of Oct. 1964 Conant and Chicopee Brooks, vicinity Mon- Connecticut. 21,30 son, Mass. Water Resources Commission, Common. Apr. 1964 wealth of Massachusetts. 28,68 Farmington River, vicinity Farmington, Sims- Water Resources Commission, bury, and Avon, Conn.Connecticut. State of Mar. 1966 Hockanum River, vicinity of Vernon, Conn . 160 do... iJune16 . .. 16 g Millers River, vicinity of Athol and Orange, WateResouresous Commission, Common June 196 Mass cn wealth of Massachusetts. Quinnipiac River, vicinity'North Haven and Water Resources Commission, S o Wallingford, Conn. State of Mar. 1965 Connecticut. NEW YORK DISTRICT * This district comprises western Vermont, small portions of Western Massachusetts, Connecticut, and eastern and south- jerntral New York, including Long Island, and northeastern New )lsey, embraced in the drainage basins tributary to Lake Cham- Olain and St. Lawrence River system east thereof and to Atlantic ]2ean from New York-Connecticut State line to but not including al~alasquan Inlet, N.J. It exercises jurisdiction, however, over Ripmatters pertaining to improvement of Great Lakes to Hudson r Waterway. Under the direction of the Secretary of the a'iY, the district engineer, as Supervisor of New York Harbor, vat. exercises jurisdiction under the laws enacted for the preser- trion of the tidal waters of New York Harbor, its adjacent or utary water, and waters of Long Island Sound. MPROVEMENTS II Page I Page Navigation Navigation-Continued 1. Bay Ridge and Red Hook 33. Other authorized' naviga- . Channels, N.Y......... 2. Bronx 130 tion projects .......... 186 3. River, N.Y ...... 131 34. Navigation work under 4. Burlington Harbor, Vt... 133 special authorization ... 187 Uttermilk Channel, N.Y. 134 5. East River, N.Y. ........ Alteration of Bridges 6. 135 Last Rockaway Inlet, N.Y. 137 35. Staten Island Rapid 7. 8. ire Island Inlet, N.Y... 139 Transit Railway Co. Plushing Bay and Creek, Bridge across Arthur 9. 140 Kill, N.Y........... 187 10. en Cove Creek, N.Y.. 142 Beach Erosion Control 11ii.Glen Cove Harbor, N.Y... 144 Great Lakes to Hudson 36. Fire Island Inlet, Long 12. RiverWaterway, N.Y.. Island, N.Y........... 188 144 37. Perth Amboy, N.J....... 190 13, _arlem River, N.Y ..... 147 38. Other udson River Channel, authorized beach .Y. ................. erosion control project . 191 14, 148 15, Iudson River, N.Y ..... . 150 Flood Control L i .ake tt*7 . Montauk C. .... l . Harbor, .......... 39. Bennington, Hoosic River 16. 155 Basin, Vt. ........... 191 17., ittle Neck Bay, N.Y .... 156 40. East Rockaway Inlet to ong Island Intracoastal Rockaway Inlet & Ja- 18, Waterway, N.Y. ...... 158 maica Bay, N.Y ...... 192 19. Manaroneck Harbor, N.Y. 158 41. Elizabeth, N.J. ......... 194 20, MIattituck Harbor, N.Y... 161 42. Fire Island Inlet to Mon- 21. ilton Harbor, N.Y...... 162 tauk Point, N.Y ........ 195 ewark Bay, Hackensack 43. Herkimer, Mohawk River, 22. eand Passaic Rivers, N.J. 163 N.Y. 198 ew York and New Jersey 44. North Ellenville, N.Y... 199 23, Channels ............. 167 45. Rahway, N.J.......... 200 eCw York Harbor-collec- 46. Raritan Bay and Sandy 24. tion and removal of drift 169 Hook Bay, N.J. . ..... 201 New York Harbor-en- 47. Rosendale, N.Y. ......... 204 trance channels and an- 48. South Amsterdam, Mo- Schorages areas....... 170 hawk River, N.Y... . 205 26. ort Chester Harbor, N.Y. 173 49. South Orange, N.J.. 206 27, Raritan River, N.J .... 175 50. Staten Island, N.Y. ..... 207 Sundout Harbor, N.Y... . 177 51. Wrightsville Reservoir, 29, rewsbury River, N.J.. 178 Winooski River Basin, 20 upervisor of New York Vt................. 208 --Harbor ............... 181 52. Yonkers, N.Y.......... 210 2.1 arrytown Harbor, N.Y.. 183 53. Inspection of completed 22. Sestchester Creek, N.Y.. 184 flood control projects .. 211 econnaissance and condi- 54. Other authorized flood con- tion surveys ......... 185 trol projects .......... 212 130 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Page page Flood Control-Continued General Investigations 55. Flood control work under 56. Surveys.............. 21 1v special authorization .. 212 57. Collection and study of basic data .......... 1. BAY RIDGE AND RED HOOK CHANNELS, N.Y. Location. These channels New York Harbor, and with lie along east shore of Upper BaY Buttermilk erly channel along Brooklyn waterfront Channel, from an east" East River. (See Coast and Geodetic Surveyfrom the NarrowS t o Charts 369 and 541.) Previous projects. For details see page 1768 of Annual Be- port for 1915, and page 195 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A channel 1,200 feet wide and 40 feet at mean low water frome deep Narrows the to Bay Ridge Avenue BroO lyn, thence 1,750 feet wide to junction of Bay Channels, thence 1,200 feet wide through Ridge and Redoo junction with Buttermilk Channel and Red Hook Channel to a channel of same dePth ,extending into Gowan us Bay from junction of Bay Ridge Channel with Red2 u. Hook re Channel, narrowing uniformly ayRde 500 feetlat28thMStreet, Brooklyn. Section vne to abOo in width 4 miles long. Mean tidal range, 4.7 feet; mean included in projecti tides, 5.6 feet; irregular fluctuations due to wind range ofsPr pressure and barometrli' u,..vary from ;3.9 feet below mean low water ,, -;.. * *******...........u II.ug up toCog Deoc337,O 54th~ l fet ,1 above Marx2 107mean Ddgng ~oo water. high a $4,277,197, exclusive nof amounts .ho New5 work susqunl •et fori completed . -nna Reotproject expended on previous projeccs, 189 , Co 9 Existingproect was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 3,1899 Channel40 feet deep and 1,200 feet wide............... II.l Doc. 337, 54thCong. , SO Mar. 2, 1907 Dredging to obtain, first a depth of 35 fee et (Annual Report, 1897, P. creasing depth to 40 feet for full widthti July 3, 1930 Widening of Bay Ridge Channel to 1,750 feet A l ept e, as............Rivers and Harbors Committee tsioa 44, 71st Cong., 2d sess. (Coll latest published map). Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. There are 56 able berthage inexcess of 80,000 terminals with a total avai mechanical-handling devices and feet. Forty terminals iaV In addition, there are 6 railroad 20 have railroad connectOl. float bridges and 2 idle ferry slips. Of the terminals, 8 are Governmentoowned, by the city of New York, and 1uis open to public 13 are ownied use. Facilities are considered adequate for existing Operations and results during fiscal year. Hopper dredge Essayons and attendant plant intermittently from July 12 to August 1, 1965, in dredgingto to restore sections of Bay Ridge and Red Hook Channels to a partial depth of 35 feet. Re- moved 204,200 cubic yards, place measurement, of material at total cost of $168,353, including $1,389 for engineering prelimi- nary to dredging for maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing proJe was commenced March 1901 and completed June 1940.Tol RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 131 stof existing project to June 30, 1966, was $10,289,326- of12,637 regular funds and $64,560 public works funds, a total $4,277,197 for new work and $6,012,129 for maintenance. Controlling mean low water depths of the channels Depth Width Section (feet) (feet) Date survey CidgeChannel from Narrows to Bay Ridge Ave., Brooklyn.. 35 1,200-700 Aug. 1965 roI 4 thidge Ave. to 45th St. (pier 4)....................... 34 1,650-1,300 Do. Branchi~ t 0o Junction with Red Hook Channel............ ..... 34 1,700-1,300 Do. o anus Bay... ..................... 30 1,000-450 June 1957 Channel .............. 34 1,200-650 Feb.-May 1960 Cost and financial statement ear, 1962 1963 Total to 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Necork: ADropriated............. ................................. . ............ 1$5,523,297 . .......... .... ..... ... ....... .... ..... . ...... ............ 15,523,297 oprated.......... $213,048 ............ $288,234 $1,655 $168,353 6,012,129 0"..... 213,948............ .288,234 1,655 168,353 6,012.129 cludes $1,246,100 for new work for previous projects. , ~2. BRONX RIVER, N.Y. ivocation. Empties into a shallow bay in north shore of East (Ser, 11 miles by water northeast of the Battery, New York City. e Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 226.) revious project. For details see Annual Report for 1915, ,e1762, and Annual Report for 1938, page 166. a41. 1ting project. A channel 10 feet deep at mean low water t t 100 feet wide, to extend from deep water in East River volt.e head of navigation at the dam at East 177th Street, in- to 1aing the first dredging from East River at Randall Avenue to yidth of 200 feet; thence to Spofford Avenue, 150 feet; thence We atson Avenue, 125 feet; thence to railroad bridge near britchester Avenue, 100 feet, except in southern approach to abo e, where it is to be 140 feet. Section included in project is ary.t 2.4 miles long. Mean tidal range is 6.9 feet in the estu- d e Mean range of spring tides, 8.2 feet; irregular fluctuations theto Wind and barometric pressure vary from 4 feet below 4e low water up to 8.5 feet above mean high water. abo Work for completed active portion of project as described vo Ve cost $1,080,910, exclusive of amounts expended under pre- t Projects, and exclusive of $10,000 contributed by local 1 7 ests. Channel widening from Westchester Avenue to East des.treet is considered inactive and excluded from foregoing thcription of existing project and cost estimate. Estimated cost of 11Portion (1953) is $299,000. Existing project was adopted by Pop River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 897, 62d Cong., 2d sess.). Slatest published map, see Annual Report for 1912, page 1470. thtocal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1913, provides ti a Of any theright-of-way that may be necessary for the execu- project shall be furnished free of cost to the United 132 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 States. Right-of-way within bulkhead lines below Westchester Avenue Bridge was accepted by Chief of 1920, and above the Westchester Avenue Engineers Bridge June 9y 1928. On September 10, 1940, the Chief of EngineersOctober approved 4y releases from damages furnished by adjoining property o1nerS in reach of river between Westchester Street. On November 12, 1940, the ChiefAvenue and East 1 74t'h of Engineers appo an agreement under which city of New the United States for cost of a retaining York wouldreiburse property in reach of river beween wall to protect adjoining York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Westchester Avenue l.esV bridge in lieu ofandfurn"Ls ing additional right-of-way. On Octo ber 28, 1940 the Secre" tary of War authorized the acceptance iNewYork to defray the eein of $10,000 from the city of cost of reling reta wall. Additionl right-of-way required in the section not been furnished.City of New.York below East 172d Street h 5 feel justi rfied in acquiring indicated it doesnot anyadditional land along the river Terminal facilities. There are 17 terminals bulkheads and wharves available for dockage, with 3,600 feet O located ic9aran a cmpetd u u ed2 , reast and west banks from Randall Avenue to East 173d 3-k b~gan along D Iel5Ol the One of the terminals is publicly Street. owned, mechanical handling d evices.. Additional five are equipped With ern facilities will be needed when existing terminals withroli project is developed. Operations and results during fiscal year Under a contract for dredging to restore 10-foot project depth in channel doWn- stream from Westchester Avenue Bridge, work began Decenber 15, 1965, and was completed February 23, 1966. Removed 59,018 cubic yards, place measurement, of material at a cost of $147,693 including $8,884 for engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance. Reconnaissance surveys cost $442. Condition at end of fiscal year. project is about 82 percent complete. Work under entire existing project was commenced in 1914 and completed Active portion ofexistin in 1941e . C " nelec toonit of wienn reachb project dimensions was, compleremain River up to the Westchester ottedfnromdedeep waterei stihanin oe st Avenue Bridge in 1926. A channel 10 feet deep and 123 to 65 feet wide from Bridge to'East 174th Street was completed Westchester Avenue mean low water depth (Jan.-Feb in 1941. Controllie varying from 100 to 60 feet from 1966) was 9 feet for widths East downstream from Bruckner Boulevard River to about 3,500 feet Bridge, thence o feet for widths varying from 100 to 90 feet to Westchester thence 5 feet for 30-foot width Avenue Bridge, Hartford Railroad Bridge. Work to the New York, New 1Iaven ect consists of widening reach between remaining under existing pro Westchester AvenueBrid g and East 172d Street. Channel between East upper limit ofJ authorized project was filled 172d Street and the under a Department of the Army in by city of New Yo1 + way. Total cost of active portionpermit, and is no longer awater" 1966, was $1,820,964, Of Which of existing project to June30' ($1,080,910 U.S. funds and $10,000 $1.090,910 was for new l. contributed funds, requre and $730,054 for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT., 133 Cost and financial statement aeal y.Total to ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 l w ork. . . . . aPropriated.......... ............... . ............ $1,149,946 atenan ... ..................... ... 1,149,946 Catoprated.... ... ....... .......... $5,730 $6,072 $158,442 772,876 ..•....... ............ . ............ 5,730 478 148,135 756,975 $26,Ueldes $10,000 contributed funds for new work. Includes $69,036 for new work and for maintenance for previous projects. , 3. BURLINGTON HARBOR, VT. i'jocation. About 100 acres in extent, is in a half-moon-shaped 1 ellentation in eastern shore of Lake Champlain, about 40 statute oI-es south of international boundary line, 70 statute miles north ha ruthern end or head of lake, and 20 statute miles southeast of Xor at Plattsburg, N.Y. (See Lake Survey Chart 172.) fe sting project. A breakwater 6,000 feet long about 1,000 sto from shore and practically parallel with it, to be built of ot~e-filled timber cribs capped with large stone or concrete. e'1Peted breakwater is in two sections, northerly 500 feet being ,Parated from southerly 5,500 feetby a gap 200 feet wide for lrose of safety in entering harbor during storms. Reference la e of low lake level is 93 feet above mean sea level.: Level of leve has varied from 0.6 foot below up to 8.8 feet above low lake Usual annual variation is 5.8 feet. New work for com- 'letd Ped roject cost $706,414. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reportsl June2 3186 Construction of first 1,000 feet of breakwater............. .H Doe. 131, 23d Cong., 1st sess. 1 6 Extension of 1,500 feet to breakwater................... H. Ex. Doe. 56, 39th Cong., 2d seas., pp. 17 and 179, printed in pts. 3 , .1875 i of 2,000 feet to breakwater and 4, Annual Report, 1866. Extension of 2,000 feet to breakwater ... . Annual Report, 1874, p. 274. Chief of Engineers authorized extension southerly of 1,000 Annual Report, 1887, p. 2407. feet and northerly for 600 feet. or latest published map, see Annual Report for 1897, p. 3298. 21ermia So rfinal facilities. Bulkhead shore front and open pile and ter a.illed piers having a total dockage of 6,520 feet. Of the te 111als, 5 wharves, 2 piers, and 1 ferry slip are in use. Five alllals eqate for have railroad connections. Facilities are considered present needs of commerce. 0 ocal cooperation. None required. teh erations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for $4abilitation of breakwater completed last fiscal year, costs of ,ar216were incurred including $1,381 for engineering prelimi- 5a to repairs for rehabilitation. call ondition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was practi- ,JO conmpleted in 1890; part of breakwater originally proposed he-- ot built, the work completed being considered sufficient for of navigation, Breakwater was built in two sections, 364 134 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and 3,793 feet long, respectively, separated by a gap of 200 feet. Breakwater is in good condition. Controlling depth in August 1948 was about 10 feet at low lake level at the wharves, increasi considerably toward the breakwater. Distinction between new work and maintenance was not made in early reports, hence it is impossible to separate costs prior to July 1, 1886. Cost and financial statement Total to Flacal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1966 1966 June New work:414 C ost .................. Appropriated......... '.... ..... ................................................ . .. . .. . . . ............ ........... 1706414 Maintenance: "1 83 Appropriated....... . *........ * ... $33 $09 283117 ... iiaiin: ****........t Rehabilitation: . ... .. 33 109 .......... 000, Appropriated......... $275,000 $550,000 555,000 25,000. ...... 1 , 3 Cot.......... ...... . 8,893 363,233 578,608 381,183 . 43,216 1 1 Includes cost of maintenance prior to July 1, 1886. 4. BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, N.Y. Location. Connects deep water in Upper Bay, New York I1a bor, southwest of Governors Island, with deep water il River northeast of Governors Island, and with Bay Ridge a Red Hook Channels forms an easterly channel along BroOl1Y waterfront from Narrows to East River. It lies between Gover- nors Island and Borough of Brooklyn, New York City. Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 541 and Previous projects. For details see page 205, 745.) Annual Report for 1932. Existing project. A channel 1,000 feet wide, at mean low water for width of existing 500-foot 40 feet deeP channel an 35 feet deep for remaining 500-foot width west of existg channel, with suitable widening at junctions with East and anchorage channels to 35 feet deep and with Rve Channel to 40 feet deep and for additional widening--".. Red 11oo anchorage and R ed HIook Channels to provide a minimum channel width of 2,100 feet to 35 feet deep. Section included ce ~ project is 2, miles long. Mean tidal range 4.4 feet; mean ra of spring tides, 5.3 feet; irregular fluctuations due barometric pressure vary from 3.8 feet mean low to wind water feet above mean high water. Cost of new work for complete. up tod project was $4,093,951, exclusive of amounts expended on pre ous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts AsDocuments Work authorized Documents and and reports 0 June 13, 1902 Channel 1,200 feet wide and not less than 30 feet deep.......(Annual Repot, H . Doe. 122, 56th 1901, p.12'[e'p Congl. 2d Aug. 30, 1935 Channel 1,000 feet wide to depths of 40 and 35 feet.......... Rivers 55, and ar ors omp. 74th Cong.,IsrteBess-' Oct. 23, 1962 Dredging two cutoff areas to provide minimum clear channel Do. 483, 55H. Cong., 87th 2esst I width of 2,100 feet at widening with anchorage and Re H. Doc. 483, 87th Cong., 2d Hiook Channels. ,Contains latest published map. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 135 Local cooperation. None required. abTeerminal facilities. There are 26 terminals with a total avail- il berthage of 26,000 feet. Of the terminals, 20 are equipped tiflo nechanical-handling devices and 17 have railroad connec- thse . One terminal is owned by city of New York. In addition, eue are two float bridges. Most available waterfront is oc- cuMied and facilities are considered adequate for existing com- rflerce, Operations and results during fiscal year. Hopper dredge Goethals and attendant plant were employed intermittently from January 15 to February 14, 1966, in dredging to remove shoals 35- and 40-foot channels. Removed 278,800 cubic yards, place measurernent of material at a total cost of $295,078, including %5,652 for engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing project began October 1903 was completed March 1965. East- 5 0 i)serlt 0-foot width of channel, from anchorage channel to ]River, was completed to a 40-foot depth in May 1935. West- rY 500-foot channel, including widening the junction with East the.r, was completed to a 35-foot depth in July 1961. Widening leteJunctions with anchorage and Red Hook Channels was com- ed in March 1965. Controlling mean low water depths of sections Depth Width Section (feet) (feet) Date asthalof channel: SJ rage 1 Channel to junction with Red Hook Channel........ 35 500 Feb. 1966 W Aalf of wth w" Red Hook Channel to the East River............ 35 500 Do. channel: 4,oorage Channel to 4,000 feet north...................... 40 500 Do. 8,000eet north of Anchorage Channel to 8,000 feet north ....... 40 500 Do. fe north of Anchorage Channel to the East River........ 34 500-400 Do. 122Otal cost of existing project to June 30, 1966, was $6,112,440- of ,051 public works funds and $3,971,900 regular funds, a total ,093,951 for new work and $2,018,489 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement ealYe Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 Cotpriated......... -$10,000 -$9,727 $600,000$1,000,000 -$2,491 1$4,590,201 1 at.. .......... 12,374 4,889 500,053 1,097,456..... .. 14,590,201 l Cropriated.......... 247,610 .... 3,493 257,928 294,311 2,018,489 ............ 247,610 3,493 257,161 295,078 2,018,489 J Wokt lUdes $122 051 for new work performed with public works funds and $496,250 for new or previous projects. c5.on EAST RIVER, N.Y. fee ation. A tidal strait about 16 miles long and 600 to 4,000 te Wide, connecting Hudson River and Upper Bay at the Bat- y, New York City, with Long Island Sound at Throgs Neck, SYork City, and separating Long Island from Manhattan 136 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Island and the mainland. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 223, 226, and 745.) Previous projects. For details see page 210, Annual Report for 1932. Existing project. Channels of following dimensions (depths refer to mean low water) : From deep water in Bay to Wallabout Channel, 40 feet deep and 1,000Upper feet New york wide; Wallabout Channel to Throgs Neck, 35 feet deep, with widths froM varying from about 550 to 1,000 feet, according to locality; Welfare (Blackwells) Island up to English Place (43d east Of Island City, 30 feet deep and varying in Dr.), Lolg width from 500 to 900 feet, with widening in approach from main channel; between South Brother and Berrian Islands, 20 feet deep and 300 feet wide, with widening in approach from main channel; ties Ree f to a depthof 40 feet, also removal removal of Coe"o and reefs lying outside Of limiting lines of main of following roC channel to giVe access to wharves: Along Brooklyn shore, Brooklyn Bridge to Manhattan Bridge (Fulton Ferry Reef), to a depth Street Reef, 25 feet; of 25 feet; Jay a Corlears Reef, 35 feet; Shell Reef, 25 feet; Horns Hook, 40 feet; Rhinelander Reef, 26 feet; and reef Point, 30 feet; and construction of a dike in Pot Cove in Hell off oa Section included in improvement is about Gate. 16.5 miles long.. Meal range of tide varies according to locality from 4 feet at Third Street, Brooklyn, and 4.4 feet at the Battery to North 4.9 feet t Hallets Point, 6.3 feet at Port Morris, and 7.1 feet at eastern g la oz trance at Throgs Neck; imitn he follwing el mean range of spring tides 4.8, 5.3 D9 7.6, and 8.5 feet, respectively; irregular and barometric pressure vary according fluctuations due to wind to locality from 3.8 feet below mean low water at the Battery, 2.4 feet at North Street, Brooklyn, and 3.8 feet at Throgs Neck up to about 5.2Third feet bove mean high water at the Battery and 8.4 high water at Throgs Neck; extreme fluctuations feet abovep. e affect navigation. New work for completed project do not seroty 903,451, exclusive of amounts expended on cost $23 previous projects. Existing p oject was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar. 3,19151 Removal of Coenties Reef to 35 feet, conditioned upon local H1.Doe. 188, 63d Cong., 1st seS. July 27,1916Channelinterests increasing depth to 40 feet. across Diamond Reef 35 feet deep and 1,000 feet wide. Do. Aug 8,1917 Channel east of Blackwells Island to 20 feet; channel between South Brother and Berrian Islands, to 20 Do. between North and South Brother Islands to feet; channel 28 feet. July Do 18,. 1918 Channel Secure a depth 40 feet ofdeep 40 feet through in chne ast hn Riv.. e n elGte. H. De. 140, 65th Cong., 1atseaS. Hell ellGGate aat e a s soo o on aasfpachannel s Pra c ti ca b le .c through East River and Specified in act. Sept. 22,1922 Depth limited to 35 feet in through o mt e V l channel between Walla. Rivers and Harbors Committee bout Channel and Things Neck. Channel latc Island, 30 feet to English P1.and eliminatedeast 2 of Blackwells 0-foot 67th Cong., 2d seas. (contains north of English P1. Eliminated channel between channel published map). South Brother Islands except as authorized priorNorthnand ing project. Remove certain rocks and reefs and to exist- construe dike in Pot Cove, Hell Gate. 1 Pub. Res. 67, 63d Cong., 3d sess. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 137 bTerminal facilities. There are 214 terminals with a total avail- th e berthage of 121,150 feet, along both shores of East River from and attery to Clason Point. In addition, there are 10 ferry slips 84 20 carfloat bridges. Of the terminals, 99 are publicly owned, railare equipped with mechanical-handling devices, and 43 have etroad connections. Facilities are considered adequate for pres- eeds. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract to restore project depth of 30 feet in channel east of Welfare Island, work began April 21 and was completed May 24, 1966. Removed 132,810 cubic yards, place measurement, of material, Engineer- ing preliminary to dredging for maintenance cost $11,108. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing project 1959 Commenced June 1916 and substantially completed March Wid Construction of dike at Pot Cove in Hell Gate and a part of u ling near pierhead line in Jay Street Reef, were omitted as of ecessairy, work completed being considered sufficient for needs $25 igation. Total cost of existing project to June 30, :1966 was Ulr8, 33-$1,743,265 public works funds and $22,160,186 reg- a,' funds, a total of $23,903,451 for new work and $1,384,912 for aItenance. Controlling mean low water depths 1933 to 1966 Section Depth Width __(feet) (feet) Pol0. ................... ay to Wallabout Channel.. . ........ .6........0i .............................. 4040 ........ 1,000 *............. ............ ................... ........ 40 tT ut Channel through west channel at Welfare (Blackwells) Island and Hell t h rogs Neck at Long Island Sound ................................. 135 1,000-550 i", n at Welfare (Blackwells) Island From Newton Creek to English Place (43d Dr.) 1at en ity..................................................30 900-500 It th Brother and Berrian Islands...................................... . Ite 20 300 t e1 .... ................................ .. 420 Int e er eel ef ...ee.. ............... orees .h im . ......... ............. .................... ::::::::........::::::: :::............ 2hn 4 ............ ... ............ thin i.o..... . . . ............ 0.............. Nl~eonderIleef2 Oa Point........ ............... ............................ .2 aP'SeeDt for scattered shoals in the vicinity of Iell Gate with least depth of 84 feet. for shoals in the upstream portion with least depth of 22 feet. -Cet Cost and financial statement aiYear.. to Total 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 NewWord.. MCPrr iated............ . ................................... $30,091,145 Snane [ 30,091,145 Cctolpri iated...................... $92,000 $4,524 $967 $332,000 1,447,805 Coeat. 92,000 4,524 967 306,771 1,422,576 ... 6i,187,694 for new work and $37,664 for maintenance for previous projects. 6. EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, N.Y. o Location On south shore of Long Island between main body o~flslanfd and western end of Long Beach. It is 10 miles east Ockaway Inlet and about 27 miles by water south and east 138 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 from the Battery, New York City. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 579 and 1215.).. Existing project. Provides for a channel 12 feet deep at mean low water and 250 feet wide from 12-foot contour in Atlantic Ocean for about 0.6 mile to 12-foot contour in Long Beach Chan nel protected by a jetty. Mean tidal range, 4.1 feet; mean rang of spring tides, 4.9 feet; irregular fluctuations due to wind a barometric pressure vary from 4.1 feet below mean low water LIP to 5.2 feet above mean high water. New work for completed active portion of project cost $503,969 (excluding $100,00 contributed funds.) West jetty portion of project is sidered inactive and excluded from foregoing descriptionCoOf existing project and cost estimate. Estimated cost (1954) O this portion is $806,000. Existing project was adopted River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 19, 71st Cong., 1stbyses5s.) 1930 Latest published map is in project document. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1930 provde local interests contribute $100,000 to cost of work ;provide an maintain interior channels suitable for navigation, 'not less tha 12 feet deep, from East Rockaway Inlet 15 miles to Iempstead Oyster Bay hline, to HIewlett Harbor and to Freeport Harb0 r furnish land, easements and rights-of-way for construction maintenance of jetties, and hold the United States free from daf" an ages. Assurances of compliance precedent to construction trance channel and east jetty were approved by Chief Of en- of Eflinee1 and Secretary of War on July 14 and 15, 1932, respectively. Loca contribution of $100,000 was deposited to credit of the United States on August 23, 1932. Since construction of west jettYi not considered necessary at this time ana~ srecli ree s£o ''easements rights-Ofw, y and release of claims for damages necessary for construction ' not being secured.1 e s Terminal facilities. There are 33 terminals in Oceanside land Park, Long Beach, and East Rockaway. Eight of these e oil terminals-6, at Oceanside, one of which has a railroad and 2 at Island Park. Other termi nals consist sP mooring docks with a berthage of 3,150 feet. Of of repair marine railways and has mechanical-handling facilities. these 14 hae are public wharves at East Rockaway and Woodmere, arNd wter-. Theje front on north side of Long Beach has been bulkheaded. ties are considered adequate for existing commerce. FCil Operations and results during fiscal year. Hopper dredge Lyman and attendant plant were employed intermittently from February 4 to March 20,1966, in dredging to restore channel depth of 12 feet. Removed 6,000 cubic yards, place measurement of material. Engineering preliminary to dredging for mainte- nance cost $2,295. Conditon at end of fiscal year. Work under existing roeet began February 1933 and is about 85 percent P t jetty, 4,250 feet long, was completed in July complete.1934. Proje 1%t channel was completed in May 19,35. Controlling water depth (Mar. 1966) through channel from deep meanl0 A tlan tic ; O Atlnti e n fto..dee.p Oca o i ndeewater in• 'East Rockaway -"- waterjn 1 •I !- feet for a Width of 250 to 125 feet. Inlet s dv East jetty was in good co' RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 139 tio11 except for minor repairs. Work remaining under existing chaOjet consists of building a west jetty, if necessary, to protect SCost and financial statement . ._ lseal year' Total to ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork. cot .................... nane-.. ....... ... a te .................... ............. ... ....... 5.. 103,969 Propriated.......... $34,600 $2,600 $37,270 $51,526 $82,191 1,038,604 * ........ 38,675 28587 71,507 54,475 82,191 1,038,604 Worksfuneds $100,000 contributed funds and includes $421,369 regular funds and $82,600 public 7. FIRE ISLAND INLET, N.Y. , ocation. On south shore of Long Island, about 50 miles by Water south and east of the Battery, New York City. It is the tfail entrance into Great South Bay from the Atlantic Ocean. eCoast and Geodetic Survey Chart 578.) e(S~e S isting project. A jetty extending generally southwest and sOeth for 5,000 feet from high ground on Democrat Point at West end of Fire Island, and a channel 10 feet deep and 250 feet Iefrom deep water in ocean to deep water within inlet. Mean tdalrange at ocean and inlet ends of Democrat Point are 4.1 and 26 feet, respectively. Irregular fluctuations due to wind and t aronetric pressure vary from 2.5 feet below mean low water up to 2.6 feet above mean high water. Cost of new work for com- leted project was $594,355, exclusive of $90,190 contributed by local interests. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acte Work authorized Documents 1937 Construction of jetty..........Rivers and Harbors Committee Doo. 33,75th Cong., 1st sess; ay1., 90 Channel 10 feet deep.............H. Doc.762, 80th Cong., 2d sess. (contains latest published map). ocal cooperation. Fully complied with, toperminal facilities. None within area immediately adjacent be ederal improvement. There are 42 commercial and pleasure o1atng terminals with a total berthage of 15,935 feet at Patch- 4.be Sayville, West Sayville, Islip, and Bay Shore. In addition, boat repair and storage yards are along shores of Great South Y and adjacent creeks. Facilities are ample for present and rObable future needs. Operations and results during fiscal year. Hopper dredge Lyman and attendant plant were employed intermittently from March 28 to April 30, 1966, in dredging to restore 10-foot project depth. Removed 108,500 cubic yards, place measurement, of ma- terial. Engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance cost $2,161. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing project ias commenced June 1939. Jetty was completed in 1941 and 'Ice a survey made in November 1953 revealed existence of a 140 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 channel with dimensions substantially the same as those author" ized, work under existing project was considered complete No- vember 1953. In May 1966, controlling mean low water depth was 9 feet for a width of 250 feet from deep water in the ocean to deep water within the inlet. Jetty has surpassed its capacitY as a sand entrapping agent and when examined in October 1953, was found to be in fair condition. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,96 New work:3 Appropriated.. ................................ Cost ................. .,.. .,.. . Maintenance:" Appropriated.........-$22200 Cost................. . 16,068 $78,700 79,503 $60,012 60,092 $170,926 170,515 $161,500 161,603 3 1,013: x Excludes $90,190 expended from contributed funds. 8. FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, N.Y. Location. Flushing Bay is on north shore of Long Island opening into East River, 12 miles by water northeast of the Battery, New York City. Bay is 1.8 miles long in a northwext southeast direction ek and from 0.4., tou 0.8 wide Flushi01. .8 mile wide. Creek enters bay from southeast and is about 1.1 miles lodl (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 226.). Previous projects. For details see Annual Reports for 191:' 1932, and 1938; pages 1,772, 169, and 168, respectively. Existing project. Provides for: (a) A bay channel with * depth of 15 feet at mean low water, and 300 feet wide from deeP water in East River 1.8 miles to maneuvering area; (b) thencd a creek channel with a depth of 15 feet at mean low water a'0 200 feet wide to Northern Boulevard Bridge, thence decreaS1il uniformly in-width to 170 feet at a point 50 feet downstream fro Van Wyck Expressway Bridge, a distance of about 1.1 miles, (c) a branch channel with a depth of 15 feet at mean low wxte and a width of 200 feet from bay channel to 0.1 mile maneuveril area; (d) an irregularly shaped maneuvering area about 2,000 by 750 feet with a depth of 15 feet at ean. low water exceptca proach to west side of municipal boat basin which will remalf 12 feet at mean low water; (e) an anchorage basin about 2,100 1,800 feet, encompassing about 84 acres with a depth of 6 feet mean low water; ~ ~ ~ .(f)~riprap .... ~ revetment ~ vte~ ,,.. ~~0 of 1,400 O ,U feet f, ext eet extensi o on nel earth dike; (g)abandonment of that portion of the creek chaflt of existing project from Van Wyck Expressway Bridge to Loe1 Island Railroad crossing a distance of 0.3 mile; (h) abandonMent of repair and reconstruction of remains of existing dike; and( completion of existing project primarily in the creek channelto authorized depth of 12 feet at mean low water. Mean tida range, 6.5 feet at mouth of Flushing Bay, 6.8 feet at Nortlaer Boulevard Bridge; mean range of sprin ides 8 .1 feet;r re fluctuations due to wind and barometric pressure vary frofl 3 feet mpean low water to 76 feet above mean high water. mated cost of new work is $2,042,100 (July 1965) exclusive RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 141 $617,900 to be contributed by local interests and amounts ex- lended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Act Work authorized Documents Oct.23,1962 15-foot bay, creek and branch channels; 15-foot maneuver- HI.Doc. 551, 87th Cong., 2d sess. (con- Ing area; 6-foot anchorage basin, breakwater and abandon- tains latest published map). ment of portion of creek channel and repair and reconstruc- tion of existing dike. tLOcal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1962 provides at local interests provide a 50 percent cash contribution to- Wards first cost of construction of recreational anchorage, break- r ter, and 100-foot widening of bay channel (1.8 miles long); aVde lands, easements and rights-of-way for construction of ~laintenance and aids to navigation upon request of Chief viOd gineers; hold the United States free from damages; pro- ane and maintain adequate approach channels and berths, use 1nodify existing facilities at terminals which would permit akof the waterway to secure full advantage of deeper channels; thr necessary removals or relocations of pipelines, cables and aher utilities and all necessary protective measures to bridges Vid( other structures crossing or adjacent to the waterway; pro- te and maintain necessary mooring facilities and utilities for cyreational boating including public landings with suitable sup- facilities lo and public automobile parking areas open to all 1iequal terms; and assign to a competent and properly con- de' ilted public body the power to regulate use, growth, and free saielopment of waterway facilities with the understanding that e facilities will be open to all on equal terms. Assurances er bere2 furnished by the city of New York and accepted on Decem- ro 6, 1962 Supplementary assurances of local cooperation to ba Qsl,Yideallforforextension of the Federal anchorage area and a boat the city of New York, in conjunction with dredging cep ect channels, anchorage, and maneuvering areas were ac- Ied February 26, 1963. Contributed funds, other, of $580,425 Nere deposited to the credit of the United States by the city of tiew York and the New York World's Fair 1964-1965 Corpora- o f $532,425 and $48,000, respectively, for this work. o erminal facilities. There are 33 terminals, of which 19 are of beast side of bay and 14 in creek. These provide 9,358 feet laerthing space along 15 bulkheads, 20 wharves and numerous Qa g floats. Eight are boat-repair and storage yards with a to acity to provide open storage for 540 recreational craft up vi45 feet long and are equipped with mechanical handling de- atees four are private club landings; three are owned and oper- by city of New York. Facilities are considered adequate O existing commerce. Perationsand results during fiscal year. A survey by Govern- et hired labor to determine condition of earthfill dike con- a lcted by local interests and condition of authorized channels anchorage areas cost $2,284 for new work. 142 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U.S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year., Dredging operations were com pleted in March 1964. Earthfill dike and riprap protection col structed by local interests were completed in October 19 6 4 . The Corps has not finally accepted the earthfill dike. Controlling mean low water depths of sections- - -r + vJ vvvvv.. .. ,.. Section Depth (feet) Width (feet) Bay Channel: From East River to Creek Channel........... ...... 14 300 Mar. 1966 Creek Channel: From Bay Channel to Northern Blvd. Bridge....... 152 Nov. 1963 From Northern Blvd. Bridge to Van Wyck Expressway Bridge.. 15 200-170 Nov. 1963 Branch Channel .................................. ..... 13 200 Mar. 1966 Maneuvering area.........................0.. 14 Mar. 196 Maneuvering area............. ........ ....... 12 ............. Nov. 1963 Anchorage Basin.. ..................................... 6 ............. Mar. 1966 'Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 was $2,262,48 d of which $2,256,357 was for new work ($1,837,350 U.S. funds al $419,007 contributed funds), and $6,129 for maintenance. addition, costs from contributed funds, other, were $580,425. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to6. Fiscal year.... ..... ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June ,' New work: Appropriated .......... ... $1,025,000 $460,000 .. .2 .. . . 3 Cost ............................ .. 260,483 1,191,515" -$5419 $1,142 2,076 Maintenance: ; .. . [,83 ,'0 12t Appropriated.. ........... . .......... .394 716 .......... Cost......................... Cos...394 . ............ 394 716.......... 1 Includes $238,873 for new work and $206,411 for maintenance for previous projects. eludes $580,425 other contributed funds for new work. REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Totaltog6 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 195 196630 New work:5 3,3 Contributed... ............... 545,336 .......... $.. ............. Cost................. .........26,614 $389,090 $2,161 $1,142 9. GLEN COVE CREEK,N.Y. Location. A narrow tidal inlet extending eastwardly about mile from east side of Hempstead Harbor on the north shore 0 Long Island, 26 miles northeast of the Battery, New York Ct (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 223.) d Existing project. Provides for a channel 100 feet wide and feet deep at' mean low water from deep water in lemPstea Harbor about ,1 "_mile ' to the head of navgatin navigation at cityy of i.es, Gle Cove. Mean tidal range, 7.4 feet; mean range of spring tde 8.7 feet; irregular fluctuations due to wind and barometric pres sure vary from 3.6 feet below mean low water up to 8.4 fe above mean high water. New work for completed project cO $29,760, exclusive of $29,774 expended from contributed fulnd' Widening to 100 feetthe upper 1,630 feet of channel and buildili RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 143 aesand fence along north side of channel where it crosses the beach are considered inactive and excluded from foregoing de- (e19ption and cost estimate. Estimated cost of this portion la) is $140,000, including 50 percent to be contributed by bocal interests. Existing project adopted by 1925 River and Har- r Act (H. Doc. 207, 68th Cong., 1st sess.). Latest, published, raP is in project document. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of March 3, 1925, Provides that local interests pay one-half of first cost of the work, ivvide rights-of-way, spoil-disposal areas, and bulkheads, and give assurances that adequate terminals will be built. Complied date as to contribution of one-half of first cost of work done to the e, cession of rights-of-way, provision of disposal areas, and e construction of terminals. Pending construction of bulk- "eads by local interests along southerly side of channel in the tper 1,600 feet of the improvement, a channel of less than roject width has been excavated. In letter dated February 4, 948, the Commissioner, Department of Public Works, city of ; Cove was notified of the conditions affecting the remaining Work*. There is no indication as to when compliance with these CTditions may be expected. o ermninal facilities. There are 1,875 feet. of bulkheads along eetherly side of waterway. Terminals are adequate for present aeeds and there is ample waterfront, both public and private, for aitional terminals as needs arise. rOPerationsand results during fiscal year. Under a contract for redging channel to project depth of 8 feet completed last fiscal iyear, costs of $4,343 were incurred, including $1,000 for engineer- gDreliminary to dredging for maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Entire existing project is about 55 percent complete. Work under the active portion of sting project was commenced August 1933 and completed Au- st 1934. The work done provided a channel 100 feet wide 0r1 deep water in Hempstead Harbor for 3,470 feet, thence radually decreasing to 50 feet wide for 180 feet, and 50 feet ide for about 1,450 feet to the head of the improvement. In dhe 1965, controlling mean low water depth was 8 feet for a ith of 100 feet from the mouth to within 1,600 feet of the head 5 feet for a width varying from 100 o t25 to the headthence improvement; thefeet of the project. Head of navigation is at 7Ity of Glen Cove, about 1 mile above the mouth. Work remain- to complete existing project consists of widening to 100 feet e upper 1,630 feet of channel and building a sand fence along 1ort side of channel where it, crosses the beach. Cost and financial statement ~'iee~y~rTotal to .... ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1960 June 30,1966 New work: Propriated .................... ...... ................ ........... 1$?9,760 cost - Mai ...... ......... ...... ..... .. 129,760 Prlopriated......................... ... $4,802 $33,000 -$10,533 90,601 .. .. S.......... . .. . .. . .. . . 4,802 18,124 4,343 90,601 1 Xeludes $29,774 for new work expended from contributed funds. 144 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 10. GLEN COVE HARBOR, N.Y. Location. A tidal cove on northeast side of Hempstead Harbor on north shore of Long Island, adjacent to city of Glen Cove, Nassau County, 1.75 miles south of Long Island Sound and 27 miles northeast of the Battery, New York City. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 223.) Existing project. Provides for construction of a breakwater it Hempstead Harbor, extending from northwest corner of Glen Cove dock southwesterly towards Motts Point for 2,000 feet. Project is about 53 percent complete. About 1,564 feet of the breakwater were completed in 1906. Completed length of breakwater affords sufficient, protection, therefore, further extension is considered unnecessary. New work for completed portion of project coSt $72,000. Uncompleted portion of breakwater is considered inac- tive.. Estimated cost for this portion (1954) is $1,038,000. I isting project adopted by 1888 River and Harbor Act and modifled June 22, 1895. For latest published map see Annual Report for 1889, page 728. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Three privately-owned yacht clubs an d boat rental facility provide service for about 510 local recreational and 90 transient craft. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for rehabilitation of breakwater, work commenced May 16, 1966, and continued. Placed 5,662 tons of stone at a cost of $93,882 i" cluding $9,946 for engineering preliminary to repairs for re- habilitation. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing projec began in 1889 and was declared inactive in 1906. Cost and financial statement • Total t°66 Fiscal year............... .1962 1963 1964 1966 J ote J0 3 New work: Appropriated................... .$72,. Cost............... ... 72,0 Maintenance: Appropriated:. ........ " $234 $213.S46 o t ................... $234 $21133 $88 ............. Rehabilitation: 88 ............ Appropriated.................... $125,000 125,8 cost............................. 93,882 .......................... f 11. GREAT LAKES TO HUDSON RIVER WATERWAY, N.Y. Location. Consists of portion of New York State Barge Canal system extending from Hudson River at Waterford to Oswvego Harbor on Lake Ontario. (See Lake Survey Charts 183, 184, and New York Canal Charts.) Existing project. Provides for allotment of Federal funds to the State of New York for expenditure under suitable Federal control and supervision in improvement of canal connecting Lake Ontario with the Hudson River. Improvement provides for a depth of 13 feet below normal pool level through all locks between Waterford and Oswego, deepening between locks to 14 feet beloW RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 145 aoir11al pool level, widening at bends and elsewhere, and increas- b~r OVerhead clearance to 20 feet at maximum navigable stage at ,ridges and other overhead structures. Widths of channel to be Provided under project are 104 feet in earth cuts, 120 feet in rock cuts, 200 feet in river sections, with widening at bends ala elsewee pro elsewhere as may be necessary. Waterway included in this CaPject is about 184 miles long, of which 160 miles are in Erie Canal from Waterford to Three Rivers Point and 24 miles are in Cos Wego Canal from Three Rivers Point to Oswego. Estimated coi for new work is $34,850,000 (July 1966). No estimate of a nitenance with Federal funds is included, as maintenance of al is not a part of Federal project. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents ,19351 Deepening between locks to 14 feet, increasing overhead Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 1g 2 1935 clearances S 21945 Depth of 13tofeet 20 feet and widening at bends and elsewhere. 20, 73d Cong., 2d sess. below normal pool level through all locks S. Doc. 252, 79th Cong., 2d sess. (con- Oet23 between Waterford and Oswego. tains latest published map). June 18,19625 Increase expenditure limitation to $28 million ,65 Increase expenditure limitation amount required for com- pletion, then estimated at $33 million. Waergency Relief Act of 1935. d4Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1945 authorized trepening locks subject to condition that an agreement be en- boded into between the United States and State of New York em- Of Y1lng certain limitations and provisions to safeguard interests o general commerce and navigation, insure Federal supervision 19 Work performed. A supplemental agreement dated June 5, of .7, containing all provisions necessary for efficient prosecution Pa Improvement, was entered into by Chief of Engineers and De- dertMent of Public Works, State of New York. Requirements un- dr)rior acts fully complied with. tr erminal facilities. State of New York provided terminal and triasfer facilities at all important points along Erie and Oswego palals, and at Buffalo, Troy, Albany, and New York Harbor. i .eight-handlingequipment, as well as storage and dock facili- o ' is governed by requirements of particular locality. State- 1Ved terminal at Oswego has a grain elevator with a capacity of raillion bushels. Albany Port District Commission erected a elevator at Albany with a capacity of 13,500,000 bushels. ort of New York Authority grain terminal in New York Harbor OGowanus Bay has a capacity of about 1,800,000 bushels. mTinals at Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Schenectady, Troy, Allany, and Oswego are provided with direct railroad connections. State-owned terminals are open to the public ake-port terminals are extensive in character. onAvailable equal terms. ter- illals appear ample to meet all requirements. WerePerations reported and results during fiscal for partial reimbursementyear. Costs of $411,928 to State of New York a follows: 146 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Contract Item of work Work ekal this to commenced completed : ... .$ fiscal year date 276,035 CB 63-2 Bridge E-l............. Raising bridge...... U.S.-200 Bridge E-55...... .......... Nov. 1963 June 1964 $30 135 ........ Mar. 1964 Oct. 1964 37793 l08 78 US-70 Bridge E-50.......... ..... d o ...... ...... i ay1965 0 May 1966 344000 344, Inspecting contracts cost $28,113 for new SCondition at end of fiscal year. Workwork. under existing project began September 1935 and is about 90 percent complete. Thirty" eight barge canal bridges and three guard raised to project clearance, one bridge lengthened, gates were one bridge removed, and four guard gates replaced under Federal project for improvement. Project vertical clearance was provided A two additional bridges with Federal funds by construction additional spillway capacity at Herkimer, N.Y., and 5 additionlO bridges and one arch beam raised, 10 removed, and 4 removed and replaced by new structures at project clearance, all by other agencies. Two bridges under the project, but not eligible reimbursement, were removed and replaced by a new structure for at project clearance by other agencies. Present depth is 14 feet normal pool level for following width; 75 feet in earth cuts, 94 at feet in rock cuts, and 200 feet in canalized rivers and laWkes. Twenty-nine locks, 22 in Erie Canal, east of Three and 7 in Oswego Canal north of Three Rivers Point,Rivers Poin' have a clear width of 43.5 feet, usable length of 300 feet, and depth over sills is 13 feet., No alterations are required in lock locks 5 and 8, Oswego Caenal. Lock 4, Oswego 8, Erie Canal, a d exist.. Numerous fixed bridges, transmission Canale does ot structures span the waterway. There are 74 bridges lines and other betVeen Waterford and Three Rivers Point and 20 between Three River$ Point and Oswego. ~Minimum and other overhead structures isclearance under existing bridg 15.1 feet above maximum 1'V gable stage. Work of lowering lock sills to project depth ' physically completed. Work remaining to complete sists of widening channel by excavation including project con removal o ledge'rock and work incidental thereto, for 0.9 mile, as describe in table below, revetment of banks with quarry stones Where necessary, and attaining vertical clearance at five bridges. Status of channel deepening .Corn- Work remaiing pleted _ FromTto To From project Work dimension FutUre n worni) (miles) progress Hudson River .............. Guard gate 2 at Waterford Guard gate 2 at Waterford.. . .Lock 10 at Cranesvillo.. . 2.8 ................... . 32.2 ............ Lock 10at Cranesville...... ......Lock 16 at Mindenville ... Lock 16gate ainHerkimer.' .......... Guard gate 6 at Herkimer........ 36.1............. . Guard gate 5 at 15.6 0.9 mile. Oswego Harbor ................. 96.7.......... Total...................................10 m RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 147 Cost and financial statement Necal Year Total to S1962 1 3 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 NewWork.- opriated......... $770,000 $360,000 $366,000 $400,000 $400,000 $27,154496 S ... ..792,968 319,936 409,716 342,917 440,041 27,130,839 Ieludes $4,813,400 emergency relief funds. 12. HARLEM RIVER, N.Y. luocation. Harlem River and Spuyten Duyvil Creek, both in- two ed in the project for improvement of Harlem River, are i- connecting tidal waterways, of a joint length of about 8 miles, iyg' wholly within limits of Greater New York and separat- d1e. IVianhattan Island from the mainland.(See Coast and Geo- tic Survey Chart 274.) P revtious projects. For details see Annual Report for 1915, e 1762, and Annual Report for 1938, page 210.. lo~ isting project. A continuous channel 15 feet deep at mean wWater and 400 feet wide from East. River to Hudson River, 5cept in vicinity of Washington Bridge, where adopted width is it feet, and at the rock cut through Dyckmans Meadow, where Ciis 350 feet and 18 feet deep. It also provides for straightening 40 1an1nel at Johnson Iron Works by making a cut 15 feet deep and 40. feet wide. Channel included in project is about 8 miles long. Maill tidal range varies, according to locality, from 4.9 feet at Willis Avenue Bridge to 3.8 feet at Spuyten Duyvil Bridge; range tiOfPring tides, 5.9 and 4.5 feet, respectively. Irregular fluctua- 'oll s due to wind and barometric pressure vary from 3.8 feet be- o Mlean low water up to 4.7 feet above mean high water at Willis fenue Bridge and from 3.7 feet below mean low water up to 4.9 oet. above mean high water at Spuyten Duyvil Bridge. New explk for completed project cost $3,595,119, exclusive of amounts ~ended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Aets eWork authorized Documents and reports Je 18,1878 Channel 15 feet deep and 350 wide.. . ... .. H. Ex. Doc. No. 75, Pt. 9, 43d Cong., 2d sess. (Annual Report, 1875, pt. 2, p. 224.) Chief of Engineers authorized widening to 400 feet through- Annual Report, 1886, p. 674. out except at Dyckmans Cut, where width was keptat 350 feet and depth increased to 18 feet. Chief of Engineers in 1893 reduced width of channel in vicin- Annual Report, 1912, p. 198. Mar* ity of Washington Bridge to 354 feet. 1913 Straightening channel at Johnson Iron Works............ H. Doe. 557, 62d Cong., 2d seas. (Con- tains latest published maps.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with. l Terminal facilities Waterfront along both shores of Har- 11 River is about 16 miles long, of which 4 miles are unavailable r Commercial use. There are 52 terminals with a total avail- ble berthage of 17,865 feet. Thirty of the terminals are owned ey the city of New York. Twenty-four of the terminals are elUipped with mechanical handling devices and 13 have railroad 148 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 connections. In addition, there are 5 railroad float bridges. Fa- cilities are considered adequate for present needs. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for dredging to restore project depth of 15 feet in channel, work com- menced June 23 and was completed September 22, 1965. Removed 37,691 cubic yards, place measurement, of material. Engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance cost $3,019 Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing project was commenced January 1888 and substantially completed 1VIY 1938. Remaining widening in section above High hibited by proximity of bulkheads to the channel Bridge is pro line. Present width is considered adequate for navigation. No further i provement is contemplated under the project. A channel 15 feet M deep at mean low water and 400 feet wide was excavated East River to High Bridge, thence 15 feet deep and 400 tofroM 350 feet wide to the Hudson River. Rock cut through Dyckns Meadow was completed to 18-foot depth and 350-foot width inl 1896. Straightening channel at Johnson Iron Works was cOrft pleted to 15-foot depth and 400-foot width in 1938 Controlli'd mean low water depth (Feb.-Sept. 1965) was 15 feet for widths varying from 400 to 200 feet from the East River to Sherran Creek, thence 14 feet for widths varying from 350 to 250 feet to Hudson River except for feet about 1,500 feet south aofshoal with a minimum depth of sS High Bridge. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966, was $4,023,679, of which $3,595,119 for new work and $428,560 for maintenance. ~a Cost and financial statement Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 Total to 6 1965Ju 30 New work: :- ------------ - -- - .. New work: p rCos .................... Appropriated .......... .. ............... .... ............... ....... .i ............. 33616 Maintenance:- . ... . .. . Appropriated........... $5 134 . Cost............... $2,573 $145,629 -$7,333 5 4 ............ ***. 2,573 28,122 110,174 1Includes $21,000 for new work for previous projects. 13. HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, N.Y. Location. Hudson River empties into Upper Bay of New Harbor at the Battery, New York City. Section yor# included this title extends from deep water in upper New York Bay under abOJt 14.5 miles to just north of Harlem River (Spuyten Duyvil Creek)' (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 745, 746, Previous projects. For details see Annual and 747.) page 1765, and Annual Report for 1938, page Report for 191 Existing project. A channel 48 feet deep and213. suitably widened at bends, from West 59th Street, 2,000 feet wide, to West 40th Street, thence 45 feet deep of same width Manhattal' water in Upper Bay; a channel 40 feet deep for full width to deeP extending from northline of 59th Street to south side ofof river Little Basin, and thence a channel of same depth to deep water in uppe New HouseYork Bay off 309, Document Ellis72d Island, substantially as shown on mapS Congress, 1st session, subject to prO- RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 149 irson that no dredging be done under project within 50 feet of Weehead lines; a channel 750 feet wide and 30 feet deep along york awken-Edgewater waterfront; removal of a shoal on New 40 f .Side between West 59th and West 61st Streets to a depth of of an obstruction north of mouth of Spuyten iQelil Creekremoval bueet; and to depth of surrounding river bottom. Channel luded in project is about 11 miles long. Plane of reference is at low water. Mean tidal range at the Battery, 4.4 feet, and 4.9 est 129th Street, 4.1 feet; mean range of spring tides, 5.3 and I .etet, respectively; irregular fluctuations due to wind and baro- Battrc pressure vary from 3.8 feet below mean low water at the Streetry up to 5.2 feet above mean high water and at West 129th eet from 3.6 feet below mean low water up to 5.3 feet above $6, high water. Cost of new work for completed project was 7,2241, exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 4,1913 Channel 30 feet deep from Ellis Island to Newark St., 40 feet H. Doe. 719, 62d Cong.. 2d seas. deep through shoal from Newark St. to Castle Point and channel 26 by 550 feet along Weehawken-Edgewater waterfront. Remove shoal east side of river between West 19th and West 32d Sts.; remove rock near Battery to 40 feet; remove obstruction near Spuyten Duyvil 'ar. 4,1915 Creek. Additional dredging through shoal from Newark St. to Annual Report, 1914, pp. 234-235. Aug' 8,1917 Castle Point. Remove shoal between West 32d and West 61st Sts. to HI. Doe. 1697, 64th Cong., 2d sess. 40 feet and widen 40-foot channel between the Battery ar 3,1925 and Canal St. to 2,000 feet. Channel 30 by 750 feet along Weehawken-Edgewater water- H. Doc. 313, 68th Cong., 1st seas. Ja. 21, 1927 front. Modification of conditions of local cooperation affecting uly 3,1930 channel along Weehawken-Edgewater waterfront. Channel 40 feet deep between pierhead lines from 20th St. H. Doe. 450, 70thCong., 2d sesas. Manhattan, to a point 1,300 feet below Newark St., Ho- boken, thence 2,800 feet wide to deep water off Ellis Island. Channel 30 feet deep between 40-foot channel and channel Aug30,19352 along Jersey City waterfront. 1 Widen 40-foot channel to full width of river from north line H. Doc. 309, 72d Cong., 1st sess. of 59th St. to south side of Little Basin, thence a channel of Do, same depth to deep water off Ellis Island. Waiver all conditions of local cooperation affecting channel Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe, along Weehawken-Edgewater waterfront. 49, 72d Cong. 2d seas. Au. 26,1937 Channel 45 and 48 feet deeo and 2,000 feet wide........... Senate committee print, 75th Cong. 1at s,,. 1 sCtain latest published maps. lso Public Works Administration Sept. 6, 1933, and Apr. 27, 1935. LOcal cooperation. None required. ierminal facilities. Waterfront included in the project for l0Drovemnent measured along both shores of river, is 32 miles 7 miles of Manhattan waterfront and 10 miles of New h ey waterfront developed for commercial use. Along Man- b an waterfront, there are 99 terminals with a total available A~thage of 130,380 feet, 17 ferry slips, and 8 car-float bridges. to1g' the Jersey waterfront there are 149 terminals having a eal available berthage of 166,621 feet, and 19 ferry slips, 27 O-'foat bridges, and 2 large shipyards with 6 floating drydocks. fthe terminals, 119 are publicly owned, 160 are equipped with pchanical-handling devices, and 132 have railroad connections. Clities are adequate for present requirements. 150 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Hopper dredge Essayons and attendant plant were employed from August 9 to 31 and from November 1 to 23, 1965, in dredging to restore por- tions of 40-foot project channel to authorized dimensions. Re- moved 138,800 cubic yards place measurement at a cost of $58,030, includming $1,016 for engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance. Hopper dredges Goethals and Essayons and fort tendant, plant were employed intermittently from August 1 to September 1, 1965, and from April 2 to May 22, 1966, in dredging to restore channel along Weehawken-Edgewater waterfront to a depth of 30 feet. Removed 820,200 cubic yards place measure- ment at a cost of $500,329, including $5,366 for engineering pre- liminary to dredging for maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing projectet was commenced April 1913 and completed September 1952. Widening and deepening Weehawken-Edgewater Channel to project dimensions was completed in August 1937 Widening 40-foot channel for full width of river from Ellis Island to West 59th Street, Manhattan, was completed in March 1939. Widelo ing 48-foot project to full project width of 2,000 feet 40th Street to West 59th Street was completed in from West November 1950. Deepening 45-foot channel for a width of 2,000 feet fron) Upper Bay to West 40th Street was completed to project dimen* sions in September 1952. Controlling mean low water depths of sections Section Depth Width _Section__ (feet) (feet) Date 40-foot channel: From Ellis Island to West 59th St .............. 35 45-foot channel: From Ellis Island to West 40th St ............... 3,00-2400 Oct. 19 63ec16 35 3,600-2,400 Oct. 1963-Dec. 48-foot channel: From West 40th St. to West 59th St. ..... 44 2,000 Oct-1,900 Weehawken-Edgewater channel: .... . 48 2,000 Oct.. 193-June 19 63-Jun From West 59th St. to opposite Hess Oil Terminals dock.. .. From opposite Hess Oil Terminals dock to West 156th St., Man. 30 750- 550 Jan. 1964-May 1961 hattan. g98 30 750-500 Mar. 1965- Y 9 Total cost of existing project to June 30 1966, was $16,566,661 -$668,820 public works funds and $6,033,421 regular fund s a total of $6,702,241 for new work and $9,864,420 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year......... 1962 1963 1884 1965 1966 June 30, 198 New work: - Appropriated ... ' 8 70 Cost ........ ': Maintenance: ... .. . .. .8... .. 2%7 ,89.. cost..... ... 335,949 369,349 386:176 461,760 64 4 558,359 9,8 A 1 Includes $69,629 for new work for previous projects and $668,820 public works funds. 14. HUDSON RIVER, N.Y. Location. Has its source in Adirondack Mountains, about 250 miles in a direct line and 315 miles along its course from the RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 151 toery, New York City, and flows generally southerly into New City ay. Section under improvement extends from New York C.Y about 156 miles to Waterford. (See Coast and Geodetic SRVey Charts 282, 283 284, 747, and 748.) for evitous projects. or details see page 1764, Annual Report Ej15, and page 226, Annual Report for 1938. Cit%,stingq project. A channel 600 feet wide from New York i~w tIo Kingston and thence 400 feet wide to Albany, with loning at bends, a turning basin 700 feet wide and 1,200 feet t at Albany, and 2 anchorages, 1 near Hudson and 1 near etlYVesant, each 400 feet wide and an average length of 2,400 t ,; all with depths of 32 feet in soft material and 34 feet in rock; ~wedce 14 feet deep at lowest low water and generally 400 feet feet o Federal lock at Troy; and thence of same depth and 200 fan Wide to southern limit of State barge canal at Waterford; da removal of State dam at Troy and construction of a lock and by d about 21/2 miles below Waterford. Channel is to be formed abdredging and rock excavation, and maintained by dredging dik constructing new, and raising and repairing old, longitudinal dis, built partly under previous projects and partly by the State at eW York. Mean range of pool elevation above Federal dam ci roy, in seasons of moderate rains, is about 2.2 feet, as deter- daned in 1934. Mean tidal range is about 4.7 feet at Federal rrn at Troy and about 4.6 feet at Albany, extreme range due to abosets is 33.4 and 25.7 feet, respectively. Normal pool level A oVe Federal dam from Troy to Waterford is 14.33 feet above 10ae sea level. In tidal section of river below dam, assumed a est low water plane from Troy to Albany is 3 feet below mean level. Location* Features of lock and dam included in existing project Below Waterford ................................ miles . 2.2 Loc Above Battery, New York City ........................ do .... 153.8 Clear width ......................................... feet .. 44.44 Greatest length available for full width ............... do .... 492.5 ift at lowest stages ............................. do ... 17.3 epth on miter sills: Upper (at normal pool level) .................... do .... 16.3 char Lower (at lowest low water) ..................... do .... 13.0 alracter of foundation: Rock. d of dam:. Fixed. 0e of construction: Concrete. C Pleted: 1917. $1,463,014. otlluntswork New for completed expended project cost $39,045,699 exclusive of on previous projects. Widening to form har- 0ors at Albany and Troy, N.Y., to 12 feet deep at a cost of $552,- 0of (1954) and completion of 27-foot channel at Albany at a cost dike 458,000 (1957) are considered inactive. Construction of dkes at a cost of $642,000 (1957) was placed in deferred for r tudy category. All three features of work are excluded from regoing description of existing project and cost estimate. 152 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the followina: Acts Work authorized Documental June 25,1910 Channel 12 feet deep from Hudson to Waterford, State lock and dam at Troy and construct remove H. Doc. 719, 61st Cong., 2d 8 * a new lock and dam.2 Mar. 3,1925 Channel 27 27 feet July 3, 1930 Channel feet deep deep from below Hudson to Albany............... Hudsona......... ... H.Doc. 350, 68th Cong., 1stses (3) Operation and care of lock and dam at Troy wereincluded H. 11. Doe. 350, 70th Doe. 210, 68th Cong. Cong., 1st lstsee esse S.o Aug. 30, 19354 Reroject July 1, 1935. JuneAg20,19384 Deepen location of 12-foot channel between Troy and Waterford.. S. channel between Albany and Waterford to 14 feet Doc. 155, 72d with no change in depths for harbors H. Doc. 572, 75thCong., 2d sess. Cong., 3d in front of Albany and Troy. Sept. 3,1954 Deepen channel between New York *. City and Albany to 32 H. Doe. 228, 83d Cong., feet and construct a turning basin and 2 1st s anchorages. IContain latest published maps. 2 Widening to form harbors at Albany and Troy to 12 feet deep Permanent Appropriations Repeal considered inactive. 'Public Works Administration, Act of June 26. 1934. Sept. 6, 1933. Local cooperation, Complied with except for proviSiOl Of River and Harbor Act of 1954, which require furnish lands, easements, rights-ofway local inereSt . posal areas for future maintenance; hold and suitable spo'd the United States free from damages; provide depths commensurate with in approache and berths channel depth . ates tererminals to serve commerce Which would move able bulkheadonontheeastimprovement; construct and maintain side of proposed turning basin or per a su andredging oinf a slope that would otherwisebe required; provide t and maintaindeat port of Albany, in addition to provided, sufficient stor- facilities heretofre vage and dation of prospective comm erce; handling facilities for accol~I and continue, through ad i tration bybo,Albany f ~ cc Commisson d,y0,, X _PortDistrict _ ~ o m i s s i o n oorulher r o t h e r PPL11)ti,' body, to regulate 5,00retin oalnth use, growth State. areN14 wharesg and development agreamg of harbor fafide ties at port of Albany and to hold suitable facilities open to allll~ equal terms. Terminal facilities , Piers and other terminal or transfer cilitiesdel served by the improvementare: between ~f1 Federal dam at lTroy there are 14 Waterford od 5,000 feet in length. State of New wharves aggregating 0to canal terminal at Cohoes. There is York constructed a dock 325 alongrg west side of river just north of Federal dam. Atfeet Troy there are 9 terminals with available dockage the State barge-canal terminal with 960 of 2,383 feet ig miles of concrete bulkhead were feet. In addition, 1I' city of Troy. At Watervliet thereis constructed along waterfront b a stone bulkhead long. Between this point and Albany there are five755 feet ti-be wharves aggregating 2,300 feet in selaer on east side of river, there length. At Albany, andJBels 15,150 feet of available berthage, and are 25 terminals agy, a n v minal with 1,586 feet on west side of the the State bargecanal" river. These terMiilfler are adequately served with railroad trackage. sit sheds, 1 warehouse, a There are 5 trapl 500,000 bushel grain elevator, and A molasses-storage plant, all provided by Albany mission. Between Albany and Hudson Port District Cor ber wharves aggregating 36,100 feet there are about 100, t,, are 12 timber wharves aggregating 5,ooo in length; at Hudson there feet in length; RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 153 Athens there are 9 timber wharves aggregating 4,000 feet in 1ength" Between Hudson and upper limits of New York City eu"tire Waterfronts of Poughkeepsie, Newburgh, and Yonkers are Nuipped with transfer facilities. At Poughkeepsie there are 6 aridinals with available dockage of 2,580 feet. At Newburgh ld New 8ub 1 , feet,Windsor there are 17 terminals with a total dockage of of which 1 with 90 feet of dockage is open to 5ublic. At Yonkers there are 20 terminals with dockage the of a5764 feet, of which 531 feet are for public use. Existing wharves ae ample for Hudson River traffic. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Under a continuing contract for area No. 11, Four Mile Point to Lin- lithgo, work was completed August 17, 1965. Removed 153,173 cubic yards of material other than ledge rock at a cost of $152,726. Under a continuing contract for rock area No. 14, Coeymans to Malden, work was completed November 22, 1965. During the fiscal year 8,835 cubic yards of ledge rock were drilled and blasted, 58,769 cubic yards of ledge rock and 42,381 cubic yards of ma- terial other than ledge rock were removed at a cost of $733,705, including $6,452 for engineering preliminary to dredging. Un- der a continuing contract for rock area No. 16 work was com- pleted August 25, 1965. Removed 19,514 cubic yards of ledge rock and 10,309 cubic yards of material other than ledge rock at a cost of $191,847. Under a continuing contract for rock area No. 18, Schermerhorn Island to North Coeymans, work was completed October 21, 1965. During the fiscal year, 84,215 cubic yards of ledge rock were drilled and blasted, 112,317 cubic yards of ledge rock and 51,113 cubic yards of material other than ledge rock were removed at a cost of $813,176 including $22,090 for engi- neering preliminary to dredging. Maintenance: Under a proposed contract for dredging between Albany and Bear Island to restore project depth of 32 feet, a total of $37,000 was expended for engi- neering preliminary to dredging. By use of Government plant and hired labor, stumps and snags which formed a potential menace to navigation and other obstructions were removed from ,the shores and channel of the river at a cost of $58,763 including $,015 for engineering preliminary to maintenance. Lock and darn in Hudson River at Troy, N.Y., was operated and maintained. O ratio flc fr16 e eraton of lock for 1965 navigation season was suspended De- "o.lber 11, 1965, and resumed April 7, 1966, for 1966 season. o incurred was $145,073 for maintenance. Under a continuing Contract for repairs to Schermerhorn Island Dike, work was com- $eted August 27, 1965. Cost of work during the fiscal year was 459. Work on repair to Schodack Creek dike was initiated in 11aune 1966. Cost of work was $2,399 for engineering prelimi- St ry to repairs for maintenance. Under a contract for con- gar'eting a new upstream emergency bulkhead at Troy lock, final justment in contract price resulted in costs of $2,551 being 1curred. Under a proposed contract for rebuilding mooring Diers at south entrance to Troy lock, initiated engineering and s g work. Cost incurred was $16,206 for engineering pre- 'Inary to repairs for maintenance. Government plant and 154 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 hired labor resurfaced top of lock walls at Troy lock. curred were $10,487 including $53-for engineering 1l Costs maintenance.. Government plant and hired laborprelimin arY to constructed concrete work area at north end of Troy lock. Costs incurred were $3,397, including $86 for engineering preliminary to mai" tenance.. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing project began in July 1910 and was completed in November lock and dam at Troy, removal of old dam at Troy and 1965. NeW construe tion of 15,545 linear feet of dikes also are complete. In reco" struction ofo old dikes 39,676 linear feet were raised to adopted crest height. Channel from New York to adepth of 32 feet. The 1,500 linear City to Albany is c nlete immediately upstream of the 32-foot feet of the 27-foot channel dredged. Channel from -Albany to project has never bee, Waterford is complete to 3 depth of 14 feet, for a small part of the widening at Troy, which is not deemed necessary to form a harbor trolling mean low water depth from for the present. Coll is 32 feet for a width of 600 feet, thenceNew York City to KingstOfl 32 feet for widths varY, ing from 400 to 300 feet to about 1,500 feet south limit of 32-foot project atAlbany, thence of the northerlY ing from 400 to 200efeet to the northerly 15 feet for widths vall dd south ect at a point 100 feet ro of yhoepne5e limit of the 27-foot proJ' Dunn Memorial Bridge Controlling mean low- water depth'in turning basin at Albanyi 28.5 feet. Controlling lowest low water depth for 14-foot project is 14 feet for widths varying from 400 to 300 feet from northerly lirflt of the 27-foot projectto New York Central Railroad at Albany, thence 12 feet for widths freight brde varying from 500 to 400 feet to the Bath Crossover Light, thence from 400 14 feet for widths varying to 100 feet to-the south lock~sut .. entrance to Troy entrtcenceis13o lock entrance it is -13 feet for a width... Troy lockck. 'At-1' the depth over lock sills is 13 feet at lower of 45 feet. Controlli fl sill. depth from above -lock at Troy to Waterford, Controlling pool leve ment, is 14 feet for widths varying the head of improv remaining under the project consistsfrom 120 to 45 feet. Wor at Albany and Troy, 27-foot channel of construction of harbor$ at Albany and reconstructiofl of dikes. Total costs of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance and care Total Publicworks.................. ......... Emergency relief ................................... $ 38,495888 $7,I20,50 . $5,014,514 $3: 238'350 . ToaToal........................7,120,501 ..................------ Total ....:... , 5,014,514 811,491......................9, 101 51,1801 11,5 RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 155 Cost and financial statement ealyearTotal to .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Newwork. iopriated .. $4,942,019 $5,048,345 $3,465,000 $4,960,000 $2,000,000 2144,270,706 ae ' . .. $4,698,8064,855,5295,286,6313,571,7451,891,454 244,158,293 oprated.......... 662,000 988,000 404,000 375,000 454,000 312,672,300 ..... 340,793 504,409 1,063,900 487,191 317,535 312,481,812 - Io,1ude $5,112,594 for new work and $346,797 for maintenance for previous projects. s ribut $238,350 public work funds and $311,461 emergency relief funds. Excludes $81,373 e uad s expended by local interests. ar lock$454,273 expended between August 18, 1915, and June 30, 1935, for operation and 3reiu and dam at Troy, N.Y. under permanent indefinite appropriation. Excludes rbursement for repairs to Troy lock. L 15. LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, N.Y. cation. On east end of Long Island, about 3 miles by land Cityof Montauk Point and 125 miles by water east of.New York cor'r It is landlocked on the east, south, and west sides and is irdetected on the north with Block Island Sound by. an artificial ' (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 362.) low isting project. Provides for a channel 12 feet deep at mean tl Wockater and 150 feet wide extending from 12-foot contour in Stk Island Sound to same depth in existing yacht basin east of feet Island; a boat basin 10 feet deep, 400 feet wide, and.900 o1 ong, northwest of Star Island; and repair and extension Droeward of the east and west jetties. Section included in the of .ect is 0.7 mile long. Mean tidal range, 1.9 feet; mean range ba Plring tides, 2.2 feet; irregular fluctuations due to wind and. toJlrtetric pressure vary from 2 feet below mean low water up feet above mean high water. Estimated cost for new work fjut1966) is $700,000, exclusive of $82,738 Navy Department boI * Existing project was adopted by 1945 River and Har- ' ct (H.Doc. 369, 76th Cong., 1st sess.). For latest published 4 see project document. c all cooperation. lo River and Harbor Act of 1945 provides that all flterests: (a) Furnish spoil-disposal areas for initial work da Uture maintenance; (b) hold the United States free from teqag es; (c) convey to the United States rights-of-way and struc- including such absolute and indefeasible easement in Lake ajtauk Harbor and in the shores and bed thereof as may be nec- aPj. to insure its permanent dedication to the use and purpose of costlic navigable waterway; (d) give assurances that they will lisruct and maintain for free public use suitable roadways to a t tss access to the boat basin and inner harbor; and (e) give liCra nles that they will construct and maintain a suitable pub- vid ing open to all on equal and reasonable terms. And pro- i d further that no work be done by the United States until the ~t s of-way, structures, and easement specified in (c)- above vae been conveyed to the United States; and title to rights-of- (crequired for roadways and landing facilities specified in to nd (d) :above, has been vested in the county of Suffolk or of East Hampton, N.Y. On December 8, 1942, the Chief of n'lleers approved the instruments complying with condition 156 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, (c) above, and partially complying with items (a) and (b). Work undertaken in Lake Montauk Harbor a part of an authorized river in 1942 was not then formed for the Navy Department. and harbor project but was project weretnot considered Conditions required under per- the wholly applicable. The supervisor' town of East Hampton, was notified of the conditions of local cooperation January 24, 1946. Local interests indicated that re- maining conditions will be met. Terminal facilities. Twenty-five water terminals side of Star Island, the lake area are on east end of entrance channel. None of the south of the island, terminals has rail atconnee iner tions or is equipped wif redgight are privately owned, one publicly handling devices. TwentYtWo There are two boatyards within owned and two federally owlned the harbor. Terminals are con- sidered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for dredging to restore project depth of 12 feet in the entrance Chan nel, work began Augusot 31 and was completed October 8, 1965 Removed 28,541 cubic yards, place measurement, of material. Engineering preliminary to dredgin g for maintenance cost $51,345. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 31 percent complete. Dredging entrancechannel and shoreward extesons eof west jetty were performed from August 1942 at the request of the Navy Department to January943 tober 1965, controlling depth at mean low with Navy funds. In Oc width varying from 150 to 75 water was 12 feet for A Sound about 300 feet north feet from a point in Block Islad of the west jetty to upstream of project. Boat basin (Feb. 1965) is 10 to plus 1.3 feet deeplirnt a width of 400 feet. Work remaining for of dredging a boat basin northwest to complete project COnV'st of Star Island; repair existi g east and westjetties andshoreward extension of east jettY. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 Total td1 ---- -- - - 1 1965 1966 Maintenance: Appropriated . ......... $57,500 $1,637 $483 $45,584 $14,284 483 8,523 51,345 1$82,738 expended for new work performed 2 with Navy funds. 16. LITTLE NECK BAY, Location. On north shore of Long N.Y. Long Island SoYou nd , about 17 miles Island at westerly end o by water from the Batter' New York City, and 3 miles west of Manhasset Bay. Bay is abO~t 2.7 miles long and averages 0.8 mile wide. (See Coastabd Geodetic Survey Chart 223.) s mile wide (See Coast Existin aProject.An anchorage, deepa 350 acres in extent, 7 fee 200-footmean low water i n southern part of Little Neck northern partwideof entrance channel connecting with deep Bay and of spring tides. of 83 the bay. Mean tidal range, 7.1 feet; meanwater ip sprigc barometf rtidess8. rang baroetri.presur fe rTeguar luctuations due to wind vary from 3.8 feet below mean low water to RIVERS AND IIARBORS-NEW YORK. N.Y.. DISTRICT 157 927 feet above mean high water. Cost estimate for new work is by 1 0,000 (July 1966) exclusive of $2,120,000 to be contributed a oal interests. Existing project was adopted by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 510, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Latest pub- lNhed map is in project document. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1962 provides that cal interests shall, prior to construction agree to contribute in cash 50 percent of first cost of construction; provide all lands, ti eMents, and rights-of-way for construction, and for construc- of gand maintenance of aids to navigation, upon request of Chief and agineers; hold the United States free from damages; provide publinaintain necessary mooring facilities and utilities including areu landings with suitable supply facilities and public parking ar Open to all on equal terms; and establish a competent and growly constituted public body empowered to regulate use, stawth, and free development of harbor facilities with the under- sanding that said facilities will be open to all on equal terms. urances of compliance were furnished by State of New York, S .Dulnent of Conservation, and accepted March 16, 1966, by the 7'rct Engineer. shoerminal facilities. Three publicly owned piers, one on west NeCe of bay and two on east shore. Two boat yards are in Little Ceac Creek equipped with mechanical handling devices with a 7acity for open storage for 250 craft. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for dredging entrance channel and anchorage area to a project depth of 7 feet, work commenced May 13, 1966, and continued. Re- moved 279,983 cubic yards, place measurement, of material at a cost of $372,676, including $21,630 for engineering preliminary to dredging for new work. Condition at end of fiscal year. In May 1960 and March 1966 5 ftrolling 1966 depths at mean low water in the anchorage area were feet in northern portion, 3 feet in the central portion, and zero . in southern portion. Cost and fnancial statement REGULAR FUNDS 62 1963 1964 1965 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS lyear Total to ...... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 -ributed.................................................$0 .......... ....... ................................. 185,475 185,475 158 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 17. LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, N.Y. Location,. Extends from East Rockaway Inlet, on the soUth side of Long Island, to Great Peconic Bay at eastern end O Long Island. Section included under this project extends from Great South Bay opposite Patchogue to the south end of Shif necock Canal. ,(See: Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 578. :Existing project. A channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet deepa mean low water from the federally improved channel in Great South Bay, opposite Patchogue to south end of Shinnecock Canal Section included in project is 34 miles long. Mean tidal ran'ge varies, from 1 foot in Shinnecock Bay to 0.7 foot in Patchogte Bay;,mean range of spring-tides varies from 1.2 feet to 0.8 feet; irregular. fluctuations due to wind and barometric pressure var from 1.8 feet below;mean low water to 12 feet above mean hig water. Cost of new work for completed project was $235,9 Existing project was adopted by 1937 River and Harbor Act ( Doc. 181, 75th Cong., 1st sess.). Latest published map is in project document. Local cooperation. Complied with except local interests Ilu furnish suitable spoil-disposal areas for future maintenance required. . . , .. . . Terminal facilities. There are 17 boat repair and sto rd yards within the area immediately adjacent to the Federal 1i' provement. There is ample room for expansion and developmen of terminals when future commerce warrants.to Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract to restore project depth of 6 feet in, Moriches and Shinnecock Bays work began August 5 and was completed September 14, 1965 Removed 133,104 cubic yards, place measurement, of material at a cost of $134,962, including $7,833 for engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance. Reconnaissance surveys cost $700,c Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing projec was commenced October 1939 and completed September 19 Controlling mean low water depth (Aug. 1958 to Apr. 1966)0 the channel was 5 feet for a width of 100 feet from the junc.o with Patchogue River to Tuthill Point, thence 5 feet for a Wit varying from 100 to 50 feet to south end of Shinnecock canal. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963e 1964 1985 1966 Juo l New work: 23' Appropriated...................... ...... .236'9" Cost.23 Maintnn.................. ............ Maintenance: ....... . ............. 1 Approprated..........$135,642 $235,000 811 $625 $17,111 $128,770 Cost............... .. 13,183 140,495 208,589 1021 135,662 18. MAMARONECK HARBOR, N.Y. Location.',Onnorth shore of Long Island Sound, 5 miles WeA of Connecticut Stateline, and 27 miles by water east of thei3at tery, New York City. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 2 29 RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 159 1 9Previous projects. For details see Annual Reports for 1915, 12,.and 1938, pages 1759, 141, and 160,. respectively. :,"I and1~ting project. A channel 10 feet deep at' mean low water 0,rieO feet wide from deep water in Long Island Sound .to belownta Point, and thence 80 feet wide to a point about. 150 feet 300fthe Boston Post Road, including an extension, to northeast ahfeet long and 80 feet wide, all with widening at bends; for 2 Sechorages, 1 of 10-foot depth about 41/2 acres in; extent and the wvest about 14 acres in area to 6 feet deep; and an anchorage in ceSt Basin 6 feet deep at mean low water with a channel of like chth and 80 feet wide connecting this anchorage with the main tial nel. Section included in project is 1% miles ,long. Mean' tular range, 6.9 feet; mean range of spring tides, 8.3 feet; irregH 3.9 yflutuations due to wind and barometric pressure vary from Wateet below mean low water up to 8.5 feet above mean high $lter. New work for completed project cost $259,307 exclusive of ex e989 expended from contributed funds, required, and amounts leded on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Apt$ Work authorized , , Documents, . 22 12 Ag2 19 Dredging 10-foot channel and anchorage. .. i.. Doe. 651, 66th Cong., 2d sess. of Dredging 6-foot anchorage in West Basin and its approach Rivers and Harbors Comnmittee Doe. 714,1960 D channel. 4, 74th Cong.. 1st sess.) Dredging 6-foot anchorage in East Basin..................IH. Doc. 209, 86th Cong., 2d sis. tlils latet published maps. 19 ca l cooperation. Provisions under River and Harbor Acts of ad1 and 1935 complied with except local interests: must provide hequate and suitable spoil-disposal areas suitably diked or bulk-, ocaled as needed. River and Harbor Act of 1960 provides that stl interests contribute in cash 50 percent of first cost of con- allction, to be paid in a, lump sum, prior to construction, final Drcation of cost to be made after actual costs are determined; trct.e lands, rights-of-way, and suitable disposal areas for con- ton and future maintenance of anchorage; hold the United lats free from damages; provide at all times adequate public s o Ing facilities, open to all on equal terms, for access to the 0fte by users of the anchorage; and allocate an adequate portion Dro e anchorage to accommodate a minimum of 15 boats, and by vide mooring facilities therein, specifically designated for use a"Chransient craft on terms equal to those in portions of the pliaCorage designated for use by local craft. Assurances of com- ce were ace,ted by thefurnished by the village of Mamaroneck and District Engineer on April 3, 1962. abl" minal facilities. There are 17 wharves with a total avail- 14l berthage of 4,800 feet along the shores of the harbor; 6 are, eN ast Basin and 4 in West Basin. Six of the wharves ,are coQ 14ed with mechanical handling facilities; none has railroad o~qections. One wharf with a berthage of 235 feet is publicly egIed. clDlled Seven boatyards with marine with storage railways space for are available for 1,050 boatscraft. pleasure and 160 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Smallboat landings, consisting of floats, having a total ber th a ge of 400 feet, are available to the public. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for dredging to provide project depth of 6 feet in anchorage area in East Basin, work commenced March 25 and was completed May 24, 1966. Removed 144,180 cubic yards, place measurement, of material at a cost of $296,491, including $8,038 for engineering preliminary to dredging for new work. Under the same contract to restore project depth of 6 feet in channel and anchorage area in West Basin, work began March 28 and was completed April 27 1966. Removed 28,349 cubic yards, place measurement, of ma- terial at a cost of $66,749, including $8,721 for engineering pre- liminary to dredging for maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing project began in October 1924 and was completed in May 1966. Wor completed consisted of providing a 10-foot main channel bralClc channel and anchorage area in East Basin completed in Aprl 1933. A 6-foot connecting channel and anchorage area in West Basin completed in July 1939. An enlargement of anchorage area in East Basin to a depth of 6 feet completed in May 1966. In JUfl 1963 and May 1966 controlling mean low water depth was 10 feet for a width varying from 100 to 80 feet in main channel froP Long Island Sound to East Basin anchorage area thence 9a feet t upper limit including branch channel; in East Basin anch o r A e areas, 10 feet in 10-foot anchorage area and 6 feet in 6-foota chorage area; in West Basin, 6 feet in 6-foot anchorage area ll 6 feet in connecting channel thereto. Total cost of existing )ro ect to June 30, 1966, was $695,135, of which $411,296 Was for new work ($259,307 U.S. funds and $151,989 contributed fund required), and $283,839 for maintenance. In addition, costs fro contributed funds, other, were $38,572. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year............... 1962 1063 1064 1965 1966 June39t New work: Appropriated.......... 8$4,000.. ............................. $137,500 $34031 Cost................. . 986 $14 ...................., 27340o Maintenance:, 128,627 34 ropriated9 Cost ......... . 1 7 00 $1,031 $80,688 75,000 5....... 95,000 1,931 80,688 62,7802 SIncludes $80,724 for new work and $13,415 for maintenance for previous projects. REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year.............. 1962 1063 103_6 1 _4195 165 16 066 June J oal30, 196 New work:4. . Contributed,......... ................. ......... $166,000 $184'9 Cost . .................................. $166,000 RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 161 OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Year cal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork: ' colitributed. .... t .......................... :::::::::::::::::I I ............................................. ........... '38,572 38,672 $69,000 38,572 3,6720 $69,000 19. MATTITUCK HARBOR,N.Y. nicaion. A tidal inlet on north shore of Long Island, 85 of re east of the Battery, New York City, and 24 miles southeast to v.il liaven Harbor, Conn., extending southward about 21/4 mile 3v68.)age of Mattituck. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart frXesting project. A channel 7 feet deep at mean low water Villae ong Island Sound to a 460- by 570-foot anchorage area at Jetti o'f Mattituck, protected at the entrance by two parallel 80 fe400 feet apart, channel widths are 100 feet at entrance and raet elsewhere. Total length is about 2.2 miles. Mean tidal fee at entrance, 4.9 feet; at Old Mill Bridge, Waterville, 5.1 Millean range of spring tides at entrance, 5.8 feet; at Old letri dge, 6 feet; irregular fluctuations due to wind and baro- 6.6 fetpressure vary from 2.2 feet below mean low water up to cost et above mean high water. New work for completed project fu 177,924 exclusive of $34,580 expended from contributed Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports ':189 Dredging 7-foot channel and 2 riprap jetties............... Annual Report 1891, p. 843. 1964 oot extension of west jetty ............. ........... 11.Doe. 8, 71st Cong, 1st sess. 1 11Dredging anchorage area and deepening channel at upper end. Chief of Engineers pursuant to sec. __107, Public Law 86-645. n latest published map. f '°cal c " ' ' Urish OOperation. Complied with except local interests must rer spoil-disposal areas for maintenance. o nal facilities. Lower portion of harbor contains four teierclal and two recreational boating terminals. Commercial . nals are used for handling petroleum products, sand, gravel, iorEg materials, fish and shellfish. Recreational terminals have the ,,g accommodations available for 20 boats and facilities for rviale of gasoline, oil, bait, miscellaneous supplies and for repair ti0 les. Upper portion of harbor contains facilities for recrea- craft and are open to the general public. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract to dredge anchorage area and upstream end of channel to a depth of 7 feet, work began September 27 and was completed October 21, 1965. Removed 40,980 cubic yards, place measurement, of ma- terial at a cost of $65,070 including $7,155 for engineering pre- liminary to dredging for new work. Under a contract for dredging to restore project depth of 7 feet from Long Island Sound to Old 162 REPORT OFP THE CHIEF OFENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Mill Road, work commenced September 27 and was completed October 21, 1965. Removed 6,285 cubic yards, place measurement of material at a cost of $7,288, including an adjustment in costs decreasing engineering preliminary to dredging from $3,959 $1,672 for maintenance. 1 Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Origill dredging was completed in 1914. East jetty was complete 9d3 1906 for a 775-foot length. , West jetty was completed in 1a Controlling depth (July 1964-Sept. 1965) at mean low water 7 and' 100 feet wide from Long Island Sound to 650 feet upstreA from south end of west jetty, thence 7 feet deep for a width Vary, ing frorm 80 to 50 feet to upstream limit of anchorage at villag Mattituck. Anchorage has a controlling depth of 7 feet. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year................ 1962, 1963 1964 1065 1966 June 3 Newwork: .. ''91 Appropriated.......... $10,000 ........... .$3,500 $35,000... Cost........ ........ .......... $10,000 91 3,999 $30,490 Maintenanc: . . .. . Appropriated..........-10,501 . 767 21,000 -9,189 9 Cost........... 35,280 ...... 767 4,323 7,288 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to66 Fiscal year............... .1962 ,1963 1964 1965 1966 Jn2 New work:5 Contributed................ ............... ... ...... $18,500 $17,000 Cost........................... .. .. 34,580 20. MILTON HARBOR, N.Y. Location. A cove on north shore of Long Island Sound, ab 29 miles by water northeast of the Battery, New York City. Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 222.), Existing project. Improvement provides for an entrance chOe nel 100 feet wide and 1.2 miles long from 6-foot contour in ol harbor; ,thence . an inner channel • 60 ando0,f 60,, and 50 feet eet wide,,wide and0 mile long; thence a branch channel 70 and 50 feet wide and t mile long all with depths of 6 feet at mean low water. Proj report was authorized May 14, 1964, and project was authori by the Chief of Engineers April 23, 1965, pursuant to section Public Law 86-645. Estimated cost of new work is $264,000et which $140,000 (53 percent) is Federal and $124,000 (47 P cent) is contributed funds. Cen Local cooperation. Local ',interests must contribute 47 percei of the first cost of dredging and furnish assurances that they pay entire cost of dredging proposed marina extension and deeV ening existing marina; provide lands, easements, and rights%' way for construction and future maintenance of project andAi to navigation upon request of the Chief of Engineers; assumi responsibility for all costs in excess of the Federal cost limita' RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 163 de to..if applicable; 'OO),000 g~es uctiona hold the United States free from dam- .PonUsties eptth u to construction and maintenance; provide and maintain Iterin In berthing areas and local access channels serving the ect area 8COmmensurate with the depths provided in related proj- utiliar ; provide and maintain necessary mooring facilities and ' ublic Including public landings and suitable supply facilities and Proe Parking areas open to all equally; maintain a competent and groly constituted public body empowered to regulate the use, stal and development of the harbor facilities with the under- asng that these facilities will be open to all equally. Assur- orf local cooperation were executed by the city of Rye, N.Y., itdober oJ 6, 1965, and accepted by District Engineer for the 0e States October 12, 1965. co'erattions and results during fiscal year. Under a proposec(, ectact for dredging to obtain a depth of 6 feet in approved proj- Colineering preliminary to dredging for new work. ProjeJect tion at end of fiscal year. Construction under existing as not been initiated. Cost and financial statement alear 1002Total to . 196 1963 1964 1965 1960 June 30, 1966 NewWork . -_-_ _ _.. C priated. . $3,000 $15,000 $8,000 $26,000 3,636 10,421 15,857 2. NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, N.J. 6 Location. Newark Bay is an estuary about 11/4 miles wide and I es long extending southerly from confluence of Hackensack ts aaassaic e4d k R iv e,Rivers to New York and New Jersey Channels. Hack- f rises near Haverstraw, Rockland County, N.Y., and ls about 45miles into Newark Bay. Passaic River1 rises in it1hlads of northeastern New Jersey and flows about 80 miles a a28 ewark Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts. .285 d87.), erous projects. For details see pages 265 and 266 of Annual Aort for 1926; page 301, Annual Report for 1929; page 244, Ul. Report for 1938, and page 134, 1954 Annual Report. cll sting project. Provides, for: (a) Newark Bay: .. A main 5 el 37 feet deep in rock and 35 feet deep in other material, abofeet Wide at entrance and narrowing to 400 feet at 4,000. feet to tle Central Railroad of New Jersey bridge; thence continuing Te it Width and same depths to branch channel to Port Newark Pasai al; thence 32 feet deep and 400 feet wide to junction of and Hackensack River channels; removal.,of east and icesae abt Cutoffs at junction with Kill Van Kull and widening,of bend tae Central Railroad of New Jersey bridge to same depths, a dis- aCe of about 4.7 miles. (b) A branch channel in Newark Bay Seet deep in rock and 35 feet deep in other material,. 600 feet Sto inshore channel at Port Newark terminal, widened at turn ce an inshore channel of same depths and 400 feet wide; a 164 REPORT OF THIE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 total distance of about 1.6 miles. (c) Maintenance to 35 feet deep at mean low water of the channels at Port lows: a Branch Channel, 500 to 950 feet Elizabeth as f feet from main channel in Newark Bay towide, extending 3,500 Inshore Inshore Channel, 500 f eet wide, extending westward from Channel; Channel for 5,250 feet; a South Branch Channel, with ,Bran width o f 550 feet, extending 1,250 feet from a minimu Newark Bay to east bulkhead at Port Elizabeth;main chan nel nel, 200 feet wide, extending westward along south a South Ch Port Elizabeth for 3,100 feet; an East Channel at Portbulkhead Elizabet' At 200 feet wide, extending a longeast bulkhead for 3 750 feet; and at Port Newark an east channel connecting Port Elizabet and Port Newark, a distance of 4,150 feet. River: A channel 30 feet dee p and 400 feet wide (d) Hackense from uPPer~, of Newark Bay channel to Central Railroad of New Jersey bri ge about 1.1 miles; thence 30 feet deep and about 2,000 feet north of Erie-Lackawanna 300 feet wide toPt Lackawanna & Western RR.) bridge, 2.8 (formerly DelaVare basin 25 feet deep at upper end of channel;thencemiles; with ao re 200 feet wide, for 10.1 miles to Little Ferry; thence 12 feet deeP' 12 fe et dee 150 feet wide to New York, Susquehanna, and Western bridge. Total length about 16.5 miles. Railroad channel 30 feet deep and 3 00 feet wide, (e) Passaic River: from point 3,000 feet aboveLincoln . Highway Bridge,Newark BaY tco 2. 6 miles; tlleec 20 feet deep and 300 feet wide to Jackson Street Bridge 2 ile$ thence 16 feet deep and 300 feet wide 2.4 miles; thence 16 feet deep and 200 to Nairn Linoleum Oqnj'$ Greenwood Lake Railroad bridge, feet wide to Montclaet about 1.1 miles; thence 10 r13 ideep and 150 feet 2wide to Eighth Street Bridge at Passaic, miles, a total di stance for Passaic River ll depth s refer to plane of of 15.4 miles. ~ Newark Bay is 4.9 feet; . me. an low water. Mean tidal rage in Hackensack River at Court Stre Bridge, 5.3 feet; in Passaic River at Pennsylvania freight bridge, 5.2 feet; and in Passaic River at GregoryRailroea Aven64 Bridge, 5.1 feet; mean range of spring tides, 5.8, 6.4, 6.2, and feet, respectively; irregular fluctuations metric pressure vary from 3.7 feet below due to wind and bto 6.2 feet above mean high water. Cost mean low water tip portion of completed project consisting ofofnew work channels for atlV° above, was $9740,241, exclusive of amounts expended describe, on preV ous projects and $285,600 -'contributed Dredging Passaic River to 20 by local interes' Jackson Street Bridge about 2.4feet deep and 300 feet wide frol' miles to Nairn Linoleum XVopf is considered inactive and excluded and cost estimate. Estimated cost from foregoing descriPtiop $1,182,000. Deepening existing 3 0-foot (1954) of this portios, ensack River, upstream from its junctionproject channel in 43c' with Passaic Riverf 34 feet in rock and 32 feet in other material, is in deferred for restudy category and with widening at bel.t description and cost estimate. Estimatedexcluded from fore 0 0 cost (July 1960) Ofh portion is $1,675,000. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 165 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts A __ Work authorized Documents Mar.2 1907 eb.2 7 16-foot channel in Passaic River......................... H. Doc. 441, 50th Cong., 2d seas. IY 25,1912 2 idemng 6-foot channel in Passaic River.......... ....... Do. y 21 0-foot channel in Passaic Riverl....................... H. Doe. 707, 62d Cong., 2d sess. 21 92 12-foot a. 10 channel in Hackensack River....................... H. Doc. 643, 61st Cong., 2d sess. July3 17 0 -foot channel in Passaic River......................... H. Doc. 284, 69th Cong., 2d sess.2 ar, 2'19303 -foot channel in Passaic River.......................... H. Doc. 156, 71st Cong., 2d sess. 19 35 and 37 feet in main channel of Newark Bay and branch S. Doe. 250, 79th Cong., 2d seas. channel to and inshore channel at Port Newark Terminal and Do.. remove portion of rock area at Bergen Point to same depths. 8 ...4 9 d cation of local cooperation for 10-foot channel in H. Doe. 430, 76th Cong., 1st seas. '9t. 3.1954 ,Passaic River. e 34-and 32-foot channel in Hackensack River including ap- H. Doe. 252, 82d Cong., 1st seas. 2 proach channel in Newark Bay from branch channel at Oct23,1962-foot channels at Port Elizabeth.................... ..... I. Doe. 289, 88th Cong., 2d sess. ro afrom Pioron t 3,000 feet above Lincoln Highway Bridge to Jackson Street Bridge complete. Conta 1fl son Street Bridge to Nairn Linoleum works considered inactive. latest published maps. Larcal cooperation. r Act Complied with as required by River and sloiaro of 1927 except local interests must provide suitable I adsposa l areas for maintenance dredging in 30-foot channel iI iaensack River above Central Railroad of New Jersey bridge Se1 0 -foot channel in Passaic River; and whenever required by a1 ,tary of War, for dredging in 30-foot channel in Newark Bay brad ackensack River below Central Railroad of New Jersey ltarb e,r as required by 1922 River and Harbor Act. River and ri ~ Act of 1945 provides local interests must furnish lands, laits-of-wvay, and spoil-disposal areas for new work and future vide enance, hold the United States free from damages, and pro- linaland maintain suitable berthing areas at Port Newark Ter- 22da, Assurances were accepted by Chief of Engineers on March $28,1950. In addition, Port of New York Authority contributed Ter,600 to cover cost of dredging berthing areas at Port Newark SThinal, which work was completed by the United States in con- th Ction with excavation of project channel during 1951. It fur- cli1r Provided for 10-foot channel in Passaic River from Mont- i" & Greenwood Lake Railroad bridge to Eighth Street Bridge P1 assaic, that when spoil-disposal areas are not available, or Otcg dredge spoil ashore is uneconomical as compared with f Mer methods of disposal, local interests shall not be required to '-ishdisposal areas for maintenance dredging. River and $aborAct of 1954 further provides local interests furnish lands, q ts-tof-way, and suitable spoil-disposal areas for initial con- With t on and future maintenance; provide depths commensurate Co,,channel depth in approaches and berths at terminals of st anies which would use improvement; and hold the United 4 ,tes free from damages. River and Harbor Act of 1962 pro- ig.s that local interests must provide lands, easements and itts-of-way for maintenance and construction, hold the United teIt's free from damages, provide and maintain adequate public Sellinal and transfer facilities, and provide and maintain depths oberthing areas at terminals. Assurances were furnished by Port of New York Authority and accepted June 12, 1964. 166 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OFENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Terminal facilities. There are 142 terminals with a total berth age of 58,276 feet as well as a large shipyard. Of these, Port Newark and Port Elizabeth which are leased and operated by Port arfage of New York Authority, provide about 16,770 feet of wh Fifty-seven terminals are equipped with mechanical-handling " vices andt 54 have railroad connections. Six terminals aggregAt v ing a berthage of 1,789 feet are not used for waterbor ie commerce. Facilities are considered adequate for existing con merce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for dredging to restore 30-foot depth in Passaic River from junctllY with Hackensack River to Lincoln Highway Bridge physicay completed last fiscal year, final costs of $36,336 were incurredy including $6,585 for engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance. Reconnaissance surveys cost $15,907. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under active portioll project began August 1907 and was completed March 1965. 1Ic ensack River is navigable 20J/ miles above mouth of New Milford Passaic River is navigable 16 miles above mouth to Dundee Rapida Work remaining under existing project is complete 32-foot ch~ nel in Hackensack River (deferred for restudy), and 2 0 foot channel in Passaic River from Jackson Street to Nairn Linoletl works (inactive). Work in Passaic River includes removingt small quantity of rock on west side of channel above Center Stree Bridge. Adjacent property owners are opposed to this work. Controlling mean low water depths (Jan. 1948 to Mar. 1966) D width Section (feet) (feet) In Newark Bay from mouth to junction with branch channel to Port Newark Terminal....... 35 53 From junction with branch channel to Port Newark Terminal to junction of Hackensack and 40 Passaic Rivers.. ... ........ .................................. 32 00 Branch Channel to PortNewark Terminal. .................. 32 60 40 Inshore Channel at Port Newark Terminal........... .. ....................... 32 30 In Hackensack River from Newark Bay to vicinity of Beacon 3........................ 30 400250 Beacon 3 to 1,500 feet north of Pulaski Skyway Bridge.. .................... 29 1,500 feet north of Pulaski Skyway Bridge to about 2,000 feet above rie-iack*iwanna'f.Ri. 2 300 0 Bridge. ................................. 29.....2 Turning basin" Turin bsi... ....... .. ..... ... . . *...... . ...... .... 25 From 2,000 feet above Erie,Lackawanna RR. bridge to head of proeetatNew York, Susque- hanna & Western R.R. bridge ..... ro ctNe Yru... 12 2003 In PassaicRiverfrom Newark Bay to Lincoln ighway Bridge........ 30 30050 From Lincoln Highway Bridge to 3,000 feet above Lincoln Highway Bridge .................. 20 3008 From 3,000 feet above Lincoln Highway Bridge to Jackson Street Bridge .................... 17 300 15 From Jackson Street Bridge to Nairn Linoleum works ... . . . . 15 300 From Nairn Linoleum works to Montclair & Greenwood Lake RR.Bridge .. 12 150 From Montclair & Greenwood Lake RR. Bridge to Gregory Ave. Bridge...................... 10 10 From Gregory to 8th Street Bridge.................................................................. Feet Minimum widths through bridge draws: 30-foot project ........................................... 6 12-foot project ...................................... .. . . Passaic River: 100 30-foot project.......................... . ............... 10 20- and 16-foot projects............................ 10-foot project ................................ ....... Total cost of active portion of existing project to June 30, 196 was $16,284,730-$9,740,241 U.S. funds and $285,600 contributed RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 167 8 9 d required, a total of $10,025,841 for . fuids.ie, .new .. work and $6,258,- *S. unds for maintenance. Cost and financial statement ____ ea .. 1 2.963...64.19 Total to 1962 1963 '1964 1965 1966 June30, 19661 NWWork.- opriated....... $250,000 -$10,148 $400,000 $85,000 -2,570 $11,495,562 aee ac..: ............. 6,595 233,257 9,995 472,435............ 11,495,562 C opriated*......... 709,853 119,000 194,182 644,982 47,196 7,439,817 ................709,853 114,613 43,670 752,274 52,243 7,397,257 elle1 8 8,600 es $1,755 321 for for new new work and $1,138,368 for maintenance for previous projects. Ex- work expended from contributed funds. 22. NEW YORK AND) NEW JERSEY CHANNELS th°cattion. Extend from deep water northwest of Sandy Hook, atugh lower New York Bay and Raritan Bay, to Perth Amboy, 41llthence through Arthur Kill, lower Newark Bay, and Kill Van ir' to deep water in upper New York Bay. This route is approx- Neately along boundary line between States of New .York and aew Jersey. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 285, 286, an 69. P PreviOus projects. For details :see pages 184 and 185, Annual eort for 1963. Y Eisting project. Provides for a channel through Ilower New ork Bay, Raritan Bay, Arthur Kill, lower Newark Bay, and Kill 5 ull to upper New York Bay, depths of 37 feet in rock and . Sfeet in soft material throughout, 600 feet wide across lower ew York Bay and Raritan Bay and in Arthur Kill to a point 1,000 feet north of Smith Creek, widened to 800 feet in vicinities Seguine f Point and Wards Point, respectively, thence 500 feet f de to a point 1,000 feet south of Piles Creek, thence 500 to 600 Wide and passing north of Shooters Island and protected by a Iet th e theceon 800 its northern side to junction of channel into Newark Bay; feet wide through Kill Van Kull to Constable Hook, Staence 1,000 feet wide from a point opposite the east end of Con- HableHook to a point near the intersection with the channel along yew Jersey pierhead line and thence 1,400 feet wide through Kill ta Rull to upper New York Bay; with an anchorage 38 feet deep oaccommodate five vessels south of Perth Amboy, all with suit- able easing at bends and junctions. Section included in, project 3S0.8 miles long. In addition, construction of a dike north of f'oters eetwide,Island and two secondary channels 30 feet deep and 400 one south of Shooters Island and other in Raritan Bay conecting with Raritan River, were completed under previous DrOjects and maintained under existing project. All depths refer tO lane of mean low water. Mean range of tides varies between 4.7 and 5.1 feet; mean range of spring tides, 5.6 to 6.1 feet; irreg- ular fluctuations due to wind and barometric.pressure vary from 3-9 feet below mean low water up to 6.9 feet above mean high ater. Estimated cost of new work is $61,300,000 (July 1966), 'cluding estimated costs of $22,861 to be transferred to construc- 168 REPORT OF T1lE CHIEF OF NGINERS, U. S. ARMY, 19066 tion of Staten Island Rapid Transit Bridge, exclusive of animoUtls expended on previous projects and $7,712 contributed by interests. Anchorage at Sandy Hook, and cutoff at junctionlocal ' Main Ship Channel, are in deferred for restudy category and e0 cluded from foregoing description and cost estimate. Estimate cost of this portion (1957) is $2,150,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: .. Acts Work authorized Documents Sept. 6,19331 Anchorage off Perth Amboy to 33 feet................. Rivers and Harbors Committee Dos Aug.30, 1935 May 28,19352 Channel 35 feet deep from lower bay to upper bay, except 17, 71st Cong., 2d ses5. Aug. 30,1935 between vicinity of Smith Creek and vicinity of H. Doc. 133, 74th Cong., 1st se5. (c Piles tains latest published map). Creek to 30 feet with anchorages 38 feet deep at Sandy Hook and Perth Amboy. May 17, 1950 Channel 35 feet deep from vicinity of Smith Creek to vicinity H. Doe. 233, 81st Cong., 1st ees. of Oct. 27,1965 WidenPiles Creek. entrance to HKillVan Kull to 1,400 feet narrowing to 11. Doe. 108, 89th Cong., st sess. a minimum width of 1,000 feet. 1 Public Works Administration 2 Emergency Relief Act of 1935. Local cooperation. See page 170, Annual Report requirements under acts of May 28 and August 30 of 1962 for page 156, Annual Report of 1965 for requirements under 1935. See actof May 17, 1950. River and Harbor Act of provides .1965 terests agree to provide lands, easements, and local 1 construction and future maintenance of recommended rightsof-way for ment, and for maintenance of aids to navigation, upon imPr° et of the Chief of Engineers to be required in the the eqU initial disposal of spoil; and hold the United public interest fo States free froM damages. Assurances were furnished by city of Bayonne 3 and by city of New York on June 30, 1966. on Jue Terminal facilities. There are 200 terminals with a total berthage of 121,725.feet. In addition, there are 8 ferrylandi and 2 carfloat (railroad) bridges. Of the terminals, 100 equipped with mechanical-handling devices, and 83 have railroad are connections. Included in terminals are five large shipyards, Five of the terminals with a berthage of 1,693 feet are not used waterborne commerce. Two terminals have marine for Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce,railwaY' Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Under a proposed contract for widening 35-foot entrance Kill Van Kull from 800 feet wide to 1,400-1,000 feet, $19,510 was expended including $15,875 for engineering preliminary to dredging for new work. Maintenance: Hopper dredge Essaysons attendant plant were employed intermittently from October 31 to November 30, 1965,in dredging to restore project dimensions of 35 and 37 feet in Perth Amboy Anchorage. Removed 463,000 cubic yard$, place measurement, of material at a cost of $238,950, including $3,557 for engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance Under a proposed contract for dredging entrance to Kill Van Kull to restore project depth of 35 feet a total of $3,538 was expended for engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance. Re- connaissance surveys cost $7,438. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 169 Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under active portion of eX sting project began in October 1933 and is about 96 percent 1fPlete. Work remaining under existing project consists of autlging cutoff at junction of Main Ship Channel to dimensions May orlzed by River and Harbor Acts of August 30, 1935, and id17, 1950, dredging anchorage in vicinity of Sandy Hook, and a ening and deepening of Kill Van Kull authorized by River and aor Act of 1965. ontrolling mean low water depths of channel included in projects Depth Width Date Section (feet) (feet) l~Oa Maini Ship Channel to Wards Point.. .............. 800-500 35 Sept. 1962-Mar. 1966. FroWarde Point to Sewaren......................... 34 800-500 Jan. 1957-March 1963. Pro Sewaren to south of Lakes Island ................. 35 Pro Psth cOfLakes Island to Piles Creek.............. reek to Elizabethport..................... 500-450 600-400 Apr. 1959-Aug. 1961. May 1955-Dec. 1959. Dec. 1962-June 1965. hon ethport Ceren to Bergen Point....................35 800-600 Oct. 1960-Oct. 1964. Point to Upper New York Bay ............. 35 800-650 Sept. 1965. acel sout;hof Shooters Island....................... 25 400-200 Aug. 1961. AnChorageinSvicinity of Sandy Hook................. 21 ............. Apr. 1961 1R hasidin so Chorae Outh of Perth Amboy...................... 137 and 25............. Aug. 1957-Jan. 1966. aritan Bay connecting with Raritan River... 26 400-250 Jan. 1964 2 feetav oot area, 37 feet available for a width of 1,500 feet adjacent to Arthur Kill Channel, affilable in easterly half of area. Total costs for existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Rehabilitation Maintenance Total Work ...... $55,888,671 $431,437 $8,137,413 $64,457,521 ub . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807,000.............................. 807,000 r elef-........ ..................... 2,023,308 .. 2,023,308 *..... ................. 7,712 .............................. 7,712 a .... ......................... 58,726,691 431,437 8,137,413 67,295,541 Cost and financial statement ial y Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 New Work. TOPriated......... -$87,000 $70,000 -$30,000........... $300,000 2$71,809,485 itan ............. 53 32....5 684 ............ 19,610 271,528,954 CDropriated.......... 22,591 11,218 903,343 $389,755 '317,388 8,204,875 eh i*.:........... 126,120 11,601 772,970 520,128 249,926 8,137,413 A Ittion: CDropriated........... ......... .... . 300,000 159,000 .. 459,000 .................................... .40,321 391,116. 431,437 ITlelluides $12,809,975 for new work and $1,160,380 for maintenance for previous projects. N.y ,ces $6,621 for new work and $1,621 for maintenance for Lemon Creek, Staten Island, Sp trs'ClUdes 1erred to$7,712 contributed funds and includes $22,861 incurred in fiscal year 1968 to be construction of Staten Island Rapid Transit Bridge during fiscal year 1967. 23. NEW YORK HARBOR-COLLECTION AND REMOVAL OF DRIFT boLocation. Applies to Lower and Upper Bays, New York Har- ii , East River, Harlem River, Hudson River Channel, N.Y., , York and New Jersey Channels, Newark Bay, N.J., and their ' uitaries. 170 REPORT OFR THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 SExisting, project., Collection and removal of drift from New York Harbor and its tributary waters, and authorizes Secretary of War to allot such amounts ,as: may be necessary for wor from appropriations 'for maintenance and improvement of exis ing river and harbor works, or. other available appropriations and that this' work shall be carried *as.a, separate and distint project.. is wholly a work ofmaintenance.', Purpose of wor 1 to afford relief from variable conditions of obstruction, and D advance estimate of amount of work required and its proper cost can be made. ,, Existing project was authorized by the following: ActsL ... w I . . k. . _ or authorized --- iI Mar. 4, 1915 Allotment from appropriations made for New York Harbor and its immediate tributaries may e Aug. 8, 1917 for collection and removal of drift in these waterways. July 3, 1930 Carrying on this work as a separate and distinct project. Local cooperation.'None required, Operations and results during fiscal year. U.S. drift collector Driftmaster, steam lighter Gorham, motor tenders Daly and Stan- wix and auxiliary plant were assigned the work of removing and disposing of drift when not employed on other work. Removed and disposed of 614,798 cubic feet (4,803 cords) of driftwood, ranging in size from small blocks to timbers of large dimensionsl' including piles and pieces of wreckage. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is one o continuous maintenance for which no percentage of completio exists. Navigation has been made safer by continual patrol harbor and removal of large quantities of drift material. Cost and financial statement . . . . . 5Totsl to Fiscal year ...............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jun 30 Maintenance: 13 33 Appropriated .......... $470,000 $510,000 1$480,000 '$609,000$ $540 000 $10..19 ................ 4689 475,416 16802 84,565 6;302 0, 24. NEW.YORK HARBOR-ENTRANCE CHANNELS AND ANCHORAGE AREAS Location. In.upper and lower bays, New York Harbor. boris 330 miles southwest by water of Boston Harbor, Mass., a 165 miles northeast of entrance to Delaware Bay, N.J., and Del Upper bay extends about 51/ 2 miles southerly from junction o Hudson and East Riversopposite the Battery, New York CitY, to the Narrows. Lower bay extends about 9 miles from the Nar- rows to the sea. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 369.) Existing project:. Provides for Ambrose Channel 45 feet deep and j2,000 feet wide, extending about 10.2 miles from the sea to deepwater in the lower bay; for Anchorage Channel, an exte" sion of' Ambrose Channel, with same depth and width, in the upper bay, opposite anchorage grounds, about 5.7 miles long; for RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 171 3southerly entrance channel, Sandy Hook Chaiinel (East Section) 35 feet deep and generally 800 feet wide extending 3.4 miles from fot ocean contour to Bayside Channel along an alinement p/erally west of South Channel; and elimination from authorized ect of that portion of layside-Gedney Channel east of junc- eio 85 fWith new southerly entrance channel; for Bayside Channel 35, 1feet deep and 800 feet wide, extending about 3.7 miles from """' ion with new southerly entrance channel to junction with fea Ship Channel; for Main Ship Channel 30 feet deep and 1,000 Watde, extending about 5.3 miles from Bayside Channelto deep C1O er in lower bay; for a channel along New Jersey pierhead line soueting Kill Van Kull with deep water in Anchorage Channel, th of Liberty Island anchorage, 20 feet deep for 500 feet wide th Widening at bends to 800 feet and about 3 miles long; an an- hOrage in vicinity of Liberty (Bedloe) Island, (about 160 acres fextent) 20 feet deep, and for removal of Craven Shoal to 30 t deep; for a channel 16 feet deep, 200 feet wide, and about 2.3 ile bues long, extending from bell buoy 23 to Hoffman and Swin- o'fle Island; for an anchorage area in Red Hook Flats to depths a , 40, and 35 feet over an area of 928 acres and an anchorage p ea in Gravesend Bay to 47 feet deep over an area of 334 acres. fee j d e ect depths mean refer range to mean of spring low 56 tides, water. feet; Mean tidalfluctuations irregular range 4.7 eto wind and barometric pressure vary from 3.9 feet below oean low water up to 5.2 feet above mean high water. Estimated ost of new work is $64,790,000 (July 1966). Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Worka authorized Documents and reports i July 5,1884 Main Ship-Bayside-Gedney to 30 feet for width of 1,000 Annual Reports, 1887, p. 62, and 1888 feet (dimensions fixed l)y Secretary of War, Dec. 27, 1886, p. 63. Mar. 3,1899 by authority of act of Aug. 5, 1886). Ambrose Channel (East Channel) to 40 feet............... H. Doc. 159, 55th Cong., 3d seas. (An. ug. 8, 1(1 June25 nual Report 1899, p. 1279). 1910 Maintenance of entrance channel under 1 head. 8 1917 Anchorage Channel, extension of Ambrose Channel into H. Doe. 518, 63d Cong., 2d seas. 00 Upper Bay. Removal of Craven Shoal............................... H. Doe. 557, 64th Cong., e1st sess. D0. ***.. July 3,1930 Channel between Staten Island and Ioffman and Swinburrie Islands. seas H. Doe. 625, 64th Cong., e1st I Relocation of southerly section of Anchorage Channel........ Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. Aug0, 1935 18. 71st Cong., 2d seas. 1 Dredging south end of Red Hook Flats, Liberty Island H. Doe. 183, 73d Cong. 2d sess. Anchorage, and channel along New Jersey pierhead line. 0. .... Deepen Baysido-Gednoy Channel to 35 feet for a width of H. Doc. 133,74th Cong., 1st sess.l Aug 26,1937 800 feet. Deepen Ambrose and Anchorage Channels to 45 feet for a Senate committee print, 75th Cong. July 3,1958 width of 2,000 feet. seas.1 slet Dredging South Channel. Elimination of portion of Bayside- S. Doe. 45, 84th Cong., 1st seas., pct. 27,1965 Gedney (Channel. Deepen and expand Red Hook Flats Anchorage. Deepen S. Doc. 17, 89th Cong., sessions slet Gravesend Bay Anchorage. Contains latest published maps. SLocal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965 provides that cal interests agree to provide lands, easements, and rights-of- ay for construction and maintenance of aids to navigation upon rquest of the Chief of Engineers; hold the United States free fot damages that may result from construction and maintenance uding submarine structures; and removal or relocation of pipe- 172 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 lines and other utilities, if necessary. These assurances have not been complied with. Terminal facilities. Harbor Bays. In Upper Bay there are 47consists of Upper and LoWer terminals with a total of 73,098 feet. In addition there Brthage are 6 car-float (railroad) bridges and 3 ferry terminals consisting of 7 slips These nals are along westerly shore of bay, from St. ter i Island, to Narrows and from Constable George, Staten Island. Terminals along Brooklyn waterfront Hook, Bayonne, to Ellis der Bay Ridge and Red Hook Channels. are reported un- Lower Bay is largelY undeveloped, terminals being confined to Gravesend there are 8 terminals with a total berthage Bay where terminals in the harbor, 41 are equipped of 12,228 feet. Of the dling devices, and 34 have railroad connections. with mechanical-har' Facilities are considered adequate for present commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Hopper dredges Goethals, Hyde, and Lyman and attendant plant were employed intermittently from July 1, 1965, to March 27, 1966, to restore project depths of 45 and 35 feet in Ambrose nd Bayside Channels, respectively. Removed. 156,150 cubic yards, place measurement of material. Engineering preliminary to dredging for mainte nance cost $9,582. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work began in 1885 and is about 82 percent under existing project complete. Main Ship a Bayside-Gedney Chan ls were completed to ruary 1891. Deepening of BaysideGedney 30 feet deep in Feb-h Channel to 35 feet for a width of 800 feet was completed in Channel was completed to 40 feet deep for June 1939. Ambrose in April 1914, and substantially completed a width of 2,000_feet width of 2,000 feet in 1951. Relocation to 45 feet deep for'4 of Anchorage Channel was completed to 40 feet deep in October 1932. was dredged to 45 feet in June 1947 and Center 800 feet in April 1948. Easterly 6 00-foot strip was westerly 600-foot striP pleted inJune 1953. Channel between substantially cOi and Swinburne Islands was completedStaten Island and Hoffrna in December 1920 upto within 300 feet of southerly limits of project. meets all needs of navigation and no further workDredged chanel is contemplated for the present. Channel along New of improvemernt' Jersey pier" head line in Marh from 1939.Kill Van Kullattob,Anc Widening horage Channel was comple dc0rage in March 1939 . Widening at bends near southerly comle eted ends authorized in 1948 was completed in Novemberand northerlY Hook Flats anchorage was completed to 40 1960. Red (Bedloe) Island anchorage was completedand 30 feet and LibertY 1944. Sandy Hook Channel (east to 20 feet in October depth of 35 feet in June 1963. section) was completed to RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT 173 Controlling mean low water depth of the channels Depth Width Section (feet) (feet) Date Arab - M-O10%Channel .............. 45 2,000-1,750 July-Dec. 1065. hdnl .. .... .......... : 30 1000-550 Nov. 1965. ay1 0 0 .Channel (east section).......... .............. 37 800 June 1965. nhoa ; '.............. 'annel* . .. ... ........ 35 800-600 May 1966. Chrven o annel...................................... 45 2,000-1, 650 Feb. 1964. f b *el " .. 130 .............. July 1931. t. w een Staten Isla n- a Sa1nd8winbur4ne 0-d 0 23 to offman Island.............................. 13 200-100 Nov. 1943. an aa nd Red 0 to Swinburne Island...................... 10 200-120 Do. 4-foot at8anchorage: tY S(Bmeare-a....................................... "' ' : . 40 .............. May 1956. a. Li it 0 area.*30...................................... .I 3 . . . . . . . M y O t 1954. .............. May-Oct. 9 4 S oe) island anchorage............................ 220 .............. Jan. 1950. NewJerseyPierhead line............................. 20 500 May 1964. ~l l nDt for a shoal 100 by 600 feet with least depth of 27 feet located along westerly chan- Xcept for scattered shoals along westerly side having a minimum depth of 12 feet. ork remaining under existing project consists of deepening and Iaanding Red Hook Flats anchorage and deepening Gravesend ay anchorage. d Cost and financial statement yerTotal 'cal to ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, Work. DOp)riated.......... $575,000 $1,462,000 -$70,000..... .. . 1819,084,790 antenanc e -............ 574,241 1,369,498 19,120 $4,142.. ... 119,084,790 Coropriated.......... 261,826 162,211 616,867 398,159 $819,000 cot172 8,059,117 ......... 3 62,01.. 162,664 614,924 375,772 83020 I 843,020 8,058,807 8,058,807 ti l eS $116,530 applied to removing wrecks authorized roject.. by acts prior to adoption of ex- 25. PORT CHESTER HARBOR, N.Y. eLoation. At boundary between States of New York and Con- a]cticut, comprises the tidal mouth, about 1.7 miles long, of By- of River whose source is in Byram Lake about 12 miles north ,2 Port Chester. River empties into, Long Island Sound about o iles by water east of the Battery, New York City. (See ast and Geodetic Survey Chart 222.) Previous projects. For details see Annual Report for 1915, Pe 1758, and Annual Report for 1938, page 157. ~t cisting project. An anchorage basin near breakwater con- f~eUted at Byram Point under a previous project, 12 feet deep, for elders on east bank opposite southern end of Fox Island, and a eannel 12 feet deep at mean low water and 150 feet wide from L01 Island Sound to mouth of river at southerly point of Fox 8anld; thence 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide to 900 feet below ( ed bridge at Mill Street in Port Chester, including a turning toain opposite steamboat landing; and thence 3 feet deep and 175 100 feet wide to 100 feet below fixed bridge. Section included A'roject is about 1.7 miles long. Mean tidal range, 7.1 feet; ean range of spring tides, 8.5 feet; irregular fluctuations due to 174 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 wind and barometric pressure vary from 4 feet below mean low water up to 8.6 feet above mean high water. Cost of new wvork for completed project was $358,475, exclusive of amounts ex- pended on previous projects, and $5,500 to be contributed by local interests. Widening turning basin and construction of fenders bank opposite southern end of Fox Island, at a cost of $93,000, Oil (1954) is considered inactive and excluded from foregoing de- scription of existing project and cost estimate. Existing projectwas authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized - - -- Documents DOCUment June25, 1910 Entrance channel 12 feet deep, thence 10 feet deep to and in- cluding turning basin, thence 3 feet deep to head H. Doc. 1165, 60th Cong., 2d seas. of im- provement. July 3, 1930 Widening turning basin, dredging anchorage basin, and 'constructing fenders on east bank. Rivers and Harbors Committ eiOee' 23, 70th Cone., 2d sess.( ° i latest published map). Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1930 provide that local interests contribute $5,500 in cash toward channel at turning basin. This condition has not been~jideni, ful filled and there is no indication as to when compliance may be expected aTerminal facilities. There are 34 terminals Harbor between Fox Island and Mill Street in Port Chester berthage of about 5,300 feet, of which Bridge with a tot ' for dockage. Village of Port Chester 3,120 feet 'are availe owns several bulkhed$ which are used as public landingss$e1for small pleasure craft. eral boatyards with storage space for 75 boats and equipped with a total of 3 marine railways are available for pleasure craft. Fq cilities adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal dredging to restore project dimensions year. Under a contract for in 12- and 1-foot channels work began May 9, 1966, and continued. yards, place measurement, of material. Removed 42,800cubc Engineering preliminarY to dredging for maintenance cost $10,042. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on active portion isting project was completed October 1938. Controlling of eX low water depth (June 1952 and Nov. 1965) Mne was 12 feet width of 140-50 feet from Long Island Sound to Fox Island, 8forg feet in anchorage, thence 10 feet for a width of 90-40 basin, 10 feet in turning basin, thence depths feet to turnil zero feet for full width to upper limit varying from 3 to remaining under existing project consists of 3-foot project. Wo0 of widening turni1 basin and constructing fenders on bank opposite southern ena O Fox Island (inactive). Total cost o f existing project 1966, was $733,634of which $358,475 was to June 30, for new work and $375, 159 for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT; 175 Cost and financial statement ?Fiscal year Total to .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Newwork: tpropriated...........$433,470 altenan............................................................... .. 433,470 Proprated..... .... ............ $1,374 $24,208 $160 $160,000 454,971 ........... 1,374 24,208 160 96,557 391,528 udes $74,995 for new work and $16,369 for maintenance for previous projects. C 026. RARITAN RIVER, N.J. ge ation. Rises in north-central part of New Jersey and flows a alldlray southeasterly into Raritan Bay, between Perth Amboy e outh Amboy, about 24 miles by water south of the Battery, ev York City. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 375.) for evious projects. For details see page 1777 of Annual Report S915, page 359 of Annual Report for 1918, and page 259 of l1ual Report for 1938. existing project. A channel 25 feet deep and 300 feet wide C lending 5.8 miles from turn in New York and New Jersey Chainels near Great Beds Light to Government wharf on main to anel, widened to 600 feet for 1,000 feet long opposite wharf fe orin a turning basin of same depth; thence a channel 15 10et deep and 200 feet wide 3 miles to Washington Canal; thence erlleet deep in soft material, 11 feet deep in rock, and gen- a Y 100 feet wide with widening at bends 5 miles to Dela- Soel and Raritan Canal entrance at New Brunswick; and a tio th channel 25 feet deep and 300 feet wide 0.8 mile from junc- pi with main channel at Keasby to upper limit of Titanium G1lent Co. property; thence 15 feet deep and 150 feet wide lile to dock of Middlsex County Sewerage Authority; thence 0.4 10 feet deep and 150 feet wide 2 miles to a point 1,300 feet below e re junction with Main Channel at Crab Island. Plane of rerence is mean low water. Mean range of tides is 5.1 feet at ""Outh of river and 5.6 feet at New Brunswick; mean range of Aets Existing project was authorized by the following: -- t..Work authorized Documents and reports ar. 2, 1919Channel 15 feet deep and 200 feet wide to Washington Canal, I. Doc. 1341, 62d Cong., 3d sess. thence 10feet deep and 150feet wide to canal locks and y 10 feet deepthrough south channel.1 y1930 Channel 25 feet deep and 300 feet wide up to New York & I. Dec. 127, 70th Cong., let sess. Do Long Branch R.R. bridge. .. Channel 10 feet deep in earth and 11 feet in rock to New H11. Doe. 454, 70th Cong., 2d sess. Do Brunswick. Width reduced to 100 feet. ...Relocation oflower reach ofsouth channel..............Rivers and Harbors Committee 2 Doc. 4 .26 31, 71st Cong., 2d sess. 1937 Channel 25 feet deep and 300 feet wide to junction of main Rivers and Harbors Committee .6, 2 Doc. and south channels, thence of same depth in south channel 74, 74th Cong., 2d sess. t toTitanium Pigment Co. ot, 17,1940Channel 25 feet deep and 300 feet wide from junction of Report on file in the Office, Chief of main and south channels to Government wharf, including Engineers (report not printed). Ot a turning basin. 23,1962Insouthchannel, maintenance of 15-foot channel to deck IH. Doc, 455, 86th Cong., 2d sess. 2 of Mliddlesex County hewerage Authority. 1,300 feet of South Channel, 10 feet deep and 150-feet wide considered inactive. ontains latest published maps. 176 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 spring tides, 6.1 and 6.6 feet, respectively. Irregular due to winds andbarometric pressure vary from 3.6 fluctuationS feet beloW mean low water up to 6.9 feet above mean high water. Cost Of new work f or completed portion of project, described above, was $1,191,000, exclusive of onsisting of chan nel amounts expended on previous projects and $66,000 contributed by local intereStst Dredging south channel to 10 feet deep and 150 1,300 feet to upper junction with main channel at Crab feet wide for considered inactive and excluded from Island iS cost estimate. Estimated foregoing description a cost (1954) this portion is $86000. 'of Local cooperation. Compliedwith except local furnish spoil-disposal areas for maintenance of 25-foot interests fre from New York & Long Branch Railroad bridge to junctiono chanel Main and South Channels, and in South Channel Pigment Co. Property. River and Harbor to Titani" local interests furnish spoil-disposal areas Act of 1962, provides ing dikes, bulkheads and embankment and necessary retaifl therefor, required for maintenance of improvement, and hold the United Stat, free f r om d amag e s . h a r 1d c Terminal facilities. Sixteen piers berthage of 8,649 feet along shores of and bulkheads with a total 1 Raritan River. Goverf' ment established a large ammunition arsenal known as Raritan Arsenal on the and storage depot ad river. One terni al is municipally owned and leased to private interests. nals are equipped with mechanical-handling devices and Ten term'lI railroad connections. In addition, there 9 haVe age space for 100 craft. Terminals are is a boatyard with stOr- considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Under a contract for dredging to restore authorized depth of 25-feet in South Channel, work commenced March 23 and was completed May 12, 1966. Removed 169,694 cubic yards, place measurement, of material. Engineering preliminary to dredging for maintenance cost $11,313. Condition at end of fiscal year. Entire existing project is about 96 percent complete. Work under ing project was commenced September active portion of exit' 1941. A shoal along northerly channel line 1919 and completed JulY Bridge was eliminated by relocation of channel in vicinity of VictorY in February 19590 Controlling depths at mean low water Section Depth Width Secn( feet) (feet) Date In Main Channel from New York and New Jersey Channels to junction with South Channel. 25 300-180 June 1956-Jan. 1965 From South Channel junction to lower end of Government wharf. From lower end of Government wharf to upper end of Govern .300-200 17 300-200 Nov. 1957-Apr. 1958 ment wharf. 17 300-200 Turning basin, opposite Government wharf............... Do. From upper end of Government wharf to Washington Canal.. .... 12 250-100 From Washington Canal to 15 200-120 Delaware and Raritan Canal lock July Do. 1962. New Brunswick. In atSouth Channel to upper limit of Titanium Pigment 1 150-80 July 1946. l dock..... From upper limit of Titanium Pigment Co. dock to Crossman's 25 300 10 May 1966. dock. 150 May 1965. From Crossman's dock to junction with Main Channel opposite 1 Crab Island.1 150-80 Do. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NEW YORK, N.Y., DISTRICT Work remaining under existing project is dredging south channel to 10 feet deep and 150 feet wide for 1,300 feet to upper junction oWith ain Channel at Crab Island. Total cost of active portion "existing project to June 30, 1966, was $6,299,615-$878,315 gudar funds, $292,685 ordnance funds and $66,000 contributed fllds, a total of $1,237,000 for new work, and $5,062,615 U.S. Uflds for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Fscly Total to ........... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30. 19661 NeW Work: S P1ropriated..........2$... n...... . .... 2 1,551 470 st...... antenance ...................... ........................ .2,51,470 , opriated.......... $1,562 $347,600 $289,000 $386,287 $419,000 5,464,777 .......... 3,194 78,890 553,461 359,996 159,080 5,174,034 a dludes $673 155 for new work and $111,419 for maintenance for previous projects. dcudes $292,685 ordnance funds and $66,000 contributed funds. 27. RONDOUT HARBOR, N.Y. Location. Comprises tidal mouth, about 3.5 miles long, of Condout Creek, whose source is about 18 miles west of Rondout. Creek empties into Hudson River from the west, about 89 miles 'lth of the Battery, New York City, and 55 miles south of ",any. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 283.) S Zisting project. A channel 100 feet wide, widening at bends, brida:e . bi 14 feet deep from deep water in Hudson River to highway g.y abo de, 1.3 miles above mouth, thence 12 feet deep to 3.5 miles ve mouth, two parallel dikes 350 feet apart, to maintain chan- . and a branch dike to extend upstream from outer end of north dike to protect that dike from running ice in Hudson River. eat tidal range, 3.7 feet; mean range of spring tides, 4.2 feet; Xtreme range, 8.2 feet; irregular fluctuations due to freshets vary frou 2 feet below mean low water up to 2.5 feet above mean high Water. Estimated cost of new work is $149,109 (July 1966). " Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports -1 I Jue 1 0,1872 Parallel dikes, branch dike, and entrance channel, 14 feet S. Ex. Doc. 35, 42d Cong., 2d sess. Aug.30, 1935 deep. Annual Report, 1872, p. 810. Extension of 14-foot channel and for 12-foot channel......... Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. Oct. 27, 1965 17, 73d Cong., 2d sess. Extend 12-foot channel from mile 1.8 to 3.5............... H. Doe. 288, 89th Cong., 1st sess. (con- tains latest published map). aLocal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965 provides lo- c 1interests furnish lands, easements, and rights-of-way for con- Sruction and future maintenance of the Federal project as todified and for construction and maintenance of aids to naviga- 0f upon request of the Chief of Engineers, including suitable emoil-disposal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and eibankments therefor or the costs of such retaining works; hold 178 REPORT OFt THE CHIEFOF ENGINEERS, U, S. ARMY, 1966 the.United States free,,from damages, depths in berthing ,areas serving terminals and provide andmaintai depths provided, in related project' areas. .commensurate with compliance were furnished by town of ;.Assurances o local o"f KingstononJune-17,-and, by town of,Ulster on June 9, by city Esopus on June 20, 1966. "Terminal:facilities. Seventeen, timber dockage of 12,132 feet along waterway. wharves with available equipped with transfer facilities; all are privately - Four. terminals are nals adequate for present needs of commerce. (For owned. Teoi description see Port and Terminal Facilities latest ftll at the Ports on UPPer Hudson River, 1.941, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and;results!during fiscal year. contract for dredging to restore project 'Under a proposet in the channel, $19,391 was expended for depths of 14 and 12 feet to dredging for. maintenance. engineering prelimiflaI! ,, Reconnaissance surveys cost $2p,568 fo fiscal year., SCondition, atend of r• wag' commenced April 1873 and is Work. e. under existing proiee Part of diking originally proposed :was about 87 percent complete. deemed of doubtful usefulness., Two not built because it w' gate obsolete parallel dikes of ^ an,cCreek, Va......................................... ........................ March 1966 . nVd Creek, M .Head ............ .... .. .... ...................... Ar i 1966 ay 1966 rat Bivalve, Md.. .................................... . . ..... June 1966 , Creek, Va................................................. ............. ....... March 1966 Va. k, '........ ................................ ............... April1966 at Mount Vernon, Va ............................................. June 1966 or, Md ...................................................... May 1966 k,Md.. ........................... .......................... April 1966 Sound, Md..... ............... ............................. ... .... March 1966 ek, Md......................................................... March 1966 eek, Md ..................... ............................. June 1966 26. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Operation and for- Construction maintenance t I 1 Ian Creek, Va.1 2 ............................ . .......... 1878 $5,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . River and flats 3......... 1953 3,910,582 qonaeo.a ia s Harbor, M d.4 5............. ............................ 1946 634,250 :$1,672 a reek Va.14 ......................................... 1928 752,465 Creek, M d.4 .. ............................ 1946 23,061 11,750 rtrt arbor, Md... 1960 3,482 .........85 retonCove, Lower Machodoe River,Va.45................. ' .ay, .. 1950 15,755 2,859 a M d.45 1950 847,924 12,621 roadCreek, M d.4 D ............................................ 1962 28,227 70,238 r reekRiver, D el.4 8........................................ 1964 964,520 10111,699 water Creek, adle Creek, Md. M d . .......... .............................. 1949 ............. 212 aaridge Harbor, d.4 ........................................ k, eebr M d.1 ... . . ..................... ................. 1949. .... ...' ... 11, ..... See footnotes at end of table. 288 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS-Continued ': , c p Nameo Forreport full last Cost to June 30, 1966 Name of project see Annual Report Operation nd for- Construction mnaintenasce Channel connecting Plain Dealing Creek and Oak Creek, Md.1.. 1940 $112 . ... Chester River, Md.4 5 .................. ... .............. 1965 12 495 Choptank River, Md.4 5............. ............... ... 1963 84,296 Claiborne Harbor, Md.2 , ............ .............. .. 1933 42,974 48 Coan River, Va.14............. 19373 . 42974..... ...... Colonial Beach shore protection, Va.114....... . 1950 .. .. ....... Corsica River, Md.4 s5... 1948 139,071 Erik and Little . ....#.. 0... 1948 1539,071 Cypress Creek,Elk Rivers, Md.2 5 Md.4.................... .4 ................. ......... 1147 1947 59057....21 Fishing Bay, Md.4 ........ ................................ 1932 3,874 134:219 Governors Run, Md..... ..................... 19503. .. . Helena Creek, Md.114 ...................... 1950 .................. ... Herring Bay andMd.4 Herring Creek, Rockhoid'Creekid.0.. 5..................................... 19616.......... 96 505949 Island Creek, Md.2 ...................... 1 18284,800 2:369 Island Creek, St. Georges Island, Md.4 5......................... 1962 6,230,8 22144 Lake Ogleton, Md.1 ....................................... 1950 233 LaTrappe River, Md.4 ........... ........... 1948 8,064.8321 Little Creek, Kent Island, Md.4 .................. .... ......... 1958 1923,0003 Lower Machodoe Creek, Va.4 5..... ... . .. .... 1904 9,916 13 Lower Thoroughfare, Deal Island Md.4 5............... ............ 1962 2044,658 46,1 Lowes W harf, M d.4 5 .......... *..... .......................... 1958 21,000 1, Manokin River, Md.4 6 21 . ........................... 1919 2234,788 32421 Middle River and Dark Head Creek, Md4' ... ................. 1947 2338,715 3: Mill Creek, Md.... ................................ 1949 Monroe Bay and Creek, Va.4 58........... ................. 196512460 45 Nan Cove, Md.5 2-9............................... ................ 1965 4734,860 . Nanticoke River at Bivalve, Md.5............................. 1063 240,817 3f765 Nanticoke River, Md........................................1950 73,243 Neabsco Creek, Va.1 4 .2....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1884 5,000..... Neale Sound, Md. 1965 2612,600 7354 Nomini Bay and Creek, Va. ............................... 1946 78,446 Northeast River, Md.45...... ............ ................. 1962 2828,4890 49 Occoquan Creek, Va. 4 4.. ......... ... 1962 2941,253 165,i Parish Creek, Md. 5........................ ............. 1963 3019,170 Patuxent River, Md.1431..1.........9.... 4 ......... 1005 3214,000 ....... Potomac River at Alexandria, Va. ............. ... 1........ .1965 95,214 44"" 1 Potomac River at Lower Cedar Point, Md.2 .... ................. 1920 10,234 6,* Potomac River at Mount Vernon, Va.4 ............ .......... 1950 17,000 ,593 Potomac River below Washington D.C.5. : 4:.......... 19..:... .1964 153,836 331,62546 Potomac River North Side of Washington Channel, D.C.34...... 1956 351 744,692 27,32 Queenstown Harbor, Md.4 -............................... 9.158 1672,858 02 Rhodes Point to Tylerton, Md.5 ............ .. .0.#........ .. 11965 34,666 37, Rock Hall Harbor, Md.5... ................................ 1964 38201,660 3929'8 St. Catherines Sound, Md.4 ... ................ 1957 4029,947 2 St. Jeromes Creek, Md.4 5... ........................ 1961 4117,857 50,521 St. Michaels Harbor, Md.5 25............................9.........1964 4617,006. St. Patricks Creek, Md.4 S ........................... ....... 1956 2615,752 4 5 St. Peters Creek, Md.5 25............1963 4346,740 130 Slaughter Creek, Md.4 5............. ..................... .1948 4,140 216 Smit Creek, Md.4 ................... ................. 1936 5,2521 Town Creek, Md.4 8............. .......... ............... 1950 43,2202 Tuckahoe River, Md.2 521.. . . . . . . ...... 1923 9,727 1710 Tyaskin Creek, Md.4 5 21 ....................... 4 ............ .... 1923 4416,297 18:3, Upper Machodoe Creek, Va. s.............................. 1916 20,281 6119 Warwick River, Md.4 ............................ .. ........ 1948 4522,041 78,1 Waterway from Little Choptank River to Choptank River, Md.1...... 1939 305 .......... 1 Entire project inactive. No commerce reported. 3 Project being restudied. Channel adequate for commerce. 5 Completed. * Includes $8,476 expended on previous project. SIncludes $31,065 expended on previous projects. 8 Includes $37,500 expended on previous projects. * Includes $50,000 expended on previous project. 10oIncludes $7,463 expended on previous project, and $5,852 expended on outstanding liabilitY in fiscal year 1966. 1 Includes $61,821 expended on previous projects. -s Includes $38,041 expended on previous project. m Includes $7,868 expended on outstanding liability in fiscal year 1966. :1 Awaiting local cooperation. '15 Includes $30,000 expended on previous project. 16Includes $79,626 expended on previous project. Excludes $8,414 contributed funds. 17 Includes $24,321 expended on previous project. o Excludes $10,306 contributed funds. Footnotes continued next page. . • FLOOD CONTROL---BALTIMORE, MD., DISTRICT 289 2Excludes $1,100 contributed funds. Abcludes $5,:000 expended on previous project. In 22Includes $ 0 1 Abandonmint recommended in 1926 (H.• Doc.•on. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess.). . . ... . : : i 2 In des. ,000 expended outside project limits. tributedfdition, $111,591 expended by, Navy Department and $54,000 expended from con- Sf unds, all new work. A'rcludes $3,650 expended on outstanding liability in fiscal year 1966. I' torizedby Chief of Engineers. S7Inxeudes $1,000 contributed funds. Includes $694 expended on outstanding liability in fiscal year 1966. d ues ,$20640 expended on previous project. lunaddition, '$25,000 expended on previous projects. _a nes $19,170 Works Progress Administration funds. 2dseadonment recommended in 1903 (Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 32. 61st Cong., cncludes $10 617 expended on previous projects. xeludes $101,162 Public Health Service funds expended 'for waterchestnut removal. o4 asNo funds available. I addition, $389,000 expended from contributed funds. ancludes , $19,000 expended on previous project. S Includes $582 expended on outstanding liabilityin fiscal year 1966. SIncludes $87,757 expended on previous project.' 1 Harbor, extending southeasterly 11northeast of center of No i1es miles from a point 114IM' east of Thimble Shoal Lighthouse toward entrance to ChesaPea e Bay. (See projects. Previous Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1222.) For details see Annual Report for 9 9. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 339 lo{;.<89 project. Provides for dredging a channel 11 miles a, 1,000 feet wide, and 45 feet deep at mean low water with aulary a channels 450 feet wide and 32 feet deep at mean low w er adjoining each side of 1,000-foot channel. Under ordi- fery Conditions mean tidal range is 2.5 feet and extreme 3 eet. Extremes of irregular fluctuation, due to combined wind 7 tides, referred to mean low water, are minus 3 feet and plus 7 eet. Existing project was authorized by the following: ActsWork authorized Documents ~ ~Se 917 A channel 40 feet deep and 750 feet wide................... I.Doe. 140, 65th Cong., 1st sess. "t1954[Channel width increased to 1,000 feet with side channels on S. Doc. 122, 83d Cong., 2d sess. (con- Ot.27,1965 Ceither side 32 feet deep and 450 feet wide. tainslatest published map). hanne45 feet deep and 1,000 feet wide................... H. Doc. 187, 89th Cong., 1st sess. LOcal cooperation. None required. t iaerminal facilities. Project serves as an entrance channel to portton Roads. See "Norfolk Harbor, Va.," "Channel to New- Ort News, Va.," etc. Opeations and results during fiscal year. New work dredging, with U.S. hopper dredge Essayons, to deepen main channel to 45 feet was commenced December 1, 1965, and continued. Removed 3,096,091 cubic yards of material, bin measurement. Cost was $1,851,385. Maintenance condition and operation studies, with vernment plant and hired labor, cost $7,551. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 50 f eent complete. Construction of channel 750 feet wide and 40 et deep was commenced in December 1917 and completed June . * Widening this channel to 1,000 feet at same depth was dNrelfenced in February and completed in April 1957. Advanced IIJing was authorized and commenced in June and completed uly 1957. Controlling depths at mean low water: Mid- Left channel Right Name of channel outside for half- outside Date quarter project quarter determined (feet) width (foet) "__(feet) tWide and 45 feet deep......................... 40 40.3 39.7 September 1965. orthuxiliary channel............... ..... o ................. 28.8 .......... March 1958. Xlary channel.......................................... 30.0 .......... Do. ork emaining feetand to complete project is deepening main channel to de eet and dredging auxiliary channels 450 feet wide and 32 feet ep adjoining each side of 1,000-foot channel. Auxiliary chan- 8Sof be deferred until need therefor is determined. Total Willexisting project to June 30, 1966, was $6,956,756, of which 946,662 was for new work and $2,010,094 for maintenance. 340 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, Cost and flancial statement Fiscal year.. . .......... 1962 1963 1964 Totalto6 1965 1966 June30, New work:$08- Appropriated. .. ........................ ...... $3,000 0 Cost..........." $ 918:837 Mainten a n ce : ....... $21,2.................. .33 . 2,436:222 2 Appropriated....... .732,908 Cot................. 725,486 $1^7622 1,575938 $1,906,049 $1518,453 $1,202,367 19,49, 1 7 372,349 1,347,925 1 Includes $3,120,313 for new work and $84,539 for maintenance for pr cludes $23,936 for new work expended from contribut e nance for previous project 9. HOSKINS CREEK, VA. Location. A tributary 2.5 miles long flowing easterly and tering right bank of, Rappahannock y Z-13 CountYl 42 miles upstream from its mouthl River in Essex CounY VA-0f in Chesapeake mile downstream from to wn of Tappahannock, Bay and oINl miles northerly of Norfolk, Va. (See Va. Creek Ve Coast and Geodetic surVeY Chart thene 535.). Existing project A channel 10 edepth 10 feet deep from that dept oif' the Rappahannock River to the highway a mile aboveo the mouth with widths of 100bridge Rappahannock River and 80 feet .within feet through the barA the' at bends, and a turning basin .ofsame depth reek suitably Nidee feet wide at public 250 feet long and -landing one-half mile above the mouth of creee Improved sectiona is.1 miles long. low water. Tidal ranges are: Mean, Plane of reference is t and extreme, about 7.5 feet. , Federal 1.6 feet; irregular, 2.5 feet; cost of new work for] C pleted project, was $44,100., Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts . Work authorized Docuents and repor Aug.26, 1937 Channel 8 feet deep and 100 feet wide in Rappahannock River Rivers and Iarbors Committee oc. 60 feet wide within creek, with a turing basino250 fee i 8,75th Cong., 1st ness long and 200 feet wide. 250 feet 8, 75th Cong., 1st sess. Mar. 2, 1945 Increasing channel depth to 10 feet and width wthn the . Doc. 129, 77th Cong creek to 80 feet. (c et and width within the . oc. 129, 77th Cong., 1st se tains latest published maP. Local cooperation. Fully complied Terminal facilities. Two bulkhead with. .. landings and two hrve$ State of Virginia operates a small boat launching ramp o lthe creek. Facilities considered adequate for navigation rm Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing, by contract, in the channel and turning basin was completed September 25 and completed November 5, 1965. Removed 99,286 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Cost of work was $45,659. Maintenance condition and operation studies, with Gov- ernment plant and hired labor, cost $366. Condition atend of fiscal year. Existing project'ias modif in 1945, was started and completed in December depth (Oct.-Nov.-1965) is 10 feet in entrance 1948. and channel ContrOllif turni basin, RIVERS AND ITARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 341 Cost and financial statement Fiscalyear Total to S 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New .... ropriated. .. $44,100 aitt- a.... ..................... ....................... ..44,100 hopropriated.......... $28,428 $840 $1,682 $4,918 $46,025 232,471 ..... 28,428 840 1,682 4,918 46,025 232,471 ludes $500 contributed funds expended for new work. 10 _TQAMES R TVF. VA iv atio n - Formed by junction of Cowpasture and Jackson Botetourt County, Va., flows easterly 340 miles, and aid esininto ernters Hampton Roads at Newport News, Va. (See Coast pr eodetic Survey Charts 529, 530, and 531.) 1 vous projects. For details see Annual Report for 1915. fro lsting project. A channel 35 feet deep and 300 feet wide 1el 1outh to Richmond Deepwater Terminal; and thence a chan- 'c8 feet Ie deep and 200 feet wide from Deepwater Terminal to wR~ihnond lock. A mooring basin 35 feet deep, 180 to 220 feet 1oe, and 2,100 feet long alongside channel opposite waterfront at Te.r well; enlargement of turning basin at Richmond .Deepwater tursinal to 825 feet wide, 2,770 feet long, and 35 feet deep; a ng ad 1edt basin in Richmond Harbor 200 feet wide, 600 feet long 8 feet deep; and construction of spur and. training dikes. Of cha s of channels are referred to mean low water. Total length secti annel included in project is 87 miles which is the navigable eion. Mean tidal ranges under ordinary conditions for differ- 2.6 Parts of river: Mouth, 2.6 feet; Jamestown, 2 feet; City Point, conl.eet; Richmond, 3.2 feet. Spring tide ranges under ordinary feet; ons at same localities: Mouth, 3.1 feet; Jamestown, 2.4 gCityatpoint, of tage 3 feet; Richmond, 3.2 feet. Ordinary fluctuations Richmond, due to floods, are 6 to 12 feet above mean beWater. Extreme fluctuations are 16 to 32 feet. Flood heights ableow Richmond diminish rapidly, the extreme, according to avail- bel 1 nformation, is about 11 feet lower at Dutch Gap, 14 miles coSto'orand feet lower to 18(1966) new17work 20 miles below. Estimated Federal is $49,396,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: ACt AcWork authorized Documents ly 1884 Channel 22 feet deep from mouth to Richmond and con- S. Ex. Doe. 147, 47th Cong., 1st sess. 1 1 02 structspur and training dikes. 3:,1905 xtension of improvement to Richmond lockat gate......... ) 11. Doe. 234, 56th Cong., 1st sss. .1930 orm a turning basinby widening channel Richmond. Channel 25 feet deep mouth to Richmond Deepwater Ter. H.I Doe. 314, 71st Cong., 2d sess. t 26,193 rinal. 13 Removal of Trigg cofferdam........................... Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 1 194 945 68,74th Cong., 1stseas.l 7 Turningbasin in Richmond Harbor....................... HI.Doe. 738, 77th Cong., 2d sess.1 Ott, 195 Maintain turning basin at Rlichmond Deepwater Terminal.. H. Doe. 191, 81st Cong., 1st sess. 1 project dimensions.............................. 196Existing H. Doe. 586, 87th Cong., 2d sess. onItain latest published maps. Doocal cooperation. Fully complied with for conditions im- oed by River and Harbor Acts of 1930, 1945, and 1950. Total 342 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, estimated cost for all requirements of terms of these authorized act s, includinglocal coopneration Uf non-Fed a ntr" tions, was $1,949,700 (1939 ). River and Harbor Act for of 1962 imposed conditions onsrucionandfutr antenane that local interests furnish r'il Actr0 lands and right 1b of-wayfor onstruti n and future maintenance navigation upon request of Chief of Engineersi including and alds t0o spoil-disposal areas, necessary retaining sutable = m , r c i,, m e n s dikes bulkheads, cs h a embankments theref or or United States free from damages cost of such retainin including damages to' publiC iorks holde private oyster and clam grounds, and change in natural course of James damages resulting from durin removal of rock, or from chanes River, from blastingea ti l hold the United States free from in ground- water leVl' provistion and operation of claim"s for costs resultingo ges or erries that may be reqU between mainlandRanany islands or relocate roads, bridges, waterfront ndcreated by channel cutoffS; el structures, sewers, t supply, storm drainage ele tric provide, maintain, and operate power, and other utilityfae"ites facilities to accommodate foreign adequate terminal and traeted and domestic commerce to develop from improved channel; expe depths in berthing and mooring and provide and maintai mensuromatewith related project depth. areas adjacent to terminals co been complied with. Local interests (city These conditions have d their willingness to provi de necessary assurances of Richmond) indie to do so. when eqUrled Terminal facilities. River's commerce handled is at city-owned terminals, city wharf, at Richmond l and Richmond do-k,,and at 13 privately owned wharves withiinor of Richmond Harbor. Richmond Deepwater in immediate Terminal at vi'1Iiead of 25-foot depth improved channel serves larger ships engaged in coastwide trade. Below ocean-going vessel nal the improvement is served by deepwa ter terM" nals and wharves, together with wharves 42 wharves. Richmond teI'Ml between Richmond and the river s mouth, are adequate Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintence dredg- ing, under one contract, in Richmond Harbor, in the channel and turning basin at Richmond Deepwater Terminal, and in the chan- nel at Chaffin Bluff was commenced March 15 and completed, April 23, 1966. Removed 230,538 cubic. yards of material, place meas- urement. Cost of work was $138,371. Maintenance dredging under one contract, in the channel at Turkey Island, in Jordan Point-Harrison BarWindmill Point Channel and in Dancing Point-Swann Point Shoal Channel was commenced June 3, 1966 and continued. Removed 117,048 cubic yards of material from Turkey Island and 110,000 cubic yards of material from Jordan Point - Harrison Bar-Windmill Point Channel, a total of 227,048 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Cost of work was $75,043. Maintenance condition and operation studies, with Governlid plant and hired labor, cost $97,812. design for dredging work in progress Maintenance engieering d for next year, with Government in the fiscal year and plaed 617. Maintenance supervision and plant and hired labor.cos $9, admainistraio co.t $24,1V ' Condition at end of fical year Construction of existing PrOJ RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 343 varicommenced in 1884 and continued intermittently through le"s modifications until 25- 18-foot channels were com- edin November 1947. Controlling depths at mean low water Mid- Left channel Right Name of channel outside for half- outside Date quarter project quarter determined (feet) width (feet) _(feet) opewell: ok'nding Shoal Channel..................... 25.1 25.0 25.6 May 1955. Hill 00o8e Channel Channel........................ ibellShoal .. ..: C an l 24.6 25.9 25.0 January 1966. aci hannel.. 25.9 26.3 26.1 Dec. 1964-May 1965. anoPint-SwannPij Channel.. 24.9 24.8 21.8 December 1965. o'donke Point Channel .................... 25.7 25.9 25.8 Mar. 1955. oChannel.t-Harrison Bar-Windmill Point 22.3 23.5 22.1 December 1965. cy 1 t4eChannel....................... . 26.3 26.0 25.0 Sept.1957. IodWel hndo to DeepwatertoTerminal Richmond Terminal Deepwater Buxton ..... Line 25.7 25.0 24.3 October 1965 & April dock 0U, 17.5 17.8 14.8 Oct. 1963 and Feb. 1965 A Line dock A fro. ichnmond toa point 200 feet downstream lock. 17.6 17.1 18.0 April 1966. downstream from Richmond lock .......... 0feet 18.0 .......... Do. tid of navigation for boat traffic is at Richmond, Va. Navi- eet o is practicable all year. Work remaining to complete proj- to Pnsists of deepening channel from 25 to 35 feet from mouth tw'e hnond Deepwater Terminal and widening to 300 feet be- 0 t Hoopewell and Deepwater Terminal. Also remaining is ' struction ttliling basin at Richmond Deepwater Terminal. enlargement of mooring basin at Hopewell and of Total cost of 6,7g Project to June 30, 1966, was $16,286,315, of which 6,240 was for new work ($6,212,404 regular funds and ($8386 public works funds) and $9,490,075, for maintenance Droy applied to removal of shoals in Bennetts Creek, Va., under add- slons of section 3, River and Harbor Act of 1940). In ane. n, $50,142 expended from contributed funds for mainte- Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS M NXA* aear eWork: oPriated.......... .... ....................................................... 11 ance ** ...... .......... 196Total ... ......... . ...... ............ ........ .... to June 30, 19661 $7,559,240 7,559,240 opriated ..........$466,500 $583,242 $430,980 $316,135 $472,675 9,613,087 t . . ..... . .......... 312,978 643,358 447,146 435,747 355,038 9,490,075 cldes $763,000 for new work for previous projects. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 344 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 11. LITTLE RIVER (CREEK), VA. Location. A tidal estuary entering south side of Chesapee Bay, Va., at east corporate limits of city of Norfolk and 9 mile west of Cape Henry. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 481 and 1222.) Existing project. Maintenance of an existing deep and 400 channel 20feet ..... ayfeet wide abou v~a extending inshore from that depth e14frles Chesapeake Bay about 1.4 miles toot" lw a Railroad System, including a basinterminals of the PennsYlv same depth 400 to 1,240 feet wide andadjacent to terminals Of the 1,160 feet long. All dePor are referred to mean low water. Under ordinary conditiOl see mean tuidal range is 2.6 feet, with extremes occurring during storm periods. of -2 and +9.5 .feet by 1945 River and Harbor Act in Existing project was authorlie accordance with a report in the office of the Chief of Engineers. ie Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Pennsylvania f t terminal a small pier, two ferry slips,Railroad and two maintains at floating bridge for transfer of f reight cars to and from its ferries, nd berth mooring tugs and car ferries, aggregating about or 950 linear feet. Exytensive Govern mentowned facilities are maintained way and at head. 2of Project. There are no publicly ownedon w tes on.he waterway. Facilities are considered faci1 commerce. adequate for exis,'t Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing, by contract, in the channel was commenced November 1 and completed on December 19, 1965. Removed 123,925 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Cost of. work was $117,197. Maintenance condition and operation studies, with Government plant and hired labor, cost $2,551. Condition at end of fiscal year. This is an artificial cha19e,7 originally dredged to 17 feet deep and 300 feet wide, supplemellt d by protection works of stone jettie which were provided by the ,Pennsylvania and wood bulkheads, Department permit. Dredging was completed Railroad Co under,Wq in 1930, cost unknown. Navy Department later ing project dimensions (Apr. 1942 enlarged the channel to e . 618, of which $168,623 was Navy to May 1943) at a cost of $1ted by Pennsylvania Railroad Co. Controllingdepths, funds and $16,995 contribt- water (Sept. 1962 and Dec. 1965) are mean,I 19.6 feet in midchannel a0 19.5 feet along the edges. . LYNHAVE 12 INLToV Cost and ftnancial statement Fiscal year.............. S, ---------- ........ 192 1C63 1964 1995 1966 june 30,96 Maintenance: Appropriated .......... $379 $1,179 $2,382 $3 1 Cot................. 79 $2,401 $119,748 1,179 2,382 2,401 119,748 12. LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA. Location. Cape Henry, Oi1 south shore of Chesapeal and 10 miles east of Norfolk,eBay, 5 miles wes° Va. Inlet conlfec tS RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 345 ianhaven Roads, a part of Chesapeake Bay, with a network of o1and waters in northern half of city of Virginia Beach. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1222.) tx %stingproject. An entrance channel from Chesapeake Bay irough Lynnhaven Inlet, 10 feet deep and 150 feet wide; a moor- 1 and turning basin, inside of 1e00 feet long, and 750 feet wide;Lynnhaven Inlet, 10 feet deep, a channel 9 feet deep and 90 et Wide to extend from the mooring and turning basin into toad Bay via Long Creek-Broad Bay Canal; and a channel erough the Narrows, connecting Broad and Linkhorn Bays, 6 feet eP and 90 feet wide. Depths are referred to mean low water. tean range of tide in Lynnhaven Inlet is about 2 feet with ex- terne fluctuations of 1.5 feet below and 9.5 feet above mean low Water. Range in Lynnhaven Bay is a little more than 2 feet. In br ad and Linkhorn Bays, fluctuations in water level are caused y loceal winds. Federal cost for new work for completed project was $334,725. In addition, $91,647 contributed funds was ex- I9eded for new work. Existing project was authorized by River larbor Act of 1962 (H. Doc. 580, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). focal cooperation. Fully complied with. erminal harves and facilities. A number of small privately-owned landings are on the project used for commercial seafood businesses and recreational boating. With construction estcoariercial and recreational terminals required of local inter- es as part of the local cooperation, it is considered that these alities will be adequate for existing and prospective commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work dredging, by contract, in channel through the inlet, turning basin, and chan- nels to Broad and Linkhorn Bays, was commenced July 1, 1965, and completed January 2, 1966. Removed 773,659 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Maintenance condition and opera- to1 studies, with Government plant and hired labor, were made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of existing project Was commenced in July 1965 and completed in January 1966. Controlling dimensions: Left Mid Y Y 346 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fisal ear 196 I Total to 6 Fiscal year............... 1962 163 1964 1905 1966 June 30,196 New Appropriated work: ..... Total0to Appropriated .......... . ........................ $200,000 $185,000334,7 Maintnn.................. Maintenance: ............ Appropriated...29 ................... 47,425 47,425 287,300 Cost........... ........................................... 287,302 6 2'935 ----- 2,935 2,935 9' CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 194 105 196 066 Tot3 ----- 1964- 19--5--1-66 New work:$I. . Contributed Contrib.. .. ............. 9 500 "........................ 59,200 $40,300 9:641 91,647 13. QUEENS CREEK, VA. SLocation. An estuary Piankatank River at its on west side of Hills Bay, a tributary of mouth on western shore of Bay. Creek entirely ,is within Mathews County, about CheSapeale 40 mniles north of Norfolk and 110 miles southeast of Washington,D'C' (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart Existing project. Provides 534.) wide from that depth in Hills for a channel 6 feet deep and 60 feet Bay into the creek and thence IP, streameto a point opposite the publi c landing, a d istance of 4,100 feet , and ta turning b asin of same bd 400 feet long at head of channel. Mean range depth, 200 feet wide, an 1.2 feet. Estimated cost (1964) of tide in creel s for new work is $30,200. Exst ing project was approved in 1965 by the Chief authority of section 107, River and of Engineers unde Harbor Act of 1960. L ocal cooperation. Local interests must provide ments, and rights-of-way for construction and futureallmaintenance lands, ese and aids to navigatio n upon the request of the Chief including suitable spoil-disposal and necessary retaining of EngineerS, bulkheads, and embankment therefor dike, works; hol ted or the cost of such reta" the United States free from damages, including age to oyster beds; provide and da" maintain a public terminal, Stlh facilities to include a minimum of 200 linear bukea ds ande"embankmhents "en°' of berthing n¢'" " nu o wirth adequate shore and water access thereto,feet including space area of at least one-half acre, open a parkil to ...all equally; provide quate shore sanitary facilities in the interest the interior waters on the of preventing pollutiof erly constituted public body creek; establish a competent and proP" empowered to regulate the use, rovt and free development of the harbor facilities h with the understnd ing that said facilities will be open to all equally; make a cash contribution equal to 28.2 percent of first ently estimated at $11,800); assume cost of dredging (pre project costs in excess of the Federal full responsibility forall Local interests gave a preliminary cost limitation of $200,000' ply with items of local cooperation. indication that they will COT " Final negotiations are still in Terminal progress. facilities. A privately owned commercial dock o RIVERS AND ARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 347 re1 h side of creek and several small privately owned landing i aaolong the creek. With the addition of public dock and park- are area required as an item of local cooperation, these facilities traaconsidered adequate for existing and reasonably prospective v-perations and results during fiscal year. New work planning, Government plant and hired labor, consisting of initiation of egoth an tiations with local interests, surveys, and preparation of plans oSpecifications for construction of the project, cost $145. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. heltrolling dimensions (Apr. 1963) are 1.8 feet in entrance chan- and 6.4 feet in turning basin. Cost and financial statement Year 1ear Total to . .. 1962 1963 196. 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork: o at e . ......... $2,750 $7,960 $500 $237 $5,000 $16,537 2,030 4,458 3,902 359 194 11,603 r 14. RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER, VA. fl ocation Rises in Blue Ridge Mountains in Virginia, and abo s southeasterly about 212 miles to enter Chesapeake Bay, boUt 40 miles north of Old Point Comfort, Va. (See Coast and pe*etic Survey Charts 534, 535, and 536.) reViOUs projects. For details see Annual Report for 1915. be Xisting project. A channel 12 feet deep and 200 feet wide vwid ee n mouth and Port Royal and 12 feet deep and 100 feet evse between Port Royal and Fredericksburg by dredging and tparuction of 20,401 feet of crib and pile dikes and 1,906 feet of iterap stone dikes, designed to retain excavated material depos- cib ehind them. Waterway included in project is 107 miles <*g Plane of reference is mean low water. Tidal ranges are: irean, 2.8 feet at Fredericksburg, 1.6 feet at Tappahannock; extfular, eguar 3.5 . feet -t attFedericksbur2.5featTplino Fredericksburg, 2.5 feet at Tappahannock; rne, 6 feet at Fredericksburg, 5 feet at rTappahannock. eleral cost for new work for completed project was $217,487, usive of amounts expended under previous projects. Existing DrOject Was adopted by 1905 River and Harbor Act (Annual Re- 'Oal for 1906, pp. 1110-1113). Latest published map is in An- ' eport for 1910, page 1364. 'Ocal cooperation. None required. PFrerminal o~edericksburg,facilities. In the 65 mile section extending from Va. to Tappahannock, Va., there are 26 wharves, tOf Which 9 are solid bulkhead type and 17 are open-pile struc- res. From Tappahannock to mouth oharves Most wharves are open to the there are 15 open-pile public. Terminals are cosidered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing, by contract, in Spottswood Bar, was commenced September 10 and completed September 18, 1965. Removed 21,789 cubic 348 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 yards of material, place measurement. Cost of work was $7,506. Maintenance dredging, by contract, in Mangoright Bar, was com- menced September 18 and completed September 25, 1965. Re- moved 61,304 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Cost of work was $18,466. Maintenance snagging and bank trimming operations with U.S. derrick boat Elizabeth between Fredericks- burg and Tappahannock, September 1965 and May 1966 , cost $11,969. Maintenance condition and operation studies, ernment plant and hired labor cost $6,539. Maintenance withGV sUPer0 vision and administration cost $3,665. Rehabilitation feet of bulkheads along Rappahannock River of 1,500 in vicinity ericksburg continued and was completed in December 9 of Fred- Condition at end of fiscal year. 1 65. ted July 1908 and completed April 1910. Existing project was t Controlling depths arei0. feet (May 1962) at Pollock Bar and 6.2 feet (Mar. 1964) at Frred ericksburg Bar.. . otal cost of existng project to June 30, 1966, was $1,780,505, of which $217,487 was for new work and $113.4,- 927 for maintenance (includes $995 for Parrotts each for Greenvale, Mill, Beach, and Creek and $1,00 Queens Creeks). Cost and financial statement 'otal tood Fiscal year ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 301 New work: T ................. C ost ............. .............. .1.. ................ Appropriated. .. .... Cste5............. SE..E............ ............. $414 414..33 Appropriated .......... .$44,829 $30471 Cost.................. 0,500:421 Rehabilitation: 44,829 3047 ,022 $33,385 , 00 9,022 $3 4 Appropriatedfcie.... A pbcok Cost.................. .............. .. .. ............. i 60feo rt18001 ,0 ............ 15,273 -4,909 I 152,818 6,0 'Includes $197,146 for new work and $113,500 for maintenance for previous projects, iFxc"udes $600 contributed funds expended for maintenance of Queens Creek. 15. STARLINGS CREEK, VA. Location. A small estuary tributary eastern side of Chesapeake Bay, adjacent to Pocomoke Sound O0" in Accomfiack County about 11 miles southeast to town of Saxis, VN'a of Crisfield,yd. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts Existing project. A channel 7 feet deep at meanand 1224.) low wter and 60 feet wide from that depth in Pocomoke Sound Starlings Creek, thence a turning basin of same depth, to mouth of wide and 1,000 feet long, and thence an apfroach channel100 feet wide connecting the turning basin with a harbor of 60 feet deep, 200 feet wide, and 500 feet refuge, 7feet 2.4 feet. Federal cost for new work long. Mean range of tide i5 $66,242. In addition, $2,973 contributed for completed project 'Wa. funds was expended, Entrance channel and turning basin were authorized and Harbor Act of 1935. (See River by River and Harbor Committee 46, 74th Cong., 1st sess.) Harbor of refuge was approved by OoC the Chief of Engineers in 1963 under authority of section 107, River and Harbor Act of 1960. Local cooperation. Terminal facilities. Fully complied with. A public dock with 650 feet of berthi~ g RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 349 -ace and six private commercial seafood docks within the creek. harith construction of public dock required of local interests within abor of refuge, these facilities are considered adequate. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work dredging, by contract in the harbor of refuge and approach channel, was commenced August 9 and completed September 8, 1965. Removed 83,192 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Maintenance dredging, by contract, in entrance channel and turning basin, was commenced June 29, 1966, and continued. Removed 10,000 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Cost of work was $8,638. Maintenance condition and operation studies, with Government plant and hired labor, cost $777. Condition at end of fiscal year. Entrance channel and turning an, Wvere completed in 1937. Construction of approach channel temb arbor of refuge began in August and was completed in Sep- tra er 1965. Controlling depths are 3.6 feet (Mar.,1966) in en- ealce channel and turning basin and 7 feet (Sept. 1965) in aProach channel and harbor of refuge. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS ical Year.Total to ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 eWork. ,.. . . .. $.. . . opriated ....... . $1,500 $5,200 $5,000 $42,000 -$3,995 $66,242 Mteoa -'p . ***............ 'proprited 128 . :.... , , 6,003 ,4 3,942 , 1,900 ,o 1,927 37,704 66,242 oprated ..... 163 1,846 556 45,000 140,246 ... 30,301 1,846 1,900 556 9,415 104,661 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS aYear Total to .... 162 1963 1964 1965 . 1966 June 30, 1966 New -- ---- __-_________________________ Work. buted...... ............................... ... $3,500 $3,500 . . . .... .. ......... ... . .......... ........... $2,973 20 ,973 (p6. SUPERVISION OF HARBOR OF HAMPTON ROADS, VA. E VENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE AND INJURIOUS DEPOSITS) VLa w s enacted for preservation of Harbor of Hampton Roads, Sits adjacent and tributary waters, so much of Chesapeake thand its tributaries as lies within State of Virginia, and so juh of the Atlantic Ocean and its tributaries as lies within Sta~idction of the United States, within or to the east of the o~ f Virginia, are administered by the Supervisor of the Har- o. o Iampton Roads. Laws relating to supervision of Harbor o anpton Roads are the act of June 29,1888 (25 Stat. 209) as .ed by section 3, River and Harbor Act of 1894 (28 Stat. d60 aC' section 8, River and Harbor Act of 1908 (35 Stat. 424, 426), c O February 16, 1909 (35 Stat. 623) and act of July 12, 1952 6 tat. 596) ; section 2, River and Harbor Act of 1894 (28 Stat. 8 and as amended August 28, 1958 (72 Stat. 970) ; act of March 9 (Refuse Act, 30 Stat. 1152) ; act of June 7,,1924 (Oil Pol- 350 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 lution Act,43 Stat. 604); and act of August tion Act, 75 Stat. 402). Supervision was 30, 1961 (Oilaoll two patrol vessels for 24 boat-months exercised by nme1nof and 31 manmonth. d shore patrol and inspection. Commercial to patrol th e Hampton Roads and airplanes were utila Norfolk offshore from beaches along Atlantic Ocean and Harbor are ty Chesaeaed especially during beach resort season. Patrols were maitaln to detect illegal deposit into navigable waters refuse, and other types of debris from vesselsofand waste oil dge tions An intensive educational program continuedshore.s. A. to preventing violations of1applicable Federal with a v'*eW gram was effected through press releases, public Acts. ThisP . notices, and personal interviews with interesteaencies talks, publ.. OcI' mittees, and Private industries. Circular letters were forwadd to fue oil firms, railroad companies, shipping companies. agencies, enlisting their support in the Agreements were reached with various Federal, antipollution Can1Palc agencies having related or similar State, and 10 to responsibilities and functi dli, obtain maximum results with minimum costs by eliminating cation of effort. Total cost of work, patrol vessels and cars, airplane rental, including cost of operakof inspections, and Nvor the office for supervision of Harbor of Hampton Roads to tle 30, 1966, was $170,969.Of Summary of legal action duri ng egal actions to end of fiscal year for fiscal year: DisPOsit 1888, as amended, Refuse Act of March violations of act of June 3, 1899, Oil PollU' Act of 1924 and Oil Pollution Act of 1961 is as follows: Cases reported to U.S. Attorney for prosecution................ Convictions obtained or settled by compromise................. Cases nolle prosse or discontinued........................ Cases dismissed after trial........ 0 C ases pending June 30, 1966 . .00.. . . . .. . . . .. . . ..0 . ... 9 Grand total........................................ . ... : Summary ranti .rsecu " .... of investigations pol,-ution ViOlatilonss......o of...invio....." no e ranting prosecutions, i.e. accidental in nature, insufficient evi" de~ance fo~rp rsu~tio r necessary corrective measures (warning letters issued or other necessary enforcement acti0 taken), during fiscal year was 85. Cost and financial statement 1r2 to06 otsl 16 194 16 196 June30#W Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 966 31965 Appropriated .......... $149,200 $155 000 $158,000 $160,000 cost.............11 $170,000 10 0,744 4:756 158 1 ,2 170 ,009 17. TANGIER CHANNEL, VA. froo Location. A tidal channel'about Tangier Island, Va., northeasterly 1 mile long, extending ier Sound, Chesapeake Bay. (See Coast to deep water in TOO t 1223.) and Geodetic Survey Existing teor and 100 feetproject. A channel 8 feet deep at mean low wide from 8-foot contour in Tangier Sound t RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 351 No. 4, and thence 8 feet deep and 60 feet wide to town of Rarker squ eerI with an anchorage basin adjacent to town 400 feet f~oar and 7 feet deep. A channel 7 feet deep and 60 feet wide T about 4,000 feet from the anchorage basin northwesterly across aatier Island to Chesapeake Bay. Mean range of tide is 1.7 feet Plet dxtreme tidal range is 4.7 feet. Cost for new work for com- Project was $116,550. Existing project was adopted by 1e River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 107, 63d Cong., 1st sess.); Palges in channel and anchorage dimensions were authorized by abic Works Administration January 3, 1934, and by 1935 River Co arbor Act (Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 51, 72d 10og., 2d sess.), and modified by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. te 141, 77th Cong., 1st sess.). Modification for channel ex- eeion acros Tangier Island was approved by the Chief of Engi- The3 under authority of section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. Lse documents contain latest published maps. f ,ocal cooperation. Complied with except local interests must ieSh spoil-disposal areas as needed for future maintenance. dockerminal facilities. Accomack County constructed a public tok in 1961. There are four privately-owned docks adjacent sidexisting project and two marine railways. Facilities are con- red adequate for existing and prospective commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work dredging, by contract to extend channel from Mailboat Harbor across Tan- gier Island to Chesapeake Bay, was commenced December 16, 1965, and completed January 12, 1966. Removed 84,040 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Maintenance condition e. operation studies, with Government plant and hired labor, e made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Channel from Tangier Sound tio~achorage basin at Tangier was completed in 1948. Construc- asof channel across Tangier Island began in December 1965 and Vat completed in January 1966. Controlling depths at mean low 7 feer were 8 feet in approach channel from Tangier Sound and acro set in the basin (Apr. 1965) ; and 7 feet (Jan. 1966) in channel sisland. Cost and financial statement ye1 eal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Work. ted......... ............ $2,750 $6,300 $8,816 $72,000 $162,835 fitnance: nostoriai ............ 2,510 .......... A li.. 6,376 4,004 30,691 116,550 AA)roprial poet"".. ted.......... $125 4,602 39,338 1,776 811 194,120 .......... 125 4,602 39,338 1,776 811 194,120 Lo18. TOTUSKEY CREEK, VA. i'ocation. In Richmond County, Va., flows southerly about 15 abo s to Rappahannock River, which it enters on the left bank erl ut 35 miles upstream from its mouth. Creek is 97 miles north- ,of Norfolk, Va. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 535.) xaisting project. A channel 10 feet deep from that depth in D ahannock River to and including a turning basin below 352 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, Totuskey. Bridge,, 4.5 miles upstream with a width of 150 feet through the bar at entrance and 100 feet thenceupstrea widened at'Ibends,,.and construction of a m suitab dike:at Booker ]3i' Plane ofreference is mean low water. Tidal 1.6at mouth and ranges are: ,e mouth and 2 feet at Totuskey Bridge; irregular 25 feet 7.5 mouth and 2.5 feet at Totuskey Bridge; feeat feet at mouth. Federal cost of new work and for extreme ,about complet9ed PrJ t was $167,869. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized , Documents and reports June 14, 1880 Dike construction at Booker Bar .... ............... Annual Report for 1880, Vol.l P Aug. 30,1935 Channel 8 feet deep and 150 feet wide at mouth, 80 feet . Dc. 183, 72 Cong, 1st wide upstream and repair of dike at 2,14 Mar. Mar 2,1945 hd Channel 10ramadrpi feet deep and 150fdk widBooker Bar. feet wide eat mouth outh, 80 feet It. Doc. 183, 72d Cong., 1st sess.(o and 100 H. Doe. 686, 76th Cong., 3d ses" (c feet wide U tream. tains latest published map)* Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Two cOuntyowned wharves and 13 pri vately ownedwharves or landings Facilities consideredadeq for existing and future commerce Operations,and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing, by contract, in the channel was commenced November 19 and completed December 5, 1965. Removed 130,700 cubic yards of material, place measurement Cost of work was $38,751. Main- tenance condition and operation studies, with Government plant and hired labor, cost $245. d Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project as inodified in 1945, was started in July and completed in September Controlling depth (Dec. 1965) is 9.3 feet at Cool 1956. Spring Bar. Cost and financial statement Fiscalyear............ 1962 Total to 66 1963 1964 65 1Tot 1966 june 30 661 New work: Appropriated......... .... 86 Cost. $167'869 Maintenance: Cost .............. ........... ............ ............ ** *-.. ............ ............ 6 Appropriated...... Cost ae.. .........$ $54,800 $5,4252,3 54,800 $65,442 ros5td.........,31 $2,484 $8,006 $38,996 252,30 2,484 8,006 38,996 AExcludes $2,000 contributed funds expended for new work. 19. TYLERS BEACH, VA. Location. On south shore of James County in a deep indentation known as Burwells in Isle of iver Bay about d miles above the mouth of the James uiver. (See Coast ad Geodetic Survey Chart 529.) a s . 1Existing project.30Provides for a harbor 150 feet wide, and 300 feet long in the marshof refuge 6 feet deep' area south ofTler0 Beach and a channel 6 feet deep, 50 feet wide, and about 2,350 Merageofte, s fe. E- sitd cot (965)0o RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 353 hk is$51,700. Existing project was approved in 1966 by the bor4ie of Engineers under authority of section 107, River and Har- LoAct flental 111elts,) Ofcoo r anidrights. Cteof 1960. peration Local 1960. alntrssms interests must provide lands, ease- pI iluaidsand ands, rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance to navigation upon the request of the Chief of Engineers, A. ~udin. dikes ng suitable spoil-disposal areas, and necessary retaining reta:'. ulkheads, and embankments therefor, or the cost of such are ling works; provide an access road with an adequate parking area and a suitable public landing adjacent to the harbor of refuge iNclud o all equally; hold the United States free from damages rpi Proly ng constituted damage to oyster grounds; establish a competent and public body empowered to regulate the use, 4 ) and free development of the facilities with the under- I ng that said facilities will be open to all equally; and assume litresponsibility for all project costs in excess of the Federal cost ldication of $500,000. Local interests have given a preliminary e aition they will comply with items of local cooperation. Final e otatins are still in progress. are rnal facilities. A few piers in the vicinity of Tylers Beach the rivately owned and not open to the public. Watermen basing ?th operations at Tylers Beach moor their vessels to stakes driven ite ore. With construction of public landing required of local rosests, facilities will be adequate for existing and reasonably o DPective traffic. itPerationsand results during fiscal year. New work planning, h0overnment plant and hired labor, consisting of initiation of C with local interests cost $2. .'lations Drojodition at end of fiscal year. No construction of existing 1964et has been accomplished. Controlling dimensions (Nov.. 1) are plus 7.1 feet in channel area and plus 5.3 in basin. Cost and financial statement ... er to Total 10962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 wWork.- Sat ed............................... $2,500 $124 $4,000 $6,624 .. ............ ........ 2,358 268 2,626 S 20. WATERWAY ON TIHE COAST OF VIRGINIA eocation. Between barrier beach along Atlantic Ocean on the extand Virginia portion of mainland peninsula on the west. It Of~esfrom south end of Chincoteague Bay through a number viciltreeks, thoroughfares and bays, to enter Chesapeake Bay in South[ of Fisherman Inlet, just south of Cape Charles, the Geo rn tip of the peninsula, for 83.7 miles. (See Coast and Survey Charts 1220, 1221, and 1222.) Ietic vCi ting project. An inland waterway 6 feet deep and 60 feet ra from Chesapeake Bay to Chincoteague Bay, Va. Mean atre of tide is about 3 feet. Greater fluctuations in water level ko caused by high winds and storms. Federal cost of new work ao con)leted project was $850,498. Existing project was %ted by River and Harbor Act of 1910 (H. Doc. 957, 60th 354 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cong., 1st sess.), and modified by River and Harbor Act of 1945 (H. Doc. 268, 76th Cong., 1st sess.). Latest published maP is project document.to Local cooperation. Complied with except local interests are furnish spoil-disposal areas for future maintenance.tOf Terminal facilities. Larger towns in area adjacent to routeo desired improvement have fairly substantial pile-andti od wharves which are used primarily by boats engaged in seahore business. A number of small landings scattered along the s between towns. Pennsylvania Railroad owns and operatesa water terminal at Franklin City. There are also wharves at vael ous Coast Guard stations in the area. All wharves are privath owned, but open to the public for transaction of business wi.h the owners. No mechanical freight-handling facilities are availa Terminals are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing, by contract, in channel between Chesapeake Bay and Magothy Bay, was commenced May 18 and completed May 26, 1966. Re- moved 46,085 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Cost of work was $49,352. Maintenance condition and operation studies, with Government plant and hired labor, cost $31,649. Controlling dimensions Length Depth in Name of section (linear feet)(datecert Lewis Creek and Chincoteague Bay........ ................. 6800 5.5 (Nov.1965) Chincoteague Channel............................ . 00 (195) Chincoteague Inlet.................... .................................. 521,200 (Nov 58) Ballast Narrows...................o ..... ............................. 75,800 Island Hole Narrows... ............... ........................... 7,100 (Nov. 58) Bogue Bay......................................................... 2,200 6 June. 1 1..........00 Cat River ........... ............. ...... Oyster Bay ............................................. :.1400 6 lo. Hog Nc..300 Land Cut....................................... Hog Nec........................................................ ......... 300 6660 19Do 1)o o.0 Northam Narrows...................................................... 113,7006 J l1964) Kegotank Bay ................................................... 411,800 6 Ju 6) Gargathy Creek ....................... ........................... 4,200 4.9 (Nov. 1865) Land Cut ............................................................ 14,2006 (TMar.1) Gargathy Narrows.... ................. .. 6,200 6 (M ar................. ................ 14,700 Metomkinin Bay ................................. Creek 6 (May 1965) Folly Creek ............. ......................... 2,200 Land Cut............................................................... 4,100 6(M...................a200( ( 96 ) Longboat Creek...20 Cross Broadwater (Cedar Isl... andBay)..... ......................... 8,00 (Dec.1964) TeBradford ..................... ... Bayitc ........................ 900 e 1964) Bay................................................... ButonSwash ,2006 ( 16) White Trout Milatone Creek............ Creek................9...........,20 .................................. ,0Do. 1)6(Dc BradLittle Sloop Chay ......... ...................... ............... ,00 (1) White TroutCCreek Millstoned hannelek ........................................... ................................................ 54,100 ,20 Do) Channel..............................................17,400 Swash B 56 (Dect6) Little Slo Channel . ........... oprth 5 06...................................... 15000 (Fe .1 3) GSandy Island Channel... .3.................... ............ 500 Great Goulds Machipongo Marsh nnel........................................................ River.......:::: :: ................. . .(195) N o Channel .......... 18,000 1 30,600 (Fe 25,50(1 .6(Dec 1965) ...... .................................... .19) Eckichy Channel....................................................... , 1 00 ( 1) NdrtSoChannel. .. 19000e(Fb193 The Thoroughflds Marsh Channel ............................................. T he aGouldtshBay.................................. T horoughfare ................. ................ " ................... 3,500) ... 1,200( 34,800 an. l196) M agothyChannelet............... Eckichy Bay .. o....... . . . . ................................. . . . . ..oo..................... 34,800 .6 (Ma ( an. )if L a ne C ut; 6,40 ......................... .... ............................. .. ShoalChannel.................. Sand Fisherm an Inlet ............ .................... ...... .................................... 6 00, 0 ( la : 1 6 ,) ............ .. 447,700 6,:00 ( Total .............................................................. 447 M A x Natural channel over 6 feet deep. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 355 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- lted in 1959. eCost and financial statement Ialyea Total to * **......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork. Coytropriated .......................... $850,498 lvraiten . .. ............. .......... .850,498 Aot opriated . $333,000 $257,883 $131,261 $115,491 $71,290 1,047,897 117,94 437,678 136,800 135,452 81,001 1,047,897 21. WINTER HARBOR, VA. Location. A tidal estuary in Mathews County, Va. entering Ohesa Va., apeake and 4.9 Bay milesonnorth its western shore 42 miles north of Norfolk, of New Point Comfort. (See Coast and eodetic Survey Chart 494.) Ea.isting project. A channel 12 feet deep at mean low water d 100 feet wide extending about 7,600 feet from that depth in Chtesapeake Bay to vicinity of public landing, and a mooring and tt1ing basin of the same depth and 400 feet square, with flared 2Plroach, at inner end of channel. Mean range of lunar tides is bef ' et with estimated variations, induced by storms, from 2 feet ow to 8.5 feet above mean low water. New work for completed oject cost $171,334. Existing project was adopted by 1950 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 319, 81st Cong., 1st sess., con- tis latest published map). rLocal all cooperation. Fully complied with. Total estimated costs ec all requirements of local cooperation under terms of the proj- ec authorization, including required non-Federal contributions, a unt to $19,000 (1956). ,erminal facilities. Three privately owned wooden wharves on fater Harbor and its branches which handle the bulk of com- merce on the project and are open to all equally. There are also n sMall private wooden foot wharves and numerous shore land- igs. In addition there is a public bulkhead and landing which Sopen to all on equal terms. Facilities are considered adequate or existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing, by contract, in the entrance channel to 8 feet deep was com- menced February 8 and completed February 17, 1966. Removed 44,415 cubic yards of material, place measurement. Cost of work was $24,737. Maintenance condition and operation studies, with overnment plant and hired labor, cost $1,122. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of existing proj- ect Was commenced in May and completed in July 1956. Controlling depths at mean low water Name of channel 80 percent of project width, Date determined 40 percent on either side of center line (feet) channl_ _ _ _ __________ nin ... ........... ......................... 7.6 Aug. 1964. amain ........ .............................. .9.8 Feb. 1966. 356 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Head of navigation for boat traffic of more than 2 feet in draftis the junction of the three branches that form upper reaches Of harbor. Navigation is practicable all year. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 un 301966 New work:3 Appropriated............................... 7 334 Cost .................. I.. .... . '" ... " ". ....... 5171, ........... Maintenance:.......... ................................ Appropriated ......... $64 93[ $93 214 $214 , 193 25,859 78 Cost.................. $2,193 $25,859 64 93 214 2,193 25,859 . Excludes $5,000 contributed funds expended for new work. 22. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Date Name of project sur conductd North Carolina: Knobbs Creek. ............... Virginia: ................... () Aberdeen Creek... BlatekwRRiver.... A pomattox ve . .. .. :: .... ....... :' ........ " ;................... ... ....... .............................. Backwater River..., Broad Creek... ................. Channel connecting Chincoteague York River with Back*'r'.to Bay ........... aih...ts af.. . Chincoteague-Harbor of Refuge ............... ....... ....... ) Davis C reek,.... ... .*."*"******...................... ..... Deep Creek, Accomack Coi t "y......... .................. ..... Deep Creek, Newport • H orn Harbor . . . News.... .... ...... '.......... . . . . . ............................. . . . . . . . . .. . i. . ( Jackson Creek........... ........ .......................... ................. Lafayette River................... Little Machipongo River...... : ........ .. .... : .... un 6 ................. .. ................. ...... June. 6 Mattaponi River.... ................... . ....................... Janeb Mill Creek........................... .................... () Nandua Creek.............................. ....... ........... Nansemond River.. ......... ................. ............... ...... July 1966 Newport News Creek.'%.......... .... ... .. March ............................ s r C h River...... Onancock O n l .. ...... ......... ','... .... .. V.,................ . ".............. ............ ..1. ..:........ i. . Oyster Channel.... ........ ........ ........ ...... ... Pagan River.. ....................... .................. I.... JanuarY Parrotts Creek.............................. Parrotta Creek. .... ....... ....... ............. ............... Urbanna Creek. .................................. Quinb Cree... ............... February 966 Whitings Creek................................ .. .............. York River.,. . ....... I... . ..... ........ 6 .... ..................... M ay June19 May--n 1 Intermittent minor activity. 23. 'OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last S.- Name of project full report Cost to June 30 see Annual Report Aberdeen Creek, Va.l for- Construction Main Appomattox River, Va.... 1963 $109,643 portionl 2 Active ............ 1954 .... Inactive portion 2............ ... .. ..... .852,651 Blackwater River, Va... ...... 17,690 ........ Active portion I 3 . .............................. ... 1962 Inactive portion.".................. .. ....... 16,144 Broad Creek Vs.a...........................19,900 .......... 6 Carters Creek, Va.. . . . . ... . . ..... 27,888 Active portion Active portion 4... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1962 . . . . . .. . 1951 . . . . . 3,271 ,8,2 Inactive portion........28,398 Channel from Phoebus, Va. to deep water in Hampton4Roadsl .*................... Channel connecting York River, Va., with Back Creek to Slaights 19501,5 Wharf.1 6 belowtable See notes below table. RIVERS AND HARBORS-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 357 0THIER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS--Continued For last full report Cost to June 30, 1966 Name of project see Annual Report for- Construction Maintenance C I Cre ' _ ,c ,A C oy. Va. ........................... .C.... 195 w, NeekVa.8o....... ........................... 194 2 , eek Va.1.195305,. S . Creek ,Va.. ..... ..................... ... 195, 782.4,524 2 ,34 e9 Cceek'*Nomack ........................... ...... 1962 97,612 63,020 RaviCreeka a. ... .. .. 1950 8,50•429 k, noee Creek N . ernVa. va Va.l.... .. . ............................... . 1964 ........................... 1950 15,000 5,937 25,064 21,. 19 28 11,851 1,1654 ack iveor,ekNC.1....................1961 Va 1 ....................................... 161... 80,500 83987 292 45, 210,384 Mahper, Va..................1950 25,044 9,546 Irin Mctl sRier i aCreek, ver N.1........................................... ,Va.I . .......... ....... .......................... 1950 ....................... 1928 47,734500 11,851 4,2591 1,165 nobnle V a. ... .1950 Aciveoo..................................1951 reek, N. .......... ............................... 1937 ..24,5.68 5,445 14,541 1,401 C Crek5kr ,VVa. ................... aehctvePporton.. ... 19150 2,393 2,458292 N , a.1. ................................. 1950 256,988 8,980,546 e Pe River, Va................................. 1952 167,477000 218,448 M,1ilor Hae' fla V. %anare C k Creki ,k, V.a a ' ..................................... . 193704581,5401 1963 2 ,458 S eivePortion .i ........... ................... ..... ...... ..... 13,89 3735 , 7etor d eiv erin. tiver, ............ Va'i'fi .... ............... .... 1052 1964.. ,43, 167,477 1 218,448 arkOtNeivCreek,'Va.t'... ................................ 1962 135,600 84,068 ananoeoCreekVa.......1951.......................190415, Ac rerk,Va1 ...... rtion ................................. '.......... . .... 1962 119,717.........83,844.1 3 76 .. .... 1. naetiv, oive 01a Portion.*... .. . .. .. . ... ................ . .. 1........... . .. . . ........ . . .... ... .... 613.55 Va.1 14 . .. P:a 'iver, ....... 1501, 526 12 NCverVa1 ........................... 1950 51,425 264,112 eeVa. ..... a~er, ...::::::::......::....i6 ..... .... : : 6:: : : : : : : : ckC River a o ers Wharf,.... ............ 19.50187,914236 1 P0yat r eek, Va.l................................. Par Cre, ,Va., i. . . . . . . . . 1963 .6 . . .. .5119,71724 . .... . . . .834,44 .Va.....1957 37,045 6,437 1950 ............................ 0 oibCkc arbor,Va. Channel to Nansemond rinel,Va.l.............................1953 Ordnance Depotl 1947 165,566 8,500 66,162 17,622 tivPortioni.. ............. ............... ... ea.,. . .. .. .. .. •... 8. Portion.. "nactive 1.,91 2 eek.Va . B.... ..... I............................. 196221,630 14,432 ro ivec, V Va............ r ,va.1...' eted . ...... . .. . .. .. * "'194 1958 6 r $2 es7 '00for new work for previous projects. ,5 d"iHon, 10o4addit $700 for $4,00 maintenance for new work for was expended previous from contributed funds. projects. In1ad aton, $2,500 for tion,$1,200 for new new work work was was expended expended from contributed funds.. funds. l $2,140 for Van. new work was expended from contributed funds. ' adnll.ton, $4,000 for new work was expended from contributed funds.1, Aclutadition. $36,000 ,eludes $51,249 for maintenance for new was expended work and $60,440 from contributed for maintenance for previous projects.. funds. es $30,000 for new work and $7,000 for maintenance for previous projects. ieludes tij $33,549 for new work and $24,754 for maintenance for previous projects. Saide s.$20,671 for new work for previous projects. I adition, $1,350 for new work was expended from contributed funds. S ddition, $500 for new work was expended from contributed funds,. 358 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 24. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Fiscal Study identification year costs Burwells Bay, Isle of Wight County, Va. (Tylers Beach)2.... Cape Charles City Harbor, Cape Charles, Va2. . ........................................ Chesconessex Creek, Accomack County, Va.1i.............................1....... 1 514 Lafayette River, Norfolk, Va.2 .............................. Nassawadox Creek, Northampton County, Va................ ............... 334 Queens Creek, Mathews County, Va.2 ......... .50. . ......................................... Webb Island, Northampton County, Va.................................................51 49 Young Creek, Accomack County, Va. ............... ....................... . .. 1 Reconnaissance survey. 2 Detailed project report. 25. AUTHORIZED BRIDGE ALTERATIONS For last Name of profect Name of project ull report Cost to June 30,1966 see Annual_ ___- Report ion d for- Construction Operation ance moi1tesasce Norfolk and Portsmouth Belt Line Railroad bridge across Southern 1959 Branch of Elizabeth River, Norfolk $2,100,840. Norfolk and Western Railway bridgeHarbor, Va., (formerly Virginian) across Southern Branch of Elizabeth River, Norfolk, (2) ............... . ..... Va. Completed. SAlteration authorized in fiscal year 1966. 26. VIRGINIA BEACH, VA. Location. On Atlantic North Carolina State line, seaboard, 22 miles north of Vigini 3.5 miles south of Cape Henry, miles east of Norfolk, Va. (See Coast and apnCd Geodetic Survey C 1227.) Existing project. Federal participation in restoration protection of shore of Virginia Beach by artificial ald sand to provide a minimum beach width of 100 feet placelentf tion 7 feet above mean low water and at elev3" beach by periodic replenishment of losses maintenance of S Ch protection; including construction of a grointosystem insure co tinuOUs to be under, taken at such times as estimated annual charges be less than the annual cost of beach replenishment therewith woUld United States shall participate in the first alone. The the full extent of its proportionate cost of the project t share of cost as a landoWnerf plus one-third total first cost of restoring publicly owned section of the shore. United and protecting a participate in periodic beach States shall further nourishment of the beach in the amount of one-half the costs for 25 years from date of commence ment of operations in placing an initial quantity material equal to deficiency in the of nourishne t design beach Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $1,581,700. Estimated at that time' cost to city of Virginia Beach is $1,847,700. authorized by 1954 Existing project Cong., 1st sess.) andRiver and by modified Harbor 1962 Act River(H.andDoc. 186, '~ Harbor 3d Act FLOOD CONTROL-NORFOLIC, VA., DISTRICT 359 (o' Doc 382, 87th Cong., 1st sess.). Latest published map is in cloject document. Construction of the groin system is not in- $54ed in above estimate. The 1962 estimate for this work was ,000 Federal cost and $531,000 cost to city of Virginia Beach. 1954cal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of September 3, 1atiP imposed conditions that local interests adopt plan of resto- 'eeron and protection; submit for approval by the Chief of Engi- ti ers, before Wto a for thecommencement of work, detailed plans and specifi- project and also arrangements for prosecuting ork: assure maintenance of protective and improvement meas- the irnments during their useful life as may be required to serve their u 1tlded purpose; provide all lands and rights-of-way; hold the oulited States free from damages; assure that water pollution that asW"'uld endanger the health of bathers will not be permitted; and axounlt continued public 4aure ownership of the shore upon which the participation. to unt of Federal participation is based, and its administration tall'Public use only. These conditions of local cooperation, per- 0 lg to beach restoration have been met and approved by the 1g~f of Engineers. Conditions pertaining to construction of have not been complied with. vh erations and results during fiscal year. Reimbursed city of e ignila Beach for Federal share of periodic nourishment of the S h and Federal costs pertinent thereto. co 0 dition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 30 percent COPlete. Beach restoration by city of Virginia Beach was st r lenced in June 1952 and completed in August 1953. Con- esction of groins has been deferred indefinitely. Local inter- efo effrtperiodically to bring it replenished beach material, as needed, to designated height and width of berm.in At an at" of fiscal year the beach had an average width of about 50 feet qtelevation 7 feet above mean low water. Local interests ac- arred their own dredging plant and adequate borrow areas and re replenishing the beach. Cost and financial statement ay 11- to Total ear. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 N~ewWork. APloprial ted.......... ............ $125,000 $75,000 $429,600 Maintec: 124,992 69,841 424,433 (o)tial ed.......... .$2,388 $5,708 $9,965 1,678 19,739 2,388 6,708 9,965 1,678 .. 19,739 27. GATHRIGHT RESERVOIR AND FALLING SPRING REREGULATING DAM, JAMES RIVER BASIN, VA. aocation. Sites of proposed Gathright and Falling Spring rs are on Jackson River, a tributary of James River, at miles J4 and 35.1, respectively. Gathright Dam site is in reach of fro son0 River known as the Gorge, about 19 miles upstream psh Covington, Va. Falling Spring Dam site is about 11 miles llCrearn from Covington and 1 mile south of community of alng Spring, Va. Both damsites are in Alleghany County. 360 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 At the elevation of the top of gates, Gathright ReservoirW extend upstream about 15 miles. (See Falling Spring and ou1 l tain Grove, Va.-W. Va., quadrangles of Geological SurveY.) Existing project. Provides for construction of Gathright D al and Falling Spring Reregulating Dam on Jackson River. h right Dam will be a rockfill dam with :impervious earthGatre with maximum height of 248 feet above streambed and acr Cor length of 800 feet with a gated side-channel concrete spillwe At elevation of the top of gates, dam will provide a total storage capacity of 417,000 acre-feet, of which 110,000 acre-feet willb flood storage; 264,000 acre-feet, power drawdown; and 430O acre-feet, dead storage. Powerplant will have an installed ,c"aP ity of 34,000 kilowatts. Variable flow from this power insta tion will be reregulated by Falling Spring Dam, which wll et low, gravity-type,; concrete structure, with an earth embanme at right abutment. Falling Spring Dam will have height of 64 feet and a crest length of 850 feet, of whicha maximuet will be concrete and 210 feet will be earthfill. Storage 640 at i See way crest, elevation will be 4,700 acre-feet, of which 4,000 acre-fel will be available for streamflow regulation. Estimated Fede cost (1964) for project, including both dams and reservoirs- $32,600,000 for construction and. $2,600,000 for lands and daf ages, including highway, railroad, and utility relocation, a total0 $35,200,000 for new work. Project was authorized by 1946 Floo Control Act (H. Doc. 207, 80th Cong., 1st sess., contains 1ate published map). Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Advance engineer ing and design activities continued, . Condition at end of fiscal year. About 50 percent of all Pla ning is complete. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year...............1962 Total t 6 i963 1)04. 1965 1966 June 30, New work: Appropriated. Aprorat.......... .... ...... .... $14,000 $26,000 $329,000 $330,000 Cost5,473 32,757 170,664 480,323 ,Location.On 28. NEWMARKET CREEK, VA. Lower Peninsula of Virginia with its uP 01 channel forming a portion of the boundary between Hampton and Newport News. Creek flows southerly fromcities.t a pol, about 3 miles west of Langley Air Force Base, then turns ge" erally east, northeast and finally nIorth, roughly parallei James River and Hampton Roads shoreline and empties southwest branch of Back River, a tributary of Chesapeake nt (See Geological Survey Sheet "Morrison, ,Ja Va.") SExisting project. Improvement of the Channel of Creek from vicinity of Dresden Drive Newrncr in Newport Highway 258 and improvement of entire length of News to et itch. A, dam across Newmarket Creek would divert Governael floodwaters from the creek into Government Ditch and thence to the Jalye FLOOD CONTROL--NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT.6 361 stimated cost (1965) of project is $2,094,000, of which E. 0,000 is Federal cost and $1,144,000 non-Federal., Project was seeroved by the Chief of Engineers in 1965 under authority of "lion 205, Flood Control act of 1948, as amended. riLca cooperation. Local interests must provide :all lands, bear cs-oof-way, and suitable spoil-disposal areas for construction; cst of all relocations of buildings, utilities; culverts, and . corers, construct pumping station and appurtenances, and all acompDleted work; hold United States free from damages; maintain r Operate all works after completion; control future flood eIages and hazards in Newmarket Creek Watershed by enforce- tdof ordinances which permit only uses of the flood plain the are consistent with flood hazard considering the fact that egflood plain may be inundated to various degrees in floods rang- yeil size from those likely to occur less often than once in: 25 aars on an average to the standard project flood, provide assur- 1Mi£ that encroachment on improved channels will not be per- gre1d, 'and warn affected interests annually of the limited de- eo protection; and provide a cash contribution in an amount tocessary to limit Federal expenditure to $1 million, including cs of all Federal preauthorization studies, preparation of plans Opecfications, and supervision and inspection of construction. iavCera-tions and results during fiscal year.-Preconstruction faning, by contract and with Government plant.and hired labor accomplished. J fdition at end of fiscal year. Planning was initiated in let 1965. lee constructed culverts along Govern- interests Boulevard, Local Warwick Ditch under Chesapeake & Ohio Rail- tracks and Jefferson Avenue. e cavation They also performed some in Newmarket Creek to relieve local flooding. Cost and financial statement ealyear Total to S.......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June o 30,t 1966 NewWork. 9opriated.......... $18,500 $8,337 $11,000 $27,661 $79,000 $146,498 ....... 9,660 17,113 9,605 5,362 41,026 84,604 29. NORFOLK, VA. (LOCAL FLOOD PROTECTION) iLocation. On port of Hampton Roads, 180 miles south of Wash- S t On, D.C., and about 20 miles west of confluence of Chesapeake and Atlantic Ocean at Cape Henry. (See Coast and Geodetic rvey Charts 452 and 1222.) Provides for local protection from tidal o0-~ng for project. Xisting central business district of city of Norfolk, located on coIzabeth River, a tidal estuary of Hampton Roads. It includes a e:screte wall 2,750 feet long, averaging about 7 feet high above .t~tng ground, with six closure structures; and pumping plant Wit three pumps of 33,000 gallons per minute capacity each at tiot head; and necessary alterations to streets, railroads, and atilities. Wall will protect against tides with a still water ele- ion of 10 feet above mean sea level with allowance for wave 862 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, 1. S. ARMY, 19" action. Estimated Federal cost (1964) for new work is $1It7 000. Existing project was authorized by Flood Control ActO 1962 (H. Doc. 354, 87th Cong., 2d sess.) -dsad Local cooperation. Local interests must provide all land, ad rights-of-way; make relocations and alterations of sewerame drainage facilities, buildings, utilities and other structures (e clusive of storm sewer, street, and railroad alterations formi on a integral part of the protective works); bear 30 percent of totl first cost, exclusive of betterments, to consist of the above 1 and a cash contribution; bear entire cost of betterme n t tefld hold the United States free from damages due to construction; a maintain and operate works in accordance with prescribed regt lations.: Formal assurances of cooperation were provided .led bY b9 qll ordinance of the city council of Norfolk adopted July 3 0,v p City furnished rights-of-way necessary to construction of Pthre ing plant, and made a cash contribution for its proportionate r of cost of pumping plant.tol Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstrue planning continued. Pumping station was completed in ded 1966. A contract for first increment of the floodwall was awar in June 1966. et Condition at end of fiscal year. All planning is about 90 Peret complete. Pumping plant is complete. A contract for first crement of floodwall has been awarded. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS aotal Fiscal Yer........ 16 1963- 1964 1 9l65s 1 96o6 JuDO GENERAL INVESTIGATION-NORFOLK, VA., DISTRICT 363 31. ILOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) ~J'hiscal year costs for detailed project reports were $2,859 for .ha. Brook, Henrico County, Va. menrgency flood control activities--repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) fotal cost for fiscal year was $9,780 for advance preparation for od emergencies. Tot32. SURVEYS $27 tI cost for surveys during fiscal year was $235,329, of which stu di Was for navigation studies, $199,027 for flood control ate' $8,226 for beach erosion studies, and $109 for review of ahed studies from other agencies. p 33. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA iscal year cost of flood plain information studies was $38,769. WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT* This district comprises central and eastern North Carolina and trbultion of south-central Virginia, embraced in drainage basins gibutary to the Atlantic Ocean from southern boundary of Vir- iila to Shallotte River, inclusive, with exception of Meherrin covet Basin above Murfreesboro, N.C., Chowan River Basin above euence of Nottaway and Blackwater Rivers, and Pasquotank of Alan d its tributaries for navigation only. It includes portion ortlantic Intracoastal Waterway from northern boundary of rth Carolina to Little River, S.C., and portion of water- ay from Norfolk, Va., to Sounds of North Carolina, south of nOrth shore of Albemarle Sound. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. Navigation Beach Erosion Control Aquatic plant control .. 2. 365 24. Fort Macon State Park, Atlantic N.C. Beach Channels, N.C. ................. 387 3. 367 Atlantic Intacoastal Wa- Flood Control terway between Norfolk, 25. Cape Fear River Basin, a., and St. Johns River, N .C. .................. 388 4. AvFla. (Wilmington Dist.) 368 A. New Hope Reservoir, 5. B on Harbor, N.C ...... 371 N.C.............. 390 6. Ceaufort Harbor, N.C... .. 371 26. Carolina Beach and vicin- abe Fear River, N.C., ity, North Carolina .... 391 7. Cabove Wilmington ..... Channel from Back Sound. 373 27. Neuse River Basin, N.C.. 392 Sto A. Falls Reservoir, N.C.. 394 8. Lookout Bight, N.C... 374 28. Swift Creek, Pitt and a Creek, N.C........ 9. Lokwoods 375 Craven Counties, N.C. 395 Folly River, 29. Tar River, Princeville, 10., a.C.eo ................. 375 N .C. .................. 395 Nteo (Shallowbag) Bay, 30. Wrightsville Beach, N.C. 396 11. l *o*e................ 376 31. Inspection of completed Nehead City Harbor, flood control projects ... 397 12. 377 32. Other authorized flood con- 13. peuse River, N.C. ....... 378 trol projects .......... 397 amlico and Tar Rivers, 33. Flood control work under 14. 4RN .C.. ................. 379 special authorization ... 398 15. Roanoke River, N.C....... 380 16. 380 Multiple-Purpose Projects S ollinson Channel, N.C... 17. ghallotte River, N.C .... 381 Including Power 18. Silver Lake Harbor, N.C. 381 34. Roanoke River Basin, Va. 19, Stumpy Point Bay, N.C.. 382 and N.C.. ........... 398 Waterway connecting Pam- A. John HI. Kerr Reser- lico Sound and Beaufort voir, Va. and N.C.. 400 20. Wilarbor, N.C......... . 383 B. Philpott Reservoir, Va. 400 21, ilmington Harbor, N.C.. 384 35. Scheduling flood control econnaissance and condi- reservoir operations ... 401 22. tion surveys .......... 386 Other authorized naviga- General Investigations 23. tion projects .......... 386 36. Surveys ............... 401 Navigation work under 37. Collection and study of Special authorization .. 387 basic data ........... 402 r 1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL gaLocation. Chief obnoxious aquatic plant in this district is alli- ditorweed, which is found in fresh-water streams, lakes, drainage Vlches and canals, wet bottom land, and on cultivated farmland in ar l ou s parts of the district., 366 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Control and progressive eradication of water" hyacinth, alligatorweed, Eurasian water milfoil, and other ob noxious aquatic plant growths from navigable waters, tributarYd streams, connecting channels, and other allied waters of the Unite States, in combined interests of navigation, flood control, drail age, agriculture, fish and wildlife conservation, public d health, related purposes, including continued research for developatnted f most effective and economical control measures. Estimated]Fd eral cost of new work in Wilmington District is $53,000 (1966)' Project was authorized by section 104, Public Law 85-500 37, 85th Cong., 1st sess.). Section 104, River and Harbor (I. P[-DOC At of 1962 modified authorizing act to provide research and planfl' costs before construction be borne fully by the United States a d not included in cost to be shared by local interests. SectionlO4, River and Harbor Act of 1965 modified authorizing act to ide U.S. waters and provide for control of Eurasian water milfoil. Local cooperation. Local interests must hold the free from claims that may occur from such operations Un ited Sttes ipate in project to extent of 30 percent of cost and Part of program, excet as modified by 1962 River and Harbor Act. Operations and results during fiscal year. Chemical aquatic growth (alligatorweed-Altpernanthera control hiloxero continued ininfested areas during growing season in fiscal ides) year. Chemical used was that recommended, by advisory committee posed of representatives of cooperating agencies and the cO 5 CorP Tests for water quality and studies on fish . by chemical control work were continued in population as Ir cte and Wildlife Service. Milfoil infestation in control areas bY ff Currituck Sou d investigated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Weed infestation in drailge canal work area at Lake Waccamaw remained Heavy infestations in Tranters Creek, canals, under contrOl' and River around Columbia, in New River at Jacksonvileald upp streams aro und Wilmington were destroyed or i thereby improving drainage and opening some greatly reduced' able areas. Work was begun in a small area onpreviously i a$S the Tar River 311 a new area at Lake Waccamaw. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year................. 1962 Trotal to 66 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $17,000 -$8,200 $2,200 Cost........... ..... .. 5 ,286 $7,000 $7,000 11 2,701 2,981 4,887 7,274 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 g tin ° Fi [ T, ...lt 30. t 19{ o. o RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 367 2. ATLANTIC BEACH CHANNELS, N.C. 3 cation . In Carteret County, on south side of Bogue Sound, ~iies West of Beaufort Inlet. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey rt 420.) 50 faisting project. A channel 6 feet deep at mean low water and oueet Wide from the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Bogue deeld to the marina east of Money Island; and a channel 6 feet deIoeD at Mean low water and 50 feet wide from the intersection of soney Island and Causeway Channels in Bogue Sound to the ltxihern end of Causeway Channel. Length of channels 2.8 miles. au8tiung project was authorized November 23, 1965, under Sority of section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. loecal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, ease- aa i,and rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance, ecessars to navigation, including suitable spoil-disposal areas, and or "esary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor daze cost of such works; hold the United States free from trages; provide and maintain adequate public terminal and adlf er facilities open to all equally in both Money Island Channel ar Causeway Channel; provide and maintain depths in berthing iaeas and local channels commensurate with the depths provided I the related project areas; and provide a cash contribution the Pethe first costs of the project, expressed as a percentage of ChP a deral construction costs, of 50 percent for Money Island In. el and 41.5 percent for Causeway Channel. Fully com- lie With. C Ful Caterminal facilities. Numerous wharves and piers exist along faeseway Channel, and a marina near Money Island has berthing a~lties for about 100 boats. Existing facilities are not adequate, Sadditional facilities will be provided by local interests. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- tract dredge RODA-C removed 45,420 cubic yards, between February 2 and April 7, 1966. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed April 1966. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 62 1963 1964 196o 368 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 3. ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BETWEEN VA., AND ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLA. (WILMINGTON NORFOL' DIST.) Locatin. On east coast of United States between and St. Johns . . ... . River, . . . Fla. .. • Secto il m i n g t o nNorfolk,' Wmgn t o n wit h in W D i ,strict r .o be-l gins at Virginia-North Carolina State line and extends genlerally southerly and southwestwardly to Little River, S.C 308 statute miles.)(See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 830 to 842, clusive.) Previous projects. For details see Annual Reports for 1926, 1932, and 1938. 191 . Existing project. A waterway 12 fee.t deep, with width Varying from 90 feet in land cuts to 300 feet in open waters; the COl struction, , maintenance of suitable bridges; water-intrusion preventive measurest in" the vicinity of Fairfeld, frm N.C.;to a channel in Peltier Creek, 6 feet deep, Intracoastal Waterway in Bogue Sound to and 50 feet wi dep including a bas.l Paneltier Creek,feet 6 deep, 200 feet wide, and 600 feet OIley achannel 61eet deep, 90 feet wide between Intracoastal Watereey and the gorge in Bogue Inlet; a channel 12 feet deep, 90 fee widep a turning basin, 200 feet wide boro; a channe ol6 f ee t deep, 90 efeetwideand 350 feet long at swa Newlongn let andA connecting channe ael of same dimensions to Intracoastal W atewar near mouth of New River; a channel 10 feet deep, New River betw een Intracoastal Waterwa feet wI t Line Railroad Bridge at Jacksonville, N.C.; and Atlantic o eTopsail Inlet a channel through , 8 feet to deep New. Topsail Inlet, to the and 1 feeta50 wide, and a chanifod Intracoastal Waterway by way o.eeP Topsail Creek, 7 feet deep and 80 feet wide; a channel 7 feet e, and 80 feet wide in Banks Channel from New paralleling the barrier beach, to the Atlantic Intracoastal ,Tosail ]nl ! Water" way; a chanrnel 14 feet d eep and 400 feet wide across the ocean at nortMasonboro ofveNeseRier,Inlet, withaiaton s453eies. suitable jetties at entrance In wa ncet ds feet.Ideep and 90 feet wide to channel of Intracoastal Wrightsville by way of Banks at adurI1,, Waterway.n and Motte Channels; , 1 basin 15 feet d eep, 300 feet wide, and 700 fe et long oneaastturn side BankseeileChannel near fee, ao yachteeee Masonboro Inlet,be• with three therein; and basin,p 230 nts d2 15-pilet feet wide, 450 feet long, and 12 .fee dolP I 1c deep 'attown of Southport connected to waterway channel of same depth. Plane of reference by asuio; length of channels and basins totals 345.3 miles. Inlow is mean w - north of Neuse River, variation in water surface, waInserY seldom exceeds 2 feet above or below mean stage. Between due tow.d fort and Cape Fear River, normal tidal range varies from 1e 3 0m feet at the inlets to 1 foot at points between. tide is 4 feet on ocean side of Bogue Inlet, and Average range Of the inlet. At New River tidal range variesfrom 2.5 feet just ilde 31/ feet at,,ies to 1 foot at head of marshes and zero at Tar Landing, above. From Cape Fear River, N*., 31 e' tidal range varies between 4.7 feet in to Little River, S.C., Cape Fear River 4 feet At t intermediate inlets, and 2 feet at points midway between inlets e On October 15, 1954 (Hurricane azel) the tid a Holden rched an elevation of 17.6 feet. RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 369 _ Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports r July 25,1912 riginal route of the Norfolk-Beaufort Inlet section......... H. Doe. 391, 62d Cong., 2d seas. Aug'8,917. urchase of canal................... ..... ... 11. Doc.589, 62d Cong., 2d seas. Change in route; following changes approved by Secretary H. Doe. 1478, 63d Cong., 3d seas., and1 of War, Apr. 14, 1919: H. Doe. 1136, 64th Cong., 1st sess. Albemarle Sound-Pamlico Sound section: Changed from "Alligator Rliver-Rose Bay route" to "Alligator River-Pungo River route." Pamlico Sound-Neuse River section: Changed from "Pamlico Sound-Brant Shoal Neuse July 8 181918 *g River route" to "Goose Creek-Bay River route." Aligator River-Pungo River route (proposed land cut con- Approved by Secretary of War, May necting the rivers): Changed from a straight line to a bent 15, 1919. *a. 21, 1927 2 approaching nearer town of Fairfield, N.C. lne A 1 -foot channel 90 feet wide from Beaufort to Ca e Fear H. Doe. 450, 69th Cong., 1st seas. Mar, 4,19332 SRiver, N.C., including highway bridge and tida lock.4 Construct a suitable bridge near lFairfield, N.C.............. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. Uae26,19343 5, 72d Cong., 1st seas. Operating and care of works of improvement provided for with funds from War Department appropriations for rivers Aug26 ,1937 and harbors. Increasing dimensions of waterway to 12 feet deep and 90 Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. Afeet-wide. 2 6, 75th Cong., lst seas. A1 -foot side channel 90 feet wide to Swansboro............ Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. Jane20,1938 1 16, 75th Cong., 1st seas. A yacht basin near Southport, 12 feet deep, 230 feet wide, H. Dec. 549, 75th Cong., 3d ses.1 Do. * and 6 450 feet long, with connecting channel. A -foot channel 90 feet wide from New River Inlet to In- H. Doe. 691, 75th Cong., 3d sees.i ,2,19485 land Waterway. J Six2mooring basins ....... ........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H. Doe. 660, 76th Cong., 3d sees.l1 190 A 1. foot channel in New Rivers ay 17', ..... H. Doc. 421, 80th Cong., 1st sess. eM . ,, Vicinity of Fairfield, drainage........... H. Doe. 723, 80th Cong., 2d sess.l 1 Masonboro Inlet and connecting channels, including jetties H. Doe. 341, 81st Cong., 1st ses. at2 the inlet.6 v.291963 A 1 -foot channel and basin in Peltier Creek7 . . . . . . . . . . . H. Doe. 379, 81st Cong., 1st ses.l a-91 A 6-foot channel 90 feet wide from Intracoastal Waterway Ayr. 1419 Detailed project report April 1963. Ar 14,96 to Bogue Inlet gorge. aac.i07' 6,0 An 8-foot channe 150 feet wide through New Topsail Inlet, 7 6l Detailed project report July 1965. July 14' thence a 7-foot channel 80 feet wide to Intracoastal Water- way by way of Old Topsail ('reek; and a 7-foot channel 80 feet wide in Banks Channel from New Topsail Inlet, paral- leling barrier beach, to Intracoastal Waterway. 2 u I tas latest published maps. &p er No. 443 72d Cong. "dri.anent Appropriations Repeal Act. bA 12 ck in land cut between Myrtle Sound and Cape Fear River. I ay 90-foot channel in New River from Intracoastal Waterway to and including a ett acsonville, N.C. 1.A e on5 0 each side of Masonboro Inlet. yb -foot channel provided under section 3, River and Harbor Act of March 2, 1945; foot project classified as inactive. ? al cooperation. Complied with except ,for Topsail Inlet. teads, athat modification, and local interests must furnish all lands, ease- rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance cldaids to navigation, including suitable spoil-disposal areas, in- the g necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments ta]or, or the cost of such retaining works; hold the United the es free from damages to wharves, piers, and oysterbeds, due to 1aConstruction works and maintenance as required; provide and fQcitain, at local expense, adequate public terminal and transfer lotaties with provisions for the sale of motor fuel, lubricants, and casBle Water, open to all equally, in Banks Channel; provide a as contribution toward the first costs of the project, expressed e ercentages of the Federal construction cost, of 3.3 percent for Ne TIopsail Inlet and Old Topsail Creek and 25.4 percent for saijs Channel, sums currently estimated at $1,600 for New Top- Iflet and Old Topsail Creek and $21,300 for Banks Channel, 370 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 plus any Federal construction costs in excess of $500,000. Formal assurances have been received. Terminal facilities. Numerous wharves waterway, used f or docking commercial and landings alo the adequate for existing commerce, except for and pleasure crat, the need of apub"' wharf in Banks Channel to be provided with the Topsail "Ilet modification. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- construction planning for new channels to Topsail Inlet cost $5,588. North jetty at Masonboro Inlet constructed by contract between July 16, 1965, and June 24, at a cost of $955,364. Between March 23 and June 30, 1966, contract dredge Talcott removed 275,000 cubic yards from new Deposition Basin at Masonboro Inlet ata cost $175,925. Maintenance: Between July 13 and 25, 1965 and November 8 December 2, 1965, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merritt remvoed 30,441 cubic yards from shoals in New River Inlet at a cost of $24,310. Between December 7 and 29, 1965, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merritt removed 23,055 cubic yards from shoals in the waterway at Carolina Beach Inlet and Snows Cut at a cost of $13,603. Between February 4 and 9, 1966, and June 7 and 30, 1966, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merritt, removed 42,533 cubic yards from shoals in Masonboro Inlet at a cost of $20,249. Be- tween January 21 and June 5, 1966, contract dredge Arlington removed 520,957 cubic yards between Cape Fear River N.C. and Little River, S.C., at a cost of $169,652. Between February 10 and June 2, 1966, contract dredge Richmond removed 407,425 cubic yards between Neuse River and Cape Fear River, N.C., in- cluding 23,769 cubic yards from the side channel to Jacksonville and 147 and cubic yards from boat basin at Southport at a cost of $166,758. Condition and operation er8•9.32. studies cost $48,536. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete Masonboro of Inmpletion deposition basin and construction excePtat fuM asonboro Inlet and dred of south jetf Aging channels to Topsail Inlet..tg further details, see 196 2 Annual Report.) Total cost for exiS wasproject to June 30, 1966, was $24,008,893, new of which $11,297', for work and $12,710955 ,was for maintenance. Cost and financial statement -e Fiscal work - ----- year...... --- -- -- - - - -- - - 1964 Total 10661 ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965_ _l 1965 1966 J n 1966 June3 6 New work:0 Appropriated......... . 599 Maintenance: Mait..nce:............ ............ 1.....9 2 1,372[ $1614 321 21 569 I 2$6 0 240,070 $I113,8007 16, 446 $1,123,800 $ '8,4,1 6 Appropriated .......... $488,651 517 300 276. 2 24 0 58,13 2 2 $ Cost............... S.. 447,789 365,669 n w $ 709605 0, 629,650 528,032 includes $198,707 for new work 65 743,099 632,640 and $107,634 for maintenance 2 Appropriations and co sts not Previously of prey p e let" were $1u569 0 foro a d ationn neroje t it fiscal fiscalyear51965nin fiso Yar ofo. a'oI,-ear and u$4, in year 1965 authorized 1963, and $4,6004 in fiscal d foryear modiicaio"Chane 1964 and for construction $1,500 under authority of section 107,for.to, OPail 1n0g 1 I "l Harbor A-t. nc ,3 c y r 14 and $ for fiscal year 1965 not1960 .?ive preVio 1 - RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 371 4. AVON HARBOR, N.C. Lolation. East coast of North Carolina, 9 miles north of Cape .tera@.(See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1232.) ad tg . project. A direct channel 6 feet deep, 100 feet wide, a ba miles long from that depth in Pamlico Sound southeast to P 1 of the same depth, 100 feet wide and 300 feet long at Avon. esure reference is mean low water. Variations in the water 2 fee of Pamlico Sound, due to winds, seldom range as much as Will dabove or below mean stage; however, by 194ub le or triple that variation. Original severe windstorms project authorized a od.Rliver and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 316, 76th Cong., 1st sess.) ectliadification for direct channel authorized May 5, 1965, under sectionl Local01 7 , River and Harbor Act of 1960. Ietcal cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands, ease- ancld, rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance, dikes n suitable spoil-disposal areas, with necessary retaining State bulkheads, and embankments therefor; hold the United Quates free from damages; provide, maintain, and operate an ade- Aotr public landing or wharf, with provisions for the sale of berth.i uel, lubricants, and potable water; provide and maintain fa it-g areas, floats, piers, slips, and similar marina and mooring ar ities as needed for transient and local vessels, as well as neces- facili access roads, parking areas, and other public-use shore oft hes; and assume responsibility for all project costs in excess e IFederal cost limitation of $200,000. Fully complied with. totalrminal facilities. Five wharves in the basin at Avon, with a siderfrontage of about 300 feet. Existing facilities are con- Oded adequate for present commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Be- tween July 7 and 21, 1965, contract dredge Marion removed 100,154 cubic yards to provide outer portion of new direct channel. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed July 21, (For further details, see Annual Report for 1962.) Cost and financial statement 'sea'Year Total to 1...... 1963 1964 1965 196 June 30,1966 Ai o riated.1$.... . ... .. ...... ... ..... $6,000 $74,100 R . -4........ ................. 1$2,147 122 1$49,600 14,227 39,493 74,096 Coeoprated............ 1,814 1,097 ............ 1.... 40,059 .. ..... 1 ............ .... ........ 15,097 ............ 40,059 r0Drllations o Channel and from costs not previously reported for modification "Avon Harber, N.C." Pamlico Sound to Avon) authorized for construction under authority ' 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. L 5. BEAUFORT HARBOR, N.C. Cit~cation. Just inside Beaufort Inlet, adjacent to Morehead p 11arbor (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 420.) l 93 revious projects. For details see Annual Reports for 1915 and arj isting project. Stopping erosion at Beaufort Inlet by jetties sand fences at Fort Macon and Shackleford points and other 372 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 shore protection; channels 15 feet deep a l w nd 100 feetfeet 12 widein inthepera Bulkhead and Gall etdp channels, anGalants at mean low water an th of 2fe in t upper 5,000 feet of Gallants Channel;for a dep Ofexcept refuge in Town Creek 12 feet dee a harboret f w 00 150 long connected to Gallants Cnel p, 400 feet wide, andd9e 0 nt andn 1400 feet fwide, ,400 et 1 annel by.a channel 12 feet deep' ide in front of town of feet long; a basin 12 feet deep, 600 feet Beaufort exceptpfor a channel 15 feet deep' Marsh100 feet wide through the basin; a stone bulkhead from feet wide throughearthexcpt d for a channel 15 feet Tdee Marsh channel across Bird Shoal to the west end of Carrot Island; an in Taylors Creek 15 feet en l Beauft2.66tomiles about Lenesn sreek 15 feet deep, 100 feet wide, extendi foot-long section ly from about opposite Marsh Street 0 hoxville at North River, except foot-long section at the Point east 'end whih s 2 ee dep for an'o0 length of channelsis 6.9 at Beaufort and 31is 69 eas1iles.end which is 12 feet deep, feet S/2. feet at the Average tidal range is /2inlet. Existing project was authorized by the following: Actas Work authorized Documents and rep Mar. 3, 1881 A 9-foot channel 200 feet wide through Bulkhead Channe etron to Beaufort; a 6-foot channel io Annual Report, 1881, p. 1013. e h Rn and oint+Core Sound;1a;, and construect cs wie .. .. , tjetties to orthRi fed Mar. 2, 1907 Mar Repairs to Fort Macon jetties 2, Repairs 1907 to Fort Mito protection. and additional jetties and shore Mar. 3, 1925 Bulkhead acro Bird Shoal.... Specified in act. ............... July 3, 1930 Increase in depth to 12 feet Rivers and Harbors Committee in Bulkhead Channel Gall Channel, and in front of Bleaufort.' sess. 2d s, 1 69th2dCong., Cong., 68th776, 8,Doe. Mar. 2, 1945 Increase in width and length ants H. all to 12 feet deep. of basin in front of Beaufort, May 17, 1960 Increase in depth to 12 feet II. Doe 334, 76th Cong., let 8se and in width to 100 May 21, 1965, ora (reek; transfer Beaufort I'rbor project.feet in Tay Channels 15 feet deep,to 100 H. Doe. 111, 81st Cong., 1st 95'. see. 107, feet wrde i Bulkhead, Gallants July 14, 1960 and Taylors (reek cchannels, and through turning basin in front of Beaufort; and harbor Detailed project report Apr. 1965 of refuge in nCreek aTow 12 feet deep, 400 feet wide, ard 900e e in Town Creek to Gallants (Channel by channel 12 fet dog c o n ec t ed wide, and 1,400 feet long. n t deep, 150 fet 'Contains latest published maps. Local cooperation. Under section 1 cal in terests must provide all lands e 07set authorization, local for construction and maintenance easements, and rights-of-wa iP areas and necessary retaining dikecludg suitable spoil-disPoS therefor, or the cost of such eaes, wbulkheads, and embank d quate public wharf wih provide, maintain, andhold States free from damages; oetaining works; the Unite- qut pulcwafwith mooring facilities; prvie operate an ad depths in berthing areas and local acciless; provide and n atain mainste with depths provided in related channels commensr1 responsibility for all roject costs n ect areas; and assume , projaccess tion off$20,000. $200,000.. Fully complied Terminal facilities. Fifty ipocess with. Fullyoof Federal cost limits waterfront facilities frontage of 2,000 feet. Existing facilities are adequate with a total for pre ent commerce. entcomerc. facilities are adequate for pre$ Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Be- tween July 7 and October 22, 1965, contract dredge Neuse removed 357,709 cubic yards to provide project dimensions in the 15-foot channels andd to provide a new 12-foot Harbor Refuge in Town Creek. RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 373 Maintenance: Between July 12 and September 2, 1965, 3,400 tons of stone were placed by contract for repairing Bulkhead Channel training wall at a cost of $55,154. Between May 31 and June 6, 1966, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merritt removed 6,501 cubic yards from shoals in Bulkhead Channel at a cost of $2,117. Con- COn and operation studies cost $3,817. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed October 22, U ' (For further details, see Annual Report for 1962.) Costs Vork the existing project to June 30, 1966, were $598,389 for new and $709,136 for maintenance, a total of $1,307,525. Cost and financial statement ca ear Total to . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 19661 June 30, Work: o riated*** . $2 400 2$7,500 2$100 $167,650 -$59,358 $598,389 ten . .. .. ... .. .. .. . 1662 26,269 23,000 24,457 103,904 598,389 opriated ....... 48,950 4,512 21,490 122,350 2,500 711,067 3,049 50,413 15,971 67,350 01,088 709,136 Ir $25,000 new work and $12,854 maintenance for previous project. colationl and cost not previously reported for modification "Heaufort Harbor' author- '8ruction under authority of section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. - 6. CAPE FEAR RIVER, N.C., ABOVE WILMINGTON Location. Formed by confluence of Deep and Haw Rivers at Oceacu r e , Chatham County, N.C., and empties into the Atlantic Cast atCape Fear, near southern extremity of the State. (See re and Geodetic Survey Chart 426.) a-reiousprojects. ajidX19ti8 p ecs For details see Annual ,ruaoo nu Reports p for 1915 rorti project. A channel 25 feet deep and 200 feet wide 10o1 mVillington to a turning basin 400 feet wide and 550 feet Wide at Navassa (2.9 miles); a channel 12 feet deep and 140 feet eut fro1m Navassa to mileboard 30 at Acme, with five channel elig S 12 feet deep and 150 feet wide to eliminate sharp bends; a strli 8 feet deep from mileboard 30 to Fayetteville by con- rece ting three locks and dams and by dredging river shoals; and Dreational Dject channels facilities at miles. is 113.9 the locks and dams. Total length of Estimated cost of new work is Dro.e ,000 (1966), exclusive of amounts expended on previous dar~ cts, but including $93,482 for rehabilitation of lock No. 1 Project was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of June 9 10 0' ; June 26, 1934; August 30, 1935; August 26, 1937; rf tber 27, 1965; and section 4, Flood Control Act of 1944. For 4ther details see Annual Report for 1962. locaa.l cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965 specified that focr interests must provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way tiol onastruction and future maintenance and for aids to naviga- Sarif required, including suitable spoil-disposal areas and neces- cos'retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor, or the dan of such retaining works; hold the United States free from aes to wharves, piers, and buildings due to construction and "tenance of the project; provide firm assurance that riverside 374 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, terminal and transfer facilities will be constructed at the upper limit of the recommended proj ect to permit modities from or to plants and bargest transfero depths in berthing areas and local access provide and rnalt e terminals cammensurate with the depths channels servin te project channel areas; and make necessary provided in theereid in sewer, wat er-supply, drainage, electrical alterations as et er utility facilities, as well as their maintenance.powerlines, and th have not been requested. Formal assUra Terminal facilities. Ten waterfront facilities total frontage of 840 feet. Additional facilities will on river, be proviith with 12-foot modification. d a i s b o Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Be- tween August 5 and 26, 1965, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merrt re- moved 13,549 cubic yards from shoals in the 8-foot channel at a cost of $25,314. Clearing and snagging with the Merritt cost $17,638. Planning and award of contract tender houses at the three locks and dams for renovation of .j cost $3,554. Condi and operation studies cost $36,578. Operation maintenance of the three locks and and ordirya dams Condition at end of fiscal year. Projec P cost 76,152 is complete excep new modification project just above were $6,847,358 Navassa. Total (including costs u i public works of which $2,499,429 $ x226 3S tenance, funds)w $1,399,517 forwas for new operating and work $2,854,930 for care, and $93,482 forr J rehabilitation neww ork: of dam No. 1. • a r o ecrean i c m me v . Cost and financial statement 1Total t0661 Fiscal yearn............. .. 1962 1963 4S 196l 19651 june New work: a o dc Appropriated .......... r Banks toooou___6 ]28146, 00 3$1170610 ..... ".-$17,418.......... Cost ................. an a c.17,300 5 1008579 2 , Maintenance: 831H o A o 123,82................ 207,606 164,5 A Includes $149,119 for new work 159,236 and $8,178 for mainte 2Code 710 fud for doects. recreational $122,000 APW and $3,550 Code facilities 710 funds. nance of reous for recreational revocation of $8,000 Code 813 funds, facilities pr a d; 'Allocations and expenditures allotted Public Works Acceleration were as follows: Code 710 Program $6 revoked , with e$3e681 pee 1 0$,68r $n4du0 7. CHANNEL FROM BACK SOUND Lppoatoeraion... TO LOOKOUT BIGHT, N.C" Location. On coast of North Carolina, Fully30 fort Inlet. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey8 miles east of 20 " 16complied0 with90 Existing project. A channel 100 Chart 420.)edeeP from Back Sound, through Shackleford feet wide and 7 feet .eet Project was authorized by River Banks to Lookout s 1937, and March 2, 1945. For and Harbor Acts of AugUst 26, details see AnnualtePof o 1959. Local cooperation. Fully complied Terminal facilities. None required. with. Operations and results durng fiscal year. Maintenance: Be- tween September 30 and October 16, 1965, contract dredge RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 375 mond removed 78,264 cubic yards from shoals in the channel, at a cost of $25,006. Between October 14 and November 5, 1965, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merritt removed 34,733 cubic yards from Barden Inlet Channel at a cost of $17,252. Condition and opera- cost $1,110. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed May 1956. Cost and financial statement %l Year. Totalto S 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New ork: DPropriated . ........... .C e. .................... ....................... ~88,328 . .................. .... ....... . $88,328 88,328 AlPropriated ... . ............ $65,394 $19,442 $5,282 $43,368 349,216 ... 65,394 13,268 11,456 43,368 349,216 r, 8. FAR CREEK, N.C. ablction. Flows easterly from Engelhard into Pamlico Sound, urt 95 miles south of Norfolk, Va. (See Coast and Geodetic V'ey Chart 1232.) wide nattag project. A channel 12 feet deep and 80 to 100 feet tur° froni Pamlico Sound to highway bridge at Engelhard, with a heafig basin 12 feet deep, 200 feet wide, and 900 feet long at the 3 19 Project was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of July 1962and May 17, 1950. For further details see Annual Report to r1962. LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. itieseminal facilities. Project is served by 12 waterfront facil- itWiith a total frontage of 2,300 feet, all privately owned. 0 ng facilities are adequate for present commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Be- tween June 24 and 30, 1966, contract dredge Richmond removed 44,000 cubic yards from entrance channels. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed June 1957. Cost and financial statement er eal Total to ........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New wok ted...................... ....................................... $164,642 DAna: 164,642 COtopria ted.......... $1,893 $54,310............ ............ $57,600 297,424 1,893 54,310........................ 21,078 260,902 9. LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER, N.C. of ocation South coast of North Carolina about 12 miles west a ae ~ear River. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1236 eological Survey Map of North Carolina.) low sting project. A channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep at to bwater from the ocean to the bridge at Supply 19 miles above, e obtained by dredging through oyster rocks and mudflats. 376 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Only Lockwoods Folly Inlet and connecting channel section tothe Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway is active; the uncompleted portion of the project above the waterway rive remains in category. Lunar tidal ranges in Lockwoods Folly River are 5 the inac feet at inlet and 2 feet at head of navigation cost of new work is $178,000 (revised 1965) at Supply. Estini.ect Existing proJ r was authorized y 1890 River and Harbor Act (Annual Report for 1887, page 1099.) Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Eight wharves on Atlantic Intracoast ta Waterway at Holden Beach, about 1.25 miles west of LockWYoo- Folly Inlet, with a total frontage of about 970 feet. Landing, about 2 miles upstream of the inlet, At Dixor wharves with a total frontage of 200 feet there are fonl Numerous landings are used for loading and unloading small boats. natura Bert ing space in vicinity of Lockwoods Folly Inset totals feet. Facilities are considered adequate for present about 1,11 Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: commerce. Addi- tional costs for new work dredging in fiscal tenance: year 1965. Conducted condition surveys. Condition at end of fiscal year. Active portion of project col" pleted June 1965. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................1962 Total to66 1903 1964 1965 1966 juneA30 New work: Appropriated........... ....... ............. ....... $32,671 . Cost..., ................. , Maintenance: Apora1,921 3 $108 Appropriated.......... $ 11,299 124,77, Cost................ . 11,299.. *. ** ******...... ........ 124,757 .. .. .. Includ................. . 3,386 Includes project condition surveys Code 470 costs and funds amounting to $2,757. 10. MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, N.C. Location. On northeastern side of Roanoke Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1229.) Island, N.C. (See Existing project. A channel 14 feet deep from the Atlantic Ocean through Oregon Inlet and 400 feet vide with connectil 12-foot channels, ioo feet wide, to Pamlico Sound, ManteO tJ.. Wanchese; and a channel 6 feet deep, 100 feet Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel wide, contlectil with Roanoke Sound. LengthOf channels 25.4 miles. Project was authorized Acts of June 25, 1910, October 17, by River and 11arbor 1940 and May 17, 1950, n under section 107 of act of July 14, Local cooperation. Complied 1960. with.i Terminal facilities. Project is served by 33 waterfront facili ties with a total frontage of 3,320 Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: On July 1, 1965, contract dredge Marion removed 1,259 cubic yards from shoals in channels to Manteo and Wanchese at a cost of $15,476. Working interttently duringthe fiscal year, sidecasting dredge Merritt removed 9,244 cubic yards from shoals RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 377 in the ocean bar channel at a cost of $54,289. Between September 17 and October 5, 1965, U.S. hopper dredge Hyde removed 86,489 cubic yards from the ocean bar channel at a cost of $79,061. Ca4ding and award of contract for pipeline dredging cost $8,274. Cotion and operation studies cost $18,125. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. (For de- , see Annual Report for 1962.) Cost and financial statement calYear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 .. a iated.$2,000 te.ro.r $26,431 -$553........................ t$1386,335 A c. ..... 187 27,691 .................................. 1,386,335 .riated .......... 502,000 242,900 142,550 $236,000 $204,870 1,781,417 ... 221,389 483,425 177,622 235,2 175,225 1,746,003 S~ 11. MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, N.C. teaOCation. On northern shore of Bogue Sound, adjacent to Prort foreV Inlet. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 420.)' 1tous project. For details see page 470 of Annual Report WidXZeing project. A bar channel 35 feet deep and 400 feet tuW,' thence an inner channel 35 feet deep and 300 feet wide, a els Ing basin 35 feet deep, and connecting shallow-draft chan- 1958 In general, project as it now exists was authorized by For iver and Harbor Act (S. Doe. 54, 84th Cong., 1st sess.). frther details see Annual Report for 1962. TCal.cooperation. Fully complied with. Dort lmnal facilities. Twenty-six waterfront facilities serve the vide 2wth a total frontage of 1,250 feet. Marine terminals pro- feet . ,731 feet of berthing space, with a depth alongside of 33 car and facilities for transfer of cargoes between rail and water f4orers. Existing facilities are considered adequate. For er details see Port Series No. 16 (1954), Corps of Engineers. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: U.S. hopper dredge Comber, with hired labor, removed 691,828 cubic yards from shoals in entrance channel and on ocean bar between July 1 and August 31, 1965, for $374,548. Repairs to dredging eo g by contract cost $707. Condition and operation studies Cost $25,025. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete, As for jetties which were deferred. (For further details, see 30,n1 a6 l Report for 1962.) Total costs of existing project to June ,1t66, were $7,140,478, of which $1,589,395 was for new work r4lain ld i ng $553,477 public works funds) and $5,551,083 for 378 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement to juTtal Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 JU New work: 1,33879 Appropriated.......... -$4,711 ......... ................................... 1633:879 Cost 9,00. .................. Maintenance:5831 ....... 1. 817 Appropriated.......... 489,491 $365,698 $265,000 $463,300 $399,000 6 5835,64 Cost.................. 290,317 547,466 275,614 466,666 400,280 1Includes $44,484 for new work and $284,557 for maintenance of previous projects. 12. NEUSE RIVER, N.C. Location. Rises in north inn central part of North Carolina near Raleigh, flows generally southeasterly to a point 30 miles W beON'th New Bern where it empties into Pamlico Sound. Total le'1538 about 350 miles. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts and 1231.) Existing project. A channel 300 feet wide and 12 feet deeP of mean low water from a point 10 miles below, up to, and in frontil- New Bern; thence 120 feet wide and 10 feet deep, from the r. road bridge at New Bern to a point about 3 miles upstrea" 9 channel 4 feet deep at dead low water to Kinston; and, durilto months of the year, 3 feet deep at dead low water to Smithfield i be obtained by dredging and snagging. Section included is project is about 160 miles long. Estimated cost of new wor bo $488,200 (1964). Project was authorized by River and arnd Acts of June 18, 1878; June 13, 1902; January 21, 1927; dep modification providing for channel 120 feet wide and 10fee do , was approved October 15, 1965, under authority of sectiO River and Harbor Act of 1960.e' Local cooperation. For section 107 modification, local intere so must provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construct of and maintenance, and for aids to navigation upon the reques j the Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil-disposal areas cluding necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankm ited therefor, or the costs of such retaining works; hold the unde. States free from damages; provide, maintain, and operate an a e quate public wharf with mooring facilities and berthing areaS OPd to all equally; provide and maintain depths in berthing areas ae local access channels commensurate with depths provided in ect lated project areas; and assume full responsibility for all proj-cy costs in excess of the Federal cost limitation of $200,000. Fuly complied with to date. Terminal facilities. Thirty wharves on this stream, of Which 2 are below New Bern, 16 at or near New Bern, 3 at BridgeiteS and 9 above New Bern. Total frontage of 2,900 feet. Facilti are considered adequate for present commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Be- tween January 30 and February 14, 1966, contract dredge Hamp- ton Roads removed 102,358 cubic yards to construct new 10-foot channel above the railroad bridge at New Bern at a cost $32,355. Maintenance conditions surveys cost $1,327. RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 379 Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed February 1966 (For further details, see Annual Report for 1950.) Cost and financial statement Year 'isal . .2Total to ...... 962 1_9_*6.. 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NWork Appropriated. t $455,990 $2,500............ $7,800 $3,000 $38,724 ....... $1,557 8,677 1,993 32,355 447,648 Appopriated.. 1,327 295,285 .~t 1,327 295,285 La t 13. PAMLICO AND TAR RIVERS, N.C. theo cation The two names apply to the same river, known as t eTar above and as the Pamlico below Washington, N.C. This 8Wairrises in Person County, flows southeasterly 180 miles to Geohington, thence 38 miles to Pamlico Sound. (See Coast and . detic Survey Chart 537.) fo ious project. For details see page 502 of Annual Report Rxi'stin r "c a S200ting project. A channel 12 feet deep at mean low water feet wide from 12-foot contour in the river below Wash- taetone to Atlantic Coast Line Railroad bridge at Washington; det 12 feet deep and 100 feet wide to a turning basin of same abth, 200 feet wide, 300 feet long, in Hardee Creek, 1,500 feet thee its mouth; thence 6 feet deep, 75 feet wide to Greenville; the e 20 inches deep, 60 feet wide to Tarboro; and thence to clear h 11latural channel to Little Falls. Project was authorized by A erc and Harbor Acts of August 14, 1876; March 3, 1879; Atgust 11 1888; March 2, 1907; July 25, 1912; July 3, 1930; and 19 62ust 26, 1937. For further details see Annual Report for Local cooperation. Fully complied with. thierminal facilities. There are 54 wharves on the portion of fro iver under improvement, of which 34 are along the water- adt at Washington, 19 between Washington and the mouth, f only 1 in usable condition above Washington. They have a exitage of 3,570 feet. Facilities are considered adequate for exist ng commerce. C1lPerations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Iiearing and snagging channel in Tar River between mouth of W dee Creek, 4 miles below Greenville and Tarboro by contract scompleted. ta Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. (For de- ls see Annual Report for 1962.) Cost and financial statement Year I Total to ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1960 June 30, 1966 ted................................ .............................. $674,651 APPropriat .... .... .. .674,651 co~at.. ed..........$164,645............ $45,000............ $700 742,981 164,645.......... ,645 $31,405 9,065 741,996 380 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 14. ROANOKE RIVER, N.C. Location. Rises in Blue Ridge Mountains, west Va., flows southeasterly about 398 miles, and emptiesof into Roanoe Wet erly end of Albemarle Sound, N.C. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1228 and Post Route Map of North Existing project. A channel 12 feet deep and Carolina.).i from Albemarle Sound to 1 mile above Plymouth, N150 C.; feet wide channel 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide to Hamilton; andthencec thene a channel 8 feet deep and 80 feet wide to Palmyra Landif' Project authorized by River and Harbor Acts of March 3, I18q July 3, 1930, and June 20, 1938. For further details see Ann10 Report for 1962. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Thirty-two waterfront facilities serve the waterway. Facilities appear adequate for existing commercebon Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: m dition and operation studies. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year . .............. .1962 1963 Total to 60 1964 1965 1966 JUToe l Ap orai ted ... .[.. :::... ..... ........ ........................ ;.. .. New work: $ 4 Appropriated............ Maintenance:7 g Appropriated ........... $20,3 36 $50,000 -$10,605 Cot.................20,336 $1 643. 3 1,825 37,570 897 $570 15. ROLLINSON CHANNEL, N.C. Location. About 3.5 miles northeast of Hatteras Inlet. (ee Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1232.)3 Existing project. A channel 12 feet deep, 100 feet wide, and miles long, with a breakwater on each side of channel, e Pamlico Sound to a basin at Hatteras, and a channel 10 feet fro deep and 100 feet wide from Rollinson Channel to Hatteras Inlet. further details see Annual Report for 1961. Estimated o new work is $465,000 (1966). Project was authorized cost to and Harbor Acts of August 30, 1935, March 2, 1945, Septemberby ive r ' 1954, and October 23, 1962. Local cooperation. Local interests have assured that all terrs of cooperation will be met. Terminal facilities. Six waterfront facilities with a total frontage of 926 feet. Existing facilitiesserve chae are adecuat for present commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Be- tween May 12 and June 30, 1966, contract dredges Clinton and Arlington removed 498,398 cubic yards to construct a new 12-foot channel in Rollinson Channel and a new 10-foot channel to Hat- teras Inlet. Maintenance: Between October 6 and 12, 1966, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merritt removed 621 cubic yards from shoals in the channel and basin. Condition at end of fiscal year. Complete except for the yeg RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 381 canel to Hatteras Inlet and deepening the basin at Hatteras i is schd 'l 'o fPthg detail is scheduled to be completed in October 1966. (For further as see Annual Report for 1961.) Cost and financial statement Feal year Total to 16"..2.....1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ,ewWork. - ao ropriated aitee:.. ... ........ $203,000 $384,910 enatce: .......... ............ ........... ........... 199,451 381,361 Appropriated. *..... .......... $9,370 .3,658 190,974 ......... 9.370. 3,658 190,974 t 16. SHALLOTTE RIVER, N.C. theocation. A small stream in Brunswick County, N.C., rising in I'ivelarge swamp country between Cape Fear and Waccamaw and known as Green Swamp. Stream is about 30 miles long routhow southerly into Atlantic Ocean about 20 miles west of Chrt Chauth 835.) of Cape Fear River. ( ,Y Coast and Geodetic Survey (See Prev for '5usproject. For details see page 1806 of Annual Report 6~eXsting project. A channel 4 feet deep at mean low water and eet Wide from the mouth to town of Shallotte. Section under 5 eovement is 9 miles long. River is tidal, range varying from se -at case a Mouth to 3 feet at Shallotte. Hurricane Hazel in 1954 tide about hal t616 feet et above v mean sea level in the river at latte Point. Project authorized by River and Harbor Acts of ach 4, 1913, and January 21, 1927. S cooperation. None required. .Cal PoimaMal facilities. A marine railway and shop at Shallotte ag and another in town of Shallotte with facilities for building threpairing boats up to about 60 feet long. On Shallotte River vide are 17 docks varying from 16 to 321 feet of frontage, pro- 'lg 1,334 feet of wharf and docking space. twePerations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Be- cb'n June 9 and 30, 1966, contract dredge Midge removed 3,850 C yards from shoals in the channel. nldition at end of fiscal year. Project completed in 1929. Cost and financial statement l l eat Total to 1962 1963 1964 g196 1966 June 30, 1966 NwWor. coa ... .... . ... A9 priated. c ..... ............. ..... .. ... 1$18,181 e opr ietd... ....... .. . . . . . . . . . **.**. ......... ..... *. .18,181 ............ ...... $17,000 32,010 ..... .r t....... ........... ...... ............ ...... 7,6510 22,620 rd $3,000 for new work on previous project. L 17. SILVER LAKE HARBOR, N.C. Location. On westerly end of Ocracoke Island, about 50 miles 382 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 northeast of Beaufort, N.C. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1232.) ud Existing project. A channel 10 feet deep to an anchorage basin in Silver Lake Harbor,from Pamlico 1o with widths of 0el, feet across Big Foot Slough bar and 60 feet in together with a training wall 300 feet long. entrance chaor* Project ized by River and Harbor Acts of July 3, 1930, and was autho, October17 1940. For details see Annual Report for Local cooperation. Fully complied with. 1961. Terminal facilities. Twelve waterfront facilities serve harbor- Facilities are adequate for present commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Be- tween February 15 and 21, and April 21 and 30, 1966 U.S. side- casting dredge Merritt removed 37,132 cubic yards from shoals in Big Foot Slough Channel at a cost of $17,260. Condition a operation studies cost $2,524. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. (For de tails see Annual Report for 1961.) Cost and financial statement ca1 year........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Ju St 196 New work: Appropriated...141 Coat..........."' .', Maintenance: 01 Appropriated.......... ........ 7,167 $16,550 $44,400 Coat................ ............ 7 167 0 93,50 $66,9006 $19,784 717 630 14 56,006 19,784 18. STUMPY POINT BAY, N.C. Location. On southeastern side of the mainland, Dare Cou~' N.C. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1229. ) eeP Existing project. A channel 75 from that depth in Pamlico Sound to afeet wide and 10 feet de basin in the harbor b Worth, 75 to 100 feet wide, 550 feet long and 10 feet deep, at plus toA irregularly shaped area providing access to the public whaT 0r. gether with protective breakwaters at entrance to the harOtg Estimated Federal cost of new work is $292,600 $10,000 for navigational aids by U.S. Coast Guard. (1966), inclu authorized by 1948 River and Harbor Act and 'Project 1960 River and Harbor Act. under sectiOl Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish ments, and rights-of-way for construction and future lands, ece and aids to navigation, including suitable spoil-disposalmaintenaad including necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, areas, ts and embanknlIefd therefor, or the costs of such retaining works; hold the Tj.e States free from damages to wharves, piers, and and maintain, at local expense, adequate public buildings; provide terminal and trap fer facilities, open to all equally in the harbor make necessary alterations in public and private at Lake wor cluding facilities, removal acsm e esonib of a small building in the basin-expansion are asume responsibility for any construction $20,000; and provide depths in costs in excess o berthing areas commepsura RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 383 With. qut4PPlroject basin depths. Formal assurances have been re- 550 minal facilities. Bulkheads in existing basin provide about videsunear feet of berthing space; and a wholesale fishhouse pro- duble about 250 feet. Part of the space along the bulkheads is c0 Y Owned. Facilities are considered adequate for existing facilerce, but any appreciable increase will require additional iOerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Plan- basi nd award of contract for construction of 10-foot channel and Cll and breakwaters. o icat" Cnfldition at end of?p fiscal y year. Construction of new modi- not started; scheduled for completion September 1967. (?or fnurther details see Annual Report for 1961.) Cost and financial statement . Yat.Total year to .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 M Ctpriated..... o .............. "~~fc.................................... ........ $7,000 $235,000 8314,4 $282,583 tenance....... . 8,351 48,934 troriated ................ . ..... $37,000 -5,484 . 95,348 .......... 527 30,989.95,348 19. WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR,N.C. CaroLation. In Core Sound, west of outer banks of eastern North oxina (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1233.) dee~tng project. A through channel in Core Sound 7 feet al1d 75 feet wide from Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Harbor; ay of rnative route of same dimensions through Back Sound by el 7 hannels at east and west ends of Harkers Island; a chan- lo al eet deep, 70 feet wide from the through channel to the ftueharbor at Cedar Island, including authorized passage and 0 d ae 1l a maintenance of a channel through existing private basin, access channel 6 feet deep, 50 feet wide and about 400 feet o a basin same depth, 60 by 100 feet; a channel 7 feet deep, Existing project was authorized by the following: Act$ Work authorized Documents and reports .30.19351A 7 -foot channel 75 feet wide from Pamlico Sound to Beau- H. Doc. 485, 72d Cong., 2d sess.2 Ao26 Afort t Harbor via Wainright Channel. 7f1937 1 A -foot aide channel 75feet wide to Atlantic............. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe, *t2,1945 C n 7e 92, 74th Cong., 2d ses.2 2 Channels 7 feet deep, 75 feet wide, at east and west ends of H. Doc. 99, 77th Cong., 1st sees. Iarkers Island and side channel 5 feet deep, 75 feet wide, Do . with 7 basin 150 by 130 feet, same depth, at Davis. May ' A -foot side channel 75 feet wide, with basin 200 by 500 S. Doc. 247, 77th Cong., 2d sess.2 S17,1950 feet, same depth, at Sealevel. Jul A 6-foot side channel 60 feet wide, with basin 100 feet by H. Doe. 68, 81st Cong., let sess.2 t 1963 about 600 feet, same depth, at Marshallbur. Jl 07 A1side channel 7 feet deep, 70 feet wide to ocal harbor at Detailed project report Dec. 12, 1962. S14,1960 Cedar Island and an access channel 6 feet deep, 60 feet wide and about 400 feet long to a basin same depth, 60 by 100 feet. Coiudi in the Public Works Administration program, Jan. 3, 1934. O latest published maps, 384 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 75 feet wide from the through channel to Atlantic; feet deep, 75 feet wide, with basin a channelh at Sealevel; a channel 5 feet deep, 200 by 500 feet, same delt 50 75 feet wide, with basilfl 60 by 130 feet, same depth, at Davis; and a channel 6 feet feet wide, with basin 100 by 600 feet, same depth, at Mars d berg. Plane of reference is mean low water; length of authoriz .ze channels about 49.6 miles. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Fifteen small wharves serve the waterwAY' Additional facilities are needed along Core Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- tract dredge Captain Piner removed 11,685 cubic yards to com- plete new side channel to Cedar Island Bay, N.C., between July 1 and 30, 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed July 30 1965. (For further details, see Annual Report for 1961.) Cost and financial statement Fiscal year...............1962 1964 1965 1966 '163 $143,640 New work: 52 Appropriated... 1 00............2 37....... Maotenne $1,249 15,666 37,989 234 4,713 .....-........ ......... Appropriated... 26,898 ,,oo 47,000 -9,703 I........... Cost..... ...................... 26,898 3372 4,655 32,742.......... xAppropriations authori for atized and cost constru and costs . ... .4o,555ius 32,74 ............ not previously reported for modification "Cedar Islandt y SIn authorized for on,Workstruction under authority of section 107, 1960 River and HarbordbJ loC interests) for new works Progress at nAdministration spent $18,585 contributed at e interests) for new work at Atlantic; excludes $1,000 contributed ($5,413 funds for new work a level.fud fo ne wokA SExcludes $1,000 contributed funds. 20. WILMINGTON HARBOR, N.C. Location. On Cape Fear Nort Carolina, between the AtlanticRiver, on southeast coast of Ocean and about 170 miles northeast of Charleston, Wilmington, N. C- S.C. (See Coastd Geodetic Survey Chart 426.) Previous projects. For details see page ' 1804 of e o for 1915 and page 533 of Annual Report for 1938. Annual R P de Existing project. A channel 40 feet deep and 500 from the Atlantic Ocean through ocean bar and feet olS to Southport, thence 38 feet deep and 400 feet wideentranc ha to upper el of anchorage basin (foot of Castle St.) at Wilmington, thee 30 feet deep and 300 feet wide to Hilton (Cape Fear) River; a 38-foot deep anchorage Bridge over Norhe3.t ton; a 30-foot deep turning basin basin at Wilm InS; opposite a channel 12.feet deep and 100 feet wide, about seaboard terlni'a'; Cape Fear River; and for a channel 25 feet deep3 miles and 200lo1enefeet wide from Hilton Bridge over Northeast (Cape point 1.66 miles above, including a turning basinFear) Rivert.00 same depth by 700 feet at a point 1.25 miles above the bridge. ModificatiIl 5 deepening channels to 40 feet into Southport and river for 38Habor feet toActfoo(S. channels.d of Caste Street, 87th was authordby Doc. 114, Cong. 2d ses) 1962 eured Rver ae re RIVERS AND HARBORS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 385 ady report on this modification has been completed, approved, I I favorable to the allocation of funds for project construction. 7 'Odfication for increasing dimensions of turning basin to 500 by (0Ca0 eet and extending channel 2,200 feet upstream in Northeast 0ae Fear) River was authorized March 10, 1964, under section authoRiver and Harbor Act of 1960. (For further details of WYork ization see 1962 Annual Report.) Estimated cost of new $11,534,000 (1966) exclusive of amounts expended on 15ris rv'us Projects. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1962 authorization rightied local interests must provide all lands, easements, and IJiteSof-way for construction and maintenance, and hold the bee. States free from damages. Formal assurances have not estarequested. Under the section 107 authorization, local inter- struMust furnish all lands, easements, and rights-of-way for con- d*"ion and maintenance; hold the United States free from sarages; and provide and maintain depths in berthing areas relatg the terminals commensurate with depths provided in relted Project areas. Formal assurances have been received. docle'rminal facilities. Thirty-four principal wharves, piers, and lide at port of Wilmington, with a berthing space of 14,400 hrder feet. These facilities handle general cargo and petroleum viedulcts. For further details see Port Series No. 12, part 2, re- Vd 1960, Corps of Engineers. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Be- ween April 4 and June 30, 1966, contract dredge Maryland com- menced providing 38-foot channel between Southport and Wil- mington by removing 1,014,701 cubic yards; also for repairs and improvements to dikes on Eagle Island. Maintenance: Between August 15 and 29, 1965, U.S. hopper dredge Gerig, with hired labor, a removed 694,904 cubic yards from shoals in Baldhead Chan- nel at a cost of $120,898. Between July 1 and August 5, 1965, contract dredge Talcott removed 849,242 cubic yards from shoals in anchorage basin at a cost of $115,109. Between April 4 and and June 30, 1966, contract dredge Maryland removed 57,221 cubic yards from shoals in the channel between Southport and wilmington at a cost of $12,727. Repairs to dredging ranges cost uC ondition and operation studies cost $39,037. Condition at end of fiscal year. The existing project is sched- to be completed in June 1968. (For further details, see An- aled 196Weport for 1962.) Total costs for existing project to June ai 6, were $6,090,769 for the new work and $12,092,836 for ienance, a total of $18,183,605. 386 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year..... A ~Total 30 to1 968' 1962 1963. 1964Jun Tota New work: Appropriated............... 000 2130,000 $85700 Maintenance: ................. 1,400400 106 3579 145,635 3 Appropriated..........-$377,472 Cost................ 66966 410,149 390:183 253,200 510,171 517,605 206,000 12 , 421,964 288:274 1fIncludes$4,625,614 fornew work and $602,614 for maintenance of previous aIncludes appropriations, and expenditures for 4219644288,27 projects, 517,605 modification authorized for construe 0 der section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act .t?' aa follows: fiscal year 1963, $4,000 with vended, and fiscal year 1964, $5,000, with $4,807 expended. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year............... Total to 1962 1963 To1966 1965 16 New work: New work:1964 Contributed.... ... 4000 S.--- Coat......................$........................... 40,000 400 40,000 21. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION Name of SURVEYS Pr oject Black River , N.C. . ame of roe Vycdk Black River',N.C.May-June Date survey cod~t6d Channel from Pamlico Sound to . April ARodan1966 22. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last CosttoJune 30,1966 full report Name of proet see Annuald Name of projectReport Construction Operstioce .. _for- Ba River, N.C.1 ...... Rv arac haven r .' N.C.1 ..................................... Be Black Harbor, N.C.1 ........ ... 15 $44,382 River, Cashie River, N.C.l............ *. 1950 93126,687 $4 ,'2 as."i"iver, oh.o..re.B.n.N.e414d0a8,,,so,1 . ..... o...... 1941 12,358 Channel connecting Thoroug B'aywi'thCedarBay, N.. 3802 190 40,4030 Channel from Pamlico Sound to Rodanthe, N.C............ Chowan River, N.C... 1965 4,029 * *. 1965 42,029 Contentnea Creek, N. 'C.*.................... 69.* Drum Inlet, 1950 . . 9 N.C.i......... ... .................. 1941 Edenton Harbor, N.C.I............ 64,395 14 .. 1953 Fishing Creek, N.C.1.. ................................ 52,828 52,828 3 Harbor of Refuge, N .C................ 1960 73,750 Mackay Creek, N.C.1..... 0 1922 19.......... 22,715 ............................ 1934 1,368,799 Meherrin River, N.C.1..................... 3 ....... 198 13,375 '4 Newbegun Creek, N.C. I.. .............................. Northeast (Cape Fear) River,N'C1 ... . 1950 47,734 3 . . . .... 4,802 Ocracoke Inlet, NC........... ....................... 6, Pembroke Creek,N.C. ............................... 1950 10,688 * 1963 9,240....... Perquimans River, N.C.l............................... 1950 Scup ernong River, N.C.1.................*.............. . SmithsCreek (Pamlico County), N.C.1 ....................... 1910 I6 13,750. Smiths Creek (Wilmington), N.C.1........................ 1950 81,164 650 1956 113,273 2' 18 South River, N.C.1................................... Swift Creek, N.C.1..1..2.............................. 1950 8,507 . 190,50 0 TrentRiver, N.C.1......0 . ..... ....................... 1940 1,600 '43 Wallace Channel, Pamlic Soun N.C... ............... Waterway connecting Swanquarter Ba 1946 115 199 Waterway-Norfolk, Va., to Sounds oNorth Carolinal.......withDeepBay Ci 1965 3:1 13210,834 110,799 . Wrights reek,N.C................... ... 1963, 1 Completed I3EACH EROSION CONTROL---WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 387 23, NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Fiscal year Atlat Study identification costs elthavic ,N$2,763 NC. ............ ................................ . $ I aven Harbor, N.C. .... .............. ."... . ........... 2,519 1arklocks Beach Channel, .C. .................... ........... 684 ManI er Island Harbor, N.C. ................... .......... ... 4,201 RMiS Harbor, N.C ....... ......... 1,543 (Shallowbag) Bay, N.C................................472 Snagging and clearing for navigation (sec. 3 of 1945 River and p_ Harbor Act, Public Law 14, 79th Cong.) anermoval of shoal in Teaches Hole Channel between Ocracoke aov Ucracoke Inlet near Ocracoke, N.C., was accomplished by arernment plant and hired labor. Between February 22 and March 1, 1966, and April 16 and 20, 1966, U.S. sidecasting dredge Merritt removed 22,783 cubic yards at a cost of $9,499, thereby completing the work. 24. FORT MACON STATE PARK, N.C. for 'ocation. On the barrier beach west of and adjacent to Beau- SInlet. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 423.) trsibsting project. Provides for Federal participation by con- p ution of Federal funds for one-third of first cost of measures 1licable to State-owned shores completed prior to October 23, ro., and 70 percent of cost for remaining uncompleted work. beoject will consist of initial restoration of 7,750 feet of beach Wir along ocean shore to an elevation of 8 feet with a crown reth of 100 feet; and construction at Fort Macon Point of a stone Stoetment to an elevation of 12 feet and about 250 feet long; a loone masonry wall to an elevation of 12 feet and about 530 feet feet and a stone groin to an elevation of 9 feet and about 1,670 Let long, extending seaward from Fort Macon Point and approxi- costelY paralleling Beaufort Inlet channel. Approved estimated bys for new work (1966) is $1,060,000. Project was authorized y1962 River and Harbor Act (H1. Doc. 555, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). theL Ocal cooperation. Local interests are to obtain approval by o dChief of Engineers before starting remaining work on project, a etailed plans and specifications for that work and also the f angements for prosecuting work; furnish .assurances satis- Drtory to the Secretary of the Army that they will maintain the th .ective measures and provide periodic nourishment during Do ir economic life, as may be required to serve their intended th~Doses; control water pollution to extent necessary to safeguard the health of bathers; maintain continued public ownership of the shores upon which the Federal participation is based, and their administration for public use during the economic life of de ro.ject; exclude all permanent habitation, including resi- tees, from the park, except the residences of park administra- ge and maintenance personnel; in accordance with the overall , sion or purpose of the park, operate and maintain the area in ,lanner which will preserve the desirable features and the nat- ialc resources of the locale; and continue to provide suitable access, and bathhouse, comfort, parking, and recreational facili- 388 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ties adequate to insure realization of anticipated recreation l aand Stateo benefits. An agreement between the United Statesviinfo ccOm, North Carolina (the cooperating agency) providing for plishment of work for the Fort Macon project was approvedJ 25, 25 1964.N Operations and results during fiscal year. State of North Carolina, by contract, completed a segment of the stone groin about 410 feet long to an elevation of 6 feet, at a cost to the State of $227,965. There were 2,829 tons of stone used to protect the northern shore at a cost of $28,109, and 92,793 cubic yards of material was dredged to nourish the southern shore at a cost of $44,779. No reimbursement was made to the State durign fiscal year 1966. Supervision and administration cost $1,934.( is Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of the projectI about 28 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 .0 JUne l30f New work: $400 App opriated....... ............. $64,000 .. .i4i Cost.................. ................. . 46,275 .143 $1,934 CAPE FEAR 25. Location. Works covered by RIVER BASIN, N.C. this project are a series off dls drt and reservoirs on tributaries of the Cape Fear River in Noee Carolina within a radius of 100 miles from Raleigh, N.C. (e Geological Survey Map of North Carolina.) ee Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1963 authorized thre principal dams and reservoirs and a series of smaller reservoirs tributaries of the Cape Fear River in accordance with the co prehensive plans in House Document 508, 87th Congress, 2d se sion Act also provides that the appropriate agencies of Departments of the Army and Agriculture shall conduct jolert investigations and surveys and prepare a report on the UPPe tributaries of the Cape Fear River in the interest of waterso protection and flood prevention, and the conservation, deve Ped ment, utilization, and disposal of water, the report to be prepa 1 and submitted in compliance with provisions of Public Law 8r 639. A list of the dams and reservoirs included in the cornmpre hensive plan follows. Estimates of cost as given are based obI 1960 price levels, except the one for New Hope Reservoir whic was revised in 1966, and the Randleman and Howards Mill Reser voirs which were reviewed in 1964. New H ope Reservoir is h only project in the comprehensive plan that has been authorze for construction in accordance with the above authorizatioll' Studies of the Randleman and Howards Mill Reservoirs haVe been completed and a report recommending construction ha s beel submitted. Funds for the joint study, to be accomplished bY the Departments of the Army and Agriculture, are included in the President's Budget for fiscal year 1967. Local cooperation. None specified except for New Hope ges" ervoir. Requirements are given in the individual report on that project. Dams and reservoirs Mie://Estimated Federal cost Miles Height Reservoir Name River above Nearest city I of dam Type of structure capacity mouth (feet) (acre-feet) Construction Lands and Total damages2 2 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . New Hope ..... Haw......... 4.3 Moncure, N.C............... 101 Concreteandearth...... 660,00 3$11,300,000 $19,300,000 $30,600,000 0 HowardsMillrv................. Randleman...................... iDeep.... Deep ......... .55.0 |.85.0 CarthageN.C........ Randlean, N.C....... 0.....±105 99 Earth.................. .98,000 163,000..4,591,00 .3,700 000 Smallreservoir................. Variou ...... ..................................... 20 to 70-6 Earth.......... . .923,000 38,454,000 f 1 Includes highway, railroad, and utility relocations. s For details see individual report. SIncludes $370,000 presently allocated to water supply to be reimbursed in the future by local interests. -.. . w . -- .- 0 CO 390 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 25. A. NEW HOPE RESERVOIR, N.C.d Location. On Haw River, N.C., 4.3 miles above its mouth, ad 2.5 miles north of Moncure, N.C. Existing project. Project will consist of an earth dam 1,330 feet long with a maximum height of 112 feet above streambe an uncontrolled, unpaved chute spillway, and a controlled *ed foot-diameter outlet structure. Some saddle dikes are reqUirt beyond the spillway. Reservoir will have a gross storage capacity of 778,000 acre-feet, of which 595,000 acre-feet will be for floo control and a conservation pool of 183,000 acre-feet for watei quality control, water supply, and sedimentation. Reservoird i be operated as a unit of coordinated system for control floods ind Cape Fear River basin, water supply, water-quality control,3b0 for other purposes. Estimated cost for new work is $30,600, (1966), consisting of $11,300,000 for construction, includhe $370,000 presently allocated to water supply to be paid for i future by local interests, and $19,300,000 for lands and including highway, railroad, and utility relocations. dainages project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1963 Existoc. 508, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests are to protect downstrea channels from encroachments and obstructions which would ad versely affect operation of the project; reimburse the Federal Government for all costs allocated to municipal and industrial water supply, presently estimated at $370,000; and bear all annulq costs for operation, maintenance, and major replacementsl~t located to municipal and industrial water supply, an a un presently estimated at $8,000 annually. Received reasonable a5 surances that these obligations for water storage would be a5 sumed from Department of Water Resources, State of Nor Carolina. iseint Operations and results during fiscal year. Project is b d designed by Savannah District, except for reservoir mapping master planning. Design memoranda completed during year clude general design, recreation facilities, construction facilitie5 real estate-area I, and dam and spillway. Preparation of deset memoranda for access road was about 90 percent c mplete out d works, 5 percent; outlet works model study, 2 percent; railro relocation, 98 percent; U.S. Route 64 relocation, 98 percent; pov and telephone lines relocation, 35 percent; secondary roads An bridges relocation, 25 percent; and reservoir clearing, 2 perce Plans and specifications completed for test fill and inspectio trenches. Preparation of plans and specifications for construe tion facilities about 55 percent complete; buildings, grounds, C utilities, 40 percent; and access road, 50 percent. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was in advance e gineering and design stage; preconstruction planninng schedul eid for completion in fiscal year 1967. FLOOD CONTROL-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 391 Cost and financial statement alyear Total to .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 P '.oprie.. ....... .. .. .. riated oP .... ............ ............ $255,000 $275,200 $514,800 $1,045,000 ....... ... 70,97 33............ 5,496 368,962 899,155 26. CAROLINA BEACH AND VICINITY, NORTH CAROLINA W L ocation In New Hanover County, about 15 miles southeast of Illvrnington, N.C., on peninsula which separates lower Cape Fear 834.) from Atlantic Ocean. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Map be"s.ting project. feet erilng at or near Construction of a dune with a base generally the building line, with a crown width of 25 with .an elevation of 15 feet above mean low water, together 50 feetegral construction of a beach berm with a crown width of li1, eet at elevation 12, extending about 25,800 feet from northern deI of Carolina Beach to southern limits of Kure Beach; initial etoo esti of sufficient suitable material north of.Carolina Beach beasecve as a feeder beach; and Federal participation in the cost of of i nourishment for a period not to exceed 10 years from year 1tial Placement. Approved estimated cost for new work l ) is $2, 761,000. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Con- roAct (H. Doc. 418, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). ease1l coperation. Local interests must (a) provide lands, relocaepts, and rights-of-way for construction; (b) make required ~aotri bst ea andu alterations of. streets, utilities, or structures; (c) for bu 37.9percent of the total first cost, with credit allowed ( L)M and (b); (d) hold the United States free from damages; Dtblaintainall works after completion; (f) maintain continued oil .Ownership of the shore; (g) adopt and enforce appropriate O'ances to provide for preservation of improvement and its oSIve vegetation; (h) control water pollution to extent neces- tar to safeguard health of bathers; and (i) at least annually tont? interests affected that project will not provide any sub- that al protection from ocean surges higher in elevation than ed of Hurricane Hazel, October 15, 1954. Requirements ful- o to date for town of Carolina Beach portion of project only. Oassurances for remaining portion have been received. terations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dune otabiization by planting American beach grass, by contract, was oC 0 illued at a cost of $34,834. Offshore beach profiles in vicinity Carolina Beach cost $7,207. be ondition at end of fiscal year. Dune stabilization scheduled to of oMpleted September 20, 1966. No work has been done south arolina Beach. 392 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 27. NEUSE RIVER BASIN, N.C. Location. Works covered by this project are a series of dar and reservoirs on Neuse River and its tributaries in orth Carolina within a radius of 50 miles from Raleigh, N.C. (Se Geological Existing Survey project.Map of North Carolina.) Flood Control Act of 1965 authorized F the Dam and Reservoir for construction as the key project inter recommended general plan of development of the Neuse r'e Basin. The plan will serve as a guide for immediate and future development of the basin's water resources as set forth in o~, e Document 175, 89th Congress, 1st session. A list of proJec luded session.geeraAalfst the general plan of development follows. Estinae .ted costs as given are based on 1963 price levels, except for Falls 1 and Reservoir, which was revised in 1966. D.ams and reservoirs Estimated Federal cost Height Reservoir Name River Nearest city of dam Type of structure capacity Construe- Lands and Total (feet) (acre-feet) tion damages] Falls 2. . . . . . . . . . ................. Falls, N.C.................. 80 Concrete and earth...... ........... 3$9,100,000 $10,900,000 $20,000,000 rO Wilson Mills....................Neuse.....................Wilson Mills, N............ 81 Concrete and earth.......... 201,000 ........................ 9,800,000 O Beulahtown....................Little....................Kenly, N.C................. 50 Earth...................... 81,000.......... ............ 6,200,000 Bakers Mill................... Little......................Princeton, N.C............ 53 Earth...................... 36,000......................6,600,00 0 LittleBuffalo................. Little BuffaloCreek......... Kenly, N.C................ 51 Earth..................... 13,000 ........... ........... 1,100,000 Buckhorn......................ContentneaCreek...........Wilson,N.C.................. Wiggins Mill.................. Contentnea Creek........... Wilson, N.C.. ........ Earth..................... Earth.................... 119,000 ...................... 35,000......................6,700,000 . 4,500,000 z Stantonsburg...... ......... Tisnot Swamp.......... .Stantonsburg, N.C...36 Earth...................... 48,000 ............ 5.......... 5,100,000 0 Great Swamp...............Great Swamp......... ... Fremont, N.C..............39 Earth..................... 18,000 ...................... 1,800,000 Black Creek.... ......... Black Creek............. Wilson, N.C.................. 33 Earth..................... 17,000 ...................... 1,500,000 Aycock Swamp..............Aycock Swamp............. Fremont, N.C........... 37 Earth...................... 47,000 ........................ 550,000 O== Hillsboro..................Eo .................. Durham, N.C................ 136 Earth................... 123,000 ........................ 8,100,000 Orange....................... Little..................... Durham, N.C............... 107 Earth.................... 57,000i....................... 3,500,000 x Includes highway, railroad, and utility relocations. a Includes $1,662,000 presently allocated to water supply and $990,000 recrea- s For details, see individual report. tion and fish and wildlife enhancement to be reimbursed in future by local interests. o z 394 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 27. A. FALLS RESERVOIR, N.C. Location. On Neuse River, about 10 miles north of the city Raleigh, N.C. 1Existing project. Construct a concrete bed1,000 feet long with a maximum height ofand 80 earth gravity d feet bed. Dam will consist of a right abutment 200 above streq foot-ong ogee spillway feet long,1ea ges, anut controlled to dshage by three 40- the contolled by 36-foot taint , lef abtetiofeog, normal streamfle°Wi Witht aa tOpmwidth of 30.feet and a 560-foot-long cahe and 3:1 side 4oO6o earth etfl slopes, connectingth.e righ cabutmenta tote hlllSide. Reservoir will have a gross %il age capacity of 408,oo acre-feet, of which 243,000 acre-fee the be for flood control,-45,000 acre-feet, for water supply fo td city of Raleigh, 82,000 acre-feet for water-quality control, od 38,000 acre-feet for sediment storage. Reservoir will be opera as the initial unit of a coordinated system theNeuse River Basin, water-supply, for control of flooS reation, and other purposes. Project water-quality control,dy items may be change b detailed monstruction prec20 planning. Estimated cost of new tion is $20 million (1966), consisting of $9,100,000 for construcand (including $1,662,000 Presently allocated $990,000 for recreation and fish and wildlife to enhancement water supPlyto to be paid for in thefuture by local interests) and $10,900 and damages, includin g highway, railroad, 000 for lafld Existing project was authorized by and utility relocati o the 1965 Flood Control A (H. Doc. 175, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). oncalncooperation. Local interests are to prevent encroach downstreservoiram channels that would interfere with the oper tiohe of the o of the reservoir; p ay the United Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, States, in accordance with the struction cost allocated t the entire amount of Cdaot $1,662,000 and relacemen$1,662,000 ent~i . and entire ao o water supply, mount of operation, presently estima -ated replacement costs allocated to water supply, presently maintenance, dd at $15,000 annually, the final amounts estiTAte actual costs are known; administer to be determined inkind, or repation project land and water te and fish and wildlife enhancement; pay, contrt kind, of one-half r repay h (which may be through user fees) with one-half of the separable cost of the project allocated ifntere tion and fish and wildlife enhancement, the amountto recrea currently being estimated at $990,000; inolv and, bear all c sts ofper tion, maintenldlife lance, and replacement of recreation and wildlife lands and facilities, the amount fish11ed estimated at $129,000 on an amount nvolved involved currently beill ances have not been requested City of Raleigh basis. cuFormarently sur. of intent to comply with water supply furnished letter Operations and results during requirements. tic has overall responsibility for the fiscal year. Wilmington Distri serving as planning design agent.project, with Savannah Generally, Savannah DiSt et c Hwill deve lop desigtn memoranda and plans However, Wilmington District will retain and specificat c er fo in g, and1 eserir- mos ui , matradrcreation - mapping c nter o a nd hi hplanning a responsib't sp ei i r planning, reserv. , uu msqmmconrol andhigwayand utility rel0 FLOOD CONTROL--WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 395 ioj"ge Subsurface investigation and preliminary site investiga- awadas been initiated. Reservoir topographic mapping contract drarded and about 30 percent completed. Hydrology and hy- Cod aianalyses design memoranda commenced. and d tion at end of fiscal year. Project in advance engineering tion desgn stage; preconstruction planning scheduled for comple- ; o ,scal year 1969. Cost and financial statement cal ar. .Total to .r1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 A414oriated. t......... ............ .O.................... . . ............ ............ o $100,000 70,305 $100,000 70,305 28. SWIFT CREEK, PITT AND CRAVEN COUNTIES, N.C. Location. A tributary of Neuse River, lies in parts of Pitt, rise fort, and Craven Counties, in eastern North Carolina. It to isnear Greenville, N.C., and flows southeast for about 42 miles New confluenceNNe with Neuse River, about 6 miles northwest of te jern, N.C. (See Geological Survey quadrangle sheets, New ce ' Vanceboro, , Ayden, and Winterville; and Army Map Serv- uadrangle sheet, Raleigh, N.C.) for r19613.s 1 vou s projects. For details see page 397 of Annual Report project. Clearing and snagging of Swift Creek from itsm stingt Creouth to Folly Bridge, 16.5 miles; thence, improving Swift Creek channel about 14.9 miles by straightening and excavating a 35 feet ,50 feet wide, to Gardnerville Bridge at mile 27.7; thence ilarly e t Wide to upper end of improvement at mile 31.4; and sim- a chY1improving lower 6,000 feet of Clayroot Swamp by providing .annel, 3 5 feet wide. Project was approved by the Chief of Coqueers on October 22, 1962, under section 205, 1948 Flood ktrol Act, as amended. 1936cal cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, ,applies. Fully complied with to date. at Perations and results during fiscal year. Construction of an Cmatic tide gage by the Geological Survey. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed June 1965. Cost and financial statement pi~eal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, 1966 New Work. os priated.......... ... . .... 1$77,070 $250,000 $325,375 -$41,349 $611,096 ............... 45,247 83,150 480,679 2,020 2611,096 lles "$38,000 funds appropriated fiscal year 1961, $39,070 appropriated fiscal year 1963. es$39,056 preauthorization studies costs. 29. TAR RIVER, PRINCEVILLE, N.C. Location. At Princeville, N.C., on south bank of Tar River, 396 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OFENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 opposite town of Tarboro. (See Geological Survey Map of North Carolina.) Existing project. Construction of an earth dike, with aPpur tenant structures, 2.89 miles long. Project was approved bY th948 Chief of Engineers on February 6, 1964, under section 205 Flood Control Act, as amended. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Between July 1, 19e6 and June 30, 1966, construction of project was completed eXce t for minor items. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction 99 percent coM plete. Cost and financial statement Tots 6 Fiscal year.... ..... . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June13 New work: 666 Appropriated.........,. ............. " Cost 1,065....i.1,180 $1.. $24,000 9,837 29,387 $143,100 24,968 $260,00038111 3:32,892 1 Funds allotted and expended for reauthorization studies. 2 Includes $761 for preauthorization studies. 30. WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, N.C. Location. A small island about 10 miles east of Wilm i n g t N.C. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Map 834.) oat Existing project. Construct a dune with a base bordering ti9 near the building line, with a crown width of 25 feet at eleVat . 15 feet above mean low water, together with integral conStrl 1 tion of a beach berm with a crown width of 50 feet at elevatiol to extending about 14,000 feet from Moores Inlet on the north t Masonboro Inlet on the south. Estimated cost for new od (1966) is $947,000. Existing project was authorized by 1962 Fl100 Control Act (H. Doc. 511, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Between July 1 and 30, 1965, contract dredge G. L. Gillespie removed 893,100 cubic yards from borrow areas in Wrightsville Sound Ad deposited material on Wrightsville Beach to construct a dune and berm, including the closure at Moores Inlet, at a cost of $202,168. Between March 23 and June 30, 1966, contract dredge Talcot deposited 275,000 cubic yards on north end of Wrightsville Beach to restore eroded levee material at a cost of $32,582. Dune stab- lization, by planting American beach grass, by contract, was co tinued at a cost of $20,723. Offshore profiles in vicinitY Wrightsville Beach cost $4,844. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project construction complete except for dune stabilization which is scheduled for completO September 20, 1966. FLOOD CONTROL-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 397: Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS .c•Year .Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 e Work. propriated. ...................... $36,000 $541,000 ...... $577,000 23,266 364,427 $176,522 64,215 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Year 196Total to ........... 1962 Year. 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Rev, oributed .. .. .. . ........ $282,000 $282,000 ........................................ 189,231 $83,795 273,026 31. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS for , determine extent of compliance with approved regulations low aintenance and operation, inspections were made of the fol- lng projects during the fiscal year: October 1965-White Oak e, l31aden and Pender Counties, N.C.; November '1965-Core hareek Craven County, N.C.; December 1965-Ellerbe Creek, Dur- County, N.C., Pantego and Cucklers Creek, N.C., Pasquotank Cai , 19 er N.C. Perquimans River, N.C., and Swift Creek, N.C.; June ex -Goldsboro, Neuse River, N.C. Responsible local officials l 0ere advised of inadequacies in maintenance and operation of lcal flood protection works where appropriate. Fiscal year cost 2,823. Total cost to June 30,' 1966, was $10,547! charged to "a enance. 32. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report seeAnnual Name of project Report ConstructionOperationand for- maintenance CoeekN.C.1 . 1960 $29,867........... ( C)reek, N.C.1... ..... . ... ... 1939-1943 00ree, .and 1958 50889............. , ek. ........... ........ .............. 1965 233,223 ............. vR eek, Dbr urham County, N.C.1I........ .. .. 1963 223,413.... q.. er.e River, N.C..:.. :::::::::::::::::::::::...........:: ............. . 1956 50,430 ,.4,589 l r , ... . ................. 1950 and ............. ........... aateo t(aPe Fear) River, N.C.I............ ....... 1956..51,896 . ....... 1961 95,873.. .. and Cucklers Pas O Creek Creek, N.C....................... . 1963 .517,948 ................. PerUtank River, ...k.e..193.57,94.......... i ver,N.C....................... .............. 1960 80,931 ......... a PRi.eRNiver, T., :.e ,N .C..i.NC.I.. .............................. 1961 , 1 47 ' 16,366'624 .,.. * *... ...... . er, 0. : ::C**.1964 .* 81,266 6,473 er ... .dtrbutaries,'North'Carolinal.::::::.. ... 1947 18,624... ,0....... 1943 22,660 .. .........., t0 , N.C.. .... .. .......... ........... 1953 64,769................ aa dike, Bladen and Pender Counties, N.C. ... 1963 214,286........... Jet authorized by Chief of Engineers under special continuing authority. 398 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 33. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization)to Study identification Fiscal year cos Black River, N.C....................................... $3,850 Broad Creek, Beaufort County, N.C..................... 1744 Conoho Creek, N.C................ ................. 6,195 Ellis Swamp, N.C................................... 8,577 Filberts Creek, N.C............ .................. 88 Gardners Creek, N.C....................,.5........ .5398 Hominy Swamp, N.C........................ . . 1,552 Joyce M ackayCreek, Creek, N.C..................................... N .C . ......... " .320,635 Mackay Creek, N.C. . ......... 0......... 24 2.............. Mill Creek, N.C.............................. 32,520 Moyock Watershed, N.C....... ...... ................ 12,541 Nahunta Swamp, Wayne County, N.C ............ ...... 384 New River, Onslow County, N.C. ........................... 4,528 Pungo River, N.C........ .................... 66319 Roanoke, Va.-Lick Run .................................. 563 Rockfish Creek, N.C ....... .............................. 15,419 Scuppernong River, N.C .... ............................. 386 Simmons Creeks, N.C......... .......... .............. " 3,378 Six Runs Creek, N.C. ....... "............................ 22,505 South Creek, Beaufort County, N.C............!'.......... 3 138 Sweetwater Creek, N.C............. 23,140 Thoroughfare Creek, N.C... .... . ... ............ 0.... " 31,257 .. Tranters Creek, N.C................ ............. 23 Emergency flood control activities, and hurricane-flood and shore protection activities at Federally authorizedprojects (Public Law 99, 84th Congress, and antecedent legislation) Federal costs for fiscal year were $2,738, of which $1,875 w for revision of flood emergency manual; $623 for exercise e training; and $240 for flood reconnaissance investigation in Neuse River Basin. Snagging and clearing navigable streams and tributariesin interest of flood control (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act) Fiscal year costs for preauthorization studies were $2,250 for Contentnea Creek and $1,348 for Gardners Creek. 34. ROANOKE RIVER BASIN, VA. AND N.C. Location. On Roanoke River and its tributaries inVirgini and North Carolina, with a radius of 100 miles from Danville, tVa. Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1944 approved genera plan for comprehensive development of Roanoke River Basin fo flood control and other purposes, and authorized construction O John H. Kerr and Philpott Reservoirs. See next page for a list o dams and reservoirs included in comprehensive plan.tt Local cooperation. None required. John II. Kerr and Phi1pot Reservoirs are only projects in comprehensive plan that have beel authorized for construction. Dams and reservoirs Miles Power Estimated cost above Reservoir develop- Name Nearest city mouth of Height of dam and type capacity ment 2 Roanoke (acre-feet) (kilo- Construction Land and Total River watts) damagesl r John H. Kerr, Va. and Boydton, Va.......... 178.7 144 feet, concrete gravity and earthfill................. 2,808,000 204,000 $63,061,000 $24,521,000 $87,582,000 r N.C.3 3 . . . . . .. . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . Philpott. Va. Bassett, Va........... 336.2 220 feet, concrete gravity 249,800 14,000 12,928,700 1,157,300 14,086,000 y Gaston, Va. and N.C... Roanoke Rapids, N.C.. 144 9 108 feet, concrete gravity and earthfill................. 432,000 54,000 27,000,000 3,500,000 30,500,000 4 Roanoke Rapids, N.C.6 .... do................ 137.0 75 feet, concrete gravity............................... 59,300 83,700 31,300,000 800,000 32,100,000 Smith Mountain, Va.7.. Altavista, Va.......... 314.2 244 feet, concrete gravity............................. 825,000 41,000 28,000,000 3,800,000 31,800,000 Leesville, Va.8.............do................ 293.7 95 feet, concrete gravity and earthfill.................. 76,900 20,000 9,100,000 1,000,000 10,100,000 Taber, Va.................do................ 275.0 54 feet, concrete gravity............................. 34,000 12,000 8,000,000 1,700,000 9,700,000 0 y Melrose, Va ............ Brookneal, Va......... 262.9 110 feet, concrete gravity and earthfill................ 120,000 43,000 17,700,000 6,000,000 923,700,000 Randolph, Va.......... Chase City, Va....... 227.8 147 feet, concrete gravity and earthfil................ 305,000 48,000 22,100,000 4,700,000 26,800,000 Stuart, Va. and N.C..... Spray, N.C.......... 297.2 138 feet earthfil] ..................................... 163,000 15,000 9,000,000 1,100,000 10,100,000 Schoolfield, Va. and N.C. Danville, Va.......... 265.9 126 feet, concrete gravity and earthfill................ 248,000 80,000 27,800,000 6,400,000 34,200,000 . . .I . .. . .. . . ...... SIncludes highway, railroad, and utilities relocation. . .. n .. 1.-- - - 2.1. . . . . Based on modified plan developed in fiscal year 1949. . . . . Construction comn- .. - I- . z a Exclusive of transmission lines. pleted in June 1955 by Virginia Electric and Power Co. NO a Details of these project items are given in individual reports. ? Construction completed in February 1966 by Appalachian Power Co. 4 Authorizing legislation provided for earth dam; concrete gravity dam con- structed. Construction completed in June 1963 by Appalachian Power Co. * Includes cost of earth dam on Whipping Creek. z Construction completed in 1963 by Virginia Electric and Power Co. CI z0 400 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS; U. S. ARMY, 1966 34. A. JOHN H. KERR RESERVOiR,VA. AND N.C. Location. On Roanoke River, about 178.7 river miles above mouth, in Mecklenburg County, Va., and 20.3 miles downstreal from Clarksville, Va. Reservoir extends upstream on Roano River 56 miles and on Dan River 34 miles. dle Existing project. A concrete gravity dam with wing and sad dikes on right and left banks, with a total length of about 2,0f feet. Reservoir is operated as a unit of a coordinated systema reservoirs in Roanoke River Basin for control of floods, genera. tion of hydroelectric power, regulation of low-water flow, and For other purposes. Power installation is 204,000 kilowatts. (stI further details see Annual Report for 1962.) Estimated cOs (1966) is $63,061,000 and $24,521,000 for lands and damange includinmg relocation of highways, railroads, and utilities, a totao $87,582,000 for new work. Existing project was authorized by 1944 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. None required. Xpai* Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: E a d sion and improvement of recreational facilities by hired labor. contract, consisting of new comfort station and camper atil building, access roads and parking areas, picnic and sanitaryo.. cilities, campsite preparation, water supplies, and miscellaneo' improvements continued under construction, general progr. Maintenance: Reservoir management was moved into new quj ters affording greater accessibility and service to public. Gene operation and maintenance of project performed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except fr additional recreational facilities, resolution of claims agailist th e Government, and judgements in real estate condemnation casv Production of power and protection from floods are provided project. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 19603 1964 1965 1966 June 6 41 327 New work: 36o Appropriated.......... $58,207 $450,752 $60,955 $125,000 $125,000 8 6:7 ainCost .................. 37,358 350,107 184,377 91,414 97,913 . . 68 Appropriated.......... 629,056 653,500 725,000 846,200 1,069,200 7: 1 Cost............... . 2..,97 642,451 745,328 813,034 748,465 34. B. PHILPOTT RESERVOIR, VA. Location. On Smith River, Va., 44.3 miles above its junctiol with Dan River, and 35 miles upstream from Virginia-North Caro lina State line in Franklin and Henry Counties. Existing project. A concrete gravity dam 892 feet long ad with a maximum height of 220 feet. Reservoir is operated asa unit of a coordinated reservoir system for flood control in o noke River Basin, generation of hydroelectric power regulationlo low-water flow, and for other purposes. Powerhouse has ato1 installation of 14,000 kilowatts. (For further details see Ann Report for 1962.) Federal cost estimate (1966), is $12,928,70 GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-WILMINGTON, N.C., DISTRICT 401 sor 1 struction and $1,157,300 for lands and damages, a total of trol A6000. Existing project was authorized by 1944 Flood Con- Local cooperation. None required. o Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Expan- c0tand improvement of recreational facilities by hired labor and Shelt, act, Consisting of new camper utility building, beach change rep r s plicnic shelters, access roads and parking areas, campsite tiPu eration, water supplies, and miscellaneous improvements con- etied under construction, general program. Maintenance: Gen- Co peration and maintenance of project performed. adndititon at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for prote oal recreational facilities, and is providing power and flood Cost and financial statement Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 MaiCot. at..........$41,800 $45,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $13,602,452 ateaance:............. 41,244 41,299 37,668 56,421 36,666 13,578,373 APrOPriae o ated.. ..... 288,944 237,600 280,500 287,200 297,000 2,814,662 S 220,723 287,750 290,410 252,754 280,392 2,754,663 5 SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIONS ohn I. Kerr and Philpott Reservoir projects, Roanoke River rve' Va., and N.C., began the fiscal year with reservoirs on rule ti.-ed During August, Kerr fell 3 feet below rule curve and con- Qebru to drop to a low of 285.59 feet, or 5 feet below rule curve on a Uary 2. The reservoir refilled to rule curve by mid-February 30245 MVIarch 7 it rose to a maximum elevation for the year of el~ feet, or 6 feet above rule curve. It was near rule curve at CU1veion 299.24 feet on June 30. Philpott remained near rule 960.5through November, but by February 10 it had fallen to Wit . , or 12 feet below rule curve. By mid-March it reached to 2 in 2 feet of the rule curve, finally reaching rule curve on May 'hand Was near rule curve at elevation 973.13 feet on June 30. Th Corps was requested to provide increased minimum stages at n , the striped bass spawning season. Request as fo N.C., during %l, or a minimum of 13 feet for 35 days and 15 feet for 16 days. aet ever, due to a very dry April, a minimum stage of 13 feet was All a y provided only for 14 days and a 12-foot stage for 37 days. "flOws to the reservoirs were controlled with normal power troati on without having to spill or dump water during flood con- $7g Periods. Total cost of functional operation for fiscal year was 11 for John IH. Kerr and $27,109 for Philpott. . 36. SURVEYS tio8sal year cost was $204,742, of which $59,334 was for naviga- coor erosion $132,063 beachtUdies; was for flood control studies; $7,704 for studies; $4,890 for hurricane studies; and $751 for ination with other agencies. 402 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 37. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA 06, Flood plain information studies are authorized by sectionfl t 1960 Flood Control Act comprise compilation and dissemina ' etal upon the request of a State or a responsible local g overne . agency, of information on floods and potential flood damages of cluding identification of areas subject to inundation by fl°oouid. various magnitudes and frequencies, and general criteria for local ance in use of flood plain areas; and engineering advice to ad. interests for their use in planning to ameliorate flood haza.0, Total costs for fiscal year were $25,728. Total costs to June 1966, were $83,270. CHARLESTON, S.C., DISTRICT* drahis district comprises South Carolina (except local watersheds al d a ng into Savannah River), western-central North Carolina, the a very small portion of southwestern Virginia. It embraces hi drainage basins tributary to the Atlantic Ocean between Little SkW and Port Royal Sound, except watersheds of Mackay and skll Creeks, and excluding Hilton Head Island. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. Navigation Navigation-Continued 2.Aquatic plant control .. 403 10. Navigation work under Atlantic Intracoastal Wa- special authorization ... 411 rway between Norfolk, la., and St. Johns River, Flood Control Char ............. 404 11. Yadkin River, N.C. ..... 411 . Ger ston Harbor, S.C.. 405 A. W. Kerr Scott Dam and 5. p 0 getown Harbor, S.C. 407 Reservoir, N.C......... 412 6. shi Royal Harbor, S.C. 408 12. Flood control work under 7. PYard River, S.C. . ... 409 special authorization ... 413 acanaw River, N.C. and 8. ] ................... 410 General Investigations uconnaissance and con- 13. Surveys ................. 413 9. Otheronsurveys ........ . 410 14. Collection and study of ter authorized naviga- basic data ............ 413 ion projects .......... 411 15. Research and development 413 o 1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL Chacation. Includes those waters within geographic limits of o0 otston District infested with water-hyacinth, alligatorweed ther obnoxious aquatic plant growth. hyai~~stng project. Control and progressive eradication of water- frotI , alligatorweed and other obnoxious aquatic plant growths ald Other avigable al waters, tributary streams, connecting channels, Carol ther allied waters in the eight coastal states from North drai na to Texas in combined interest of navigation, flood control, a liag e , agriculture, fish and wildlife conservation, public health Ietrelated purposes, including continued research for develop- Ped of most effective and economical control measures. Cost to $1e ra l Government is estimated at $393,000 and to local interests ized00, a total of $510,000 (July 1965). Project was author- SessIy 1958 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 37, 85th Cong. 1st thori: Section 104, River and Harbor Act of 1962 modified au- co1t Ilng act to provide that research and planning costs before clud ruction shall be borne fully by the United States and not in- thed in cost to be shared by local interests. Authority to extend lyler Work to problem areas in all States is included in the 1965 and Harbor Act. freocal cooperation. Local interests must hold the United States tici fron claims that may occur from such operations and par- ecepate in project to extent of 30 percent of cost of program, Sot as modified by 1962 River and Harbor Act. State of Dath Carolina has not provided local cooperation for its partici- as a whole; however, with the concurrence and indorse- 404 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 ment of the Commissioner of Agriculture, the State representative in the program, the South Carolina Public Service AuthoritY State agency operating the Santee-Cooper project, is provirdil local cooperation required by terms of authorizing act for ope r tions being conducted with that agency within its project areaies Operations and results during year. Bureau of Sport Fisher and Wildlife, Department of Interior, working under a menvore dum of agreement with the Charleston District, continued sh search work to determine the effects of various herbicides on o and wildlife. Limited field test operations were conducted Or alligatorweed in Lake Marion of the Santee-Cooper project undet contract with the South Carolina Public Service AuthoritYt determine the effect of several herbicides. No general field Oh erations were conducted. Field investigations continued throug1 out the State in order to maintain a current record of the lo0cad and quantity of obnoxious aquatic plants in South Carolina. ch eral costs for fiscal year were $39,422 for planning and resear plus $1,560 for operations.o .Condition at end of fiscal year. Control operations are c tinuming in cooperation with the South Carolina Public Serv e Authority in previously treated areas within the Santee-Cooped complex. About 5,200 acres of alligatorweed have been trea of under the expanded project. Research to determine effects herbicides on fish and wildlife is continuing. State Legislah tut appropriated $10,000 to provide for local cooperation throughhe the remainder of the State. A contract was submitted to ed Commissioner of Agriculture for execution but it was not S'i "be due to legal problems. It is believed that the contract Willbe signed early minfiscal year 1967. Control operations wou performed by Corps personnel. Cost and financial statement Total6oo year................. Fiscal 1962 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30' New work:50 2 97 Appropriated.......... $119,500 -$35,000 $24,700 $39,000 Cost.................. $52,000 35,982 49,807 31,399 19,471 40,982 1 Excludes $79,753 non-Federal costs. 2. ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BETWEEN NORFOLK' VA., AND ST. JOHINS RIVER, FLA. (CHARLESTON DIST.) Location. Begins at Little River near North and South C' lina State Line and extends generally southerly along coast to South Carolina 62 miles to Winyah Bay; thence 63.5 miles, Charleston; thence 84.5 miles to and including Port Royal SouD a total of 210 miles. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Ch " 835, 836, 837 and 838.)t Previous projects. For details see page 613 of Annual Repo r for 1932. Existing project. A waterway 12 feet deep and not less th 90 feet wide with a branch channel of the same dimensions RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHARLESTON, S.C., DISTRICT 405 WClellanlville, and construction of three bridges crossing the wexerway in Ilorry County, S.C. In general, the project as it ans today was authorized by 1937 River and Harbor Act (River ther diarbor Committee Doc. 6, 75th Cong., 1st sess.). For fur- details r see page 422 of Annual Report of 1962. LOcal cooperation Fully complied with. Chartminal facilities. Rail-water terminals at Georgetown, Whareston, Johns Island and Port Royal, and numerous open-pile 4prves mostly for shipping agricultural products, fish, oysters, Velie Ood, wood products, petroleum, etc. Marinas are at con- a41d at p intervals along entire waterway where limited supplies cr4ftrepairs are available for both commercial vessels and pleasure 4d ' Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce O recreation requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. Pipeline dredge Ideal performed maintenance dredging by contract during July- September 1965, restoring project dimensions in 1 shoaled area between Charleston and Beaufort, S.C., and 5 shoaled areas be- between Winyah Bay and Charleston, S.C., removing 441,064 cubic yards of material for $121,351. Pipeline dredge Dauntless per- formed maintenance dredging by contract during April-June 1966, restoring project dimensions in 6 shoaled areas from Charleston Cha~aufort, S.C., 5 shoaled areas between Winyah Bay and Charleston S.C., and 3 shoaled areas between Little River and Winyah Bay, S.C., removing 787,119 cubic yards of material for $308,344. Clearing of banks and snagging was performed by 87 g ract at a cost of $2,400. Surveys and supervision cost $115,- Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed 940; three bridges were completed in 1936. Survey showed trolling depth as follows: Depth Width itle Section (feet) (feet) Y l iver to Winyah Bay .......................... l, 10.0 70 1C11e Bay to Charleston ........................... 10.0 70 Charle aville Branch Channel ........................ 8.0 60 reSton to Port Royal Sound ....................... 10.0 70 o$7 otal 45 ,8Federal f ')3 8 % cost of existing project to June 30, 1966, was ~ $1888 for new work and $8,476,807 for maintenance, a total 5,822,695. Cost and financial statement rear Total to ......1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Work: . :$7,455,378 7,455,378 Cwo~riated. $750,955 $346,000 $434,500 $422,500 $410,600 8,575,406 455,580 599,371 256,489 476,092 547,974 8,546,229 ....... , c0C1,,. " es $109.490 for new work and $69,422 for maintenance of previous project. 3. CHARLESTON HARBOR, S.C. of theaion. On coast of South Carolina about 15 miles southerly e midpoint of coastline, 50 miles southwest of Winyah Bay, 406 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 S.C., and 80 miles northeast of mouth of Savannah River. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 1239 and 470.) e Previous projects. For details see page 1808 of Ann'ual5 port for 1915; page 579 of Annual Report for 1926 and page 562 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A channel 35 feet deep from Atlantic Oceall 21.9 miles to mouth of Goose Creek, together with a 35-foot pt channel via Town Creek. Also a 10-foot depth channel on y Pleasant side of the harbor into Shem Creek to U.S. Highway e bridge, and a 30-foot anchorage basin in lower harbor betWe d Castle Pinckney and Fort Moultrie. A 40-foot channel estima.ad to cost $6,060,000 was authorized to be executed when fotir necessary in interests of national defense from the 40-foot co.nsee in Atlantic Ocean to U.S. Naval Base. For further detalts page 425 of Annual Report for 1962. In general, the prJect it exists today was authorized by 1940 River and Harbor Act e Doc. 259, 76th Cong., 1st sess.). For further details see P 426 of Annual Report for 1962. Local cooperation. Local interests have fully complied to date for but are experiencing difficulty in securing suitable spoil area c- continued maintenance. A concerted effort is being made tO quire additional spoil-disposal areas. rIile Terminal facilities. Piers and slips extend for about i.al along eastern waterfront of city of Charleston with an additi ~t mile of marginal wharves. South Carolina State Ports Authoral operates 8 piers for fruit, wood, cold storage facilities and gelte cargo, a grain elevator and belt-line railway which serves it entire Cooper River waterfront. Modern facilities are alsO wharves of 7 major petroleum companies including storage t are farms. Modern facilities for marine repairs and servicing .1i also available at Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., Charleston Divs a U.S. Navy Department has modern facilities for constructionld maintenance of naval vessels including atomic submarines. ove ing docks and storage areas for missile-carrying type vessels h also been constructed and are being operated by the U.S. For further details see Port Series No. 13, 1960, Corps of neers.,edge Operations and results during fiscal year. Pipeline dredges Pullen and Enterprise performed maintenance dredging in upper and lower harbor, July 1965, removing 368,638 cubic yards of material for $161,456. Pipeline dredge Clinton performed main- tenance dredging by contract in anchorage basin during August- October 1965, removing 914,121 cubic yards of material for $177,974. Hopper dredge Gerig and hired labor performed main- tenance dredging in entrance channel, May-June 1966 removing 1,316,324 cubic yards of material for $342,206. Pipeline dredge Natchez performed maintenance dredging and spoil area repair by contract during March-June 1966 removing 552,550 cubic yards of material for $134,578. Pipeline dredge Gillespie performed maintenance dredging and new dike construction by contract dur= ing May-June 1966 removing 281,836 cubic yards of material, and placing 5,300 linear feet of earth dike on new Daniel Island dike for $204,565. Surveys and supervision cost $224,807. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHARLESTON, S.C., DISTRICT 407 Condition at end of fiscal year. Jetties protecting entrance waslel across the bar were completed in 1895. Existing project colmpleted in October 1962 except for national defense por- tijo Surveys showed controlling depths as follows: Depth Width O Section (feet) (feet) Vi to Vicinity Fort Sumter (entrance channel) ....... .35.0 800 ity Fort Sumter to Custom House Reach .......... 35.0 600 S1 H ouse Reach to U.S. Naval Base ............... 35.0 500 ,aval oN Base to Goose Creek ....................... 35.0 400 Tidewareek Channel ................................. 33.0 400 Loweater Reach ..................................... 35.0 400 erHarbor anchorage basin ....................... 30.0 2,000 leFederal costs for existing project to date were $3,328,349 for w ork and $21,308,621 for maintenance, a total of $24,636,970. Cost and financial statement ial Year 1 Total to ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Copriated.*. . . $500,000 $712,572 .................................. $9,914,804 antenlance*............. 332,451 880,121 ....................... ............ 9,914,804 r otorated......... 1,148,7951,503,800$1,993,500 $1,789,000 $2,626,300 23,318,888 1,137,3281,167,9011,699,6652,237,9491,245,586 .... 21,710,610 ll tio $6,586,455 fornew work and $401,989 for maintenance of previous projects. In ad- 00 for maintenance expended from contributed funds. L 4. GEORGETOWN HARBOR, S.C. Chocation. On coast of South Carolina 50 miles northeast of pearleston Harbor and 90 miles southwest of entrance to Cape p .ver, N.C. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 787.) for 1 Oous projects. For details see page 1806 of Annual Report fnua15; page 549 of Annual Report for 1938; and page 442 of g .al Report for 1944. of 6 isting project. A channel 27 feet deep with varying widths to 10 to 400 feet from the Atlantic Ocean to and including a toting basin at U.S. Highway 17 bridge over Sampit River, a te of 17.9 miles. Project also provides for the continued main- e tioc SampitofRiver lroj of depth 18 feet for a width of 400 feet of bypassed por- opposite city of Georgetown. In general, b Joect ' r A cas. " it e exists x stDo today was 2d authorized wa a t byy18 1948 River and Hiar- " see a (S.Doc. 21, 81st Cong., 1st sess.). For further details Sages 423-424 of Annual Report for 1962. pOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. erminal facilities. At port of Georgetown suitable for ocean- titber vessels: One concrete marginal pier and one of creosoted- 1~ 4er construction. For intracoastal waterway traffic: A tow er of smaller wharves and landing p)laces along the George- Se.Waterfront on the old channel. For further details see Port les No. 16, 1955, Corps of Engineers. Operations and results during fiscal year. Pipeline dredge Hampton Roads performed maintenance dredging by contract, July-August 1965, restoring project depths in Sampit River, Up- per Winyah Bay, and Eastern Channel, removing 525,290 cubic 408 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 yards in Sampit River and Upper Winyah Bay, and dredgiing 1,930 linear feet in Eastern Channel reach for $75,131 pipelinle dredge Hampton Roads performed maintenance dredging by con- tract, April-June 1966, restoring project depth in Upper Winyah Bay and Sampit River, removing 535,000 cubic yards for $166,176. Hopper dredge Hyde and hired labor performed maintenance dredging in entrance and gorge channels, September-November 1965, removing 361,904 cubic yards for $145,508. Salmons Dredging Co. constructed dredging ranges by contract fori entrance channel at a cost of $12,028. Surveys and superv 1 cost $75,048. cmpleted in Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project completelin 1951; jetties completed in 1903-04. Surveys showed controlli depths as follows: Wth Depth (feet) Section (feet) 400 Ocean to gorge channel ............................. 26.0 300 Gorge channel to mouth Sampit River ................. 26.0 250 Mouth Sampit River to head project (via cutoff) ........ .21.0 100 Sampit River bypass channel .......................... 5.0 Federal costs for existing project to date were $4 ,6 1 5,903 for new work and $7,127,300 for maintenance, a total of $11,743,203' Cost and financial statement , [ Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 31 New work:10175 Appropriated........... ................................... ................ 061 Cost.......................... ....... ...... ............ 88 Maintenance: $ 0 7,41L 6 Appropriated.......... $238,400 $408,200 $324,000 $376,980 $554,000 7 '241 Cost................. 164,502 469,867 194,919 423,317 473,891 x Includes $2,445,852 for new work and $114,556 for maintenance of Previous Project 5. PORT ROYAL HARBOR, S.C. t of Location. On coast of South Carolina 57 miles southwe sh 1 Charleston Harbor and 23 miles northeast of entrance to Sava" River, Ga. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 571.)al Existing project. A channel from the ocean through Port oya Sound to Port Royal, S.C., 27 feet deep and 500 feet wide acles, the ocean bar and in Port Royal Sound for about 12.7 njd thence 24 feet deep and 300 feet wide in Beaufort River Battery Creek for about 8.3 miles to and including a turning bi" 27 feet deep and 600 feet wide opposite wharf of South Carolil State Ports Authority. Project was authorized by River For Harbor Act of 1954 (H. Doc. 469, 81st Cong., 2d sess.).] further details see page 430 of Annual Report for 1962. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. South Carolina State Ports Authority co t structed a concrete marginal wharf and operates modern terl ~ f facilities which are considered adequate for present commerc the port.4 Operations and results during fiscal year. Hopper dredge ce and hired labor performed maintenance dredging in entranc RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHARLESTON, 409 S.C., DISTRICT 411nel during November 1965-January 1966, removing 430,929 c Yards of material for $160,229. Surveys and supervision cost $30,771 "9 ndition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was comp d -.9 Surveys showed controlling depths as follows: Depth Width Section (feet) (feet) \ou to mouth of Beaufort River (entrance channel) . 26.0 250 Vout Beaufort River to mouth Battery Creek ......... 24.0 300 Turnli Battery Creek to turning basin ........ ....... .. 24.0 300 ng basin (at Port Royal) ....................... 27.0 500 Cost and financial statement a1Year to Total ..... 1963 1964 1965 .1966 June 30,1966 NeA ork. ,......... ... ...... ,. ..... . ... . .... $1,786,100 1,786,100 ,!ance? 0Popriated $17,000 ........ $141,700 $283,700 $243,120 $191,000 1,021,334 15,545 143,155 281,159 245,661 191,000 1,021,334 r 6. SHIPYARD RIVER, s.C. . ha cation. A tidal tributary of Charleston Harbor, S.C. It it its source about one-half mile below U.S. Naval Base, whence abo tWS southerly about 3 miles and empties into Cooper River tt three-fourths mile above Drum Island. (See Coast'and Pdeti Survey Chart 470.) for reous projects. For details see page 610 of Annual Report 932 and page 463 of Annual Report for 1944. toI isting project. A channel 30 feet deep from Cooper River o" ittsburgh Metallurgical Co. plant including two turning basins; oopposite Gulf Oil Corp. terminal and another at upper end o b ect: In general, the project as it exists today was authorized o1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 93, 79th Cong., 1st sess.). further details see page 429 of Annual Report for 1962. VOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. Telerminal facilities. In lower three-quarter of a mile of chan- hi ae large marginal wharves of Gulf Oil Corp. and Shipyard. ocee Terminal Co. These wharves accommodate deep-draft, ~~agoing vessels for handling petroleum products and fertilizer" Wherials On upper channel is Pittsburgh Metallurgical Co.'s f for handling ores. Operations and results during fiscal year. Pipeline dredge Clinton performed maintenance dredging during July-August 1965, removing 564,490 cubic yards of material for $188,783. Dike repairs, by contract, during November 1965-January 1966 cost $10,172. Pipeline dredge Gillespie performed maintenance dreding during June 1966, removing 70,000 cubic yards of ma- terial for $17,943. Surveys and supervision cost $31,161. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed ou1 t61. Surveys showed a controlling depth of 23 feet through- "ttae project. 410 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement year..............1963 Fiscal 1962 1964 196 Total Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jn 0 96 New work: 491974 Appropriated........................ 4911974 Cost................................................ .. Maintenance: 3,909109 Appropriated.......... $381,850 $168,200 $196,200 $471,527 $137,000 Coat................ 231,480 309,558 380:13 203,019 261,765 248,059 1 Includes $4,150 for new work on previous projects. 7. WACCAMAW RIVER, N.C. AND S.C.et Location. Rises at Lake Waccamaw, N.C., and flows Southwes 139.9 miles into Winyah Bay near Georgetown, S.C. (See Geo logical Survey map of North and South Carolina, 1929.)rt Previous projects. For details, see page 675 of Annual Repot for 1950. th Existing project. A channel 12 feet deep at low water, 415 80 feet bottom width, from mouth of river to Conway, S.C., 41d miles, thence a channel 4 feet deep at low water and 50 feet wid to Red Bluff, S.C., 25.5 miles above Conway; thence a cleared channel to Lake Waccamaw. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. At Bucksport (mile 27.0) which is also oa the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, there is a wharf where fae rine fuel and limited marine supplies may be obtained. Ther are a few privately owned wharves used for loading pulpwood o barges which are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Snagging in loloe 20.4 miles between Enterprise Landing and Conway, lorry County, S.C., during July-August 1965.t Condition at end of fiscal year. Snagging contract complete with 10-foot navigation restored. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 New work: $26 814 Appropriated....$2....... .. .'..,814 C ost .................. .26 Maintenance: 263 Appropriated............. .... ... . .......... $33,500 $,500 2 813 Cost......... .. . . 23,866 16,134 8. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Name of project Date survey co d Ashley River, S.C ........................ .......... March 1966 FLOOD CONTROL-CHARLESTON, S.C., DISTRICT 411 9. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS Forlast Cost to June 30, 1966 full report see Annual Name of project Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Abb. I Creek SC Ash!e .. 1947.................. Creek, S.C......................................... 1947 ................ ................ 4lerese .Raree on RiverS s.0. River ree . ...... ....... ........... ..... ..... ............ 1955 $260,996 ....... 1947 ................. 1 $499,337 Rie... MStoRlIierS.C.2....................... 1950 ......... 1950 364,824 34 824 541,860 reatPe 8S.C. 2 1938 33,103 900 Littl eeRiver, S.C.131950 183,712 269,673 Lsbr eRiver, S.C.2 4.................................. 1919 19,550 25,650 Mychs "iver N.C.Clark and r River, C................* and S.C.2.......................... ....... 1897 19,000................ i, er and Clark reek, SC I.......................... 1910 9,500 ... l el C S. .......... .......................... 195029,0507,150 a5ka reek, S.C. ...... .................. ........1947 ... 0....1. 0 W eeRiver 1 i .. 1 214............................ 1896 15841........ t ,e 1 1R9e0S'.i9.78..............,1950 99,750544 i ver S.C. 2 1940 60,000 151,784 N . ....................................... er, 1892 102,809.......... 2a meted. a o eomrnerce reported. Ataiment recommended in 1926 (H1.Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess.). onment recommended in 1926 (H. Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess.). 10. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 s. _(preauthorization) Pipeline dredge Dauntless performed maintenance dredging in Village Creek during April 1966 removing 22,804 cubic yards of material for $12,893 to complete the project. Surveys and super- on cost $5,925. L 11. YADKIN RIVER. N.C. e cation. Rises on eastern slope of Blue Ridge Mountains in Victern North Carolina, flows generally easterly 100 miles to City of Donnaha, N.C., thence southeasterly 104 miles ch uence with Uwharrie River near Badin, N.C., where its to its name ofges to Great Pee Dee River. (See Geological Survey map North Carolina.) st '1isting project. Flood Control Act of 1946 authorized con- St etin of four flood control dams in upper Yadkin River Basin, R' on Yadkin River above Wilkesboro, N.C., and two on Reddies ever, a tributary stream. Studies made after authorizing act t ished economic advantage of providing needed flood control yrage in two reservoirs, one on the Reddies and one on the rdkin, rather than in four reservoirs as originally planned. Yesent planning considers only two-reservoir plan. Cost for for kin River reservoir (W. Kerr Scott Dam and Reservoir) and Reddies River reservoir as follows: Dam and reservoirs 412 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Although Reddies River reservoir is authorized, it isininacti status at present and will not be discussed further except to no that $131,500 has been expended in planning project and preparc tion of a definite project report which was completed in March 1950. An individual report on W. Kerr Scott Dam and Reseoir follows. 11. A. W. KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, N.C. Location. On Yadkin River, N.C., about 6 miles upstre from Wilkesboro, N.C. At full flood control pool elevation (1' to0 feet mean sea level), reservoir extends 15.7 miles upstream Wilkes-Caldwell County line. 01lPool Existing project. Impounding of the reservoir to normal 963, level (1,030 feet mean sea level) was effected in January 19 est Project consists of a rolled earthfill dam 1,740 feet long, withcoVe at elevation 1,107.5 feet mean sea level, or about 148 feet a i streambed elevation; a spillway near north abutment of dan~ rock cut with crest elevation 1,075; and outlet works consiSii of intake structure, control tower, and circular concrete condt. 12.25 feet in diameter through base of dam near south abut112,. Reservoir has a gross capacity of 153,000 acre-feet of which 1 ill 000 acre-feet are reserved for flood control, 33,000 acre-feetith be used when required for water supply and conservation W 8,000 acre-feet being contained in minimum pool.ge Local cooperation. Fully complied with. For details see Pge 413 of Annual Report for 1963. Operations and results during fiscal year. All recreational cilities were utilized beyond their maximum capabilities duri~o fair weather. Acquisition of additional lands and constructio of recreational facilities authorized under the Appalachia Fr gram will result in the project having the capability to acc 0 modate about 250,000 additional visitors annually. On aiIv occasions the watershed area received excessive amounts of ret fall, resulting in the necessity to control the outflow to preve possible flood damages to the areas below the dam. All ouo works facilities performed efficiently with a minimum arnmount time required for control operation. ddi Condition at end of fiscal.year. Authorized acquisition of ad tional lands and construction of recreational facilities in the Ie areas were completed during the fiscal year, except paving of ye1 access roads which will be completed during first quarter of fise year 1967; also certain remaining real estate deficiency udgast of initial land procurements. Project was commenced in Augu 1960 and placed in operation for flood control and water storage purposes in February 1963. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-CHARLESTON, S.C., DISTRICT 413 Cost and financial statement Totalto 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NeWork.: .. $2,200,000 $969,000 $461,475 $259,046 $171,200 $8,344,221 . o0Propriated 2,410,409 951,822 638,686 106,451 307,360 8,308,537 Mam"".. 19,800 99,000 150,700 138,600 408,100 18,358 99,481 121,583 162,720 402,142 ,000 recreation funds. 12. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, . 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) sca l uci Creek, yearN.C. orc costs for preauthorization studies were $7,364 for and S.C.; $176 for Edisto River, S.C.; $14,262 S.C Gap Way Swamp, N.C. and S.C.; $11,142 for Johns Island, ; and $2,516 for Sugar and Briar Creeks, N.C. Energency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Putblic Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) tio'ederal cost for fiscal year was $13,603 for advance prepara- ~oal'99ing and clearing of navigable streams and tributaries in interest of Scontrol (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Cong.) s a'ederal cost for fiscal year was $81,978 for clearing and igging in Crabtree Swamp near Conway, Horry County, S.C. T 13. SURVEYS f0orotal cost for fiscal year was $476,472 of which $358,512 was beaavigation studies, $111,441 for flood control studies, $25 for t11t erosion studies and $6,494 for watershed studies in coordi- "'o With the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 14. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA sts during fiscal year were $23,553 for flood plain information 15. RESEARCH AND DEVELOMENT st 1Ydrologic studies. Cost of collecting stream flow data, with and hydrologic studies during fiscal year was $4,782. 1cO r. S t SAVANNAH, GA., DISTRICT* This district comprises drainage basins tributary to the Atlan- Fer ocean between Port Royal Sound, S.C., and the harbor at twenandina, Fla., including Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway be- R"ie these points. This area covers headwaters of Savannah Vvesr in southwestern North Carolina, a considerable portion of otern South Carolina, eastern Georgia, and a small portion of theastern Florida. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page A Navigation Flood Control-Continued 2. Aquatic plant control.. . 415 11. Flood control work under antic Intracoastal Wa- special authorization ... 424 erway between Norfolk, F a ., and St. Johns River, Multiple-Purpose Projects 3. la. (Savannah Dist.) . 416 Including Power 4. uswick Harbor, Ga.. 417 12. Savannah River Basin, Ga. 5. S ernandina Harbor, Fla. 419 and S.C. ............ 424 6. Savannah Harbor, Ga. ... 420 A. Clark Hill Reservoir, aVannah River below Au- Ga. and S.C ..... . 425 7. -gusta, Ga............. 421 B. Hartwell Reservoir, Ga. tionnaissance and condi- and S.C. .......... 425 8 Otion Surveys .......... 423 13. West P o i n t Reservoir, tier authorized naviga- ion projects .......... Chattahoochee R iv e r 423 Basin, Ga. and Ala .... 426 9. Flood Control General Investigations Inspection of completed 14. Surveys............... 426 10. Otfood control projects .. 423 15. Collection and study of trer authorized flood con- basic data ............. 427 ol projects .......... 423 16. Research and development 427 1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL With tion. Includes waters within Savannah District infested Exnoxious aquatic plant growths. ad i project. Provides for a 5-year program to control aq radicate water-hyacinth, alligatorweed, and other obnoxious Co1 '.plant growths from navigable waters, tributary streams, cost ing channels, and other allied waters. Estimated Federal Ites $26,000. Cost to local interests during program is esti- Lae d at $3 000. Project was authorized by section 104, Public Rive 85-500 (I. Doc. 37, 85th Cong., 1st sess.). Section 104, rnd Harbor Act of 1962, modified authorizing act to provide llyrch and planning costs prior to construction shall be borne bY by the United States and not included in cost to be shared i aca l interests. Authority to extend the work to problem areas States is included in 1965 River and Harbor Act. the bor cost cooperation. oca Local interests must provide 30 percent of of program except as modified by 1962 River and Har- orAct and agree to hold the United States free from damages. ~ro Perations and results during fiscal year. Coordination of A foject Planning in Georgia is responsibility of Savannah District. Corrnal contract was approved by Georgia State Game and Fish DeiMtission on October 6, 1965. The Commission proposes to evrm all control work on cost reimbursable basis for control and ation work in excess of required 30 percent local contribu- 416 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tion, with Government bearing 70 percent of total cost. Li~n t ed operations are underway on lower Flint River, Mobile Distric " Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning for program 1n vannah District is in progress. Cost and financial statement .__ ._ Total to1 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: 6 Appropriated ........... $24169 $14,400 ..- $12,000 $6,600 $3,000 $2,000 1 Cost............... . .. 2,440 581 51 6,600 6,600 582 582 47 SIncludes preauthorization study of $1,500. 2. ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BETWEEN NORFOLK VA., AND ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLA. (SAVANNAH DIST.) Location. This 165 mile section of waterway connects (eo Royal Sound, S.C., with Fernandina, Fla. (See Coast an detic Survey Charts 838-841, inclusive.) Previous projects. (between Savannah, Ga., and Fernandif 1 ' Fla.). For details see'Annual Reports for 1915 and 1938. ter Existing project. A waterway 12 feet deep at mean lOW ' G, and not less than 90 feet wide between Port Royal Sound, dths and Savannah, Ga.; 12 feet deep at mean low water, with Wi e of 90 feet in landcuts and narrow streams and 150 feet in lit, waters, between Savannah, Ga., and Fernandina, Fla.; and a soe able anchorage basin at Thunderbolt Ga. Mean tidal rano between Port Royal, S.C., and Fernandina, Fla., is from 6 to r feet, with fluctuations from 11/ to 21/2 feet, due to winds and lun phases. Existing project was authorized by the following: a f , t Acts Work authorized Documents I. -~-- .1 ^.,..-- r-"". BEAUFORT, S.C., TO SAVANNAH, GA., SECTION June 3, 1896 Route No. 2 adopted .................................... H. Doc. 295, 53d Cong., 3d sees. Mar. 3,1899 Route No. 1 adopted............ ............... Do.l SAVANNAH, GA., TO FERNANDINA, FL, IO July 13,1892 Original 7-foot channel ................................... I. Doc. 41, 52d Cong., 1stsess. s Mar. 3,1905 Provided for Skidaway Narrows... ........................ H. Doc. 450, 58thCong., 2d O July 25,1912 Incorporated alternative routes previously improved as sepa- H. Doc. 1236, 60th Cong., 2d rate projects and the auxiliary channels. CUMBERLAND SOUND GA., AND FLA., TO ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLA., SECTION Aug. 8,1917 Consolidation of the 3 sections, shown above, into "Water- way between Beaufort, S.C., and St. Johns River, Fla." BEAUFORT, S.C., TO CUMBERLAND SOUND, GA., AND FLA., SECTION Mar. 2,1919 Removing logs and snags from Generals Cut.............. H. Doc. 581, 63d Cong., 2d se@s* Do.... Improving Back River to provide a channel 7 feet deep and H. Doe. 1391, 62d Cong., 3d ses. 150 wide. Mar. 3,1925 Channel 75 feet wide between Beaufort, S.C., and Savannah, S. Doc. 178, 68th Cong., 2d seS. Ga. July 3,1930 Channel from Baileys Cut to Dover Creek............. S. Doc. 43, 71st Cong., 2d ses CongO' Aug.26, 1937 A 7-foot protected channel around St. Andrew Sound....... Senate committee print, 74th 1st sess. o tteeDoC' Do... A 12-foot channel between Beaufort, S.C., and Savannah Ga. Rivers and Harbors Comite via Beaufort River and Port Royal Sound. 6, 75th Cong., 1st sees. June 20, 1938 A 12-foot channel between Savannah Ga., and Fernandina, H. Doc. 618, 75th Cong., 3d sees Fla., various cutoffs; and anchorage basin at Thunderbolt, Ga. Mar. 2, 1945 An alternate route 9 feet deep and 150 feet wide in that part H. Doe. 114, 77th Cong., lstsee* of Frederica River, Ga., not now traversed by the main route, at no additional cost to the United States. Contains latest published maps. RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAVANNAH, GA., DISTRICT 417 T .cooperation. Fully complied with. at , nalfacilities. Exclusive of adequate terminal facilities so t orts of entry, this improvement serves numerous wharves, consid which are open to the public on equal terms. Facilities O red ample for existing commerce. tracterettons and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Con- 638 cuDPeline dredge Cherolkee, during July 1965, removed 332,- and c3"0 yards of material from waterway and between June 8 Nbic , 1966, contract pipeline dredge Ideal removed 184,506 1arnshards of material, both from main route of waterway at Soaltotal corn Creek, HIell Gate, Florida Passage, and Bear River at ost of $90,007. U.S. tugboat Dozier dredged out a small diked Fields Cut by dragging at cost of $285. Construction of l il area on Wilmington River by Government plant drag- ie urveyss completed in May 1966 at cost of $11,843. Condition Codia~nd general supervision and administration cost $18,443. ect c tion at end of fiscal year. Main channel of existing proj- No1,t"mPleted in 1941, is maintained at 12 feet. Along main 'inilmum depth recorded was 10 feet in Wilmington River, i0utI{ 0ud iver, Little Mud River, Altamaha Sound, Buttermilk nate and Jekyll Creek. Former main channel, now an alter- e d foute through westerly end of South Channel and northerly eaII Vilmington River, will be maintained to a depth of 7 feet ava ow Water for traffic between points north and south of u11 ah Harbor. Costs under existing completed project to 0ai1966, were $763,599 for new work and $6,018,571 for enance, a total of $6,782,170. Cost and financial statement OlCost 1962Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Swork: A tPN riated *$5,9 ........ ........ ......... . ..... . ... $958,096 a ... . . ...... ...... 958,096 lh9ror, o. riated ........ . t........ $279,000 35,996 $390,000 633,029 $232,500 230,259 $353,800 308,784 $242,000 120,578 6,322,070 6,153,369 es $194,497 for new work and $134,798 for maintenance for previous projects. r i~3. BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA. aocation. Entrance is 70 statute miles south of entrance to er , 1ah Harbor, Ga., and 25 statute miles north of entrance to chhftnd i4 _a ,, evzn .) Harbor, Fla. (See" Coast and Geodetic Survey arli 0us projects. For details see Annual Reports for 1915 Zting t project. A stone jetty 4,350 feet long at entrance to '~it iver and following channels: 32 feet deep and 500 feet Zoe across bar; 30 feet deep and 400 feet wide through St. Simon f Brunswick River, and East River to foot of Second avenue; Co eet deep and 300 feet wide in Turtle River to Allied Chemical fet harf, formerly Atlantic Refining Co.; 27 feet deep and 350 ide in East River from Second Avenue to confluence with 418 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Academy Creek; 24 feet deep and 150 feet wide in Acadeli Creek; and a cut from Academy Creek to Turtle River, if decide advisable; a channel in Back River 20 feet deep and 150 feet from St. Simon Sound to mouth of Mill Creek; and a channeo0 Terry Creek 10 feet deep and 80 feet wide from its mout All1 point immediately above wharf of Glynn Canning Co. the depths refer to mean low water. Mean tidal range o0d of bar is 6.5 feet, at city of Brunswick 7.3 feet, and at upper e'iver harbor 7.6 feet. Existing project was authorized by sxet and Harbor Acts between 1879 and 1950. In general, c project is covered by 1950 River and Harbor Act (H. D c: 1for 10, 81st Cong., 1st sess.). For further details see Annual Repot 1962. Local cooperation. Complied with to date. -- tall Terminal facilities. Twenty-six wharves and piers, alms ad" privately owned, having a berthing space of 11,444 feet. Ied dition, Port of Brunswick and State of Georgia construtast transit shed and modern docks with 1,500 feet of aprons on fort River at a cost of over $1,300,000. For further details see Series No. 16, Corps of Engineers (revised 1954). ceIJ.S' Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: U.S. pipeline dredge Henry Bacon dredged in East River October 14- 28, 1965, and April 6-16, 1966, removing 419,345 cubic yards of material at cost of $139,853. U.S. hopper dredge Hyde dredged May 3 to June 30, 1966, removing 438,397 cubic yards of material from bar channel and 64,188 cubic yards of material from St. Simon Sound at cost of $209,011. Plans and specifications of prepared and contract awarded in June 1966 for constructio.bor dredging ranges for Brunswick Bar Channel. Brunswick ardel model at Waterway Experiment Station and verification of - 0f were completed and test program was commenced at total cost $54,301 Rapid shoaling in East River has existed since caSO deepening to 30 feet in June 1959. Investigations and studiead excessive shoaling continued. Studies of shoalingra t es per dredging methods indicate maintenance dredging should be 9i formed by Government plant until studies are completed, c0 order that data can be developed and unpredictable shoaling r be expeditiously dredged. Routine condition surveys, Gto0s ment supervision and administration, and special investigat for model requirements cost $30,044.t Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project Wa5sCo pleted in December 1960. General condition of harbor worsj satisfactory providing maintenance dredging continues.4l mum readings of authorized project depths were: In 32-,e channel, 30 feet on St. Simon Range; in 30-foot channel, 28 feet on Brunswick Cut Point Range; in 27-foot channel, 17 feet above Second Avenue. Costs for existing completed project to J1ne 1966, were $9,287,107, of which $3,433,743 was for new worl.('te- cludes $97,521 public works funds) and $5,853,364 for val- nance (includes $4,995 public works funds). RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAVANNAH, GA., DISTRICT 419 ---. _ Cost and financial statement Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1065 1966 June 30, 19661 . t d..... $11,262................................... $4,077,208 maa ale.............. $7............ ............ ............ ............ 24,077,208 oprated .......... 309,000 445,000 $436,200 $5 60,200 $535,000 6,019,632 ..... 311,676 445,589 432,383 553,959 433,209 5,907,778 des Cl e $643, 465 for new work and $54,414 for maintenance for previous projects. In- X $'60l 0 for preauthorization study. es $10,000 contributed funds for new work. oction. 4. FERNANDINA HARBOR, FLA. SaocLton. Entrance is 95 statute miles south of entrance to Jaannah Harbor, Ga., and 221/2 statute miles north of entrance to Chrt 453.) Harbor, Fla. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chaksonville forkStin project. Extends from the bar to junction of Lance- ldet Creek with Amelia River, 7 miles, and authorized project r is 28 feet. Project was authorized by eight River and iarbor Acts between 1880 and 1950. The 1950 authorization is "ctive and project as it exists today was authorized by 1945 etr and Harbor Act (IH. Doc. 284, 77th Cong., 1st sess.). Proj- See Was completed at a cost of $3,288,816. For further details 'nnual Report for 1962. cooperation. Local interests must provide suitable ter- Ci8°1al spoil facilities open to all on equal terms; furnish lands and tre age-disposal areas; rights-of-way for construction and fu- 7 aintenance; and hold the United States free from damages. be rinal facilities. There are 16 wharves and piers with Tisu space of 4,973 feet along 2 miles of water frontage. e s considered adequate for existing commerce. (See Port 0 ies No. 16, 1954.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Plans and specifications were prepared and contract awarded in Decem- ber 1965 for construction of dredging ranges for St. Marys en- trance channel. Work was completed in January 1966 at cost of $11,796. Contract pipeline dredge Cherokee dredged in inner harbor and turning basin July 1-29, 1965, removing 523,843 cubic yards of material at cost of $81,922. U.S. hopper dredge Hyde dredged in outer harbor March 23, to May 6, 1966, re- moving 178,557 cubic yards of material at cost of $155,602. ot engneering, miscellaneous reports, and condition surveys c $7,126. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. ainStone jetties completed in 1905 are in need of repairs. Re- basnlltg work is to deepen inner harbor channel and turning O -n to 32 feet when and if inactive 1950 project is reactivated. er harbor channel has been realined and deepened to 34 feet fee' elopment of a military project. Controlling depths are 34 2 1ilOver outer harbor, 5 miles, and 25 feet over inner harbor, 420 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 june30, 16 New work: Appropriated ......... $3,288 016 Cost .......... ..................................................... 3, , Maintenance: Appropriated..........$100,000 $87,000 $188,500 $175,000 $186,000 75 .................. 176 8 188,388 106,145 256,446 5. SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA .of Location. Harbor entrance is 75 statute miles Charleston Harbor, S.C., and 70 statute miles north ofouth Brs0) wick Harbor, Ga. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1 aPrevious projects. For details see Annual Reports for1 and 1938. Existing project. Channels 40 feet deep and 600 feetwijde d across the5ocean bar to harbor entrance, about 7 miles feet deep, and 500 feet wide to Atlantic Coast Line terminal;, po t$ deep and 400 feet wide to vicinity of Garden City (Georgia.F Authority terminal) ; and 36 feet deep and 400 feet wide to vifeet of Savannah Sugar Refining Corp., about 22.6 miles and 3ot deep and 200 feet wide to a point 1,500 feet below Atlantic Coathree highway bridge, about 1.45 miles, total length 31.05 miles; 00e turning basins 34 feet deep by 900 feet wide by 1,000 feet long,.oA at or near Atlantic Coast Line terminal, one at or near Anerl,i Oil Co. terminal, and one at or near Kings Island; turningal 30 feet deep by 600 feet wide by 600 feet long at or nearSali Sugar Refining Corp. terminal and at or near extreme upper tt of project near Continental Can Cod. terminal. Sediment c ~td. works consisting of tide gate structure across Back River; iiW ment basin 40 feet deep, 600 feet wide, about 2 1 miles o1011,.ge entrance channel 38 to 40 feet deep and 300 feet wide; canal across Argyle Island 15 feet deep and 300 feet wide;drafro011 works and canals for supplying fresh water to Savannah C01o aI Natiotly Wildlife Refuge; and facilities to mitigate damages to preIelyj improved areas other than refuge lands. Mean range of tide i 8.2 feet at upper end of harbor and 7.3 feet at lower end. treme ranges are about 10.7 and 11.4 feet, respectively. mated cost of new work to date is $9,874,000 exclusive of arntPo expended on previous projects and preauthorization studies. isting project was authorized by 14 River and Harbor Acts fro 1907 through 1965. In general, the River and Harbor Acteo 1965 covers principal features of existing project. Estimate total Federal cost for remaining new work is $8,694,000 for Wide5 ing and deepening channels and turning basins with an additio $250,000 payable by local interests (H. Doc. 226, 89th Cong.). $7,040,000 for sediment control works and appurtenant facil, with estimated cost to local interests of $311,000 (H. Doc. 89th Cong.). spi Local cooperation. Local interests must provide suitable spol areas for maintenance and hold the United States freefrl damages. City of Savannah and Chatham County, Ga., as lo assurers, supplied satisfactory spoilage easements for all requir RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAVANNAH, GA., DISTRICT 421 Say/14eareas specified by "Twenty-five year spoilage plan, Tvnah Harbor" and revisions. existi nalfacilities. Fifty piers and wharves adequately serve use ow aterborne commerce of the port. These facilities, With f dolphins, have a combined berthing space of 28,404 with feet water ater depths alongside ranging up to 34 feet at mean low detail 5 All have railway and highway connections. For further and seePort Series No. 14, Corps of Engineers (revised 1954) SanualReport for 1962. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: U.S. pipeline dredge Bacon dredged in inner harbor July 1, to October 11, 1965, November 1, 1965, to April 3, 1966, and May 23, to June 30, 1966 removing 4,768,671 cubic yards of material at cost of $1,003,892. U.S. hopper dredge Gerig dredged in outer harbor April 10, to May 11, 1966, removing 711,046 cubic yards of ma- terial at a cost of $260,491. Construction of spoil dikes by Govern- ment plant dragline cost $73,967. Dragging and sweeping the visio arbor cost $4,791. Condition surveys, government super- $70,494and administration, less credits to pipeline dredging, cost cttter * To minimize agitation, dredges were operated with slow t4eat,,tpeed and adjusted swing speed. Due to lack of instru- cated on these studies cannot be fully evaluated except as indi- eosd biy long range maintenance conditions. Dredge spoil '000feet." "0 ein diked spoil areas required pipelines in excess of P10,000d "1 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is incomplete. A alring walls, jetties, and other structures are in fair condition. gral orized channels are maintained by a planned dredging pro- read. With work at critical areas when necessary. Minimum feet 11s from depths authorized were: In 40-foot channel, 36 at Tybee Knoll; in 38-foot channel, 32 feet at The Lower Flats ng Island Crossing; in 36-foot channel, 27 feet at Port oei $9 Worth Costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, were o4 ,137 for new work and $40,088,710 for maintenance, a total ,42,847. Cost and financial statement __ Year16 Total to 1963 1964 1065 1966 June 30, 19661 oitsriated .......... ......... $140,000 $277000 -$656 . ce": .15,753 $16,714,521 400,591 ............ 16,714,521 copriat6ed*... . $1,621,600 $1,650,000 1,084,700 1,667,0001,402,000 40,88,626 ci,) ..... 1,413,7681,798,3141,947,3061,751,2551,413,635 40,387,604 I0Cle ' ... .. .__.. .__,__.. . ..... s 1'0$7,26 0 3 8 4 for new work and $298,894 for maintenance for previous projects. In. ecti 0 , of 0for preauthorization study. Excludes $34,298 for removal of sunken vessels: navigation Code 410 , 6. SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA. acad tion. Savannah River is formed by confluence of Tugaloo aral, .eneca Rivers on northwestern boundary line between South boI'Ina and Georgia. It flows southeast 314 miles, forming 1 Cary line between the two states, and empties into the A' lantic Ocean 16.6 miles below Savannah, Ga. (See Geological rVey maps of South Carolina and Georgia.) 422 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Previous project. For details see Annual Reports for 1915 and 1938. de Existing project. A channel 9 feet deep and 90 feet wde (at ordinary summer flow of 5,800 second-feet at Augtus Ga.) from upper end of Savannah Harbor to head of na0 gation at Augusta, 3 miles above Fifth Street Bridge, a total of about 199 miles. Improvement is to be obtained by construecg* of contraction works, closure of cutoffs, bank protection, dred river regulation. Mean abot 1 itfet tidal anexrem variation o of at mouth 34 river 1 feean Freshet variation above normal pool level (elevation 114.5 3 sea level) of New Savannah Bluff lock and dam ordinarily about 13 feet with an extreme of 34atfeet. mile 2 test ba el approved project cost estimate for providing a 9-foot chan (Sept. 1963) is $6,576,000 exclusive of amounts expenided lff previous projects. Recreation facilities at New Savannahe by lock and dam cost $17,000. Existing project was authorize is seven River and Harbor Acts between 1890 and 1950 a d 6, generally as authorized by 1950 River and Harbor Act (S. Docot 81st Cong., 1st sess.) For further details see Annual Rep for 1962. Local cooperation. Complied with to date. City Cotcil o Augusta, Ga., and Georgia and South Carolina Ports Authori agreed to act as local assurer. Terminal facilities. Only water terminals served by this i h provement are at Augusta, Sylvania, and at or near Savafnga Augusta provided a municipal dock valued at $50,000 and Georgi Ports Authority constructed a State port from local funds cost'lg $400,000. In addition, Pure Oil Co., Texaco, Inc., and Iers, Brothers Brick and Tile Co. maintain terminals'below Aug t s and Allied Chemical Co. maintains terminal at Sylvania. ve are supplemented by natural landings along river and exteni5 facilities at Savannah. 1 Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: work by contract on spoil dikes completed July 6, 1965. Mainte- nance: Pile dikes were constructed by contract at 5 locatiOs 66 tween miles 182 and 27 from October 27, 1965, to June 30,(1pr at cost of $112,635. Crane barge No. 2 with towboat Piasapc. formed 8 months of snagging and clamshell dredging in co-e tion with 9-foot project at cost of $63,615. Contract dredge Ideal, April 22 to May 30, 1966, dredged 189,824 cubic yards of material at cost of $155,376. Operation of lock and da, rotld channel condition surveys, and other government supervision , administrative costs were $53,065. Riverflow is regulated e operation of Clark Hill and Hartwell Dams, and has incre a from minimum daily flow of record of 1,105 cubic feet per seco before construction of dams to 6,100 cubic feet per second 11e construction. ^el Condition at end of fiscal year. In general, open-chafa' works are in good condition. Project depth of 9 feet was 'let tamed 90 percent of fiscal year, with a minimum depth, of ,. recorded at mile 28, Atlantic Coast Line Railroad BridQ0 Costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, were $10,475,699, FLOOD CONTROL--SAVANNAH, GA., DISTRICT 423 Which $6,663,851 was for new work (includes $1,634,562 public Works funds), and $3,811,848 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement alyear Total to .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 work: C t ri ed.........$769,002 $11,262 $270,000 $63,000 -$9,312 $6,757,331 anena*c'e*............733,240 344,539 25,805 295,928 18,697 6,757,331 ropriated 105,000 162,000 120,000 186,000 397,000 3,826,176 ........... ~05,048 158,617 121,457 186,215 384,691 3,811,848 tdes $93,480 for new work for previous projects. Includes $17,300 for preauthorization 7. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Date survey 8 tila , Name of project conducted t.ar IverO Ga. ......................................... Mar. 1966 sRiver, Ga. and Fla .............................. May 1966 8. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Operation and Alta -------- for- Construction maintenance ' onee and Ocmulgee Rivers, Ga..................... 1962 1$821,457 951,286,097 t . 4 .. 1950 3199,723 46,828 e ary Rier, Ga.2 4 ............................... 1935 8,000 4,200 S G. and Fla., and North River, Ga............. earb 1951 15,688 59,399 a River, ' Ga.4 ................. 1929 17,906 17,094 anab RiveraboA...................................... 1951 9,452 40,123 v above R eah ugusta, Ga.86 7 . .... ....... 1929 69,600 5,870 Rver at Augusta, Ga.S 6 8....................... 1929 200,556 17,444 s lud $760,610 for new work and $111,950 for maintenance for previous projects. Ex- Cha is such that percentage of completion cannot be stated. Ia e adequate for commerce. , 54,929 expended on Doboy Bar. o't recommended for abandonment in H1. Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess. SAbotrnerce reported. c th84 percent completed. Owing to construction of 2 power dams which submerged oetefwork under the present and former projects, this improvement cannot be com- the da 8ginally planned. dt_ es $185000 contributed funds ($172,151 for construction and $12,849 for operation des $286 office and administrative cost. 9* INSPECTION b~urin Ju OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS a ll g June of fiscal year, inspections were made at Augusta Well laintained. acon levees. The works were in good condition and being Cost for fiscal year was $801. 10. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Operation and for- Construction maintenance aeo, %avannah River, Ga. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1941 $643,016 ............. ... .................................... 1955 380,043............. " tod. -- 424 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 11. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHIORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Fiscal year cost for continuation of preauthorization Butler Creek, Augusta, Ga., was $19,579, study for studYeol Peacock Crfo cost $4,557, and reimbursable hurricane studies cost $19,323 Amelia Island and $4,791 for St. Simon Island. Emergency floodcontrol activities--repair,flood fighting, and rescue 'Work. (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation.) d Revisions to emergency manuals, emergency planning, %J other expenditures cost $8,399, and operations and studies in co nection with hurricane work cost $22,636. 12. SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN, GA. AND S.C. Location. Works covered by this project consist of a seres of 11 dams and reservoirs on Savannah River and its tributaries in Georgia and South Carolina. (See Geological Survey of Ga. and S.C.) Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1944 approved gene plan for comprehensive development of Savannah River go for flood control and other purposes (HI. Doc. 657, 78th Cong'on sess.) and authorized construction of Clark Hill Reservoir o Savannah River in Georgia and South Carolina as initial steP0 this development. Flood Control Act of 1950 authorized c struction of Hartwell Reservoir under the general plan. Dams and reservoirs Name River Estimated cost Federal Non-Federal HClark tweUll, Ga. and S.C....................... Savannah...... Hartwell, Ga. and S.C ................ 479,153,000 ............ 89 000 Goat Island, Ga. and S.C............ d.... 9,240,00.............. 33624 000O ......... do ..... 89,240,000 .. 3..........3 6,000 Middleton Shoals, Ga. and SC........... ...... . do .... ..... ':- 6,400,000 .. Chattooga units (4), Ga. and S.C...... .......... Chattog... 3431............ Tallow Hill, Ga.................." 1,500,000 ....... 34 ,00 ...... Broad..........3941,700,000.... ....... 38,' Anthony Shoals, Ga.......................... .. ... o.. ... . 18 ,00,000 ........... Newry-Old Pickens, S.C.............. 32 9 ,00 ... ....... eowee.... 29 g.., 000 .*00 IFinal cost (excludes $127,000 for preauthorization study). Approved Aug. 1963 (excludes $73,000 for preauthorization 8 Approved July 1954. study). Excludes Code 710 funds. Clark Hill and Hartwell Reservoirs are only projects in coA prehensive plan that have been authorized for construction. it bill for authorization of Trotters Shoals for construction as th$ Savannah River Basin project is under consideration. Trotte Shoals, estimated to cost $85 million, would replace Goat ISlae and Middleton Shoals. Duke Power Co. made application to ed eral Power Commission for license for Newry-Old Pickens Projegl and for Jocassee Project located further upstream. IndividU reports on Clark Hill and Hartwell Reservoirs follow. Local cooperation. None required. MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-SAVANNAH, GA., DISTRICT 425 12. A. CLARK HILL RESERVOIR, GA. AND S.C. Location At mile 237.7 on Savannah- River about 22 miles Strean from Augusta, Ga. (See Geological Survey maps of egja. and South Carolina.) jian'Sting project. Flood Control Act of 1944 approved general 78th for development of Savannah River Basin (H. Doc. 657, Dam Cong., 2d sess.) and authorized construction of Clark Hill clum and Reservoir, final cost of which was $79,153,000.' (Ex- codes preauthorization study cost of $127,000.) Dam has a feC rete section 2,282 feet long with a maximum'height of 200 ferete etsila is and a controlled spillway 1,096 feet long. Concrete section tanked on the west by a rolled-earth embankment of 2,069 feet, ld on the east by a similar embankment of 1,329 feet. Total 330hof dam is 5,680 feet. At maximum power pool elevation a reservoir covers 70,000 acres. It provides, total storage 3 90aty of 2,900,000 acre-feet allocated as follows: flood control de VUU acre-feet; hydroelectric power 1,045,000 acre-feet; and rera orsStorage 1,465,000 acre-feet. ae Seven 40,000-kilowatt gen- have generating capacity of 280,000 kilowatts, with aver- e1trOtal yearly output of 700 million ilowatt-hours of electrical Local cooperation. None required. g Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Gross kil1eration of electric energy for fiscal year was 757 million pOWatt hours, most of which was delivered to Southeastern $160er Administration. Flood damages prevented amounted 'to ten 000. Miscellaneous recreation facilities cost $95,845. Main- ace: Operation and routine maintenance. ce01dition at end of fiscal year. Construction is complete ex- t for additional recreational development. Cost and financial statement Year 12 6Total to 1962 1963 1964, 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Nework.- Mi 8ropriated.......... $62,950 $420,000 $26,400 $50,000 $96,500 $79,604,576 ,nce-1*368,142 ......... .61233 26,455 49,753 95,845 79,603,674 1 opriated.......... 547,500 599,500 613,300 691,100 715,000 7,030,807 ot.......... .. 552,045 595,452 605,196 661,351 647,808 6,912,323 e ud e s $127 $391,273 accelerated public works funds. Includes $323,498 Code 710 funds and for DPreauthorization study. 12. B. HARTWELL RESERVOIR, GA. AND S.C. abLocation. Hartwell Dam is on the Savannah River 305 miles (Ove its mouth and 89 miles upstream from Augusta, Ga. (See Qogical Survey maps of Ga. and S.C.), au~tisting project. Flood Control Acts of 1950 and 1958 8ttorized $50 million and $44.3 million, respectively, for con- deucting Hartwell Reservoir in general plan for comprehensive velopment of Savannah River Basin approved in 1944 Flood goltrol Act (H. avit-t4ype, 657, 78th Cong., 2d sess.). Dam is concrete Doc.feet 1,900 long with a maximum height of 240 feet Controlled spillway of 568 feet. Concrete section is flanked 426 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 on east and west abutments by earth embankments 13,369 feet long and by saddle dike 2,521 feet long also on west side. To'l length of dam is 17,790 feet. At maximum power pool elevates 660, reservoir covers 55,950 acres. Total storage capacity o~f _l 293,000 acre-feet; hydroelectric power 1,416,000 acre-feet; rs dead storage 1,134,000 acre-feet. Four 66,000-kilowatt generator have generating capacity of 264,000 kilowatts. A fifth generat ode is planned for installation in the future which would then proVed total generating capacity of 330,000 kilowatts. Latest approv project estimate (Aug. 1963) is $89,240,000. Local cooperation. None required. o Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Co0 activities during fiscal year from construction funds consisted o acquisition, resettlement, and damage payments for lands and re- locations: $682,100; construction of recreational roads, par kl areas, and a number of miscellaneous recreational facilities:.I$ - 799; animated display installation, construction of reservoir daof signs and museum displays: $23,300; and continued operation Clemson University pumping station: $16,000. Flood dnag prevented were $130,000. Gross generation of electric energY o* fiscal year was 486 million kilowatt hours. Maintenance: pe tion and routine maintenance. va Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of projecbout initiated October 1955 and completed December 1963. ddi- 76,735 acres have been acquired and easements taken on an ad tional 647 acres. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $ 6210 Appropriated.......... $12,500,000 $3,965,500 $1,321,983 $436,600 $697,681 8860639 Coste............... 13,757,8653,364286 1,870,575 194,271 0999,199 88, Maintenance: _. .. 400 Appropriated.......... 81,400 335,800 500,000 606,200 594,000 2, 7 8 Cost................. 72,494 341,570 495,530 592,219 568,845 , Excludes $276,201 for accelerated public works funds. Includes $281,371 Code 710 funds $73,000 for preauthorization study. 13. WEST POINT RESERVOIR, CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER BASIN' GA. AND ALA. West Point project on the Chattahoochee River, 2.8 miles uP stream from West Point, Ga., was authorized by Flood Contro Act of 1962 (H.Doc. 570, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Project is tob designed and constructed for flood control, power, recreation, and wildlife development and streamflow regulation for do" stream navigation. It is being designed and constructed bY a vannah District for Mobile District. For complete inforatiof see Mobile District. 14. SURVEYS Fiscal year cost was $92,275, of which $57,143 was for navi tion studies; $5,834 for flood control studies; $28,475 for beac erosion studies; and $823 for review of watershed studies frol other agencies. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-SAVANNAH, GA., DISTRICT 427 d15. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA l lea sfood plain information for Shoal Creek, DeKalb County, Ga., completed awaiting higher authority approval prior to re- atPreliminary planning for flood plain information studies ies Cost of $1,992 was initiated for the following approved stud- Atls avannah and Chatham County Waycross and Ware County, 1lains and Clark County, and Macon and Bibb County. Flood atinformation studies were continued for DeKalb County, Ga., Cst of $12,277 and for metropolitan Atlanta at cost of $13,900. SYear total cost was $28,169. 16. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Ydrologic studies during the fiscal year cost $5,294. ;. JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT* l ith exception of a small area in northeastern section of anrida, this district comprises a portion of south-central Georgia the peninsular Florida, embracing the watersheds tributary to harbtlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico from, but not including talso at Fernandina, 1Stbor includes Puerto Fla., to and including the Aucilla River. Rico and the Virgin Islands. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. Navigation Navigation-Continued Aquatic plant control, Flor- 27. Other authorized naviga- 2, ida **............ .... 3 Canaveral Harbor, Fla. .. 429 tion projects ......... 463 431 28. Navigation work u n d e r 4. Cedar Keys Harbor, Fla.. 433 special authorization ... 464 5. Charlotte Harbor, Fla... 434 6. pross Florida Barge Canal 435 Beach Erosion Control 7. sort Myers Beach, Fla.. 436 29. Broward County, Fla., rt 8. Pierce Harbor, Fla.. 437 beach erosion control and 9 orseshoe Cove, Fla. 438 Hillsboro I nl et , Fla., Intracoastal Waterway, navigation project ..... 464 Caloosahatchee River to 30. Duval County, Fla ..... 465 10. 7 Anclote River, Fla ... 439 31. Fort Pierce, Fla ........ 465 lntracoastal Waterway, 32. Palm Beach County from Jacksonville to Miami, Lake Worth Inlet to 11. Fla. ........... . 441 South Lake Worth Inlet, 12. acksonville HaIrbor, Fla . 443 Fla .................. 466 1. JOhns Pass, Fla. ....... 444 33. Inspection of beach erosion 14. ey West Harbor, Fla.. 445 control projects ........ 467 Largo Sound Channel, 34. Other authorized beach ero- 1,. •i 15. la* .ij ............. 17. Okecho arbor, Fla ... 447 sion control projects ... 468 1 7 ehob ee Waterway, 448 Fla. 450 Flood Control 18. pklawaha River, Fla .... 452 35. Biscayne Bay, Fla ...... 468 19. palmBeach Harbor, Fla. . 453 36. Central and Southern Flor- 20, pass-A-Grille Pass, Fla. . 454 ida ................... 468 21 ponce De Leon Inlet, Fla. 455 37. Four River Basins, Florida 476 22 e Harbor, P.R...... 456 38. Phillippi Creek Basin, Fla. 477 Removing water-hyacinth 39. Inspection of completed flood control projects .. 478 23.S lorida ........ .. ..... fron navigable waters in 457 40. Flood control work under S Petersburg Harbor, special authorization ... 478 2 .anJuan H arbor, .R. 458 459 General Investigations 26. apa Harbor, Fla .... 460 41. Surveys ............... 478 econnaissance and condi- 42. Collection and study of tions surveys .......... 462 basic data ........... 479 1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL, FLORIDA ocation. Navigable waters, tributary streams, connecting lnels and other allied waters within Jacksonville District. twisting project. Control and progressive eradication of aterhyacinth alligatorweed, and other obnoxious aquatic plant °ths from the navigable waters, tributary streams, connecting anllels, and other allied waters in Jacksonville District in the S1ned interests of navigation, flood control, drainage, agricul- e , fish and wildlife conservation, public health, and related pur- ses, including continued research for development of the most etive and economic control measures. Estimated cost of new 430 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 work in the Jacksonville District (1966) for completion of pil portion of existing project by end of fiscal year 1967 is $2,531,ra Federal funds and $872,000 non-Federal contribution. PreP t tion of the estimated cost of new work under the modified projeh beginning fiscal year 1968 will be initiated after conferences wor local interests have been completed. Existing project was au-lc t ized by 1958 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 37, 85th Congr1her sess.) and modified by River and Harbor Act of 1962. Fr. authority to extend the work to problem areas in all States Is cluded in 1965 River and Harbor Act. Local cooperation. Requirements of local cooperation, set forth in 1962 annual report, were modified by 1962 River and I tarbo Act to provide that research costs and planning costs prior e construction shall be borne fully by the United Sta.,tes and n~ed- included in cost to be shared by local cooperation. For no11 th eral contribution see section: Existing project. Compliance v requirements of local cooperation is on schedule. Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning: SuP ment No. 5 to State Design Memorandum No. 2-D, presentiT1'up erations and costs for fiscal year 1965, was submitted in Jd 1965. Coordination, review, and planning of work with Floro Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission continued througho the fiscal year. Planning was initiated with the Commission b continuation of operations in fiscal year 1968 as authorized b : 1965 River and Harbor Act (79 Stat. 1089, 1096). Researc d Addendum 3 to the summary report, large scale field tests,-'ale parts of stage 5 of research program was completed. Large Scd field testing of herbicides on alligatorweed is being deferred pened ing further studies. Agricultural Research Service continted chemical and biological research under contract and subritte quarterly and annual reports as required. Flea beetles (gentr Agasicles), which confines its feeding to alligatorweed, was 1 O duced from South America and established April 9-10 1965, on alligatorweed in a test area in Ortega River, southwest of ac sonville. They multiplied from the original 250 to tens of thoed sands in about 13 months. About 90 percent of the alligatorw of in the test area was killed by the beetles. Remaining fringere weeds harbored many beetles, while others dispersed and Vet 1 observed on alligatorweed over 2 miles from the releaseiPol Over 8,000 beetles were captured at Ortega River site and release. at new sites in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and MississiP e Operations: Progressive control of hyacinths continued bY in District and State field crews. District continued operations. b Oklawaha and Upper St. Johns River Basins, Lake Istokpoga t utaries, small tributaries of Lake Okeechobee, Caloosahatchd River, Alafia River, Manatee River, Little Manatee River, s Santa Fe River. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish CoMnis sion continued operations in Upper St. Johns River in east coa areas (Cocoa to Stuart), Peace, Myakka, Hillsborough, Witha coochee, Suwannee and Kissimme Rivers, and in gulf coast are (Yankeetown to Tampa). New work: Sprayed 42,703 acreshe hyacinths (21,653 acres by the Corps and 21,050 acres bY RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT. 431 state) Costs incurred were $107,874 for engineering and re- Sealch and $390,745 for operations. the adition at end of fiscal year. Operations by the Corps and been ate are in progress. About 253,000 acres of hyacinths have i bottheated in Florida under the project. Research is continuing h, c emical and biological phases. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWorkc. opriated.*.........$334,800 $390,200 $373,500 $397,000 $430,000 $2,382,600 ..... 276,448 455,464 367,299 389,355 370,176 2,303,735 Includes $180,000 for preauthorization studies. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS (WORK-IN-KIND) 1yC4lear Total to .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work. coatributed . $125,786 $106,457 $170,600 $124,072 $128,443 $774,329 125,786 106,457 170,600 124,072 128,443 774,329 Qc .2. CANAVERAL HARBOR, FLA. 146 cation. On east coast of Florida in Canaveral Bight, about rt iles south of entrance to Jacksonville Harbor and 69 miles Sir h fentrance to Fort Pierce Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic vey. Charts 456 and 1245.) e~~t Itmg project. Maintenance of the 37- and 36-foot-depth and ance channel and 35-foot-depth turning basin; construction abuOPeration of sand transfer plant; relocation of perimeter dike entr 4,000 feet westward and extension of harbor westward; two an nce jetties 100 feet long (constructed of native stone core fe ranite sides and cap) ; a lock; a channel and turning basin 31 25 fdeep near relocated dike; and a barge canal 12 feet deep and pr f.eet wide from turning basin to Intracoastal Waterway. catOJet is about 11.5 miles long. Plane of reference is mean low (ter (ocean) for harbor dike and lock, and mean low water esatanan River) for barge canal. Mean tidal range is 3.5 feet at tance and practically non-tidal in Banana and Indian Rivers. Data relative to lock istance to nearest town ...................... 9.9 miles via 12-foot barge canal and Intracoastal Narl Waterway Seil f nearest town ................. ..... Cocoa, Fla. 4oes from Intracoastal Waterway .............. 6.5 ift (irensions (feet) ...................... 90 wide; 600 long' e "th ..................................... Varies with tide hara on sills (mean low water, ocean) . .. . 14 feet o ter. of foundation ..................... Piles in sand lot eted and opened to navigation ............ 1965 1act cost ............. ................. $2,971,967 , 400 feet authorized. At request of NASA lock was constructed 90 feet wide with t aring additional cost ($700,000). Length increased to 600 feet to be compatible with width. Operation and maintenance of lock is a Federal responsibility. 432 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Estimated cost (1966) of new work is $10,160,000 Fed0 $3,603,000 non-Federal ($1,003,000 contributed funds and $2,o ect 000 other costs) ; and $700,000 costs to NASA. Existing Pro') was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of March (S. 2, 1945 Doc.140, 14, Doc. 367, 77th Cong., 1st sess.) and October 23, 1962 87th Cong., 2d sess.). oil-dis' Local cooperation. Provide all lands, rights-of-way,gPinited posal areas, retaining dikes, and embankments; hold the ridge States free from damages, provide and maintain four-lane bbt f and roadway subject to Federal contribution of 65.3 percentd cost of constructing bridge and 51.2 percent of constructing roe way; provide public terminal and transfer facilities;.an d ilS alterations as required in berthing facilities. For further i ance see Senate Document 140, 87th Congress, 2d session. Complo'rl by local interests is on schedule. Non-Federal cost of new "'V is $1,003,000.id Terminal facilities. South of barge canal and west of turith basin is a 1,000-foot concrete bulkhead with an 8-foot-depth berth ing area which accommodates shrimp and commercial fislable boats. Two finger piers at west end of bulkhead are avai.foo0t for charter boats. On south side of turning basin is a400 marginal wharf, complete with utilities, operated by Canavllel Harbor Port Authority. On south shore of ship canal, pWitl to channel, are 600 feet of oil docking facilities, completel iS pipelines to storage tanks. At easterly end of barge cana are terminal for handling bulk construction materials. Facilities considered adequate for existing commerce. lc 1 Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: PhYtll construction of lock and related work was completed but acere completion date not established. Contract costs for the year 65 $177,639. Dredging barge canal was completed August 31,de- at contract cost of $65,932 for the year. General and detailjed sign memorandum for the sand transfer facilities was cornPlte, Operations for providing Canaveral lock water lines, f g d and miscellaneous alterations commenced November 30, 1965, d were completed March 3, 1966, at contract cost of $28,605. dw eral portion of cost of constructing bridge and paving roade on dike, by local interests, was $139,546. Engineering an 4 J sign and supervision and administration cost $55,868 and Mfald $20,871, respectively. (Negative amount for supervisiOln n administration due to assessment of liquidated damages.) 4Jl- tenance: Entrance channel and turning basin was dredged Au- gust 30 to September 14, 1965. U.S. Dredge Gerig removed 438,- 875 cubic yards of material at a cost of $109,976. Inner chanel and turning basin was dredged November 20, 1965, to January 5, 1966. Dredge Dauntless removed 353,531 cubic yards of material at a contract cost of $79,713. Engineering and design and $el vision and administration cost $9,770 and $28,892, respective Hired labor surveys, inspections, and reports cost $13,966. ld Operation and care: Hired labor cost of operating the lock maintaining buildings and grounds was $67,580. RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 433 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 62 rcent complete. Work remaining is construction of sand "a1sferplant and extension of harbor. Controlling depths SChameel Depth (feet) Date of srvey trance channel .............................. 36.3 Oct. 1965 a castin ................................ 35.4 Do icanal to intersection with Bar ge barge channel ....................... 12.0 Aug. 1965 Scanal, remainder ......................... 12.0 Do Cost and financial statement 1cal ea Total to ........ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Newwork. . ropriated......... ............ $80,000 $1,200,000 $3,695,000 $150,000 $6,614,190 atenace*............ .......... 78,874 818,965 3,518,872 446,719 6,352,620 C ropriated.......... $31,475 4,616 140,883 324,500 315,704 1,576,130 33,562 ....... 4,585 139,501 323,531 309,897 1,567,941 e necti dl $29,680 for preauthorization studies but excludes $652,468 contributed by NASA in Swi construction of lock and $1,003,000 contributed funds for new work. 3. CEDAR KEYS HARBOR, FLA. Lcation. On south side of Cedar Key on Gulf of Mexico in to County, Fla. Harbor lies about 110 miles north of entrance Sanpa Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1259.) Repor~t .. PR1epious project. For details see page 740 of 1962 Annual I EX'isting project. Channel 10.5 by 200 feet from Gulf of Mex- leo to Cedar Key and channel 8 by 100 feet from Gulf of Mex- of to Main Ship Channel via existing Northwest Channel. Plane p reference is mean low water. Mean range of tide is 2.4 feet. Ri ect is about 11 miles long. Project was authorized by 1884 1er and Harbor Act, and by Chief of Engineers on March 24, 9, under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. _ cal cooperation. Fully complied with to date. For require- Slts see 1965 Annual Report. Contributed funds for new work rounted to $1,473. beTerminal facilities. Three privately-owned docks with a total to thfig space of about 800 feet. Two of these docks are open a the public, and all have highway connections. Facilities are equate for existing commerce. Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dredg- A, Northwest Channel commenced July 23 and was completed Ugust 30, 1965, at a contract cost of $13,712. Engineering and esgn and supervision and administration cost $1,151 and $2,385, respectively. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for rertoval of rock from Middle Ground Channel. This channel is art of Main Ship Channel, which is in an inactive status. Con- atlling depth in the Main Ship Channel (Feb. 1956) was 8.5 feet 8xifeet in the Northwest Channel (Aug. 1965). Total costs of esting project to June 30, 1966, were $86,069 for new work and 434 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 $30,000 for maintenance, a total of $116,069. In addition, $1,473 expended from contributed funds. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3 New work: $18 Appropriated.......... ............................. $19,656 $1,901 569 Cost ................................ ................... 5,404 16,14400 Maintenance:" 30 0 Appropriated... .......... ........... 3000 Cost........ .......... ............................... ........... 1Includes $82,500 expended for new work under previous project. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jue 30,196 New work: $413 Contributed...... ................................... $2,285 -$8121413 Cost........... . ............ ............ ............ 369 1,104 4. CHARLOTTE HARBOR, FLA. Location. A large bay on west coast of Florida. Entrance 68 miles south of entrance to Tampa Bay and 150 miles north O Key West. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1255.) 1a Previous projects. For details see page 457 of 1959 Annu Report. Existing project. Channel 32 feet deep and 300 feet wide, ~ creased to 700 feet at bend, from Gulf of Mexico to Port 30C Grande, thence 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide from deep water ae Port Boca Grande to and including turning basin 200 feet sqt 5 at municipal terminal at Punta Gorda. Project is about 2~, miles long. All depths refer to mean low water. Mean tidal range is 1 foot at Port Boca Grande and 1.4 feet at Punta Gordl. Extreme range is about 3 feet at Port Boca Grande and 3.8 feet at Punta Gorda. Strong southwesterly winds raise water level abotlt 1.5 feet; strong northerly and easterly winds lower it about foot. Project was authorized by 1950 River and Harbor Act Doc. 186, 81st Cong., 1st sess.) and prior acts. Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date. Contribute funds for new work amounted to $15,563.e Terminal facilities. A phosphate wharf at Port Boca Grand and municipal earthfill pier about 850 feet long at Punta Gorda, both open to the public. Railway connections are available at.Fort Boca Grande, and highway and railway connections are availiable at Punta Gorda. A tank farm was built at Port Boca Grande dr ing 1960 for storage and rehandling of bunker fuel oil. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: U.S. Dredge Hyde dredged in entrance channel February 23 to March 17, 1966, removing 104,519 cubic yards of material at a cost of $71,689. Engineering and design and supervision and administra RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 435 t,iaoCOSt $11,597 ad $2,920, respectively. Hired labor surveys, in- SPections, and reports cost $4,104. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in 1959. IMarch 1966, controlling depth from Gulf of Mexico to Port Ioca Grande was 32 feet and 9.3 feet from Port Boca Grande to PlAlta Gorda. Total costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, totre $432,399 f for new work and $1,337,792 for maintenance, a t t $1,770,191. In addition, $15,563 expended from con- uted funds for new work in Boca Grande entrance channel. Cost and financial statement 1eal Year .......... Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NwWork.- eropriated.. . .......... ............................................... $545,399 airite. .................... ................................................ 545,399 ClPPrpiated. r .$108,763.............$125,059 $170,300 $91,000 1,339,122 ........ 108,763 -$4 124,934 .169,789 90,310 1,337,792 on esd $113,000 for new work on previous project and $12,230 preauthorization studies ri buted roject; excludes $15,563 expended for new work on existing project from con- L 5. CROSS FLORIDA BARGE CANAL ao cation. Proposed canal extends up St. Johns River, past of atka, thence up valley of Olkawaha River, across divide south 11 .,cala, and down valley of Withlacoochee River to Gulf of ' ico, about 12 -4'Sting 95 miles north of Tampa, Fla. project. Provides for lock canal with project depth of t2,feet and minimum bottom width of 150 feet, with five locks and 18' earth dams. Project including section in St. Johns River is 184.4miles. Principal features of locks and dams St.Johns Eureka lock Silver Springs Dunnellon Inglis lock '1.lock and dam lock lock and dam earet town (miles)............ Palatka, 11.2 Sparr, 15.8 Ocala, 8.9 Dunnellon, Inglis, 3.2 Milesfr 2.5 i'OreaAtlanticIntracoastal 90.4......... 111.4........ 127.7.. .. 168.6. 156.5........ r i onsf al (feet)l ............ 84 by 600.... 84 by 600.... 84 by 600.... 84 by 600.... 84 by 600. be tt e (feet)................20...........20......... 2. 20-15........212-27.......29. level.over sills at normal pool -r (feet) 14. i................ .. 17......... 216-31....... 216-31....... 18. cha er(feet)..................1.............14 ........... 16........... 18 ..... 15. Nl e r offoundation............ Piles in sand.. Piles in sand. Piles in sand.. Rock....... Rock. Ypecoamnr.. . .... Movable..... Movable..... None........ . .None....... Moveable. Det re y ruction................. Earth .......Earth 3 . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Earth . stircmplete................... . ........................ 0........ cost..........$... "dcontract 18-vi8,33,000... $.. $6,20,000... $8,700,0... $6,350,000. r elea Width and greatest available length. evlvo levelvaries with natural ground water profile from minimum elevation 40 to maximum th concrete spillway and movable gates. eOPeration and maintenance of the locks and dams will be a ederal responsibility. Estimated cost of new work (1966) is 145,300,000 Federal, and $12,400,000 non-Federal for lands, lihl-of-way, and other costs. Project was authorized by Pub- aw 675, 77th Congress (H. Doc. 109, 79th Cong., 1st sess.). 436 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands 0 rights-of-way for construction of canal; hold United States.ges from damages; and operate and maintain all highway bridgo and roadways built in connection with project. Assuranceser local cooperation were accepted by District Engineer NovenIer 13, 1963. Compliance by local interests is on schedule. Terminal facilities. None. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Co1" struction of section of canal from St. Johns lock to Rodman Foo was completed January 15, 1966, at a contract cost of $257,497 of for the year. Construction of section from Inglis lock to Gulf Mexico continued. Contract costs for excavation by dragli amounted to $1,135,544 and by dredge, $766,048. Constructiorn project office building was completed September 16, 1965, at aCO tract cost of $45,530 for the year including cost of well. Go struction of bridge at U.S. Highway 19 continued. Contract cos were $905,872. Construction of St. Johns and Inglis locks co, tinued. Contract costs were $2,559,524 and $1,991,049, respec tively. Construction of Rodman Dam and spillway and EureP lock and dam commenced March 28, and April 14, 1966, and co1 tract costs were $87,637 and $84,450, respectively. UndistribUtd costs were $11,552. Engineering and design and supervisio" l administration cost $836,953 and $669,276, respectively. g Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project begat February 1964 and is 10 percent complete. Canal is complet from Palatka to Rodman Pool. Cost and financial statement Trotas t 66 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 New Appropriated.......... work: $195,000 $205,000 $800,000$4,000,000 $10,000,000 $1 7t,:80 Cost .......... . 100,761 79,307 622,690 3,452,9879,350,932 SIncludes $20,000 for preauthorization studies. 6. FORT MYERS BEACH, FLA. Location. On Estero Island near mouth of Caloosahatch River, about 20 miles below Fort Myers and 110 miles south Tampa, Fla. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 855-s' 1255.) Existing project. A channel 12 feet deep by 150 feet wide fro" that depth in San Carlos Bay into Matanzas Pass, thence11 b. 125 feet in Matanzas Pass to upper shrimp terminals. Project l 2.1 miles long. Plane of reference is mean low water. Mean ti1 range is 1.7 feet. Spring range is about 2.3 feet. Strong north erly winds lower the water surface 1 to 2 feet; strong southerl6lY winds have an opposite effect. Project was authorized by 1960 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 183, 86th Cong., 1st sess.).. ted Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date. Contribu funds for new work were $1,095. Terminal facilities. Five large shrimp packing houses, seve 1 fish houses, two fuel and ice terminals, and three marine railv af RIVERS AND IIARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 437 c reationial-craft facilities include two marinas, a boat- and ~or-testing laboratory, and numerous privately owned piers and siarves. All terminals have highway access. Facilities are con- "dred adequate for existing commerce. aperations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Plans ad specifications for restoring channels to project dimensions adre completed. Engineering and design and supervision and Ifnistration cost $1,317 and $157, respectively. C 0Ondition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in 1961. a ntrolling depths (July 1965) were 7.5 feet in entrance channel 10.0 feet in Estero and Matanzas Passes. Cost and financial statement 'al Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Niew wok Plropriated............... ................................ ................. $104,340 anite 104.340 ia 1 . . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . ...... ..... ....... ............ tenance: 104 ,340 're ...... .... ........... copriated.................. .t ...... ............ 1,..___________,_____ i000' ........................ ............ ............ $735 $47,000 1,474 47,735 2,209 ew ores $22,300 for preauthorization studies but excludes $1,095 contributed funds for Zc 7. FORT PIERCE HARBOR, FLA. e °ocation. On east coast of Florida, about 218 miles south of to ance to St. Johns River and about 124 miles north of entrance tOlami Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 582.) tio zisting az: project. Channel generally 27 by 350-200 feet to sta- 130, thence 25 by 200 feet to turning basin 25 by 900 feet, and a latenance of two jetties and shore revetments. Project is 4 out 3.5 miles long. Plane of reference is mean low water. e4an tidal range is 2.6 feet at the entrance and 0.7 foot at ter- 1inals. Project was authorized by 1935 River and Harbor Act (.t Doc. 252, 72d Cong., 1st sess., and River and Harbor Com- dlittee Doc. 21, 74th Cong., 1st sess.) and prior acts. For further details see 1961 Annual Report. LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with to date. b erminal facilities. Two earth-filled piers forming a slip 200 i Y00 feet with bulkhead wharf at inner end, affording a berth- a space of about 1,653 feet. South pier and bulkhead wharf aredunicipally owned. There is a precooling plant, a warehouse, rad a fruit packing house available. North pier is served by t ray and both piers by highway connections. North of the faring basin local interests provided deep-draft berthing and pier ~ct1lities. Also available is a bulkhead wharf 8 to 10 feet deep 'ith armple room for open storage and with tank storage for u troleum products in the rear. Facilities are considered ade- ate for existing commerce. tPerations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Con- 0act for restoring project dimensions in inner channel and turn- basin was awarded June 22, 1966, however dredging operations a10e not commenced. Engineering and design and supervision a administration cost $8,524 and $958, respectively. 438 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in198 Jetties and revetments are in good condition . Controlling depth (Aug. 1965) were 26.2 feet in outer bar cut; 21.5 feet in bar cu , ocean shore to Angle Point; 19.5 feet in widener at fAngle POin, 15.1 in Indian River cut, Angle Point to turning basin; 16.5 . turning basin; and 5.5 in outer 100-ft perimeter of turning bas1l* Cost and financial statement Totl t966 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: Appropriated.......... ........ .......................... $33 1 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $227 $127,000 1, 1119 Cost .................. .227.................................. 9:482 8. HORSESHOE COVE, FLA. Location. On gulf coast of Florida about 18 miles southeast of mouth of Steinhatchee River and 10 miles northwest of moutof Suwannee River. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1259) Existing project. Channel 6 feet deep by 75 feet wide from the depth in the Gulf of Mexico to and including an irregular-shapVe basin of like depth at village of Horseshoe. Project is 175~ ile 2 feta eis long. Plane of reference is mean low water. d srn• .... tidal sterlY .... Mean ran1g is 2.4 feet and spring range is 3.1 feet. Strong southwest.ed winds raise the water level about 1 foot; strong northerly I0e lower it about 1.5 feet. Project was authorized by 1950 i and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 106, 81st Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date. Terminal facilities. Three marineways, about 300 feet of p1 vately owned piers and wharves, and a public wharf about feet long. Facilities are considered adequate for existing co'I merce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance:o tract for restoring channel and turning basin to project dimed sions was awarded June 30, 1966. However, dredging operation have not commenced. Engineering and design and supervisol and administration cost $4,263 and $1,388, respectively.9 Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in Predredging surveys are underway. Cost and financial statement 0 to Total 1 Fiscal year.......1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June3 I .._- New work: Appropriated.................................................... 351 gdU Cost............. .................... 35 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... -$311................................$ ,000 85 3 p Cost.................. for preauthorization 39,338,929 studies.61 .-- ''. 1 Includes $9,929 for preauthorization studies. RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 439 9* INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER TO ANCLOTE RIVER, FLA. LOcation. Extends from mouth of Caloosahatchee River at g nta Rassa, Fla., to mouth of Anclote River, Fla., following in leral an almost continuous series of protected inside waterways alog the gulf coast of Florida. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey arts 856-SC, 857-SC, and 858). rev ious projects. For details, see page 767 of 1945 Annual "eport. Calmisting project. Channel 9 feet deep by 100 feet wide from Ca0osahatchee River to Anclote River; deepening existing chan- el at Caseys Pass to 9 feet; channel 6 feet deep by 80 feet wide (Cats Point Channel) along southeastern side of Boca Ciega Bay eat Prenchman Creek and Gulfport; maintenance of bulkheads, Irect.ents, and two jetties built at Caseys Pass under previous Prject; and improvement and maintenance of Sunshine Skyway abannel. Plane of reference is mean low water. puaout 160 miles of channels. Mean ranges of tideProject includes are 1.7 feet at at Aa Rassa, 1 foot at Port Boca Grande, 1.4 feet in Tampa Bay at Ana Maria, and 2 feet at entrance to Anclote River. Extreme ages are about 4.5 feet at Punta Rassa, about 3 to 4 feet be- tEaeen Port Boca Grande and Corey Causeway over Boca Ciega wia, and about 5.5 feet at entrance to Anclote River. Southerly ort s over the area generally raise water level by 1 to 1.5 feet; fortherly winds lower water level by 1 to 2 feet. Estimated cost forniew work (1965) exclusive of costs for improvement of endshine Skyway and Cats Point Channels, and amounts ex- 0 00 d on previous projects, is $6,950,000 Federal and $6,405,- righ non-Federal. Non-Federal costs are for lands, easements, thor s-of -way,and spoil disposal areas. Existing project was au- 3 7 1rzed by River and Harbor Acts of March 2, 1945 (I. Doc. 3e1 76th Cong., 1st sess.), June 30, 1948, May 17, 1950, and Ceptember 3,1954, approved by Senate and House Public Works p"rlittees May 1957 (H. Doc. 109, 85th Cong., 1st sess.). ,JIect was further modified by the Chief of Engineers on March a962, and March 1, 1963, to include under section 107, River b Harbor Act of 1960 improvement and maintenance of the 9- ~0 l00-foot Sunshine (CatsSkyway Point Channel and provision of a 6- by oot channel Channel) in Boca Ciega Bay, resPectively. Local cooperation. Local interests must construct, maintain, op Perate Venice Avenue bridge and any other bridges over r ute C-1; furnish all lands, rights-of-way and spoil areas; make 4equired alterations and relocations; hold United States free from atwages; and contribute in cash 50 percent of initial cost of con- otruction of the 6- by 80-foot Cats Point Channel and 36 percent of initial cost of construction of the 9- by 100-foot Sunshine Sky- Say Channel. West Coast Inland Navigation District furnished oatisfactory assurances of compliance. Contributed funds for on truction of Cats Point and Sunshine Skyway Channels were 9)07 and $4,766, respectively. Compliance with requirements is s 'chedule. 440 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Terminal facilities. One municipal concrete pier, one railvaY pier, one freight wharf, one marginal wharf 500 feet long on ter- minal island, and ten privately owned landings, all at Sarasot (municipal pier and freight wharf are open to the public; railwaye pier is used mainly for storing Pullman cars. All other piers hav highway connections only.); six wharves along Boca Ciega 13 and a number of small privately owned piers and wharves.at various points along waterway for use of commercial L.to boats and recreational craft. Facilities are considered adequat for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dred ing channel from Charlotte Harbor to Alligator Creek was com- pleted October 8, 1965. Dredge Dauntless removed 555,883 cubic yards of material at the contract cost of $217,038. ConstructOl of the channel from Alligator Creek to Dona Bay contite Dredge Charleston removed 2,074,375 cubic yards of materia a contract cost of $748,442. Engineering and design and super vision and administration cost $11,995 and $80,952 respectiveY Maintenance: Dredging in section between Caseys Pass a24 Anclote River began July 6 and was completed September 1965. Dredge Huffman No. 3 removed 517,448 cubic yards of material at a contract cost of $192,758. Engineering and desi4g and supervision and administration cost $122 and $2 7,239, r t spectively. Hired labor surveys, inspections, and reports cos $11,473.0 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 90 percent complete. Work remaining to complete project jis co pletion of dredging currently underway and provision of slope protection from Alligator Creek to Dona Bay. Controlling depths Depth Dte of Reach (feet) survey Punta Rassa to Charlotte Harbor .................................... ..... 0 Sept.106 Charlotte Harbor to Alligator Creek...9..... . ............................... 9.0 Oct. 19065 Alligator Creek to Dona Bay ..................................................... Under Dona Bay to Tampa Bay......... ................................... contract 1965 Tampa Bay to Anclote River........................... ........................ . 9.0 Sept. 1966 Cats Point Channel...... .......................... ..................... .0 1.964 Sunshine Skyway Channel........................ **......................... . .. .0 y 1963 Total Federal costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, ere $6,327,631 for new work and $413,183 for maintenance, a total of $6,740,814. In addition, $14,473 contributed funds expended for Sunshine Skyway and Boca Ciega Bay channels. RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 441 Cost and financial statement . ialYear. ...... 192Total to S ........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWork. S o at ..........$482,000$1,049,000 $952,472 $881,707 $872,214 $6,967,802 altena,'nCe . ...... .. .. ... 961,432 1,897,032 634,133 918,948 1,058,427 6,843,110 opriated* 955 40,000 10,400 225,000 32,000 864,150 ..............955 37,121 11,089 27,380 231,592 863,932 e ot es $515,479 for new work and $450,749 maintenance for previous project; $8,472 for *0 fo n Sunshine Skyway Channel; $9,707 for new work for Cats Point Channel, and SfoDreauthorization studies. Excludes $14,473 contributed funds for new work. 10 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FLA. tion . Waterway extends from Jacksonville to Miami, lcao the' following St. Johns River to mouth of Pablo Creek and tPreefollowing in general an almost continuous series of k.Otected inside waterways along Atlantic coast of Florida to 8 5. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 841SC, 843SC, p C, and 847SC.) VevoUs projects. For details, see pages 618-619 of Annual 80eport 1938. Channel 12 by 125 feet from Jacksonville to CiZsting project. , Clef modified to 10-foot-depth from Fort Pierce to Miami by Sebast of Engineer's report of July 22, 1960; side channels at atd etIan and Daytona Beach and turning basins at Sebastian teraaero Beach, all to an 8-foot depth; and operation and main- is7Ce of Palm Valley highway bridge. Plane of reference II ean low water. Project is 370 miles long, including 21 miles Johacksonville Harbor. Mean range of tide is 3.8 feet at St. 11a Riaver, 0.7 foot in Indian River at Fort Pierce, 1.8 feet Por ake Worth at Port of Palm Beach terminals, 2.3 feet at ran~ erglades terminals, and 2 feet in Biscayne Bay. Extreme Pier , 1 about 7 feet at St. Johns River, 1.5 feet at Fort at c, and 3 feet in Biscayne Bay. Tidal effect is imperceptible it lts along waterway distant from inlets. Existing project, 19 eneral, was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of July 3, 36 (0S.Doc. 71, 71st Cong., 2d sess.); March 2, 1945 (IH. Docs. 2d6 and 261, 76th Cong., 1st sess., and I. Doc. 740, 79th Cong., o cooperation. Fully complied with to date. .cal Wh ermainal facilities. A number of privately owned piers, tijhalves, and landings at various points along waterway. Ter- P rtls with railway connections are available at Jacksonville, I11t Pierce West Palm Beach, Port Everglades, and Miami. luicilpal piers or wharves were constructed at Titusville, Cocoa, lourne, and Vero Beach for handling general freight and at St.~ W Ugustine, Daytona Beach, New Smyrna Beach, Eau Gallie, 4Oest Palm Beach, Delray Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and Miami for Drovi recreational craft. Yacht basins open to public were q~ ded at Jacksonville Beach, Daytona Beach, Titusville, Eau idle, Vero Beach, Fort Pierce, West Palm Beach, Fort Lauder- f, ollywood, and Miami. Facilities are considered adequate existing commerce. (For further details on facilities at 442 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Jacksonville, see Port Series No. 15, 1956, and at West Pa1 No. 16, 195a t Beach, Port Everglades, and Miami, see Port Serieswork Operations and results during fiscal year. New :Contract costs relative to recently completed dredging in channel fid Delray Beach to Oakland Park were $1,365. Engineerin 9 1 , design and supervision and administration cost $1,668 an ver respectively. Maintenance: Dredging between St. Johns $ch and St. Lucie Inlet began January 10 and was completed M3arbic 8, 1966. Dredges Dauntless and Admiral removed 377,106 cbior yards of material at a contract cost of $207,060. Contract forde emergency dredging to remove shoals at Marineland and Poncere Leon Inlet was awarded June 15, 1966. Contract costs $3,500. Hired labor cost of snagging and clearing was $20. Ent neering and design and supervision and administration c $13,327 and $23,589, respectively. Hired labor surveys, i Pd all tions, and reports cost $29,792. Operation and care: Steelley concrete double-leaf bascule highway bridge near Palm V 6. was operated and maintained by hired labor at a cost of $37,d Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project as modifieareD the Chief of Engineers is complete. Existing channel widthsntl reduced at 69 localities by bridges. Most limiting horizO n clearance is 55 feet at Jupiter Island Bridge, Jupiter, Fla. he limiting vertical clearance of 56 feet at mean high water at th fixed span bridge of the 36th Street (Julia Tuttle) CausewvaY Miami. Controlling depths Depth D8aeof Channel (feet) rve St. Johns River to St. Augustine... .................. ..................... 1964. St. Augustine to Matanzas Inlet....120Mr6................................. 12.0M .196. Matanzas Inlet to Ponce de Leon Inlet......... ............................... 12.0 . Ponce de Leon Inlet to Hlaulover Canal....... ............................. 12.0 Haulover Canal to Melbourne............ ........................ .... 12.0 Melbourne to Wabasso..................... ............................. .... 16 12.0 Oct.Do65 Wabasso to Fort Pierce ................................................ . . 12.0 o0. Fort Pierce to St. Lucie Inlet................................................. ... 0 St. Lucie Inlet to Palm Beach Harbor.......... ................. Mar. 1966 Palm Beach Harbor to Miami.............- ...... ................... 10.0 Do. Total Federal costs for existing project to June 30, 1966, wer $16,406,451 for new work, $6,397,764 for maintenance, $610,094 for operation and care, a total of $23,414 309, regu funds. In addition $2,199,842 expended from public works funS for new work. Non-Federal costs for lands, spoil areas, rights-o way, and other costs are estimated at $3,195,000. Cost and financial statement A30 0 year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: ..- _031 Appropriated..........$768,000 $420,000$2,235,000 $120,000 .. 069 $18'o7 Cost................. Maintenance: |4/'757,31 561,2095 ] 1,307,402 ' ' | 01,745 ' s ' i' 8, , 9 Appropriated.......... 222,900 606,200 263,600 93,812 341,000 7,',69 Cost................. 195,128 282,718 491,355 217,987 315,074 7,2 1 Includes $94,776 for new work and $213,222 for maintenance for previous projects 'o operating and care under provisions of permanent indefinite appropriation; and $30,0 preauthorization studies. RIVERS AND IIARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 443 11. JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FLA. ecation. Comprises lower 26.1 miles of St. Johns River which ell ies into Atlantic Ocean near northeasterly corner of Florida Plnsula. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 636SC.) 19 revious projects. For details, see page 607 of Annual Report, to 'isting project. Channel 38 by 400 to 1,200 feet from ocean II "Ile 20 via Dame Point-Fulton cutoff, thence 34 feet to Com- adore Point, and thence 30 feet deep to Florida East Coast Rail- tonY bridge at Jacksonville, including a 30-foot channel in Arling- exise u t and in Old Dame Point-Fulton Channel; maintenance of jet ting 42- and 40-foot depth entrance channel; maintenance of rev8es at channel entrance; and construction of training walls and Pre nients. All depths are referred to local mean low water. theoJect is about 26.1 miles long. Mean tidal range is 5.3 feet on abtar, 4.9 feet at Mayport, 2.6 feet at Dame Point, and 1.1 feet bar acksonville. Extreme range varies from about 9 feet on the raiso about 1.5 feet at Jacksonville. Strong northeasterly winds soWater level about 2 feet at Mayport and Jacksonville. Strong fOot westerly winds lower water about 1.5 feet at Mayport and 1 225 at Jacksonville. Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $21,- 4 0 exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects and 000 000 non-Federal cost ($230,000 contributed funds and $111,- , 'r lands, rights-of-way, and other costs). Of this amount, an/leted modifications amounted to $12,425,054 Federal costs of.z$11,000 non-Federal costs for lands, easements, and rights- 2,19ay. Project authorized by River and Harbor Acts of March 245 (II. Doc. 322, 77th Cong., 1st sess.; S. Doc. 230, 78th Cong., ( sess.; and S. Doc. 179, 79th Cong., 2d sess.), October 27, 1965 de oc. 214, 89th Cong., 1st sess.), and prior acts. For further L(l, see 1962 Annual Report. datecl cooperation. Fully complied with for work performed to itters or work authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act, local visirests must contribute 2.6 percent of contract price plus super- Drov( and administration for work to be provided by the Corps; darOVide all lands and rights-of-way; save United States free from fa-iges; and provide and maintain public terminal and transfer lities. Estimated contributed funds for new work is $230,000. 6ii eminal facilities. There are 105 waterfront facilities serv- ated be port. Of these, 3 piers at municipal docks formerly oper- Jaely city of Jacksonville, are now operated by newly formed 24 f sonlville Port Authority; and 27 are commercially operated, oil Or private use and 3 open to public. There are 15 commercial !i al erminals and 4 oil docks operated by Navy Department. 14, Way facilities are available to 12 of the commercial piers, at cee0 enticipal docks, to 14 of the oil terminals, to a privately owned storage facility and to a privately-owned phosphate load- eilevator. There are 20 outfitting piers and drydocks for serv. ring small i cing vessels and numerous facilities for repairing and large craft. Facilities are considered adequate for exist- Conrmerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: U.S. dredge Hyde removed 245,467 cubic yards of material from ter- 444 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 minal channel January 13 to February 23, 1966, at a cost of $141,156. Dredge Cartagena removed 226,321 cubic yards of ma- terial from Pilot Town cut March 22 to May 23, 1966, at a con- tract cost of $152,314. Dredging to remove shoals between Trout River and Mayport began June 11, 1966. Dredge Cartagen re- moved about 171,000 cubic yards of material at a contract cost of $110,100. Engineering and design and supervision and adluur" tration cost $27,449 and $42,421, respectively. Hired labor veys, inspections, and reports cost $16,872. rcent Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 59 perc D complete. Jetties are in fair condition. Revetments and trainig walls are in good condition with exception of Mile Point traliigt wall which is in fair condition. Bank erosion is occurrid.ng several locations and repairs will be required. Work remnaln to to complete project is deepening channel to 38 feet from oceal mile 20 and to 34 feet up to Commodore's point. Controllineet depth was 24 feet from Hogan Creek to foot of Laur street (1962) There has been no recent survey in section from La r Street to St. Elmo W. Acosta Bridge. Maintenance dredgiTOtal currently underway between terminal channel and ocean.35,041 Federal costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, were $12,1 re" for new work, $15,703,037 for maintenance, and $102,813 for, habilitation, a total of $27,940,891 regular funds. In additi $290,013 expended from public works funds for new work. Cost and financial statement .1 scotal to66 Fiscal ............... year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,9 New work: 45,19 Appropriated.......... ............................ ................. $5 ,191 Cost. Maintenance:.3,953 ................. ............ Appropriated.......... $300,627 $889,800 $463,921 $647,000$1,106,500 16,4, Coste...h ............... 365,425 854,194 179,226 967,562 490312 13 Rehabilitation:102 ,81 Appropriated.......... - 17,187 ........ . ., 13 Cost.................. 10215 ........................ ... ......... Includes $3,520,137 new work and $543,399 maintenance on previous projects and $290, for new work expended from public works funds. 12. JOHNS PASS, FLA.19 Location. A natural inlet on west coast of Florida conect'les Boca Ciega Bay with Gulf of Mexico. The Pass is about 8 ~""e northwestward of lower Tampa Bay directly across Boca Cie Bay from St. Petersburg, Fla. (See Coast and Geodetic SurVeY Chart 1257.)1, e Existing project. A channel 10 by 150 feet in the gulf, theql 8 by 100 feet inside pass, and 6 by 100 feet to the IntracoasOe Waterway. Plane of reference is mean low water. Mean r.s of tide is 1.5 feet. Project is about 2.6 miles long. Project tio authorized December 2, 1964, by Chief of Engineers under sectl 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date. For requr ments see 1965 Annual Report. Contributed funds for new o amounted to $28,953. RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT ,445 rer'minal facilities. Only small marinas and repair yards for 0 ational craft in the general vicinity. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dredg- ing project began December 16, 1965, and was completed February 7 1966. Dredge Huffman No. 3 removed 77,655 cubic yards of material at a contract cost of $50,893. Engineering and respean resectvelysupervision and administration cost $2,806 and $11,959, ee Cn Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Con- 'rol8lg depths in February 1966 were as authorized. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Saayear Total to ........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 work. c~Pated. o ............... ....................... $25,000 $25,439 $65,690 ... . .......................... ,724 0........36,705 58,680 " I$15,251 e for preauthorization studies. Preauthorization studies for Johns Pass and Grile Passm rade jointly. Study cost prorated according to construction cost. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1963 1964 0 13. KEY WEST HARBOR, FLA. vocation. Key West is an island near western end of Florida Of , 160 miles by highway from Miami, Fla., and 220 miles south sid ntrance to Tampa Bay. The harbor proper lies on westerly 584he town. aald540) " ."(See Coast and Geodetic 'nulR Survey 'Charts 576 r 19 evious projects. For details, see page 643 of Annual Report, S'histing project. Removal of coral heads and reefs from Main ch' Channel and anchorage to provide channel 30 by 300 feet; Nllnel 17 feet deep and of sufficient width for navigation in crthwest Channel with two jetties at entrance, and widening nel opposite et wharves to 800 feet with a depth of 26 feet; pro- Schannel 12 by 150 feet from 30-foot-depth ship channel into 800 West Bight, a 12-foot depth turning basin in the Bight and an 100'fot-long granite-mound breakwater; and a channel 8 by feet along the north and east sides of Fleming Key and into i i'n0 Bight. ,Plane of reference is mean low water. Project Gatiout 23 miles long including channels into Key West and Westrison Bights. Mean range of tide is about 2.5 feet at north- alt .entrance and about 1.3 feet at Main Ship Channel entrance 0ot,, the harbor. Extreme range of tide is about 5.5 feet at NXOwest entrance and about 3.1 feet at seaward entrance. Sting project was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of 446 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 September 19, 1890 (H. Doc. 145, 50th Cong., 2d sess. and 1 . Doc. 39, 51st Cong., 1st sess.); May 28, 1908, July 25, 1916 Doc. 706, 62d Cong., 2d sess.); July 18, 1918 (H. Doc. 185' 2d Cong., 1st sess.); October 23, 1962 (S. Doc. 106, 87th Con~g aY sess.); and modified March 1, 1963, to include provision o107 8- by 100-foot channel in Garrison Bight under section.,or0 River and Harbor Act of 1960. Estimated cost of new for (1966) is $1,861,000 Federal and $29,000 non-Federal costCo0* lands, rights-of-way, and other costs, excluding cost o 0000 structing Garrison Bight Channel. Of this amount $1,41, Federal cost is for completed modifications. 1, Local cooperation. Only required for providing chanel(ey Garrison Bight, and channel, turning basin, and breakwater iII West Bight. Requirements are fully complied with for const provide all lands and rights-of-way; hold United States f c li damages; provide and maintain public terminal and transfer flocal ties; and provide and maintain depths in berthing areas ade tls access channels serving the terminals commensurate with d.id provided in the related project areas. Assurances for pro* Ve channel, turning basin, and breakwater in Key West Bight wce accepted by District Engineer February 13, 1964. Compli v with requirements is on schedule. Contributed funds for work for construction of Garrison Bight were $35,371. 1 g Terminal facilities. Seven wharves and 7 piers, all avrese connections with city streets. Terminals are adequate for preUblic. needs and, with the exception of one wharf, are open to P In addition, there are four Navy piers. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: . ad construction planning for providing access channel and baslD e* for constructing breakwater was initiated. Engine ering an 0 9 sign and supervision and administration costs $10,987 and $1 , respectively.t Condition at end of fiscal year. Project as a whole is abo t 57 percent complete. Work remaining is completion of jettie northwest entrance, which is considered unnecessary at this ti provision of 12-foot channel and turning basin and breakvater to Key West Bight. Dredging operations, financed by the NaVy'.0 deepen the Main Ship Channel to 34 feet and to enlarge the turVrt, basin are complete. For further details, see 1962 Annual Iepo Controlling depths pate Of Depth sre Channel (feet) Main Ship Channel.. .................................. 34.0 June 1965. Turning basin........................ ............................. 0 )o. Northwest Channel.................... .. ......................... recent I Nosurvey- Nosurvey. recent Channel o posite wharves ........................................... .0. June1 Channel afong and east sides of Fleming Key and into Garrison Bight. 8.0 Feb. 3north 0 19 a0 Key West Bight including turning basin.................... Channel into ........ 6.3 Jon Total costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, were $1,0.8 0 for new work and $340,543 for maintenance, a total of $1,418 RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 447 4ddition, $35,371 contributed funds expended for new work arrison Bight. Cost and financial statement 88tal Year Total to . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWork. .. . ...... . . . . [ . .... . . M~otenancl ated .............. .................. . . .. .. $43,000 -$7,629 31,188 4,183 $52,000 $1,145,780 12,078 1,105,858 piated .... $6,300............ ......................... .340,543 .............................. . 77,607............ .... 340,543 o $27,500 expended for new Ooalrneaduand $33,658 for work inwork under Main Ship previous Channel, project; $345,887 for removal of of which $2,274 was for removal 1disounder authority of the special act of May 28, 1908; and $18,000 for preauthori- . Excludes $35,371 contributed funds for new work. c 14. LARGO SOUND CHANNEL, FLA. o'tion. Largo Sound is in Key Largo in Monroe County, 1la C,o east coast of Florida about 60 miles south of Miami. (See tand Geodetic Survey Chart 849.) 1, _gproject. gs. A channel 6 feet deep and 50 feet wide from Pl Channel f through South Sound Creek into Largo Sound. tidalra reference is mean low water. Largo Sound has a mean as aange of 1.1 feet. Project is about 5 miles long. Project tio 1thorized April 20, 1964, by Chief of Engineers under sec- 1 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. letl cooperation. Fully complied with to date. For require- Were see 1965 Annual Report. Contributed funds for new work W $85,608 raminal facilities. Two Government-owned boat launching ,a Government-owned marina with fuel and water facilities VI aig berths for 16 boats, and a privately owned marina with a 0 facilities. SPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dredg- sf channel from Hawk Channel through South Sound Creek 2,4completed July 31, 1965. Dredge Two Brothers removed CUbic yards of material at a contract cost of $63,733. Engi- Ceeri $1,r3 Co n and design and supervision and administration costs 0 d $2,672, respectively. u 1ndtzon at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. No t0 .has been made of channels since completion of dredging S"ect depths in July 1965. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 1962 1963 I_ 1 _ _ Total to June 30,19661 oat. $1,000 $32,528 $63,093 $30,659 $127,280 .... ........ 7 21, 480 62,575 34,221 118,352 lIes $25,008 for detailed project reports. 448 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS F Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 196 J 15. MIAMI HARBOR, FLA. abo011ut Location. Miami is near northerly end of Biscayne BaY! iver 71 miles south of entrance to Palm Beach Harbor. Miami eter has its source in the Everglades and flows southeasterly to Biscayne Bay at Miami. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey 547 and 1248.) to.otter Existing project. A 30 by 500 foot channel from ocean toU ~1d end of north jetty thence 400 feet wide through entrancecipal across Biscayne Bay to and including a turning basin at mult 0 terminals; a 30-foot depth turning basin at Fisher Island-yfroII rubblestone jetties at entrance; a channel 15 to 200 feeral' mouth of Miami River to turning basin at municipal termlinlal channel 8 by 200 feet from mouth of Miami River to Intracoel Waterway and thence 100 feet wide to Government Cut; a chaat 15 feet deep in Miami River varying in width from 250 fea i mouth to 90 feet inland; and a channel 12 by 100 feet fromn to a harbor of refuge in Palmer Lake. Total project is atfo 15.3 miles long. Plane of reference is mean low water, excePf 0 . .. where 15-foot channel in Miami River d pthsarerebased . eredepths ba o , feet fee conditions. Mean tidal variation is 2.5 feet at entrance and in the bay. Extreme variation is about 4.5 feet at entrance level feet in Biscayne Bay. Strong easterly winds raise water Y about 1.5 feet at entrance and 1 foot in the bay. Strong weste, winds lower water level about 1 foot at entrance and ab01 00 foot in the bay. Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $9, fd A Federal and $7,306,000 non-Federal ($692,000 contribute.'d and $6,614,000 other costs). Existing project was authorize9th the River and Harbor Acts of March 2, 1945 (S. Doc. 251,1 Cong., 2d sess. and H. Doc. 91, 79th Cong., 1st sess.); JtlY for 1960 (S. Doc. 71, 85th Cong., 2d sess.); and prior acts. further details, see 1962 Annual Report. re Local cooperation. Complied with to date except for those quirements pertaining to channel from Miami River to harboat refuge in Palmer Lake (see 1961 Annual Report). Estirt contributed funds for new work, $692,000. i Terminal facilities. Forty-five piers and wharves, of whiel is on Fisher Island, 3 at Miami Beach, 5 along south side 1 along westerly bend of MacArthur Causeway, 10 along wse5s lia of Biscayne Bay at Miami, and 25 on Miami River. Six fadC are open to public for handling general cargo, four of whicha modate deep-draft vessels. All general cargo wharves have s way and railway connections except causeway terminal whic a~ highway connections only. A municipal yacht anchorage 0 f"re' and wharf are open to the public for recreational craft.O are maining piers and wharves, 4 in the bay and 3 on Miami River RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 449 sed for handling petroleum products, 17 are used in connection h :t Ship repair activities, and 6 are used for mooring vessels or i lidling private freight. In addition, numerous landing facilities Sreand.around Miami are designed for and used exclusively by IcIreational craft. Metropolitan Dade County is actively engaged Islaelocating and providing additional port facilities on Dodge oped in Biscayne Bay. The facilities, though incomplete, were 4aled to commerce June 7, 1965. A total of 9,200 feet of deep- Witer berthing space (32 ft. mean low water) has been provided ith an additional 7,800 feet expected to be added. A 2,000-per- ha capacity passenger terminal with high-speed baggage facilities trianeen planned to handle five ships per day. A huge free-span andlls it shed containing 200,000 square feet has been constructed, Sid acilities for an additional 300,000 square feet are under con- in eration. Completion of the port facilities is scheduled for early qtate f. Facilities at Miami Harbor were not considered ade- ti ~e rexisting commerce which necessitated the above reloca- llandadditional provision. vio berations and results during fiscal year. New work: Super- vision and administration charges relative to recently completed Worklamounted to $195. Maintenance: Cleanup operations fol- Hurricane Betsy cost $3,347. U.S. dredge Gerig removed 210,218 cubic yards of material from entrance channel September 22 to October 1, 1965, at a cost of $61,248. Boulders were re- moved from southerly side of Government Cut from September 2 to Novemnber 16, 1965, and from March 30 to June 10, 1966, at contract costs of $24,155 and $35,013, respectively. Engineering $3 design and supervision and administration cost $2,324 and DoP0rtCs 6 3 , respectively. Hired labor surveys, inspection, and re- cost $26,392. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 98 eriert complete. Remaining work is widening mouth of Miami Wver; channel 8 by 200 feet from mouth of river to Intracoastal 12 baerway, thence 100 feet wide to Government Cut; and channel ouY 100 feet from Miami to a harbor of refuge in Palmer Lake. ole.lh and north jetties are in good condition except repairs are eed near seaward end of north jetty. Controlling depths._ Depth Date of Channel (feet) survey b, .anne ........ Oct. 1965. 6,o a at 54th municipal at Fisher terminals............................................. I land ................................................ 26 Do. 30 May 1966. oeth ofMiami River to turning basinat municipal terminals................... 12 July 1964. Of iami River to Government Cut via Intracoastal Waterway................ No recent No recent el to I survey, survey. PamerI ake................ ....... 9 May 1959. 450 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Totto Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1065 1966 June 30, New work: V3 Appropriated.......... $84,000 $70,000$1,461,000 $805,000 -$1,761 9 ,698273 cost.................. 24,178 7,271 1,565,324 821,273 193 04 833 Maintenance: 2 949v33 Appropriated.......... 11,001 13,959 12,700 42,688 186,000 2049:2 Coat....... .......... 15,357 13,945 12,654 42,647 185,542 s o Includes $r61,660 preauthorization studies and $2,202,126 expended from public Work for new work. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total tO06 Fiscal ................ year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 9 New work:'88 Contributed......... .. $14,824 ............. $107,100 $245,219 -S44,254 3,89 Coat.................. 4,267 $1,283 88,993 228,344 2 1Excludes $343,497 for work-in-kind. 16. OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FLA. Location. Traverses southern part of Florida peninsula Caloosahatchee River, Lake Okeechobee, and St. Lucie Canal, co" necting coastal waterways along gulf and Atlantic shores. (see Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 855-SC and 856-SC.) A 1al Previous projects. For details, see page 785 of 1949 Report. Existing project. Replacing old locks on St. Lucie Canal Y single new locks; channel 8 by 80-100 feet from Ft. Myers a the Intracoastal Waterway, Jacksonville to Miami, near Stuarti 8-foot deep basin at Stuart; a side channel at Ft. Myers; operated and care of St. Lucie lock; and maintenance of features comple el under previous projects as follows: a 12- by 200-foot cha"n from gulf to Punta Rassa, thence 10 by 100 feet to Fort %lYel with a 10-foot deep basin at Fort Myers; a 6- by 80-foot chaflcie along south shore of Lake Okeechobee from Clewiston to St. L I Canal; a 6- by 60-foot channel in Taylor Creek from toWl d Okeechobee to Lake; and operation and care of Moore Haven and Ortona locks. Existing project was authorized by River .tte Harbor Acts of August 26, 1937 (River and Harbor ComM 6 Doc. 28, 75th Cong., 1st sess.) and March 2, 1945 (H.Doc. 69ad 76th Cong., 3d sess., and H. Doc. 736, 79th Cong., 2d sess.), or Permanent Appropriation Repeal Act of June 26, 1934. further details, see 1962 Annual Report. Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date. tio Terminal facilities. Three freight piers, 1 municipal recreao pier, 4 privately owned piers, and a municipal yacht basin.e Caloosahatchee River near Fort Myers. The Corps has provl boat basin, launching ramp, and 120-foot wharf on Caloosahatchee River about one-quarter mile below Ortona lock. There a numerous small wooden-pile landings along upper Caloosahatcher River, along lake shore, on St. Lucie Canal, and on St. Lucie River including one railroad terminal pier, a municipal pier, and a P~i for handling petroleum products at Stuart. A municipal yac RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 451 has has been provided at Indiantown. Also, 550 feet of wharves arde been provided on west side of Taylor Creek immediately land- ardOf hurricane gate No. 6 and 150 feet acht basin has been provided on west side on east side of creek. of creek immediately riWard of hurricane gate. Installations on Taylor Creek are targtly owned, but open to the public. There is a 440-foot at L al Wharf on Industrial Canal at Clewiston; 125-foot wharf I40 elle; 150-foot wharf at Belle Glade; 125-foot wharf at Creek Haven; coee cat town 50-foot wharf at Alva; and 30-foot wharf on Taylor of Okeechobee. All have highway and/or railway tiercetion s . Facilities considered adequate for existing com- OPenations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Re- talledcontrolled, electrically operated pedestrian gates were in- l at Wt St. Lucie lock at a cost of $2,122. A public address eV as installed at Ortona and St. Lucie locks costing $2,211. Cost (Way was dredged July 26 to August 22, 1965, at contract hired 1 $12,800. Snagging and clearing navigation channels by $766 labor cost $20,895. Maintaining signs on waterway cost C aintenance of recreation areas and repairs to residences S4pt,,,,058 and $3,140, respectively. Engineering and design and eet- iS10onand administration costs were $54 and $14,770, re- 3"12y. Hired labor surveys, inspections, and reports cost L 1* Operation and care: Moore Haven, Ortona, and St. ofof~711, locks ) 8 8 . were operated and maintained by hired labor at a cost 8onc ition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for "0t basin at Stuart which is inactive. For details, see 1962 feetllal Report. Controlling width of 80 feet is reduced to 50 at locks and to less than 80 feet by bridges at 13 localities. Controlling depths Depth Date of Channel (feet) survey Jt exco M .to Punta Rassa................................................... 12.0 April 1965. o oat t oFortnaMyers..................................................... FlrB 6.5 May 1965. r.a Orto lock....................................................... 8.0 April 1965. oalok toe Okeechobee at Moore Haven................................... oLake 8.0 Do. e - eefrom Moore Haven to St. Lucie Canal via south-shore channel ........ 6.0 Do. ake6 '0~ton approach channel................................................ 8.0 Do. . L4a .he beeto St Lucie lock ................................................ 8.0 Do. TIMle River from lock to Intracoastal Waterway near Stuart....................... 8.0 Do. k from town of Okeechobee to Lake Okeechobee.................. ....... . 0 May 1960. ota Federal costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, were $1,855,717 for new work, $1,270,281 for maintenance, and 887,138 for operation and care, a total of $7,013,136. 452 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Totalt,1 Fiscal year... ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June301 New work: 77992 Appropriated.......... $16,100 -$831......... ........................ ,0 99 Co .................. . 678 14,773 ............................ ... 22007, Appropriated.......... 154,500 205,000 $187,100 $148,300 $153,000 Cost ................. 167,815 131,745 249,368 143,738 163,736 3 . .. . . . . I II 7 j.,ec 7. t 1Includes $16,222,276 for new work and $7,581,150 for maintenance for previouspfro do Excludes $500,000 for new work and $1,000 for maintenance expended from contriu on previous projects. 2 Includes $52,269 for recreational facilities (Code 710). 1 Excludes $67,558 which represents services rendered without reimbursement. 17. OKLAWAHA RIVER, FLA. " i Location. River has its source in system of large lakes central part of theFlorida peninsula and flows generally northeb then easterly, emptying into St. Johns River 22 miles ab-e Palatka. Extreme head of system is considered to be L Apopka, 120 miles above mouth of river.al Previous projects. For details, see page 613 of 1938 Ap10 Report. Existing project. Channel 6 feet deep from river moutht head of Silver Springs Run; clearing channels to Lake Grl t maintaining dikes to obtain a navigable depth of about 4 fee Leesburg and construction of a lock and dam at Moss .31 Project length is about 85.7 miles in the river and 5.4 miles il Silver Springs Run. Existing project was authorized bYe and Harbor Acts of September 19, 1890; March 2, 1907,J Doc. 782, 59th Cong., 1st sess.); June 25, 1910; Ju 'ly 25, 1 and July 27, 1916; and Permanent Appropriation Repeal Act June 26, 1934. For further details, see 1962 Annual Report. Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date.d Terminal facilities. Numerous private and public landings ft boat-launching ramps are along river. Public recreationres basins and boat-launching ramps are near Silver Springso (e Landing, and Moss Bluff. There is a municipal wharf on lb Griffin at Leesburg. Facilities are considered adequate for exiS ing commercee Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenllc Snagging and clearing between St. Johns River and Moss13. by hired labor operations amounted to $9,156. Contract gsnagg and clearing operations began November 16, 1965, and were C'o01 pleted January 25, 1966, at a cost of $15,550. Engineering design and supervision and administration cost $334 and $4,6s respectively. Hired labor surveys, inspections, and reportS lO- $3,890. Operation and care: Hired labor cost of operating and dam and maintaining buildings and grounds was $20,259- Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. 00 Bluff lock and dam structure is in poor but usable conditiof, trol is to be replaced under the Four River Basins, Fla, flood coe project. Controlling depths at normal stages are approxima~eg Mouth of river to Silver Springs Run, 4.5 feet; Silver Spr, Run to Moss Bluff lock, 3.5 feet; Moss Bluff lock to Leesburg, RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 453 Total Federal costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, $311,352 for new work, $629,651 for maintenance, and 44 for operation and care (excluding $11,414 under pro- s of permanent indefinite appropriation), a total of ,347. Cost and financial statement Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New'Mr A ok M ogriated i.......$315,264 ........ 315,264 riated CI~oat ....$38,600 $64,000 $35,600 $29,600 $51,400 1,100,837 42,003 56,607 39,893 30,330 53,827 1,100,409 "Ider ' ~3,912of for Soins for previous projects and $11,414 new workindefinite permanent for operating and care appropriation. Loc 18. PALM BEACII HARBOR, FLA. eltocation. On east coast of Florida about 71 miles north of e~tance to Miami Harbor and about 264 miles southeasterly from Chace to Jacksonville Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey 4gis 291 and 1248.) Wimsting project. An entrance channel 35 by 400 feet merging basI. all inner channel 33 by 300 feet to and including a turning 4ilen;;bank revetment; and restoring jetties. Project is about 1.6 ada long. Mean range of tide in ocean at entrance is 2.8 feet 4.5 fat turning basin, 2.2 feet. Extreme range of tide is about hav e etat inlet and 3 feet at terminals. Seven-foot tidal ranges at occurred during storms. Project depths refer to mean low owfer Which is 1.66 feet below mean sea level. Estimated cost 1.p Work (1965) is $7,579,000 Federal cost and $2,094,000 ot) ederal cost ($575,000 contributed funds and $1,519,000 other Existing project was authorized by the 1960 River and b4b*or Act (H. Doc. 283, 86th Cong., 1st sess.) and prior acts. Lkdetails, see 1962 Annual Report. to da lcooperation. Fully complied with for work performed ~ t For requirements see 1961 Annual Report. Estimated qtgributed funds for new work is $575,000. Compliance with re- 7ier ents is on schedule. oeil Tinal facilities. Two slips with wharves, three warehouses, Dro orage tank for sirup, and three storage depots for petroleum a)cts connected with terminals by pipelines. Rail and high- w conlnections, water supply, and other facilities have been totaloaec in warehouses and shipside of slips. Facilities afford Allb1 erthing space of 3,929 feet with depths of 17 to 22 feet. are arves are owned by Port of Palm Beach District. Facilities o considered adequate for existing commerce. (See Port Series 616, 1954, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Invitations for bids for constructing entrance channel and turning basin Dellilssued in March 1966 but bid opening delayed indefinitely pending resolvement of restriction of blasting operations within the city limits of Palm Beach necessary to provide the desired contruction. Engineering and design and supervision and ad- 454 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ministration cost $61,068 and $5,951, respectively. Maintellance: U.S. dredge Gerig removed 57,370 cubic yards of material from entrance channel from September 11-14, 1965, at a copst of $48,543. From March 18-23, 1966, U.S. dredge removed 16,191 cubic yards ofmaterial from entrance channel and turning basin at a cost of $20,914. vision and administration cost $732 and $13,128, respectivel Hired labor surveys, inspections, and reports cost $3,849. 46 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about to percent completed. Repairs are needed at both jetties dUeete hurricane and storm damage. Work remaining to comP ept project is that work authorized by the act of July 14, 1960,.eCh5 for dredging inner channel between stations 56 and 78 which re been provided to project dimensions. Controlling depthSWnIel 27 feet in entrance channel (Mar. 1966), 26.2 feet in inner cha.. (Apr. 1965), and 25 feet in turning basin (Jan. 1965). Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS S Total to66 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 june New work: Appropriated.......... $3 741 $58,000 -$25,000 $225,000$1,500,000 $430,000 558 Cost.................. Maintenance: 25,661 5,475 37,051 1,686,275 61,054 1321 3'311 Appropriated.......... 7,799 85,300 27,300 45,500 86,500 1:321:63 Cost.................. 7,878 85,287 27,299 44,464 87,166 1 Includes $52,000 for Preauthorization studies and $80,000 for new work and $30 maintenance from public works funds. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ------ 96 19 Jun 30 tolTtal Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 JuneA Now work: 1 Contributed........... $ ,667 ......... $19,538 $161,196 $27,355376 Cost............... ... 2,507 $535 3,620 164,740 ............. 5,965 19. PASS-A-GRILLE PASS, FLA.Wit Location. A natural inlet connecting Boca Ciega BaY Gulf of Mexico and located slightly northwestward of lowe Tampa Bay, near St. Petersburg, Fla. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 586 and 1257.)O Existing project. An entrance channel 10 by 150 feet ac-ro the gulf bar, then 8 by 100 feet to Intracoastal Waterway. Pl of reference is mean low water. Mean range of tide is 1.5 feet Project is about 3.4 miles long. Project was authorized Nover ber 19, 1964, by Chief of Engineers under section 107, 1960 1iI and Harbor Act. Local cooperation. Fully complied with to date. For require, ments see 1965 Annual Report. Contributed funds for new o amounted to $41,292.i Terminal facilities. Only a yacht club marina and small repa yards in general vicinity for recreational craft. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dredg ing of project began February 8 and was completed April 27 RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 455 1966. Dredge Huffman No. 3 removed 142,137 cubic yards of material at a contract cost of $62,555. Engineering and design ans supervision and administration cost $2,830 and $8,672, re- Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Con- inUfg depths in April 1966 were as authorized. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS alyea Totalto ......... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Propriated ......... .................................... $20,000 $37,000 $57,000 ......... ............................. ............ 8,627 32,765 41,292 rIlle $17,406 for preauthorization studies. Preauthorization studies for Johns and Pass- asses made jointly. Study cost prorated according to construction cost. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1963 1964 Lr 20. PONCE DE LEON INLET, FLA. StS ocation. On Atlantic coast of Florida about 65 miles south of (SeAugustine Harbor and 57 miles north of Canaveral Harbor. e Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1245.) oceaistingaproject. Entrance channel 15 by 200 feet across then e bar, thence 12 by 200 and 12 by 100 feet through the inlet; 10rt southward in Indian River North, 12 by 100 feet, and 111thward in Halifax River, 7 by 100 feet, each leg continuing to of, racastal Waterway; ocean jetties on the north and south side 4i0Ret 4,200 feet and 2,700 feet long respectively; and a weir in refer jetty with an impoundment basin inside jetty. Plane of oe~ ence is mean low water. Mean range of tide is 4.1 feet in taS and 2.3 feet inside the inlet. Project is about 5 miles long. $I1iated cost of new work (1966) is $1,200,000 Federal and r 10,O000 non-Federal ($1,500,000 contributed funds and $90,000 Ac ands). Project was authorized by 1965 River and Harbor (ol.Doc. 74, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). areOcal cooperation. Prior to construction, local interests must de to contribute 54.9 percent of contract price plus supervision tll adTinistration thereof for all items of work to be provided by toe orps, currently estimated at $1,500,000; contribute $1,379,000 fO rd the cost of future maintenance and operation to be per- tiorl ed by the Corps; provide all fitu's to existing improvements lands, rights-of-way and altera- required for construction and r 'demaintenance; hold United States free from damages;, and oDe de and maintain necessary mooring facilities and utilities f to all. Assurances of local cooperation have been requested ol local sponsor. 456 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Terminal facilities. None in the immediate area. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on project has not coc menced. Controlling depths (Mar. 1962) were 11 feet in entrabc channel and channel through inlet; 8 feet in channel in ind River North; and 4 feet in channel in Halifax River. for Cost and financial statement. Only $45,918 Federal costfO preauthorization studies. 21. PONCE HARBOR, P.R.50 Location. On south-central coast of Puerto Rico, about 10d miles by water southeast from San Juan Harbor. (See Coast ad Geodetic Survey Charts 902 and 927.) dea Existing project. A seawall 362 feet long; dredging two ared north of causeway leading to the pier, 30 and 18 feet deep a e containing about 77 and 47 acres, respectively; dredging an area off the municipal pier 30 feet deep and containing about 18 acS and a breakwater 2,400 feet long extending southwesterly frero Punta Carenero. Plane of reference is mean low water. Mlo tidal range is 0.6 foot; extreme varies between about 1 foot be and 2 feet above mean low water. Estimated Federal cost of ded work (1956) is $1,430,000. In addition, $21,960 was expen from contributed funds. Existing project was authorized b River and Harbor Acts of March 3, 1925 (1.Doc. 532, 67th Co ,n 4th sess.), August 30, 1935, and March 2, 1945 (H. Doc. 745, 79th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. United States shall reimburse to localin,- terests funds contributed for dredging and shall undertake, d in out contribution by local interests, remaining dredging included4 the project, and all other portions of improvement (bulkhead fl seawall) shall be at expense of local interests. Local interests must construct 2,362 linear feet of seawall and 4,340 linear feetO concrete bulkhead wharf; construct a rubblemound bulkhead 3 public landing for small boats; cede to a 1-acre plot fronting A rubblemound bulkhead; furnish suitable spoil-disposal areas; Fr provide rights-of-way and release from damage claims. further details, see 1949 Annual Report. ates Terminal facilities. Municipality of Ponce owns and opera the only deep-draft terminal facilities in Ponce Harbor, which ed sist of a municipal pier 515 feet long and 108 feet wide, and bulkhead wharf 1,890 feet long. Both are equipped for transfer and storage of freight. Municipal pier has a steel transit shoe 386 by 85 feet. Bulkhead wharf has two steel storage shedS, _ 362 by 58 feet and the other 262 by 58 feet. Existing facilitie are open to the public and considered adequate for present coo merce.M t ce: Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance Dredging to restore project dimensions in harbor area began September 23 and was completed October 21, 1965. Dredge Judith I removed 51,336 cubic yards of material at a contract cost of $46,869. Engineering and design and supervision and ministration cost $4,052. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 1 RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 457 etcIt complete. Work remaining for Federal portion of project ext t-s of completing the dredging of 30-foot maneuvering area dredg municipal bulkhead terminal; dredging 18-foot area; breaing 3 0-foot area serving municipal pier; and constructing std'kater extending southwesterly from Carenero Point. A was °completed in 1959 found that completion of remaining work act1i t economically justified at that time. Project is in an in- un.e st.atus. Controlling depths: In May 1963, 17.3 feet from fet opal pier 500 feet north and 30 feet from municipal pier 550 to SOUth , and in October 1965, 21.1 feet in the area contiguous arehouse wharf. Cost and financial statement Nalya Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Nw ork. M e. Olated.......... . .......... ........................ ......... $187882 o priated.. ........ . .. $2,000 $50,296 110,587 .... .. " ......... ...................... . 1,375 50,921 110,587 otrbut~fud$11588 expended for restudy but excludes $21,960 expended for new work from 22. MOVIN WATER-HYACINTH FROM NAVIGABLE WATERS L IN FLORIDA lakesocation. Water hyacinth is found in fresh-water streams and e .in.various parts of the district. h1yacittzng project. Provides for destruction or removal of water stittth in navigable waters of the state so far as they con- rechean obstruction to navigation and commerce, using any ,e oanical, chemical, or other means not injurious to cattle, and a log booms to close sloughs and backwaters as an auxiliary ns . No estimate of the final cost of work has been made. -X. qting project was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of arch 3 1899 (H. Doc. 91, 55th Cong., 3d sess.), June 13, 1902, L arch 3, 1905. For further details, see 1962 Annual Report. Gclcooperation. None required. tverations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Con- triced spraying operations: 1,635 acres in St. Johns River and tuibtaries cost $49,888; 2,366 acres in Okeechobee Waterway and ' 44aries cost $12,826; and supervision and administration cost 1tCldition at end of fiscal year. Project is for maintenance. 20 the year, 4,001 acres of hyacinths were sprayed in about oV 0 Miles of waterways. Hyacinth infestation is widespread hbe Lake Okeechobee. There are currently about 4,000 acres of 3acilth on the lake. New canal construction in Kissimmee tI ver allowed the plants to flow into Lake Okeechobee increasing t e il1festation. Spraying in upper reaches of the Kissimmee stree r the Aquatic Plant Control Program is progressing down- tionan to Lake Okeechobee. The hyacinth in all other naviga- A'011 channels are under control. This program combined with atic Plant Control Program is producing excellent results. 458 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 Ju 3 1 year............... Fiscal Maintenance: 238 1 Appropriated.......... $65,000 $75,000 $75,000 $81,000 $80,000 2 ,233 Cost............... .. 63,023 76,678 76,314 80,395 77,157 23. ST. PETERSBURG HARBOR, FLA.S5 Location. St. Petersburg is on west shore of Tampa aYf of miles southwest of Port Tampa City. Entrance from Guid Mexico to Tampa Bay is about midway of west coast of Fl of about 330 miles southeast of Pensacola, Fla., and 65 miles or rts Charlotte Harbor, Fla. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey 586 and 1257.) Previous projects. For details, see page 671 of 1938 A Report. Existing project. Entrance channel 24 by 300 feet from TarIr op Bay westward to Bayboro Harbor, including a port basin of s'si depth; a channel 15 by 100 feet in Bayboro Harbor with a b si 12 feet deep; a channel 12 by 75 feet in mouth of Salt Creek ', l entrance channel 20 by 200 feet from lower Tampa Bay northeV for about 5.5 miles and thence 19 by 250 feet westward to 24-fot depth northern entrance channel; and a channel 16 by 200 bY 600 feet on easterly side of Port Pinellas beacon. Plane of refereet is mean low water. Mean tidal range in Tampa Bay is 1.5 feter spring range, 1.9 feet. Strong southwesterly winds raise 0Ic level as much as 1.5 feet; strong northerly winds lower it as rne as 2 feet. Project is about 8 miles long. Project was authorictd by Deficiency Act of March 4, 1929, and River and Harbor A6, of July 3, 1930 (S. Doc. 229, 70th Cong. 2d sess.), AugUSt 1937 (River and Harbor Committee Doc. 71, 74th Cong., 2d sessOf and May 17, 1950 (H.Doc. 70, 81st Cong., 1st sess.). Partoot project authorized by 1950 River and Harbor Act except 1 re depth channels in Bayboro Harbor and at mouth of Salt Creek tW considered inactive. However, this inactive part is currene under restudy to determine whether dredging of this part of th project is economically justified. Project except for inactiveP00 tion was completed at a Federal cost of $214,000 and $930,0 non-Federal cost for dredging and port facilities.. Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands, rig of-way, and spoil-disposal areas; hold United States free fre damages; and strengthen or move structures necessary to s fe guard the channels and adjacent lands and structures. Req tro ments for active part fully complied with. Terminal facilities. A 1,500-foot-long municipal wharf anrid t warehouses at the Port of St. Petersburg turning basin. Fro turning basin to Bayboro Harbor the U.S. Maritime taiiof station has 1,360 feet of wharfage space. On Bayboro r there are 5 oil company wharves, 2 marine repair and sutPivip plants, a sand and shell wharf, 6 marine railways, steam-electr1 plant and fuel wharf of the Florida Power Corp., and 4 privateo owned marginal wharves. Two oil companies have terminals O' RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 459 Salt Creek and there are three municipal yacht basins north of ort of St. Petersburg. Facilities considered adequate for exist- cormerce and are open to all equally. o perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Eco- o"fc restudy for determining economic feasibility of completion fai theproject was deferred pending action by local interests. k enance: Hired labor surveys, inspections, and reports. for ?dition at end of the fiscal year. Project is complete except ia. 4foot-depth channel and basin from Tampa Bay to Bayboro fee1ior which is considered inactive. Controlling depths: 20.5 A til 2 0-foot channel leading northward from Tampa Bay in thrril 1966; 19 feet in 19-foot entrance channel and 17 feet i roughout Port of St. Petersburg basin in March 1963; 14.5 feet IPoarbint Pinellas Channel in May 1938; and 12 feet in Bayboro costor and in mouth of Salt Creek in August 1957. Total Federal W0ts for existing project to June 30, 1966, were $228,919 for new and $55,859 for maintenance, a total of $284,778. Cost and financial statement FiscalYear. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, 19661 N~ew'Work.- Costropriate d. ....... ........... $10,000 $433 ... $261,957 6,383 3,637 $64 . ...... 261,608 boatopriate ................... 1,460 174 .. $5,060 76,391 .1,400174...460 174 .. 5,060 76,391 " ' 6, ' 6e es $32,689 for new work and $20,532 for maintenance under previous project and rPreauthorization studies. Loca 24. SAN JUAN HARBOR, P.R. oocation. On north coast of Puerto Rico, about 30 miles west Coape San Juan and 1,100 miles southeast of Miami, Fla. (See p.4t and Geodetic Survey Chart 908.) 19 16 evious projects. For details see Annual Reports for 1915, ,.and isting1938. project. Entrance channel 38 by 800 feet across the "ter bar to channel bend with a 45-by-500-foot section within this inanlel, thence 36 by 1,200-880 feet to inner harbor extending to ch ersection of Graving dock and Army Terminal Channels; a byanIel 35 by 600 feet to San Antonio Channel with an area 35 by 30-1,100 by 2,800 feet in San Antonio Channel; a channel 36 e 0 0 feet in Army Terminal Channel with turning basin; a talrnel 30 by 400 feet from inner harbor to Graving dock with T'er g basin; 32- by 300-foot Puerto Nuevo Channel from Army a e inal basin to Graving dock basin; and a 36-foot deep anchor- vaoff Isla Grande. Mean tidal range is 1.1 feet; tide heights \y from about 1 foot below to about 2.8 feet above mean low eater. Existing project was authorized by 1958 River and porbor Act (H. Doc 38, 85th Cong., 1st sess.), and prior acts. o additional information see 1962 Annual Report. . ocal cooperation. Fully complied with to date. Contributed N14 for new work amounted to $100,000. 460 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 STerminal facilities. There are 27 piers and bulkheads wharves in the harbor capable of docking deepdraft vessels, which have o aggregate berthing length of about 26,300 feet; however, due o limiting depths it is estimated that berthing space available foe deepdraft vessels is about 22,200 feet. Eighteen piers are on th north shore, 3 fronting Graving dock turning basin, 5 at&rnl Terminal basin, and 1 on south shore of San Antonio Chan. Two piers and bulkhead wharves are privately owned, 9 are,.of Government property, and 16 are owned by Commonweal .l- Puerto Rico. Twenty-two piers are equipped with mechandi- transfer facilities. Twenty are open to general public In1 a tion, there is an aggregate length of about 2,100 feet of berthhi space at Catano Point used principally by small vessels tie 18-foot draft range. This space is open to the public. Facj are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: CorCle tract costs relative to dredging completed in fiscal year 1965.We $319. Engineering and design and supervision and admilli tion cost $5 and $1,962, respectively. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Controlling depths Channel Depth (feet) Date f rve Entrance channel . . 45 July 194 Inner harbor to intersection of Graving dock and ArmyvTerminal Channn .......... 36 MaY 196 San AntomnioChannel. ..................... ...................... Jly 1964 Army Terminal Channel and turning asin~i..................... 0. ... Jly. 19 Channel from Graving dock to turning basin . 31....................A........... pr 96l Anchorage area off Isla Grande............................ ............... 64 Total Federal costs of existing project to June 30 1966, were $12,614,836 for new work and $1,656,429 for maintenance, a to ed of $14,271,265 regular funds. In addition $427,068 was expen~d for new work and $24,737 for maintenance from public wo funds and $100,000 contributed funds for new work. Exis project includes entrance channel and turning basin to Ar.y Terminal which cost $1,543,712; this expenditure made from i' tary appropriations and is not included in above costs. Cost and financial statement Totall 66 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 New work: _$To at0 68 Appropriated..........$499,952 $4,160,000 8 Cost................. $4,633,000 $200,000 47,607 4,535,4144,326,727 .. $.13:7 501.257 $2286 , Appropriated.......... Maintenance: . 16,700 1,325 84 -3,000 . .... 687 Cost..................1,356 12,478 297 .... ..... Includes $747,684 for new work and $44,730 for maintenance under previous projectco' $14,676 for preauthorization studies. Excludes $100,000 expended for new work from tributed funds. 25. TAMPA HARBOR, FLA. Location. A large natural indentation of Gulf of Mexico ab midway of west coast of Florida. Entrance is about 220 miles RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 461 Se tof Key Coast andWest and about 330 miles southeast of Pensacola. Geodetic Survey Charts 586, 587, and 1257.) Re ous projects. For details, see page 665 of 1938 Annual aist ing project. Channel from Gulf of Mexico to Port Tampa Iulle ampa, 36 by 600 feet in Egmont Bay, 34 by 500 feet in ald t Key Cut, 34 by 400 feet in Tampa and Hillsborough Bays feet inPort Tampa and Sparkman Channels; channels 34 by 400 Chai Ybor Channel and 30 by 300 feet in Seddon and Garrison traflels; turning basins at mouth of Hillsborough River, at en- 30 bfce toYbor Channel, and at entrance to Port Tampa; a channel basiY 00 feet from Hillsborough Bay to and including a turning abov i Alafia River; a channel 9 by 100 feet to a point 2,000 feet fge Columbus Drive bridge; a breakwater; and maintenance o30 b hannel 12 by 200 feet in Hillsborough River, and a channel proi 150 feet in Port Sutton Channel, with turning basin. Rivect is about 67 miles long, including 10 miles in Hillsborough loer and 3.6 miles in Alafia River. Plane of reference is mean bay Water. Mean range of tide is 1.3 feet at lower end of the ry, 1.6 feet at Port Tampa, and 1.8 feet at Tampa. Extreme re is about 3.8 feet at lower end of the bay and 4.8 feet at feea. Strong southwesterly winds raise water level about 1.5 lowe Strong northerly winds, which usually occur in winter, ad water level about 2 feet. Project was authorized by River ses larbor Act of May 17, 1950 (H.Doc. 258, 81st Cong., 1st 0ctb September 3, 1954 (H. Doc. 567, 81st Cong., 2d sess.); acts e)r23, 1962 (H.Doc. 529, 87th Cong., 2d sess.); and prior * For further details, see 1962 Annual Report. ,ete cooperation. Fully complied with to date. For require- W.a see 1965 Annual Report. Non-Federal cost of new work T$13,932. eluderminal facilities. Sixty-one piers and wharves at Tampa, in- RD tig 14 on Hillsborough River suitable for vessels drawing eit0.11 feet, and 2 piers at Black Point, 28 others within Tampa Old lmits, one at East Tampa, 13 on slip at Port Tampa, and 3 on vT ampa Bay at Rattlesnake, Fla., which will serve deepdraft 778 els. Municipal terminals on Ybor Channel consist of a slip o eet long, 250 feet wide, with a wharf on both sides, of which co has a steel-frame transit shed. Most facilities have railway Driections. Municipal terminals, one city wharf, and 10 coPivately owned terminals are open to the public. There are 14 fac.lercial oil terminals and 2 privately owned cement storage aclities. Facilities are considered adequate for existing com- C0 rce except those at Port Tampa. (See Port Series 17, 1956, rDs of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dredg- ing of Ybor Channel was completed October 21, 1965. Dredge Hendry No.5 removed 406,766 cubic yards of material at a con- tract cost of $758,476. Engineering and design and supervision Sadministration costs were $1,279 and $30,132, respectively. bo aintenance: Contract for dredging in Tampa Bay, Hills- aough arded Bay, Port Tampa, Port Sutton, and Alafia River was June 2, 1966, but dredging operations have not com- 462 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 menced. Engineering and design and supervision and adminlistra" tion cost $19,937 and $3,535, respectively. Hired labor survey$1 inspections, and reports cost $8,431.AS Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. whole, project is in good condition. Controlling depths Channel Depth (feet), Dateof 01 Egmont Channel................... ................................. 34.9 Apr. 1964 Mullet Key Cut.................................................... 34.0 Do. Port Tampa Channels....................................... .............. 8.0 Nov.163 Port Tampa turning basin.............. ................................. . 28.0 Hillsborough Bay Channels.......... . . " . ....... ......... ...... 31.0 . Hillsborough Bay turning basin........... ..................... Alafia River entrance channel and turning basin..... .................. Seddon Channel.............. 27.00 Do. Do. ................................. 29.0 o. Port Sutton Channel...... ............................. . ..... 0 Do. Port Sutton turning basin....... . ......... . . ............... ..... 27.1 Do. Sparkman Channel.................. ................................. ... 31.0 Do. Garrison Channel, west to east......... 23.0 po Ybor Channel..... ............. 34.0 Nov. 1 9 6 Ybor turning basin ......... . .: '. .. ' ".......... 34.0 Jan.1966 Hillsborough River, Lafayette Street Bridge to Garcia Street Bridge :::::.:::.:.... 9.2 Jan. 1960 Thence to a point 2,200 feet northeast of Columbus Drive Bridge.. ..... 9.0 Do. Total Federal costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, were Main project: $22,423,809 for new work and $4,274,51.7 ~o maintenance, a total of $26,698,326, regular funds. In additO' $1,329,300 was expended for new work from public works fiuldo $1,463,000 from emergency relief funds, and $13,932 from coor tributed funds. Hillsborough River: $291,621 was expended for new work (including $21,155 for preauthorization studies). Cost and financial statement MAIN PROJECT-REGULAR FUNDS Totalito9 Fiscal year............ . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June ' New work: 640 Appropriated......... .. * $155,000 *................ $690,000 260691 Cost ................ * $n............ 29....*...******** 29,160 i e r O 776,459a 1 Appropriated.......... $80,499 $157,100 $236,000 169,000 498,200 4:291 Cost... .. 309,388 155,696 130,786 275,412 31,903 4 $ Includes $853,050 for new work and $17,107 for maintenance under vr $27,358 for preauthorization studies. Excludes $291621 for Hillsborough River (inc $21,155 for preauthorization studies). YBOR CHANNEL-CONTRIBUTED FUNDS , Total to Fiscal year............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30. II I I _I I-- - -- , New work: Contributed.................. . $19,023 . Cot.. ....................................... 504 $13,428 _. / 26. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Name of project Date survey cold~cted Channel from Naples to Big Marco Pass: 12-foot Channel Gordon Pass to Naples, Fla. ...................... May 1966 Manatee River, Fla .................................. July 1965 New Pass, Sarasota, Fla.............................. Apr. 1966 966 Port Everglades Harbor, Fla.......... ........... May-June 1 RIVERS AND HARBORS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 463 27. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual report Operation and for- Construction maintenance A r la1 1959 25272,427 Aleai ,P1................................. .. ........ 1959 $91,420 Atll asciteit er SAt s i.P.R1. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 1956 1965 1,128,075 195,847 bfh .1..anal, Florida3 ............... . ............. 1939 45,099,153 . rcoastal aRiver, Waterway between Norfolk, Va., and St. Johns 1964 361,225 921,774 BakesFa (Jacksonville Dist.)i. a over Inlet, Fla.1....................... 1965 6262,235 ........... Ch oNa es.1to 1 Big Marco Pass: 12-foot Channel, Gordon 1964 7298,017 50,162 C a ' ad arbor, St. Croix, V.I. ............................... 1964 8323,317 ............ slte a...1961 1086,349 Cr lay annel i............ Ca l a....... ................................ . 1940 2,846............. 66 Ysa Rv Fla.1. 194 2 , 9 1941 25,000 19,993 Harbor,Fla.1... ................................ 1940 9,627 495 0 aar Harbor, Flal.".......... ....... ................... 1964 11248,221 .............. a H r r, P. .2....... .................... .......... . 1945 ............................ 11 ae r P.R.12 ............ 1945 . .3 .96 ll rdo, aiver, Fla.*....... ... ..... 1...37 133,999697 aalver, Fla.12(iss. 0a tal ........ ........W * ......... %...... ........ 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . irle Waterway, Miami to Key West, Fla. 1963 243,079 325 ake re ver, Fla.1. ................................... 1931 23,479 25,202 Ittle t and Iunns Creek, F.14.........................1931 10,276 8,166 atee River, Fla.14.............................. .1949 1511,903.. e Ig er, Fla ....... ......................... 1965 123,350 105,801 arbor, ...... .............................. 1956 168,187 155,692 NewPas tarbor, Fla.1.. .......... 1939 17,696........... Ne *.arasota, Fla.1 1 ......... .......... .. 1964 1645,811 2,950 ora , l..... .... ................ 1956 36,518 ............ , Fla .1962 1 . .. .. .. .. .. .... ....... 2,000 18,057 4hA 1 c nnel and hha turning basin ... 1963 2110,527 ............. aetFla side channel and basin14....19046 .............. . p 0rt ee iver Fla......................................... 1950 . .. .......... SW lades H arbor, Fla.1..................................... 1965 16683,921 647824 ' Fl . . .................................... .. . 1957 1893,208 606 eHarborFla.1................................. 1958 191,535,434 165,837 St L 8River, Jacksonville to Lake Harney, Fla.14................ 1963 201,171,243 20602,025 n c Fla. ............ 1949 21123,602 63,719 t1hH Iarbor, V.14... ............................... 1949 1,989 .............. Swathe ver Fla. 13. . ............................... 1940 135,053 5,783 Wj1 ebiver, Fla.14 ............... ............. 1963 2276,418 102,168 e River, Fla4 ................................... 1962 23614,912 280,083 D l et e . 21O cludes $5,000 preauthorization study cost. th forually adopted by Congress. Modified plan recommended in House Document 194, 1 iares.s, 1st session. 10dency relief funds. n Ircl..es $ 7,566 for new work on previous project. vevo ,es $19,000 for preauthorization studies but excludes $243,235 contributed funds for ie wcludes $42,083 for preauthorization studies but excludes $130,488 contributed funds for Work. cjudes $20,000 for preauthorization studies. 10 ct as modified by Chief of Engineers in report of June 30, 1961, is complete. WOk"ludes $40,000 preauthorization studies but excludes $42,783 contributed funds for new ei,w reludes $26,712 for preauthorization studies but excludes $36,000 contributed funds for 1.2 Work. 1s1)eferred for restudy. , I $1,000 expended from contributed funds. .ition, 16 rI1ctiv 64 xDen(ded on restudy. uthorized August 28, 1aorA 1963, by Chief of Engineers under section 107, 1960 River and 17 Actu Construction costs exclude $45,811 contributed funds expended for new work. ew' des $28,148 for preauthorization studies but excludes $323,456 contributed funds for e er al cost, including $8,000 preauthorization studies. Excludes $93,000 contributed funds ufor new work. I des $71,303 for new work on previous project and $59,000 preauthorization studies. dn11, $137500 expended from contributed funds for new work. a 1clud es $29,566 for new work and $25,838 for maintenance under previous project. S"'Cludes $26,689 for new work under previous project. S ncludes $10,154 expended for new work under previous project. ncludes $30,000 expended for new work under previous project. 464 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 28. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Study identification Fiscal year costs Reconnaissance Reports:1$816 Angelfish Creek, Fla. .................................... 27 Blind Pass, Fla ......................................... 1 271 Boca Raton Inlet, Fla . ................................. q1)671 Moncrief Creek, Fla. ..................................... 7,396 Okeechobee Waterway, Fla ............................ 46 Detailed project reports:(3) Cross Key Canal, Fla ................................ . 396 Moncrief Creek, Fla. ................................... "236 Okeechobee Waterway, Fla. .......................... 236 1 Reimbursable from revolving fund. Total cost of reconnaissance and detailed project reports. SCost included under new work for Largo Sound Channel. Snagging and clearing for navigation (sec. 8 of 1945 River and HarborAct, Public Law 14, 79th Cong.) ed Supervision and administration relative to recently complet dredging between Federal Bar Channel and Intracoastal Wate way in St. Lucie Inlet, Fla., cost $3. 29. BROWARD COUNTY, FLA., BEACH EROSION CONTROL AND HILLSBORO INLET, FLA., NAVIGATION PROJECT Location. Broward County is on lower east coast of FlOrid 300 miles south of Jacksonville and about 30 miles north of 1~Va Hillsboro Inlet is in northern part of Broward County. ( Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1248.) vrd SExisting project. Provides for Federal participation to to cost of a shore restoration and protection project and a projecta to provide and maintain a channel adequate for small craft n vi tion. Plan provides for restoration of a protective and recrea tional beach at four locations generally 100 feet wide with ber elevation of 10 feet above mean low water, a navigation channe'et by 100 feet from the Intracoastal Waterway to a point 1,500 feet oceanward in Hillsboro Inlet, thence 10 by 150 feet in the oceql jetties on north and south sides of ocean entrance; a permane" td based floating dredge; and on a deferred basis, a trestle-mou n t5 sand-transfer plant, if needed. Mean range of tide in area is or feet. Plane of reference is mean low water. Cost estimate fo new work (1966) is $1,830,000 Federal and $7,989,000 ,1" Federal ($7,980,000 cash contribution and $9,000 for lanl c. Project was authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (I. pI)o' 91, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). cet Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute 90.5 percth of the first cost of beach restoration in the reach between n orto county line and Hillsboro Inlet 90 percent of first cost allocated to beach restoration and 50 percent of first cost allocated to navlgad tion for reach between Hillsboro Inlet and Port Everglades J 72.4 percent of beach restoration in reach between Port Evergla e and south county line; provide all lands and rights-of-way; obtaill he of Engineers of plans and specifications if loc s approval oo Chief interests construct beach erosion features; and furnish assurance BEACH EROSION CONTROL-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 465 tat they will hold the United States free from damages, provide esta aintain adequate public landing or wharf at Hillsboro Inlet, sterhaih a public body to cooperate financially and to provide and aiatel local facilities for navigation, control water pollution, Draoitai n ownership of publicly-owned shores, and maintain all revict Works except the jetties (maintenance of the channel to evert to the United States if sand-transfer plant is constructed). saurances of local cooperation were requested from the local $7 0, 00Estimated contributed funds for new work is CjPerations and results during fiscal year. None. co ditionat end of fiscal year. Work on the project has not cs and financial statement. Only $29,620 Federal cost and S80 contributed cost for preauthorization studies. 30. DUVAL COUNTY, FLA. location. On upper east coast of Florida, within 20 miles of 1daGeorgia State line. Ocean shoreline is about 16 miles o10 .- (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1243.) cost tag project. Provides for Federal participation toward elevato constructing with artificial fill, a beach 60 feet wide at ard tion 11 feet above mean low water with a natural slope sea- ticis and for periodic nourishment for 10 years. Federal par- a latioUn to be 100 percent of the first cost of construction Otlicable to the Federal shore and 50 percent applicable to the he Publicly-owned shore and 55.5 percent of periodic nourish- soutlsts for first 10 years of project life. Mean tidal range at work Jetty in St. Johns River is 4.9 feet. Estimated cost of new ($3801966) is $4,700,000 Federal and $3,850,000 non-Federal ad ri 0000 contributed funds and $50,000 for lands, easements, Act 1hts-of-way). Project was authorized by River and Harbor of 1965 (H. Doc. 273, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). of 4cal cooperation. Local interests must contribute 50 percent Co ta cost of constructing non-Federal publicly-owned shores; year bute 44.5 percent of periodic nourishment costs for first 10 tio0 a of project life; provide all lands, rights-of-way, and reloca- ol '.hold the United States free from damages; control water tiPlon; and furnish assurances that they will maintain con- ae"led public ownership of the shore upon which the amount of Loeral Participation is based during economic life of project. al sponsor is unable to furnish assurances at this time. Esti- Oed contributed funds for new work is $3,800,000. OPerations and results during fiscal year. None. ConOdition nllenced. at end of fiscal year. Work on the project has not Sst and financial statement. Only $54,171 Federal cost for ueauthorization studies. S.31. FORT PIERCE, FLA. 181Location. Fronts Atlantic Ocean and is on coastal barrier and in St. Lucie County which separates Indian River from the 466 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ocean. Area is 120 miles north of Miami and about 225 iles south of Jacksonville. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Ch r 582.) oard Existing project. Provides for Federal participationtoi cost of a local shore restoration and protection project which. ed- volves construction and periodic nourishment for 10 years. rt eral participation amounts to one-half of such costs for tha trt of the ocean shoreline extending 1.2 miles southward ofFad Pierce navigation inlet, and 70 percent of such costs for tiead jacent 0.1 mile shoreline known as Lions Club Beach Park. is range of tide in area is 2.6 feet. Cost estimate (1966)ws $655,000 Federal and $615,000 non-Federal. Project wq authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 84, 89th CoDg' 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Local interests must contributeoeh the costs of protecting and periodically nourishing the reach ee shoreline starting at and extending 1.2 miles south of Ft. h. Inlet and 30 percent of cost of protecting and periodically nrOurai ing 0.1 mile of shoreline known as Lions Club Beach Park; ob c approval by the Chief of Engineers of detailed plans and speci ald tions for the project; furnish all lands and rights-of-Way; furnish assurances that they will maintain continued public 0oWer ship of the publicly-owned shores, exclude permanent hU.h habitation and provide full park facilities at the Lions Club Beach Park, provide periodic nourishment of the beach, and control w4t r pollution. Assurances have been requested from the local spol"S Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on project has not coo menced. for Cost and financial statement. Only $16,250 Federal costor preauthorization studies. 32. PALM BEACH COUNTY FROM LAKE WORTH INLET TO SOUTH LAKE WORTH INLET, FLA. Location. The 15.6-mile reach of shore on east coast of Florida between Lake Worth Inlet and South Lake Worth I lr Town of Palm Beach occupies northern 10.5 miles of sandy bi rier beach island (Palm Beach Island) about 70 miles north Miami. Remainder of island is in towns of Lake Worth Lantn and Manalapan. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 124S,) Existing project. Provides for Federal participation in costS a plan of protection comprising restoration of a protective beqc1 construction and operation of a sand transfer plant, and additiona periodic beach nourishment. Federal funds would be contributed, subject to certain conditions, in an amount equal to 7.5 percentOo initial costs of beach restoration, appurtenant drainage work,yil periodic beach nourishment for 10 years from the year of iiti placement. Federal share of costs for construction, operatioD and maintenance of the sand transfer plant for its first 10 Ye operation would be 19.3 percent up to October 23, 1962, and 21. percent thereafter. Mean tidal range is 2.8 feet. A tide of feet can be expected during hurricanes of medium intensity. Al" BEACH EROSION CONTROL---JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 467 0ed (1966) cost estimate is $535,000 Federal and $5,075,000 I ederal. Existing project was authorized by River and bor Acts of May 17, 1950 (H. Doc. 772, 80th Cong., 2d sess.) July 3, 1958 (H. Doc. 342, 85th Cong., 2d sess.). cal cooperation. Local interests must obtain approval by the r f Engineers of plans and specifications and arrangements Posecution of work; provide lands and rights-of-way; furnish trances that they will assure maintenance of protective meas- aand periodic nourishment of protective beach at suitable in- 'als, including operation of sand transfer plant; control water tion; and continue public ownership and use of publicly owned es. Assurances for construction, operation, and maintenance and transfer plant were received and accepted. Assurances remainder of project have not been furnished. Phipps Park, 'esenting 1,200 feet of shoreline on Palm Beach Island, will be ified for 70 percent Federal participation; provided land is 0ly owned, park includes a zone from mean low water line ding permanent human habitation as specified, park includes creational beach, park provides for preservation of natural urces, park extends landward sufficiently to include dunes, , or other natural features to absorb wave energy and ag effects, and park facilities for public use are provided. IPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Local rests were reimbursed $10,293 for Federal share of cost of ation of sand transfer plant during fiscal year 1965. Main- ace: Hired labor surveys, inspections, and reports. ondi-tion at end of fiscal year. Project is about 31 percent Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to ....... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NW,Work. C1)Propriated.......... $8,650 $10,400 $9,000 $7,500 $10,270 $190,470 fltAena",* 8,329 10,592 8,683 7,967 10,293 190,470 Cpropria ted.................... . ...................... 656 656 656 656 $26,350 preauthorization studies. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 We,,work: trebut e........... $34,827 $43,623 $32,062 $28,007 28,007 $36,923 36,923 $696,261 696,261 Cot... 34,827 43,623 32,062 trib- Rdes $26,850 for preauthorization studies and property or services in lieu of cash con- 33. INSPECTION OF BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS (ey West, Fla., was inspected December 1965. 468 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 34. OTHER AUTHORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROLpROJ For last Cost to June 30106 ame of Name project of project report full Annual see . i8 -d r tion Report Construction nsintensace for- Key West, Fla.......................... 1963 1107,140 Palm Beach County, Fla., from Martin County Line toLake ' Worth 1065 237,161 . Inlet and from South Lake Worth Inlet to Broward County Line. San Juan, P.R................................................ 1965 323,532 .. Virginia Key and Key Biscayne,... Fla..... .. .... ............................ . ....'.. .. . I".. .....I 412,598 -r b u ted 1 Includes $10,800 Federal cost for preauthorization studies but excludes $192,168 contri funds. 2Preauthorization studies cost $37,161 Federal and $26,150 non-Federal. SPreauthorization studies cost $23,532 Federal and $22,400 non-Federal. APreauthorization studies cost $12,598 Federal and $12,750 non-Federal. 35. BISCAYNE BAY, FLA.rt Location. A shallow tidal sound in extreme southeastern p a of Florida. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 1248 a 1249.) Existing project. Project provides for prevention of hurricane tidal flooding through construction of a levee barrier with all gated navigation opening extending across Biscayne Bay fro the mainland to near Fisher Island. Mean range of tideI Miami Harbor is 2.5 feet at entrance and 2.0 feet at Dade COU e 1 Seaport Terminals. Cost estimate (1966) is $2,440,000 Feder and $1,045,000 non-Federal ($860,000 contributed funds ad $185,000 for lands, easements, and rights-of-way). Exisbe project was authorized by 1965 River and Harber Act (11.D O" 213, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). e- Local cooperation. Local interests must provide all lands, eas ments, and rights-of-way; bear 30 percent of the total first costte the project, presently estimated at $860,000, hold the United Stater free from damages; and maintain and operate project works a completion. Requested assurances from local sponsor. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on project has not co" menced. Cost and financial statement. Only $116,386 Federal cost for preauthorization studies. 36. CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA Location. Generally within southeastern 18 counties of FloriO covering an area of about 16,600 square miles. It is comprised Upper St. Johns River basin in northeastern section of projec Kissimmee River basin in central section above Lake Okeechobee, Lake Okeechobee-Everglades area in central and southwestern section, and east coast Everglades area in southeastern section.l e Previous projects. Completed works for control of a Okeechobee were included in and constructed under navigatio' project for Okeechobee Waterway, Fla. (formerly Caloosa hatchee River and Lake Okeechobee drainage areas, Florida), an under provisions of River and Harbor Acts of July 3, 1930, and FLOOD CONTROL---JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 469 August 30, 1935. For further information see Annual Reports, 1948 and 1949. er8 atin project. Project is for flood relief and water con- leveat on and provides principally for: an east coast protective La ee extending from Homestead area north to eastern shore of or Okeechobee near St. Lucie Canal; three conservation areas tficWater impoundment in Everglades area west of east coast pro- astive levee with control structures to effect transfer of water i necessary; local protective works along lower east coast; en- aement of Lake Okeechobee agricultural area by levees and 1 ; enlargement of portions of Miami, North New River, Lalboro, and West Palm Beach Canals; enlargement of existing ea e Okeechobee levees and construction of new levees on north- ital and northwest shore of lake; increased outlet capacity for i1Proved control of Lake Okeechobee; floodway channels in Kiss- 0veee River basin, with suitable control structures to prevent strdrainage; an interrelated system of canals, levees, pumping tati o n s , and structures in southwest Dade County to control Jo e r levels; and facilities for regulation of floods in upper St. tiJofls River basin. Project will provide water control and protec- a'd fromn recurrence of devastating floodwaters from Everglades east local sources, for the highly developed urban area along lower La coast of Florida and for productive agricultural areas around .e Okeechobee (including towns around lake), in the upper Protohas and Kissimmee River basins, and in South Dade County. )u Jeet includes 987 miles of levees, 854 miles of canals, 19 Proje ng plants, and 158 floodway control and diversion structures. oet also provides that upon completion, local interests assume cheation and maintenance of all completed works except Chobanel , locks, and control works for regulation of Lake levees, s Okee- il be and main control structures of conversation areas, which Wieale operated and maintained by the United States. Principal fores of hurricane gates constructed under previous projects a9e Okeechobee Waterway and maintained under existing project CJuly 1, 1950: Gate Nearest town e. NDepth Character over of Year Name sills founds- corn- Actual Miles (feet) tion pleted cost S Clewiston, Fla................................. . 0.0 10 Pile.... 1935 $309,748 4 Lake Harbor, Fla............................ 0.5 10 Rock... 1935 316,938 5 Celle Glade, Fla............................ 4.0 10 ..... do... 1935 350,025 6 0 knal Point, Fla............................... 0.0 10 ..... do... 1935 262,465 Oeechobee, Fla.............................. 6.0 7 Pile...... 1936 373,273 eeare 50 feet wide with available length unlimited. They are constructed of concrete with ati C~Cr gates and have no lift. Gate No. 6 has an auxiliary culvert spillway with auto. cntrol. Moore Haven lock serves as hurricane gate structure 1. ArQ. Principalfeatures of locks and dam .. J S-791 lock and dam S-65 lock S-65A lock S-65B lock S-65C lock S-65D lock S-65E lock LTJ Nearest town.... ............ At Olga............ Frostproof 23 miles. Avon Park 26 miles. Sebring 20 miles.... Sebring 25 miles... Okeechobee 14 miles.. Okeechobee 10 miles. Miles from mouth of river. .. .. 6.........6.. ......... 56 ................ 46................ 32................ 25................16. .............. 12.' 3 0 Lock dimensions (feet).............. 50 by 250.......... 30 by 90........... 30 by 90.......... 30 by 90........... 30 by 90.......... 30 by 90........... 30 by 90.1- Normal lift (feet)...... .. 2.5.............. 4.2............... 6.3............... 6.0................. 7.2.......... 5.8 ............... 4.6. y Elevation of normal pool surface (feet). 3.0........ ..... 50.5.............. 46.3.............. 40.0............ 34.0.............. 26.8.............. 21.0.O Depth of sills (feet)........ ....... 14................ 6.... ....... 6.................. 6.6........... ...... 6.6... ...... ... ...... 6................. 6. Character of foundation ............. Piles in clay... .. Piles in sand........ Piles in sand........ Piles in sand........ Piles in sand....... Piles in sand........ Piles in sand. Kind of dam........................ Movable... ... None.............. None.............. None.............. None.............. None.............. None. Type of construction....... ....... Reinforced concrete Reinforced concrete Reinforced concrete Reinforced concrete Reinforced concrete Reinforced concrete Reinforced concrete rigid frame. rigid frame rigid frame. rigid frame. rigid frame. Percent complete................ 100.. ..... 100 52. ................ ................ 100................ 99. ... .. 100. ............... 100. Estimated contract cost........... 2 3,803,65.5...... 2$1,194,132.......$1,550,000........ 2$921,819.......... 2$1,092,326....... 2$1,130,835.......2$1,269,282. 1 Operation and care of S-79 lock and dam is a Federal responsibility. 2 Actual contract cost. O z z FLOOD CONTROL--JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 471 cost estim. testmate for new work (1966) is $269 million Federal funds, Den1dillion contributed funds, and river and harbor funds ex- 1d on previous projects. Local interests' costs in reviewing Pdla est. and specifications are expected to be $250,000. In addition, 0c ated. cost to local interests of lands, rights-of-way, and re- ions is $65 million. isting project was authorized by the following: EExAct Act Work authorized Documents Jae 1948 First phase of comprehensive plan for flood control and other 30, H. Doe. 643, 80th Cong., 2d seas. (eon- DL31954 Murposes. tains latest published map). S Modification and expansion of authorization to include entire H. Doe. 643, 80th Cong., 2d ses ly 14,1960 eonprehensive plan of improvement. et.S23,1962 Canals, levees and water control and drainage structures in S. Doe. 53, 86th Cong., 1st seas. Nicodemus slough area, Glades County. bo . Flood protection onBoggy Creek near Orlando........... S. Doe. 125, 87th Cong., 2d sess. D: Flood protection p in Cutler Drain area, near Miami.......... S. D)oc. 123, 87th Cong., 2d sess. o *.....lood control and drainage works for South Dade County ....S. )oc. 138, 87th Cong., 2d sess. Project for Shingle Creek, between Clear Lake and Lake Toh- S. Doe. 139, 87th Cong., 2d sess. -. opekaliga, for flood control and major drainage, including Do. development of Reedy Creek Swamp. .* Improvement of easterly section of West Palm Beach Canal S. Doe. 146, 87th Cong., 2d sess. Oct.27,1965 for flood control and major drainage. Primary works for flood control and major drainage in South- S. Doe. 20, 89th Cong., 1st seas. bo. west Dade County. SPrimary works for flood control and major drainage in Hen- H. Doe. 102, 88th Cong., 1st sess. dryCounty. lo9ca l Cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash, fol- .w'g Percent so I rentages of total contract cost and supervision and ad- dAlo Cotrol Percent cash Work authorized contribution uJh 0 194 o'3 . . First phase of comprehensive plan.......................................15.0 * *54 Ot. 14,1960."' Second phase of comprehensive plan.....................................20.0 **3,.62 .. Nicodemus Slough area.... ......................................... 31.5 bo . . West Palm Beach Canal................................................ 12.8 Boggy Creek basin................................................... 29.7 . Shingle Creek basin.................................................... 25.9 b . .. . South Dade County area............................................ 19.2 t 27 i*96i ... Reedy Creek Swamp......... .......................................... 150.0 ' *o. . Southwest Dade County............................................. 46'0 Hendry County area......... ........................... 19.8 sharing on this item includes all costs, including engineering and design and land. SLocal mt d, ocal interests must also provide lands, rights-of-way, spoil- oisal areas; hold United States free from damages; bear cost of ttenance and operation of all works except those having to do S regulation of Lake Okeechobee and main control structures fec servation areas; construct and maintain lateral drainage DrLoeltes; prohibit encroachment on flood-carrying capacity of im- dve channels; and assume cost of construction of all new high- tiltbr.idges, relocations of existing bridges, and alterations to lor es incident to construction of project. Central and Southern adotda Flood Control District, representative of local interests, assu e d resolutions August 1, 1949, and September 15, 1954, wvou ng United States that requirements of local cooperation I19Q4 be supplied for work authorized by Flood Control Acts of and 1954, respectively. Assurances for work authorized by 472 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Flood Control Act of 1962 were accepted by District Engie April 17, 1964, and May 5 and 18, 1964. Assurances haveld received but not accepted for the works authorized by the Fladd Control Act of 1960. Assurances have been requested for theey ditional works authorized by Flood Control Act of 19 65 butts have not been received. Total estimated contributed fund' $56 million. Operations and results during fiscal year. Work accomplished was as follows: New work (contract) : 9 Relocation of bridges ................................... ' Construction of: 3807,820 Channels and canals .............................. 03 3,66 Levees ............................................ 9,1 33 Pumping plants ................................ .. 4 6513 Floodway control and diversion structures ........... 5 ,619 Engineering and design ........................... 053,511 Supervision and administration ..................... 1,382,380 Total applied cost .................................... 14 ,945 Undistributed cost .................................... Maintenance:514 Patrol, inspection, and maintenance of lake levee slopes.... Periodic and miscellaneous surveys, inspections, 89,926 repairs, and operations.......... .................. 6, Operation and care of facilities ....................... , Install public address system at S-79 ..................... 4,192 Clear culverts and hurricane gate structures ............... 4 Clean out landslide toe ditches and berms on Hoover dike (Lake Okeechobee levees) ............... 81 Stabilization of crown of new and enlarged levees L-D3 ... . 2s2, Construct fence along right-of-way L-D3 .................. 4,2 Fertilize grass, L-D1, 2, 3 ............. *............. 1,54 Construct fence along right-of-way L-49 . ................. 16, Replace damaged dolphin S-79 ......................... 996 Engineering and design ............................. 48 Supervision and administration ................................ Operating and care: (a) Features completed under prev' navigation project for Okeechobee Waterway and being Mael tamined under this project: (1) Levee about 68 miles longsoe erally following south shore of Lake Okeechobee and north. ; levee 15.8 miles long; (2) spillways at Ortona and St. Lucie loC0 part-time operation of Moore Haven lock gates for discharge C0o trol; 5 hurricane gates; 20 gated drainage culverts around ele Okeechobee; 16 spillways along St. Lucie Canal and radio t ect phone network. (b) Features completed under existing PrOJ 1 ) to be maintained with operation and maintenance funds:. () Levees 48, 49, and 50-total length of 45 miles- (2) spijl . structures S-10, S-11, S-12, and S-18, and (3) S-79 lock and dcOr (c) In addition to the actual facilities listed above it is neceSs.rl under operation and maintenance to continue meteorologi'a studies, water level records, stream gaging stations, etc., f0 proper regulation of the level of Lake Okeechobee and storage water in conservation areas 1, 2, and 3.e Regulation: Corps: Lake Okeechobee stages generally Wee s t a ge held close to the desired schedule except for normal drop in during the early part of the winter dry period. Very heavy ri1 FLOOD CONTROL----JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 473 al in January and February in the Kissimmee Basin resulted in a"OW to Lake Okeechobee during the last half of the year which Wa Over 750 percent above normal. Total net water supply to the lake was 2,190,000 acre-feet which was just about within U er one-third of historical values. Substantial releases through tt. Lucie Canal-Caloosahatchee River were required to control othe lake despite pumping by Central and Southern Florida Flood a rol District from the lake into the conservation areas during arch, April and May. Releases of 564,250 acre-feet through CaoSahatchee River and 150,000 acre-feet through the St. Lucie Wtere made during the year, of which 314,000 acre-feet or abe 55t percent was made in June-when all conservation areas 1 ee ull and could not take any more water from the lake. Sup- ied about 530,000 acre-feet from Lake Okeechobee to maintain 40,000 1 Project canals and supply irrigation water to over Col0sacres of farmlands. liow nservation area No. 1 generally followed regulation schedule. hrWever, hydrograph was marked by a number of characteristic tarpD rises due to the large inflow capacity compared to the rela- teely small storage capacity followed by a gradual reduction in srge as the pool was brought back to schedule within the 30-day Wasecast periods. As in the previous year, rainfall during June Worunusually heavy. A tropical disturbance moving up through Oriuda contributed most of the 19.74 inches which fell during the hislth This rainfall was the greatest amount of any June of u Orical record. As a result of this rainfall and attendant arli g from the agricultural area, the stage in area al No. 1 at end of the year was almost 2 feet above conservation schedule and s to e6ate in the structure 10 spillways were open clear of the water 7 3ect the maximum possible discharge from the pool. About eet of acre-feet were released through structure 10; 120,000 acre- feet th of water came from this pool to maintain desirable stages in tearea east of the pool. el0 Onservation area No. 2A followed the regulation schedule abely until about mid-January when the stage began to drift Ove desired stage after initiation of large releases into the area s o conservation area No. 1. However, the pool was back on lar edule by mid-April. Rainfall in June of 16.85 inches, exetely from the tropical disturbance moving up the State, was Ceeded only once in June during the period of rainfall record. 'tend of year stage was about 2.4 feet above schedule and all ee in the structure 11 spillways were open clear of the water to elt 9 68o)000 6 the maximum possible discharge from the pool. About acre-feet were released through structure 11. About co,00 acre-feet of water were discharged from this pool to east coastareas. COnservation area No. 3A reached regulation schedule for the rt time in June 1966 since the encircling levees were completed Il July 1963. Regulatory releases of excess water to lower con- Servation area No. 3A to scheduled heights were initiated through f(eture 12 on June 3, 1966. However, discharge of water trans- arred from Lake Okeechobee by Flood Control District pumping Project pumps had previously been initiated on March 5, 1966 474 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 under the interim regulation schedule. It is estimated tht 180,000 acre-feet was released at structure 12 since that date under the interim schedule and agreement to supply wateulie Everglades National Park. Regulatory releases during feet through S-12 totaled 87,000 acre-feet. About 310,000 acrets were released to the park through S-12. At end of year all gate in structure 12 were open clear of the water to effect the maxinuM possible discharge to the park. Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District. CoM pleted canals, structures, and pumping stations were operatedby the Flood Control District to supply water to irrigated ar en maintain desirable water levels in project canals and to prey to salinity problems in coastal areas. About 1,334,000 acre-feet water were pumped from developed areas into Lake OkeechObed and the conservation areas and about 367,000 acre-feet transfer h from Lake Okeechobee to conservation areas by pumping throuh agricultural canals. This pumping, plus water released fronm the lake and conservation areas during dry periods resulted inlar benefits throughout the agricultural and east coast areas. e agreement was reached with the State of Florida to transfer water from Lake Okeechobee to Everglades National Park at rat ranging from 1,000 to 140 cubic feet per second depending o011 stage of Lake Okeechobee. The - agreed • " Corps p . to repay Central _., of and Southern Florida Flood Control District for the cost o pumping this water with project pumps into the conservaYtiol areas for discharge to the park at Tamiami Trail; the basis of payment to be the total volume released to the park at S-12 1l accordance with the above schedule. From March 5 to Jt1ne 3 releases to the park were made at scheduled rate of 1,000 cub feet per second. By that date the three conservation areas had reached their desired stages under the approved regulatio' schedules and this pumping was terminated coincident with the beginning of regulatory releases from area 3A into the park. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 50 percent complete. Planning for entire project was begun in Noverber 1948 and has been continued. For construction completed before fiscal year 1966, see Annual Reports for 1960-1965. Construction completed under existing project during fiscal year aneferred Date tra contro to flood Feature Construction period distri fordd operati maint Channels and canals: C-16. ................................... Apr. 1963-Aug. 1965......... Not transferred C-43 see. 3B ....... ........... ....................... Do. Dec. 1964-June 1966......... C-bOA.............................. Do. 1965 Apr. 1965-Sept. 1965... . Oct. 20, .... -lO C.... t... .......... ... .... ::. ............................ ....................... do.......... ..... .. .......................... C-111 sec. 1... ........... Apr. 15, 1966 Levees: May 1964-Mar. 1966........ L-D 4.... .................... see. 2.. L-31D4E . . . . .. ................... Nov. 1964-Jan. 1966......... Not transferred ............... July 1965-June 1966......... Do. Drainage facilities:* *....... S-18C ...................... S-20(....... ........... ...................... May 1964-Mar. 1966........ Apr. 15, 1966. S-21A ...................... .......................... July 1965-June 1966......... Not transferre ......................... Apr. 1965-Feb. 1966......... Do. s-41........................ Apr. 1963-Aug. 19615......... Dec. 14, 1965 s-65C.................................. Feb. 1963-Dec. 1965......... Feb. 25, 8-119 .......................... Apr. 1965-Mar. 1966........ Not transferr s-121 ............................................... .... Apr. 1965-Dec. 1965......... )ec. 15, 196 FLOOD CONTROL-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 475 Date transferred to flood control Feature Construction period district for operation and maintenance 3-124 -i 1 3-124. .. ......... ..................................Dec. 1965-Apr. 1966..... June 21, 1966 -1"9. ..................................... 5-125 .... Dec. 1965-May 1966........ ..... ... Do. -1.4. ...... ..... ..... ..... ... -........... .......................... Nov. 1964-Oct. 1965......... . .. Oct. 1965-Mar. 1966........ Not transferred Dec. 10, 1965 Apr. 1965-Feb. 1966......... Not transferred Mar. 1965-May 1966........ Dos AllFederally maintained features of project were generally in oocondition at end of fiscal year. Status of works under contract at end of fiscal year Approximate Feature Construction started percent complete i i andceCanals to Everglades National Park .............Not started............ ..... ... o,...... 83 Mar. 1965............. 90 a.Sec3a34 ... . . . .... 3 c 4 * .. ................................... ........ Oct. 1964.............. 57 4see 2 .................................................. Aug. 1965............. 35 Not started......... $1 and 1 ..... .......................... Apr. 1965............. 0311C- 03N, and C-03. ..... Dec. 1965.............. 38 11sections2 and 3.. ....... ............................ May 1966.............. 5 11 t ..ext.. ....................... ................. May 1966............. 7 Sec. 113(part)*..... e. ............ ......... ......................... M ay 1966............. May 1966............. * ......... ........................... Mar. 1965............. 68 18sereander........................................ May 1966............. 7 Wsec.1........ ...................... .... Not started......... ..........o .9 75ec 1................... ... ................... Oct. 1965............... 99 7 Aug. 1965............. 21 eee. ............................................... Jan. 1966................... 30 7 xtension.. ... .... ................................... June 1966.......... a control structure................ ................. Sept.1965............. Ufeatures: ....... o......8 andS-20A ................................................ Not started............ 'osue... . **.................... .... . ....................... Dec. 1965.............. 38 ... ....... ...................... ****: ............... ..... Apr. 1965........... 99 .ccnerotA.......................................... t5A.. Mar. 1965.......... 90 July1965................... 52 Dec. 1965............. 99 **** .. .................................................. Oct. 1964.............. 57 5Ic a ionur *** .. ...................... .......................... Feb. 1965............. .................................................. Not started............. ..............o and -135machinery....... June 1966............. ....... ... o. ' i... ..... .. .. .... ... ... .. .. .. .. ............... .. May 1966............. 3 Oct. 1965............... 20 , °i * o *................... ................ ............. Not started............ Apr. 1965............. 99 73and 67 .......... ....... .... .............. Dec. 1965............. 38 May 1966............. 7 77 and 8-178................................................ May 1966.......... 5 Dec. 1965............. 38 S.... ........... ............... .................... Apr. 1965............. 99 4 *****.... ........................................ Dec. 1965............. 38 remaining is to complete construction of features under and all remaining works described in paragraph Existing Total Federal costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, 34,479,164 for new work (including $283,869 preauthoriza- lies), $2,950,221 for maintenance, and $714,413 for opera- Scare, a total of $138,143,798. In addition, $25,350,624 ted funds expended for new work. 476 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement ..- ' REGULAR FUNDS Totei 1o Fiscal year................ 1062 1063 1964 1965 1966 June New Appropriated......... work: $14,000,000 $13,500,000 $12,500,000 $12,150,000 $16,320,000 $131245,86 34,479,1'4 Mantrenance: Cost .................. •4t~o 3 183 11,664,48015,329,40017,011,87310,279,33911,980,297 3 474 Appropriated.......... 246,700 218,600 291,000 288,500 442,800 3'3 Cost................. 226,719 244,541 310,462 268,338 327,043 SExcludes River and Harbor funds expended on previous projects (see costand roPy statement for Okeechobee Waterway, Fla., project for these costs) and $15,543 for received without reimbursement. Includes $283,869 for preauthorization studies. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year ................ 1962 I 1063 1964 [196 196 IJ 1962 year............... 163 1964 16 1966 TotFiscal New work: Contributed........... Cost.... ....... 37. FOUR RIVER BASINS, FLORIDA l14 Location. Area covers about 6,000 square miles withilect counties in central and southwest peninsular Florida. Prough, includes all or part of four main stream basins-the Hillsbororee Oklawaha, Withlacoochee, and Peace Rivers-and all Of th smaller coastal basins north of Tampa, Fla., drained Pithlachascotee and Anclote Rivers and Lake Tarpon. . eroe Existing project. Provides for control of floods and iMproo ment of drainage, and water conservation through construeres. of necessary canals, levees, reservoirs, and control struct More specifically, project provides for: Green Swamp arec conservation area and three storage reservoirs with necess canals and control structures: Hillsborough River-four floo storage reservoirs, with necessary channels, control structure$A and levees; Oklawaha River-levee on north shore of Lake Ap o. improvement of part of river channel and a west bank levee belo Moss Bluff lock and dam, and replacement of the lock and d0 Withlacoochee River-one flood-storage reservoir with otnl canals and control structures; Peace River-Peace Creek eaol and control structures and improvements to existing water cO.t. and drainage features; Gulf Coastal areas-Lake Tarpon : oe let canal and control structure; Anclote River: control structth vorw control st and channel improvement; Pithlachascotee River: reservoir o outlet canals and control structures. Moss Bluff Lock Nearest town .. ............................. 20 miles Name of nearest town ........................... Ocala, Fla. Distance above mouth of river ..................... 65.5 miles Lock dimensions ................................. 30 x 125 feet Normal lift....................................18.0 feet Elevation of normal pool surface ...... I.............58 feet Depth of sills ................................... 12 feet Character of foundation ............. .............. Piles in sand Kind of dam ................................... Nonerete Type of construction ............................. Reinforced con Percent complete ................................ Not started Estimated cost .............................. .... $740,000 FLOOD CONTROL---JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT , 477 fuids and $40cost funstimated for new million work (1966) is $56,300,000 Federal contributed cost ($10,800,000 au s and $29,200,000 for other costs). contributed Existing project was 2d ~orized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 585, 87th Cong., ss.). oca cooperation. Local interests must furnish all klnds, and rightod f-way; provide all alterations or replacements of publi et. rivate utilities, roads, bridges (except railroad bridges), al.; hold United States free from damages; operate and maintain a1 Project works after completion; construct and maintain such abyl ated works as are necessary to realize benefits made avail- fir sty the project works; and contribute in cash 17 percent of cost of construction ($10,800,000). OPterations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- clstruction planning on the project continued. Contract for 2struction 'of the Tampa Bypass from Tampa Bay to U.S. High- eay 41 was awarded May 23, 1966, but construction has not com- 1 ed. Construction of Lake Tarpon Canal commenced April ar~ld 66 . Contract costs were $11,000. Engineering and design respeervision iectivelyr and administration cost $319,157 and $37,115, COldition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project com- I.eed April 8, 1966, and is 1 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year Total to . 1962 1963 1904 1965 1960 June 30, 19661 New lwor. S riated....................................... 202,200 $880,000 $1,424,690 ....... ............ .0.................... 199,129 362,843 904,462 Reldes $342,490 for preauthorization studies. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Nal yer Total to .......... ..1962 63 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 0 atributed................... ...................... Co ......... $99,450 $99,450 ........................ L.... ............ ............ 4j4299...4,429 4,429 38. PHILLIPPI CREEK BASIN, FLA.- of Jcation. In southwest peninsular Florida about 50 miles south TaMapa.•.lThe watershed comprises about 58 square miles of coasta Catal lowlands, all within Sarasota County except for a small g area in southern Manatee County. aqi xisting project. Provides primary works for flood control t ajor drainage by enlargement of main stream and its major aUt~ary channels, realinement of channel at US. Highway 41, alprovision of spillway and inlet structures, and appurtenant orks. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $5 million Federal 3,400,000 non-Federal ($1,300,000 non-Federal funds and 478 REPORT OF THIE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 $2,100,000 for lands and relocations). Project was authorized bY 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 156, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). s2 Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash 2- percent of contract price and costs of supervision and admninisje d tion thereof for each part of the primary work to be proVi. by the Corps (estimated at $1,300,000); construct and maints' associated works; provide all lands and rights-of-waY; provio all necessary new highway bridges, alterations or replacemen te bridges, roads, miscellaneous utilities, and other existing improbe ments, except railroad bridges and approaches; hold the Unijld States free from damages; prevent encroachment on the floo carrying capacity of the improved channels; and operate and maedl tamin the works after completion. Assurances have been reqUet from the local sponsor. Operations and results during the fiscal year. None. ot Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on the project has o commenced. Cost and financial statement. Only $42,823 Federal cost for preauthorization studies. 39. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS 4 ida Following features transferred to Central and Southern Florid Flood Control District were inspected quarterly during theoyer01 a total cost of $6,701: 11 pumping stations; about 60 contr structures; about 300 miles of canal; about 530 miles of levees, and improvements of Arch Creek, including control structure. 40. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress as amended (preauthorization)rt Reconnaissance report prepared and detailed project rePof initiated to consider a plan of preventing recurring flooding Hogtown Creek (Clear Lake Area), Gainesville, Fla. E*g neering costs were $26,793. Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue cork (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Federal costs for fiscal year were $8,035 for advance prepara tion and $24,208 in connection with hurricane alert for Hurricanle Betsy. 41. SURVEYS Hired labor costs all Federal funds during fiscal year were: Navigation studies ....................................... 27 $15,2203 Flood control studies .................................... 272'48 Beach erosion studies ................................... 8 '55 Hurricane studies ........................................ 415 W atershed studies ...................................... 43 Total ................................................ GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-JACKSONVILLE, FLA., DISTRICT 479 . 42. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA fired labor costs for flood plain information studies incurred o ing fiscal year were $11,959 for Charlotte and North Lee Iu ties, Fla.; $1,342 for Guayanilla River, P.R.; $3,785 for for aa River, P.R.; $176 for La Plata River, P.R.; and $11,397 Sanati R~iver, P.R. Completed flood plain studies Dn Requesting agency Date completed Federal cost Baaon Rver, P.R.......Department of Pubic Works, Commonwealth of Puerto April 1965...... $12,863 County Rico, SFla...... Division of River, P.R*...Department Water Resources of State of Florida........ L March 1965..... 29,968 of Public Works, Commonwealth of Puerto June 196...... 21,961 Rico. MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT * seThis district comprises a small portion of southeastern Tennes- Te Western Georgia, western Florida, all of Alabama south of soheSsee River Basin, eastern Mississippi, and a small portion of theastern Louisiana embraced in drainage basins tributary to PearGulf of Mexico, west of Aucilla River Basin, to and including tea rl River Basin. It includes section of Gulf Intracoastal Wa- rvay from St. Marks, Fla., to Lake Borgne Light No. 41, La. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Flood Control-Continued 2. Apalachicola Bay, Fla ... 482 29. Okatibbee Reservoir, Miss. 509 2. quatic plant control .... 483 30. Tombigbee River tribu- 4.1ayou La Batre, Ala .... 484 taries, Miss. and Ala... 509 5.1 loxi Harbor, Miss .... 485 31. Yellow Jacket Creek, Ho- lack Warrior and Tom- gansville, Ga ........ 510 6. gbee Rivers, Ala ... 486 32. Inspection of completed 7 7Con River, Ala.. Secour Bar arrabelle 489 flood control projects ... 511 and Har- Other authorized flood con- 33. 8. bor, Fla............... 490 trol projects ......... 511 9.]auphin Island Bay, Ala. 491 34. Flood control work under ast Pass Channel from special authorization ... 512 Gulf of Mexico into Choctawhatchee B a y, Multiple-Purpose Projects 10. Pla ............ 492 Including Power 11. east Pearl River, iss. 493 11.ulf Intracoastal Water- 35. Alabama-Coosa Rivers, Way between Apalachee Ala. and Ga.. .......... 512 Bay, Fla., and Mexican A. Allatoona Reservoir, 12. border (Mobile Dist.) 493 Coosa River Basin, 13.GulfPort Harbor, Miss... 495 Ga ................ 514 14,Mobile Harbor, Ala.... 496 B. Carters Dam and Res- 15. alania City Harbor, Fla. 498 ervoir, Ga ........ 516 16. p]ascagoula Harbor, Miss. 499 C. Claiborne loc k and ass Christian Harbor, dam, Ala.......... 516 17 1Mss.. 500 D. Jones Bluff lock and 18. Pearl River, Miss. and La. 501 dam, Ala........... 517 19. Harbor, Fla... sensacola 503 E. Millers Ferry lock and 20.Perdido Pass Channel, Ala. 504 dam, Ala.......... . 518 2t. teloving water-hyacinth 504 36. Apalachicola, Chattahoo- aterway connecting Tom- chee, and Flint Rivers, bigbee and Tennessee Ala., Ga., and Fla .... 518 22 . Rivers, olf and Ala. and Miss.. 505 A. Buford Dam and Res- Jordan Rivers, ervoir, Ga......... 522 93. Miss ................. 506 B. Columbia loc k and leconnaissance and condi- dam, Ala. and Ga... 523 24, tion surveys .......... 506 Other authorized naviga- C. Jim Woodruff lock and 25., Ntion projects .......... dam, Ga. and Fla... 524 avigation work under D. Lazer Creek Dam and Special authorization ... 507 Reservoir, Ga ...... 526 E. Lower Auchumpkee 26. Reach Erosion Control Creek Dam and Res- 6Authorized beach erosion control project....... ervoir, Ga......... 527 507 F. Spewrell Bluff Dam and 27, Flood Control Reservoir, Ga....... 527 28. Armuchee Creek, Ga .... 507 G. Walter F. George lock Jackson and East Jackson, and dam, Ala. and Miss. .................. 508 G a. .. .............. 528 482 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ysge Multiple-Purpose Projects Page General Investigations 31 Including Power-Continued Surveys 53138. H. West Point Dam and Reservoir, Chattahoo- chee River Basin, Ga. 39. Collection and study o 31 and Ala ........... 529 basic data ....... * 37. Scheduling flood control 531 reservoir operations ... 531 40. Research and development 1. APALACIHICOLA BAY, FLA. t Of Location. On coast of northwest Florida 160 miles e 1o) Pensacola Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 126 Previous projects. For details, see page 1833, Annual ReP for 1915, and page 689, Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. (a) A channel 10 feet deep and 100e wide from 10-foot depth in Apalachicola Bay, across St. Geor Island, to within 300 feet of gulf shore, thence increasing t1l1? formly in width to 200 feet at shore and continuing witQ e width to 10-foot depth in the Gulf of Mexico, with twin je extending from dune line to outer end of channel; (b) an i ; bar channel, 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide, in Apalachicola l 0 (c) a boat basin 200 by 880 feet and 9 feet deep at Apalachicqde Fla., with a connecting channel 9 feet deep and 80 feet ** el through Scipio Creek to Apalachicola River; (d) a chanl l known as Link Channel, 10 feet deep and 150 feet wide, Apalachicola Bay; (e) a channel generally parallel to shore e t Eastpoint, Fla., 6 feet deep, 100 feet wide, and about 6,000 de to long, with a connecting channel 6 feet deep and 100 feet W~feet water of same depth in St. George Sound; (f) a channelti deep and 100 feet wide through Bulkhead Shoals, connect000 Apalachicola Bay with St. George Sound; and (g) a 6- bY 1 o foot channel about 1 mile long, generally parallel to shore at Mile, Fla., with a 6- by 100-foot connecting channel to water the same depth in Apalachicola Bay. Mean range of tid throughout this harbor is 1.6 feet. Extreme range, except durirl. storms, is about 3 feet. Plane of reference is mean low Water. Improvements at Two Mile were authorized November 21, 196 by Chief of Engineers under authority in section 107, River dre Harbor Act of 1960. Other features of existing project ,ve, authorized by River and Harbor Acts of September 3, 1954 (Its Doc. 557, 82d Congress, 2d sess.), July 3, 1958, and prior ac For details see Annual Report for 1962. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. de- Terminal facilities. Consist of pile-and-timber wharves ade quate for existing commerce. , e Operations and results during fiscal year. U.S. pipeline dredge Guthrie, operating in St. George Island channel March 3 to 1l and May 24 to 27, 1966, removed 115,181 cubic yards of material at a cost of $27,107. Surveys, engineering, design, supervlisio and administration cost $10,445. ed Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, autllori by 1954 River and Harbor Act, was completed in 1959, includi reimbursement to local interest for approved work, as authorised RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 483 y 1958 River and Harbor Act. Improvements at Two Mile ectre completed in September 1964. Total cost for existing proj- ete o June 30, 1966, was $1,754,383, of which $912,337 was for cha ork and $842,046 for maintenance. Controlling depths of Ch4lnels were: St. George Island channel, 10.0 feet; inner bar 196nel, 11.0 feet; Scipio Creek channel and basin, 8.5 feet (June Eastchannel, feet);andLink 10 feet (May 1964); Two Mile channel, 6 Point channel, 6 feet (June 1966). Cost and financial statement 1alYear Total to 1962 1903 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 XeWwork. . opriated............................ 2$118,600 $6,303 .... $1,047,296 matenac 'e................................. 312,888 111,669............ I 1,046,950 Proriated ..........$15,500 $16,000 26,000 37,000 $42,000 1,015,434 . ................. 15,372 14,289 27,829 36,836 37,552 1,010,812 a2ucludes $184,613 for new work and $168,766 for maintenance on previous projects. $2,500 2cludsappropriation in fiscal year 1963, not previously reported. S$2,403 expended in fiscal year 1963, not previously reported. L 2. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL 1h cation. Navigable waters, tributary streams, connecting c anels, and other allied waters in Mobile District. icaX'stting project. Provides for control and progressive erad- aq1.ai of water-hyacinth, alligatorweed, and other obnoxious cotlc plant growths from navigable waters, tributary streams, i ect~1ng channels and other allied waters of the United States, clOmbined interest of navigation, flood control, drainage, agri- C1plure, fish and wildlife conservation, public health, and related furposes, including continued research for development of most ective and economic control measures in cooperation with other ederal and State agencies in accordance with report of Chief of laineers, House Document 37, 85th Congress, 1st session. Esti- IVIoted Federal cost for new work for that portion of project in ioedile District (1966) is $382,000. Existing project was author- Ced by section 104, 1958 River and Harbor Act (HT.Doc. 37, 85th og., 1st sess.). Section 104, River and Harbor Act of 1962, 0difled authorizing act to provide research and planning cost D'or to construction shall be borne fully by the United States. ac tion 104 River and Harbor Act of 1965, modified authorizing to include water of the United States and for control of Urasian water milfoil. qocal cooperation. Local interests must agree to hold the Deited States free from damages that may occur from operations Ierformed in connection with this project, and participate to extent of 30 percent of cost of program. Requirements are being et il Florida, Louisiana, and Georgia. }perations and results during Slant growths in infested areasfiscal year. Treatment of aquatic was as follows: Florida: Con- ]raetoras spray plant operating in Grassy-Munson Chain, Eight jVe PondO Ochlockonee River, and Apalachicola River sprayed ested areas at a cost of $7,101 including $2,308 contributed 484 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 funds. Georgia: Under contract approved September 1965, the Georgia State Game and Fish Commission initiated field operle tions on lower Flint River between Albany and Lake Seminole- Billing has not been received for this work. Louisiana: Contrad tor's spray plant operating in tributaries to Pearl River sprad infested areas at a cost of $8,262 including $3,312 contrib 3Th funds. Research carried on under two contracts cost $28'94. Engineering, design, supervision, and administration cost $3,th Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning in connection Id State of Alabama is being continued. Research prografinitl in 1959, is being continued. Field operations were initiated a Florida, April 1960; Louisiana, June 1960; and Georgia, may 1961. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year................j 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jn CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1 Includes $21,940, $5,454, and $21,430 contributed by Florida, Georgia, and Louisin* re spectively. 3. BAYOU LA BATRE, ALA. Wto Location. A tidal stream about 10 miles long, emptyin1 6t Mississippi Sound on southern coast of Mobile County, Ala., ae:n 10 miles northwest of Cedar Point, the southern tip of wes mainland shore of Mobile Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Sraro Chart 1267.) Existing project. Provides for a 12- by 100-foot channel fromt that depth in Mississippi Sound to a point about 2,800 feet s.~e of the highway bridge, thence a channel 12 by 75 feet to the br 'd an overall distance of about 33,500 feet. Mean tidal range is o feet, and extreme, except during storms, is 3/, feet. Plan reference is mean low water. Existing project was authorizedby 1965 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 327, 88th Cong., 2d ses5" contains latest published map) and prior acts. Local cooperation. Fully complied with.in Terminal facilities. Wooden wharves at seafood processi. plants and public launching ramp. Facilities adequate for e%1 ing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- tractors' pipeline dredge Pontchartrain, operating in Bayou~ Batre channel June 29 to 30, 1966, removed 35,250 cubic yards of material at a cost of $5,073. Engineering, design, superVisxi RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE. ALA., DISTRICT 485 aid administration cost $4,837 Maintenance: Contractors' dredge Moreland II, operating in Bayou La Batre channel October 25 to December 12, 1965, removed 290,954 cubic yards of material at a cost of $42,562. Surveys, engineering, design, supervision, Coadninistration cost $6,512. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, prior to modi- authorized in 1965, was completed in 1956. Work author- tizlon lie in 1965 began in June and is scheduled for completion in vember 1966. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS l Fi ... ear Total to - ... ... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work. Dropriate d........................ $156,000 $255,000 tenance: *..... ............. ............. ... 9,910 109,867 Appropriate opt, d d......... $16,000 $908 ....................... 50,000 270,401 ..... 104,729 960 ........................ 49,074 269,475 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ear eal Total to ............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 New ork coa e............. .................................... $10,500 1$10,500 tated cost for providing spoil dikes for 1965 authorization. r 4. BILOXI HARBOR, MISS. 32 Location. On Mississippi Sound in southeastern Mississippi, east iles by water Pascagoula Harbor, Miss., and 14 miles west of Miss. ea of Gulfport Harbor, (See Coast and Geodetic survey ahrt 1267.) for 1938. f~. eVious projects. For details see page 744, Annual Report 12Zisting project. A continuous channel about 23 miles long, , feet deep, and 150 feet wide from Mississippi Sound, passing fest of Deer Island, to 12-foot depth in Back Bay, thence 12 8 deep and 100 feet wide in Back Bay, Cranes Neck, and iYou Bernard to Air Force Terminal, about mile 2.6, and widen- alor easing sharp bends, and maintaining existing channel elo/ northerly side of U.S. Highway 90 bridge, from main Ceannel in Biloxi Harbor to entrance to Ott Bayou, to 6 feet , 4 9l 40 feet wide, and about 1 mile long. Under ordinary con- lons, mean tidal range is about 1.8 feet. Plane of reference is ~1an low water. That portion of project providing a 12- by 0-'foot channel in Mississippi Sound west of Deer Island is to be oestudied and excluded from foregoing cost estimate as a result 'of local interests dredging a channel east of Deer Island which oOVides for 12-foot navigation. Estimated cost (1962) of this .trilon is $274,000. That portion of project providing an en- fance channel 6 feet deep, 50 feet wide, and about 1,800 feet long o i1t Old Fort Bayou, as authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act, lactive and excluded from foregoing cost estimate. Esti- 486 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 mated cost (1954) of this portion was $6,000. Existing lproct was authorized by 1960 River and Harbor Act (H. Doe. 271,Y t Cong., 2d sess.) and prior acts. For details see Annual Repo for 1962. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ber Terminal facilities. A number of wooden piling and tina1, piers for small craft and fishing boats, a bulk gasoline terminal several boat ways, and concrete products plant. engineer Operations and results during fiscal year. Surveys, gin ing, design, supervision, and administration. for Condition at end of fiscal year.- Existing Existing proec, project, excet exceP 1931 fo inactive or deferred for restudy portions, was commenced in s and completed in August 1962. Controlling channel dePth (March 1966) are: Mississippi Sound channel west of Deer ISla0tt 10 feet; Cranes Neck channel, 11.5 feet; and entrance to Bayou, 6 feet. Total costs of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance T Regular ........................... $212,770 $5 ,569 Contributed ...................... 5........................,000 10,200 Total Total........ 217,770 609,769] .................. ............ 217,770 609,769 Cost and financial statement Total 066 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1 New work: 15 Appropriated.......... $122,500 $10,954 ......... 1 Cost.................. 14,157 119,297............. . . Maintenance: .... ... 4... Appropriated...................... 46,804 $3,250 $42,250 $50,000 ,01 Cost.......................... .30,591 19,463 41,931 1,450 $ Includes $44,382 for new work and $86309 forma intenance on previous projects $5,000 for new work and $10,200 for maintenance expend.ed from contributed funds 5. BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, ALA. Location. Black Warrior River rises in northern AlabOr_ above Birmingham and flows generally southwesterlyto te with Tombigbee River at Demopolis, Ala. Thence, Tombjb45 flows south, uniting with Alabama River to form Mobile River 4e miles above head of Mobile Bay. Distance by water from lobl to vicinity of Birmingham is about 415 miles. Previous projects. For details see page 732, Annual Report fo' 1938.el Existing project. Provides essentially for a canalized ch 45 9 feet deep and 200 feet wide from mouth of Tombigbee Riveree miles above Mobile, to vicinity of Birmingham, via Tombig e and Black Warrior Rivers, to mile 430.4 on Sipsey Fork, le 429.6 on Mulberry Fork and mile 407.8 on Locust Fork,aind f maintenance by snagging of Mobile River above mouth of Chi asaw Creek, a total waterway distance of about 463 miles. Total lift of 258 feet is accomplished by nine locks and dams. Origin Features of existing locks and dams Great- Width Depth Type construction Year Miles Dis- est length of over opened Actual Lock above Nearest town tance available chain- Lift sills at Character of Kind Year to cost Mobilel (Alabama) (miles) for full ber (feet) low foundation of dam complete naviga- of lock - width (feet) water Lock Dam tion and dam _(feet) __(feet) .I2 Jackson.......... 116.6 Coffeeville........ 3 600.0 110 34 13.0 Rock........... Gated....Concrete... Concrete... 1965 1960 2$21,597,264 Demopolis ........ 213.4 Demopolis......... 2 | 600.0 110 40 do..........Fixed ......... 13.0 ..... do..... 1962 do.......... 1954 219,774,583 Warrior..........261.1 Eutaw............6 600.0 110 22 13.0 Sand,clay.........Gated..... do...Earth.......1962 1957 2130295,5 William Bacon Oliver . ........ 338.1 Tuscaloosa........ ........ 460.0 95 30 10.8 Hard shale....... ..... Fixed.... do.....Conerete... 1940 1939 4,450,874 Holt............. 347.0 do........... 6 600.0 110 64 13.0 Shale, sandstone... Gated.........do.......... do.............. 1966 2328,100,000 15 ............... 357.8 Northport ........ 20 282.1 52 14 10.0 Sandstone........ Fixed... .....do.......... do ..... 1910 1910 430,234 16 .............. 364.0 Adger............ 1 285.5 52 21 9.5 ..... do............do......do..... .... do..... 1915 1915 520,854 John Hollis 365.5 ..... do........... 20 285.5 52 72 do............do... ... 9.5 ..... do..... ..... do..... 1915 1915 53,824,859 Bankhead4. Totallift.............. .. ............................ 258.............................................. .................... 'Mileage from foot of Government Street, Mobile, Ala. 'Double-lift lock. - SExcludes cost of recreation facilities to be provided at completed projects 5 Excludes $1,435,636 estimated cost of land submerged, damage to struc- under Code 710. tures, and cost of clearing. C S1966 estimate. 488 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 construction program, consisting of 17 dams with 18 lifts,?W completed in 1915. Replacement of original structures bY eo locks and dams, under modernization program: William 3acO 4 Oliver replaced locks 10, 11, and 12; Demopolis replaced ockoc s 5, 6, and 7; Warrior replaced locks 8 and 9; Jackson replaced 10c 1, 2, and 3; and Holt will replace locks 13, 14, 15, and 16. T s with completion of Holt lock and dam, 16 of the original lock10 id have been replaced by 5 new locks. Jackson lock and damr hi life refuge, authorized in 1960, will include 4,250 acres N s reservoir area and along its boundaries. Existing project W authorized by various River and Harbor Acts, 1884-1960. ver placement of obsolete structures was authorized by 1909 ie and Harbor Act. For details see Annual Report for 1962. Tidal influence extends from Mobile 101.6 miles to old locAt where tidal effect is apparent only at low stages of river. c Mobile mean and extreme tidal ranges are 1.5 to 3.6 feet, respo tively. These are at times slightly increased by the effecla, winds. Greatest fluctuation of river stages is at Demopolis'ints maximum being 59.7 feet. Maximum fluctuations at other Poca* are 40 feet at lock 1, 101.6 miles from Mobile; 57.8 feet at Tu096 loosa, 352.6 miles from Mobile; 13 feet at Birmingport, miles from Mobile; and 27 feet at Cordova, 429.6 milesyfro Mobile. Ordinary fluctuations at these points are at old loch1 20 feet; at Demopolis, 35 feet; at Tuscaloosa, 40 feet; at B3irmet port, 4 feet; and at Cordova, 7 feet. Works of improveee t reduced amount of fluctuations at different points by 3 to 10ef Estimated cost (1966) of new work is $99,497,000 exclUsive ted amounts expended on previous projects. Additionally, estiMode cost of providing recreation facilities at completed projects ( ' 710) is $1,171,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ndlilg Terminal facilities. Docks, storage facilities, and ,handl equipment have been provided as required at most loading ies unloading points along this waterway. These include faclitie for handling petroleum and petroleum products, coal, ores, saod and gravel, pulpwood, manufactures, and various other conlmod 0 ities. While most terminal facilities are privately owned, 10 are available for use by the general public. Facilities are con sidered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Warrio lock and dam: Recreation facilities provided at completed proj (Code 710) cost $14,027. Demopolis lock and dam: Recrea51 facilities provided at completed project (Code 710) cost $14,1 Jackson lock and dam: Recreation facilities provided at completerd project (Code 710) cost $190. Holt lock and dam: New performed under contract: Relocation of roads and utilities, $ 996; construction of dam, $1,532,407; construction of lock, $1, ' 047; access roads, $220,218; lock approach channels,$ 119,t recreation facilities, $277,055; permanent operating equiPmed $38,215; and reservoir clearing, $47,206. New work perfor r with hired labor was acquisition of lands, $108,248; and engi.ee ing, design, supervision, and administration, $335,830. Maint nance: U.S. pipeline dredge Collins, operating in Black Warrior RIVERS AND HARBORS---MOBILE, 'ALA., DISTRICT 489 and Iombigbee Rivers from July 3 to November 14, 1965, and June 5 to 30, 1966, removed 1,572,437 cubic yards of material at a cost of $410,843. U.S. snagboat Toro, operating in Black Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers July 16 to November 24, 1965, March 1 to 7 and June 5 to 30, 1966, removed 3,840 cubic yards of ma- terial and 4,160 obstructions at a cost of $86,823. Anchoring of of IloCi llis Bankhead Dam cost $119,906. Operation and care re~lS cost $583,145. Maintenance of locks cost $42,132., Dam survacement study cost $3,001. Miscellaneous investigations and i s cost $97,893. Engineering, design, supervision, and ad- Couration cost $228,587. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, commenced the 7was essentially completed in 1915. :Since then three of relaceginal locks and dams (10, 11, and 12) were removed and Wh'ced by William Bacon Oliver (Tuscaloosa) lock and dam 56 1 Was completed in 1940; four original locks and dams (4, to and 7) replaced by Demopolis lock and dam which was opened tlacavigation in 1954; two original locks and dams (8 and 9) re- 1 5acedby Warrior lock and dam which was opened to navigation by195 *and three original locks and dams (1, 2, and 3) replaced gust ackson lock and dam which was opened to navigation in Au- dary 60. All major construction is complete on these locks and sehed Construction on Holt lock and dam began in 1962 and reailed for completion in 1968, is practically the only work aIning. The lock was opened to navigation June 29, 1966, da ocks and dams 13 and 14 have been removed. Locks and up1 815 and 16, which Holt will also replace, will be removed o0 comPletion of powerplant when reservoir will be raised to level. Totaoject owexist Operating Funds New work Maintenance and care Total or.*.** ****........ $92,559,441 -I $17,152,569 !i $21,087,165 $130,799,175 E ergeworks .. .. y relief. ...................... 79,220 .............. ', ,....... 79,220 00 ............ 607,308 ............................ 607,308 Total ....... ........ ..... o. i I i 93,245,969 17,152,569 21,087,165 131,485,703 .. . . ... .. ... . 1 ____ _ Cost and financial statement rTotal 2lyeat to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Work:' Copriated.........$1,028,497 $3,204,321 $5,745,705 $8,446,394 $3,428,700 $94,223,400 tenace............ 1,70,400 3,227,7555,926,2537,586,0664,022,848 293,852,900 lropriated.........1,263,775 1,405,0001,437,9001,740,9781,744,000 38,465,866 ............. 1,262,8441,347,6121,495,0631,738,3331,572,330 38,289,734 $606,931 1 cludes for new work and $50,000 for maintenance on previous projects. $310,646 ludea for recreation facilities (Code 710) on completed projects. 6. BON SECOUR RIVER, ALA, Location. Rises 2 miles south of Foley, Ala., and flows south- 490 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 erly about 8 miles, emptying into Bon Secour Bay, an armn of Mobile Bay in southwest Alabama. Existing project. A 10- by 80-foot channel from Gulf Intra coastal Waterway through Bon Secour Bay to mouthOf Ed- Secour River and extending up river to vicinity of Swifts Lalde ing, thence 6 by 80 feet up river to a point about 600 feet bet Oak Landing, with two turning and maneuvering areas 150 fdeet wide and 1,100 to 1,200 feet long opposite Swifts Landing 'ar ice loading dock. Plane of reference is mean low water. Ove all length of improvement is about 4.7 miles. Mean tidal ralgy- is about 1.5 feet and extreme, except during storms, is 3.5 feet ' Existing project was authorized by Chief of Engineers, May of1 1963, under authority in section 107, River and Harbor Ac 1960. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. rgial Terminal facilities. A number of pile-and-timber 1m arg wharves used by seafood industry and a marine ways oca ely along existing project. These, together with numerous privte owned piers, are considered adequate for existing commerce.e r Operations and results during fiscal year. Surveys, engineer ing, design, supervision, and administration. djl Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was commencedcril July and completed in October 1964. Controlling depths in A. 1966 were 10 feet in turning basin, 8.5 feet in lower river sectioll and 6 feet in upper river section. Cost and financial statement 'total 30 tog661 year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1994 1995 1989 June ' New work: 615 Appropriated..................... Cost .................. $10,000 $107,417 $1,199 . ..... 11815 ........ ,183 14,598 98 34 . .... 00 Maintenance: Appropriated ......... ,183 14,598 98,834. Appropriated .. ..................... 1. ........................ $17,000 Coat.............................. . ........................ .. . 1Exclusive of $9,700 contributed funds for new work. 7. CARRABELLE BAR AND HARBOR, FLA. Location. On northwest coast of Florida about 185 miles east of Pensacola. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1261.) Previous projects. For details see Annual Report for 1963' Existing project. A 27- by 200-foot channel from GulfO Mexico for 3 miles to a point west of Dog Island, thence a 25 150-foot channel for 5 miles through St. George Sound and Carra belle River to a turning basin 500 feet square and 25 feet deep a town of Carrabelle, a 10- by 100-foot channel from turning baso for 0.6 mile to U.S. Highway 98 bridge, thence a 10- by 8-Ofoo channel for 3 miles to confluence of New and Crooked Rivers'e Plane of reference is mean low water. Mean range of tide throughout this harbor is 2.2 feet. Extreme, except durin storms, is about 3 feet. Channels above turning basin were al thorized May 17, 1965, by Chief of Engineers under authority o section 107, River and Harbor Act of 1960. Other features o RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 491 (timng project were authorized by River and Harbor Act of 1954 A. oc. 451, 83d Cong., 2d sess.) and prior acts. For details see fl"ial Report for 1962. LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. Whaermnal facilities. A public terminal, privately owned coves, Cornaerce.,and four marine ways. , Facilities adequate for kexisting n Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- tractor's pipeline dredge Miss Golden Isles, operating July 26 to September 3, 1965, removed 317,381 cubic yards of material from the small craft channel at a cost of $118,711. Surveys, engineer- te esign, supervision, and administration cost $10,744. Main- cce: Surveys cost $173. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed 9September 1965. Total cost for existing project to June 30, 96 Was $789,941, of which $481,627 was for new work and $8,314 for maintenance. Controlling depths in channels were: litrance channel, 10 feet; harbor channel, 15 feet; turning basin, Seet, June 1966, and channel extension, 10 feet, May 1966. Cost and financial statement eTotal to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 e Work: Copriated ....................................... 000 -85,35 C o it ed..$145,000 -15,355 18503,331 . 1aatte"nan e. . .10,190 129,455 1503,331 $10,000 c o rlated........... $208 ............. 18,000 .... 308,393 .............9,677 452 ........... 17,827 173 308,314 neludes $21,704 for new work on previous projects. 8. DAUPHIN ISLAND BAY, ALA. Location. Between Dauphin and Little Dauphin Islands on bs'ide of entrance to Mobile Bay, about 30 miles south of Mo- 0 e,Ala., and 55 miles west of Pensacola, Fla. (See Coast and Godetic Survey Chart 1266.)- I frXisting project. (a) A channel 7 feet deep and 150 feet wide lobile Bay to an anchorage basin of same depth, about 7 res in area, in marsh just north of Fort Gaines on Dauphin slad; a channel 4 feet deep and 40 feet wide from anchorage tebsi, to Dauphin Island Bay; and a jetty and revetment to pro- aid entrance channel; and (b) an anchorage basin 7 feet deep ch 500 feet square at Dauphin Island village, with an entrance teannel of like depth, 100 feet wide and about 8,300 feet long, ex- gnding to 7-foot hydrographic contour in Mississippi Sound. . ean tidal range is 1.1 feet, and extreme, except during storms, about 4 feet. Plane of reference is mean low water. Existing PrOJect was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of March 2, 1945 (IIH.Doc. 333, 76th Cong., 1st sess.), and September 3, 1954 D Doc. 394, 82d Cong., 2d sess.). Documents contain latest lished maps. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. erminal facilities. On village basin, several privately owned 492 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 wharves for handling seafood, a public dock and mooring slip,~ a pier for recreational craft. On bay, a marina, public launchin ramp, and a number of private piers. Facilities adequate for e isting commerce. .e Operations and results during fiscal year. U.S. pipeline dredge Collins, operating in village channel July 18 to 28, 1965, removed 91,400 cubic yards of material at a cost of $30,399. Surveys'el gineering, design, supervision, and administration cost $5,30July Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in 1959. Controlling depths of channels were: Fort Gaines entrn ce channel and basin, 7 feet; connecting channel, 4 feet (Mar. 1966) village channel 6.6 feet (Apr. 1966). Cost and financial statement 'Totalto year............... . Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 166 New work: $292,665 Appropriated............ ................................. 6 ............. Cost.................. .......................................... Maintenance: 82,893 Appropriated.......... $11,000 $1,000 $15,000 $14,050 $36,000, Cost................ .. 3,150 9,014 16,796 14,015 35,708 9. EAST PASS CHANNEL FROM GULF OF MEXICO INTO CHOCTAWHATCHEE BAY, FLA. Location. An entrance from the gulf into Choctawhatchee 0 at eastern end of Santa Rosa Island, 48 miles east of entrance it Pensacola Bay and 49 miles west of new entrance to St. AndreW Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1264.) "0othe Existing project. A 12- by 180-foot entrance channel froalel gulf stabilized by twin jetties and a 6- by 100-foot spur chane into Old Pass Lagoon. Mean range of tide is 1.3 feet; extrei range, except during storms, is 2.5 feet. Plane of reference. mean low water. Existing project was authorized by 1965 R lc and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 194, 88th Cong., 2d sess.), and pub Law 193, 82d Congress. ed Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work authorig s before 1965. For work authorized by that act, local interests must furnish suitable lands for spoil disposal and aids to na h tion; hold the United States free from damages; and make a cash contribution of 30 percent of the first cost of general navigatid. facilities presently estimated at $493,000. The State of Florid and Board of Conservation indicated willingness to furnish re- quirements. tiber Terminal facilities. Small privately owned pile-and-tibe piers used in connection with fishing industry in this locality le adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Contractor operations during September and October at cost of $2,145 closed breach in sandspit protecting Destin Harbor opened by Hurricane Betsy U.S. pipeline dredge Guthrie, operating in East Pass Channel April 11 to 21, 1966, removed 136,013 cubic yards of material at a cost of $24,621. Surveys, engineering, design, supervision, administration cost $6,419. RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 493 Condtion at end of fiscal year. Construction has not been initi- 1 966)o jetties authorized in 1965. Controlling depths (May to 1d Were 10.7 feet in East Pass channel and 6 feet in entrance toOdPass Lagoon. Cost and financial statement year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 . ance: Copriated..... .....- $9,000 $37,000 $56,600 $42,000 $36,000 $581,455 .. 44,839 31,894 62,331 41,162 33,185 577,784 Locat 10. EAST PEARL RIVER, MISS. It foration. A main distributary of Pearl River, Miss. and La. Its morns boundary between southern Louisiana and Mississippi. and outh is 35 miles by water west of Gulfport Harbor, Miss., Wat 5 miles east of New Orleans, La., via Gulf Intracoastal perway. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1268.) Ie.V.us projects. For details see Annual Report for 1963. about s ng project. A channel 9 feet deep, 200 feet wide, and 9foo .3 miles long, at mouth of East Pearl River, connecting i~v c ontour in Lake Borgne with, same contour in East Pearl fee0r. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range is about 18/4 lo ,; extreme range is about 31/2 feet. Plane of reference is mean 1t Water. Existing project was authorized by 1910 River and bor Act (H. Doc. 328, 60th Cong., 1st sess.). LOcal cooperation. None required. coterm"inal facilities. Consist of natural landings which are 0otsidered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Contractor's pipe- line dredge Vicksburg, operating in East Pearl River August 9 to 15, 1965, removed 192,250 cubic yards at a cost of $22,455. Sur- $, $2 ' 70.engineering, design, supervision, and administration cost Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- Clleed t1lo1fg in December depth and completed in January 1911. Con- in August was 9.0 feet. Total cost of existing heiect to June 30, 1966, was $152,739, of which $8,928 was for ew Work and $143,811 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Year. Total to 1 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Nwvork. opriated.......... ........................ .................... ............ $37,128 " .na. .... ............ .......... .. ......... ............ .. . ....... 37,128 C opriated ..................... $36,721. $25,000 $300 143,811 ........... ............ 36,721.. 1756 25,125 143,811 eludes $28,200 for new work on previous projects. 11.GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BETWEEN APALACHEE BAY, FLA., AND MEXICAN BORDER (MOBILE DIST.) Location. Extends westward from Apalachee Bay, Fla., along 494 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 gulf coast to Rigolets, La., via a series of coastal lakes, b~t sounds, and land cuts. For further details see Annual Reporfor 1962. Previous projects. For details see page 906, Annual Repor for 1930. de Existing project. A waterway 12 feet deep and 125 feet Wi, at mean low water from Apalachee Bay, Fla., to Mobile Bay, to and 12 feet deep and 150 feet wide from Mobile Bay, Ala~r Rigolets, La. (Lake Borgne Light No. 41), and for a triboLltUo channel (Gulf County Canal), 9 feet deep, 100 feet wide, andb it 6 miles long connecting Intracoastal Waterway at White Coy Fla., with St. Joseph Bay. Waterway between 12-foot deptholets tours in Apalachee Bay and Lake Borgne Light No. 41 at f de- is 379 miles long. Existing project, exclusive of inactiv o tof ferred for restudy portions, was completed in 1957 at a cos $5,940,456. Existing project was authorized by 1950 Riverct Harbor Act (H. Doc. 325, 81st Cong., 1st sess.), and prior For details see Annual Report for 1962. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. belle, Terminal facilities. Available for public use at Carra and Apalachicola, Panama City, and Pensacola, Fla.; Mobiles Bayou La Batre, Ala.; and Pascagoula, Biloxi, Gulfportd ade" Christian, and Bay St. Louis, Miss. Facilities are considered quate for existing commerce. a Operations and results during fiscal year. Carrabelle-AP" chicola Bay Section: U.S. pipeline dredge Guthrie, operating Oc- tober 19 to 21, 1965, and February 8 to March 3, 1966, removed 389,340 cubic yards at a cost of $76,825. Apalachicola B~ja Andrew Bay section: U.S. pipeline dredge Guthrie, operating April 22 to May 1, 1966, removed 308,363 cubic yards of material at a cost of $114,409. Gulf County Canal section: U.S. dragline No. 2, operating March 21 to 25, 1966, removed 4,296 cubic yards at $6,669. West Bay-Choctawhatchee Bay Section: Repair l', maintenance of erosion protective works from November 1,1o to January 14, 1966, and February 28 to June 10, 1966, *ne $65,246. Mobile Bay-Rigolets section: Contractor's Pipeline dredge Vicksburg, operating July 17 to August 8, 1965, removed 800,615 cubic yards of material at a cost of $114,660. Miscel , ous investigations and surveys cost $34,255. Engineering, des supervision, and administration cost $20,730. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is com e except for portion between Apalachicola Bay and St. Marks, ctat which is deferred for restudy. Total costs of existing pro.ec June 30, 1966, were $12,429,319, of which $5,940,456 was for6 work (includes $340,000 emergency relief funds), and $6,48 for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 495 inimum depths at mean low water available to navigation Feet Section Project Left Right Mid-channel depth outside outside for half quarter quarter proj. width June 1966 JuO9. Aaahc Apalachicola Bay to Carrabelle, Fla.................. 12.0 10.0 10.4 11.0 b a. hpcalahicola Bay to St. Andrew Bay, Fla............. 12.0 10.0 9.5 11.0 an 1966 Gulf County Canal, Fla............................ 9.0 8.0 7.8 9.0 r.19 Choctawhatchee Bay to West Bay, Fla.............. 12.0 8.2 10.5 12.0 Rar.196 " poctawhatchee Bay to Pensacola Bay, Fla........... 12.0 12.0 10.8 11.2 Pensacola Bay, Fla., to Mobile Bay, Ala.............. 12.0 10.0 10.0 11.5 65 MobileBay, Ala., to Rtigolets, La.................... 12.0 11.0 11.0 11.5 Cost and financial statement ear Total to ork..... 1962 1963 164 1965 1966 June 30, 1661 Cprin a .ted.... ........ ................................................ . $5,986,061 ce . ""*** --** . *********** .** .*** ********** * ** * *...... . 25,986,061 Oapriat.ed. ......... $219,000 $581,429 $336,050 $543,000 $466,150 6,759,051 ........ 217,424 372,366 519,935 400587 432,794 6,554,000 aue45605 for new work and $65,187 for maintenance on previous projects. Ocue$340,00 0 emergency relief funds. L 12. GULFPORT HARBOR, MISS. ab ation. On Mississippi Sound in southeastern Mississippi, t 44 and 90 miles by water west of Pascagoula Harbor, Miss., SrlMobile Harbor, Ala., respectively, and 78 miles east of New 0eodan (via Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.) (See Coast and Pr tc Survey Chart 1267.) 19- evous projects. For details see page 747, Annual Report for ajd Xisting project. (a) A channel 32 feet deep, 300 feet wide, dee about 8 miles long across Ship Island Bar, a channel 30 feet ee, 220 feet wide, and about 11 miles long through Mississippi ee1,. and an anchorage basin at Gulfport 30 feet deep, 1,320 Cor e, and 2,640 feet long; and (b) maintenance of existing str ercial small-boat harbor about 26 acres in area, and a 0 *-approach channel, 100 feet wide and about 4,300 feet all , from deep water in Mississippi Sound to small-boat basin, ta a depth of 8 feet. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal ab,, eS about 13/, feet, and extreme, except during storms, is roct 31/2 feet. Plane of reference is mean low water. Existing ( et was adopted by River and Harbor Acts of July 3, 1930 81st Coc. 692, 69th Cong., 2d sess.), June 30, 1948 (H. Doc. 112, d Seng., 1st sess.), and July 3, 1958 (S. Doc. 123, 84th Cong., sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. at t~rminal facilities. Modern rail-connected terminal facilities Portis port are considered adequate for existing commerce. (See 0 Series 19, revised in 1957.) Operations and results during fiscal year. U.S. hopper dredge Langfitt,operating in Ship Island Bar Channel December 12 to 30, 496 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 1965, removed 734,955 cubic yards of material at a cost of $104,- 428. Contractor's pipeline dredge Fritz Jahncke, operating in Mississippi Sound channel December 6 to 20, 1965, removed 1,084,- 494 cubic yards of material at a cost of $122,956. Miscellne investigations and surveys cost $8,844. Engineering, esig supervision, and administration cost $28,388.eted Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was compl feet in 1950. Controlling depths: Ship Island Bar Channel, 3266); (Jan. 1966); Mississippi Sound Channel, 26.5 feet (June 196ll- main harbor anchorage basin, 27 feet (June 1966) ;and 1 boat channel and basin, 7 feet (Mar. 1966). Costs for exist lv s project to June 30, 1966, were $7,400,375, of which $635,758 64, for new work (includes $47,883 public works funds), and $, 617 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement to Totll Fiscal year..... ...... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jne 3 New work: $9041 Appropriated......................904 Cost ...................................... 4 Mainteance: Appropriated.......... $100,000$1,020,000 $333,000 $369,800 $269,000 908J810 9,016 Cost................ 98,712 1,032,646 335,443 369,970 264,616 x Includes $269,017 for new work and $2,312,292 for maintenance on previous project 13. MOBILE HARBOR, ALA. Location. Along lower 5 miles of Mobile River, in south1l ern Alabama, 91 miles by water west of Pensacola Harbor, ater 90 miles east of Gulfport Harbor, Miss., and 144 miles by eo northeast of mouth of Mississippi River. (See Coast and C detic Survey Chart 1266.) Previous projects. For details see page 503, Annual Report for 1963. 1 Existing project. (a) A 42- by 600-foot channel about 1el miles long across Mobile Bar; (b) a 40- by 400-foot chi in Mobile Bay to mouth of Mobile River; (c) a 40-foot c nel in Mobile River to highway bridge, varying from 500 to ad feet wide; (d) a 25-foot channel from highway bridge fohell up Chickasaw Creek to a point 400 feet south of mouth oft iD Bayou, widths being 500 feet in Mobile River and 250 feet Chickasaw Creek; (e) a turning basin 40 feet deep, 2,500 long, and 800 to 1,000 feet wide, opposite Alabama State docee (f) a turning basin 40 feet deep, 800 feet wide, and 1,400 fo long opposite Magazine Point; (g) a 27- by 150-foot channel fro0 Mobile Bay Channel along Arlington pier to a turning baslna8e feet long and 600 feet wide opposite Brookley Air Force feet ocean terminal, and continuing thence to a turning basin 250 oot wide and 800 feet long in Garrows Bend, thence a 22- by 150-0d channel to the causeway linking McDuffie Island to maila and (h) maintenance by snagging Three Mile Creek from itsproo tersection with Industrial Canal to Mobile River. Project vides also for an anchorage area 32 feet deep, 100 feet wide, a RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 497 200 feet long opposite site formerly occupied by U.S. Quarantine atoln at McDuffie (Sand) Island. Prior to widening Mobile Y aChannel as authorized in 1954, Quarantine Station anchorage byrea Was maintained to a project width of 200 feet. Construction h ocal interests of a solid-fill causeway across Garrows Bend hviane between McDuffie Island and the mainland is also pro- chae for under existing project. Total length of bay and river ' atc sis about 41.7 miles. Plane of reference is mean low of Ne. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range at lower end tidalProvement is 1.2 feet and at upper end 1.5 feet; extreme tida ranei34 range is 3.4 feet at lower end and 3.6 feet at upper end. 1Xist aid pi g project was authorized by 1954 River and Harbor Act Lorior acts. For details see Annual Report for 1962. a cal cooperation. Fully complied with., att,,inal facilities. Modern rail-connected terminal facilities Port. port are considered adequate for existing commerce. (See 0 eries No 18, revised in 1960.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: U.S. hopper dredge Gerig, operating in Mobile bar channel July 1 to 30, 1965, removed 911,581 cubic yards of material at a cost of $191,598. Surveys, engineering, design, supervision, and admin- Po ion cost $22,313. Maintenance: Contractor's pipeline dredge, Pontchartrain, operating in Mobile Bay and River channels No- vember 22, 1965, to June 28, 1966, removed 4,150,716 cubic yards of material and contractor's pipeline dredge, Fritz Jahncke, op- erating in Mobile River channel February 14 to March 31, 1966, removed 1,612,462 cubic yards of material all at a cost of $806,878. tioytaining buoy at wreck cost $270 Miscellaneous investiga- a i and surveys cost $13,688. Engineering, design, supervision, administration cost $56,502. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- eced in 1931 and completed in July 1965. For details see An- R eport for 1965. Obtaining depths of channels Minimum depth (feet) Date Channel Project depth Left Left and Right (feet) outside right outside quarter inside quarter quarter ._ _, 1965. ' Me1166. kr. "." Bar channel............................ 42.0 36.0 42.0 42.0 Bay channel: South end to mouth of river........ 40.0 39.0 40.0 38.0 . River channel: ... Mouth to State docks.................... 40.0 36.0 40.0 38.0 State docks to turning basin................ 40.0 40.0 40.0 . 40.0 Do State docks to Highway bridge.............. 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 Magazine Point turning basin.............. 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 1166.... ." Chickasaw Creek: Highway bridge to mouth of creek........... 25.0 25.0 25.0 17.5 Mouth to 400 ft. below Shell Bayou......... 25.0 16.3 19.4 17.3 Arlington channel............................ 27.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 . _- _.4_.........; 498 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Costs of existing projects to June 30, 19 66 Total Funds New work Maintenance $19782,847 Regular........ $12,002,256 1~4O000 Public work.................. ................ .... $7,750,591 14,000 Emergency relief .................................. .... ......*** 41,242 Total...................................... 7,805,833 12,002,256 I Cost and financial statement Total t Fi year................ 1962 iseal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: 14 488931 Appropriated..................... $300,000 $912,000 $1,896,000 -$42,540 14:488, 1 Cost .................. ............ 35,115 1,151,225 1,665,210 213,9116 68 Maintenance: 16135,6 Appropriated.......... $1,717,000 -11,000 498,200 61,500 913,992 16098, Cost..................1,605,918 93,874 303,933 290,880 877,338 Includes $6,683,104 for new work and $4,096,681 for maintenance on previous proje 14. PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FLA. Location. On northwest coast of Florida, 102 miles east of ey trance to Pensacola Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic ur Chart 1263.) Previous project. For details see page 710, Annual Report fo 1938. Existing project. A channel about 1.8 miles long extendiC from deep water in bay across Lands End to the Gulf of Mexi d 300 feet wide and 32 feet deep in bay and across Lands End lf, 450 feet wide and 34 feet deep in approach channel in the Edt and protected by two jetties, each about 700 feet long; and channel in Watson Bayou 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep fr'l that depth in St. Andrew Bay to highway bridge, about 13/4 nvd.g Mean tidal range is 1.3 feet, and extreme range, except duretller. storms, is about 4 feet. Plane of reference is mean low waN t Existing project was authorized by 1948 River and Harbor.ls (H. Doc. 559, 80th Cong., 2d sess.) and prior acts. For detal, see Annual Report for 1962. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Considered adequate for existing co" merce. (See Port Series No. 19, revised in 1957.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: C.r0" tractor placed 13,160 tons of stone in west jetty between Februt'r 17 and June 30, 1966, at a cost of $145,680. Surveys, enginee- ing, design, supervision, and administration cost $20,299. Ma tenance surveys cost $399. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was cot o menced in 1933 and completed in November 1949. Repairs jetties, authorized by Chief of Engineers March 6, 1961, beg in June 1961 and are about 80 percent complete. Controlli3 depths of channels were: Channel from bay across Lands End, ,32 feet (Apr. 1965) ; approach channel in gulf, 31 feet (Apr. 1965)' and Watson Bayou, 10 feet (June 1964). RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 499 Costs of existing projects to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitation Total o orks ............................... $105,058 $2,039,479 $355,303 $2,499,840 .6....... . 581,959 ............................ 581,959 Total-... 687,017 2,039,479 355,303 3,081,799 Cost and financial statement cal eaI Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,19661 .Coprt ......... -$35,676............................... .. $270,000 $1,349,901 Mi'tenance.**..*......... 163,702 ................................. 165,979 1,245,880 C~opriated 5.......... $122,000 -$100 5000 $23,000 8 2,553,084 ............. 4,517 117,229 5,131 22,697 399 2,553,083 ne $203,560 for new work, $513,604 for maintenance on previous projects, and $855,808 ok) for rehabilitation of jetties under existing project. 15. PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MISS. L~ocation. Along lower 6.8 miles of Pascagoula River, lower 6 Qes Of Dog River, and in Bayou Casotte (about 4 miles east of of Pascagoula River), is in southeastern Mississippi, about h1-ut b les by water west of Mobile Harbor, Ala., and about 44 miles , ater east of Gulfport Harbor, Miss. (See Coast and Geodetic Vey Chart 1267.) 198evious projects. For details see page 741, Annual Report for 35 'iSting project. (a) An entrance channel 40 feet deep and iel feet wide from Gulf of Mexico through Horn Island Pass, 200fding an impounding area for littoral drift, 40 feet deep, ,efeet ide, and about 1,500 feet long adjacent to channel at 3t end of Petit Bois Island; (b) a channel 38 feet deep and rai feet wide in Mississippi Sound and Pascagoula River to feealroad bridge at Pascagoula, including a turning basin 2,000 of and 950 feet wide (including channel area) on west side belong feet ,ver below railroad bridge; (c) a channel 38 feet deep and 225 wide from ship channel in Mississippi Sound to mouth of Wu ie.oCasotte, thence 38 feet deep and 300 feet wide for about 1 feetlo a turning basin 38 feet deep, 1,000 feet wide, and 1,750 rai lng; (d) a 22- by 150-foot channel up Pascagoula River from riroad bridge to mouth of Dog River, thence up Dog River to tiihway 63 bridge; and (e) a 12- by 125-foot channel from high- WaY bridge, via Robertson and Bounds Lakes, to mile 6 on Dog aver. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range is 1%/ feet, ad extreme range is 33, feet. Plane of reference is mean low bor er. Existing project was authorized by 1963 River and Har- del ct (H. Doc. 560, 87th Cong., 2d sess.), and prior acts. For ails see Annual Report for 1963. LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. at erminal facilities. Modern rail-connected terminal facilities poat hi s port are considered adequate for existing commerce. (See rt Series No. 19, revised in 1957.) 500 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. New work:, U.S. hopper dredge Gerig, operating in Horn Island Pass channel July 30 to August 12, 1965, removed 308,127 cubic yards of mnaterial at a cost of $97,022. Surveys, engineering, design, supervisiOdfldge administration cost $13,051. Maintenance: U.S. hopper dreg Gerig, operating in Horn Island Pass channel October 2 to 28, 1965, removed 507,385 cubic yards of material at a cost if1l 364. Contractor's pipeline dredge Fritz Jahncke, operating in Mississippi Sound channel December 23, 1965, to February 14, 1966, removed 1,267,034 cubic yards of material and contractor's pipeline dredge Tehefuncta, operating in Mississippi Sound chan- nel May 2 to 27, 1966, removed 322,463 cubic yards of material at a cost of $253,607. Miscellaneous investigations and soutra$ cost $5,481. Engineering, design, supervision, and admini tion cost $48,357. .leted Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was con'P 66, in August 1965. Total costs of existing project to June 30,1d were $9,229,050, of which $5,668,543 was for new work ere $3,560,507 for maintenance. Controlling channel depths wha Horn Island Pass, 40 feet (Mar. 1966); Mississippi Sound 6 6); nel, 38 feet (May 1966); Pascagoula River 38 feet (Mar. cih Dog River channel, 12 feet (Feb. 1966). Dog River cuto co nel dredged by local interest was 12 feet in February 1966; Bay Casotte channel was 37.5 feet and Bayou Casotte basin 38 fee March 1966. Cost and financial statement Total0 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3 New work: 19 Appropriated.......... $894,259 $1,000,000 $1,732,451 $484,274 -$83,243 672 Cost .................. 914,258 887,044 1,845,407 290,959 110,073 3' 2. Maintenance:'[399' 013 Appropriated.......... 324,200 108,000 102,000 354,500 502,100 3,973 Cost............ .. 322,685 109,742 102,048 353,763 498,809 1 Includes $904,442 for new work and $412,624 for maintenance on previous proiects 16. PASS CHRISTIAN HARBOR, MISS. Location. On Mississippi Sound in southeastern Mis s i s s 9 9 miles west of Gulfport Harbor, Miss., and 68 miles east of 10 Orleans, La. (via Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.) (See Coast d Geodetic Survey Chart 1268.) 110 SExisting project. Maintenance of a harbor within existing p heads and breakwaters constructed by local interests, and l is entrance channel, both to a depth of 7 feet. Entrance chane bY 100 feet wide and harbor is about 1,000 feet along the shore / 700 feet wide. Mean range of tide is 1%/ feet and extrem eIs feet. Plane of reference is mean low water. Existing project ,b authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 214, Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map.). Local cooperation Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Wooden piers for recreational and co*R mercial small craft, public launching ramp, and two public doc with electric hoists. Facilities adequate for existing commerce. RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 501 aO~rations and results during fiscal year. Government plant ass ired labor operating for 10 days in September 1965 after Chrit. geof Hurricane Betsy, removed debris and drift from Pass sigstian Harbor at a cost of $4,938. Surveys, engineering, de- , upervision, and administration cost $1,312. ADril on at end of fiscal year. Project was commenced in ad nd completed in June 1959. Controlling depth of entrance rbor in April 1966 was 6.2 feet. Cost and financial statement Y5ear; cal Total to , . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 work. N~ew 0DPI0priatd ........ ..... $59,319 ........... .................... ........... ............ 59,319 Co riated. .......... $476 $6,250 6,726 .......... 476 6,250 6,726 17. PEARL RIVER, MISS. AND LA. ction. Rises in east central Mississippi and flows south- about 172 miles to Jackson, Miss., thence southeast about riles to head of its delta, whence West Pearl River flows 34 miles to the Rigolets, a tidal pass connecting Lake Pont- ail with Lake Borgne, an arm of the Gulf of Mexico. Oius projects. For details, see page 750, Annual Report )38. Sting project. A channel from mouth of West Pearl River miles to mouth of Bogalusa Creek at Bogalusa, La., 7 feet 't low water with a bottom width of 100 feet in river sections 0 feet in canal section; with locks 65 by 310 feet clear inside lsions. Plan of improvement may be divided into three sec- as follows: River section from mouth of West Pearl River to 8.5 at Holmes-Bayou with a channel 7 feet deep and 100 feet to be obtained by dredging, snagging, and cutoffs at sharp ;canal section from mile 28.5 to 48.7 at Pools Bluff with a el 7 feet deep and 80 feet wide, to be obtained by construc- f three locks in the canal with sills across Bogue Chitto at 44 and across river at mile 48.7; river section from mile o 58 at mouth of Bogalusa Creek, to be obtained by dredging, P11g, and easing of bends. At Bogalusa mean variation of surface is 10 feet and extreme, 23 feet. Plane of refer- Is mean low water. Estimated (1965) cost for providing itional facilities (Code 710) is $79,200. Existing project dopted by 1935 River and Harbor Act, subject to approval Board of Engineers. This approval is in House Document 75th Congress, 2d session, which contains latest published 502 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Various features of locks included in existing projects Lock.................... ............. 1 2 i i Miles above mouth.... ........... 29.4....... Nearest town...................... ..... 40.7....... .. ..... 43.9. Pearl River, La....... ' Bush, La............ Sun, La. Miles to nearest town.... 9 .............. 3. ........... .. 2. Greatest length available for full width (feet). ............... 310................. 310. Width of chamber (feet)........... Lift (feet) .................... 65.... 65 ................... 65. 2 .............. 15 ................... 11. Depth over sills at low water (feet)...... 10. 10.............. 10 silcly Character of foundation................ Sand, gravel, silt, clay. Sand, gravel, silt, clay. Sand, gravel, s1. Type of construction................... Concrete and steel..... Concrete and steel..... Concrete and stee Year completed.... ............. 1949........ ... 1950. Date opened for navigation............ 1950...... ...... 95 November 1953 ..... November 1953.......$1,497,539....... November9 Actual cost of lock .................... $2,119,110........... $1,967,537........... Local cooperation. Fully complied with. -terl Terminal facilities. City of Bogalusa provided a barge terich nal consisting of a wharf, transit shed, and access road a'it t ardson's Landing at head of project. A privately owned wh- is Pearl River Highway Bridge near Pearl River Station, La ,~us used for unloading logs. Only natural landings exist at variOo locations on the river. Facilities are considered adequate existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Recd tion facilities (Code 710). Maintenance: Contractor's dredge Titan, operating February 27 to March 7, 1966, performed tia' tenance dredging, contractor's dredge, Crown Point, operaqI May 24 to June 30, 1966, performed maintenance dredging, 65, contractor operating during November and December line cleared drainage ditches all at a cost of $48,186. U.S. Draf 0 No. 2, operating August 25 to September 12, and October 1t 29, 1965, performed snagging operations at a cost of $171er9. Miscellaneous investigations and surveys cost $13,213. pcr S tion and ordinary care of locks cost $32,317, maintenance of ra cost $11,825. Engineering, design, supervision, and adiiialt tion cost $29,409. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was col' menced in October 1938 and completed in January 1956. o locks were opened to navigation in November 1953. Cosiclh existing project to June 30, 1966, was $9,706,064, ofWc $8,291,837 (includes $17,343 Code 710 funds) was for new 'Wore and $1,414,227 for maintenance including operating and care Controlling depth in June 1966 was 7 feet at mean low water. Cost and financial statement Total~oo Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3, j New work: 31 Appropriated..................................1$25,000 $13,800C .. Cost................................ 9,068 0.. 6,19 . . 28, Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $98,275 $173,200 180,500 127,500 171,000 1 ,39 Cost................. 78,218 164,020 209,300 124,241 152,369 x Includes $144,443 for new work and $168,172 for maintenance on previous projects. I Includea $17,848 for recreational facilities (Code 710) on completed projects. RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 503 18. PENSACOLA HARBOR, FLA. abLocation. A landlocked bay on coast of northwest Florida 50 miles east of entrance to Mobile Bay. (See Coast and Survey Charts 490 and 1265.) Sodeti Previous projects. For details see Annual Report for 1938. chhaisting project. Provides for (a) A 35- by 500-foot entrance cola tel about 5 miles long, from Gulf of Mexico to lower Pensa- foot ay; (b) a 33- by 300-foot bay channel; (c) two 33- by 300- eh Parallel approach channels to opposite ends of inner-harbor ana~nel; (d)an inner-harbor channel 500 Dier 3,950 feet long; (e) a 30- by 250-footfeet wide, 33 feet deep, approach channel to ePiaeadrh line south of Muscogee wharf; and (f) a 15- by 100-foot deeeteaceWide, and into channel Bayou Chico, thence a channel 14 feet deep, about 4,400 feet long to a turning basin 14 feet isalan d 500 feet square. Mean range of tide throughout harbor ~about 1.1 feet near entrance and about 1.6 feet at head of bay. ofrenle tidal range, except during storms, is about 3 feet. Plane Proe'rence is mean low water. Modification of Bayou Chico bayoet to provide for enlarging entrance channel to 21 by 100 feet, 20beu channel to 20 by 100 feet, and deepening turning basin to thilt has been deferred for restudy. Estimated (1955) cost of 19 2Portion was $168,000. Existing project was authorized by and.ver and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 528, 87th Cong., 2d sess.), Prior acts. For details see Annual Report for 1963. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. at7rminal facilities. Modern rail-connected terminal facilities Port s p ort are considered adequate for existing commerce. (See erles No. 19, revised in 1957.) ioPerationsand results during fiscal year. Adjustment of pre- 1 Year new work cost $11. Maintenance surveys cost $10,- thCndition at end of fiscal year. New work is complete except thoz features which are deferred for restudy. Modification au- 1 9zed il 1962 was commenced in March and completed in May $2)0 Total costs of existing project to June 30, 1966, were 6 ,703, of which $875,005 was for new work (includes $119,- t1public works funds), and $1,625,698 for maintenance. Con- eh , depths of channels were: Entrance, 30.6 feet; Bay coge e33 feet; inner-harbor channel, 33 feet; channel to Mus- feet iPier, 33 feet (Feb. 1966); Bayou Chico outer channel, 15 111nner channel and basin, 14 feet (Apr. 1966). Cost and financial statement atal1 Year S1962 102Total to 1963 1964 1965 1066 June 30, Doriated ....... ................................ $409,500 -$35,330 $1,469,693 . ***..... . . ............ .................. *..... 374,160 11 1,469,693 ated.. ....... . $1,000 $171,769 $15,000............ 10,200 1,752,370 ...... 1,000 160,61 26,151............ 10,177 1,752,347 udea $594,688 for new work and $126,649 for maintenance on previous projects. 504 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 19. PERDIDO PASS CHANNEL, ALA.bile Location. About midway between Pensacola, Fla., and obile Ala. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 872.) twin Existing project. A 12- by 150-foot channel stabilized bY ass, rubblemound jetties, from the Gulf of Mexico into Perdido the thence 9- by 100-feet into Perdido Bay with a spur channel o o,- same dimensions into Terry Cove. Existing project wa , thorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (S. Doc. 94, 88th 2d sess.). a Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish suitable lublic for spoil disposal and aids to navigation; provide adequate p tlhe terminal facilities including berths and access channels; holdtio United States free from damages; and make a cash contribit. of 43 percent of the first cost of general navigation facitsed presently estimated at $471,000. State of Alabama expres willingness to furnish requirements of local cooperation. ad Terminal facilities. Six marinas, numerous timber piersit docks, and several launching ramps. Facilities adequate for e% ing commerce. Operationsand results during fiscal year. None. been Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has notb initiated. 20. REMOVING WATER-HYACINTH . Location. Streams tributary to gulf coast in Mobile D1i of Existing project. Provides for extermination or rernlvO i, plants from navigable waters of Florida, Alabama, MvissiSS'porb Louisiana, and Texas, so far as they are or may become anther struction to commerce, by any mechanical, chemical, or coats means whatsoever; for construction and operation of bo equipped with suitable machinery for such removal and conslmr tion and operation of log booms to prevent plants drifting .i er one stream to another. Existing project was authorized bY iel and Harbor Act of 1916 and prior acts. For details see Anfl Report for 1962. Local cooperation. None required. t Operations and results during fiscal year. U.S. spray Plto and hired labor operating in Mobile River delta from July 064 November 25, 1965, and April 25 to June 30, 1960 sprayed 1'ly acres in Chuckfee Bay, Burns Lake, Mallard Creek, Maple a3"1d Gravine Island, Big Bay John, Raft River, Middle River, a l Bayou, Smith Creek, Big Bayou Canot, Tensaw River, Owl 3aYt lco Little Bay John, Dennis Lake, Bayou Sara, Steele Creek, 1lle Creek, McVay Creek, Conway Creek, Louis Bayou, Dead La Squirrel Bayou, Big Briar Creek, Duck Bayou, Mallard Fo d Oak Leaf Bayou, Sand Bayou, Battle Creek, Domines Creek, a Catfish Creek. for Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, which is ° maintenance, was commenced about 1899, and work has carried on since that time. RIVERS AND HARBORS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 505 Cost and financial statement NealyeTotal to _1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 maintenance* co ated $20,500 $22,000 $22,000 $20,000 $28,000 $650,368 ....... 20,468 19,623 22,208 22,202 26,366 648,734 21. WATERWAY CONNECTING TOMBIGBEE AND TENNESSEE .RIVERS, 14c ALA. AND MISS. o n. ,ti''n Waterway extends from mile 215 in Pickwick pool and' lw essee Rliver, southerly through northeastern Mississippi Wla Alabama, a total of 253 miles, to the confluence of eterni pr' Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers at Demopolis, Ala. revious projects. For details see Annual Report for 1953. See tinq project. Provides for a waterway connecting Tennes- VIan in Tombigbee Rivers via East Fork of Tombigbee River, thre1eys and Yellow Creeks. Plan of improvement consists of bet sections: river section, 9- by 170-foot channel for 168 miles feet een Demopolis and Amory, Miss.; canal section, 12 by 170 by or 45 miles from Amory to Bay Springs; divide section, 12 to T15feet for 40 miles from Bay Springs through dividing ridge ile~nessee River; 240- by 1,000-foot passing places every 4 acco i. canal and divide sections. Total lift of 341 feet to be s1ePtPlished by 10 locks. Estimated (1964) Federal cost for eloc ork is $263 million plus $18,700,000 non-Federal cost for ized btions and bridge alterations. Existing project was author- y ' for 19 46 River and Harbor Act. For details see Annual Re- for f- 1953. l altoca cooperation. Local interests must make and maintain Wvcrations in highways and highway bridges and in sewer, uitabersupply, and drainage facilities; provide and maintain 1tabe and adequate river and canal terminals. Officials of the 13, 9 0f ssissippi were notified of the requirements December )e1 49 and officials of the State of Alabama were notified on ofthber 20, 1949. Legislation enabling boards of supervisors the te various counties concerned to enter into agreements with the Snited States relative to navigation projects was adopted by t ate of Mississippi in 1950. erminal facilities. None. Perations and results during fiscal year. Completed an eco- oc evaluation supplement to general design memorandum. don 0nition at end of fiscal year. No construction work has been 0,on existing project. Total cost of existing project to June 1966, was $891,253 for new work. 506 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement I Total to } Fiscal year................ 106 1963 1964 1965 1966 I 110354 New work: 8116,90 Appropriated .......... ............ $..125,000 $8 ,0 1,8 Maintenance: ..... ain M t . an e * * ** * * * * .** * ....... ............ ". .. . . . . 110,224.613 , 7. 326 6 3 2'4331 1 Appropriated.......... .......... ......... 6....... 34, ACostpit........ ... 1Includes $197,651 for new work and $234,331 for maintenance on previous projects 22. WOLF AND JORDAN RIVERS, MISS. oNev Location. In southeastern Mississippi, 54 miles east of Orleans. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1268). 6 Existing project. Provides for 7- by 100-foot channels frem foot contour in St. Louis Bay to 7-foot contour in each stredan Channel lengths are 1.6 miles for Wolf and 2 miles for Jore River. Plane of reference is mean low water. Mean tidal raoect is 1/4 feet and extreme, except during storms, 31/ feet. rt was authorized by 1907 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 91', Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. None required.are Terminal facilities. Natural landings along these streamS considered adequate for existing commerce.of Operations and results during fiscal year. Adjustmentofprior year cost $38. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project waso° menced in 1907 and completed in 1908. Controlling depth t Wolf River channel was 6.5 feet and in Jordan River, 7.0 feet (Mar. 1966). Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J !o3,0, lg g $ 9,1 New work: Appropriated....... ... ................................. 29,11 Cost......................................... ................ " 134'648 Maintenance: Appropriated.................... $17,879.............$22,400. 134,64 Coat............................. 17,879.............. 22,362 $38 23. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Project Date of e Bayou Coden, Ala ....................................... November1965 er Blackwater River, Fla ................................... Novemb Escambia and Conecuh Rivers, Fla. and Ala. ................ May 19661966 La Grange Bayou, Fla. ................................... January Panacea Harbor, Fla......................................June 1966 Port St. Joe Harbor, Fla. ................................. June 1966 St. Marks River, Fla .................................. June 1966 FLOOD CONTROL-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 507 24. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance li'o Coden.3 eou alere162 $,660 5$5..............0.............. 1096 $17,454 I. t o v, 4 .. .. .. .......... . . . ... RueC , eh l .i...3 a e isA ....... ............................ 1946 1946 14,000 4 ,0 000 5.,70 k a eR a. and Ala........................... 1949 171,885 266,445 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lre d onecuh Rivers,Fla.and Ala. 1965 137,324 215,052 rhope,. . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 1964 LaQ . reek,Fa. 3Ala.3 .. 1964 29 00 29,000 14 , 745 14,745 Lef ra e ,la3 ,.................................... 1931 8,562 36,800 S P . asawhay Rivers, Mi'ss. 4... . ........ 1919 23,090 42,676 Ocioe River,h{.....................9648,96 4,3 0 1' Mis.s 34 .. ................... 1902 47,528 14,472 let oWra CreekMi River Ga. a 1. .................. 1900 5,000 ................ a aI dar *.....................................1887 3,000.............. e Coosawtee Rivers, Ga.4..................... 1907 32,656 ............. rl li- er, r,Fla.3 M- 5ate 6 *Iss*4... ......................... .... 1 4 ' 1964 12, 357 122,383 rS er, . . .. 1956 15,000 164,999 St Edinbu Jo n1911 31,872 36,991 Sa i ver , Fla3.. ..... ............................. . 1963 1,960,862 554,269 8 iver, la.. ................................ 1965 1,710,809 19,153 Chiola er, Ala.13 ........... . ....... 1893 43,972 .......... .. River, Fla. from M riannato its mouth4.......... 1941 36,781 63,193 2Ill5aciverce reported. 4 0Dleted a 11bth dons e n tt in H. Doc. 467. 69th Cong., 1st sess. 'tinrzednrn by recommended W Chief of Engineers (Public Law 86-645, see. 107). project provides for maintenance only, $15,000 spent on previous project. 25. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law P .f a l 86-645 (preauthorization) ba i Year costs for preauthorization studies were $11,082 for City 11 Island Bay, Ala.; $7,077 for Grand Lagoon, Panama oe0l. a.; and $10,289 for St. George Island Channel, Apalachi- ay, Fla. 26. AUTHORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECT For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Operation and for- Construction maintenance County, shore protectionl..................... 1953 $1,133,000 ................ , 27. ARMUCHEE CREEK, GA. °cation. A tributary of Oostanaula River, rises in Walker 1es in northwest Georgia, and flowing south for about 40 h e ,,empties into Oostanaula River 10 miles above its con- S e With Etowah River to form the Coosa River. Armuchee wehas a drainage basin lying in Floyd, Chattanooga, and eais Counties. Armuchee, the principal community in the , sabout 8 miles north of Rome, Ga. 0)ottflng project. Improvement of Armuchee Creek for flood clearing banks ol by clearing channel of snags and debris and 508 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 from the mouth for 83,000 feet to about mile 15. Estimated ced (1965) of project is $144,000. Existing project was authorion August 8, 1963, by Chief of Engineers, under authority in se t 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended. a Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, plies. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Clearing, snaggig engineering, design, supervision, and administration. enced Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was cormen in November 1964 and completed in July 1965. Cost and financial statement Tot,31to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J e New work:41 Appropriated..........$10,000......... $19,000 $115,000 -$28,453 11 Cost ................ 3,872 $1,999 7,339 91,211 11,126 28. JACKSON AND EAST JACKSON, MISS. Location. On Pearl River at Jackson, Miss., about 278 ril above mouth of river. at Existing project. Provides for improvement of Pearl ~iverio Jackson, Miss., for flood control, to be obtained by constru ad of levees about 62,620 feet long, three pumping stationS, ile 5.04 miles of channel rectification including a cutoff 2.3. ld - long in Pearl River. Estimated cost (1965) is $7,600,000, ed ing $712,000 non-Federal contributions. Project was autoris. by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 441, 86th Cong., 2d sesd Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish la ndsddi rights-of-way for construction; make changes, alterations, a the tions, or relocations of any public utilities made necessary bY,. work; hold the United States free from damages; provide ass' s ances that encroachment on improved channels and pond a le- will not be permitted; maintain and operate works after corn, tion; and contribute in cash toward Federal first cost of constre tion an amount currently estimated at $712,000. Conditions being complied with. of Operations and results during fiscal " year. Construction. llel"ddll channels, levees, and pumping plant cost $2,536,053, incleder $276,019 non-Federal contributions. Engineering, design, suP vision, and administration cost $193,780.964 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began July 1964 and is about 60 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 62 1963 I 1984 105 FLOOD CONTROL--MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 509 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Nal eyaTotal to ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Newwork: contribted. atributed. $162,521 $276,019 $438,540 ..... .162, 521 276,019 438,540 29. OKATIBBEE RESERVOIR, MISS. Location. On Okatibbee Creek 37.7 miles above its mouth, in auderdale County, Miss., 7 miles northwest of Meridian. conrofting project. Provides for a dam and reservoir for flood co , water supply, and recreation. The dam will consist ofa abovPacted earthfill 6,620 feet long with top elevation 367 feet ele .mean sea level, or a maximum of 55 feet above streambed ea eation with top width of 18 feet. Spillway, 1,500 feet east of lOat end of dam, will be an unpaved free overflow type 1,000 feet 1eg With fixed crest at elevation 355.. A sluice intake structure dunr center of dam will serve two 6.5-foot diameter concrete con- 10its At maximum pool elevation of 355, reservoir will contain for,800 acre-feet, of which 80,600 will be for flood control, 8,500 Se' vater supply, and remaining 20,700 acre-feet will form a corn- 000 a.on pool for recreation. Estimated cost (1966) is $9,000,- including $1,217,000 non-Federal contributions. Approved hie1t -late feltding (1966) for annual $2,000 non-Federal. cost of maintenance is $113,000, Project was authorized by 1962 and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 549, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). -er Chaocal cooperation. Local interests must protect downstream the anUnited els fromStatesencroachments and obstructions and reimburse for construction cost allocated to water supply tea annual operation, maintenance, and replacement costs allo- ted to water supply. A resolution by City Council of b0 dian, adopted October 18, 1961, indicated willingness of that oy to assume responsibility for complying with requirements. ,P0erations and results during fiscal year. Land acquisition ae39'214; relocations $261,752; clearing for dam $350,253; es roads $16,692; engineering, design, supervision and ad- hstration $249,610. ad .ndition at end of fiscal year. Construction began June 1965 Is 28 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Year eal Total to .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork. ropriated................... $150,000 $100,475 $450,000$2,188,500 $2,888,975 ............. 70,845 179,630 347,009 1,917,521 .2,515,005 30. TOMBIGBEE RIVER TRIBUTARIES, MISSISSIPPI AND ALABAMA SLocation Tombigbee River rises in extreme northeast Missis- i and flows southerly through eastern Mississippi and western Alabama, emptying into Mobile River about 45 miles above its 510 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 mouth at Mobile, Ala. Tributaries to be improved for flood con" trol are all in northeast Mississippi and northwest Alabama. Ss Existing project. Provides for improvement of 22 tributaf, of Tombigbee River by means of channel enlargement and cutoost channel clearing, and snagging. Approved estimated o00 (1966) for new work is $25,173,000, consisting of $23,700s Federal funds and $1,473,000 to be contributed by local interess Existing project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act Doc. 167, 84th Cong., 1st sess.). ad Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands rights-of-way for construction; make all road, highway bri s and utility changes; alterations, additions, and relocation s pre sary for project; hold the United States free from damages all vent future encroachments in improved channels; maintain r works after completion; and contribute $1,473,000 in cash or equivalent work.- Operations and results during fiscal year. Channel imPros. ments cost $349,375, including $17,000 non-Federal contributicost Engineering, design, supervision, and administration $152,553. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Jue 1965 and overall project is about 3 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Ju 3, New work: $83926 Appropriated.......... $55,000 $106,000 -$60,375 $400,000 $333,300 685,40 Cost .................36,986 33,974 17,689 111,832 484,928 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS I Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June work: New Contributed.................................... $2,200 $17,000192 $9 20 Cost.............. Cost...2,200 ....... ....... 2,200 17,000 17,000 31. YELLOW JACKET CREEK, HOGANSVILLE, GA. St Location. Rises in southern part of Coweta County in central Georgia and flows generally southwesterly for 30 ,"es7 enters Chattahoochee River through the left bank 214 miles abo'Ve its mouth. Hogansville, which is 54 miles southwest of Atla et Ga., is in northeast corner of Troup County. Yellow Jac- Creek flows through improved portion of Hogansville in vicinet of Atlanta and West Point Railroad bridge. Yellow Jacde Creek has a drainage basin about 24 miles long and 16 miles *de and drains an area of 200 square miles. for Existing project. Improvement of Yellow Jacket Cree.k l flood control by enlargement of a 1,200-foot reach of channel Hogansville and rectification of a 2,800-foot reach downStra' from enlarged channel. Bridge modification consists of protec~te of steel pile bents on State Highway 100 bridge. Existing proJ FLOOD CONTROL---MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 511 vas authorized by the Chief of Engineers June 23, 1964, under aneority in section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as arfIenided. 19 cal cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, OPeapplies. Requirements being complied with. ientrations and results during fiscal year. Channel improve- tratio OmPleted. Engineering, design, supervision, and adminis- a CoWlition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in April as completed in December 1965. Cost and financial statement ealyear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 OP.iated. .... -... .... . oat ed... $28,000.. $28,000 $270,000 $9,000 $335,000 . 1,206 $13,492 13,732 142,849 159,455 330,734 32. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS u cal i flood-protection works for which inspection is performed Cat this heading consist of levee projects at West Point, Ga., on h aoochee River; Montezuma, Ga., in Flint River Basin; t1te and Geneva, Ala., in Choctawhatchee River Basin; and Coosa, Ga., Collinsville, Ala., and Prattville, Ala., in Alabama- creek iver Basin; and channel-rectification projects on Black creek Gadsden, Ala., in Alabama-Coosa River Basin; Old Town Creek' Tupelo, Miss., in Tombigbee River Basin; and Sowashee drain'Ileridian, Miss., in Chickasawhay River Basin, and a VIong e project at Jackson County, Fla. Projects at Rome and Is~ uma, Ga., and Collinsville, Ala., include pumping stations. setlons were made during September 1965 to determine ex- tet o er.at'compliance with approved regulations for maintenance and advi..on of several projects. Responsible local officials were fRsed of inadequacies in maintenance and operation of local orotection 0Dois works under this jurisdiction where appropriate. $108 Year costs were $1,500. Total cost to June 30, 1966, was '10charged to maintenance. 3. OTHER AUTIIORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Operation and for- Constructionmaintenance lle, V, .. ......................................1964 $274,024........ 1 M......................1040 r,ver, .l and La., at Jackson, Miss.4................. 1937 ............... 71,119......... eCooa 1.ga Creek, Ala.l............................. 1946 649,280............. et APoi ,, Ver,Ga.1.....................................1955 384,550................ t, h"attahoochee River, Ga.1 1955 10550,637......................... 599,637.. Auth eted. elorized by Chief of Engineers under section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as ra leted "b with funds appropriated for maintenance and improvement of river and harbor o funds allotted nor work done on this project. 512 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 34. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATIO Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization)ost Study identification Fiscal,1 year Baldwin and Hannon Sloughs, Montgomery, Ala......... 14,642 East Jackson County, Fla .............................. g4 Lake Douglass, Decatur County, Ga...................... 1,263 Leeds, Ala ............................................. 3,8 Shades Creek, Jefferson County, Ala. (unfavorable) ..... 2810 Thomasville, Ga. (unfavorable) ......................... ' Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Federal costs for fiscal year were $8,542 for advance prep 1d tion; $1,662 for emergency operations for Hurricane Bet5Ys fol- $359,954 for disaster relief caused by Hurricane BetSYs for lows: $179,760 for Harrison County, Miss., and $180,194ade Hancock County, Miss. Reimbursement of $289,245 will be by Office of Emergency Planning. 35. ALABAMA-COOSA RIVERS, ALA. AND GA. O Location. Alabama River is formed 18 miles above IVon 0 ce ery, Ala., by junction of Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers. rTlh ite$ it flows southwesterly through Alabama 318 miles and uath with Tombigbee River about 45 miles north of Mobile insorte western Alabama, to form Mobile River. (See Geologica~l.Sri$ maps for central and southwest Alabama.) Coosa iveto formed at Rome, Ga., in northwest Georgia, by Juocte of Oostanaula and Etowah Rivers, which have their sour ethe southeastern Tennessee and northern Georgia. From RonrrarA Coosa River ,flows southwesterly through Georgia and Alaery 286 miles, and unites with Tallapoosa River near Montgo ger' Ala., at about the center of the State, to form the Alabama h1es (See Geological Survey maps for northeast Alabama,S Tennessee, and northwest Georgia.) etails Previous projects. Projects for Alabama River* For deort see page 1837, Annual Report for 1915; page 725, Annual i 0 0~e for 1938; and page 592, Annual Report for 1944. Projects15 Coosa River: For details see page 1837, Annual Report forIe page 728, Annual Report for 1938; and page 594, Annua port for 1944. Existing project. Provides for full development of Alabser Coosa Rivers and tributaries for navigation, flood control, .de recreation, and other purposes, in accordance with plans t1 ere preparation by Chief of Engineers, subject to modifications tdro 0 ' of which may be advisable for increasing development of vel electric power. Project was authorized by 1945 rtai and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 414, 77th Cong., 1st sess., co s latest published maps). Public Law 436, 83d Congress, ro pended authorization of comprehensive plan, insofar as dro vides for development of Coosa River, to permit non-Fedar' interests to develop the Coosa by construction of a series o t, in accordance with conditions of a license issued pursuas MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 513 8 eral Power Act and in accordance with certain other provi- phass and requirements of aforementioned public law. Present st ,iOf improvement, now under construction, provides for con- Provion of, Jones Bluff and Millers Ferry multiple-purpose im- wvorkeients Claiborne lock and dam, and supplemental channel of AlProviding for a 9-foot deep navigation channel from mouth SCarlabama River to Montgomery, Ala., and for construction of Crivers Dam, a multiple-purpose improvement on Coosawattee Coos 1a. Estimated cost (1966) for new work on Alabama- tures Rivers is $199,700,000, consisting of $197,400,000 for struc- 1res, and $2,300,000 for supplemental channel improvement, ex- -Ve of amounts expended on previous projects. Developments proposed under existing project e struc Claiborne Millers Ferry Jones Bluff 5 ... .. .. .. .. ......... lock and dam lock and dam lock and dam Carters Dam mile____ AbiNe Vmouth t town ... ofriver............... . . . . . . .•. 181.8.......... . . .. 1142.2......... . . . 1245.4........ . . . . 226.8. tlce(miles*..... ............. Claiborne, Ala.. Camden, Ala....Benton, Ala.....Carters, Ga. WY lock eat i length,f .............. .8.......... 7...... ... 10........... 2. i l t rfe walow t) 600........... 600............ 600........ Liftth Oflock chanber (feet)......... 84..........84.......... ......... ation (feet) . ........... .. ... 30................ 50 ............. .45............ . elevel)normal poolsurface(mean 35.........80.............1021. Xi., 'ter vlls atlow water(feet) . 12...........12.... 12 .1....... ... iof foundation.......... ..... Rockr....... .. Roek........ Rock nRocke....... ? leig , way ........ Te 0 darn (........Gated........GGate.... Gated........Fixed crest. COlstructi(fnet a ) ...................50............ 85 ............91............423. P.,Or cap S tcore. .................. Concrete. Concrete .......Concrete...... Rock-fill earth pacity (acre-feet)............. 90,600......... 370,000........ 245,000....... 473,000. t rc lo ent (kw).......... . ............... 75,000......... 68,000....... 250,000. est .................. 9 ........ ... ..... 42....................... 23. at cost co : '°nStrtio auction and design............ $2 2,620,000...$48,151,000.... $46,108,000.... $66,355,000 rations) damages (including re- 1,380,000.... 5,049,000.... 6,492,000.... 1,246,000 . . Tn .I a cost (1966) ................. 53,200,000.... 24,000,000.... 67,600,000 52,600,000.... 2Above MIouth of Alabama River. e mouth of Coosawattee River. forcal cooperation. To be determined as formulation of plans loc development of project progresses. No action in matter of al cooperation has been initiated. l 7erminal facilities. On east bank at Montgomery, a natural s4iaig connects with the city streets. Wofford Oil Co. has a dilI Wharf about 10 miles below Montgomery equipped for han- in Petroleum products. There are also various natural land- Ri along the river. Facilities and natural landings on Alabama O are considered adequate for existing commerce. 5tr, erations and results duringq fiscal year. New work: Con- amc1on contained on Carters Dam, Millers Ferry lock and dam, ald Caiborne lock and dam, and was initiated on Jones Bluff lock . dam. Engineering and design was initiated on Alabama blicr channel. Detailed information on operation and costs ap- riable to the four structures is presented under their respective re Ject titles elsewhere in this report. Maintenance: Reservoir lation and preparation of reservoir regulation manual. 514 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Fiscal year costs for new work on overall project - _______ -Total Feature Contract Hired labor Carters Dam... ....... .............................. $5,877,065 $1,452405 3 3 Claiborne lock and dam................................... 850,874 482,118 1652 388 Jones Bluff lock and dam..................................267,839 384,549 13,2812443 Millers Ferry lock and dam............................... 10,540,637 2,740,607 584 Alabama River channel... ............................................ 50,842 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction on Carters, D was initiated in April 1962, on Millers Ferry lock and dalff April 1963, Claiborne lock and dam in May 1965, and Jonesdesg lock and dam in June 1966. Advanced engineering and deer is underway on the Alabama River channel. Maintenance oPrc tions on Alabama River, since authorization of existing Prj have been limited mainly to periodic dredging to restore d for open-channel depth from mouth to Wetumpka as provide ~ver, under previous projects. Maintenance operations on Coosa Ire of which were discontinued in 1950, consisted mainly of the care Government property at locks and dams constructed under for vious projects. These locks and dams have been inoperativefiors some years and no longer serve any useful purpose. Inspecti 0f of lower Alabama River in 1955 indicated a controlling depthlly 4 feet from mouth to Claiborne. Boats drawing 3 feet can usuNo operate all year; greater depths are usually available from tive, vember to June. Since all existing locks on river are inopera for through navigation on Coosa River is impossible. Cost li existing project to June 30, 1966, were $42,993,151, incl $42,799,143 for new work, $104,077 for maintenance of ex channel in Alabama River (4-foot project), $19,263 for oPerfters and care of locks and dams on Coosa River (care of lockma10 houses and other Government property at lock sites prior tor when this activity was discontinued), and $70,669 for rese for regulation and preparation of reservoir regulation manualsfor Weiss and Logan Martin Dams. Cost and financial statement Tots66O Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 june New work: 2009,'0 Appropriated.......... $1,042,9990 $2,448,950$4,002,441 $10,994,000 $25,859,600 340,491, Cost................. 942,464 2,383,3173,965,73710,909,40722,646,936 080 Maintenance: 3,172,: Appropriated.......... 9,900 8,072 10,000 12,000 16,000 3,172, Cost.................. 9,633 7,421 10,699 12,306 15,969 x Includes $3,692,483 for new work and $2,978,050 for maintenance on previous projectoO 2Includes $1,012,985 allotted for planning studies on Howell Mill Shoals Dam o^1 plVV River for which authorization has been suspended and $15,000 allotted for review l.ic for development of Coosa River submitted by non-Federal interests pursuant to publ 436, 83d Congress. .ver- SIncludes $1,012,985 applied to new work on Howell Mill Shoals Dam on Coosa Fder8l $11,109 expended during fiscal years 1956-57 on review of plans submitted by non.e terests pursuant to Public Law 436, 83d Congress. 35. A. ALLATOONA RESERVOIR, COOSA RIVER BASIN, CA. Location. Dam is on Etowah River in Bartow CountY, ast ea about 48 miles upstream from Rome, Ga., about 5 miles due MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-MOBILE, ALA., DISTRICT 515 of C. fartersville, Ga., and about 2,000 feet downstream from mouth Rieatona Creek. Reservoir extends about 28 miles up Etowah Sea levate maximum power-pool elevation of 840 feet above mean eiting Project. Adam and reservoir for flood control, regu- eleaO streamflow for navigation, and development of hydro- typCel ofPower. Height above river bottom of concrete gravity- abovPedam is about 190 feet, from elevation 690 feet to 880 feet cor0 rlMean sea level. Spillway, with crest at elevation 835, is aC0dtled by nine tainter gates, 40 feet wide by 25 feet high, chag o tOainter gates 20 feet wide by 25 feet high; it has a dis- face capacity of 318,500 cubic feet per second with water sur- vith a t elevation 870.1. 10 fe ee discharge valve, One 48-inch diameter sluicing conduit and four sluices 5 feet 8 inches wide by coist high, are included in dam. Installed generating capacity or a t.s of two 36,000 kilowatt units and one 2,000 kilowatt unit, 110,0 0otal of 74,000 kilowatts. Ultimate installed capacity will be t'0 6 kilowatts. The reservoir, covering 19,200 acres at eleva- 81,42650 has a storage capacity of 671,000 acre-feet. Cost was 0 of ,000 excluding an estimated (1966) $1,060,600 for addi- tij ofIrecreation facilities at completed project (Code 710 funds). 1941 was authorized by Flood Control Acts of August 18, ecr.nd December 22, 1944 (H. Doc. 674, 76th Cong., 3d sess.) Acte tion facilities were authorized by section 4, Flood Control etof 1944. Of al cooperation. None required (Sec. 2, Flood Control Act 4ine 28, 1938, applies). the ses. Under authority of section 10f, Federal Power Act, beefl ,abama Power Co. was assessed $324,918 for headwater i g 1 ts resulting from the operation of Allatoona Reservoir dur- 0 61, 1962, and 1963. atPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Rec- 1ntae facilities (Code 710) provided. Operation and mainte- CeOW Operation and ordinary maintenance of dams, reservoir, a derouse service and recreational facilities, and supervision Of Ahdministration incidental thereto. Gross power generation 14 IatOona Reservoir was 155,600,000 kilowatt-hours, of which Ad.00,000 kilowatt-hours were delivered to Southeastern Power ak4lnistration. Rains in headwater areas during February, ro, and April 1966, resulted in rises in pool elevation a maxi- t of 11.08 feet and a total impoundment of 352,000 acre-feet. 1 Nral stages at Rome, Ga., were reduced as much as 6.3 feet, ate corresponding total reductions in flood losses were esti- Co at $459,000 urban and $255,000 rural. bera .ition at end of fiscal year. Construction on existing project a in March 1944, was completed in October 1955. 516 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total t9 Fiscal year.............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: 295,311 Appropriated.......... ,$160,000 $211,679 $140,000 $129,000 $81, 000 $32'89,o Maintenance: [ 1194$2,0 CosMain tce: 121,944 145,404 204,024 162,518 100, 4 8428 Appropriated........... 613 359,000 380,811 375,500 587,600 572, 000 4 66 Cost................. 354,121 374,882 379,006 505,666 5633,'555 1Includes $864,968 for recreation facilities (Code 710). 35. B. CARTERS DAM AND RESERVOIR, GA. tee Location. Damsite is in Murray County, Ga., on CoosaWae of River 26.8 miles above its junction with Conasauga River, ofl iles headwater tributaries of Alabama-Coosa system. It is60ll , north of Atlanta, near town of Carters, Ga. Reservoir Wi both Murray and Gilmer Counties. dda Existing project. Consists of a 1,950-foot long rockfill across the river, three saddle dikes on left bank, a 2 5 8.foot*.l high-level, gated spillway on left bank, and a powerhouse o rig bank having two units with a total generating capacity of 0to kilowatts. Reservoir will have an area of 3,220 acre ' be capacity of 473,000 acre-feet, of which 193,600 acre-feet Wrol. usable for power and 95,900 acre-feet reserved for flood collos For cost estimates and other information see Alabamaoos project.pe- Operations and results during fiscal year. New work pr formed under contract was construction of dam and dikes $4t 994,096; powerplant $275,709; and access roads $607,2 6 0 38, work performed with hired, labor: Land acquisition cost $3 r engineering, design, supervision, and administration coS 416,167, Condition at end of fiscal year. pin $157,012 for land and land acquisition; $2,156,125 for re tilities of Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad, roads, and ates $481,536 for reservoir clearing; $3,094 for boundary m1 $826,961 for dams; $100 for power supply for pumping Pneit $560,496 for recreation facilities; $277,616 for' per flstrule operating equipment; $103,598 for maintenance during cofsuper tion; $169,539 for engineering and design; $276,856 for vision and administration; and $14,428 undistributed cost0 ved Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began iinte j ber 1958 and is 90 percent complete. The dam is cOmleP ctret. 1 all other major items of work are completed or under and ease To date, 36,970 acres of land have been acquired in fee ments on an additional 25,414 acres. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total10966 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1064 1065 1966 New work: 5 3 Appropriated..........$2,765,000 $4,845,000 $5,100,000 $9,180,000 $6,000,000 34, Cost................ 2,931,205 4,431,1984,925,8139,770,44341853,173 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year.. .............. 1963 1964 1965 1966 JofeO30 New work: $2 3: 38 Contributed........... $250,022 $361,164 $370,849 $726,596 $743,850 2, Cost............... ... 473,251 369,495 371,458 725,355 174,188 10.B. SHELBYVILLE RESERVOIR outl Location. Dam will be on Kaskaskia River at mile 221.8 ' one-half mile upstream from Shelbyville, Ill. Reservoir i 11 tend northeastward to approximate river mile 275 thr° FLOOD CONTROIL--ST. LOUIS, MO., DISTRICT 631 'l Moultrie, and Coles Counties, Ill. (See Decatur sheet of 1:250 00United States published by Army Map Service, scale 1:500 and Geological Survey quadrangle maps, scale ear~ la project. Provides for construction of a compacted tIreilldam with a concrete spillway section. Spillway struc- 45*a 'll consist of an ogee overflow section surmounted by three feet b 3 7-foot tainter gates. Dam will be about 108 alteratove streambed and about 3,000 feet long. Relocations or otilitiare required to railroads, highways, and miscellaneous ions "ectMaximum storage capacity will be 684,000 acre-feet. ladt cOst (1966) is $44,175,000, of which $10,700,000 is for is an damages. Local contribution toward cost of project toocooperation Local interests must contribute toward ofthis project 7.06 percent of total cost for water-supply 8eProvided, 6.86 percent of total cost for land enhance- Of ad 9.65 percent of total cost plus 5.75 percent of total cost A arlYle Reservoir for recreation, fish and wildlife benefits. Ditract was entered into between State of Illinois and the eakeStates under which the State will act as local sponsor to %l-icontributions for this project. State of Illinois is currently v 1" )eratPayments • thereunder.. ter _t.ons and results during fiscal year. Land acquisition, 2u99ction, and planning continued. Costs incurred were Of a,557 for land and land acquisition; $1,080,818 for relocation da s,3 utilities, and cemeteries; $618,718 for construction of 50,000 for recreation facilities; $43,104 for p)ermanent t, eatingeqimet 0 4g equipment; $19,470 for maintenance during construc- ii $464,747 for engineering and design; $169,959 for super- 01 and administration; and $10,774 undistributed cost. "iton at end of fiscal year. Construction began in April 4ebad is 28 percent complete. To date, 25,173 acres of land .acen acquired in fee and easements acquired on an additional Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Nlyea Total to 1062. 193206 960106 Jne30000 or.- ,ew C$29....... 200,000 $406,00051,120,000 $3,200,000 $1,535,000 $9,862,000 .... 287,024 391,015 1,115,302 3,020,160 4,214,152 9,334,807 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ear Total to ......1062 1063 10611 1965 1060 June 30, 1060 ite$349,973 $347,540 $875,800 $1,781,143 $3,354,456 ................. 322,790 374,536 875,893 1,534,995 3,108,214 to 10.C. VILLAGE OF NEW ATHENS,ILL. oction. Proposed levee will provide flood protection to New 632 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Athens, Ill. New Athens is in St. Clair County, Ill., on River at mile 41. f Existing project. Provides for construction of 6,875 feet rY 0 earth levee, a pumping station, drainage structures, and necesS6a6) sry closure structures and sewer alterations. Project cost (1 $2,400,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. t for Operations and results during fiscal year. Second contra. nder construction of sewer alterations, pumping plant, and remn coe" of levee was awarded May 2, 1966. Costs were $125,000 liford struction of upper flank levee, $233 for Government furnl e~ for terial, $106,065 for engineering and design, and 2,28 supervision and administration. l Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of upper laced levee was initiated and major portion of remaining work p under contract. Project is 18 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $79000 Appropriated........... $35,000 $73000 ............ $120,000 $451,000 44298 Cost............... .. 18286 74,515 s , o 80,069 256,583 11. McGEE CREEK DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, L Location. In Brown and Pike Counties, Ill., on right beaP Illinois River between mile 67.2 and 75.1 above the 1VMiss 'b- River. (See Kansas City sheet of map of United States P lished by Army Map Service, scale 1:500,000.) 14.7Miles of Existing project. Provides for reconstruction of ald a14.7 levee, construction of a new pumping plant, closure structure, to seepage control measures. Project will provide protectiOl of about 12,080 acres of agricultural land against a floodjly about 50-year frequency. Estimated total construction cost bou- 1966) is $4,570,000. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood trol Act (H. Doc. 472, 87th Cong., 2d sess.) dis Local cooperation. Because of the vulnerability of thie trict to flooding, District Commissioners have been very act1 he efforts to obtain the flood protection they need and desire. ore district has been steadily improved in the past few years, as I le local funds became available. The district is believed to have for legal authority and financial capability to act as local sponsor this work. tio~ Operations and results during fiscal year. PrecolstrUeg planning continued. Costs incurred were $36,414 for engineeri and design, and $2,850 for supervision and administration. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on general desio memorandum is essentially complete. Preconstruction planlS is 99 percent complete. FLOOD CONTROL-ST. LOUIS, MO., DISTRICT 633 Cost and financial statement yer PIcal Total to 1062 1963 1984 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Ne-Alpropri~d. Work. - -. . ..... ... .... . . rop ....... $72,000 $140,000 $5,000 $217,000 ............... 48,507 127,485 39,264 215,256 . ......... 12. MERAMEC PARK RESERVOIR, MO. Lrca'ion. Dam will be at mile 107.5 on Meramec River in Cranln County Crawfod Fa near Sullivan, Mo. Reservoir is mainly in Louis d, Franklin, and Washington Counties, Mo. (See St. ~ 00.)0.) sheet of map published by Army Map Service, scale 1:250'0 Act atin project Project authorized by 1938 Flood Control 1g1h d provides for construction of an earth dam about 170 feet Wiliotha crest length of 2,550 feet. Reservoir will provide 1 acres acre-feet of storage and provide flood protection for 10,950 of so flood plain in the Meramec River valley above the mouth belo~r,beuse River, and partial protection for 28,760 acres of land ater Bourbeuse. Project will also provide water supply, uality control storage and recreation, and fish and wildlife 800t,000 Project cost (July 1966) is $42,800,000, including $4,- t00 ocal reimbursement for water supply. Cost of cooperation. Local interests must contribute toward alnce W,Project for storage allocated to water supply in accord- dertonath the Water Supply Act of 1958. State of Missouri Wara~trated sufficient interest and approval of the basin plan to operat the assumption, at this time, that necessary local co- 0Oeratin o Lwill be forthcoming. st~ructisons and results during fiscal year. Work on precon- to n planning was continued. Costs incurred were $21,691 Py 11)o$534uinary mapping and advance planning for land acquisi- isol 4,382 for engineering and design, and $39,968 for super- .d alrodtionadministration. Con at end of fiscal year. Hydrology memorandum was reove and work continued on general design memorandum. nstruction planning is about 71 percent complete. Cost and financial statement rear 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Total to June30, 19661 Nowwork: I D ropTtata C, o ed rt. $200,000 $600,000 $1,000,000 1,........... .. .... .... ... . 198,935 596,041 994,976 'lde$200,000 for definite project study. r 13. MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT ST. LOUIS, MO. i°c i on . Protective works will be on right bank of Missis- 18.2 lnVer from Maline Creek to Carr Street, between miles miles nd 180.2; from Poplar Street to Chippewa Street, between 79.2 and 176.3. Area to be protected includes low-lying 634 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARIVIY, 1966 lands along riverfront of St. Louis between river an hiati ground. (See folder by Corps of Engineers, of 1 3tl,to Charts, Middle and Upper Mississippi River, Cairo,7 Minneapolis, Minn.) eet of Existing project. Provides for construction of 21,200 c osure earth levee, 34,400 feet of reinforced concrete floodwal, tationif structures, underseepage relief measures, 25 pumplnl? rotec and alterations to 44 sewer systems. Project will prov1d alis.e tion to heavily industrialized area along riverfront from street Creek to Carr Street and Poplar Street to Chippew d tot against a flood of about 200-year frequency. Estimat 0 00 coll construction cost (1966) is $80,145,000 including $1,54 6 8 4th tributed funds. Project was authorized by Public Law 2A Congress (S. Doc. 57, 84th Cong., 1st sess.). author Local cooperation. Formal assurances as required by rtces izing act were received from city of St. Louis. These aste'dy are applicable to reaches 3 and 4 of project and supplemetces assurances of Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District. AssUtio f by Sewer District are applicable to maintenance and opera art of sewage, drainage, and pumping facilities constructed asdainage project and to local cooperation requirement that new .vd flood and sewage facilities constructed within limits of proteCtithout plains will function at all river stages up to design flood, quire- cost to the United States. Included in local cooperation rst equal to 3.6 percent of fi te ments is a required contribution of construction of reach 3. Assurances were accepted.hg-of ht" District Engineer, October 22, 1958. City furnished rd jdig way required for all work currently under contract s woL r cated they will be able to fulfill requirements for remainn 46,00 as required. Through June 30, 1966, city contributed $1, areL toward construction cost of reach 3. Flood protection for tudied along Maline Creek in city of Bellefontaine Neighbors ws. ers oi and approved as part of the project by Chief of Enzgin l1~ September 29, 1961. Due to lack of financial ability of l'is area terests in this reach the cost of providing protection to th1 was deleted from project cost. tg,24 Operations and results during fiscal year. Costs of $3,,ted o were incurred on reach 3. Work by contract consi5s lter ' $2,827,595 for construction of levees, floodwalls, and swer $40 for tions; $316,684 for construction of pumping plants; and$2 for engineering and design. Costs by hired labor were $18'oCol, erosion protection measures; $6,277 for protection duriij 6 for struction; $1,437 for storage of pumps and motors; $7 istra engineering and design; $228,312 for supervision and aver tion; and $10,840 undistributed cost. Costs of $6,593 ,0 incurred on reach 4. Work by contract consisted of $ 226905 for construction of floodwalls and sewer alterations; $581 Costo pumping plants; and $205,340 for engineering and design. 10134 by hired labor were $329,699 for engineering and design; $3ui0 for supervision and administration; and minus $1,719tl tributed costs. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of reach 3 1 initiated in March 1959 and reach 4, August 1963. Reach 3 FLOOD CONTROL-ST. LOUIS. MO.. DISTRICT 635 Dercenlt co ercent lete; reach 4 is 34 percent complete; total project, 65 COmplete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS i l s ear. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ieWork*-___ ___________ r ated. $8,049,272 $7,605,728 $7,605,000 $7,695,000$8,975,000 $51,375,000 8,393,0866,930,0077,664,6666,981,64 9,925,291 50,567,474 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS alYear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work: ouftribtd. 00t. $273,107 $267,007 $251,003 $142,587 $130,740 $1,446,001 628,700 193,038 233,389 90,000 155,686 1,325,814 14. PER"IRY COUNTY DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICTS LOc. NOS. 1, 2, AND 3, MO. 'oton.In Perry County, Mo., and Randolph County, Ill., above Oh bank of Mississippi River between miles 94 and 111 Ckett o River. Project, as enlarged by inclusion of Crain and rliver Islands, includes that portion of bottom lands between kask. andbluffs and between Red Rock Landing, Mo., and Kas- arta Island. (See folder by Corps of Engineers of Navigation a "iddlen.and Upper Mississippi River, Cairo, Ill., to Minne- te 2 E'.Minn.) ting project. Raising and enlarging existing levee sys- a bile'reconstruction of 7.7 miles of riverfront levee, 14.1 of 7.Of back levee, and 4 miles of upper flank levee; construction tel tMiles of new riverfront levee; and construction of appur- lcsurWorks consisting of gravity drainage structures, highway teI structures, surfacing service roads on levee crown and tio t railroads at levee crossings. Project will afford protec- e 1ti0th e district against a flood of about 50-year frequency. te, ed total construction cost (1966), including $41,000 for y 19 ary levee repairs, is $6,861,700. Project was authorized Lo P Flood Control Act. Over cooperation. Fully complied with. otrcations and results during fiscal year. Cost incurred by tabolWere $244,187 for seepage control measures. Hired erosi costs were $602 for piezometers installation, $4,363 for oi l2 protection measures, $1,515 for engineering and design, Co1 4 ,109 for supervision and administration. QCistilton at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated on n project in December 1937 and was in beneficial use in fall *6. Project is 99 percent complete. 636 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1066 1966 June301 New work:$663 Appropriated.......... $380,106 $230,000 $330,000 $552,700 -$25,000 6,78 Cost............... ... 235,217 3906,112 259,875 254,105 274,776 15. PRAIRIE du PONT LEVEE AND SANITARY DISTRICT, ILLINO Location. On left bank of Mississippi River between io. 166 and 175 above the mouth of Ohio River. (See St. Louis), d map published by Army Map Service, scale 1:250,000.) eport Previous project. For details see page 719 of Annual for 1962. ace of Existing project. Project area contains about 12,900 ac s potential industrial area protected from major floods of ther, sissippi River by levees built to approved grade. owe o., when Mississippi River stage exceeds 15 feet on St. L0ouisu0o gage, substantial damage results from impoundment f four within the district. Project provides for construction ,uthor" pumping stations to reduce interior flooding. Project was t d ized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 540, 87th Cong' sess.). Estimated cost (July 1966) is $1,030,000. " andrd Local cooperation. Local interests must providela rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States free frod damages; maintain and operate project after completion'; o provide assurances that encroachment on improved channes o ponding areas will not be permitted, and if ponding areasl t ,jlited, capacities are impaired, substitute storage capacity or equi vjed pumping capacity will be provided without cost to the ovide States. Local interests indicated their willingness to pr necessary requirements. tiol Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruc ai planning continued. Costs were $37,080 for engineerin , design, and $2,462 for supervision and administration. du Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memoranc and plans and specifications for the pumping plants were pleted. Cost and financial statement to Trotal Fiscal year................. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 , 0 New work:79 Appropriated.......... .................... $47,000 $47,000 79 Cost.................. ............ 40,454 39,542 ' Excludes $5,235,927 for new work on previous project. 16. REND LAKE RESERVOIR, BIG MUDDY RIVER, ILL. Location. Will be in Franklin and Jefferson Counties in 5 .7 ern Illinois. Proposed damsite is on Big Muddy River, ver miles upstream from its confluence with the Mississippi heet and about 3 miles northwest of Benton, Ill. (See Belleville caSle of map of United States published by Army Map Service, S FLOOD CONTROL-ST. LOUIS, MO., DISTRICT 837 ,isV, and Geological Survey quadrangle maps, 1:62,500.) Ungatedln project. Provides for construction of an earth dam, eatiad concrete spillway, relocation of roads and utilities, rec- tio n al facilities, access roads, and service facilities. In addi- ars o subimpoundment dams will be constructed on upper ese of reservoir to enhance fish and wildlife itese oror will have an area of 24,800 acres, and value of project. a storage capac- uityol 4,000 acre-feet. Project will provide flood control, water eprea . low-flow regulation, conservation of fish and wildlife, is $44,4 , and area redevelopment. Project cost (July 1966) S ol ,000, of which $8,100,000 is local contribution for water adCost of construction is $33,400,000 and $11 million for l~andsI taldct damages. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Con- ol(II. Doc. 541, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). SIll' cooperation. Agreement was reached among State (1) as, Rend Lake Conservancy District, and the Corps that Joitlate of Illinois and Rend Lake Conservancy District will eitered aId severally sponsor this project, (2) State of Illinois ater into a contract with the Corps to pay $8,100,000 for enid upply features of the project, and (3) State of Illinois and the Cake Conservancy District will enter into contract by which Wate uservancy District will be granted authority to distribute tion to rom the water supply storage in this project. Legisla- Illio. implement the above agreements was passed by the suraG General Assembly and approved by the Governor. As- races of local cooperation and water supply contract have been O1 approved by the Secretary of the Army. .tedand $1,77eratons and results during fiscal year. Costs incurred were of 1,o431 for lands and land acquisition; $82,509 for relocations rads , railroads, and utilities; $699,989 for subimpoundment c ast uct*4,922 for tributary gages; $3,085 for maintenance during S erUvi.ction; $404,836 for engineering and design; $111,543 for SCondlon and administration; and $12,856 undistributed cost. C Zdition at end of fiscal year. Construction of subimpound- reloat ams was completed. Construction was initiated on road acresa on contracts. Land acquisition continued; to date, 14,930 addit ave been acquired in fee, and easements acquired on an addilonal 45 acres. Project is 11 percent complete. Cost and financial statement lyes,, Total to work.. ........... 62 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661' ,k'Driated tiated *$20,000 r0 $430,000 $461,000 $742,093 $3,542,000 $5,195,093 ............. 3,500 445,361 229,749 673,918 3,091,171 4,443,699 el $550,000 Area Redevelopment e1i$,4409 Administration funds 1nstruction costs of Interstate Highway 7 to meetallotted to State of Illinois project requirements. In- 03Area Redevelopment Administration funds allotted to the Corps. 0 17. RICHLAND CREEK, ILL. oocotion. A tributary of Kaskaskia River, in St. Clair and ste Cincinnati sheet of map of United (SeeMap Counties, byIll.Army es, Published Service, scale 1:500,000.) 638 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Provides for channel improvementsch Richland Creek through Belleville, Ill., and the agriculturalcorbi- extending 20 miles below the city. This improvement,1Ile bY nation with two reservoirs to be constructed above Blellevllle- Department of Agriculture will provide flood protection tod con ville and agricultural property downstream. Estimatedorized struction cost (July 1966) is $6,040,000. Project was audsess.) by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 571, 87th Cong., 2- rovide Local cooperation. Local interests indicated they willPrupon formal assurances together with necessary court authority as' request. Necessary legal steps to accomplish execution q11 re- surances will take about 6 to 9 months after preliminary re to ments are furnished. City of Belleville proposed a bond issbject provide local costs for reaches 2 and 3. This bond issue forma to referendum vote. Local interests in reach 3 are to district to cosponsor project with city of Belleville. d Tere Operations and results during fiscal year. Costs incure ad $27,155 for engineering and design and $1,430 for supervis'n administration. desi Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on general memorandum is near completion. Cost and financial statement ot5 to 6 1965, 1966 39 1 Julie Fiscal year ................ New work: 1962 1963 1964 I....... $298 - Appropriated.......... ........ ............ $90,000 $195,000 $13,000 29 NTi Cost....................77,899 183,719 28,586 18. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN (ST. LOUIS DIST.) e Location. Mississippi River Basin above Ohio RiverexclCal of Missouri River Basin, in St. Louis District. (See Geolo Survey State maps for Illinois and Missouri and quadrangle the also, St. Louis, Quincy, Rolla, and Paducah sheets of mat0000.) United States, published by Army Map Service, scale 1:250eneral Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1938 approved ge9 Per comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in ttee Mississippi River Basin described in Flood Control Comionttee Document 1, 75th Congress, 1st session, with such modificaogi thereof as in discretion of Secretary of War and Chief of v iri neers may be advisable, and authorized $6,600,000 for resersvi and $2,700,000 for local flood protection works on upper ects sippi and Illinois Rivers; reservoirs and local protection proecifi- to be selected and approved by Chief of Engineers. Act sP and cally provides that authorization shall include enlargemrnengiver extension of a system of levees on south side of Sangamon 604Y east of Chandlerville, Ill., as set forth in House Documen rized 75th Congress, 3d session. Flood Control Act of 1944 authoc o to be appropriated additional $10 million for prosecution 0ie of s prehensive plan, including Red Rock Reservoir on Des 19 River. Flood Control Act of 1946 authorized an additiona 1-* propriation of $10 million for prosecution of comprehensive pla" FLOOD CONTROL--ST. LOUIS, MO., DISTRICT 639 -f5Ulu.trol Act of 1950 authorized an additional appropriation 11g lillion for prosecution of comprehensive plan. Follow- loi rlidividual projects in St. Louis District were considered in Prehensive plan: Reservoirs aTneTotal estimated cost Tributary basin State (last date of revision) Park t i amee C '.. Meramec................... Missouri................. $42,800,000 (1966) Rfll...... ................. do .............. ..... do..................... 28,400,000 1966 ............. do ............... ..... do................... 21,400,000 1954 Levees For last full report Total estimated cost Projects see Annual Report for- nli'ssi i River: 5 t iver v levee project, II!.................................... 1966 $14,857,800 (1966) - kaski Fort Chartres and Iv Landing, Ill..................... 1957 2,123,700 rad T Island levee project, 11.1... ............................ 1949 3,487,500 (1966) 11i oMiller Werlevee project, I ll.. .... ............................. 195) 4,667,900 Sliver d levee project, Ill...................................... 1955 164,183 eredoia Lake and Willow Creek levee, 111.2...................... 1944 2,359,738 (1966) eomp)leted work cost of $297,460. coleted work cost of $249,738. tiOQerations and results duiing fiscal year. Planning was con- cod on Meramec Park Reservoir and construction continued on ProjectRiver Project. See individual reports for details of 4COl ition at end of fiscal year. In the Meramec Comprehensive 11e4'deReport, the Meramec Park and Union Reservoirs are recom- reauth to be deleted from the Flood Control Act of 1938 and ay as units of the Meramec Basin Plan. The Cedar Hill aorized auty is recommended to be deleted but not reauthorized. Work torized by the Flood Control Act of 1938 for the Wood River b1o1dc is essentially completed. Work has not started on project athoration authorized by Flood Control Act of 1965. All work ra zed for Stringtown, Ft. Chartres, and Ivy Landing, Ill., the work Tower, Ill., and Miller Pond, Ill., projects are completed. Izask authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1938 for the h askia Island, Ill., and lMeredosia Lake and Willow Creek levee, lo ' are completed. No work has been accomplished on ad- ola protection authorized for these two projects by 1962 Flood tdr t Act. Total cost to date for St. Louis District projects iedhis authorization is $23,527,500, excluding costs on projects auth 0 rity..from this authorization and reauthorized under a new 19. VAI.LEY CITY DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, ILL. a 'at"ion. On right bank of Illinois River between miles 63.2 67.0, in the northeast part of Pike County, Ill. South fork of ee Creek flows along the north district boundary. 640 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Provides for reconstruction of 6,150 liDeo feet of the upper flank levee at an estimated cost (July 196.ief of $96,491. Project was authorized August 16, 1963, by h80th Engineers under authority in section 205, Public Law 858, Congress, as amended. Local cooperation. Terms of local cooperation have been wer' Operations and results during fiscal year. Costs incurred were $57,857 for contract work on levee. Hired labor cost ad $1,982 for engineering and design and $4,928 for supervisiOl administration.di Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated August 1965. Project is 93 percent completed. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30196 New work: 491 Appropriated....................... $991 $11,000 $74,000 $10,50089473 Cost.............................. . .991 10,858 12,857 64,767 20. WOOD RIVER DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, ILL. Location. In Madison County, Ill., on left bank of MississP River between river miles 195 and 203 above Ohio River. ds trict includes bottom lands between river and bluffs and etead from Cahokia diversion channel on the south to opposite lock 0 f dam No. 26 at Alton, Ill., on the north. Small industrial ciesof Hartford, Wood River, Roxana, and East Alton and part of tA riverfront, lie within the district. (See folder by Corps of iver, neers of Navigation Charts, Middle and Upper MississiPi Cairo, Ill., to Minneapolis, Minn.) ied Existing project. The 1938 Flood Control Act author.ide raising, enlarging, and extending existing levee system to proc 20.8 miles of levees and construction of appurtenant works.lc- sisting of gravity drainage structures, highway and ralro d I closure structures, alterations to existing or construction of neW ofkj pumping plants; surfacing service road on levee crown, In ee necessary alterations to railroad tracks and bridges ta lo crossings, seepage corrective measures and construction of e"c- water dam at mouth of Wood River. Project will afford Prone. tion to this district against a flood of about 200-year frequedidyg Estimated total construction cost (1966) is $14,629,800 (exclifled $23,000 contributed funds). Flood Control Act of 1965 1nod station with collector ditches and necessary aputn ati,,ted b 1938 for Flood of removal Control waterAct. to provide impounded f existing F work by authorized by 1965fadii levee. Esti Federal Local cost of this modification cooperation. Fully complied is $228,000 for work auth ve. with (1966). jed Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work Zuhoiver by 1938 Flood Control Act. For work authorized by 1965 ~n and Harbor Act, local interests must provide lands, easements$,o rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States free i all damages due to the construction works; maintain and opera tel the works after completion in accordance with regulations Pre scribed by the Secretary of the Army; and prevent eneroachand on improved channels or ponding areas and, if ponding areas FLOOD CONTROL---ST. LOUIS, MO., DISTRICT 641 a ties are impaired provide substitute storage or equivalent aa O1e tlgcapacity promptly without cost to the United States. 1938 Ltions and results during fiscal year. Under authority of levees ood Control Act, cost incurred by contract was $345 for f9; $173 fo Ures$ " ired labor costs were $263 for erosion protection meas- sa for supervision and administration; and minus $1,641 fr waorle and transfer of equipment. No funds were available Cordit authorized by 1965 Act. '99n tion ized Perc en tatcomplete. end of fiscal year. Work authorized by 1938 Act No work has been done on work author- ' 1965 Act. 96 At Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Zoowori. --- Oiated ..........$794,005 $225,816 $5,000 $25,000............ $14,629,821 .....686,025 441,873 38,275 58,338 -$860 14,622,528 $23,00c 000 contributed funds. Mi 1 PECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Sthe f1P i,Illinois, and Kaskaskia Rivers levees were inspected ditio, a of 1965 and spring of 1966 at a cost of $17,100. In ad- !ert expended for piezometer repairs and $1,707 for ,5046nwas 81nand administration. 22OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and --. _ for- maintenance 5 Rih rapage and Levee District, Illinois River, 111.1............ .... .......... C rr t ersion, Illinois2........ ...................... 1953 $2,837,114... h a urd, o., reaches Nos. 1 3, and 43... .. .......... . 1959 22,000 .............. So., No.22. 1965 5,157,805.............. 2. . . . . . . . . 4ra trek )Tcoki.and Venice Drainage and Levee . . .District . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1955 185,700 ........... Cor of ld eityand Levee District, Illinois. 1964 4,984,500........ t of rd .Illinois S4n , River, Ill.1 . ........................ ............ .... . .. So D'.eredosia D and Willow Creek, and Coon Run Drainage ............. . . .. .... aned tricts. Illinois River, 111.1 1d 6-.(i tain Bluff Levee and Drainage District, Illinois2.... 1959 5,889,500 ........ eaud8 and Clear Creek Drainage District, Illinois ...... 1963 1,920,600.. at P3k ey Drainage and Levee District, Illinois River, I .... .. etY kprotection for certain hi hway and railroad facilities 1950 50 0 :.. . Roeac~yrd'nag, Mo. (see Flood ControI Act of 1944).2 A4 a to llevees on Mississippi, Illinois and Kaskaskia 1953 .............. $1,033,279 0d fighting and rescue work (see. 5, Flood Control Sasa1941, hRr9 0 n.. 3ended).4 ary eyro"ctionfocet h w ! ffl r--r' lon,for certain highway and railroad facilities at 1952 50,000 ........... 6tyrobridge (see. 12, Flood Control Act of 194,).2 0 2 on for Illinois approach, Chain of Rocks Bridge 1946 25,000 ...... R odCntrol r Act of 1944).2 2. . . . . . 4Nr and Iy Landin Drains e District No. 5, Illinois 1958 1,154,800...... IdtOIewb Inage and Levee istrict,Illinois River, Ill.1........... ........................... SBage and Levee District, Illinois River, Ill....,.......... .............. .............. Alrnage and Levee District, Illinois River, Ill............... .th Dn and and tvZxneDiage Levee Levee District, District, Illinois2.0. .4 ..... Illinois2rIl......... * 1957 939,569........... erand e vicinitIllinois2R..... .1959 3,882,600.. 1 ,' 4 ra andLevee istrict, 6Illinoiss....................... .......... .. .. ........... 1959 1,866,910 e District, Missouri... 3 ... .. .. .. .. ......... a~8 1938 . ..... .. kott il e vee District No. 1, Missouri. 1949..... 001ty t .Drainage and Levee District, Missouri3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1938 ea r age and Levee District, Illinois River, 111.1......... 6000....... ..-e oDis' 'ea-. 111.3 a Al . triet, ai.ae andaLD.oD isritMi.............eD r Misouri3........... in, M ............ 193 8 ....... 196019, 00.. otes next page. I I 1 642 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 PROJECTS - C ont in ged OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL 1 Projects authorized or modified by Flood Control Act of Oct. 23, 1962. 2 Completed. SInactive project. Work complete pending another flood. ve Act Completed except for seepage control measures which are inactive. ad rbo er I, SLow-lying lands in this district acquired under authority of 1937 River anded additional protection for remaining lands in the district has been recommen Mississippi agricultural area report. 23. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZAT0 Emergency flood control activities---repair,flood fighting, and rescue (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation)." ne repare" F'ederal cost for fiscal year was $53,846 for advance re- tions, $5,022 for emergency operations, and $147,872 f habilitation. Snagging and clearing navigable streams and tributaries n interest of flood control (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public • Law 780, 83d Cong.)' Riv er s Unfavorable report was submitted on Kaskaskia iver ging and clearing and on North Fork, Salt River, Scagginy clearing, costs for the year were $998 and $887, respectively. 24. CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND RESERVOIR, SALT 1IV , 0 (JOANNA RESERVOIR) jSileS Location. Salt River rises in Schuyler County, about l12het south of Missouri-Iowa State line. It flows generally souot erly about 192 miles and empties into Mississippi River a th of miles above Louisiana, Mo., or about 284 miles above ol89 of Ohio River. (See Kansas City and Quincy sheets of j0000 United States published by Army Map Service, scale 1: and Geological Survey quadrangle maps, 1:250,000.)eprt Previous project. For details see page 645 of Annual ep for 1963. rle- Existing project. Provides for construction of a multiplev pose reservoir, including power, flood control, water suPPly, supPtox1 gation storage, pollution abatement, fish and wildlife C1onserlaelt and recreation. Dam consists of a compacted earth emban]( with a concrete spillway controlled by tainter gates. Da spillway are about 1,700 feet long. Spillway structure 39foot of an ogee overflow section surmounted by four 50-by 2000 tainter gates. Reservoir will have a storage capacity of.,4 'stri acre-feet for use of flood control, future domestic and ind roject water supply, sediment storage, and power generation. iloyat document plan provides for installation of two 27,000 lpe units, one conventional and one reversible, to be used for" 000 storage operations. Project cost estimate including $,1966) for local contribution for water supply is $70,600,000 (ly.sition This estimate includes $10,120,000 for lands and land acqut ('I. costs. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control A r Doc. 507, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Studies are currently Uvnder co using revised power values furnished by Federal Pow er y' mission to determine if installation of two 35,000 kilow' 11thor one reversible, would be more economically feasible than a o ization plan. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-ST. LOUIS, MO., DI)STRICT 643 Local cOOperation. In accordance with provisions of Water s ly c of 1958, the cost of storage allocated to water ouwuld be reimbursed by the local sponsor. State of underst'acting through its State Water Resources Board and 1gis uthority of the General Assembly of State of Missouri by tioJ1 Prov passed in 1965, will sponsor this project. This legisla- Glake Driate 2. sonlable ides that the Water Resources Board is authorized to assurances and enter into contracts with appro- c Fedeira ederal departments for purposes of discharging non- SUlpp ly responsibilities relating to municipal and industrial water Water reorage as permitted by applicable Federal legislation on oard Aesources projects. Assurances were executed by State toey ril 8, 1965. Assurances reviewed by Office of the At- ta of eneral, State of Missouri, and it is his opinion that the te 'cutVIissouri has the legal authority and financial capability b eiee aid assurances. These assurances have been approved ilto itf Of Engineers. A water supply contract will be entered .)Yvith the sponsor before any use of the water supply storage 1 ielud.edi under this project. No local contribution for recreation, Oe -recreation aspects of fish and wildlife, is required. fltts ons and results during fiscal year. Initial construction la ax ere received. Costs incurred were $144,908 for land and for rcquisition; $26 for buildings, grounds, and utilities; $42 ides, anent operating equipment; $376,660 for engineering and Codin27,610 for supervision and administration. acces tion at end of fiscal year. First construction contract, O otheroad to damsite, was awarded. Planning continued acres hr items. Land acquisition was initiated; to date, 928 additive been acquired in fee, and easements acquired on an "al 9 acres. Cost and financial statement year Total to S ....... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 d So riated ... ..... ....... .. ..... $200,000 ... .. $363,000 $439,000 $700,000 $1,918,628 ...... ...... 181,027 376,346 439,677 549,246 1,762,924 S$216,628 for definite project study. c 25. SURVEYS ~fYcalYear costs were $53,859 for navigation studies, $34,198 eleiood control studies, $1,625 for coordination with other ies, and $159,634 for comprehensive basin studies. as 26. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA $ i. Year costs for flood plain information studies were SThis amount was used to complete the Meramec, Big adi1 and Belew Creek studlies; continued Saline Creek study; ttiated Dry Creek, Head Creek, and Bourne Creek studies. 644 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Completed flood plain studies . -- Federsl coot Location Requesting agency Date completed Belew Creek........................... Jefferson County, Mo.... January 1966..10 Big River . .... ... .. do................. October 1965... 300 Meramec River tributaries........ ... .. ... do......... ...... . do......do ...... . 2 0 Mississippi River tributariesl.................. .... o...o.............. September 1964..- ' Includes Mississippi River, Glaize, Joachim, Plattin, Rock, and Sandy Creeks. 27. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Fiscal year costs for hydrologic studies were $4,445, of $3,495 was for storm studies and $950 for sedimentation st GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT* strea ston District comprises drainage basins of all short of MIex oarising in coastal plain of Texas and flowing into Gulf San i, iIncluding entire basins of Buffalo Bayou, San Jacinto, erabrnard, Lavaca, Navidad, Mission, and Aransas Rivers. It dr.aii ces Agua Dulce, San Fernando, and Olmos Creek Basins Gagneto Baffin Bay, and coastal area south thereof to the ItIo icl*des A, ide and east of western boundary of Starr County, Tex. lower basins of major streams flowing into Gulf of high, Sabine River, Tex. and La., downstream from U.S. Strea Y 190 crossing at Bon Wier, Tex.; Neches River down- Strea from Town Bluff gaging station; Trinity River down- erazo fon Texas State Highway 19 crossing at Riverside, Tex.; Caro River downstream from confluence with Navasota River; G0uadalu e iver downstream from gaging station at Austin, Tex.; River 13 River downstream from confluence with San Marcos Co0d i San Antonio River downstream from confluence with Es- rio a Creek; Nueces River downstream from confluence with "'Atascosa Rivers. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. Au" Navigation Navigation-Continued atic plant control D. Wallisville, Tex ..... 688 2. sraouthwestern Division) 645 15. Reconnaissance and condi- Ceda sIsland Harbor, Tex. 646 tion surveys .......... 689 4 Cha Bayou, Tex.. .... 649 16. Other authorized naviga- tion projects .......... 689 , .*.prTexel to Port Bolivar, . .... ....... 650 17. Navigation work u n d e r 6., port Harbor, Tex. ... 651 special authorization . 689 vCheston Harbor and SGulf annel, Tex ........ 653 Flood Control WayyIntracoastal Water- betweendApaiachee 18. Buffalo Bayou and tribu- taries, Texas .......... 690 gay, Fla., and Mexican 8. t{Order (Galveston Dist.) 656 19. Freeport and vicinity, ouston Ship Channel Texas ................ 691 , Tex. " Sip Channel 662 20. Highland Bayou, Tex .... 692 tagorda Ship Channel, 21. Port Arthur and vicinity, 10.p ex ."ftx"""............... 665 Texas ............... 693 22. Taylors Bayou, Tex .... 693 i1 pChristi ransas-CorpTus . 11.fortsti Waterway, Tex. 667 23. Texas City, Tex ........ 694 SIsabel Small Boat 24. Vince and Little V i n c e 12. abasin, Tex ........... 670 Bayous, Tex........... 695 a ine-Neches Waterway, 25. Inspection of completed S ........ .Tex ..... 671 flood control projects .. 696 14" Txis City Channel, Tex. 676 26. Other authorized flood con- ataryi Texas and ries, River ......... tribu- trol projects .......... 696 677 27. Flood control work under A. Anahuac Channel, Tex. 684 special authorization .. 696 SLiberty local protection * project ............ 685 General Investigations Trinity River Multiple- Purpose Project to 28. Surveys ............... 697 Fort Worth, Tex... 685 29. Research and development 697 1. AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL (SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION) Location. Navigable waters, tributary streams, connecting 646 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 eight southern coastal channels, and other allied waters in the States from North Carolina to Texas. Repr Previous projects. For details see page 699 of Annuale for 1963.Of Existing project. Authorized by River and Harbor Ahe ts July 3, 1958, October 23, 1962, and October 27, 1965. trol d authorize a comprehensive project to provide for contda- aid progressive eradication of water-hyacinth, alligatore other obnoxious aquatic plant growths from navigable rI tributary streams, connecting channels, and other allieda alis North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, AlabaMi ati0jo sissippi, Louisiana, and Texas in combined interests of nav""tion flood control, drainage, agriculture, fish and wildlife conserv rch public health, and related purposes, including continued.e astlres for development of most effective and economical control mead01o" Estimated cost for new work is $41,200 Federal (Corps) an l,l e Federal $4,000 by cash contribution or work of equivalent (River and Harbor Acts, 1958 and 1962). At 19 Local cooperation. Section 104, River and Harbor Act Oplies modified by section 104, River and Harbor Act of 1962, 99e' On February 21, 1961, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Depr.t to advised that it desired to participate in the program suslttre. passage of enabling legislation by the Texas State LegLegisl Such legislation failed to pass the 1965 session of State rograi ture, and as a result Texas will be unable to participate in utdel next fiscal year. Sabine River Watershed of Louisianfa Islished jurisdiction of Galveston District. Work is being accOl1 iver under New Orleans District contract with State of Lo ie Non-Federal work contribution is estimated to be $4,000, and Harbor Acts, 1958 and 1962). co Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning ws tinued. 'edb Condition at end of fiscal year. The project as authoriSco River and Harbor Acts of 1958 and 1962 is about 80 percen adica plete. Work remaining consists of continuing control andI tion of aquatic plant growths in Louisiana. Total cost of esiti1 project to June 30, 1966, was $35,838 all for new work, cons of $34,166 Federal funds and $1,672 work contributions. Cost and financial statement Total919 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: 6 Appropriated........ .. $2,200 $2,000 $6,000 $500 $3,500 Cost.................. 2,485 2,118 6,577 1,061 956 x Excludes $1,672 work contributions. 2. BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TEX. '1t Location. At extreme south end of coast of Texas, a st of miles north of mouth of Rio Grande and about 5 miles 128s Brownsville, Tex. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1port Previous projects. For details see page 1017 of Annual RP for 1932. RIVERS AND HARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 647 ng project. Provides for channel dimensions in various of the waterway shown in the tabulation below, for dual t the gulf entrance, and a 1,000-foot extension to existing etty. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range is /2feet and extreme range is about 2 feet. All depths refer low tide. Height of tides is dependent, to some extent, on ~ and during strong "northers" in winter season water xn southern end of Laguna Madre may be raised 4 feet or Ove mean low tide in the gulf. Estimated cost for new $16,247,600 Federal (Corps), excluding expenditures on projects, and non-Federal $2,067,400, including $1,683,- ributed and $384,142 lands. Adopted project dimensions Depth . Section of waterway below mean Bottom Length low tide width i i i ----------- -- - ................................. ur n bsn xe i.............................. tooseIsland.... Isnd ......................... 38 300 12,000 ItYOr fu l sla •3sii h Goose u Island.... unng t~o o...... rtwaflhi 0extens~lion o. basin etens~ion....... I .. .. ba. .. ... ........................... Hea WW3 Burning basin. . (Channel to P I......... ... " .. . ............................... ....... : : :. : ......... ............................... .......... 361 900 to 1000 201) 12,250 49,750 16,790 7,140 2,700 7,650 1,300 Se l C~ w gb b a w aar sv il s )..... ........ a sin . . . .... ........................ 361 200 5,000 1nnelfrbur(On sin) 15 305 to 370 1,470 hne basin)............ ............ . ...... ........ . 15 370 1,470 S ing to rownsville Channel............. ...... ctHarbor 15 100 770 channel.......................... 15 270 450 Existing project was authorized by the following Acts l ~Work authorized Documents hy3. 1930 (P24 V,,1934) 13 Jetties op and jetty channel, inside channels and basins....... R ivers and Harbor Committee Doe. S )193LocalCooperation requirements nimodifiedto provide contri- Rivers 16, 71st Cong., 2d sess. " 13 5sj ition of funds to cover cost of original dredging of all in- and Harbors Committee Doe. 10, 71st Cong., 1st sess. 1937 Dide 1 channels and basins. 'len etty n channel to 31 feet and inner channels and Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. '42 1945 nrownsville and Port Isabel turning basins to 28 feet. 32, 75th Cong., 1st sess. *- D" arge Port Isabel turning basin ......... Deepen entrance channel to 35feet; deepen ................. to 33 feet channel 1 [. 1)oc. 335, 76th Cong., 1st sess. 1 across Laguna Madre; deepen to 32 feet channels from IH. Doc. 347, 77th Cong., 1st sess. ,aguna Madre to turning basins at Brownsville and Port sab)el; widen turning basins; an(l dredging present shallow- draft channel south of Port Isabel from railroad bridge to Jly 24,1946 agnabM dre and connecting channel to Port Isabel Additional connecting channel between Port Isabel and H. )Doc.627, 79th Cong., 2d sess.1 Sy 1 Brownsville channels; and transfer shallow-draft channels lap, 19 Isabel to It lPort ee)en to38 feet inGulf Intracoastal Waterway. outer bar channels 1. and 36 feet in all H1Doe. 192, 81st Cong., 1st sess. other authorized channels and basins; extend existing turn- ing basins at Brownsville and Port Isabel; and construct Juy14,1960 Ship channel. l 141 qiue al-boat basin with a connecting channel next to Browns- mlen Brownsville Channel to 300 feet at a depth of 36feet 1H I. Doc. 428, 86th Cong., 2d sess.' from former Goose Island passing basin to turning basin extension, thence at a width of500feet and same depth to turning basin proper, deepen to 36 feet an area in south- east corner of turning basin, maintain two existing basins of fishing harbor, anda connecting channel, and construct a third basin, with necessary connecting channel, and ex- tend Brazos Island Harbor north jetty seaward 1,000 feet. aC t latest published mnaps. 648 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Complied with except as requi red byset'o 101, River and Harbor Act of 1960. Non-Federal contribtll Terminal facilities. A grain elevator and covered plant for $1,683,258.lt f bulk cargo constructed by Brownsville Navigation Dist icthe privately owned marine ways for boat repairs constructed illdd fishing harbor. (See Port Series No. 19, revised 1957, fOrre. tional facilities). Facilities are adequate for existing co0imlitrce' Operations and results during fiscal year. Major re istra* tion: Engineering and design and supervision and adrami Isith tion cost $12,348 and $29,012. Rehabilitation of north and south jetties continued at a cost of $294,510 with placement of 13,714; tons cover stone; 2,450 tons of core stone; 25 tons filler stone. 14,564 tons blanket stone, and resetting 6 existing cover stone New work: Engineering and design and supervision alle.ch- istration cost $22,705 and $1,645 for widening BrownSvile ng nel from Goose Island to Brownsville Turning Basin, .deePorth south east corner of Brownsville turning basin, extending sal1 jetty 1,000 feet seaward, and constructing a third basin .o, d boat fishing harbor. Maintenance: Engineering and desi C" supervision and administration cost $8,721 and $52,216. Ject 41 and reports, acnd dition and operation studies, inspection and sPTro~aar condition surveys cost $14,893. Dredging in jetties and sea bar channels by U.S. hopper dredge A. Mackenzie (Apr. 18 thru May 8, 1966) removing 247,903 cubic yards of material at a cost of $103,156. Dredging was completed in Brownsville Channe (Jul 1 to Aug. 26, 1965) removing 1,455,215 cubic yards of material at a cost of $261,569. Dredging was accomplished in Brownsville and Port Isabel Channels (Jan. 17 to Mar. 4, 1966) removing 1,094,430 cubic yards of material at a cost of $242,792. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is aboutig percent complete. Work remaining consists of .W1rig Brownsville Channel from Goose Island to Brownsville tosin basin and deepening southeast corner Brownsville turning b: to 36 feet, extending north jetty 1,000 feet, and constructi ~d third basin of fishing harbor 15 feet deep, 370 feet wideV os- 1,470 feet long with a connecting channel adjacent to Br ville Channel. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitation Public works.......... ........ .............. $6,940,426 $8,688p007 $10150,003 .............................. uli work 2,848,560 .............. ............. :. 25 Contributed.......... ..................... 1,683,258 .............. ............ i 1 3 Total of project.................... cost 11,i7244 8, ,oo7 1,10,003 RIVERS AND HARBORS--GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 649 Cost and financial statement Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWork.- - - _ __ _____ roriated.......... 00.000 $.. $102,364 $90,000 $10,530,491 R tnan e....... ................ 206,761 290,875 24,350 10,464,841 corated. . .. $659,600 $462,304 276,122 453,160 427,702 8,700,237 ..... ken ... .. Stat . . . .. .. .. . . . 693,835 430,514 307,359 197,975 683,347 8,688,007 .. I. . 91,699 722,434 335,870 1,150,003 fnds, $67hi 5,855 for new work for previous projects. Excludes $1,806,619 contributed Wich 123,361 represents previous projects and $1,683,258 is for existing project. LOc . 3. CED)AR BAYOU, TEX. n. About 30 miles long. It flows to the south and e ttl RMiles b nto northwest corner of upper Galveston Bay, about 11/ orthew mouth of San Jacinto River and about 281/ miles 1282.)of Galveston, Tex. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart Previ p 1938.u s projects. for4 xisti l For details see page 869 of Annual Report enlo l n 10 sting Project. A channel 10 feet deep at mean low tide and rlileseet Wide from Houston Ship Channel to a point on bayou, 11 bay above mouth. Project also includes jetties at mouth of ditionU Provided for under previous project. Under ordinary con- feet Is Mean tidal range is about 0.6 foot and extreme range 1.2 stron',res, ( ,eight of tides is dependent largely on the wind, and during northers" in winter season, water surface may be de- Ped al 2 feet below mean low tide. Cost for new work was: outsral .(Corps) $13,576 exclusive of amount expended on previ- Pro rJects, and non-Federal $12,576 contributed. Existing 71 i Was adopted by 1930 River and Harbor Act (S. Doc. 107, fro stg., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Channel iactivrst bend above mouth to a point 11 miles above mouth is aL' lcooperation. Section 1, River and Harbor Act of 1930, in1e, s. These conditions have not been completely met, but local eCharests complied with all necessary requirements to complete co4 Ielto first bend in Cedar Bayou above mouth. Non-Federal Sribution $12,576. loc aerminalfacilities. A few small wharves, privately owned, for Coli Use at various places along Cedar Bayou. Facilities are 0 ldered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: s. ect condition surveys cost $79. Engineering and design and wa vision and administration cost $1,069 and $5,515. Dredging thr Performed from Atkinson Island to Boaz Island, (Sept. 2 through Oct. 14, 1965) removing 456,755 cubic yards of material at a cost of $44,255. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete diept for inactive portion. Channel was completed to project a.ensions from Houston Ship Channel to first bend in Cedar YOu above the mouth in 1931. Total cost of existing project to 650 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 June 30, 1966, was $685,592, of which $26,152 was for neW " (includes $12,576 contributed funds) and $659,440 for tenance. Cost and financial statement - ________ ________ -_________ - - otal t Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 19065 1966ii jo 3 New work: $526 Appropriated.......... .... .... ............................ .. 3 5.............. Cost................ ...................... .......... ........... 73 21 1.. Maintenance: 7319: - Appropriated.......... $254 $59,500 ........... $399 $51,929 729, Cost....... ......... . .254 47,347 $8,775 2,214 50,918 .- .--.- .... 1Includes $39,087 for new work and $69,784 for maintenance for previous pr . . ... s roj ects. cludes $12,576 for new work expended from contributed funds. 4. CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TEX.i4 Location. Port Bolivar is at end of Bolivar Peninsula an ith miles north of city of Galveston. Channel connects the port u i channel in Galveston Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic 8 Chart 520.) Previous project. For details see page 870, Annual Report fo' 1915. ad Existing project. A channel 30 feet deep at mean low tide s on 200 feet wide on bottom, beginning at deep water in Gwith an Harbor and extending to a turning basin 1,600 feet long, Widei averag average widthv of s about 750 feet and 30 feet at mean da lowIr a n g e 'swa front of wharves. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal ra s is about 1.3 feet and extreme range about 2 feet. Height Of t ,,in dependent largely on the wind, and during strong "nortbhers0V the winter season water surface may be depressed 2fee 95 ) mean low tide. Completed new work cost $85,214 (July 1elt exclusive of amount expended on previous projects. Enlacrgeost of turning basin from 1,000 to 1,600 feet, estimated 'totald (July 1954) $71,000, is inactive. Maintenance of channel. of portion of turning basin to 20 feet deep over a bottom wid as 200 feet accommodates existing commerce. Existing proje d authorized by acts of June 25, 1910 (H. Doc. 328, 61st Cof 4 sess.), and March 2, 1919 (H. Doc. 1122, 65th Cong., 2d sess5., tains latest published map). Local cooperation. None required. co Terminal facilities. Terminals are privately owned and eet sist of 2 slips and 2 piers. The piers, 400 feet wide by 1,200ted long and 210 feet wide by 1,200 feet long, are badly deterlot 0t and not in use. The slips are used as anchorages by s draft vessels. A highway ferry landing owned by State of de- is at south end of turning basin. Facilities are consideredde quate for existing commerce. - Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: $ 5 gineering and design and supervision and administration cos sliP and $698. Dredging was performed in the Highway Ferry slip (Nov. 4-29, 1965) removing 39,831 cubic yards of materlalCt cost of $12,069. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete excePt inactive portion. Project dimensions have not been maintaine RIVERS AND HARBORS.---GALVESTON. TEX.. DISTRICT 651 1pleted part since lesser dimensions are adequate for exist- coh Was ' 6nerce. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966, ors 4,o550, of which $85,214 was for new work and $679,336 tienance. Cost and financial statement Ce 'alyear .......... 1 Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Ai oriated.*.*.$133,925 aneC e a cNe,:..... ........................................................ .. .. 133,925 corated... .$135 $246 $11,528 $253 $14,200 728,138 135 216 10,539 -51 12,792 725,437 ices $48,711 for new work and $146,101 for maintenance for previous projects. Lr 5. FREEPORT HARBOR, TEX. froCction . Formed by improvement of Brazos River, Tex., Coa uth to about 6 miles upstream to Freeport, Tex. (See 0rP and Geodetic Survey Charts 887 and 1283). u s for 1 o projects. For details see page 1860 of Annual Report ehl iproject. Existing project dimensions for various ig s and basins are shown in following tabulation: Adopted project dimensions (feet) Section of waterway Depth below mean Bottom Length 0 low tide width 1terbar ..- ta o nel ..... ................................... 38 300 16,000 a t por urning basin.................................. 36 200 10,840 D a to U rnIngbasin.................................... ........ .. 36 700 700 Per basin. ............................................. 36 375 7,155 t asain ............................................ 36 600 600 razert auffer Chemical Plant................................... 30 200 6,090 f o iraa ng basin .. .................. ........................30 500 500 a botr Channel... .Cannel ....... ...... :: :....................... ::.... .. 30 200 2,690 turning basin.. ..................................... 30 550 to 600 525-675 iglxsting project also provides for: A jettied entrance consist- letgth two parallel, rubblemound jetties 560 feet apart with Jett~ of 4,708 feet (northeast jetty) and 5,018 feet (southwest or' a diversion dam in Brazos River about 7.5 miles above t.o al mouth of river; for a river diversion channel from dam 1,th.ew outlet to gulf about 6.5 miles southwest of original gatioi~ l andfor necessary auxiliary works together with a navi- sior clock in diversion dam. Jetties, diversion dam, and diver- Cohiannel are complete. Lock was not constructed and is is abdered inactive. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range e1 bout 1.5 feet and extreme range about 2.5 feet. Except under etreme conditions, rises on river and in diversion channel do not tlse greater variations in water surface than those caused by Sal action. Estimated cost for new work is: Federal (Corps) , 000funds, t uted and non-Federal $1,436,000, including $758,303 con- $360,249 work contributed, and $317,448 lands. 652 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following. Acts Documents -- Work authorized Mar. 3, 1899 Dredging and other work necessary in judgement of Secretary Specified in act. of War for improving harbor; for taking over jetties and privately built works at mouth of river. 2d Se' Mar. 2,1907 Examination authorized. Work later confined to maintenance H. Doc. 1087, 60th Cong., of jetties. Feb. 27,1911 Repairs to jetties and dredging...... .............. Specified in act. Mar. 4, 1913 Construct a seagoing hopper dredge.................... ....Do. 3d sess' Cong., Aug. 8, 1917 Purchase of one 15-inch pipeline dredge and equipment, its H. Doc. 1469, 63d operation for 3 years, operation of seagoing dredge / time o•mitee o. for 3 years, and repairs to jetties. Mar. 3, 19251 Diversion dam, diversion channel, and necessary auxiliary . c. Rivers and Harbors Committee works. 10, 68th Cong., 2d sess.mittee July 3, 1930 Maintenance of diversion channel at expense of local interest.. Rivers and iarbornstCowe.. " c .* 18, 70th Cong., oi0mittee Aug. 30, 19352 Deepening channels and basins.....I....................... Rivers and Harbors es 1st e~ ittee 9o 15, 72d Cong., Do...... Maintenance of present project dimensions of channels and Rivers and Harbors Coas, and29, basins at Federal expense. 15, 72d Cong., 1st see Cong., 2d sess. ses' e1st May 17, 1950 Deepen outer bar channel to 38 feet from gulf to a point H. D)oc. 195, 81st Cong.' within jetties; thence 36 feet in authorized channels to and including upper turning basin. Cp July 3, 1958 Relocate outer bar channel on straight alignment with jetty lates2dpsess H. Doc. 433, 84th Cod channel and maintain BrazosHarbor entran.ce tarns ~ (c0 channelnd latest tain, publishe turning basin (constructed by local interests). Construction of lock in diversion dam at local expense considered inactive.dered in iv ct ' Dredging upper 1/ mile of channel to vicinity Stauffer Chemical plant conside Included in Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. Local cooperation. Fully complied with except for inactive portions. Non-Federal contributions estimated at $1,118,t 5 o oil Terminal facilities. Small privately owned wharves, castic docks, one acid dock, two shell unloading docks and one ca.ith dock. Brazos River Navigation District has one large dockor. two transit sheds over rail facilities permitting allweather Facilitiesconsidered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Con- ject dition and operation studies, inspections and reports, and. proad condition surveys cost $11,012. Engineering and desiged supervision and administration cost $9,118 and $17,259..Doet ing accomplished: Sea Bar & Jetty Channels (U.S. hopper dredge A. Mackenzie), 965,200 cubic yards of material removed (Oct. 24 to Nov. 19, 1965) at a cost of $117,042; jetty channel to upper turning basin, 50,000 cubic yards of material removed (June 26-30, 1966) at a cost of $39,930. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is co~ d to exclusive of inactive portions. Existing project was improv h a depth of 38 feet in entrance channel and 36 feet in inside ch d nels and basins except Brazos Harbor entrance channel Brazos Harbor turning basin, which were improved to 30 feet. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitation .................... Regular........... $1,710,062 $6,576,534 $8,935 Public works....... .................... 116,575 ....... .. Contributed.................** '.......4.... 758,303 Total....... . ................... 2,584,940 8,935 Value of useful work performed..,:,. ... '...... . 360,249 ............. Total coat of project................. 6,576,534 2,945,189 8,935 i i RIVERS AND HIARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 653 Cost and financialstatement al [ ITotal to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 New~ok - . . . ]1. . . . ADopriated. Sa ............ .......... $1,973,735 A,e. r' . . $17,851 .. .......... ........... ............ ............ 21,973,735 habu -* . 103,522 $407,073 $273,000 $348,532 $500,108 6,884,021 .tato **:*.......... 107,040 280,494 399,815 349,674 194,361 6,576,534 P~rO riated S.......... ... .. 20,000 -11,065 . 8,935 ...... ........................... 8,935 ...................... 8,935 d $147,098 for new work for previous project. 4t1$58,303 expended from contributed funds. S 6. GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TEX. estotOn. A consolidation of authorized improvements at Gal- Vesto' Tex., which includes projects formerly identified as Gal- ea all 1 arbor, Tex.; Galveston Channel, Tex.; and Galveston exic, extension. Entrance to Galveston IHIarbor is on Gulf of extendo n northern portion of Texas coast. Galveston Channel ei Ul afrorn a point in Galveston Harbor between Bolivar 11har and Fort Point across former inner bar to and along eet wirfont of Galveston, Tex., and is about 5 miles long and 1,200 SPrev.de. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 520). for 191ious projects. For details see page 1854 of Annual Report 4 ting project. Provides for a channel 800 feet wide and te deep, from deep water in Gulf of Mexico to a point be- f800ettiles 2 miles west of seaward end of north jetty, thence fet ee Wide and 40 feet deep to Bolivar Roads; a channel 36 OdeeP at mean low tide and 1,200 feet wide from Bolivar fot (outer end of old inner bar near Fort Point) to 43d Street; fe soUlubblemound jetties extending from Galveston Island (on exioIN) and Bolivar Peninsula (on the north) into Gulf of ) (south jetty is 35,900 feet long and north jetty 25,907 feet ~ oita cOncrete seawall from angle at 6th St. & Broadway, in c1ret Galveston to south jetty, and a 16,300-foot extension of groj ealseawvall southwesterly from 61st St.; construction of 13 e.I Ong gulf shore between 12th and 61st Street, Galveston, and maintenance of seawall, which lies along gulf front of ,de ston,.from angle at 6th Street and Broadway to south jetty. I6I ordinary conditions, mean tidal range in Galveston Harbor rae feet on outer bar and 1.4 feet on inner bar with extreme 4es of 2.3 and 2.1 feet, respectively. Mean tidal range in feet 'ton Channel is about 1.3 feet and extreme range about 2 4 bRder ordinary conditions. Height of tides in both Galveston aband channel is dependent largely on the wind, and during et b'orthers" in winter season water surface may be depressed 17 below mean low tide. Estimated cost for new work is $3,87,000 Federal (Corps) and $4,145,000 non-Federal including '270 cash contributions and $564,725 lands. 654 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following: i , Acts Work authorized Documentl 'nreport 18tseO a i Aug.5,1886 Construct 2 rubblestone jetties at entrance to Galveston Harbor. II. Doe. 85, 49th Annual Report, COg 1311. 6 188 ' 2d seDe June 13, 1902 A channel 1,200 by 30 feet from Bolivar Roads (outer end of If. Dec. 264, 56th Cong old inner bar near Fort Point) to 51st St.1 Mar. 3,1905 Purchase or construct hydraulic pipeline dredge.. . Secifiedinact 2 Se" Cong, 2d Mar. 2,1907 Extension of jetties to present project length and construc- I. Doc. 340, 5oot Co tion and operation of a dredge. Rivers and iarb s seas. Doe. 1, 59th Cong.' 2d seas. Do.....Extension of Galveston Channel from 51st to 57th Sts., with I. Doe. 768, 59th Cong. depth of 30 feet and width of 700 feet.2 June25, 19102 Conditional extension of Galveston Channel between 51st and H. Doc. 328, 61st Cong.' 2d se 57th Sts., 30 feet deep and 1,000 feet wide. July 27,1916 Extend seawall at Galveston from angle at 6th St. and Broad- H. Doc. 1390, 62d Cong', 3d ses. way to vicinity of Fort San Jacinto. July 18, 1918 Deepen harbor channel to 35 feet and widen to 800 feet..... Cong. 2d H. Doc. 758, 65th Cong., ses 2d ses' Sept.22,1922 Further extension of seawall at Galveston to a junction with H. Dec. 693, 66th Cng. south jetty; and repairing seawall in front of Fort Crockett Reservation. ' Jan. 21, 1927 Deepen Galveston Channel to 32 feet; and maintain Gal- If. Doe. 307, 69th Cong. st s veston harbor channels to dimensions of 800 feet wide, 35 Ite . C ee D feet deep on outer bar and 34 feet deep on inner bar.3 Coe. Aug. 30,19354 Maintain State Highway Ferry Landing Channels to di- Rivers and Harbors om mensions of 12by 100 feet. 31, 72d Cong., lstses2d ses. Do..... Construct 13 groins along gulf shore from 12th to 61st Sts., HI.Doe. 400, 73d Cong. in city of Galveston at a limited cost of $234,000 (10 groins constructed). Do..... Deepen Galveston Channel to 34 feet (Bolivar Roads to Rivers and Harbors Cess I' e 43d St.). 61, 74th Cong., 1 te'Comitte Do..... Deepen Galveston entrance channel to 36 feet.............. Rivers and Harbor tsess 5 57, 74th Cong., s d es. Apr. 4,1938 Completion of project for construction of 13 groins. June 30, 1948 Deepen Galveston Harbor to 38 feet from gulf to a point 2 561, 80th Cong' H. Doc. miles west of seaward end of north jetty and 36 feet thence to Bolivar Roads; revoking authority for main- tenance of ferry channels; and Galveston channel to 36 feet deep from Bolivar Roads to 43d St. t May 17, 1950 Construct extension of Galveston seawall from 61st St., H. Doe. 173, 81st Cong' " southwesterly 16,300 feet along gulf shore. 350, 85th Cong' 2d st' . I)oc. July 3,1958 Deepen Galveston Harbor to 42 feet from gulf to a point 2 H. D~oc. 350, 85th Cong", miles west of seaward end of north jetty and 40 feet thence to Bolivar Roads. SDredging 46th to 51st Streets inactive. 2Inactive. 3 Deepening 43d to 57th Streets inactive. SPreviously authorized Sept. 6, 1933, by Public Works Administration. 5 Contains latest published maps. Local cooperation. Complied with except for inactive po~rd1l Section 101, River and Harbor Act of 1948 applies. Non contributions, $3,580,275. e' Terminal facilities. None on Galveston Harbor, wich trance channel leading to terminal facilities on Galvesto'n, City, and Houston Ship channels. Galveston Channel thr e, facilities are mostly on south side of channel. PrincipalN" ($e owned by city of Galveston, extend from 10th to 41st Streeteor Port Series No. 23, revised 1959) and are considered adeqlu ' existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major . abilit" rehetio tion: engineering and design and supervision and admi'1ir cost $6,872 and $83,885. RIVERS AND HIARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT Stone placement accomplished Quantities Dcrition Period (tons and each) Costs thJetty (Station 324 00 to 354 + 00)........... July 1 to Oct. 22, 1965. 14,697 T. cover $199,449 3,561 T. core 192 T. filler 6,671 T. blanket N~tetty l tty (stati 130 + 00 to 200 + 00)............ (station July 1 to Nov. 5, 1965. 165 Ea. resets 27,598 '.cover 459,565 15,521 T. core 2,406 T. filler ort Jetty (statio 8 (0 to 130 + 11,507 '1'. blanket 00)............ July 1 to Oct. 14 1965. 1,703 ,a. resets 23,666 T. cover 428,490 13,653 T. core 2,323 T'. filler rth etty (Station 200 00 to 229 00).........July 19,369) T. blanket , 15, to June 30, 1,595 Ea. resets 0 t 22 + 0) ......... July 1, 1965, to Junie 30, 29,249 T'1'.cover 522,410 10 60. 11,299 T. core 2,419 T. filler 18,988 T. blanket 877 Ea. resets - ._._.._ fir 1V A . New work: 36-foot project. Engineering and design and sipervision and administration cost $9,885 and $21,362. Deep- ening from Bolivar Roads to pier "B" was accomplished (Apr. 12 to June 30, 1966) removing 2,272,500 cubic yards of material at a cost of $530,000. 40-foot project. Engineering and design he f°l0pervision and administration cost $7,217 and $122,542. Wing dredging was performed: Cubic yards e1 lDescription Period of material Cost b~a 1 f (Ue . iealig ned inner bar channel.............. u July 1 to Nov. 24, 1965.. 2,114,338 $785,948 hopperIo ter bar channel and outer bar channel Des 5 July 1 to Aug. 3, 1965. 633,640 154,670 Dee, ler baredhe A. Mackenzie). ee o r bar el (U.S.hopper dredge A.fackenzie). Mar. 1 to Mar. 14, 1966. 314,470 70,870 ~ge erig) and Bolivar Roads Channel ( " ._,er dredgchannel Oct. 29, 1965, to Mar. 7, 2,238,570 711,075 19066. e: Engineering and design, including model supervision and administration cost $95,680 and dition and operation studies, inspections and re- ject condition surveys totaled $24,380. Repairs to cost $1,450. The following dredging was accom- Cubic yards Description Period of material Cost S a o ier"B"... .... e npier "" in onjunction with deepening.... July 1-20, 1965. 105,08(1 $176,802 Apr. 12 to June 20, 1966. 127,500 30,000 peter pJg. n ner bar channel in conjunction with 1,434,21)5 July 1 to Nov. 24, 1965. 546,136 Oateer adrede l with deepening lconjunction (U.S. S baredga .Macoenzie. Feb. 13-28, 1966. 351,857 81,912 O er 9 rd efa n el in onunwtionith deepening (U.S. Dec. 1-31, 1965, and 51,906 35,659 Feb. 1-28, 1966. 43,621 1et o.. at end of fiscal Ie ndition . year. Existing proj'ect is about 89 (elU..si cmplete, exclusive of inactive portions. Work remaining, ve of inactive portions, consists of dredging Galveston 656 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Channel to a 36-foot depth from Bolivar Roads to 43d Street ~ dredging the realigned 42-foot outer-bar channel. Dredg ng1' initiated on outer-bar channel in fiscal year 1965. Dre c al yea initiated on the 36-foot portion of Galveston Channel in 1966. Total cost of existing project to June 80, 1965 Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitation Regular: Channel................... 82 36,7l1,2 .......... $7,689,208 $22,630,567 $6,450,82 ,8' 13 y0 Seawall....... eawa ............................... Public works............ ........ 8,754,209 " 163 ,273............. 13,121.... :1 3 580,415 Contributed........................... .3,580,275 *. Total cost of project..................... 20,023,692 22,806,961" 6 82 Cost and financial statement . Fiscalyear..........;..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 - . .... -.. 348 Nfew work: $26, 1 Appropriated.......... $334,400 $9,000 $130,938 $575,000 $3,883,614 224' ................ ain ance: 247,513 342,087 134,736 561,878 2,413,569 2298 5 Appropriated.......... 1,629,898 729,813 M ............... Coehabast 1,581,751 774,561 579,500 2,543,500 569,367 2,486,935 1,043,304 1,023,924 6, " R tehabilitation: 5,85,62y Appropriated...........650,000 890,000 1,500,000 1,900,000 1485362 6,1 Cost.................143,895 1,230,922 882,102 2,439,913 1,700,671 1Includes $8,421,996 for new work and $86,126 for maintenance for previous prodje In addition, $3,580,275 expended from contributed funds... A g 7. GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY B13ETWEEN APALA BAY, FLA., AND MEXICAN BORDER (GALVESTON 1IST.) i1e Location. Extends from a point on Sabine River aboUt itl below Orange, Tex., to Brownsville, Tex., about 421 milesiver a flood-discharge channel, about 7 miles long, in Colorado. • .co;' ry extending from Matagorda, Tex., to Gulf of Mexico; a tri tr ter r channel in San Bernard River, extending from Intracoastal cros way crossing to State highway bridge some 30 miles above fro' ing; a tributary channel in Colorado River extendin9hanel Intracoastal Waterway upstream 17 miles; a tributar,, lacio, extending about 14 miles from Intracoastal Waterway to ' 1tra Tex.; a tributary channel extending about 2 miles from teldl coastal Waterway to Rockport, Tex.; a tributary channel eS' ing about 6 miles from Intracoastal Waterway near Port l Tex., to town of Aransas Pass, Tex.; a tributary channeO one-fourth mile long extending from Intracoastal Waterwa4l es' Port O'Connor, Tex., into Barroom Bay; a tributary chann via tending about 38.8 miles from Intracoastal Water W ria Seadrift to a point in Guadalupe River 5.5 miles below aVlCe Tex.; a harbor of refuge for small craft at Seadrift; '. Ch8 extending from gulf to Port Mansfield, Tex., about 11 rniletrV a tributary channel in Arroyo Colorado extending from le$' coastal Waterway to a point near Harlingen, rTex., about 3101lC and side channels near Port Isabel, Tex. (See Coast andG e d S Survey Charts 1116, 1117, 592, 533, 1279, 1280, 1282, 1283, 1285, 1286, 1287, and 1288.) RIVERS AND HARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 657 'evZous projects. West Galveston Bay and Brazos River ., Tex., for details see page 1859 of Annual Report for 1915. xlng Schannel project. Existing of waterway: project dimensions provided for in A channel 16 feet deep (below m.l.t.) abottom width of 150 feet, from Sabine River to Houston Channel; two channel relocations in vicinity of Gulf Colorado Santa Fe Railway Bridge near High Island, between miles Adoted project dimensions provided for in tributary channels Depth in Length feet below Bottom _ _.. . Tributary channel mean width low tide in feet Miles Feet Channel:1 tiGIWW to mile 8.2 ........................ 12 125 8.2 0 mile 8.2 to near mile 13.2...... .................. 9 100 5.0 .. 9 600 er Channel.... 9 100 226.7 ~hannel3. 9 100 15.5 ... . . . n.... .................................... 9 400 ... ....... 500 150 2,522 io .... ....... ............ . . 125 6.2 (4) in Ne.. .............................. 12 200 ...... .... 700 channel ...... ......................... 12 300 12 150-480 .....1,150 •.... 450 i Bay .............................. 6 60 rma: .......... ihn.....................i:::.......... iorth turnout from main channel, GIWW... 9 100 eins 800 (avg) 9 600 (avg) Lt channel fromain channel, GIW.:. 9 100 0.7 4,256 ft via south turnout from channel to Victoria... 9 100 2.0 4,66 9 250 .300 ut channel from channel to Victoria.... 9 100 0.05 3,000 B ort ... ..................... ...... 200 (5) .. ..... 99 200 2.1 inaPrt .. .. 475 1,255 +. .. ........ ............. 12 125 6.1 . . . 12 :00 2,212 2 12 125 0.2 OsBr arbor nown Harbor... ........ ... ............... 12 600 Mansfield: 300 .,o....... annel..................... .......... 16 250 0.8 .......... 'annelto hopper dredge turning basin ............ . 0.4 Ige unoturning . ......... basin. 300 ..... ....... 08Padre sn.s as.... Island ::: and .......................... Laguna Madre to main channel, 14 100 7.7 .......... nels, teast side of main channel, GIWW : . hn o"out................ ............... 12 100 .......... 2,980 urnout....... ........................ 12 100 .......... 2,957 it side of main channel, GIWW to P.T. of turnout 12 100 0.4 .......... nnels, n'asi asi west side of main channel, GIWW: c nl ......... urnut s..o ..........t....."................ .. ... 12 200 .......... 200 .......... 2,957 .2,980 xi I'T. of turnout channels to approach channel to 14 125 0.6 .. pig basin, annel to main turning basin................ 14 200 0.3 basino............................... banreos............................ 14 4C0 1,250 ynextensin 14 1,000 .......... 580 in .. 860 8 160 12 350 1,450 viaso ut from main channel, GIWW W ... 12 125 .......... °..... ........................ 12 400 500 u h... n.trom m i .n................................. uro h............................. 12 200 3,499 0.8 12 125 6 60 0.3 12 125 0.3 construction of a salt water barrier at mile 16.9. ed to mile 31 above mouth. Upper 31/2 miles are in inactive category. for maintenance of a suitable flood-discharge channel in Colorado River from e*,c to the gulf. tective breakwaters totaling about 1,600 feet long at entrance to Palacios turning ed to mile 34.7 above GIWW; open to navigation to mile 28.9 above GIWW. A en mile 29.5 and 34.3 is complete but not accessible to navigation. Reach from and including turning basin, under construction. for parallel jetties at the gulf entrance of Port Mansfield. ed to mile 31. Mile 25.8 to 31 to be restudied. 658 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 lock 316.4 and 319.1 and miles 320.1 and 325.4 west of flarveyottoO Louisiana; a channel 12 feet deep (below m.l.t.) over a .a width of 125 feet, from Houston Ship Channel to Brownslvi ide alternate channel, 12 feet deep (below m.l.t.) by 125 feeat poit through Galveston Bay. The dredged channel begins a.nd e on Main Channel, north of the Galveston Causeway, reloca- tends 2.9 miles to deep water near Pelican Island Bridge ; orda tion of 12-foot deep by 125-foot wide channel in I taan; Bay, between mile 454.3 and 471.3 west of Harvey lock, LouisopUS relocation of 12-foot deep by 125-foot wide channel in ocl; Christi Bay, between mile 539.4 and 549.7 west of Harve nel maintenance of existing 12-foot deep by 125-foot wide chasas through Lydia Ann Channel, between Aransas Bay and Aralocks Pass; provision of such passing places, widening of bendsssary or guard locks, railway bridges over artificial cuts as are nee atio and the tributary channels tabulated below. Mean tidal vail is 0.5 foot at Orange, 1 foot at Port Arthur, 1.3 feet in Ga 0 se Bay, 1.5 feet at Freeport, 1 foot in Matagorda Bay, 1 foot ~1, and Antonio Bay, 1 foot at Corpus Christi, 1.5 feet at Port Isabe IarV 1.5 feet at Brownsville. Extreme ranges of tide under ordinet i conditions are 1 foot at Orange, 1.5 feet at Port Arthur, 2 d Aransas Bay, 2 feet at Freeport, 1.5 feet in Matagorda a-l, and Antonio Bays, 1.5 feet at Corpus Christi, 2 feet at Port Isabel onD 1.5 feet at Brownsville. Height of tides is dependent largel lh wind. Strong north winds have depressed water surface a s I l as 2 feet below mean low tide. Estimated cost for new wo is Federal (Corps) $50,806,700, excluding expenditures ononprey1 prolol projects; and non-Federal $10,862,000, including $395,000 ad tarily expended, $4,248,000 lands, $4,296,000 relocationls, $1,923,000 other costs. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documen Cong., 1st sess Mar. 3, 1925 Channel 9 by 100 feet, Sabine River to Galveston Bay, and If. Doc. 238, 68th a 20-inch pipeline dredge.I'" " .t Jan. 21, 1927 Channel 9 by 100 feet, Galveston Bay to Corpus Christi .... . .... 1)o. C,75th 0 g" Aug. 26, 1937 Maintenance of a flood-discharge channel in Colorado River.. S. Committee prin., 3d sess. June 20, 19382 Channel 9 by 100 feet in San Bernard River, Tex........... H. Doc. 640, 75th Cong., 3d sess. Do...... Channel in Colorado River, 9 by 100 feet, with basin ........ Doc. 642, 75th Cong '3d ses. Do...... Channel 9 by 100 feet from Palacios through Trespalacios I. Doc. 564, 75th Cong., and Matagorda Bays. 3d sess Do...... Channel 9 by 200 feet from main channel to harbor at Rock- H. Doc. 641, 75th Cong.,3d port and improve harbor to 9-foot depth. 3d sess Do...... Channel 6 by 100 feet from main channel to Aransas Pass, I. Doc. 643, 75th Cong., 3 Tex. July 23,1942 Enlarge waterway, Sabine River to Corpus Christi and ex- tend to Brownsville, Tex., providing depth of 12 feet and width of 125 feet throughout.tsess Mar. 2, 19453 Channel 6 feet deep and 60 feet wide from main channel near H. l)oc. 428, 76th Cong., 1st se Port O'Connor, Tex., into Barroom Bay. 1st ses Do...... Enlarge channel from main channel to Aransas Pass, Tex., i. Doc. 383, 77th Cong.,1tSe providing a depth of 9 feet and width of 100 feet. Do...... Channel 12 by 125 feet from main channel to Red Fish Land- S. Doc. 248, 78th Cong, . se (ee ing, Tex., with basin. lt ses Do..... Channel 12 feet deep and 125 feet wide from main channel II. Doe. 402, 77th Cong. 1 to vicinity of HIarlingen, Tex., via Arroyo Colorado, with Public Law 14, 79th Cog basin. 2dses. July 24, 1946 FillIsabel a portion turningof basin, shallow-draft channel adjacent to Port construct a channel to connect H1.Doc. 627, 79th Cong., 2 shallow-draft channel with main channel near shoreline of Laguna Madre, and enlarge shallow-draft channel west of this connection, all to 12 feet deep and bottom width of 125 feet. See footnotes at end of table. RIVERS AND HIARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 659 Xipting project was authorized by the following-Continued ActI ___ Work authorized D)ocuments 21946 Rg ly 24,1946oute main channel to north shore of Red Fish Bay between 11. 1)oc. 700, 79th Cong., 2d seas. Aransas Bay and Corpus Christi Bay; deepen tributary 17 channel from Port Aransas to Aransas Pass, Tex., 12 feet ay17 19500Aternate And extend basinacross channel at same depth. South Galveston Bay between Port H. Doe. 196, 81st Cong., 1st sess. July J 2'i2ly . . Bolivar and Galveston causeway. ed Fish Landing" changed to "Port Mansfield, Tex.".. Incorporate as part of Intracoastal Waterway a channel 9 hy 100 feet from main channel via Seadrift to point on Sept, uadalupe River 3 miles above Victoria, Tex., authorized 3,19543SgbyRiverand Harbor Act of 1945. 4 S ntranceall craft harbor 9 by 200 by 1,000 feet at seadrift with an H. Doe. 478, 81st Cong., 2d ses. channel 9 by 100 feet. Wien tributary channel between Port Aransas and Aransas H. Doec.376, 83d Cong., 2d sess. ass, Tex., to 125 feet- straighten and widen to 125 feet connecting channel to Conn Brown Harbor, and maintain 9, 1999(on Brown Harbor at Federal expense, all to 12feet deep. mP rove channels and basins comprising channel to Port S. Doc. 11,86th Cong., 1st sess. ansfield constructed in part by Federal Government and I1nPart by local interests; constructing turnout curves at Gulf Intracoastal Waterway intersection and bend easing at entrance to turning basin; construct parallel jetties at gulf entrance; maintenance of locally dredged jetty channel 23,1962 16 by 250 feet; and maintenance of small craft basin. m rove main channel 16 feet deep and 150 feet wide from 11. Doc. 556, 87th Cong., 2d sess. Sabine RItiverto Houston Ship Channel; with two reloca- t. 2 ts; relocate main channel in Matagorda Bay and Corpus 2,, 16 risti Bay; and maintain existing eepen and widen channel to Palacios;Lydia Ann Channel. construct two pro- H. D1)oc.504, 87th Cong., 2d sess. tective breakwaters; maintain and deepen existing basins; S and deepen, enlarge, and maintain existing approach hannel to basin No. 2. liminates requirement of local interests to construct bridge If. Doc. 288, 87th Cong., 2d ses. at mile 29.2, turning basin at Victoria, and maintain turn- ing basins at Victoria and Seadrift; provide: Federal con- struction of vertical-lift railroad bridge at Missouri Pacific Railroad main line crossing, mile 29.2; construction and uture maintenance of basin near Victoria, Tex., and main- 27,1966 Oct, Oct 27, Tex. tenance of basin constructed by local interests at Seadrift, Modify existing Federal navigation project to provide a If. Doc. 217, 89th Cong., lst sess. channel extending from Gulf Intracoastal Waterway through Chocolate Bay and Chocolate SBayou to project channel mile 8.2, thence to a turning basin near channel mile 13.2 and f'r salt water barrier in Chocolate Bayou about 3.7 miles upstream from basin (channel mile 16.9). 230, 76th Cong., 1st sess., and project documents contain latest published maps. 4 c 1tiveupger 31/2 miles inactive. redging UDDer 5 miles to be restudied. rest 1Local co.lCooperation. Complied with except for portions to be d led, inactive portions, and provisions of section 101, River 1965 arbor Act of 1962 and section 301, River and Harbor Act of iredNon-Federal contributions estimated at $395,000 are re- pT erri Pot Atnal facilities. There are terminal facilities at Orange, CorsArthur, Galveston, Freeport, Port Lavaca, Port Aransas, co deCristi, Port Isabel, and Brownsville where this waterway Seriesde With channels improved under other projects. See Port . p o. 19 (revised 1957), Port Series No. 23 (revised 1959), Series No. 25 (revised 1959), Corps of Engineers. Local Ottee Prtss constructed terminal facilities at Port Mansfield and ort taingen. There are privately owned piers and wharves at Portolivar, Palacios, Fulton, Rockport, Seadrift, North Seadrift, ad Isabel, and Aransas Pass, and municipal wharves at Palacios Sranfsas Pass. Facilities are adequate for existing commerce. eratons and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitation: 660 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 for Engineering and design and supervision and administratio Colorado River west lock-west gate cost $36 and $16,622. Mi habilitation was continued and completed April 17, 1966, cost of $68,046. Engineering and design and supervisionI 1 ministration for Colorado River east lock-east gate cost $ $76. Final contract cost for east gate was reduced $3,000. neering and design and supervision and administration for Bolivar dike cost $7,957 and $15,298. Minor rehabilitatior commenced April 5 and completed May 12, 1966. Placer 6,553 tons cover stone; 4,312 tons core stone; 7,819 tons stone; and 593 tons filler stone cost $164,666. New work: neering and design and supervision and administratiO Guadalupe River, Channel to Victoria cost $13,743 and $1 Alteration of facilities by Missouri-Pacific Railroad Co.. $174,302. Work continued on alteration of the Missour- Railroad and facilities and construction of a new railroac b at a cost of $551,852. Channel work in conjunction wit. struction of new railroad bridge cost $46,403. Excavati( channel from station 1810+00 to and including turning bas 1 continued at a cost of $319,195. Final cost for an access o protection levee from station -1+00 to 169+80 totaled $ Work was performed on another access road on protectiol from station 904 +00 to 1530+00 and station 1724+00 to 181 July 16, 1965, to June 30, 1966) at a cost of $249,340. SeediT mulching of levees and channel slopes and berms from S 1725+00 to 1810+00 totaled $1,010. Excavation of Westerly Wye of channel to Victoria (mile 0 at main channel) was accom- plished July 28 to Aug. 25, 1965) removing 187,998 cubic yards of material at a cost of $54,639. Engineering and design andS vision and administration for channel to Palacios cost $14,7 $44,007. The channel and basins were dredged (Feb. 26 to June 23, 1966) removing 2,346,055 cubic yards of material at a cost of $227,070. Construction of breakwaters was performed ( Mar. 7 to June 30, 1966) with placement of 16,600 tons cover stone and 18,487 tons blanket stone at a cost of $231,209. Maintenance: Mud Bayou Bridge, Brazos River floodgates, and Colorado locks were operated and maintained at costs of $30,234, $1 and $116,205. Modifications and additions to guidewalls at Brazos River floodgates cost $54,343. Access roads at River floodgates and Colorado River locks were repaired and at costs of $70,568; and $1,971. Mooring clusters were re and replaced at Brazos River floodgates and Colorado River at costs of $10,398 and $12,750. Additions and conversic quarters at Brazos River floodgates and Colorado River lock $4,339 and $3,769. Miscellaneous repairs at Colorado River cost $22,688. Engineering and design and supervision .t ministration for the above structures cost $31,380 and $41 Condition and operation studies, inspections and report project condition surveys on main channel and tributarie $153,092. Engineering and design and supervision and A istration for main channel and tributaries cost$77,82 $217,939. Repairs to levees on channel to Victoria were I hired labor at a cost of $7,162. Reference lines were repal RIVERS AND HARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 661 ost f 9 65 f $66,111.Final cost for dredging completed May 22, Isabel r channel to Port Mansfield, Arroyo Colorado and Port o Mud Flats totaled $6,931. ,Dredging performed in main channel and tributaries Cubic yards Description Period of material Cost 0 orth 0 ,rea. - I __________________________ - 1.- - - M.u ,o li] ivear toC o olaterdaasly a............. ........... y ... ................. pt 315 othcolate to Cl orth Riv MighIMatagorda e l ea315,.... .". Bay..y Bay..; . .." .... ................. ... .. '................ July July July 1to 1 to 1 to Aug. 18, 1965. Sept. 16, 1965. Aug. 29, 1965. 660,328 620,433 466,900 $92.538 88,841 58,494 itie Cnhannel(mie "" . July 1 to Aug. 2, 1965. 623,507 76,025 t I g bain. e,(mile July 1 to Aug. 25, 1965. 230,232 39,244 to 15.5) turning basin July 1 to Oct. 29, 1965. 575,096 152,477 Corp C Manelu Flats, Arroyo Colorado and channel July 1 to Nov. 17, 1965. 1,106,786 252,524 C a ti Bay to Mud Flat area..................... July 19, 1965, to Feb. 16, 1,727,487 228,846 ael toareat C ie tyVcoianand channel 1966. to Seadrift........... e on to North Deer Island............ Aug. 31 to Nov. 26, 1965. 1,042,680 109,332 Oct. 22, 1965, to Jan. 26, 1,850,798 212,751 . to Vini o gol b rado River locks, Colorado 1966. Nov. 29,1965, to June 28, 1,068,963 199,433 ,NoiI Oct~ obv .............................. 1966. Nov. 4, 1965, to June 1,800,000 254,099 Cl t O ls el M ufi net basn. 30, 1966. dFlats, Arroyo Colorado and channel Feb. 19 toJune 30, 1966. 1,172,472 188,090 Clarte t co and basins in conjunction with Feb. 26 to June 23, 1966. new work. 225,380 21,817 t ,el . Bernard River and San Bernard River 00 Mar. 4 to June 30, 1966. 846,000 135,640 dre~nafeld ra.dRe 40M ettY and Sea Bar Channel (U.S. hopper Nov. 19-28, 1965. 90,749 43,617 ie 0fRiver cros g()icin lar °ng (vicinzie). o sR f ant, vicinity of Brazns River floodgates) May 13-25, 1966. 175,000 24,686 Coedi Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 82 pornot complete, exclusive of portion to be restudied and inactive eta ." Work remaining: Complete channel to Victoria, Tex., at n fiscal year 1957 including constructing a railroad d bridge tarbo 29.2 and dredging a turning basin near Victoria, Tex., two r of .Refuge at Seadrift portion is inactive); completing ai potection breakwaters on channel to Palacios; improvin to ousanel to 16 feet deep and 150 feet wide from Sabine River th~ ton Ship Channel, a channel 12 feet deep and 125 feet wide e arelocated route in Matagorda Bay, and a channel 12 feet Asti feet wide through a relocated route in Corpus salt ay; dredging Chocolate Bayou channel; and constructing er barrier in Chocolate Bayou. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance I Rehabilitation Total * -I-- I I-- ] "Ul~le . .... V ub teaWork prf ed.......... $41,159,744 $40,733,081 $1,269,204 $83,162,029 o. ed...... . .. . .r. 466,477..... ......... 466,477 Toilc • d •r m. . ...... 395,000 .... . .. . . .............. 395,000 . . "t"nrd ........................ 139,776 139,776 e0 fproject ...................... . ~~.. .............. . .. . - . . . 42,160,997 1 40,733,081 1 1,269,204 84,163,282 662 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jun New work: 35' 241,032 Appropriated.......... $3,225,893 $513,392 $1,326,758 $2,265,000 $1,022,56 4332,0 Cost..................3,948,919 41 745,933 655,639 1,339,324 2,033,505 7e, Maintenance: 49,716 Appropriated.......... 3,888,461 1,861,8,0) 2,951,866 3,427,515 3,321,713 43,25 , hCost ........... 4,363,071 1,686,821 2,320,148 3,969,075 3,231,029 138 Rehabilitation: 0 Appropriated.......... 351,000 44,000 650,500 65,000 179,638 2 j 21 1 1:6t 3 Cost.................. 176,697- 168,868 564,808- 598,867 I 269,964 _ rojeect I . . .. ... I . ... . 1Includes $706,709 for new work and $1,526,564 for maintenance for previos 217,8t Includes project formerly carried as "Chocolate Bayou, Tex."; reference II. Doc. Cong., 1st sess. 8. HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TEX. te Location. Connects Galveston Harbor, at a point eorth Port Bolivar, with city of Houston, Tex., extending 50 milesn and westerly across Galveston Bay through San Jacinto Ri vright Buffalo Bayou to a turning basin at head of Long Reach with et, draft channel 7 miles long from turning basin to MIain 539.) Houston. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 1282 andeport Previous projects. For details see page 1856 Annual Re for 1915. fri Existing project. Existing project dimensions provided o various channels and basins are shown in following tabulatl I (feet) Adopted project dimensions h Section of waterway Depth Lengt below Bottom mean width low tide Bolivar Roads to Morgan Point... .................................. 40 400 40 Morgan Point to 5,000 feet above Baytown............................. 40 400 ,'7 5,000 feet above Baytown to Boggy Bayou.............................. 40 400 513, Boggy Bayou to Brady Island...................................... 40 300 8, 0 Brady Island to turning basin................. ...................... 36 - 0 0 34 Turning basin.............................................36 400 to 1,0 4, Turning point at Clinton Island...... ""..". ...... ...... 40 700 1, Turning point at mouth of Hunting Bayou........................ 40 900 to 1,00 21'4 Turning basin to Jensen Drive............. ......................... 10 60 4,700 Turkey Bend Channel.........10.................10.. . 60 1 Jensen Drive to mouth of White Oak Bayou.......................... 10 60 100 5-mile cut (below Morgan Point)................................8 125 Barbour Terminal Channel............................................ 16 1 100 1, 0 Barbour Terminal turning basin.... ................................... 16 1,100 Greens Bayou: Channel mile 0 to 0.34........................................... 1, 39 36 175 6t5 Channel mile 0.34 to 1.55......................................... 15 100 6 Channel mile 1.55 to 2.81......................................... 12 100 x Approximate length. RIVERS AND IIARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 663 'Xisting project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar.51905 g 2Mar Easing or cutting off sharp bends and construction of a pile Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 9 a, 21919Ae35, 61st Cong., 2d sens. Mar, 3,1925 9 A channel 30 feet deep, widen bend at Manchester and A enarge turning basin. H. Doc. 1632, 65th Cong., 3d seas. S A3 'ight-draft extension of channel to mouth of White Oak I. Doe. 93, 67th Cong., 1st sess. J4Y3190IaYou. uiden channel through Morgan Point and to a point 4,000 H. Doe. 13, 71st Cong., 1st sess. ,, l9353D feet above Baytown and widen certain bonds. 1 Deepen 400 to 32 feet, in main channel and turnia lzsin, and Rivers and Harbors Committee l)oc. . a -foot width throuh Galveston Bay. 2S, 724 Cong., 1st sess. . . en to 34 feet in rmin channel .nd widen fromN Morgan Rivers and Harbors Committee l)oe. D2, 1945 BPoint o turnin ,n. 58, 74th Cone., 1st sess. .*, rdach channel 1i hy 60 feet behind Brady Island.......... . Doc. 226, 76th Cong., sletseas. Widln channel from Morgan Point to lower end of Fidelity H. Doe. 266, 76th Cong., 1st sess. 0 Slndo with turning points at mouth of Hunting Bayou so. slandower end of Brady Island. une30 en.channel from lower end of Fidelity Island to Hoauston H. Doe. 737, 79th Cong., 2d sess. ,1948 Dturning Deepento basin 36 feetandfrom dredge off-channel silting basins. Blolivar Roads to and including main H. Doe. 56 , 80th Cong., 2d seas. July turning basin at Houston, Tex., including turning points 3.19984 , eepen Hunting Hat to 40Bayou and Brady feet from BolivarIsland. Roads to Brady Island, If. Doe. 350, 85th Cong., 2d sess. (con- construct Clinton Island turning basin, a channel 8 by tains latest published map). ly 141960 n t at Five Mile Cut, and improve shallow draft et 714,1~~ 1ea'ncl at Trurkey Bend. S1965 rour Terminal at Morgan Point.............. ... Sec. 107, Public Law 86 645. 7 toring existing locally dredged channel from mile 0 to H. Doc. 257, 80th Cong., 1st seas. 0,t3 to 36 feet deep and a 15-12 ft. channel froi mile 0.34,1 to 2.81, in Greens Bayou. Snatid of Pile dike considered inactive. PreO sI: inyactive from I[ill Street Bridge to mouth of White Oak Bayou. e "'n athorize(d Sept. 6, 1)33, by Public Works Administration. cannel to 40 feet from mile 47 to Brady Island is inactive. f tidal range under ordinary conditions is 0.6 foot to 1.3 ba lower part of Galveston Bay; 0.6 foot to 1.3 feet in upper a emd 0.5 to 1 foot in San Jacinto River and Buffalo Bayou. 1.2feet ranges under ordinary conditions are about 2 feet, 12 eet .and 1 foot respectively. Freshets caused rises of over 1ir1cejin Buffalo Bayou; however, this condition has not occurred D er pletion of Addicks and Barker Dams for flood control on lIgel Watershed of Buffalo Bayou. Height of tides is dependent ,011 thSrgelon the wind, and during strong "northers" in winter sea- ,e. e Water surface may be depressed 2 feet below mean low 916," 00 s.timated cost for new work is: Federal (Corps) $31,- e it including $42,500 for Barbours Terminal, excluding ex- clludures on previous projects; and non-Federal $10,413,500, ,elcat!g $1,365,000 cash contributed, $2,282,500 lands, $416,000 te los."atio and $6,350,000 other costs on fully completed modifi- a cooperation. Complied with except for inactive portions, o 1triton 301, River and Harbor Act of 1965. Non-Federal Striutions estimated at $1,365,000. to e~r nal facilities. City of Houston and Harris County Hous- hich1 )l Channel Navigation District operate modern terminals ee pp 1 supplement privately owned wharves, piers, and docks. cilti ort. r Series No. 24 (revised 1959) Corps of Engineers. Fa- Of pa' cOnstructed since 1959: Barge dock facilities 1 mile north s Badena, Tex., and near Brays Bayou; wharves near mouth of Yayou; and pier 1,000 feet downstream from Tuckers Bayou. les considered adequate for existing commerce. 664 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 40.foo1 neering and design and supervision and administration onf project cost $5,844 and $53,847. Dredging performed Cubic Yrds cot Description Period of mate Deepening Greens Bayou to Sims Bayou including Hunting July 1, 1965, to Feb. 13, 1,443,918i 13,66 Bayou and Clinton Island turning basins. 1966. 213,233 Deepening lower reach of Houston Ship Channel (U.S. Jan. 3-23, 1966. hopper dredge Gerig). Maintenance: Engineering and design, including model s and supervision and administration cost $140,274 and $d pro' Condition and operation studies, inspection and reports, ail area ect condition surveys cost $18,376. Reference line and spoigasi repairs totaled $16,681. Atkinson Island Barge Assemblin~g dgiL was constructed at a cost of $150,199 which included dredging 989,988 cubic yards of material and installation of 14 concrete mooring anchors. The following additional dredging was complished: Cubic yards Cost Description Period of material Greens Bayou to Sims Bayou including Hunting Bayou July 1, 1965, to Feb. 13, 533,237 and Clinton Island turning basins in conjunction with 1966. deepening. 37 Bar bour Terminal Channel. . .......... ....... Light draft extension above turning basin...... ....... July 1-2, 1965. 13,67 10174 July 21 to Oct. 14, 1965. 155'987 Red Fish Reef to Morgan Point......................... Jan. 10 to June 30, 1966. 5882,657 240 Morgan Point to vicinity Baytown ....................... Apr. 27 to June 30, 1966. 1 16:5 57 32 Lower Galveston Bay in conjunction with deepening (U.S. Jan. 3-23, 1966. 4,912 hopper dredge Gerng). Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 98. Per complete, exclusive of inactive portions. The 34-foot projecpro completed .in 1941. The 36-foot project was completed 1960. Bolivar Roads to and including the Houston turning basin .D1960. An 8- by 125-foot channel at Five Mile Cut was completed 1 ~c Turkey Bend improvement 10- by 60-foot cutoff channel was C0 pleted in 1960. Bend easing and widening at 36-foot dePloiVar1 livar completed in 1963. The 40-foot project extending from Roads to mile 47 was completed in March 1966. Work renliig consists of dredging a channel in Greens Bayou. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Tots Funds New work Maintenance 2, 35 Regular.................................................$28,818,039 $33,404,312 s62pDU0 Public works..... ............ .. .......... .. 2,612,932 ........... 1, 365' Contributed................................ 1,365,000 .......... Zg3 Total cost of project............................... 32,795,971 33,404,312 66,200, RIVERS AND HARBORS---GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 665 Cost and financial statement .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 661 June 30,19al &14 Aated : ... ce * *.. $2,633,700 2,750,982 $1,199,020 4,087,359 $2,978,062 2,605,700 $2,479,000 2,803,875 $923,413 1,086,871 $35,536,128 35,536,128 opriated. 1,878,724 2,043,000 2,392,700 2,258,001 2,050,458 34,682,803 1,767,568 2,096,210 2,302,588 2,379,419 2,012,178 34,617,454 U, 74,10 for 157new new work for work and $1,213,142 for maintenance for previous projects. Ex- and $200,000 for maintenance from contributed funds. LO 9. MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TEX. )rovejo . This is a consolidation of shallow draft channel im- delts tandof "Channel from Pass Cavallo to Port Lavaca, Tex.," gorda 1.draft channel improvements authorized under "Mata- oth e P Channel, Tex." Bar at Pass Cavallo is 125 miles Pass t of Galveston entrance and 54 miles north of Aransas ect e connects Matagorda Bay with the gulf. Proj- P tls y across Matagorda Bay and Lavaca Bay to towns of osite aca and Point Comfort. These two towns are on op- orth WSides of Lavaca Bay and both are about 26 miles Vey hast from7 Pass Cavallo. (See Coast and Geodetic Sur- arios 1 Project. Existing project dimensions provided for in hannels and basins follow: Depth in feet below Bottom Section of waterway mean width Length low tide in feet in feet t 199 1 tl ' c e l Cern."'t.... ut 'Slh oh .. ......................................... 38-36 300 17000 Ch%'jR bi4. Q Ihqto rt **36 ... ...................... Doturningb .... .... ........ 200 106:274 urng asin................. ....... 36 200-300 5,949 "ort' * ...... n 36 1,000 1,000 your i . eee[ ............................................ 12 125 125 21,775 21,775 t urnlabb ... 12 .t,,lathotB.' rrof e. . ........... .. 12 27-340 532 AW . .efuge ......................................... ..... 12 125 10,166 N~l to 48111 T .................................. 12 300 1,682 " d-, i............... .. ........................................ 12 ............................................. 6 250 100 1,750 106,900 extiectda l s o provides for dual jetties at entrance, south jetty .I 61,000 feet to 24-foot depth in the gulf and north jetty e td l a ,900 feet to 24-foot depth. Under ordinary conditions st j1htid l range is about 1 foot and extreme range about 2 feet. Ag 1,,r tide is dependent largely on the wind, and during ess northers" in winter season the water surface may be Wok .Sed 2 feet below mean low tide. Estimated cost for new 00 e Federal (Corps) $17,127,000, and non-Federal $13,180,- 0 ,0 ddig $12,580,787 contributed funds, $182,800 for lands, or relocations, and $196,413 other costs. S)00 666 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Dou June 25, 1910 Channel to Port Lavaca, Tex., 7 feet deep and 80 feet bot- -1 ' H. Doe. 1082, 60th Cong. DO tom width. o o' Aug. 30, 1935 Extend 7-foot channel to shoreline of Lavaca Bay at mouih Rivers and Htarbo oitteeDo of Lynns Bayou. 28, 74th Cong., Corittee Aug.26,1937 Deepen and widen channel to present project dimensions..... Rivers and I s ssess. o. 37, 75th Cong .: , lst Mar. 2, 1945 Extend channel 6 by 100 feet from Port Lavaca via Lavaca H. Doc. 314, 76th COn . Bay, Lavaca and Navidad Rivers to Red Bluff, a distance of 20 miles.2d Do...... A harbor of refuge 9 f, t deep near Port Lavaca and an H. Doc. 731, 79h Cong. 2d approach channel 100 feet wide and equal depth. Co8tC"' July 3, 1958 Deepen to 12 feet and widen to 125 feet Port Lavaca Chan- H. Doc. 131,84th Con nal and Approach channel to harbor of refuge; deIpen to 12 feet Port Lavaca turning basin and basins at harbor of 2dsess Do ...... refuge. channel 38 by 300 feet, a channel 36 by 200 Anentrgance I 3, Doe. 388, 4hCong""P) 84th Ionsed ) feet, 22 miles long across Matagorda and Lavaca Bays (contains latest publhe to Point Comfort, 'Tex., a turning basin 36 feet deep and 1,000 feet square at Point Comfort, and dual jetties at entrance from gulf. 'Actof Local cooperation. Section 101 River and Harbor ACt 1958, applies. Complied with except for constructing a C t Port LIf public mooring facilities at Harbor of Refuge at pot edra and contributing 50 percent of apportioned cost of de1 co channel, currently estimated to be $12,509,000. The $7.1'hael to tributed prior to fiscal year 1.962 was for dredging ca Red Bluff. Lazac, Terminal facilities. Privately owned facilities at Fort rvatelf municipal owned facilities at mouth of Lynn Bayou, P Tex owned and publicly owned facilities at Point Comfor ~e, These facilities are considered adequate for present coa9sit Facilities at Point Comfort consist of a channel, turnle with wharfs, oil dock and loading equipment, all o.eest Aluminum Co. of America; and a wharf built by local inter Point Comfort turning basin. p Operations and results during fiscal year. New workl: co neering and design and supervision and administratioorco $16,832 and $301,475. Termination costs for a contract foric struction of jetties totaled $77,432. Dredging of 596,1OliA ef yards of material at a cost of $419,707 was accomplihe etlu trance channel and across Matagorda Peninsula (July 1 to ire 2, 1965). Dredging was performed in entrance channel of contract dredge, attendant plant, and operating personne , p 24 to Sept. 11, 1965) at a cost of $14,250. Dredging 1,712,285 cubic yards of material was also accomplished in the entrance channel by U.S. hopper dredge A. Mackenzie (Aug. 4 to Oct. 23, 1965; Nov. 29 to Dec. 31, 1965; and Feb. 1-12, 1966) at a cost of $570,302. Construction of jetties, north dike and shore protection was continued by placing 146,813 tons cover stone (total to date- 231,233 tons); 118,380 tons core stone (total to date - 264,438 tons); 24,508 tons filler stone (total to date-53,570 tons) and 76,616 tons blanket stone (total to date-475,463 tons) at a cost of $2,272,310. 9 Maintenance: Condition and operation studies cost S Engineering and design and supervision and administratiof° lCO $12,454 and $22,985. Final cost for dredging from Gulf of i'Al RIVERS AND HARBORS(GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT to Point Comfort totalked $10,400. Reference lines were repaired at a cost of $9,750. Dredging was performed in outer bar and jetty channel with U.S. hopper dredge A. Mackenzie (Mar. 15 to Apr. 17,1966) removing 536,212 cubic yards of material at a cost of $174,198 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existingproject is 99 percent . Port Lavaca Channel and turning basin and harbor be and approach channel, 12-foot channel were completed ear 1963. North dike, south jetty, and entrance channel ),pleted in fiscal year 1966. Project will be completed seal year 1967 when work on north jetty is completed. 'T'ot to Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS r'~ Year, 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NwQok. M0 t r~'ed. $794,400 $3,966,508 $5,219,210 $4,453,000 $2,000,000 $17,419,083 858,719 3,942,636 2,852,118 6,378,8482,112,028 17,048,305 01~r°riated, 147,105 70,946 337,715I 722,438 552,8541 2,393,366 117,071 101,423 327,857 720,906 252,066 2,080,918 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS dea p Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 S$1,814,000 $2,300,000 $6,500,000 $375,000$1,520,000 $12,580,787 1,493,909 6,252,537 1,372,150 1,689,687 1,559,380 12,439,450 $182,800 for contributed land. J PORT ARANSAS-CORPUS CHRISTI WATERWAY, TEX. A isaso n * This is a consolidation of old improvements of Port .i al' Tex. and channel from Aransas Pass to Corpus Christi, Ar.ansas Pass is on southern portion of Texas Coast, 180 ' suthwest of Galveston and 132 miles north of mouth of 4 aande. Aransas Pass connects Corpus Christi Bay and ,Lte bay with the Gulf. Waterway extends from deep water jettied entrance, thence westerly 'de1ee ulf includingPass to and Aransas les through a turning basin at Corpus Christi, Wtesterly 1%, miles through Industrial Canal to and in- i urning basin at Avery Point, thence westerly 41/, miles erl 1cluding a turning basin near Tule Lake, thence north- " 1.8 miles to and including a turning basin at Viola, 44186e Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 523, 892, 893, 1285 t of3 projects. For details see page 1861 of Annual Re- 1 9 15. r chproject. I Existing project dimensions provided for in nels and basins comprising this waterway: 668 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 -oet-di ... e (feet) Adopted project dimensio'n Section of waterway Depth Bottom n bmean width lowtide 42 700 00 Aransas Pass outer bar channel........................................ 42 600-700 10 Aransas Pass jetty channel ........ 42-40 650 11 Inner basin at Harbor Island..................................... .. 40 100 Channel to Port Aransas........................................... .12 200 Turning basin at Port Aransas.................................... 00 12 3 -400 11100 Anchorage basin at Port Aransas................................. 12 400 5419 Jetty channel to Corpus Christi turning basin............................ 40 1000 Corpus Christi turning basin......................... 40 400 13 Industrial Canal..... ..................... . .................. Avery Point turning basin.............................: ............ 000 101 Channel to Tule Lake turning basin.................................. Tule Lake turning basin....................................... 40 900 100 Chemical turning basin.......................... ............... 40 900 40 200 1 Viola Channel....................................................40 700000 40 Viola turning basin...................................... ............ 40 100 40 Jewel Fulton Canal........................12 200 Jewel Fulton turning basin........................ ............ 12 200 Branch Channel to La Quinta...................................... 36 300 8' Approach channel to turning basin...............................36000 Turning basin at La Quinta....................................... 36 '150 West turnout to Main Channel PA-CC Waterway.................... 32 1 Includes portion of main channel. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar. 3, 1899 Acquisition of old curved portion of north jetty previously Specified in act. constructed by private parties. June 13,1902Complete north jetty in accordance with builder's plans...........Do. . Mar. 3, 1905 ..... do ................................................. ..... Do. Co l Mar. 2, 1907 Connect old curved jetty to St. Joseph Island, and construct Rivers and Harbors south jetty. 5, 59th Cong., 2dseas. 3daS Feb.27,1911 Dredge roadstead in Harbor Island Basin to 20 feet deep and H. Doe. 1094, 61st Cong., construct 10,000 linear feet of stone dike on St. Joseph Island.3dse Mar. 4, 19131Channel between jetties and Harbor Island Basin to 25 feet H. Doe. 1125, 62d Cong. deep, extend jetties seaward, extend dike on St. Joseph island 9,100 feet, and dredge approach channel 12 feet deep to town of Port Aransas.g se* Sept.23,1922 Dredging channel from Aransas Pass to Corpus Christi, H. Doe. 321, 67th Cong.3d ' 25 feet deep, 200 feet bottom width.1s July 3, 19302 Deepen entrance channel from gulf to Harbor Island and H. Doe. 214, 70th Cong.s provide an inner basin at Harbor Island of reduced areaoe but greater depth.Hite Do..... Aransas Pass to Corpus Christi Channel with depth of 30 feet. Rivers and Harbors Combitt 9, 71st Cong.,1stsC ttee 3 Aug. 30, 19353 Enlarge all channels from gulf to western end of basin dredged Rivers and Harbors CoMnd 40 by Humble Oil and Refining Co. at its docks on Harbor 35, 72d Cong., 1stsess.S Island. Cong., 2dsess. let es. Do...... Maintain channel and maneuvering basin between breakwater H. Doe. 130, 72d Cong.. o.13, and western shoreline of Corpus Christi Bay. Do...... Maintain 30-foot depth of approach channel, turning basin Rivers and Harbors CoIttee genoC at Corpus Christi, Industrial Canal and turning basin at 74th Cong., 1st sess' pc* Avery Point.e Do...... Maintain and deepen to 32 feet channel from deep water at Rivers and Harbors Coit Port Aransas to and including turning basin at Corpus 63, 74th Cong., let ses. Christi.g3dss June20, 1938 Extend main turning basin at Corpus Christi westward H. Doe. 574, 75th Cong.*3d 2,500 feet at its present width and depth, deepen exist- ingIndustrial Canal and turnin basin to 32 feet and extend this canal at a depth of 32 feet and general width of 150 feet, westward along Nueces Bay shore to a turning basin 32 by 900 feet, and 1,000 feet long near Tule lake.2ds Mar. 2, 1945 Provide depth of 34 feet in all project channels and basins H. Doe. 544, 78th Cong., d from Port Aransas to and including Tule Lake turning basin, for a width of 250 feet from Port Aransas to break- water at Corpus Christi, for a width of 200 feet in Indus- trial Canal and in channel between Avery Point and Tule Lake turning basins, and widen Avery Point turning basin to 1,000 feet.2 a June 30, 1948 Deepen entrance channel to 38 feet from gulf to outer end T.Doe. 560, 80th Cong., 2d sV of jetty; 38 feet decreasing to 36 feet thence to station 90, north jetty; and 36 feet in all other deep water channels See footnotes at end of table. RIVERS AND IIARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 669 RXiotinproject was authorized by the following-Continued Acts Work authorized Documents and basins except 2 000-foot undredged part of inner basin S t Harbor Island, and a width of 400 feet in channel from 3 954 A ransas to maneuvering basin at 014 anchorage basin 12 feet deep, from 300Corpus Christi. to 400 feet wide, H1.Doe. 654, 81st Cong., 1st ses. 14 nd 900 feet long in Turtle Cove at Port Aransas, Tex. ranch channel 32 by 150 feet, extending northerly from H. Doe. 80, 83d Cong., 1st seas. main channel in vicinity of Port Ingleside, along north shore 01Corpus (ChristiBay to Reynolds Metals Co. plant and a turning basin 32 feet deep and 800 feet square near plant DO **. In general vicinity of La Quinta, Tex. An entrance channel 36 by 400 feet on a tangent alinement H11. Doe. 487, 83d Cong., 2d sess. fromn 0-foot channel in Corpus Christi Bay, near Corpus July Christi breakwater, to flared approach channel to Corpus ,1958 Christi turning eepenand widenbasin. La Quinta Channel to 30 by 200 feet; S. Doe. 33, 85th Cong., 1stsess. enlarge La Quinta turning basin to 36 by 800 by 1,000 oDeepen flared entrance feet; aentrance channel toto channel; widening and gulf 42 feet from at curves. to outer end of 1. Doc. 361, 85th Cong., 2d sess.(con- jetty; 40 feet inall other deepwater channels and basins tains latest published map). except undredged northward extension of inner basin at Hlarbor Island and branch channel to La Quints; and widen Industrial Canal to 400 feet with flared entrances 0, to Corpus Christi and Avery Point turning basins. Cannel 40 by 200 feet extending 2.2 miles from Tule Lake ..... Do. 0 turning basmnto a turning basin 40 feet deep, 700 to 00 feet wide, 1,000 feet long at Viola, Tex. eptheof 12 feet and a width of 100 feet in locally dredged ..... Do. Jewel Fulton Canal from La Quinta Channel to a turning basin 12 by 200 by 400 feet, and assumption of mainte- nance by United States. 1 of north jetty 1,950 feet and south jetty 1,265 feet considered inactive. oedin 19 2,060o-by 50-foot northerly extension of inner basin considered inactive. e' Public Works Administration program September 6, 1933. and February 16, *et leg of Wye junction with main channel inactive. p roject also provides for two rubblestone jetties at Aransas tan Iltrance, extending into the gulf from St. Joseph and Mus- especslands, project lengths of which are 9,240 and 7,385 feet, Jose.hlvely. Project further provides for a stone dike on St. Island about 20,991 feet long, connecting with north jetty Xand aoextending up this island to prevent a channel being cut Arans 5 Jetty. Under ordinary conditions, mean tidal range at an das Pass is about 1.1 feet and extreme range about 2 feet, / t Corpus Christi mean range about 1 foot and extreme about dir. eet. Heights of tides are dependent largely on strength and seaso lons of winds, and during strong "northers" in the winter w a ter A surface may be depressed as much as 3 feet below $8)868 , low tide.Estimated cost for new work is: Federal (Corps) 58,5000, exclusive of amount expended on previous projects; Witlh 000 La Quinta Channel (32 feet)-west leg of Wye Junction 1o0Peain Channel, which was placed in inactive category; and a~ deral $7,268,700, including $3,118,072 contributed funds rel4 Value of useful work performed, $620,200 lands, $1,527,000 toc lns and $2,003,400 other costs. ~li1al cooperation. Fully complied with. Non-Federal contri- buht s estimated at $3,118,072. aMnal fe facilities. Terminal facilities on Harbor Island at P f Aransas Pass, Ingleside, Corpus Christi, La Quinta, Avery (0et, and Viola, are considered adequate for existing commerce. O Port Series, No. 25, revised 1959, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Major rehabilita- tion: Engineering and design and supervision and administra- 670 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tion cost $6,846 and $63,945. Rehabilitation of north and south jetties continued by placing 68,084 tons cover stone; 28,037 tons core stone; 8,151 tons filler stone; 58,719 tons blanket stone; and resetting 827 existing cover stone at a cost of $1,376,210. New work: Engineering and design and supervision and adrsti t rn tion cost $1,323 and $14,257. Deepening of Corpus Christi turn- ing basin to and including Viola Turning Basin was accomplished from July 1 to Sept. 29 1965, removing 455,390 cubic yards of ma- terial at a cost of $297,271. Maintenance: Engineering and design sign and supervision and administration cost $44,406 and Condition and operation studies, inspection reports, and iredt $47oct condition surveys cost $26,820. Reference lines were reP a cost of $6,850. The following dredging was performed: t Cubic Ysrds Cos Description Period of mate rial $23,# Corpus Christi turning basin to and including Viola turning July 1 to Sept. 29, 1965. 105,286 319 basin in conjunction with deepening. 3190 Channel to La Quinta................................... July 1 to Aug. 13, 1965. 1,13 8578 432,6 Harbor Island Inner Basin, Bay Channel and approach Mar. 10to June 30, 1966. 3,23 0,138 93,616 channel. 187,950 Outer Bar Channel, Jetty channel and Corpus Christi June 13-30, 1966. 18 Channel (U.S. hopper dredge A. Mackenzie) Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 1 00 percet complete exclusive of inactive portions. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 ,ot Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitatio on Regular... ............................. $18,543,687$20,891,771 $2,904,49 49 Public works... ............................. 324,287 ............. ........... 0 Contributed...1............................ 1,401,377 152,555........... Total............................. .20,269,351 21,044,326 2,90 Value of useful work performed..................1,716,695....................... 211, Contributed land... .......................... 276,720 ....................... Total cost of project....................... 22,262,766 21,044,326 2,904,49 0 JO Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $20,240, Appropriated.......... $682,707 $741,790 $1,480,790 $1,530,000 -$15,980 Cost................. 664,181 798,624 1,539,6201,224,023 312,851 690 Maintenance: 2103'293 Appropriated.......... 955,955 1,115,928 705,668 731,710 933,006 21 900, 20,9b1, Cost.................940,964 1,116,111 659,982 652,808 994,241 Rehabilitation: Appropriated................................. 450,000 1,105,0001,350,000 Cost......... ................................. 44,549 1,412,9401,447,001 1Includes $1,372,534 for new work and $62,452 for maintenance for previous proe cludes $1,401,377 for new work and $152,555 for maintenance from contributed I td ' 11. PORT ISABEL SMALL BOAT BASIN, TEX. 't Location. At extreme south end of coast of Texas, abO°uo miles north of mouth of Rio Grande and about 125 miles s ont IIVERS AND HARBORS--GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT chal anlasas, Tex. Basin at Port Isabel is connected to main 1/2 ilof Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. Main channel is about se east of the basin. ide~ en! Project. An entrance channel 7 feet deep by 75 feet the 5 aenlding from main channel to Gulf of Mexico to inside by 50 orele at Port Isabel, Tex., an inner channel 6 feet deep and aeet wide from entrance channel to East Harbor Basin, area oirregular shaped harbor basin 6 feet deep having a surface range about 7 acres. Under ordinary conditions mean tidal of tid about 1,/2 feet and extreme range is about 2 feet. Height stroni ,ls dependent, to some extent on the wind, and, during end o 1 northers'" in winter season, water surface in southern 0l tfd Laguna Madre may be raised 4 feet or more above mean tridse in the gulf. Estimated cost for new work is: Federal butd $46,559 and non-Federal $57,559, including $46,559 con- artthred funds and $11,000 for lands. Existing project was 8~645ized by Chief of Engineers under section 107, Public Law Local tributio cooperation. Fully complied with. Non-Federal con- ,Oer .$46,559. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering and de- recl.l supervision and administration cost $237 and $4,514. Dredging was performed in the Port Isabel Small Boat Harbor (July 1,1965, to Feb. 18, 1966) removing 243,642 cubic yards of material at a cost of $77,775. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is 100 percent complete. act dredging of boat basin was completed September 1965. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year Total to .. .. . 1062 1963 1904 1965 1966 June 30,1066 3tro riated .$... 3,000 $17,000..... . . . -3,441 .. $46,559 554 1 $2082 $3,312 40,610 46,559 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Year Total to ........ 91062 1063 1064 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 t . ............ ............ $50,000............ - 3,441 $46,559 ..... ............ ............ 608 $3,945 41,916 46,559 OCato 12. SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY,TEX. 11at on. This is a consolidation of old improvements of echor at Sabine Pass and Port Arthur Canal" and "Sabine- Iver t Canal, including Sabine River to Orange and Neches about 5Beaumont, Tex." Sabine Pass is on Gulf of Mexico B0th588miles east of Galveston and 280 miles west of lthe West Pass, Mississippi River. It connects Sabine Lake with ed Gf Port Arthur Canal extends 7 miles from near upper f Sabine Pass to Port Arthur docks at mouth of Taylors oay ou. Near its upper end, Sabine-Neches Canal joins and 672 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 extends to mouth of Neches and Sabine Rivers. WaterwaYYt extends up Neches River to Beaumont and up Sabine 3 ad Rve, Orange. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 517, 5 1279.) Previous projects. For details see page 1863 of Annuale1 Fe-3 port for 1915, page 985 of Annual Report for 1916, and page of Annual Report for 1926. .ed or Existing project. Existing project dimensions provided various channels and basins follow: I pions (feet) - Adopted projec t dimeson th n~g Section of waterway Depth Sbelow Bottom mean width low tide 81000 Sabine bank channel.................................................. 42 00 Sabine Pass outer bar................................................ 42 oo81)0 Sabine Pass jetty channel............................................ 40 8 Sabine Pass anchorage basin........................................... 500 2S1,6 40 '500 32,E Sabine Pass Channel.................................................. 40 500 1,76 Port Arthur Canal................................................... 40 200-66 1,61 Entrance to Port Arthur turning basin.................................. 40 420 1, 0 Port Arthur east turning basin.... .................................. 40 600 Port Arthur west turning basin......................................... 40 302 Channel connecting Port Arthur west turning basin and Taylors Bayou , turning basin......... ............................................. 200-250 340 Taylors Bayou turning basin.......................................... 40 150-1,400 5, Sabine-Neches Canal, Port Arthur Canal to Neches River................. 40 400 Neches River, mouth to maneuvering area at Beaumont turning basin ...... 40 00 Neches River, turning point vicinity mile 31.3........................... 401) i1,0 Neches River, turning point vicinity mile 37.2........................... 1 000 40 11,000 Neches River, turning point vicinity mile 41............................. 40 Neches River, channel extension, vicinity mile 41......................... 36 '350 S Maneuvering area at Beaumont turning basin............................ 40 Beaumont turning basin... ....................................... 34 350 350 ,864 22,00 Beaumont turning basin extension.......................... . 34 , Beaumont turning basin extension to end of project channel, vicinity Beth- 9 38 lehem Steel Co....................................................30 200 4 Sabine-Neches Waterway, Neches River to Sabine River................. 30 200 3 Sabine River, mouth to foot of Green Ave........................... 30 Orange turning basin............................................ 30 200-1 ,300 1,693 Orange municipal slip.......................................... 30 Old Channel around Harbor Island................................ 25 150-1200L8 Foot of Green Ave. to Point near Southern Pacific Bridge near Echo.... 12 100 Adams Bayou.... ............................................. 12 Cow C o w Bayou 0 o . ..... .ay u .................................................. si 13 Orangefield turning basin .......................................... 1 13 I Diameter. SIncludes 1,554 linear feet of 36-foot channel. 8 4.6 miles authorized. Existina proiect was authorized bu the fl owint Acts Work authorized Doc-mentS Sda Cong., July 25, 1912 Existing project dimensions of jetties, a 26-foot channel H. Doc. 773, 61st through Sabine Pass, Port Arthur Canal and Port Arthur turning basin; and a 26-foot turning basin at Port Arthur. A depth of 25-feet in Sabine-Neches Canal, Neches River to Beaumont and Sabine River to Orange, including cut- offs and widening channels. 3d e Sept. 22,1922 Deepen channels to 30 feet from gulf to Beaumont, with in- H. D)oc. 975, 66th Cong creased widths and an anchorage basin in Sabine Pass. 2dsass Do..... Deepen Port Arthur east and west turning basins and approach S. Doc. 152, 67th Cong. 2d e channel to 30 feet. Take over and deepen to 30 feet channel connecting west turning basin with Taylors Bayou turning basin. For a 30-foot depth in channel from mouth of Neches River to cutoff in Sabine River near Orange. 1st Mar. 3, 1925 Removal of guard lock in Sabine-Neches Canal............. H. Doc. 234, 68th Cong., 1st Jan. 21, 1927 Widen Sabine Pass and jetty channel, Port Arthur Canal, and H. Doe. 287, 69th Cong. . Sabine-Neches Canal. For dredging 2 passing places in Sabine-Neches Canal, easing of bends, removal and re- See footnotes at end of table. RIVERS AND HARBORS--GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 673 Existing project was authorized by the following-Continued Acts Work authorized Documents constructing Port Arthur field office, extending Beaumont turning basin upstream 200 feet above new city wharves, .3019351 Sand an anchorage basin in Sabine Pass. D ol. . A depth of 32 feet in channels from gulf to Beaumont turning Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. basin, including all turning basins at Port Arthur. 27, 72d Cong., 1st seas. Do.. Doeepen channels to 34 feet with increased widths from gulf Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. to Beaumont turning basin. 12, 74th Cong., 1st ses. Aug.26,1937 Construct suitable permanent protective works along Sabine Specified in act. Lake. maintain Maintain Taylors Bayou turning basin. Do ...*. wharf channel from Sabine River to Orange municipal Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. redging 500feet from eastern end of Harbor Island and 3, 75th Cong., 1st sess. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. Jue 20,1938 Iabandonment of channel south and west of Harbor Island. ncreased widths of channels from gulf to Beaumont turning H.20, 75th Cong., 1st seas. Doe. 581, 75th Cong., 3d sess. basin and channel connecting Port Arthur west turning basin and Taylors Bayou turning basin, deepen Beaumont turning basin and Beaumont turning extension to 34 feet; and dredge a new cutoff from Smiths Bluff cutoff to McFad- Oct. 17, 1940 din Bend Abandon Orange turning basin; dredge a channel 25 by 150 S. Doc. 14, 77th Cong., 1st seas. feet, suitably widened on bends to highway bridge, and Mac. Edredge a cutoff channel opposite Orange. 4o: .... . 1945 ", xtend Beaumont turning basin upsteam 300 feet.......... Widen Port Arthur west turning basin H. Doe. 685, 76th Cong., 3d ses. to 600 feet............ 60, 77th Cong., 1st seas. red a channel from Beaumont turning basin to vicinity S.S. Doe. Doe. 158, 77th Cong., 2d seas. JY 24,19463 Of 'ennsylvania Shipyard. Deepen Sabine Pass outer bar channel to 37 feet, Sabine H. Doc. 571, 79th Cong., 2d ses. Pass jetty channel to 36 feet at inner end, deepen to 36 feet Sabine Pass Channel, Port Arthur Canal, Port Arthur east and west turning basins, Taylors Bayou turning basin, and channel from PortArthur west turning basin to Taylors Bayou turning basin, and channel from Port Arthur west turning basin to Taylors Bayou turning basin, deepen to 36 feet and widen to 400 feet Sabine- Neches Canal from Port Arthur Canal to mouth of Neches River except through Port Arthur bridge; deepen Neches River channel frommouth to Beaumont turning basin to 36 feet with widening to 350 feet from Smiths Bluff to Beaumont turning basin; deepen junction area on Neches River at Beaumont turning basin to 36 feet; and widen Sabi ne-Neches Canal between Neches and Sabine Rivers , to 150 feet. Improve Cow Bayou,Tex., by construction of a channel 100 H. Doe. 702, 79th Cong., 2d sesas. feet wide and 13 feet deep, extending from navigation channel in Sabine River to a point 0.5mile above county bridge at Orangefield, Tex., with a turning basin........ mprove Adams Bayou, Tex., to provide a channel 12 feet deep IH. Doe. 626, 79th Cong., 2d seas. and 100 feet wide extending from 12-fioot depth in Sabine y 17,1950 River to first county highway bridge across bayou. Deepen to 36 feet and widen to 400 feet the Sabine-Neches H. Doe. 174, 81st Cong., 1st seas. 8e~k 3,19548 ('anal near Port Arthur bridge; reconstruct Port Arthur Bridge and relocate Port Arthur field oflice. eetification of certain reaches of existing Sabine Pass Chan- S. Doe. 80, 83d Cong., 2d seas. nel, Sabine-Neches Canal, and Neches River and Sabine River Channel; widen to 350feet entrance channel to Port Arthur turning basins; widen curve at junction of Port Arthur and Sabine-Neches Canals; relocate and enlarge Sabine Pass anchorage basin to 34 by 1,500 by 3,000 feet; widen to 200 feet Sabine-Neches Canal from mouth of Neches River to mouth of Sabine River and Sabine River Channel to upper end of existing project at Orange, except for channel around Harbor Island at Orange; deepen to 30 feet Sabine River Channel from cutoff near Orange mu- nicipal slip to upper end of project, except around Hlarbor Oct. 1 Island; and enlarge area at entrance to Orange municipal 23,1962 slip to provide a maneuvering basin. Improve outer bar channel to 42 and 40 feet for all inland H. Doc. 553, 87th Cong., 2d sees. (con- channels to Port Arthur and Beaumont; width of 500feet tains latest published maps). in Port Arthur Canal and 400 feet in Neches River Channel to Beaumont with three turning points in Neches River; a channel, 12by 125feet, extending in Sabine River to Echo; and replace an obstructive bridge at Port Arthur, Tex. Deauthorization of uncompleted portion of channel be- tween Port Arthur west turning basin and Taylors Bayou turning basin and enlargement of entrance channel to Port Arthur turning basins. Previously authorized Sept. 6, 1933, by Public Works Administration. PoOthotes continued next page. 674 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 a syW 2 Complete widening of channel between Port Arthur west turning basin and Taylors a turning basin Complete deauthorized by River and Harbor Act of 1962. ylr9" deepening of channel between Port Arthur west turning basin and Taylors BYo turning basin deauthorized by River and Harbor Act of 1962. *d activend SChannel extension above Cow Bayou turning basin near Orangefield considere ier SWiden to 350 feet entrance channel to Port Arthur turning basins deauthorized Harbor Act of 1962. Project also provides for two stone jetties at Sabine Pas 8a trance from the gulf, western jetty to be 21,905 feet lo re- eastern jetty 25,310 feet long. Project further provides fo sit moval of guard lock in Sabine-Neches Canal, construction ostage able permanent protective works along Sabine Lake fr from owned by city of Port Arthur to prevent dredged materia sited, entering Sabine Lake and to prevent erosion of material deposAr reconstruction of Port Arthur Bridge, and relocation of port thur field office. Mean tidal variation at entrance is aboutl t feet, at Port Arthur about 1 foot, and at Orange and Beassea. about five-tenths foot. Prolonged north winds during w ea son have depressed water surface as much as 3.4 feet below uch low tide while tropical disturbances have caused heights as k is: as 8 feet above mean low tide. Estimated cost for neW Voro Federal (Corps) $48,407,200 excluding expenditures on previ 0 CO projects; and non-Federal $5,452,800, including $1,088,500 ~$335, tributed funds, $32,000 value of useful work performed, andde a, 000 value of expired service life of old bascule highway brldtions. Port Arthur, Tex.; $1,689,800 lands and $2,307,500 re ortioD Local cooperation. Complied with except for inactive PAct of of project, and provisions of section 101, River and Harbor Are- 1962. Non-Federal contributions estimated at $1,455,500 are quired. ( ised Terminal facilities. See volume 2, Port Series No. 19 (re , 1957), Corps of Engineers. There are 3 wharves and piers rie dition to the facilities included in the referenced Port er Facilities are considered adequate for present commerce. 3 6 foot Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 0 odi- project. Final cost for rectification and widening of 36foo6dsi fication totaled $4,748. 40-foot project. Engineering and 4 eg939 and supervision and administration cost $150,162 and $4 (includes $2,146 contributed funds). Dredging performed Cubic yards Cost Description Period of material $ Deepening Sabine Pass Channel and anchorage basin.......July 1, 1965, to Mar. 22, 4,033,071 ' 1966. 434 Deepening and widening lower reach of Port Arthur Canal.. July I to Nov. 24, 1965. 2 213 3.52 13088 Deepening and widening upper reach of Port Arthur Canal... June 7-30, 1965. '326:803 Includes $58,000 contributed funds. Maintenance: Engineering and design and supervision andtio ministration cost $10,081 and $126,598. Condition and opera cost studies, inspections and reports, and project condition surveys Ias $21,921. Sabine Pass west jetty (sta. 90+75 to 157+1,80) o repaire(d (July 1 to Oct. 1, 1965) by placement of ,28. ~t cover stone and 21,370 tons core stones, and resetting 3e ex RIVERS AND IIARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 675 of pStone at a cost of $660,621. Final cost for dredging portions Ttlrnrt Arthur Canal, Sabine-Neches Canal and Port Arthur facill Basin totaled $1,000. Barge assembling basin mooring of $ies were constructed on the Lower Neches River at a cost '3. The following dredging was performed: Cubic yards Description Period of material Cost .1. - -I I. NeeheCanal and Neches River Channel........... Sabineps Ch July 1, 1965, to Feb. 11, 1,322,697 $227,088 1966. Channel and i anchorage basin in conjunction ta f ssArk. July 1, 1965, to Mar. 22, 3,473,919 620,403 Low oPortA Sof rt.hr 1966. t Canalin conjunction with new work.... 238,827 47,009 July 1 to Nov. 24, 1965. e ArthurArthur Canal, Sabine-Neches Canal and JOrt Oct. 31, 1965, to Apr. 18, 2,815,290 1,369,971 r Port A A rning basins. 1966. e aAthur Canal in conjunction with 20,000 4,966 new dredo.5elakend outerbar Channel (U.S. hopperwork.....June 7-30, 1966. May 9 to June 12, 1966. 1,988,500 169,074 perCeition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 56 IS e complete exclusive of inactive portion. Authorized work obstr plete except for deepening project to 40 feet, replacement of 11 uetive bridge at Port Arthur and dredging a 12-foot channel ine River from Orange to Echo, Tex. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Total ibuted ;r " ork8. $25,578,863 $33,527,539 $59,106,402 . ..... *... 1,363,652 ............... 1,363,652 tributed. .. 474,848 ......... 474,848 . ..... ........................... 27,417,363 33,527,539 60,944,902 uef ueof perform .. . 116,760 ................ 116,760 ed.... .3 00 32,0 030..................3000......3 .............. Toat ofproject. 27,566,123 33,527,539 61,093,662 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS alYear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19861 otriated........$1,385,400 $915,000 $2,390,741 $450,000 $1,505,000 $32,717,060 ae. "...........1,338,233 .c.. 915,956 1,573,811 980,072 1,270,122 32,123,347 priated o .......... 2,145,5002,236,3642,296,9001,740,5013,008,427 35,937,759 2,173,2332,241,8121,635,7642,105,9043,275,667 ....... 35,907,216 des $5,180,832 for new work and $2,379,677 for maintenance for previous projects. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 2earTotal to ........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 work. bute .......... ............ ........... $63,348 $58,000 $1,052,355 ..................... .............. 61,202 60,146 1,052,355 s $577,507 for previous projects. 676 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 13. TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TEX. side of Location. Texas City is on mainland of Texas on w est olo Galveston Bay, about 10 miles northwest of city of Gavs (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 886 and 1282.) 1 port Previous projects. For details see page 1856 of Annuale for 1915. e Existing project. Provides for a channel 40 feet deep o rgart low tide and 400 feet wide from deep water in Galveston LI 61/2 miles to turning basin at Texas City, with a pile dike trit north side 28,200 feet long covered with clay and other ide on dredged from channel, with a turning basin 1,000 feet aboat bottom and 40 feet deep at mean low tide extendingol l" 4,250 feet to southward of south property line a short santo Chemical Co.; construction of a rubblemound dike be distance south of existing pile dike and extending 27,600 in p" tween stations -1 +600 (the shore) and 26+000; eas$ 16 proach to Texas City turning basin; an industrial bargecae feet deep, 125 feet wide for 1.6 miles southwestward fro'e City turning basin, thence at 12 feet deep for 0.1 mile, t,400 195 feet wide for 0.2 mile, and a turning basin 12 feet deetat feet wide, and 415 feet long; and revocation of requireMi local interests construct a common-carrier oil terminal at basin extension. Under ordinary conditions mean tidl r 0 t about 1.3 feet and extreme range is about 2 feet. Heighth" is dependent largely on the wind and during strong 'norelO in winter season water surface may be depressed 2 fee(corps) mean low tide. Estimated cost for new work is Federal adI $5,146,000 excluding expenditures on previous projects, a,54959 Federal $331,700 including $28,741 contributed funds,$ lands and $248,000 work contribution. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar. 4, 1913 A channel 300 by 30 feet and construct a pile dike 28,200 H. Doe. 1390, 62d Cong. 3d e feet long north to channel. 1stsess July 3, 1930 A harbor 800 by 30 feet at Texas City, and construct a rubble- H. Doc. 107, 71st Cong., o' mound dike. omit e Aug.30, 19351 Extension of rubblemound dike to shoreline................. Rivers and Harbors CO ' omt 4, 73d Cong., Ist sess. .ittee Do..... Deepen channel and harbor to 32 feet..................... Rivers and Harbors Col o *c P46, 73dCong., 2d sess.mmittee Do...... Deepen channel and harbor to 34 feet..................... Rivers and Hlarbors CO peoc 62, 74th Cong., 1st ses 1Ittee Aug. 26,1937 Extend harbor, 1,000 feet southward, 800 by 34 feet ........Rivers and lHarbors Com 47, 75th Cong., 1st se 2dsess June 30, 1948 Deepen channel and harbor to 36 feet, widen channel to 400 i. Doe. 561, 80thCong. feet and harbor to 1,000 feet and changing name of project (coG' to "Texas City Channel, Tex." 2d ses' July 14, 1960 Deepen channel and turning basin to 40 feet and construct H. Doe. 427, 80th Con _S) 16-foot Industrial Barge Canal. tains latest published Previously authorized Sept. 6, 1933, by Public Works Administration. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Non-Federal cO" tributions, $276,741. e oil Terminal facilities. Privately owned terminal facilities e te the mainland at inner end of this channel and considered ad 9 ), for existing commerce. See Port Series No. 23 (revised1 Corps of Engineers. An industrial barge canal extendif RIVERS AND HARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 677 S outhwestward from south end of Texas City turning basin turling basin have been constructed by local interests. Operationsand results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- neering and design and supervision and administration cost bi anad $18,538. Dredging to deepen channel and turning basin and extending turning basin, (May 16 to June 30, $1966) re- moving 1,142,500 cubic yards of material at a cost of $286,305. Maintenance: Engineering and design and supervision and ad- tudieslon cost $7,097 and $2,647. Condition and operations Juc.tio and inspections and reports cost $337. Dredging in con- junction with deepening channel and turning basin was performed from May 16 to June 30, 1966, removing 57,500 cubic yards of ma- terial at a cost of $31,125. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 77 percent a193e- Pile dike was completed in 1915 and rubblemound dike basil, t 0a Enlargement of channel draft(ch36 opeeto 36 by 400 feet and turning da by 1,000 feet was completed in April 1960. A deep- industrialnnel and turning basin along the alignment of authorized eepe al barge canal was completed by local interests in 1964. foot poing channel and turning basin to 40 feet including the 1,000 lring basin extension was initiated in May 1966. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitation Total Ut $3,859,821 $6,577,982 $726,158 $11,163,961 .......................... 136,296............................ 136,296 otal CO ........................ 28,741........................... .28,741 .................... 4,024,858 6,577,982 726,158 11,328,998 Cost and financial statement 1Total to ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 19661 June 30, atei ........ *..... ................................. ............ $750,000 $4,787,956 e : ....................................... . . ......... 324,984 24,362,940 ated oit ..........$621,015 $224,450 $304,313 $466,233 115,000 6,849,261 i ........... 616,496 229,386 299,953 468,273 41,206 6,773,065 . ............. . .. 22,000 835,000 -130,842 ........... 726,158 .................. 10,791 190,442 524,925.... 726,158 In ddi$366.823 for new work and $195,083 for maintenance for previous projects. ol, $28,741 expended from contributed funds. Lc ct 14. TRINITY on. RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TEXAS Main stem of Trinity River is formed at Dallas by ence of West Fork and Elm Fork at river mile 505.5. The alla o'rk, about 209 miles long, is principal tributary above Qaab ot, and Elm Fork is about 119 miles long. Mouth of Trinity one-half mile west of Anahuac, Tex., and 38 miles north of 50 0 Bay. (See Geological Survey quadrangles, scale cost!eVioiu s projects. For details of abandoned locks and dam ruction see page 986 of Annual Report for 1932. 678 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Improvement of Trinity River and taries by construction of coordinated developments to provio navigation, flood control, water supply, water quality contro provide related benefits in connection with other activitiesStl recreation and fish and wildlife conservation . Project pro for a multiple-purpose channel for navigation, flood CO recreation and fish and wildlife conservation purposes extei from Fort Worth generally along the course of Trinity.1 Liberty, Tex., thence via existing channel to Liberty projec connection with the Houston Ship Channel near Red Fish1 Galveston Bay, a total length of about 370 miles of ir. channel. Multiple-purpose channel would provide for afnl waterway having minimum dimensions of 12 feet deep and 1 wide and would extend in tidal waters for about 28 miles, the waterway would be canalized for about 336 miles to Fort terminus. Spur channels 12 feet deep and 150 feet wide exte to turning basins 400 feet square would be provided at Dalla Fort Worth. The channel would have 17 gated navigoation and one overflow navigation dam in addition to the auth Wallisville Reservoir dam, the Livingston Reservoir dam tob structed by local interests, and authorized Tennessee Colonyf voir dam to provide slackwater pools for navigation. The S' of dams would have 19 locks below Dallas, each having clear dimensions of 84 feet wide by 600 feet long, and 4 locks bet Dallas and Fort Worth, each 56 feet wide by 400 feet long. ect includes existing Federal projects designated as "An Channel, Texas," and "Mouth of Trinity River, Texas, I near Anahuac, Texas. Other coordinated developments C existing project includes 11 multiple-purpose reservoirs a local protection works. Tidal range in the bay is from 0.6 f 1.2 feet. Extreme low tide is 1.5 feet below mean low tide. cost of existing project is estimated at $1,077,527,700. Tfrinity Rivter Mfultivle-Purpose Channel to Fort Worth navigation loks and dams I Soda ruct Peper-dam cent I -.. Total com- estimated Kind of dam Type of dam construction plete cost < (1962) i ! !f " 15 Piling...... Fixed overflow.. Concrete paved embankment.... (2) Lock 1............ 28.3 4 miles NW of Anahuae, Tex.... 84 x 600 4 4 Lock and dam 2..... 47.4 1 mile west of Liberty, Tex..... ..... do... 12 16 ..... do... ..... do..... Movable ...... Gated, concrete spillway....... $14,900,000 Z Lock and dam 3..... 59.1 7 miles NW of Hardin, Tex..... .....do... 20 36 ..... do... ..... do......... do........ .... do...................... 16,300,000 Lock and dam 4..... 74.8 2 miles south of Romayor, Tex.. ..... do... 24 60 ..... do... ..... do.......... do........ ..... do.................... 18,500,000 Lock 5A............. 98.0 1 mile east of Camilla, Tex..... .....do... 41 101 ..... do... U-Frame... None 4 ........ None....................... 13,800,000 Lock SB.............. 99.2 ..... do....................... do... ..... 30 131 ....do... Piling..... None ......... .....do......... ......... 16,000,000 Lock and dam 6..... 147.9 9 miles NW of Riverside, Tex... ..... do... 7 138 .... do... U Frame... Movable...... Gated, concrete spillway...... 16,600,000 Lock and dam 7...... 183.9 7 miles east of Middleton, Tex... do... ..... 30 168 ....do.. Piling...... ..... do............. do................... 17,000,000 Lock and dam 8..... 207.5 8 miles NE of Nineveh, Tex... do... ..... 24 192 .... do... ..... do..........do........ ..... do...................... 15,700,000 Lock and dam 9..... 217.9 3 miles south of Long Lake, Tex. ..... do... 18 210 ..... do........ d o.......... do............. do................... 15,000,000 do... ..... 235 do..... Nones........ None.............. ......... 12,600,000 U Lock 10A............ 233.0 6 miles SE of Tenn.Colony,Tex. ..... do... 25 ..... Lock 10B............. 233.6 .... do................ do... ..... 27.5 262.5 ... do... U-Frame... None6........ ..... do................... (7) Lock and dam 11..... 258.9 4 miles south of Trinidad, Tex.. ..... do... 7.5 270 ..... do... ..... do..... Fixed overflow.. Concrete spillway........... (2) 274.5 6 miles north of Kerens, Tex.... ..... do... 14 284 ....do.. Piling...... Movable...... Gated, concrete spillway...... 13,100,000 Lock and dam 12..... Lock and dam 13..... 286.6 6 miles NE of Chatfield, Tex.... ..... do... 24 308 .... do... .....do..... ..... do............. do................... 16,300,000 Lock and dam 14.... 298.4 2 mile south of Rosser, Tex..... ..... do... 18 326 .....do..........do........ ..... do................... 14,200,000 344 ..... do... .....do..... .....do........ 13,700,000 Lock and dam 15.... 306.3 6 miles NW of Kaufman, Tex... ..... do... 18 ..... do... ..... .... do................... Lock and dam 16.... 311.2 5 miles SW of Seagoville, Tex... . ..... 12 356 ..... do........ do.......... do............. do................... 12,000,000 13,100,000 Lock Lock and dam 17.... and dam 18...... 317.8 331.3 Dallas, Tex.................... Dallas, Tex................... 56 x 400 do... 16 24 396 ..... ..... do... ..... do........ do..... .... do.... do..... .... do......... . ..... do................... ..... do................... 11,800,000 13,100,000 0Z Lock and dam 19..... 342.5 Grand Prairie, Tex............. ..... do... 28 424 do..... ..... do................... .....do... .... do......... 13,500,000 Lock and dam 20.... 331.9 Grand Prairie, Tex............ ..... do... 28 452 .... do... ..... do..... ..... do...................... ... do.... 13,200,000 Lock and dam 21.... 360.2 Fort Worth, Tex............... ..... do... 28 480 do... ..... .....do..... .....do.............. ........ - 1 - 1 1 1-I*1- 1- Subtotal, locks f ...................................... f 1 8290,400,000 4 and dams. MuLLy4lulu 7 7 7 7 .......... I......... 7 7 1 ' 1 Mileage from Houston Ship Channel near Red Fish Bar. 8 Lock 10B located in Tennessee Colony Reservoir dam. Navigati on dam not 0 2 Estimated cost included in cost of Wallisville Reservoir project. required. SLock 5A located in cutoff channel about 6,300 feet below Livingston Reservoir 7 Estimated cost of lock 10B and lock and dam 11 included in cost o f Tennessee ' dam. Plan provides for lock 5A to form and regulate navigation pool 5A. Colony Reservoir. C 4Lock 5B located in Livingston Reservoir dam. Navigation dam not required. 8 Excludes estimated cost of locks 1 and 10B and lock and dam 11 • y 6 Lock 10A located in cutoff channel about 2,600 feet below Tennessee Colony Reservoir dam. Plan provides for lock 10A to form and regulate navigation pool 10A. 680 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Additional features of multiple-purpose channel o I IT I. FeaturePercent est('2 Feature complete 000 $1I0000 Relocations Lands. .. .......................... . . : : :: : : : : ...... : ::6,90 0' 00 roads Access................................................ roads..............................................1.000 Accesnds .. . ..... 0 158, 0 00 Channels and canals... ............................................ . 0 37000 .0350 .3................. Recreation facilities................ .......................... Buildings, grounds and utilities...... .......................................... 1,40 Permanent operating equipment.. .... 1($287 .5 0000 Subtotal, additional features .................................................. 577900 0 ......... *7,- Subtotal, locks and dams, and additional features. ........................ 27 10 Channel to Liberty, Tex........... .......................................... 13 Total, Trinity River Multiple-Purpose Channel.............................00,000 Navigation aids (U.S. Coast Guard) .............. ........................... on ultipl 1 Includes $31,708,600 forlocal participation and cooperation, see detailed report on sel Purpose Channel project, Galveston District report.oe Includes $550,000 for local participation, see detailed report Multiple Purpos project, Galveston District report. reservoirs Name of reservoir / Stream i Nearest city /Miles above mouth I DrainageI area (sq mi) HeightI of dam (ft) Type of dam Reservoir capacity (acre ft) Year or percent completed Total estimated cost Aubrey................................Elm Fork........... Aubrey............... 60.0 682 116 Earthfill....899,900 0 $34,073,000 (1962) Bardwell ............. ............ Waxahachie Creek....... Bardwell............ 5.0 178 82 1.....do..... 140,000 80 11,500,000 (1965) Benbrook............................... Clear Fork............. Benbrook............. 15.0 429 130 .....do..... 258,600 1952 12,000,000 (1965) 00 .... Denton Creek.......... Grapevine.......... 11.7 695 137 .....do..... 435,500 1952 11,753,000 (1965) Grapevine.................... 7.2 272 91 ..... do..... 4S8,700 0 31,180,000(1962) Lakeview..................... Mountain Creek......... Grand Prairie.......... Lavon................ 55.9 770 69 .....do..... 423,400 1953 12,590,000 (1966) z Lavon ........................... East Fork............ 748,200 0 19,800,000 (1966) Lavon modification...................... East Fork............. Lavon............. 55.9 770 81 do..... ..... Elm Fork............. Lewisville.............. 30.0 1,658 125 do..... ..... 989,700 1954 21,971,000 (1965) Garza-Little Elm .................... 212,200 1963 9,598,000 (1966) Richland Creek.......... Navarro Mills.......... 63.9 320 82 do..... ..... Navarro Mills ........................... do..... 3,366,800 0 1193,782,000 (1962) Tennessee Colony.............. ..... Trinity............. Palestine........... 339.2 12,687 114 ..... Roanoke........... 32.0 604 97 do..... ..... 249,200 0 16,900,000 (1962) Roanoke ............................... Denton Creek......... 16,210,000 (1965) Trinity.............. Wallisvile........... 3.9 21,262 26 ..... do..... 58,000 0 Waivile..................... 0 Subtotal............................................... ° . .................... 3391,357,000 2 Includes cost of navigation dam 11, locks O10Band 11, navigation channel between locks 10B and 12, and pipeline to Benbrook Reservoir. 8 Below Livingston Reservoir. Includes $105,605,400 for non-Federal participation and local cooperation. For further information see Local cooperation. r C m' Local protection projects Miles above mouth Year or Total ____percent estimated 00 Project Stream Type of structure completed cost From To Fort Worth Floodway..... .................... West Fork and Clear Fork... 551.6 564.5 Enlarge levee and channel and floodway............ .1957 $9,524,000 (1960) Fort Worth Floodway extension (West Fork)............ West Fork..................564.5 570.4 Levees, channel, and drainage facilities............. 39 6,616,000 (1965) Fort Worth Floodway extension (Clear Fork)............Clear Fork................. 1.6 10.4 Levee, channel, dams, discharge facilities, and bridges. 6 8,377,000 (1965) West Fork Floodway............................... West Fork.................. 507.8 551.6 Leveed floodway, channel bridges, and drainage 0 17,809,000 (1962) facilities. 0 Dallas Floodway................ ............. Trinity River and Elm Fork.. 497.8 507.8 Enlarge levee, clear floodway and modification of 1960 9,848,000 (1960) drainage facilities. Dallas Floodway extension........................... Trinity River............... 488.6 497.8 Leveed floodway, channel bridges, and drainage 0 14,327,000 (1962) facilities.1 Elm Fork Floodway............................. Elm Fork and Denton Creek.. 0 30.0 Leveed floodway, channel, drainage facilities, and 0 16,823,000 (1962) bridges. Big Fossil Creek improvement........................ Big Fossil Creek............. 0 3.6 Levee and channel improvement, drainage facilities, 85 2,496,000 (1966) and relocations. Duck Creek Channel improvement.................... Duck Creek................ 10.4 17.5 Channel improvement and bridges................. 0 5,024,000 (1962) East Fork channel improvement........................ East Fork.................. 0 31.8 Levees and channel improvement.................. 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 7,900,000 (1965) ti Liberty levee project................................. Trinity River........ ....................... Levee and drainage facilities l 0 2,090,700 (1962) Subtotal.............. .... ............... ............ .. .......................... .................. .......... 2100,834,700 12 Flood control features exclusive of navigation features of the Trinity River Multiple-Purpose Includes $36,224,700 for non-Federal participation and local cooperation. For Channel project. C further information, see Local cooperation. C RIVERS AND HARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 683 Navigation projects incorporated into Trinity River and tributaries, Texas, project Percent Estimated Project name complete total cost outh f h... el, Tex*. Tex iiyRiver, .. ... . .......................................... . ... . . . . 100 1$6,000 T River, Tex .......................... ............... 100 280,000 ............................... . ...... 86,000 DiCo t9eted De 1 eted 1911, Project is being maintained. No cost to local interests. 107, project is not being maintained. No cost to local interests. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Document T5I . 2 nn.--____ hannel to Liberty.. l~d1 ..... ....... ..... . .............. on improvements above Liberty and terminate all H. Doc. 89, 66th Cong., 3d sess. ovements by lock and dam, leaving a 0-foot channel Liberty to mouth. channel to Liberty, Benbrook, Little Elm and Grape- H. Doc. 403, 77th Cong., 1st sess. Reservoirs, modification of Garza Dam, and leveed ways at Ft Worth and Dallas. Reservoir. . ... .. ........... H. Doc. 533, 78th Cong., 2d sess. iment of 9-foot channel in Galveston supply storage in Lavon Bay......... H. Doc. 634, 79th Cong., 2d sess. Reservoir.............. Specified in act. ed Dallas Floodway to include drainage facilities...... H. Doc. 242, 81st Cong.. 1st sess. uct water supply and utilization facilities in Lavon Specified in act. rvoir. 'o Mills Reservoir.............................. HI. Doc. 498, 83d Cong., 2d sess. ell Reservoir. ...... ............................ IH. Doc. 424, 85th Cong., 2d sess. orth Floodway Extension.................. H. D)oc. 402, 86th Cong., 2d sess. sail Creek levee and channel improvement............ HIf.l)oc. 407, 86th Cong., 2d sess. villeReservoir and incorporation into existing project HI. Doc. 215, 87th Cong., 1st seas. huac Channel and mouth of Trinity River projects. forth Floodway (Clear Fork)......... . ... . H. Doc. 454, 87th Cong., 2d sess. Reservoir modification and East Fork Channel im- H1.Doc. 554, 87th Cong., 2d sess. erment. le-purpose channel from Houston Ship Channel to H. Doc. 276, 89th Cong., 1st sess. Worth, including locks and dams, Liberty local pro- on, Duck Creek channel improvement, extension of as Floodway, Elm Fork Floodway, West Fork Flood- and Aubrey, Lakeview, Roanoke and Tennessee Colony rvoirs, including water-conveyance facilities to Ben- iexpenditure of any funds for construction of those facilities ite designed exclusively for Ia. the Chief of Engineers shall submit to Congress a reevaluation based upon current Ocal cperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965, sec. 301, (H. 6, Nlt.i1 7' 89th Cong., 1st sess.) not fully complied with for erest le-purpose channel to Fort Worth. Total cost to local in- for multiple-purpose channel is estimated at $31,708,600. for dleturther information on multiple-purpose channel project, see vittcpreport Galveston District. Local cooperation fully complied a41 o portion of channel to Liberty between Houston Ship )bel and 1 mile below Anahuac as required by River and oll r Act of 1946, (H. Doc. 634, 79th Cong., 2d sess.), but not ctomplied with for remaining portion of Channel to Liberty, 1st l0 2, ]River and Harbor Act of 1945, (H. Doc. 403, 77th Cong., Chaess.), estimated at $550,000. None required for Anahuac e a1 1 el Project. In general local interests must reimburse Fed- cove overnment for cost of water supply in reservoirs and water Voir Yance facilities. Total cost to local interests for all reser- Drojects isestimated at $105,605,400. Further information 684 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 regarding local contributions for reservoirs listed in foregfin table, excepting Wallisville Reservoir is in detailed report Port dividual reservoirs, Fort Worth District report. For detail rtioeP on Wallisville Reservoir see Galveston District report. See 'ects* Flood Control Act of 1936 applies to all local protection projects Total cost of local cooperation for the local protectiol Prtion listed in the foregoing table is $36,224,700. Further informets regarding these projects, excepting the Liberty levee projetre.- in detailed report on individual projects, Fort Worth Distre port. For detailed report on Liberty levee project see GalvestO District report. ahUc, Terminal facilities. Privately owned wharves at AfLiberty, Wallisville, Texas Gulf Sulphur Co.'s slip, Moss Bluff an Tex. Facilities are adequate for existing commerce. ois- Operations and results during fiscal year. See GalvestOChl .* trict detailed reports on Anahuac Channel, Multiple-Furpose nel to Fort Worth, and Wallisville Reservoir. tailed Condition at end of fiscal year. See Galveston District deect, report on Anahuac Channel, Liberty local protectio 1 3ser, p Multiple-Purpose Channel to Fort Worth, and Wallisville voir. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966, ye $3,167,125 (Galveston Dist.), of which $1,955,810 was fo,1e work and $1,211,315 was for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Ffiscal year.............. .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jue I 36081 ew work: $4,3 '116 Nv Appropriated.................... ......... $227,500 $390,000 $700,000 23,92 Cost....................................183,147 341,854 378,534 434 Maintenance: 1,6'971 Appropriated.......... $33,193 $3,015 42,000 11,000 66,150 1754, Cost.................. 33,567 2,168 26,399 28,096 57,424 projects 1 Includes $1,966,306 for new work and $543,662 for maintenance for previous 2In addition, $66,000 expended from contributed funds. 14 A. ANAHUAC CHANNEL, TEX. to Location. Extends from 6-foot depth in Galveston 13h of Anahuac, Tex., opposite mouth of Trinity River, 38 miles nort Galveston, Tex. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 12 05 Existing project. No project dimensions authorized bY lon River and Harbor Act. A 6- by 80-foot channel, 16,000 feet lo was dredged in 1905. At present a 6- by 100-foot channel is yet. tained. Under ordinary conditions tidal range is 0.6 to 1.22 Height of tide is dependent largely on wind. Strong north ab depress water surface 1.5 feet below mean sea level. Latest p" sesso lished map is in House Document 440, 56th Congress, 1st Estimated cost of project is $5,975. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: cos gineering and design and supervision and administration speC $2,800 and $4,100. Condition and operation studies, and l 9 tions and reports were made at a cost of $4,000. Dredging RIVERS AND HARBORS---GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT ,.685 .c Yards (Nov. uled 28, 1965, to Jan. 15, 1966) removing 155,195 of material at a cost of $39,867. SleteodtOn at end of fiscal year. Project is 100 percent com- aChannel was completed in 1911. B. LIBERTY LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT .cat14 ard45 'On. In Liberty, Tex., on Trinity River between miles 34 1:24,0.)0 (See Geological map for Liberty, Tex., quadrangle scale project. Pirovides for construction of 53,500 feet of stin1t 1rain and ver and two pump Harbor Act stations. Project (H. Doc. 276, 89thwas authorized Cong., by 1st sess.). oaped cost for new work is$1,800,000 Federal (Corps), and locttioaralP $300,000, including, $223,000 lands and $77,000 re- aplies Locol cooperation. Section 301, Flood Control Act'of 1965 Zonsatand 1as beeditn endresults during of fiscal fiscal year. None. year. No planning or construction initiated. 14 C. TRINITY RIVER MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECT TO FORT WORTH, TEX. n. Triiit In Galveston Bay, Trinity River, and West Fork of Pre 2 iver, Tex. for 193ious projects. For details see page 986 of Annual Report it project. A multiple-purpose channel in interest of ht101n , flood control, and recreation extending from Houston wil'l hannel near Red Fish Bar in Galveston Bay thence fol- rilit authorized channel to Liberty project along east shore of rilitY Bay to mouth of Trinity River at Anahuac, Tex., and the Trinity .ver to Liberty, thence continue along general course of tt po, River to Dallas and West Fork to Riverside Drive bridges qrXi, Worth, a total length of 370 miles, with spur channel and 2 abasin at Dallas and at Fort Worth. Project provides for bai t gation locks, 17 movable dams, and one overflow dam to 2 feetI a navigable waterway having minimum dimensions of ee tdeep and 150 feet wide to turning basin at Fort Worth. tai,~~,ulation "Pertinent data concerning system of locks and nyi Channel dimensions in excess of those cited for naviga- ashould be provided to meet the requirements for flood control Sin the following tabulation: 686 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Pertinent data concerning system of locks and dams proposed for Trinity River multiple-purpose project to Fort WorthTOs Proposed lock Proposed dam - ber " ua, Location 2Normal pool elevation 1 levation Sil ndI lock and daml Lock . _ ........ .. _ Lift 2 percent eleva- of gat" No.(feet) ere n tion2 Lower Upper 1 4 - 44-021 28.30 41 0 4 4 5.0 -16.0 7 0.4 6 47.45 2 4 16 12 17.0 -13.0 6.4034 59.08 3 16 36 20 37.0 3.5 o 74.85 4 36 60 24 61.0 26.0 98.00 5A 60 101 41 (5) . ... 4. %4 99.20 5B 101 131 30 (5) 6 404 147.92 6 131 138 7 139.0 126.0 5-40%4 183.92 7 138 168 30 169.0 126.0 40%6 207.55 8 168 192 24 1930 152.0 217.95 9 192 210 18 211.0 166.0 233.00 10A 210 235 25 (6 233.61 1013 235 262.5 27.5 (6 258.91 i 11 262.5 270 40 7.5 (7) .. . 274.51 12 270 284 14 286.0 O258.0p.43 286.64 13 284 308 24 309.0 278.0 540%26 298.38 14 308 326 18 327.0 302.0 021 306.31 15 326 344 18 345.0 322.0 402 311.25 16 344 356 12 357.0 331.06 5 317.81 17 356 372 16 373.0 344.0 6-40-- 331.31 18 209 372 3946I 396 4,24 24 28-42.0 397.0 363.5 6- 342.51 19 396 424 28 425.0 260 402.0 0 6,4.031 351.91 20 424 452 28 451.0 26.0 360.17 21 462 480 28 481.0 451.0 1 Distance in channel miles from the Houston Ship Channel. SElevation in feet above mean sea level. 8 Elevation of 2 percent flood discharge (regulated) in feet above mean sea level. ' Authorized as a feature of the Wallisville Reservoir project. 5 Livingston Reservoir spillway controls river flows passing locks 5A and 513B. @Tennessee Colony Reservoir spillway controls river flows passing locks 10A and 1013* 7 Notched outflow spillway at lock No. 11. Dimensions and capacity of Trinity River Multiple-Purpose Projec to Fort Worth, Tex. Channel mile e Recommended el Reco Length Bottom D)epth operating cascity (miles) width (ft)l discharge cfs) From To (ft) (cfs) 0.0 28.3 28.3 150 213.3 Tidal pool Wallisville Reservoir3 4 35.50 43.50 8.00 300 27.0 35,000 46# 43.50 55.70 12.20 350 30.0 35,000 45 55.70 74.85 19.15 200 34.0 35,000 45,0 74.85 4100.88 26.03 150 40.0 35,000 45006 Livingston Reservoirs 147.92 6234.60 86.68I 1501 45.0 35,000000 1747.9 234.0 Tennessee Colony Reservoir'?500 32, 274.51 293.00 18.49 200 25.0 25,000 , 293.00 304.00 11.00 150 28.0 25,000 2, 304.00 331.31 27.31 150 26.0 20,000 10 331.31 337.30 5.99 150 26.0 20,000 15, 337.30 342.51 5.21 150 26.0 12,000 15,0 342.51 360.17 17.66 200 26.0 12,000 15,' 360.17 367.83 7.66 150 26.0 12,000 16, 367.83 369.78 1.95 200 26.0 12,000 LApproximate depth of channel below top of river bank. el es 2 Project provides for deepening the 9 by 150-foot channel to Liberty to 12 feet belO 0 low tide. 3 Project provides for 12 by 150-foot navigable channel below bottom of conservatiirto elevation 1.0, from lock 1 in Wallisville dam (mile 28.3) to mile 35.50.ool, 4Upper end of flood release discharge channel at Livingston spillway basin. 5 Project provides for 12 by 150-foot navigable channel below bottom of conservat tio o elevation 101, from lock 5B13,mile 99.20 to 147.92. ool, SUpper end of flood release discharge channel at Tennessee Colony spillway basin..tio _ Project provides for 12 by 150-foot navigable channel below bottom oy conser hlo lo" 9 e elevation 235.0, from lock 10B (mile 233.61) to lock and dam 11, (mile 2 58.91),annd le vation 270 from lock and dam 11, (mile 258.9) to lock and dam 12 (mile 274.51). RIVERS AND HIARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 687 Lon, project provides for 44 high-level fixed highway 13 vertical lift railroad bridges over navigable waterway, bridge and 3 modified highway bridges over channel up- of turning basin at Fort Worth, relocation of 111 pipe- Spower transmission lines, 17 communication lines, 6 les, and 6 sewer lines, access roads to lock sites, buildings, , utilities at lock sites, permanent operating equipment, Lc-use areas totaling 2,600 acres. Total cost of multiple- channel, including cost of channel to Liberty, is estimated 250,000, exclusive of aids to navigation estimated at ,as shown in report on "Trinity River and tributaries, alveston District. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents e. 22,1922 i.Dc 99_6h og, dss . Abandoned waterway improvement from Liberty to Dallas and left a channel 6 feet deep and of navigable width from 2~4 , 1945 Lvity to the mouth. II. Doc. 989, 66th Cong., 3d sess. Aavigable channel from Houston Ship Channel near Red t. Doc. 403, 77th Cong., 1st sess. Fish Bar in Galveston Bay to Liberty, Tex., with project derpth of 9 feet deep and 200 feet wide in Galveston and 1 5 fty Bays to mouth of Trinity River and 9 feet deep and LiBertaet wide in river section, with a turning July24,1946 basin at ed Moifi project to provide for a channel 9 feet deep and 150 H. Doc. 63-1,79th Cong., 2d sess. eet wide fromHouston Ship Channel near Red Fish Bar in Galveston Bay extending along east shore of Trinity Bay to mouth of Trinity River at Anahuac, including protective2 0 spoil embankment on bay side of channel in lieu oct. 23, 1962 Mof 9 by 0-foot channel in Galveston and Trinity Bays. ti pe-purposeWallisville Reservoir, including a naviga- tion lock in Wallisville dlam at chaniel mile 28.30 and ad- H. Doc. 215, 87th Cong., 1st sees. 'ancement of Channel to Liberty from 1 mile belowAna- et.27,116 u l milue23.2) to Texas Gulf Sulphur Co.'s slip at channel mmultiple-purpose channel extending from Houston Ship H. D)oc. 276, 89th Cong., 1st sess. Channel near Red Fish Bar in Galveston Ba along Channel to Liberty, thence continuing along genera course of Tri- e s River to Dallas and West Fork to Riverside Drive bri- dity inFort fg Worth, including locks and dams to provide a navigable waterway having minimum dimensions of 12 feet deep and 250 feet wide, with necessary relocations of highway and railroad bridges and utility lines, access roads and lock site buildings and appurtenances. I cooperation. Fully complied with for portion of "Chan- iberty" between Houston Ship Channel and 1 mile below c as required by 1946 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 634, .ag.,2d sess.), but not complied with for remaining portion unel to Liberty" as required by River and Harbor Act of i. Doc. 403, 77th Cong., 1st sess.), at an estimated total )550,000, of which $460,000 is for lands and rights-of-way ,000 for pipeline relocations for 9- by 150-foot channel. plied with for multiple-purpose channel to Fort Worth as Sby River and Harbor Act of 1965 (II. Doc. 276, 89th 1st sess.). Cost to local interests for multiple-purpose is estimated at $31,708,600, summarized as follows: .nd damages, $8,607,500; relocations: highway bridges, 00; railroad bridges, $647,800; pipelines, $3,342,800; les, $973,700; communication lines, $1,290,000; access ,652,300; and sewer lines, $591,900. 'znal facilities. Privately owned wharves and docks at 688 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Anahuac, Wallisville, Tex., Gulf Sulphur Co.'s slip, Moss Bluff and Liberty, Tex., are adequate for existing commerce. .nel to Operations and results during fiscal year. (Channel to Liberty) Maintenance: Engineering and design and super and and administration costs $381 and $538. Cond toredg , operation studies and inspections and reports cost $738 '1966) Dredg- ing was performed in the channel to Liberty (Jan. 15-21, 1966) removing 23,103 cubic yards of material at a cost of $5,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. The 6-foot channel to a$ was completed in 1925. The 9-foot channel to LibertY. dredged from junction with Houston Ship Channel to a 1pofl mile below Anahuac, Tex. Work remaining consists o.f a rt, 150-foot channel from Houston Ship Channel to Fort W el Tex., with necessary locks and dams. The 9- by 150-foOt co For to Liberty is coincidental with the 12- by 150-foot channel to Worth. 14 D. WALLISVILLE, TEX. tof Location. Dam is at river mile 3.9, about 4 miles northes Anahuac, Tex. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 12820 foot Existing project. Provides for construction of a 3 e dam to store water to elevation 4 feet above mean sea leve ,d eX an 84- by 600-foot navigation lock in a cutoff channel; m8ls tension of authorized channel to Liberty from its present ter -le i at channel mile 23.2 to Texas Gulf Sulphur channel at chan~~lt g 33.6. Dam is composed of a nonoverflow section 16,820 feeV0 with a crest elevation varying from 13.0 to 10.0 feet above 50 sea level, and an overflow section 22,400 feet long. Allbut ,bo eio feet of overflow section has a crest elevation of 5.5 feet mean sea level. The two remaining portions of overflow s the have crest elevations of 4.0 feet above mean sea level. B oeees overflow and nonoverflow sections basically are earthern yo with full or partially riprapped side slopes and paved roadw t their crest. Lock is at channel mile 28.3, has a sill depth of i 16.17 feet below mean sea level, a normal lift of 4 feet an , founded on piles in clay. Dam controls a drainage area o e square miles below Livingston Dam (non-Federal proJeet channel mile 99.2) and has a storage capacity of 58,000 acr e0.6 Under ordinary conditions mean tidal range in bay is froind foot to 1.2 feet. Height of tide is dependent largely on zea Strong northerly winds depress water surface 1.5 feet belo~r sea level. Reservoir was authorized by 1962 River and e t Act (H. Doc. 215, 87th Cong., 1st sess.). Channel imnprove7 was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 402,000 Cong., 1st sess.). Total estimated cost of project is $16 ,2t Federal (Corps) and $10,000 non-Federal for lands for con tion of portion of channel to Liberty. ° Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute an a 1ated equal to cost allocated to water supply, one-half of cost alloc 0f to salinity control and cost allocated to recreation less col ' basic facilities and less 15 percent of total project cost. Loc4et terest contribution is estimated at $3,527,000. For improveal 1 of the navigation channel, exclusive of reservoir features, lo c RIVERS AND HARBORS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 689 trasfe"u u st provide lands, spoil areas, and adequate terminal and rat facili ties, make necessary relocations of utilities crossing Iver channel and give assurances that they will hold the rited lited tates free from claims for damages, including but not fro teodamages due to salt water intrusions, that may result Spero truction and operation of the navigation improvements. eerin ions and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- $104,247 and design and supervision and administration cost Admi0st7and $21,844. Federal land purchases totaled $183,666. First 1 rative costs for Federal purchases of land totaled $68,777. ek acoSnstruction contract was awarded June 27, 1966, for the bridge essroad, intake canal, intake structure and intake canal C 0 Prec %ition.at end of fiscal year. Project is 6 percent complete. and a uction planning is complete, land acquisition initiated, struct ract for construction of access road, Big Hog intake ure, intake canal and access bridge awarded. 15.RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Name of project Date survey conducted lear Lake Tex................................... Oct. 1965, Feb., Mar., and Apr. 1966 bayouTe ........ ......................................... Oct. 1065 ........................................ Mar." 1966 16,,OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and rkaitnfor- maintenance QrazosR o, Tex j 2......... eekTer terS reek n,eI from ....... Velasco to Old"Waslington2.... . 31 19...................... 1924 $9,920 3216,989 $27,129 223,0109 a 1024 326,89 223,010 i¢ckjQ rt0 ear Lake, Tex.4 ................... 1965 66,934 204,716 oqbl' . a , ',cannel to Nav'y"Sea"pl'an'e B'ase, Encinal Peninsula4 1046 11104,344 15,579 ,4 , ayou,$ ex.4.4.. ..................................... 1054 33,042 60,437 b46 T .41 *. 1965 10,310 316,488 Litle Iannua Reef), Tex.2". . .. . ... . ... . . 1922 2,476 847 ter(Q ex,.. ............................................ 1933 2,261 54,042 reek, .Y..................................... ...................................... .... 1957 1922 6,942 1,656 7,5 1922 6,942 7,556 1Ve an1d Harbor Act (H. Doc. 768. 80th Cong., 2d sess.) revoked 6-foot channel for f raasauthorized t by River and Harbor Act of 1945 (11. Doc. 337, 76th Cong., 1st 4Iui Itradreau horized only that portion of existing 4- by 100-foot project lying westward ve. cstal Waterway. C dlete.$123,676 from previous project. 11 a detuate for existing commerce. WeaquntyNavigation District, Rockport, Tex., constructed project as authorized by 2oertnit. iarbor Act (11 Doc. 114, 81st Cong., 1st sess.) in 1955 under Department of coxnlerce reported. , NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION., Navigation activities.pursuant to section 107, S Yea Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) ic al year costs for preauthorization studies were $6,633 for aTrPal boat basin at Port Aransas, and $98 for Pleasure Island or, Sabine Lake, Tex. 690 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 196( 18. BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TEXA shed, Bayou wate o hd Location. Improvements are on Buffalo a part of San Jacinto River watershed, in Harris eologIl 0 Tex. (see, west and northwest of city of Houston, Survey quadrangle sheets for Harris County.) lo aY Existing project. Provides for improvement of Buf 0 gstOl and its tributaries above turning basin (Houston) of sto Ship Channel to control floods for protection of city of ch l and prevent deposition of silt in turning basin of shaP rectfi by construction of detention reservoirs, enlargement a, stInA cation of channels and construction of control works. and 1o" cost for new work is: Federal (Corps) $66,100,009 pro ect Federal $41 million for lands and relocations. xjijsti 19prc 111, 99 whic was authorized by Flood Control Acts of August September 3, 1954 (H. Doc. 250, 83d Cong., 2d ses ) 3e provided, in lieu of features authorized by 1938 ti Harbor Act (H. Doc. 456, 75th Cong.,and ta 2d sess.), for s trgffol Reservoirs on Buffalo Bayou for clearing, Addicks oct ing, enlarging, and lining where necessary channelsO Brays, and White Oak Bayous; October 27, 1965 (g. 11wit 89th Cong., 1st sess.), provides for extending upper lim~'~ ilesfrol Oak Bayou portion of project upstream about 2.1 M C ree Burlington-Rock Island Railroad bridge to mouth of Cole Type of Reservoir co Nearest Height of Name city dam (feet) structure Ccaci48A 0 acre-feet 204,500 30 Addicks Dam and Reservoir...... Houston, Tex... 49 tention". de- Earthfill Barker Dam and Reservoir ........... do......... 37 ..... do ....... 207,00 acre -et Local cooperation. Section 203, Flood Control Act of applies. Local interests have accomplished 100 perceIce required local cooperation on Brays Bayou, and 77 Poto CO White Oak Bayou, which includes the authorized extens'rests intere1nel% Creek. On Buffalo Bayou, local interests purchasedchanel. had in 7.4 miles of rectified 14 the United States Barker and Addicks Dams for $256,651. Of the reMqaihave quired rights-of-way on Buffalo Bayou, local interests .de re be quired about 30 percent. Also 66 percent of required bre cations and 4 percent of required utility relocations unt l10 accomplished. Advance of $4,400,000 by the Harris Coubl Control District was refunded in September 1956. Pu oa 86-53 authorized reimbursement of $38,726 to Galveston, tY and Henderson Railroad Co. for bridge$63,661 alterations a ct b for proj Bayou. Non-Federal contributions total terments. . r Operations and results during fiscal year. New wordii Bayou. Engineering and design and supervision a W cco tion costs $55,611 and $30,866. Channel rectification w0 196 plished from Roark Road to Westheimer (July 1 to Oct. 3 h at a cost of $124,666. Seeding and mulching of berms a l re nel slopes from Southwest Freeway to Westheimer Road ri formed at a cost of $40,923. White Oak Bayou. Enginee FLOOD CONTROL-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 691 $15,~ 1In Supervision and administration costs $75,296 and Chann t Co s t for relocation of a railroad bridge totaled $1,923. coantirerectification on White Oak Bayou (mile 1.07 to 3.5) was yale St and completed August 27, 1965, at a cost of $18,683; cost of et to 18th Street (mile 3.5 to 6.4) was continued at a 1 $rlil 08 8 ,8 3 0. Channel rectification from 18th Street to listhe -Rock Island Railroad (mile 6.4 to 8.5) was accom- seecdin (Dec. 9, 1965, to June 30, 1966) at a cost of $435,167. to yl 1 and mulching of berms and channel slopes from mile 1.07 fore iteet cost $34,449. Buffalo Bayou. Advance planning Teeri ne rectification of Buffalo Bayou cost $128,760 for engi- and design and $9,499 for supervision and administration. recreatn 11ad Barker Dam and Reservoirs. Master planning for ea t Onal facilities in Addicks Reservoir cost $455. d R enance: Addicks Dam and Reservoir and Barker Dam ad 4 ervoir 1 were operated and maintained at costs of $43,758 018. .ist Engineering and design and supervision and ad- ese . ion at Addicks Dam and Reservoir, Barker Dam and clud r and Buffalo Bayou rectified channel cost $8,770, in- COldit$8,360 1ercen tiOn at for endreal estate. of fiscal year. Existing project is about 59 IIe complete. Construction of Barker Dam was completed Cha eruary 1945. Construction of Addicks and 7.4 miles of as con ectification downstream from Addicks and Barker Dams Sdicd. Pleted in October 1948. Modification of Barker and ec dDaris consisting of gating of two uncontrolled conduits oift a, was completed in fiscal year 1963. Work remaining rct tcaof the completion of design and construction of channel til on for Brays, White Oak, and Buffalo Bayous. Cost and financial statement 1902 Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,19661 4... ... $2,715,000 $2,801,608 $1,944,000 $3,470,000 $3,204,000 $39,726,494 * e '' . *.. 2,841,808 2,810,0781,363,8634,231,2722,204,239 238,666,829 235,300 220,000 242,700 155,000 93,900 2,073,798 . 106,622 340,618 192,600 207,481 94,516 2,067,353 un da Uns of $4,400,000 repaid to Harris County Flood Control District. Cost and fi- S Iddherei f rnaerly reported under advanced funds transferred to Federal funds and are (1ftn $63,661 contributed funds expended for Brays Bayou Channel, and $12,900 and $19,104 contributed funds expended for enlargement of Clodine ditch. 19. FREEPORT AND VICINITY, TEXAS oc t. n . (Hurricane-FloodProtection) 1 7" of Freeport is in southern part of Brazoria County O11ft 'Of Mexico at mouth of Brazos River, about 43 miles No'^s "west. of?)leso ' Galveston, 'x Tex. lood Ifn project. Authorized p)lan provides for hurricane- o~t cti for a highly industrialized area and community arot 9,000 persons. Major features of project consist of e Zveents to 42.8 miles of existing levees, two interior drain- rPing plants and 2.1 miles of new levee. Estimated cost for 692 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 new work is: $11,700,000 Federal (Corps) and nonOFeder $5 million consisting of $3,607,000 cash and $1,393,000 la Existing project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Ac Doc. 495, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Section 203, Flood Control Act of 1is96 ap 962, e- plies. Non-Federal contribution estimated at $5 million i quired. rk gi Operations and results during fiscal year. New wor: cost neering and design and supervision and administration ex $282,432 and $55,918. Construction of Oyster Creek levee ess tension continued at a cost of $199,350. Repairs to shell a road totaled $569. t cod Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 6 percen1 cof plete. Work remaining consists of acquisition of lands, struction of road ramps, levees, and pumping plants. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 988~ uTotal Fiscal year. ............... 1962 1063 1964 1965 1066 New work: Appropriated...................... $60,000 $300,000 $400,000 $7g0,00 Cost.......................... .......... 30,076 324,442 367,734 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Tots' Igo Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1un~ New work: $215:6 Contributed...........$120,000 $155,000 .... Cost............... .............. 17,981 170,535 1 Excludes $38,100 estimated value of contributed lands. 20. HIGHLAND BAYOU, TEX. tld Location. Rises near Arcadia, in Galveston County, Tex'ter flows into Jones Bay, an arm of West Galveston Bay. 'ThWil shed, with an area of about 38 square miles, lies entirelY-S il Galveston County. Bayou is about 14 miles long and vali width from about 0.3 mile at its lower end to a rmaxin~t~jarT about 5 miles near its midpoint. (See Coast and Geodetic. 886). enage- Existing project. Plan of improvement provides for e trtc ment and rectification of Highland Bayou Channel and conflh" tion of a diversion dam in Highland Bayou, with a diversio l a' nel along general course of Basford Bayou to Jones (, Existing project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control AC Doc. 168, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). Estimated cost of nV W co' is: Federal (Corps) $3,850,000 and non-Federal $1,500,000 sisting of $681,000 lands and $819,000 for relocations. a65'p" Local cooperation. Section 204, Flood Control Act of 1965 plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. cto Condition at end of fiscal year. No planning or constr' has been initiated. FLOOD CONTROL-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT (;93 21. PORT ARTHUR AND VICINITY, TEXAS (Hurricane-Flood Protection) extroc t ion. Port Arthur is on west shore of Sabine Lake in Areate southeast part of Texas, about 14 miles from the Ahealdu er consideration is comprised of about 38,500 acres, gulf. and Pear cities of Port Arthur and Groves, towns of Griffing Park, Exitige, and Lakeview, and adjacent industrial areas. reconstinfl proyect. Authorized plan provides for: Raising and seaOall~ucting 6.3 miles of existing concrete and steel sheet-pile seawall; coonstructing 0.3 mile of new concrete and sheet-pile coastrulralsing and improving 7.5 miles of existing earth levees; interio ting 20.3 miles of new earth levees and constructing four is: Fedrainage pumping plants. Estimated cost for new work cosiedtineral (Corps) $40,600,000 and non-Federal $17,400,000 an $9'ti g of $13,100,000 cash contribution, $3,400,000 for lands lood (,9000 for relocations. Existing project was authorized by Lod Control Act of 1962 (I. Doc. 505, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). applies cooperation. Section 203, Flood Control Act of 1962, Opert Non-Federal contributions estimated at $17,400,000. Ieerif ons and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- $5971 and design, and supervision and administration cost to 51+and $49,169. Construction of the floodwall (sta. 505+00 cost ) was W performed from March 24 to June 30, 1966, at a received$48,160. Contributed lands in amount of $143,000 were lCOndition at end of fiscal year. Work under initial construc- l ract was started March 24, 1966. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year Total to . . ...... 192 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ...... $150,000 $281,000 $356,000 $750,000 $1,537,000 S......... 115,116 248,390 393,084 635,181 1,391,780 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS year. cs. ....... eo 1962 1963 1964 1065 ............ ............ ............ ............ ,oo, $500,000 Total to June 30, 1966 $500,000 S . ... ... ....... ....... ..... . ...... . 59,119 159,119 Cldes $143,000 estimated value of contributed lands. ,Loo 22. TAYLORS BAYOU, TEX. cor on. Watershed of Taylors Bayou is in extreme southeast o tf Texas adjoining basins of Neches River and Sabine Lake trea eas t . City of Port Arthur is about 8 miles from the main "rm t " Taylors Bayou. (See Coast and Geodetic Chart 885). streamting project. Provides for enlarging and rectifying the Water channels and constructing a diversion channel and salt 206, 8 gtate . Authorized by Flood Control Act of 1965 (H. Doc. t Cong., C 1st sess.). Estimated cost for new work is: 694 REPORT OF TIlE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Federal (Corps) $5,930,000 and non-Federal $3,450,000,0i0 di' $2,020,000 cash contributioni, $649,000 lands, and $781, relocations. Atof 1965, Local cooperation. Section 204, Flood Control Act 000. applies. Non-Federal contributions are estimateda t $2,020' Operations and results during fiscal year. None. tructiof Condition at end of fiscal year. No planning or COfs has been initiated. 23. TEXAS CITY, TEX. (Hurricane-Flood Protection)tie Location. On southwest shore of Galveston Bay, about northwest of Galveston, Tex. City has a frontage of ab bJt miles on Galveston Bay and a maximum inland width of 9 miles, and a total land area of about 50 square miles. trctiof Existing project. Authorized plan provides for const for of improvements at Texas City, Tex., including protecttI south and central portions of city of La Marque, Tex., for o0d. of storm tides, consisting of new and enlarged levees a~tgether walls about 16.2 and 1.3 miles long, respectivelyt. o 0. with related drainage and stoplog structures,a naviga tiol ing and pumping plants. Estimated cost for new for se Federal (Corps) $16 million and non-Federal $6,858,000otrit. wall with closure structures including $4,915,000 cash cost , tion and $1,943,000 for lands. Additional non-Federal r ramps in lieu of closure structures is $172,000. Existinv. rd including protection for city of La Marque, which is consdre195S necessary part of development of area, was authorized 7f Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 347, 85th Cong., 2d sess. ec03 local cooperation provisions, which are set forth in sec. the act). 15 loo Local cooperation. Requirements are in section 203, 195 o Control Act. Based on 1966 estimates, local interests.Mn ut tribute $6,858,000 toward the project, and, at their optiOn, AbOt ditional $172,000 for ramps in lieu of closure structures. _ 1o" $7 million from county bond issues is available to defra lad Federal costs. Local interests acquired about 50 percent#iof needed for the project and are proceeding with acquist, lands. go1111 Operations and results during fiscal year. New worl o ci neering and design and supervision and administrati1 n $306,940 and $133,849. Relocations under contracts coSt cost o Erosion control was performed under two contracts at vee $10,389. Miscellaneous repairs and erosion contro l frolee station 7+50 to 280+00 were accomplished with hird levee forces at a cost of $1,159. Final cost for construction o co#" from station 141+50 to 199+00 totaled $95,025. Work ws tinued on construction of the hurricane flood protection sysS follows: FLOOD CONTROL-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 695 Description Period Cost LeveeC" - ----.---.. - n tloructilooay TLeda control stru Sa37l L Area Sta. 367+7i5 to 459 50).......... .. July 1to Nov. 24, 1964........ $34,313 (e.. e on truct . .. . . . . July 1, 1965 to June 30, 1966... 578,085 on 692 -00 to 783+00) ... ... .... do do........ .................... 137,930 ecent on at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 43 Ds, reltcommplete. Work remaining consists of acquisition of OI leveesocation of railroad ramps and signals, and construction , tidal control structure, floodwalls, and pumping plants. Cost and financial statement aREGULAR FUNDS 'elYear.'' Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 work. ostroPriated460,000 $782,000 $2,346,000 $2,740,000 $2,400,000 $9,019,000 438,914 625,004 1,812,204 2,840,266 1,079,557 7,025,064 CONTRIBUTEDI) FUNDS Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 i S $300,000 $1,905,600 ........... ............ .$769,900 $2,975,500 S 60,415 $126,568 474,249$1,216,266 230,288 12,107,786 823,278 estimated value of contributed lands. 24. VINCE AND LITTLE VINCE BAYOUS, TEX. io Watershed of Vince Bayou and tributary, Little aYou, has an area of about 17 square miles and lies ithin Harris County. Vince Bayou is a minor tributary l Bayou in San Jacinto River Basin on upper gulf coast Ls. Lng project. Provides for enlarging and rectifying chan- ince Bayou from mouth to a point about 7.3 miles up- and Little Vince Bayou from mouth to a point about s upstream, a total distance in both streams of about ' Estimated cost for new work is: Federal (Corps) )0, and non-Federal $2,950,000, consisting of $1,952,000 and $998,000 for relocations. Existing project was Zed by 1962 Flood Control Act (TI. Doc. 441, 87th Cong., ScOoperation. Section 203, Flood Control Act of 1962, Local interests have acquired 80 percent of real estate cleeBayou channel rectification. About 5 percent of all d relocations on Vince Bayou has been accomplished. tons and results during fiscal year. Plans and specifica- r.rectification of Vince Bayou between the mouth and were prep)ared. A feature design memorandum was sub- On Little Vince Bayou. Feature design memorandum 'V ince Bayou between mile 3.9 and 7.29 is about 90 per- 696 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning continued durig the fiscal year. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ .1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... ............ ............ $52,000 $92,000 $455,000 24 Cost.................................... 49,513 76,862 120,836 25. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PI0OJtCTS je0 Inspections of completed flood control local protection pror operated and maintained by local interests were iade ofl quitas Creek, Kingsville, Tex., (Oct. 1965 and June 1966);9 Navidad Rivers, IHallettsville, Tex., (Oct. 1965, Feb. 965 June 1966); Colorado River, Matagorda, Tex., (Oct 1rd May 1966); San Diego Creek at Alice, Tex. (Oct. 1965 and 19 1966); Oyster Creek levee extension at Freeport, Tex.,(ct1965 and Apr. 1966); Little Cypress Bayou at Orange, Tex.,-(VTe%- ec. and Apr. 1966) ; and Galveston seawall at Galveston, 1965 and May 1966) at a cost of $1,548. 26. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PR For last Cost to June 30 full report - I---sd Name of project see Annual pe? ice Report .aain for- Construction 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' i Colorado River, Matagorda, Tex. 1963 $273,757 *'*...'" Lavaca-Navidad Rivers, Tex.: Hallettsville project. .......................... 1961 256,043 " General channel projectl...................... . 1952 21,086 .. *... Mill Creek, Tex. .... .. ....... ...................... . 1952 24,753 .. .. San Diego Creek, Alice, Tex.2... 2 . . . . . . ....... ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1963 135,175 Tranquitas Creek, Kingsville, Tex. ,, 1956 130,239 SInactive. a Completed. 27. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZA0 Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) . 0C Fiscal year cost of $118 was for preparation of reconnaoved report for flood protection at Oso Creek, Robstown, Tex., reprov from active list of projects being considered for Federal imp ment. Emergency flood control activities--repair,flood fighting, and res5ce (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) r iO' Fiscal year Federal costs were $7,614 for advance prepar and $2,806 for flood emergency operations. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-GALVESTON, TEX., DISTRICT 697 28. SURVEYS Type of studies Fiscal year cost Berh .. . . . . reach *................................................................$86,499 nrcooerat our . 205,650 .... 0** *. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 24 335 2k.335 naz th.o.c .:.........................................................500,694 .. . . . . . . . O of (Idon h er agencies:50,9 t service. seroyonwi 2,255 atoo t ela than smail authorized projects................................477 iscal 29. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT lYear cost was $676 for hydrologic studies. FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT * 1 includes that portion of Texas south of Red River basin exclusive of drainage basin of Rio Grande and its s above and including Pecos River; exclusive of drain- s of all short streams arising in coastal plain of Texas ng into the Gulf of Mexico, including entire basins of 3ayou, San Jacinto, San Bernard, Lavaca, Navidad, Md Aransas Rivers; exclusive of lower basins of major lowing into the gulf as follows: Sabine River, Tex. and iStream from U.S. Highway 190 crossing at Bon Wier, 'hes River downstream from Town Bluff gaging station; ver downstream from Texas State Highway 45 crossing ide, Tex.; Brazos River downstream from confluence asota River; Colorado River downstream from gaging Austin; Guadalupe River downstream from confluence Marcos River; San Antonio River downstream from Swith Escondido Creek; Nueces River downstream fluence with Frio and Atascosa Rivers; and exclusive Dulce, San Fernando, and Olmos Creek basins draining us Bay and coastal area south thereof to Rio Grande )f western boundary of Starr County, Tex. District also that portion of western Louisiana in Sabine River basin upstream from U.S. Highway 190 crossing at , Tex., and portion of eastern New Mexico included in basins of Brazos and Colorado Rivers. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1, Da Navigation Flood Control-Continued 2. eche3 Reservoir, Tex.. 700 18. Lavon Reservoir, Tex.... 719 2 eshes and Angelina iv 3 Tris, Tex. 19. Lavon Reservoir modifica- S..... - f....... R - 700 tion and East Fork taries River and tribu- Channel improvement, 4Othe , Tex. .......... 701 Tex. ................. 720 authorized naviga- 20. Navarro Mills Reservoir, projects .......... 703 Tex. ................. 722 Flood Control 21. Proctor Reservoir, Tex... 723 6. 22. San Angelo Reservoir, Tex. 724 channel improve- 6. 23. San Antonio Channel im- lTex .......... 703 provement, Tex ...... 725 7, ell Reservoir, Tex. 704 24. San Gabriel River, tribu- Reservoir, Tex. . 705 l. ok Reservoir, Tex. tary to Brazos River, 707 Tex. ................. 726 ssil Creek, Tex. ... 708 25. Somerville Reservoir, Tex. 727 River and tribu- 12. , Tex. ......... 26. Stillhouse Hollow Reser- 709 voir, Tex ............ 728 SReservoir, Tex... 711 27. Vorth Floodway Trinity River and tribu- 18. ar Fork) Tex...... taries, Tex. ........... 729 713 28. Vorth Floodway Waco Reservoir, Tex .... 730 14. st Pork) Tex...... 714 29. Inspection of completed Little Elm Reservoir flood control projects .. 732 15, ,isville Dam), Tex. 30. Scheduling flood control 16, mie Reservoir, Tex. 714 716 reservoir operations ... 732 up e and San An- 31. Other authorized flood con- Rivers, Tex ..... 717 trol projects ........ 734 Creek Reservoir, 32. Flood control work under .***............ 718 special authorization .. 734 700 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 rage Page iai Multiple-Purpose Projects age General InvestigatiOns 17 Including Power 35. Surveys ..... ** f Sam Rayburn Reservoir, 33. 36. Collection and stuU Tex................... 734 basic data .. t 34. Whitney Reservoir, Tex. . 736 37. Research and develoP 1. DAM B RESERVOIR, TEX.1 eo Location. Dam is on Neches River about 12.4 riles 3A mouth of Angelina River, one-half mile north of Tow'n Tex., and 93 river miles north of Beaumont, Tex. *p ovemen Existing project. For description of completed stimate and authorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962 :buted by cost of project is $8,726,000, including $2 million contri local interests. Local cooperation. Completed as required. tionof Operations and results during fiscal year. Constrdu ite" recreation facilities continued. Routine operation and pa nance continued. No flood control storage is providedn feet B reservoir. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year wash 0tl above mean sea level, corresponding to 73,020 acre-feet 0boVe storage; and at end of fiscal year elevation was 81.02 fe t 0 age. mean sea level, corresponding to 69,900 acre-feet of total ,19 Maximum pool elevation was 83.57 feet on February gtiO &rain 11Jd corresponding to 102,300 acre-feet of total storage; d pool elevation was 63.95 feet on September 22, 1965, corir s ing to 2,000 acre-feet of total storage. Water sup 13966 e accrued to the project during fiscal years 1965 and 1 6 elY water releases of 472,460 and 490,660 acre-feet, res Pf. Accumulated releases to June 30, 1966, were 7,357,400 ,r ( c Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction starte ' 51, 1947 and project was ready for beneficial use in APri , Completion of construction of recreation facilities remain I Cost and financial statement Fiscal year.. .............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 19966 New work: Appropriated.......... $100,000 $98,000 $95,000 $52,500 $449,000 Cost.................. 91,979 90,262 106,233 55,927 2 900 9, . 6oo ', s 66 199o o Maintenance: 16 Appropriated..........165,190 151,600 135,000 148,300 1558,200 Cost................. 171,949 245,119 146,693 139,598 157,271 1 Excludes $2 million contributed funds for new work. 2. NECHES AND ANGELINA RIVERS, TEX. Location. Neches River rises 60 miles southeast of Tex., and flows generally southeast 416 miles to SabinE miles east of Port Arthur, Tex. Angelina River flows s 200 miles to its confluence with Neches River 126 miles mouth. Authorized features are located as follows: Dam on Neches River about 3 miles west of Rockland, T Rayburn Dam on Angelina River about 10 miles nord] Jasper, Tex.; dam A on Neches River about 4 miles RIVERS AND HIARBORS-FORT WORTIH, TEX., DISTRICT 701 o er , Tex.; dam B on Neches River about one-half mile north eastow ]Bluff, Tex. (See Geological Survey base map, North- eixas, scale 1:500,000.) land ng project. Provides for dams and reservoirs, at Rock- respe d ~am Rayburn damsites on Neches and Angelina Rivers, to ag ively, which will give a large measure of flood protection rIon, ultural lands in lower river valley and to city of Beau- aid reduce hazards to navigation resulting from floods, )ex., agrOvide a regulated flow in lower river to supply municipal, Dosed Ural, and industrial demands. In addition, these pro- DoWerojects will permit development of a large amount of firm Vides fand afford opportunities for recreation. Plan also pro- barn, for construction of dam A, on Neches River below Rockland Ange or development of power and dam B, below confluence of di agelina and Neches Rivers, to regulate daily fluctuations in liaisc rgefrom turbines in upper projects and to develop a ]eserV iount of iust oirs power. Construction of Rockland and dam A 1964 ed by and power facilities at dam B is to be deferred until future conditions. Estimated cost for new work in da6 or dam B and Sam Rayburn Reservoirs and in 1954 for daill oand Rockland Reservoirs, is $119,246,000, including $5 illi non-Federal cost. l contr'ol works included in comprehensive plan Rocklandl Sam Rayburn Dam At Dam B Stream...ra gai ........ Neches. Neches. S. ............... Neches. Angelina. River-larea square .............. Rockland. Jasper. Horger. Town Bluff. m iles............. 3,557. 3,449. 3,758. 7,573. Type t(feet)bve mou th of Neches River.. 160.4. 151.3. 142. 113.7. . 106. 120. 49. 45. ................ Earthfill. Earthfill. Concrete and Concrete and ?~~orol str earth. earth. ecostr ean c capacity (acre-feet).. torage 1020,100. 1,145,000. None. None. tal an(," edime fflow (acre-feet).... or(acre-feet andalo eh 1,125,500. 1,400,000. Pondage. 77,600. ,,W ntreserve (acre-feet). 1,141,700. 1,452,000. None. 16,600. t) ................. 3,287,300. 3,997,600. Pondage. 94,200. et molment (kv.)................. 13,500. 52,000. 2,700. 2,935. 1O8truction cost:. Cated ..... d and damages $32,468,500 $32,900,000 $3,213,400 $7,378,500 ............... 13,831,500 28,100,000 6,600 1,347,500 Total. 46,300,000 .... 261,000,000 3,220,000 38,726,000 e. Esti nated costas of July 1954. eIllla S eludes $2 3 mi llioncontributed funds. . oT See indi llion contributed funds. vidual reports for further details. 3. TRINITY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TEX. "tion. Trinity River basin is in eastern half of Texas and s about 360 miles, generally along a northwest-southeast rom Archer County on northwest to Chambers County and ' Bay on the gulf on the southeast. Maximum width of the in the headwaters, is about 100 miles. All or parts of 36 Counties are included in the project. Multiple-purpose 0ors included in project are located as follows: Tennessee r damsite at river mile 339.2 on Trinity River, in Anderson reestone Counties, and about 16 miles west of Palestine, Aubrey damsite at river mile 60.0 on Elm Fork of Trinity 702 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 River in northeast Denton County, between towns of SanggerDa; Aubrey and about 30 river miles upstream from LewisV llbutary Roanoke damsite at river mile 32.0 on Denton Creek, a tri 't orey to Elm Fork of Trinity River, in Denton County and abou dt half mile northwest of town of Roanoke, Tex.; and LakevieN d0d site at river mile 7.2 on Mountain Creek in Dallas CountYile located just south of city limits of Grand Prairie, about 14 rile from downtown Dallas, Tex. bo Existing project. Project was authorized by River and t 11 Act of 1965 (II. Doc. 276, 89th Cong., 1st sess.) and consis the multiple-purpose channel extending about 370 miles alolnge. Trinity River from Houston Ship Channel to Fort Wortl 8d including a series of locks and dams to provide flood cocnrrpose navigation on the main stem of the river; four multipleP totl reservoirs; and five local protection projects. Estimate0 ntOt cost of improvements is $1,007,740,000 including $2,900,for 1 ca Federal cost for land acquisition and relocations required the fol" protection projects. Plan of improvement provides for ea. lowing: Multiple purpose channel: About 370 miles of t Vit tion channel, 17 navigation dams, 20 locks and apPurte.ed required facilities, relocations and land acquisition. Esta hll cost is $613 million. Tennessee Colony Reservoir: An ea ta dam, with maximum height of 114 feet above streambed an t length of 29,500 feet including a 520-foot controlled concrete ser - way, which controls 12,687 square miles of drainage area. oeet ,f voir provides total storage capacity of 3,366,800 acre-, tplY which 2,144,300 are for flood control, 1,032,500 for water osti storage, and 190,000 for sediment reserve. Estimat.edf to $227,300,000, including navigation locks and dam, and PiP fe Fort Worth. Aubrey Reservoir: An earthfill dam 13.,66 0a long including a 688-foot concrete ogee type spillway, wit 6$ mum height of 118 feet above streambed, which controlg e square miles of drainage area. Reservoir provides a total t cor capacity of 899,900 acre-feet, of which 258,300 are for flood et trol, 603,800 for water supply storage, and 37,800 for seloir: reserve. Estimated cost is $41,100,000. Roanoke Rese ogee An earthfill dam 15,200 feet long including a 328-foot concretged type spillway, with maximum height of 97 feet above stres ervoir which controls 604 square miles of drainage area. Resvohich provides a total storage capacity of 249,900 acre-feet, oeserve. 223,700 are for flood control and 26,200 for sediment r rtl Estimated cost is $21,400,000. Lakeview Reservoir: An etpe fill dam 22,620 feet long including a 136-foot concrete ogeic spillway, with maximum height of 91 feet above streambed, des controls 272 square miles of drainage area. Reservoir prov are total storage capacity of 488,700 acre-feet, of which 136,700 r for flood control, 306,400 for water supply storage, and 45, rotec sediment reserve. Estimated cost is $36,100,000. Local coir tion projects: Improvement of West Fork of Trinity River a sists of multiple-purpose channel and floodway for navigatiod flood control from the mouth of West Fork in Dallas Floo way upstream 31 miles, to end of existing Fort Worth Floo cost Estimated Federal cost is $11,600,000 and non-Federal FLOOD CONTROL-FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 703 jUtru,000; Improvement in Elm Fork watershed from its mouth ard ean to Grapevine and Lewisville Dams includes realignment tribuelargement of portions of Elm Fork, Denton Creek and drai~n~aay channels, construction of levees, appurtenant interior udtilag e facilities, relocation and alteration of roads, bridges, and $13'es, and rights-of-way acquisition. Estimated Federal cost is extens.00 and non-Federal cost $7,800,000; Dallas Floodway way don improvement provides for extension of existing flood- of Triwnstream to Five Mile Creek, enlargement and realignment itrilnitY tiver in the area, construction of levees, appurtenant atI~1 rir drainage facilities, relocation and alteration of bridges, 000 t-of-way acquisition. Estimated Federal cost is $9,800,- arovenon-Federal cost $7,800,000; Duck Creek channel im- of Vent provides for realignment and enlargement of 6.6 miles aceqUlsit- reek Channel, modification of bridges, and rights-of-way erl on. Estimated Federal cost is $4,400,000 and non-Fed- of elast $1,100,000; Liberty Channel improvement plan consists strgement and realignment of Trinity River in the area, and l estircon of levees and appurtenant interior drainage facilities. Lo,000.- Federal cost is $2 million and non-Federal cost 0400ed occ a l Coo peration. The President of Trinity Improvement As- lve and Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Trinity oRoAuthority of Texas have stated that these agencies will tion pr the project and undertake to comply on items of coopera- States .luired of local interests. Local interests must pay United for 5 "I n accordance with Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, costsrs 1cOsts and annual operation, maintenance and replacement Aibrallocated to water supply storage on Tennessee Colony, O ' Roanoke and Lakeview Reservoirs. haverations and results during fiscal year. None. No funds Co been appropriated for initiation of work on project. C ition at end of fiscal year. No work has been accomplished. 4. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1066 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance ekla °eor,NeNeches d e rv-'or, ch e s River, RiverTex.1.................. Tex.1........102 ........... 1952 510,200 $21,700 ............. River, 'ex.......................... .ei 52 50,200 ........... 5. ABILENE CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TEX. ribUc ation. On Elm Creek, a tributary of Brazos River, and its Creek ines' Little Elm, Cat Claw, Cedar, Lytle, and Buttonwillow in urban area of city of Abilene, Taylor County, Tex. .ist Nd Itzng project. Provides for diversion dike, channel clearing In 'ig,drainage structures, and channel improvements on e9 tle Elm, Cat Claw, Cedar, Lytle, and Buttonwillow Creeks, bridgeer with necessary alterations to railroad and highway s and urban and private company utilities. Project was 704 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962. Estimated Fle; cost of improvement is $34,600,000 and estimated cost to total terests is $8,100,000 for lands and damages and relocations, of $42,700,000. dalter Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands andopted highways and utilities. City of Abilene by resolution satis May 17, 1962, expressed a desire to attain a reasonable and s the factory solution of the flood threat confronting the city withiithe financial capabilities of the community. iol en Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruct gineering and design was initiated.eeri Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction engin and design is 14 percent complete. Cost and financial statement 1963 1964 1965 1666 to o0 year ................ Fis ral New work: $ 1 Appropriated................................. ............ ............ $150,000 Cost........ ............................................... 68,007 6. BARDWELL RESERVOIR, TEX.1 Location. Dam is on Waxahachie Creek, 5 river miles UP$ the from its confluence with Chambers Creek, a tributary o fe , Trinity River, and about 5 miles south of Ennis, Ellis Count0 feet Existing project. A rolled-fill earth embankment 15,400ested long including a 350-foot rectangular uncontrolled broadelt of spillway in a right-bank saddle. Dam has a maximum helges of 82.4 feet above streambed and will control 178 square a1 l..7of drainage area. Reservoir provides a total storage capactpply 140,000 acre-feet (79,600 for flood control, 42,800 for water-d coSt storage, and 17,600 for sedimentation reserve). Estima ted by of project is $11,050,000. Existing project was authorized. Public Law 86-399. (H. Doc. 424, 85th Cong., 2d sess, co latest published map.)s oc Local cooperation. Construction of project is subject to Co dition that local interests contribute toward cost of proJecfal conservation storage for water-supply purposes. Inf a 196 1 contract approved by the Secretary of the Army on June24' 4, e- Trinity River Authority agreed to fulfill all requirements. r0o ceived $11,190 first payment on principal for storage space Po vided December 6, 1965. Payments toward annual cos.foOt operation and maintenance, and annual cost of operating 0"re conduit in amounts of $6,225 and $2,000, respectively, ere ceived same date, as per contract requirements. 4ftds: Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular.f.hwy Completed embankment and spillway $1,563,321, U.S. 1 gh rt 287 and State Highway 34 relocations $164,108, park roads.' co1 1 $153,099, CRI & P Railway relocation $29,728, and erosio' se trol $21,687; continued land acquisition $105,277, and purclntY permanent operating equipment $63,036; and initiated cotio9 road relocations $223,763, park roads-part 2 and recre FLOOD CONTROL-FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 705 fcities $295,374, Brazos Electric Co-op facilities relocation and of-Way $108,856, and site improvement $17,023. rthy rise on Waxahachie Creek above Bardwell Reservoir Bardwell Reservoir Corsicana, Tex.1 Outflow coincident Estimated eDateof with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest Peakinflow Peak flow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest without reduction per second) trolled above mean control stage Bardwell in stage area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Reservoir (feet) feet per (acre-feet) (feet) second) Afr.26, 20,000 0 428.45 29,970 27.9 29.0 1.1 preciabl overflow begins at 22.6 feet. DDrecib le t elevation on November 20, 1965, when deliberate impound- S)old) v a s initiated, was 391.82 feet above mean sea level, corre- year 9ng to 1,580 acre-feet of total storage; and at end of the in ( elevation was 420.98 feet above mean sea level, correspond- tio't to 54,800 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool eleva- during Oi urng the period since deliberate impoundment was 428.45 tora Y , 1966, corresponding to 84,870 acre-feet of total 1965 e inimum pool elevation was 391.60 feet on November 30, acer, orresponding to 1,510 acre-feet of total storage. Benefits Year We to Bardwell project: Flood damages prevented this fiscal fiscal e r e $750,000, and accumulated damages prevented through Vas re e a r 19 6 6 were $750,000; water supply benefits: No water year. eased or withdrawn from conservation storage during fiscal A osition at end of fiscal year. Construction was started in to c 1963 and project is 95 percent complete. Work remaining lis0 Plete project consists of completion of land acquisition, ark rCounty roads relocation, Brazos Electric Co-op relocation, proads-part 2 and miscellaneous recreation facilities, and site P,year o vemaent.. .... 19062 Cost and financialstatement 1963 1964 19065 .. .. Total to June 30,1966 wWork. ... .. d. oaioat $185,000 $478,000$2,418,500 $4,651,500 $3,352,000 $11,210,000 Atlce',t .......... 199,601 444,374 1,775,9084,914,2673,013,522 10,454,458 Dr1oated. ,o %... .. ... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. ....#.... 39,050 39,050 ................. .... ........ ............ ... ........ 38,325 '38,325 Loco 7. BELTON RESERVOIR, TEX. location. Dam is on Leon River about 16.7 miles above con- eltce of Leon and Lampasas Rivers and about 3 miles north of on, Tex. (See Geological Survey base map, scale 1:500,000 Survey, Belton sheet, scale 1 :62,500.)I S ieologicrel zatinU project. For a description of completed improve- 706 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ment and authorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962. mated cost of project is $15,657,000. J e8 Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of Ju1State 1938, applies. A contract with Brazos River Authority,fa10s agency, for remaining water supply storage in reservoir at proved by Secretary of the Army on January 15, 19 58 paid estimated cost of $1,642,893. To date $173,212 has bee Under the contract Brazos River Authority must also paY inte- nually 11.2 percent of actual annual cost of operation andI trct nance. To date $66,264 has been paid. An interim , 899 with Brazos River Authority for emergency use of W.ter S011 storage in project was approved by Secretary of theArmy0 January 2, 1957. Amount of $152,435 paid by authorite d to March 21, 1957 for use of these facilities will be crdieco" interest and principal payable under formal water supplyio of tract. Operations and results during fiscal year. Constructecon" recreation facilities and routine operation and maintenanc feet tinued. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 593'.9 Noteworthy rises on Leon River above Belton Reservoir. Belton Reservoir Cameron, Tex. Outflow coincident Estimated .te with peak Maximum Corre- Experi. crest Vst Peak inflow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced stage t redctl Date of (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest withou i peak flow per second) trolled above mean control stage Belton. (feet) area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Reservoir qfeet per (acre-feet) (feet) second) Nov. 8,1965...... 42,000 94 576.76 63,400 21.8 30.8 Apr. 25,1966 ...... 19,000 46 580.88 102,000 35.2 35.7 I Appreciable overflow begins at 34.2 feet.tA above mean sea level, corresponding to 451,400 acre-feet alove storage; and at end of fiscal year elevation was 569.05 feetar e. mean sea level, corresponding to 211,000 acre-feet of total ere Maximum pool elevation was 593.49 feet on July 1, 1965, cpool sponding to 451,400 acre-feet of total storage; minimtum to elevation was 568.73 feet on October 2, 1965, correspondeto 208,600 acre-feet of total storage. Benefits accrued to are1 project: Estimated flood damage prevented this fiscal year $3,434,000. Accumulated damages prevented through fsca year 1966 were $63,343,700; water supply benefits: Duril ,-feet,1 years 1965 and 1966 releases of 15,530 and 14,680 ar ~ec respectively, were made. Accumulated releases throu ghlesc year 1966 were 110,220 acre-feet; and other water uses: ge made during fiscal years 1965 and 1966 were 5,120 a'lted acre-feet, respectively, for low-flow regulation. AccurlV ere releases through fiscal year 1966 for low-flow regulation 152,200 acre-feet.I e Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started . 1949 and project was ready for beneficial use in March FLOOD CON51 JnTPCT cDm T TITXrnVT, TRPTr!T77 f77 Dletion of Code 710 recreation facilities and work associated rereai'sin g conservation pool (reservoir clearing, relocation of Clatonl fa rea .in tacilities, and construction of East Range Road bridge) o complete M project. and financial statement -tCost yerTotal 5ca~ 0 ete.1962 to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Weork: PropDriated $36,500 $44,000 $13,480,159 a 156,083 $145,365 $145,000 144,160 154,741 128,593 57,057 44,164 113,480,159 AoPonPriated I C .. ,, t.. ... 124, 400 119,400 131, 300 140,000 185,500 1'201,2I2 1,201,282 125,098 104,249 130,177 147,381 173,598 1,179,735 es 47,309 receipts from reconveyance of land which were deposited to miscellaneous c- o.' 8. BENBRIOOK RESERVOIR, TEX. 'ri itlon. Dam is in Tarrant County, Tex., on Clear Fork of West F .Ri v e r 15 river miles upstream from its confluence with Orth of Trinity River about 10 miles southwest of Fort and t nqproject. For description of completed improvement cost othorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962. Estimated Localrject is $12 million. alplies cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, Operat N o water supply storage is included in project. and coto°ns and results during fiscal year. Land acquisition oerat.astruction of recreation facilities continued. Routine ton and maintenance continued. Not" r ises on Clear Fork of Trinity River above Benbrook Reservoir Benbrook Reservoir Fort Worth, Tex.1 Outflow ate coincident Estimated ekatekof inflo wWith peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest 6ow Peak inflow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood- crest without reduction Per second) trolled above mean control stage Benbrook in stage area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Reservoir (feet) feet per (acre-feet) (feet) second) 22,000 0 705.61 52,250 5.8 9.1 3.3 ADDrecib pe e Overflow begins at 8.0 feet. sea IelVation at start of fiscal year was 694.02 feet above mean e of , corresponding to 88,330 acre-feet of total storage; and at C' fiscal year elevation was 694.09 feet above mean sea level 1ool edilng to 88,590 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum 140, evation was 705.61 feet on May 7, 1966, corresponding to 69138 acre-feet of total storage; minimum pool elevation was eet ofeet on September 21, 1965, corresponding to 78,700 acre- totaleservoir teo rook storage.andBenefits accrued Fort Worth to system Floodway: consisting Estimated of flood 708 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 96 0,Ind g. damages prevented during fiscal year are $8,980,r000 anddat cumulated damages prevented to June 30, 1966, are esti 1965 $20,591,000; other water uses: Releases during fiscal years.eet, and 1966 for low flow regulation were 5,750 and 5,150 acr76,'00 respectively, accumulated releases to June 30, 1966, were7 acre-feet. p Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of projecther started May 1947 and ready for beneficial use in SePte cili 1952. Minor land acquisition and completion of recreation ties remain. tCost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $1 Appropriated.......... $170,361 $175,798 $120,031 $39,116 $50,000 11,4006 Cost................. 126,266 203,265 119,057 56,327 35,876 1 6958 Maintenance: '766 '131 Appropriated.......... 180,180 119,200 112,700 137,000 142,700 1311 Cost.............. ... 112,838 186,946 117,099 125,849 153,571 -e- - - receiP 1 Excludes $322,346, receipts from reconveyance of lands, deposited to miscellaneous 9. BIG FOSSIL CREEK, TEX. re%,011 Location. In city of Richland Hills, Tarrant County, ' Big Fossil Creek, a tributary of West Fork, Trinity River. bout Existing project. Levee and channel improvements toeriOT 3.3 miles of creek channel, construction of appurtenant 1 sti drainage facilities, and alteration of one railroad bridge.d est mated Federal cost of these modifications is $1,921,000, a cash mated cost to local interests is $605,000 which includes $9,00tiod, contribution and $596,000 for lands and damages and relocaylood a total of $2,526,000. Existing project was authorized bYell.- Control Act of 1960 substantially in accordance with recon s6th tions of Chief of Engineers in House Document 407, Congress, 2d session. d3 Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands . rights-of-way for construction, maintenance, and operation;ies sume responsibility for relocation and alterations to utili rte; r te hold the United States free from damages; maintain and oP ce all works after completion; and contribute in cash 0.46 pereeXt of Federal cost of construction. City of Richland Hills, ces furnished formal assurances May 24, 1963. These asslure96 3. were accepted by the District Engineer on October 14,o" Cooperation required during construction period has been plied with. s Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular ft3I el Completed CRI & P railway relocation $36,568, and initial ch. excavation, clearing and levees $54,580; continued final stagedtiated nel excavation, levees and pumping plant $337,530; and inch" 11 slope protection $14,600. Contributed funds: Final stage roY nel excavation $8,000. Benefits accrued to Big Fossil Creek1 00, ect: Flood damages prevented this fiscal year were $5711 which is the accumulated damages prevented through fiscae 1966. FLOOD CONTROr -- n-Or- r ,T Trr D TIT T0 709 fldot' hon at end of fiscal year. Construction was started in a 6let e and. project is 97 percent complete. Work remaining to excavati project consists of completion of final stage channel n, levees, and slope protection. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 'e'Year...1962Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 eWork: PPro:riated ... $60,000 $70,000 $250,000 $1,055,000 $486,000 $1,9215,000 58,634 43,293 132,179 888,178 732,892 1,865,176 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1'1 6%1ear Total to ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 .......... 9$t8900 ........... ... ..... .. ... 8,000 8,000 10. BRAZOS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TEX. Ivei ca ton. Improvements are in central portion of Brazos ist1asin within an 85-mile radius of Belton, Tex. eide 1 Project. Flood Control Act of 1954 adopted basin- ouse Dn of improvement in Brazos River Basin as outlined in ap ocument 535, 81st Congress, 2d session, and authorized aD ration of $40 million for partial accomplishment of that ooAn additional $21 million was authorized by 1960 Flood Sotho Act. Flood Control Act of 1962 added the North and i Fork Reservoirs (San Gabriel River) to the Brazos River 7th Plan of improvement as outlined in House Document 591, t- easeOngress, 2d session. Public Laws 88-253 and 89-42 iVely bd monetary authorization $30 and $14 million, respec- Vides ~frging total authorization to $105 million. Plan pro- Sallor construction of following reservoirs for flood control ad lied purposes in Brazos River Basin, Tex.: Waco Reservoir ollosque River, Proctor Reservoir on Leon River, Stillhouse outh Qesery eservoir on Lampasas River, Laneport, North Fork and ork Reservoirs on San Gabriel River, Somerville givero on Yegua Creek, and Ferguson Reservoir on Navasota work * Plan also provides for construction of a levee and related 290 to west side of Brazos River between river miles 250 and Alellt afford flood protection for Burleson County Levee Improve- exististrict No. 1. Plan further provides for modification of DOWer g Belton Reservoir project by installation of hydroelectric ect d generating facilities. Existing project maps are in proj- hew Cument. As itemized in tables below, estimated cost of local Cork is $196,660,000 including an undetermined amount of caldotribution for water-supply storage in reservoir projects ad 10,00 non-Federal cost on local flood protection projects. Flood control works included in conmprehensive plan San Gabriel River Dams and reservoirs.............................. Waco Proctor Modification Stillhouse Somerville Ferguson of Belton Hollow Laneport North Fork South Fork 0 Stream.......... Bosque. Leon. Leon. Lampasas. San Gabriel. San Gabriel. San Gabriel. Yegua Creek. Navasota. H Nearest city... .......................... Waco. Proctor. Belton. Belton. Granger. Georgetown. Georgetown. Somervile. Bryan. Drainage area (square miles)....................... 1,670. 1,265. 3,560. 1,318. 709. 247. 123. 1,012. 1,782. Miles above mouth............I 4.6. ............ 238.9. 16.7. 16.0. 29.7. 4.0. 4.7. 20. 36.5. Height (feet).................................... 140. 86. 192. 200. 111. 188. 167. 80. 67. Type.......................................... Concrete and Concrete and Earthfill. Earthfill. Concrete and Rockfill. Rockfill. Earthfill. Concrete and It earth. earth. earth. earth. 0 Flood control storage capacity (acre-feet)............ 553,300. 310,100. 640,000. 390,600. 116,500. 87,900. 45,500. 337,700. 516,400. CZ Water-supply storage capacity (acre-feet)............ 104,100. 31,400. 12,000. 204,900. 193,200. 126,700. 89,000. 143,900. 62,200. Sedimentation reserve capacity (acre-feet)........... 69,000. 32,700. 84,900. 34,900. 22,200. 7,000. 4,000. 25,900. 40,600. Capacity, total (acre-feet)........................ 726,400. 374,200. 1,097,600. 630,400. 331,900. 221,600. 138,500. 507,500. 619,200. Estimated total cost (July 1966)...........149,450,000 2 3$8,290,000 $14,440,COO $19,900,000$28,800,000$14,700,000 $9,600,000$23,700,000 2"4$24,000,000 x Includes $250,000 non-Federal contribution. SIncludes undetermined amount of local contribution for conservation storage. 3 Deferred for restudy. Estimate as of July 1958. SDeferred for restudy. Estimate as of July 1960. z Local flood protection works to2 v Miles Location Stream above Type structure Estimated V12 mouth cost Burleson County..............................Brazos River.......................... 250-290 Levee. ........................................... 1$3,780,000 1Includes $310,000 non-Federal costs. FLOOD CONTROL FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 711 results of reservoir regulation on river stages at controlling gaging stations downstream 2 3 Valley 4 4 eriod Wacol Iasse Cameron Junction Richmond Areciale e.Controlling gaging station verflowbeginsat (feet).......... 27.0 12.0 34.2 45.0 32.0 Nov e9 5 Experienced crest stage (feet) _ 1r. l '6ji P. . ..1 ... .. '." ..................... 1.........j ..... 21.8.......... 172 .1 35.2 ... 37.6 ... 28.6 o . . . Estimated crest stage without reservoirs (feet) 'Vt. 1966 ..2... ............................. ....... 30.8 8.4 2.............. 6.2 35.7 4 . 7 Nov, Estimated reduction in stage (feet) Apr ........................ .......... 11.2125..... io. 8.4 8.9 . .. a Moified bWhitney and Waco aded by Proctor Reservoir Reservoirs. i 'fied by Belton and Proctor Reservoirs. "dbyWhitney, Waco, Belton, and Proctor Reservoirs. Loct 11. CANYON RESERVOIR, TEX. 1outh ' t on Dam is on Guadalupe River, 303 miles above its Coa. c1d about 12 miles northwest of New Braunfels, Comal fz g Project. An earthfill dam 6,830 feet long, consisting sDillW ai darn 4,410 feet long, an uncontrolled broadcrested-type in h 1 ,260 feet long, and dikes totaling 1,160 feet. Maxi- total ghtof dam is 224 feet above riverbed. Reservoir has a for florage capacity of 740,900 acre-feet, including 346,400 for Wa control, 28,100 for sedimentation reserve, and 366,400 ai er-supply storage. Dam controls 1,425 square miles of ecly 1 b. a s i n . Estimated cost of project is $20,015,000, in- e~cljg $1400n. e a 0,4,000 contribution by local interests. Existing proj- 7th ,authorized s by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 247, 4gat og., 1st sess.), subject to provision: the aWheniever any power project, not under Federal license, is benefited to o eservoir project, the Federal Power Commission after notice n ohe a SShall owners of such unlicensed project and after opportunity for her ordetermine and fix a reasonable and equitable annual charge to e o the United States, on account of such benefits by said owner or r otherrecipients of such benefits. for ject Was modified by Flood Control Act of 1954 to provide Stra local contribution during construction, and permit con- Latet 1lof hydroelectric power facilities at non-Federal expense. Loc ublished map is in project document. Authori cooperation. Local interests (Guadalupe-Blanco River Day r ty) must contribute $1,400,000 during construction, and ther enainder of costs allocable to local interests, with interest ece at rate of 21/2 percent per annum, over a period not to ihied 50 years, for which they will be permitted to utilize water o1enltded for water supply and streamflow regulation for devel- of 1 t .o f electric power. In a formal contract approved by Chief tho]it. tneers on October 24, 1957, Guadalupe-Blanco River Au- ty agreed to fulfill all requirements of local cooperation. 712 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Required $1,400,000 contribution was made in full by contrbtder Guadalutped was Blanco River Authority. In addition, $22,848 for installation and operation of reservoir leakage gages. Ulder the contract the authority must pay 34.8 percent of actual annel cost of operation and maintenance. To date $67,897 has bee paid. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds d: Completed Comal County roads, part 3, $346,438; Comal Cunted roads, part 4, $188,059; site improvement, $36,547; contiand foundation grouting $21,845, and land acquisition $26,363 lities initiated Canyon Park, part 2 and miscellaneous factes $565,689. Noteworthy rise on Guadalupe River above Canyon Reservoir Canyon Reservoir Gonzales, Tex . Outflow coincident Estimated with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest Fstiated Peak flow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced stage reductioo Date of o (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest without inat a peak inflow per second) trolled above mean control stage Canyon (feet) area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Reservoir feet per (acre-feet) (feet) second) .- . . .. . . 0.6 Dec. 2, 1965 ...... 3,000 150 884.0 0 23.7 24.3 Appreciable overflow begins at 20.0 feet. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 883.01 feet above yea sea level, corresponding to 208,300 acre-feet of total storage; "a at end of fiscal year elevation was 888.06 feet above Ineaui level, corresponding to 237,400 acre-feet of total storage. 31, mum pool elevation during fiscal year was 889.54 feet on w 1966, corresponding to 246,400 acre-feet of total storage; pd- mum pool elevation was 880.4 feet on October 17, 1965, corresd ing to 194,000 acre-feet of total storage. Benefits accrue are to Canyon project: Flood damages prevented in fiscal year 1966 ag estimated at $1,900. Accumulated damages prevented throu h fiscal year 1966 were $1,104,500; water supply benefits: lDurir fiscal years 1965 and 1966 releases of 107,970 and 140,810 0ac h feet, respectively, were made. Accumulated releases throu fiscal year 1966 were 250,740 acre-feet.e i Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started A rilect 1958 and project completed for beneficial use June 1964. project is 99 percent complete. Work remaining to complete project consists of completion of Canyon Park, part 2 contract, and alionl land acquisition and relocations. FLOOD CONTROL-FORT WORTHI, TEX., DISTRICT 713 Cost and financial statement 1Year Total to ....*..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 e work: Propriated ......... $2,275,000 $3,519,500 $2,750,000 $1,044,000 $1,265,000 $18,545,118 aitenaance:............ 2,223,4763,588,9832,659,414 996,480 1,310,955 118,416,892 C ropriated....... ....... ....................... 120,900 131,950 252,850 ..... ... ............ ............ ............116,736 134,128 250,864 1 ] clude $1,422,848___ __ __ tribto udes$1,422848 expended for new work from contributed funds, including $22,848 "con- funds, other for installation and operation of gages for leakage study. 12. FORT WORTIH FLOODWAY (CLEAR FORK), TEX. Location. In Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Tex., on Clear Fork Trinity River between miles 1.6 and 10.4. riverc PJiSttingan project. e Provides for improvement of 6.5 miles of terio channel, construction of 2.3 miles of levee, appurtenant in- istr"drainage facilities, and 1.0 mile of diversion channels. esti*ted Federal cost of these modifications is $3,960,000 and xis ated cost to local interests is $4,587,000, a total of $8,547,000. sbs ng project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962, s latially in accordance with recommendations of Chief of thefers in House Document 454, 87th Congress, 2d session. terocal cooperation. Prior to construction of project local in- thaiSts l Rust, provide lands and rights-of-way for construction, for ,tenance and operation of project, including those required of SlnP areas; provide designated fill areas required for disposal ti 0excess material from channel excavation work; provide reloca- lu~' alteration, or reconstruction of existing improvements, ex- stVe of railroad bridges, but including existing utility lines, farliet. and highway bridges, channel dams, and recreational IJhit es (miniature railroad bridge and facilities) ; hold the are ted States free from damages; prohibit encroachment in sump Waas and flood carrying capacities of improved channel and flood- Tar orks; and maintain and operate all works after completion. fk ,nant County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 shed formal assurances December 10, 1964. I n Perations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: glatedphysical work on T&P railroad bridge alteration $15,000, irLr & SF railroad bridge alteration $9,000; initiated channel des~prOvlement, increment 1, $10,000; and continued engineering and n 38,00. stCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was tiorted in January 1966. Project is 7 percent complete. Reloca- a8d ,channel improvement, and engineering and design are 33, 1, S percent complete, respectively. Cost and financial statement MealYearTotal ..1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 to June 30,1966 Work: ro'priated.......... . ......... $80,000 $95,000 $105,000 $150,000 $430,000 ... ..... 7 ,771 , 1........,913...... 43,717 76,904 272,305 714 REPORT OF TH{E CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 13. FORT WORTH FLOODWAY (WEST FORK), TEX. Location. In Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Tex., on West For of Trinity River between miles 564.5 and 570.4. iles of Existing project. Provides for improvement of 4.2 enact river channel, construction of 6.7 miles of levee, appuPtirated drainage facilities, and 1.6 miles of diversion channels. E stimated Federal cost of these modifications is $2,504,000 and estim"ort cost to local interests is $4,247,000, a total of $6,751,000. 1o Act Worth Floodway extension was authorized by Flood Controns of of 1960 substantially in accordance with recommendat d Congress, Chief of Engineers in House Document 402, 86th .Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish landssald session. aP rights-of-way for construction, including those required f.r1Sa areas; make any alterations to existing improvements whlhrom be required for construction; hold the United States flood- damages; prohibit encroachment in sump areas and n ad carrying capacity of floodway extension; and mcintain Col" operate all works after completion. Tarrant County Wate for trol and Improvement District No. 1 assumed responsibilitY acting as local sponsoring agency for the project. u,, ds' Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular- tiated Continued channel excavation and clearing $769,875; .1y by slope protection $11,000; continued engineering and desig hired labor $44,825. 8 i lete* Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is 52 percent co letv Construction was initiated March 1965. Initial channel ecis tion and clearing is 93 percent complete, initial slope protectirct 28 percent complete, and engineering and design is 95 peC complete. Cost and financial statement year............... Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jn 0 New work: .. ,38 Appropriated.......... $45000 $100,000 $50000 $390,000 $805,386 1,343 Cost................. 32,554 109,109 21,526 304,283 872,77 14. GARZA-LITTLE ELM RESERVOIR (LEWISVILLE DAM), Location. In Denton County, Tex. on Elm Fork of Tri River 30 river miles above its confluence with Trinity Rivedol about 22 miles northwest of city of Dallas, Tex. at a site stream from old Garza Dam. at Existing project. For description of completed improverdmat and authorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962. Estimated lost of project is $21,991,700, including $3,676,700 contributed bY cal interests. tal1 Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute incremeMet cost of water supply storage and convey to Federal Govern~aro sufficient interest in lands and appurtenances of old Garza f and Reservoir to insure proper operation and managemenre existing project. A contract with city of Dallas for 415,000 acrze feet of water supply storage and rights and interests to a FLOOD CONTROL-FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 715 a o nd Reservoir was approved by the Secretary of the Army A col y 1 6 , 1953. Local contributions have been made in full. feet ract with city of Denton, Tex., for remaining 21,000 acre- the o Water supply storage was approved by the Secretary of To dary on May 20, 1954, with an estimated cost of $250,064. of dale Denton has paid $137,854. Under above contracts, cities respectias and Denton must pay annually 21.9 and 1 percent, To dat ively, of actual annual cost of operation and maintenance. O e Dallas has paid $224,787 and Denton $9,975. Co1perati.ons and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: ties letion of land acquisition, construction of recreational facili- , nd routine operation and maintenance. Noteworthy rises on Elm Fork of Trinity River above Garza-Little Elm Reservoir Garza-Little Elm Reservoir +Dallas, Tex.1 Outflow coincident Estimated Dateof with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest eak inflow Peak infflow rom fow pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest without reduction per second) trolled above mean control stage Garza- in stage area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Little Elm (feet) feet per (acre-feet) Reservoir 9.. second) (feet) CPt22, pb 1011966*' 16,000 250 514.68 0 24.8 36.6 11.8 30, 3196 33,000 80 516.60 38,400 27.9 38.1 10.2 Ap.DU 100,000 170 531.090 521,400 38.5 47.0 8.5 reciable overflow begins at 30.0 feet. 01 elevation at start of fiscal year was 515.13 feet above mean corresponding to 467,600 acre-feet of total storage; and fel, id of fiscal year elevation was 520.07 feet above mean sea corresponding to 592,600 acre-feet of total storage. Maxi- Pool elevation was 531.90 feet on May 5, 1966, corresponding 5,900 acre-feet of total storage; minimum pool elevation was 7 feet September 20, 1965, corresponding to 390,800 acre- of total storage. Benefits accrued to system comprised of -Little Elm Reservoir, Grapevine Reservoir, and Dallas Iway: Flood damages prevented this fiscal year were 91,600 and accumulated damages prevented through fiscal 1966 were $160,869,100; water supply benefits: During Years 1965 and 1966 releases of 162,690 and 127,610 acre- respectively, were made, accumulated releases through Year 1966 were 1,244,560 acre-feet. "Iition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was "d November 1948 and ready for beneficial use in November Completion of recreation facilities remains. 716 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscalyear................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: -17,766 102 Appropriated.......... $181,000 $185,000 $120,058 -$146,898 $6,142 117765:6 Cost.... 163,716 200,220 -59,953 36,474 65,996 69 Maintenance: 1,794'00 Appropriated.......... 178,120 163,400 187,000 223,500 282,500 1,749:0 Cost.................. 169,970 178,203 167,803 217,353 269,900 to 1Excludes receipts from rcconveyance of land of $426,606, which wcre deposited laneous receipts, and $3,676,661 for new work expended from contributed funds. 15. GRAPEVINE RESERVOIR, TEX. gree Location. Dam is in Tarrant County, Tex., on DentOl Rk of 11.7 river miles upstream from its confluence with Elm FnDllas, Trinity River and about 20 miles northwest of city of Tex. et Existing project. For description of completed improv cost and authorizing act see Annual Report for 1962. Estimate local of project is $11,753,000, including $2,040,000 contributed by Local cooperation. Local interests must pay for Nated s storage included in project. A contract with Dallas County 0,000 Cities Water Control and Improvement District No. 2 for 50, of acre-feet of water supply storage was approved by Secretared the Army on March 21, 1955. Park Cities paid the reqeet of $607,000. A contract with city of Dallas for 85,000 ,acre-fee 1 water supply storage was approved by the Secretary of the coAr on March 17, 1954. Dallas paid required $1,433,026 .A olter tract with city of Grapevine, Tex., for 1,250 acre-feet ofte supply storage was approved by Secretary of the Army on SePvine ber 14, 1953, at an estimated cost of $22,654. To date Grape tio has paid $13,444. Above contracts include payment of oper ties and maintenance costs as follows: Dallas County park Crt of Water Control and Improvement District No. 2, a pro rata paore actual annual cost, which part to be not less than $2,000 nor e- than $3,000; Dallas, 9.2 percent of actual annual cost; and 0$9.55 vine, its pro rata part of actual annual cost (estimated at op annually and included in total annual payment). FollO"wiltie eration and maintenance payments have been made: Iarl(k Cites $33,822, Dallas $66,756, and Grapevine $1,034. Ucti of Operations and results during fiscal year. Construc conl' recreation facilities and routine operation and maintenance tinued. FLOOD CONTROL---FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 717 i'nificant rises on Denton Creek above Grapevine Reservoir I Grapevine Reservoir Dallas, Tex.l Outflow coincident Estimated Datleof with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest peakinflow Peak flow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated (cubic feet uncoin- tion (feet flood crest without reduction per second) trolled above mean control stage Grapevine in stage area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Reservoir (feet reet per (acre-feet) (feet) et second) %Dpt 19 ,22 . .. . .i i i i i i-- i-- 11,000 15 5333.44 24.8 36.6 11.8 1966 00 70 534S59 0 27.9 38.I1 10.2 117,856 38.5 47.0 8.5 e" fl hin30,000 60 548 .60 DDreciabl0 eoverflow begins at 30.0 feet. e, lelevation at start of fiscal year was 534.96 feet above mean at e el, corresponding to 188,200 acre-feet of total storage; and leveld of fiscal year elevation was 542.68 feet above mean sea , corresponding to 250,700 acre-feet of total storage. Maxi- 24, 19lOO,1, elevation during fiscal year was 548.60 feet on May i 6 corresponding to 306,400 acre-feet of total storage; resmolum pool elevation was 530.98 feet on September 20, 1965, to s Ing to 160,400 acre-feet of total storage. Benefits accrued eser e. comprised of Garza-Little Elm Reservoir, Grapevine scal and the Dallas Floodway: Flood damages prevented this )olr, thou, ear were $39,291,600 and accumulated damages prevented ts. fliscal year 1966 were $160,869,100. Water supply bene- A, 60 uring fiscal years 1965 and 1966 releases of 35,600 and leases acre-feet, respectively, were made and accumulated re- Coetrough fiscal year 1966 were 350,850 acre-feet. Startedflon at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was o tI.ecember 1947 and ready for beneficial use in July 1952. ion of recreation facilities remains. C(ost and financial statement Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 wrk: m .......... $275,040 $145,695 $112,342 o riated $70,500 $45,000 $8,925,011 ance ..... .. 185,364 248,133 111,771 74,221 42,835 18,921,616 cost ated..........129,780 131,500 151,500 145,700 144,900 1,286,419 ... .. 108,269 151,886 139,951 156,471 143,093 1,281,478 2,0 0 146,795, receipts from reconveyance of lands, deposited to miscellaneous receipts, '.for new work expended from contributed funds. 16. GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVERS, TEX. n IaVotio . Improvements are Gonzales Reservoir on lower San )rove River, a tributary of Guadalupe River and channel im- s S ent of San Antonio River and tributaries at San Antonio, 83 tig Project. Flood Control Act of 1954 (H. Doc. 344, a ng., 2d sess.) adopted plan of improvement on Guadalupe a Antonio Rivers at an estimated Federal cost of $30,254,- 718 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 000. Plan provides for construction of Gonzales Reservdioci.1 San Marcos River for flood control and water suppY Due flood protection for cities of San Antonio and Kenedy, Texl nel to lack of local cooperation, authorization for Kenedy Chlre improvement expired May 5, 1964. Existing project maP coS in project document. As itemized in tables below, estilma federal for new work is $72,300,000 including $16,700,000 non- cost on local flood protection projects. Flood control works included in plan of improvements Gonzales Dam and Reservoir Stream na ...................... ........................................... Nearesit city.......... ......... ..... ....................... ...... 344. Drainage area square miles.............................................. 54. Distance above mouth (miles).................................................. ....... Height (feet)............................ . ............................. * 102 3crete F od control storage capacity (acre-feet ................... . ................. ............ 100,800. Water-supply storage capacity (acre-feet).............................................. 2 000. Sedimentation reserve capacity (acre-feet)......................................... * 000. Capacity, total (acre-feet). ..................................................... Estimated cost: $2134,0 Construction....... ......................................................... $114566P000 Lands and damages. ......... ...................................... 11 - Total (July 1964)............... ........... ..... ................. , Local flood protection works Miles Lands and Tot Location Stream above Type structure Construction damages mouth San Antonio..... San Antonio 221.8 Channel rectifi- $22,988,800$15,911,200 River and trib- 237.3 cation. utaries. SIncludes $16,700,000 non-Federal costs. 17. HORDS CREEK RESERVOIR, TEX. bu t Location. On Hords Creek, a tributary of Pecan B3 aYouPtreat 13.5 miles west of Coleman, Tex., and about 27.8 miles uPsheet from mouth of Hords Creek. (See Geological Survey$ Grosvenor and Zephyr, scale 1: 62,500.) . nemt Existing project. For description of completed impro s{ted and authorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962. sted cost of project is $2,823,000 excluding $105,079 contrlibtl local interests. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. co " Operations and results during fiscal year. Operationo1pr sisted of construction of recreational facilities. Routine 0 tion and maintenance continued. Pool elevation at start- 4 was 1899.60 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to S acre-feet of total storage; and at end of fiscal year was ,vql feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 7,150 acre-fee li storage. lVaximum pool elevation was 1899.60 feet on . 1 0 1965, corresponding to 8,440 acre-feet of total storage; min 0 to pool elevation was 1895.10 feet on April 17, 1966, correspO l reen 6,420 acre-feet of total storage. Benefits accrued to HjordsC FLOOD CONTROL---FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 719 : 665 Accumulated and 1966 flood damages prevented were $926,600; water supply benefits: through fiscal During fiscal releases of 820 and 910 acre-feet, respectively, lade; accumulated releases through fiscal year 1966 were acre-feet; and other water uses: Releases for low flow Lon during fiscal years 1965 and 1966 were 10 acre-feet and .lated releases through fiscal year 1966 were 550 acre-feet. lit ion at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was January 1947 and completed for beneficial use in April Completion of recreational facilities remains. Cost and financial statement Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Clropriated $75,000 $80,000 $49,000 $21,500 $22,000 $2,486,167 76,490 82,521 44,910 25,748 22,380 12,485,972 Coopriated .. . 127,830 61,600 614,850 75,500 77,500 810,300 . 68,009 119,710 74,721 75,374 77,548 808,914 $105,07 9 contributed funds. 18. LAVON RESERVOIR, TEX. ion . Dam is in Collin County, Tex., on East Fork of 1 lver 55.9 miles above its confluence with Trinity River ut 22 miles northeast of Dallas, Tex. niggroject. For description of completed improvement thorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962; for informa- icerning Lavon Reservoir modification and East Fork 1 improvement project, see individual project. Estimated Project is $12,590,000. cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, Local interests must repay cost of a water supply ;tructure. A contract with North Texas Municipal Water for water supply storage, including cost of intake struc- as approved by Secretary of the Army July 8, 1954, at "ated cost of $1,405,753. To date the district has paid *. Under the contract North Texas Municipal Water Dis- L1st Pay annually 13.6 percent of actual annual cost of op- and maintenance. To date the district has paid $114,055. tiOns and results during fiscal year. Land acquisition tstruction of recreation facilities continued. Routine op- and maintenance continued. 720 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Noteworthy rises on East Fork of Trinity River above Lavon Rer Crandoll, Tex . - Lavon Reservoir er et Outflow coincident with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- Estimated crest stage Esti a redsctioo Date of Peak inflow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced peak inflow (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest without iastgee per second) trolled above mean control stage Layem Darn (ft) area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) feetper (acre-feet) (feet) second) --_ " 5,9 Apr. 30, 1966...... 42,000 0 489. 85 276,800 21.1 27.0 'Appreciable overflow begins at 13.5 feet. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 471.96 feet above e sea level, corresponding to 143,100 acre-feet of total stoeM and at end of fiscal year elevation was 473.50 feet aboV 1 eorge. sea level, corresponding to 160,800 acre-feet of tota 966 cor. Maximum pool elevation was 489.85 feet on May 2, 19 pool responding to 420,400 acre-feet of total storage; minimu'i to elevation was 469.09 feet on January 27, 1966, corresPo.bavol 113,400 acre-feet of total storage. Benefits accrued to $36 project: Flood damages prevented this fiscal year were 'r1966 700 and accumulated damages prevented through fiscal ye year were $19,107,600; water supply benefits: During fiscactively, 1965 and 1966 releases of 26,210 and 28,720 acre-feet, resp vete were made. Accumulated releases through fiscal year 1966 1965 201,900 acre-feet; and other water uses: During fiscal year and 1966 releases of 0 and 2 acre-feet, respectively were ngfr low-flow regulation, accumulated releases for this purposer fothis releaes ug 1$ fiscal year 1966 were 43,350 acre-feet... tW Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of projectber started January 1948 and ready for beneficial use in SeptcilitieS 1953. Completion of land acquisition and recreation fa remains. Cost and financial statement - _______- ______ _______- - ______ - Tt5lfto Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 ue New work: $12439,6 Appropriated.......... $188,769 $344,627 $259,000 $25,942 $9,958 12 80 Cost... . . 248,316 344,601 209,606 45,534 29,851 3 Maintenance: 1 490464 Appropriated.......... 115,080 117,500 1341,000 147,000 191,700 1311 Cost.................. 114,652 118,969 129,632 148,750 166,826 19. LAVON RESERVOIR MODIFICATION AND EAST F01 CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TEX. Location. Existing dam is in Collin County, Tex., o itY Fork of Trinity River, 55.9 miles above its confluence with 'rW River and about 22 miles northeast of Dallas, Tex. Chael. e.1 provement of East Fork extends from its mouth to river nmil Existing project. Reservoir modification provides for r i top of existing dam from elevation 502.0 to 514.0 and lengt; FLOOD CONTROL--FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 721 dam from i 1 existing In'O Ifeit feet t( about 19,493 feet; modifica- clcabout 9,499 gr existing concret spillway structure; enlargement of exist- ay; rvoir area, involving acquisition of additional rights-of- 6 t Iocation and alteration of highways, county roads, railroads ork Chities; and provision of recreational facilities. East chael annel and floodway improvements consist of 25 miles of rive, enlargement and straightening of the East Fork between trcle 0.0 and 31.8; replacement of inadequate levee-sluice 0 es; rehabilitation of existing levees; acquisition and clear- ig of1g halIeland areas as required for rights-of-way along improved ay aldnld existing levees; alteration of existing railroad, high- eas county road bridges crossing the improved channel as raisi relocation of existing utility lines; and strengthening and disct about 202,400 linear feet of levees of seven existing levee 200 ts. Reservoir will provide a total storage capacity of 748,- le-0 eet (275,600 are for flood control, 380,000 for water e4tp,; for sedimentation reserve). Esti- htorage, and 92,600 ,800 ederal cost of the modification and improvement is a,000, and estimated cost to local interests is $400,000 for Loc'd damages and relocations, a total of $39,200,000. ove cooperation. Local interests must reimburse the Federal Ade'rent for costs allocated to increased water supply storage 1e the terms of the Water Supply Act of 1958. Reimburse- of N currently estimated at $21,955,000. Board of Directors a4lha Texas Municipal Water District, by resolution passed eter . ,1960, stated that it was the intention of the board to til, Ito the necessary contract with the Corps at the proper oer, Local interests costs in connection with the channel im- reloc lenlt are estimated at $400,000 for lands and damages and an ion of highway bridges and utilities. Supervisors of Kauf- ab ittY Levee Districts Nos. 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, and 15 a letter dated June 30, 1961, indicating their letteo l'ofJointly r~t ed the proposed channel and levee improvement. In eterv o Congressman Ray Roberts, dated May 30, 1966, the Sisors of Kaufman County Levee Districts Nos. 4 and 5 Ofed as to the possibility of construction of the lower portion ill Pjork Floodway within their districts, and indicated their ti ess to furnish the necessary assurances of local coopera- 'Oer their respective districts. Of tionsand results during fiscal year. Operation consisted es8e nation of preconstruction engineering and design, which esl tially complete. Project is a new construction start in .Cl Year 1967. 1 tion at end of fiscal year. Modification of existing project o Ircent complete. Engineering and design is 24 percent Cost and financial statement 1962 Total to 196.........3 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 o ated .... .......... .... $127,500 $267,500 $180,000 $575,000 ......................... 117,675 259,430 195,560 572,665 722 ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 196 6 REPORT OF THE CHIEF 1OF 20. NAVARRO MILLS RESERVOIR, TEX. le Location. Dam is in Navarro County, Tex., at river ile on Richland Creek, a tributary of Trinity River, about 16 Miles southwest of Corsicana, Tex. . ment Existing project. For description of completed improv0e cost and authorizing acts see Annual Report for 1965. Estimalcal i"d of project is $9,688,000 including $300,000 contributed by terests. coindi- Local cooperation. Construction of project is subject t of tion that local interests pay an amount equal to 25 per ded iOn total cost of project for water-supply storage space prow ble to reservoir; pay $300,000 as total cost of project attlibun streaxrl increase in net returns for higher utilization of dow e- valley lands; and assume 25 percent of annual cost of lized nance and operation, payable in one lump sum on ac reta basis, or annually. In a formal contract approv ed by re dg of the Army on August 27, 1959, Trinity River Authorityee to fulfill all requirements of local cooperation. In suPP eitT agreement entered into August 18, 1965, contract witl , o the River Authority was modified to provide for a divis'on plY storage space into storage for a present and future water ble and revision of payment schedules, to become due and P9yh January 1, 1966, and annually thereafter. To date, $25,69s been paid on principal and $16,300 toward operation ebution tenance under terms of the contract. Non-Federal contri totaling $300,000 have been received. eted Parl Operations and results during fiscal year. Complete rutie road paving and minor land acquisition, and continued operation and maintenance. Significant rise on Richland Creek above Navarro MillsResvo x Navarro Mills Reservoir Richland, Te . Outflow Extimate coincident crest with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- stage Date of Peak inflow flow from pool eleva- spending enced without o 1esag peak inflow (cubic feet unconi- tion (feet flood crest Navarr( per second) trolled above mean control stage Mills it feet) area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Reservoi feet per (acre-feet) (feet) second) 1,r Apr. 25, 1966...... 32,100 13 437.18 89,4100 21.1 22.4j SAppreciable overflow begins at 20.5 feet. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 424.20 feet above ridt sea level, corresponding to 61,820 acre-feet of total storage,4level, end of fiscal year elevation was 424.52 feet above mean seair corresponding to 63,430 acre-feet of total storage. 1Ia15 pool elevation was 437.18 on May 17, 1966, corresponding to g 700 acre-feet of total storage; minimum pool elevatiOe-ofeet 421.55 feet on February 6, 1966, corresponding to 49,200 acrflood of total storage. Benefits accrued to Navarro Mills project: caU' damages prevented this fiscal year were $1,301,900 and ac FLOOD CONTROL---FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 723 an~dojlages prevented through fiscal year 1966 were $2,960,000 of 400 er water uses: During fiscal years 1965 and 1966 releases reulat.and 9,140 acre-feet respectively were made for low flow year 1on, accumulated releases for this purpose through fiscal 9 Were 9,680 acre-feet. bCOflditionft"nlard ee bet1959 ion at end of fiscal year. Construction started Decem- eloca and project completed for beneficial use March 1963. 0 rk "ationof Hill County roads is the only remaining item of Cost and financial statement lear Total to . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 eWork.___ -_________ a o~riated . $3,050,000 $1,816,049 $129,500 $50,051 $148,000 $9,298,000 ee:."........... 2,544,811 2,327,721 221,382 57,430 32,872 19,149,529 A loprited.. ot. 28,100 91,000 115,100 125,500 359,700 27,770 87,816 112,478 129,773 357,837 lde $300,000 contributed funds. Lo• 21. PROCTOR RESERVOIR, TEX. cation. Dam is at river mile 238.9 on Leon River, a trib- of 13 Brazos River, about 8 miles northeast of Comanche isanche County, Tex. Dlal fortn Project. The improvement, a unit of comprehensive aeard lood control in Brazos River Basin, consists of a concrete- gray' 'th dam about 13,460 feet long, including a concrete oht Yle nonoverflow section 206 feet long and a gate- eogee-type spillway 520 feet long. Dam has a maximum olofil area o f86 feet above streambed. Reservoir controls a drainage 810 1,265 square miles and provides a storage capacity of RDDI0 acre-feet for flood control, 31,400 acre-feet for water- totlurposes, l and a sedimentation reserve of 32,700 acre-feet, $14, 440 of 374,200 acre-feet. Estimated cost of project is Q t 0 1,00 0. Existing project was authorized by 1954 Flood ubl ishAct (H11.Doc. 535, 81st Cong., 2d sess., contains latest Local map.) t,lot 1 lth cooperation. Construction of project is subject to condi- Vater at local interests contribute toward cost of project for a% Upply storage. Brazos River Authority, a State agency, vd res p onsibility of disposing of water-supply storage space of d in project. A formal contract was approved by Secre- rlytOfacthe Army July 1, 1960, at an estimated cost of $1,707,900. 16 at was modified by supplemental agreement November 1, g o provide for division of storage for present and future ly re 11PPly. First payment to principal for present water sup- Ie ditVed May 25, 1966, in amount of $12,198. Under the sup- e t fat agreement the authority must pay annually 5.166 per- Otantnual cost of operation and maintenance of the project. Oa e the authority has paid $2,800. cPeoi ations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: anua0tion of land acquisition and routine operation and main- 724 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Noteworthy rise on Leon River above Proctor Reservoir Proctor Reservoir Hasse, Tex '.1 OutflowEstimated coincident p- tjmated with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest s e stion Date of peak inflow Peak inflow (cubic feet flow from uncon- pool eleva. tion (feet sponding flood enced crest s hut wio rei in l.a per second) trolled above mean control stage Lavon (feet) area°c(cubic d) sea level) storage (feet) seon feet per (acre-feet) (feet) I (fee Ja~ / pa m .I 12,8 May 2,1966....... 15,000 11 1167.32 27,750 3.4 16.2 x Appreciable overflow begins at 12.0 feet. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 1169.24 feet above e sea level, corresponding to 98,760 acre-feet of total storag e a at end of fiscal year elevation was 1161.82 feet above mea i- level, corresponding to 58,570 acre-feet of total storage. zodid mum pool elevation was 1167.32 on May 6, 1966, correS P as to 87,150 acre-feet of total storage; minimum pool elevatio.rfeet 1154.28 feet on October 18, 1965, corresponding to 30,590 a cd da- of total storage. Benefits accrued to Proctor project: F1o ages prevented this fiscal year were $388,000 and accU0 damages prevented through fiscal year 1966 were $3,0 j a , ' other water uses: Releases for low-flow regulation durltivelY, years 1965 and 1966 were 3,450 and 4,830 acre-feet, respecuo and accumulated releases through fiscal year 1966 for this P were 9,950 acre-feet. ec t s Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of pro Jber started July 1960 and completed for beneficial use Septe 1963. Work remaining is completion of land acquisition. I Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 196(6 June 3U,'K.g New work: $14 4 Appropriated.......... $4,750,000 $5,245,000 $1,575,000 $211,400 -$9,000 14,24 ance: MainCost .................. 4,670,246 5,177,112 1,626,269 371,278 -6,017 2901 Appropriated.................................. 58,650 102,000 129,500 Cost ...................................... 58,647 101,638 127,828 22. SAN ANGELO RESERVOIR, TEX.i f0 Location, Dam is on North Concho River, a tribu tary, of cho River, about 6.6 miles above mouth of North Concho 9,A near city of San Angelo, Tex. (See Geological Survey base Texas, scale 1: 500,000, and sheet Wall, scale 1: 62,500.) roveret Existing project. For description of completed imPro aed co and authorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962. Estima3 of project is $15,874,000. g9, Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 193 ]I'e plies. A water-supply contract with Upper Colorado ved Authority for water-supply storage in reservoir was apPro FLOOD CONTROL----FORT WORTIH, TEX., DISTRICT 725 r'Yof the Army on October 11, 1948. The Authority has Uted $860,438 toward cost of project and $64,324 toward ton and maintenance for a 50-year period. The Authority Se andditional consideration of $1 a year for useful life )lect. ratiOfs and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: uation of land acquisition (deficiency judgments), con- o( of recreational facilities, and routine operation and lance. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 1882.58 "ove mean sea level, corresponding to 30,930 acre-feet of orage; and, at end of fiscal year, elevation was 1877.19 Ve mean sea level, corresponding to 20,790 acre-feet of torage. Maximum pool elevation was 1882.58 on July 1, orresponding to 30,930 acre-feet of total storage; minimum evatio was 1874.24 feet April 22, 1966 corresponding to acre-feet of total storage. Benefits accrued to San Angelo 6: Accumulated flood damages prevented through fiscal 966 were $2,343,000; water supply benefits: During fiscal 1965 anid 1966 releases of 9,840 and 13,510 acre-feet, re- e6, were made, and accumulated releases through fiscal 66 were 60,700 acre-feet; and other water uses: Releases 0w regulation during fiscal years 1965 and 1966 were 80 Sacre4eet, respectively, and accumulated releases through rear 1966 were 24,900 acre-feet. Ition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was IVay 1947 and ready for beneficial use February 1952. emainling consists of completion of recreational facilities hor land acquisition. Cost and financial statement to Total 1062 1963 1964 1965 1066 1966 June30, eWWork. oriated*e $203,000 $166,329 $107 371 $48,900 $40,000 $15,752,450 Pia~ .oe opriated * 185,186 181,846 92,639 95,150 34,004 15,744,168 .. 142,480 128,100 139,000 114,600 121,100 1,401,410 .. 139,567 145,761 131,007 123,692 116,379 1,394,970 Fiso23. SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TEX. n . Floodway is in city of San Antonio, Bexar County, "San Antonio River and San Pedro, Apache, Alazan, and ez Creeks. tn! project. Provides for clearing, widening, deepening, raightening about 31 miles of river and creek channels to Standard project flood discharges, construction of channel and paving, conduit, and construction and alteration of rail- ridges. Estimated Federal cost of these modifications is 7,000, and estimated cost to local interests is $16,700,000 includes $600,000 cash contributions and $16,100,000 for lamages, and construction, a total of $38,900,000. Existing Was authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 344, )ag., 2d sess.). Latest published map is in project docu- 726 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish land rights-of-way for construction, including purchase and rein( buildings, relocation or reconstruction of bridges (excluS railway bridges), channel dams where applicable, and lines; hold the United States free from damages; maintal operate all works after completion; and provide a cash CO tion for enhancement benefits of 2.65 percent of actual construction cost. San Antonio River Authority furnish surances that it will comply with all requirements of local eration. These assurances were accepted by the District neer on April 15, 1957. To date $210,000 has been conti by San Antonio River Authority. In addition, $30,000 ha contributed and accepted, under the authority of Civil Ft Appropriations Act of 1958, for vehicular crossings over Antonio channel. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular6 Completion of channel excavation and walls unit 4-21, $ initiation of channel excavation unit 5-1, $29,500; initiation Bridge No. 12 relocation $30,000; and continuation of eng 1 and design $101,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was stal October 1957 and project is 35 percent complete. Reloc channel improvement, and engineering and design are 91, 85 percent complete, respectively. Work completed cOnS channel improvement units 1,2,4-1, 4-2, 7-1, and 8-1, an road alterations in units 2, 4, 5, and 7-1. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 30,66 June year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: 066% Appropriated.......... $1,300,000 $738,000 $603,100 $590,000 $950,000 Cost..................1,298,051 752,475 343,750 658,411 877,064 year................ Fiscal b I CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1963 1964 1965 1966 to ta e0,196 New work: - -00:-0 Contributed........... $40,000 $25,000 $20,000 $5,000 $15,000 Cost............. ............ 65,000 ............ ..... 20,000 ......... 24. SAN GABRIEL RIVER, TRIBUTARY TO BRAZOS RIVE Y' cot 'it Location. System of three reservoirs in Williamson dyr a in the central portion of Brazos River Basin. Laneport dt of river mile 29.7 on San Gabriel River, about 8 miles eatforl ' Granger, Tex.; North Fork dam at river mile 4.0 on Northo of San Gabriel River, about 3.5 miles northwest of George 0f Tex.; and South Fork dam at river mile 4.7 on South FoTe San Gabriel River, about 3 miles southwest of Georgetow ' 1954 Existing project. Laneport Reservoir was authorized br wvere Flood Control Act, and North and South Fork Reservoirs FLOOD CONTROL--FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 727 orized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated total Federal of Project is $53,100,000. Plan of improvement provides for 1olowing: Laneport: An earth and concrete dam 16,000 Song, with maximum height of 111 feet above streambed, controls 709 square miles of drainage area. Reservoir pro- a total storage capacity of 331,900 acre-feet, of which 116,500 ' eet are for flood control, 193,200 acre-feet for water supply ge, and 22,200 acre-feet for sediment reserve. Estimated of project is $28,800,000. North Fork: A rockfill dam ' feet long with maximum height of 188 feet above stream- Wbich controls 247 square miles of drainage area. Reservoir d00es a total storage capacity of 221,600 acre-feet, of which ly acre-feet are for flood control, 126,700 acre-feet for water Y Storage, and 7,000 acre-feet for sediment reserve. Esti- Scost of project is $14,700,000. South Fork: A rockfill '100 feet long with maximum height of 167 feet above a- ed, which controls 123 square miles of drainage area. 50ir provides a total storage capacity of 138,500 acre-feet O0 for flood control, 89,000 for water supply storage, and 000r sediment reserve). Estimated cost of project is 00,0. Icl cooperation. Construction is subject to condition that d itnerests reimburse the Federal Government for costs allo- to. water supply at Laneport, North Fork, and South Fork r-s. Reimbursement currently estimated at $11,641,000 Laneport, $7,050,000 for North Fork, and $4,584,000 for os Fork, for a total of $23,275,000, exclusive of interest. ) aUiver Authority, a State agency, by letters dated July 28, o nd December 22, 1960, indicated its acceptance of plan of )1yvenient and agreed to fulfill requirements for the water Portion of each project in ultimate plan of development. )loty attion of water supply contracts for Laneport and North k eservoirs is scheduled for consummation in fiscal year 1967 or South Fork Reservoir in fiscal year 1968. Cetrotns and results during fiscal year. Continued precon- St_).)eng ineering and design. tion at end of fiscal year. Project is about 1 percent con- es ork accomplished consists of preconstruction engineering Cost and financial statement 1ear141 Total to 1962 163 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 IUopriated. S.......... .......... $342,400 $500,000 $842,400 .. ............................. 309,832 411,305 721,226 25. SOMERVILLE RESERVOIR, TEX. ation. Dam is on Yegua Creek 20 miles upstream from its ece with Brazos River and about 2 miles south of Somer- X1sting project. Plan of improvement, a unit of comprehen- 'lan for flood control in Brazos River Basin, provides for 728 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 construction of a rolled-fill earth embankment 24,925 feet 0 and an uncontrolled ogee-type spillway 1,250 feet lofg.d will has a maximum height of 80 feet above streamnbed p 1pillo control 1,012 square miles of drainage area. Reservoir 377' 0 vide a total storage capacity of 507,500 acre-feet, of whic r w ter acre-feet will be for flood control, 143,900 acre-feet fo eserve. supply storage, and 25,900 acre-feet for sedimentatioln .et Ws Estimated cost of project is $23,700,000. Existing r ., 2d authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 535,81s sess., contains Local latest published cooperation. cofori map)of..project is subject toec' Construction tion that local interests contribute toward cost of prOJe enC y, water-supply storage. Brazos River Authority, a Staterapply offered to assume responsibility for disposing of water P storage space provided in project. A formal contr c t es proved by Secretary of the Army on May 10, 1962, at mated at $6,512,000. - -funds Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular prt a Completed reservoir clearing $244,900, county road relocationd 1 $135,167, and FM 1697 relocation $18,703; continued ~trtioll quisition $1,521,377, and embankment and spillwayco 28g9 ,54' $5,466,566; and initiated county road relocation part 2 $ e and park road part 1 and ramps construction $197,942.-d iJu Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction startedes, re 1962 and project is 87 percent complete. Lands and dale te re locations, and construction are 94, 76, and 83 percent comPle spectively. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: 020,0;64 Appropriated..........$410,000 $1,690,000 $4,150,000 $5,900,000 S8,000, Cost.......... ....... 391,745 1,681,170 3,776,770 6,243,632 8,253, 26. STILLHOUSE HOLLOW RESERVOIR, TEX., o Location. Dam is on Lampasas River 16 miles upstrea1iver its confluence with Little River, a tributary of the BraZOS and about 5 miles southwest of Belton, Tex. -tf relh" Existing project. Plan of improvement, a unit of co. for sive plan for flood control in Brazos River Basin, provi dile construction of rolled-earth embankment 8,080 feet long' 1,6 5,894 feet long, and an uncontrolled broad-crested spillwayre 1 feet long. Dam has a maximum height of 200 feet above jteaer bed and will control 1,318 square miles of drainage area. (3906 voir provides a total storage capacity of 630,400 acrefee 34900 for flood control, 204,900 for water-supply storage,. andis for sedimentation reserve). Estimated cost of projecti trO million. Existing project was authorized by 1954 FloodublO Act (H1. Doc. 535, 81st Cong., 2d sess., contains latest P map.) foratio _1 Local cooperation. Construction is subject to cntrs9 local interests contribute toward cost of project frw FLOOD CONTROL--FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 729 UA*rae- Brazos River Authority, a State agency, offered to as- Drovideesponsibility of disposing of water-supply storage space tar o IIn project. A formal contract was approved by Secre- 0 tae Army April 13, 1962, at an estimated $6,445,000. erteions .and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: baoke d Bell County roads relocation $58,361; continued em- 0undatit and spillway $3,315,785, land acquisition $89,017, location grouting and piezometer installation $64,378, and re- Voit cl of electrical distribution facilities $45,180; initiated reser- Par cearing $60,000, Youngsport bridge construction $25,000, and CDaris and ramps $10,000. o strucion at end of fiscal year. Project is 63 percent complete. tio0s ' ation started in July 1962. Lands and damages, reloca- eetiv 'ld construction are 91, 65, and 53 percent complete, re- Main dam is 49 percent complete. Cost and financial statement ea Total to ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 oropriated $408,000 $1,667,000 $2,575,000 $3,500,000 $4,200,000 1$12,682,812 e D3........... 350,458 1,671,064 2,483,8803,607,4664,048,133 12,493,814 receiDts froni disposals and relocation of funds related thereto. oc 27. TRINITY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TEX. ive o1'n. Four improvements are in upper portion of Trinity a 50 i' sin ( Benbrook, Lavon, Grapevine and Lewisville) within hardele radius of Dallas, Tex., and two (Navarro Mills and Tile a ) are in Richland-Chambers Creek watershed, within 25- 0stradius of Corsicana, Tex. rii ing project. All improvements are in operation. De- r epton of plan and authorizing act for Bardwell project included zilhl elt Annual Report. For description of plan and author- " a rther o"for Navarro Mills project see Annual Report for 1965, improvements see Annual Report for 1962. For oh" control works included in comprehensive plan lood r er...... Benbrook Lavon Grapevine Lewisville Mills Bardwell ... . Ct Clear Fork.. Fast Fork. Denton Elm Creek. Richland Waxahachie haj~ ty ('reek. Creek. a5re ... ..... Benbrook. Lavon. Grapevine. Lewisville. Dawson. Ennis (,V ei'Rht onn ' re miles) . 429 770 695 1,600 320 178 D. *eet) ***.... 15.0 55.9. 11.7. 30.0. 63.9. 5.0 ......... 130. 609.. 137. 125. 81.7. 82.4. ......... Earthfill Concrete gray- Earthfill. Earthfill. Earthfill. Earthfill 10 ,,ity and Ceetrol earth, trfeet) Storage capacity 170,350. 275,600. 238,250. 525,200. 143,200. 79,600 0e- tiSYStorage capacity 72,500. 100,000. 161,250. 436,000. 53,200. 42,800 e i- Otalreservecapacity (acre-feet) . .... 15,750. 47,800. 36,000. 28,500. 15,800. 17,600 . . .. ate tal ( re-feet). .258,600. 423,400. 435,500. 989,700. 212,200. 140,000 I19 $12,590,000 .....$12,000,000 1$11,753,000 $11,050,000 3$9,688,000 2$21,991,700 S~led 040,000 non-Federal costs. ly. 676*700 non-Federal costs. $300.000 non-Federal costs. 730 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 inl- local flood protection projects, Big Fossil Creek project cluded in this Annual Report and Fort Worth and Dallas P are in Annual Report for 1960. Estimated cost of imp.V for new work is $100,970,700, including $6,016,700 local contributions for water supply storage in reservoirs, an 000 non-Federal cost on local flood control projects. Local flood protection works Miles Totalcos Location Stream above Type structure estinmated mouth 524 pO99 Io, ,8 (Juy96 Fort Worth......... Clear and West Forks.. 560 Levee and channel clearing... 2 9 48 ,6 u"(J Dallas...... ........ Elm Fork and Trinity 505 Levee channel clearing and Rive.. modification of interior 00(Juy1966) drainage. Richland Hills....... Big Fossil Creek....... 1.5 Levee and channel improve- 32,526,00 ment and interior drainage structures. 'Includes $5,643,000 non-Federal costs S Includes $1,498,000 non-Federal costs. a Includes $605,000 non-Federal costs. Results of reservoir regulation on river stages at controlling gag stations downstreami 2 4 6 Flood period Fort Worthl Dallas Crandall3 Rosser Richlands Oakwo ' Controlling gaging station Appreciable over- 8.0 30.0 13.5 26.0 20.5 4 flow begins at (feet). IExperienced crest stage (feet) Sept.1965...... "...27.9 . ........... 9 8 . Feb. 1966......... Apr, 1966......... 5.8 274 85 2. 2. 70 Estimated crest stage without reservoirs (feet) e .. " Sept.1965........ ... 36.6 . .25.66........4 Feb. 1966 ....... 38.1................30.8..............01 Apr. 1966......... 9.1 47.0 27.0 49.0 22.4 Estimated reduction in stage (feet) -'... Sept.1965........ 01.8 .. ....... 1..1.2 Feb. 1966......... 1 ....... ... Apr. 1966......... 3....3: 8.5 . 12.0o .3 3 1 Modified by Benbrook Reservoir. 2 Modified by Benbrook, Grapevine, and Garza-Little Elm Reservoirs. 8 Modified by Lavon Reservoir. ' Modified by Benbrook, Grapevine, Garza-Little Elm, and Lavon Reservoirs. SModified by Navarro Mills Reservoir.illse vOid 6 Modified by Benbrook, Grapevine, Garza-Little Elm, Lavon, and Navarro Mills 7Modified by Bardwell Reservoir. 28. WACO RESERVOIR, TEX. oeit Location. Dam is on Bosque River, 4.6 river milesc abotY, confluence with Brazos River, at city of Waco, McLennan- Tex. sive Existing project. Improvement is a unit of compre of plan for flood control in Brazos River Basin and consisladil concrete and earth dam about 24,618 feet long inc Ad a gravity-type concrete nonoverflow section 240 feet log, 664 FLOOD CONTROL-FORT WORTIH, TEX., DISTRICT 731 ' long gate-controlled ogee-type spillway. ota- Dam has a vides a height of 140 feet above streambed. Reservoir pro- 04,10 ~torage capacity of 553,300 acre-feet for flood control, reserv cre-feet for water-supply purposes, and a sedimentation eco.e acre-feet for a total of 726,400 acre-feet. Proj- N69,000 0 ity ol 1,670 square miles affords substantial flood protection r ot he Waco, Tex., and lower Brazos River Valley, and provides o 0 0 beleficial water uses. Estimated cost of project is 9,450 istin 1, including $250,000 contributed by local interests. oc. 535 roject was authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (11. 81st Cong., Construction ocaloca cooperation. 2d sess., contains latest published map). is subject to condition that 6 an erests Permit the Federal Government tolled b to utilize, without cost, any reservoirto lands breach existing now con- Proje t - city of Waco needed for construction and operation of i exchange for water-supply storage equal to that exist- Lake Waco at that time. City agreed to this condition ed its desire to purchase additional water-supply storage. f Ma22, 1958, existing Lake Waco was transferred from city D o~ to the Federal Government. In formal contracts ap- rby,ecretary of the Army on April 15, 1958, Brazos River o y and the city of Waco agreed to fulfill all requirements 25ooperation. Contributed funds of $250,000 were received Cottiact, 1958, from Brazos River Authority. Under terms of the Brazos 0s and t14.087 River percent and city of Waco must pay Authority toward respectively annual cost of opera- itof Maintenance. Following payments have been made: 1eraco $2,383, and Brazos River Authority $9,100. leteions and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: eted par k roads, parts 2 and 3 $136,536, and site improve- t eoudary monumentation and erosion control $59,748; recreatid land acquisition $42,093; and initiated miscellaneous oral facilities $184,240. thy rise on Bosque River above Reservoir fWae) (e Waco Reservoir Waco, Tex.1 Outflow bat O coincident Estimated eat of e with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest kflo Peak inflow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest without reduction Per second) trolled above mean control stage Waco in stage area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Reservoir (feet) feet per (acre-feet) (feet) An second) ADD,36,000 49 468.48 114,900 17.2 28.4 11.2 e verflow begins at 27.0 feet. Pl elevation at start of fiscal year was 454.81 feet above mean od ' corresponding to 151,100 acre-feet of total storage; and at oiyearlevationwas 455.10 feet above mean sea level, corre- l1gto 153,200 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool eIONWas 468.48 on May 2, 1966, corresponding to 267,400 e.etof total storage; minimum pool elevation was 452.4 feet 732 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 on September 19, 1965, corresponding to 134,300 acre-feet o sf storage. Benefits accrued to Waco project: Flood dagmdmageS vented this fiscal year were 5,986,000 and accumulateter suppld prevented through fiscal year 1966 were 23,298,300; , 5,080 benefits: During fiscal years 1965 and 1966 releases od releases 18,010 acre-feet, respectively, were made. Accumulatee iater through fiscal year 1966 were 23,090 acre-feet; and other wflo uses: releases during fiscal years 1965 and 1966 for lo laed regulation were 0 and 13,100 acre-feet respectively. Acc lunltere releases through fiscal year 1966 for low flow regulatione 13,100 acre-feet. t completer fo Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is 99 percen eadY Construction was started in July 1958, and project was olpletion beneficial use in February 1965. Channel repair and c of land acquisition and recreation facilities remain. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 . 1964 1965 1966 00 1 0 New work: $600,00 4 ,8 Appropriated.......... $8,365,000$10,720,000 $7,807,000 $6,326,000 Cost... .......... 8,336,022 11,543,553 7,619,267 6,382,808 532,349 Maintenance: Appropriated ......... ...................... 49,000 162000 201, Cost ................. 45,724 Excludes $250,000 expended for new work from contributed funds. 29. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL P Inspection of completed local flood protection projec periodically in compliance with section 208.10 of title 3 Federal Regulations, which contains regulations for and maintenance of local flood-protection works aP Secretary of the Army in accordance with authority ir Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936. Inspection was made as follows: 966. Dallas Floodway ............................. April and laY Fort Worth Floodway ........................ March 1966.6 d Pleasanton Floodway ........................ December 1965 a Completed portions of San Antonio November Channel improvement ...................... April 1966. Fiscal year cost was $3,486 and total cost to June 30, 1966 a $38,921. 30. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERA e5 In accordance with Flood Control Act of 1944 expend- and were made for scheduling flood control reservoir operatioL 0r preparation of reservoir regulation manual for Marshland Dam, on the Colorado River, near city of Austin, Tex., preparation of reservoir regulation manual for Twin Buttes on Middle and South Concho Rivers near city of San Angelbor ll T. Marshall Ford Dam was authorized by 1937 River and a 0 Act. Project was constructed jointly by Bureau of Reclam FLOOD CONTROL---FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 733 iscal~Wer Colorado River Authority and was completed during StructYear 1942. Twin Buttes Reservoir was authorized for con- r)on a by Department of Interior by Public Law 152, 85th daises . Construction was initiated in June 1960; closure of Jatarted in June 1962; deliberate impoundment was started a arY2,)1963.' Significant rise on Colorado River above MarshallFord Reservoir during fiscal year. Marshall Ford Reservoir Columbus, Tex.l Outflow 1) Ocoincident Estimated eakate ofi with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest Peak inflow inflow flow from pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest without reduction per second) trolled above mean control stage Marshall instage area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Ford (feet) feet per (acre-feet) Reservoir ~~l22second) eg2218 (fcet) ,1 200,000 56 680.24 0 4.3 23.5 19.2 mreciahie overflow begins at 21.0 feet. waso elevation in Marshall Ford Reservoir at start of fiscal year acre 2.92 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 1,208,000 as 676 of total storage. Maximum pool elevation was 686.56 a fae 65 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 1,091,000 feet of total storage.Maximum pool elevation was 686.56 to 1May 5, 1966, corresponding to 1,281,000 acre-feet of total 21 5 lnimum pool elevation was 673.86 feet on September ood corresponding to 1,042,000 acre-feet of total storage. 2control regulation was in effect from February 21 through j260 1966. Flood damages prevented during fiscal year were 96 .00e and accumulated damages prevented through fiscal year Voir re $46,152,900. During filling stage Twin Buttes Reser- 1 the consist of two separate pools, one on South Concho River i cother on Middle Concho River and Spring Creek. Equal- Sele annel between these two pools is at elevation 1,925.0. e leations in Twin Buttes Reservoir at start of fiscal year ech 92 4 .86 feet in South Concho pool and 1888.00 in Middle WeSPring Creek pool. At end of fiscal year, pool elevations il 1918.54 feet in South Concho pool and 1888.15 feet in re1 Concho-Spring Creek pool. Maximum pool elevations a 18924.86 feet on July 1, 1965 in the South Concho pool Qrek 96.72 feet on May 3, 1966 in the Middle Concho-Spring Dool. Minimum pool elevations were 1918.54 feet above Pa il 18Sea level in the South Concho pool on June 30, 1966 S883.20 feet above mean sea level in Middle Concho-Spring Tol ool on April 20, 1966. Fiscal year costs were $11,982. costs to end of fiscal year were $61,004. 734 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 31. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS cottu,30, l9 For last Cost to Jun full report. and Name of project f0 Annual see C t eratin Report Construction ,ainteos"c for- Belton Reservoir, Leon River, Texas (modification) 3... . . .......... .. Blieders Creek Reservoir, Tex.1.............3 . .1................. .319657,600 Burleson County levee, Brazos River, Texas3 4" ............ Ferguson Reservoir, Navasota River, Texas 6 .......................... ..... .. .. .. .. ... . ... .. ... .. ... . Gonzales Reservoir, San Marcos River, Texas ...... 4 Lake Brownwood Reservoir, Pecan Bayou, Texas7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1952 stsess.)* 1 Inactive. Authorized by Flood Control Act of 1960 (11. Doc. 180, 86th Cong.1 2 Deferred for restudy due to lack of economic justification. SAuthorized by Flood Control Act of 1954 (H. Doc. 535, 81st Cong., 2d sess.*). 4Inactive. 5Deferred for restudy for possible modification.s e) Authorized by Flood Control Act of 1954 (H. Doe. 344, 83d Cong., 2d ses.), 1 ses' Inactive. Authorized by Flood Control Act of 1941 (H. Doc. 370, 76th Cong. 32. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATN Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public LaW 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) _Oect Fiscal year cost of $4,624 for continuation of detailed Prc o report on Rutledge Hollow Creek, in interest of flood prot for city of Poteet, Tex. Emergency flood control, hurricane-flood, and shore protection acvities (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Federal cost for fiscal year was $14,866 for advance preP d tion, $10,570 for emergency operation, and $51,839 for repair restoration. 33. SAM RAYBURN RESERVOIR, TEX. fro 1 Location. Dam is on Angelina River 25.2 miles upstrea tof its confluence with Neches River and about 10 miles northwe Jasper, Tex. ocoptrol' Existing project. A unit of comprehensive plan for flood e ° water supply, and hydroelectric power development in olled. Angelina Rivers Basin, provides for construction of_ a total earthfill embankment 11,300 feet long, earthen saddle dike a e ing 3,790 feet, an uncontrolled concrete saddle spillway with and length of 2,200 feet and 775 feet of earthen spillway dikest, 1,365 foot section which includes a concrete nonoverflow' ec't 166 feet long with power intake and flood control outlets ad 1,199 feet of earthen dikes. Top of the dam will be abo les feet above riverbed. Reservoir will control 3,449 square re.feet drainage area and have a storage capacity of 3,997,600 acre d (1,145,000 flood control storage, 1,400,600 power storage tial 1,452,000 powerhead and sediment reserve). Capacity of ill be installation of hydroelectric power-generating facilities. ia 52,000 kilowatts. Estimated cost of project is $61 Ifill diotin cluding $3 million to be contributed by local interests. E DOC. project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act ( Gee 98, 76th Cong., 1st sess.) Name of project changed from Bend to Sam Rayburn by Public Law 88-123. Nedle * Local cooperation. As a unit of four-reservoir plan for M1ULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 735 that lonaR iver Basin, the project was adopted subject to provision project thinterests give assurances that upon completion of entire an adthey will contribute $5 million toward first cost of work Of Sa i itional $200,000 annually for 50 years after completion aiechesayburn Reservoir. A formal contract with Lower rther'alley Authority, a State agency, covering local interests 22 17 ents was approved by Secretary of the Army on January 0J,000 O Contribution of $5 million made in full and initial er0annual payment received in current fiscal year 1966. eent iOns and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- Dowe.rith regular funds: completed embankment, outlet works, $317,658 u se $10,957,696; completed park roads, parts 1, 2, and 3 c 8letecompleted relief wells and drainage ditch $212,308; cation ansite improvement $60,385; completed FM road 705 relo- raoit repair of east access road $71,905; completed erosion ailway2,040; continued land acquisition $453,950; initiated SP acilitie-relocation $183,602; initiated miscellaneous recreation eNti1Pien le t 309,958; $88,813. continued purchase of permanent operating orthy rises on Angelina River above Sam Rayburn Reservoir Sam Rayburn Reservoir Evadale, Tex.1 Outflow Estimated e Ocoincident a crest ea eof inflow with eak Maximum Corre- Experi- stage ainflo eak inflow flow rom pool eleva- spending enced without Estimated (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest Sam Rayburn reduction Der second) trolled above mean control stage Reservoir in stage area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) (feet) (feet) feet per (acre-feet) eb second) 2, _____ _ '196 82,000 0 144 20 0 17.1 20.9 3.8 32,000 0 15582 0 17.0 18.6 1.6 , eeiable Overflow begins at 17.0 feet. sea le elevation at start of fiscal year was 130.48 feet above mean at d eorresponding to 466,400 acre-feet of total storage; and eVel O fiscal year elevation was 155.51 feet above mean sea 1 corresponding to 1,987,000 acre-feet of total storage. Maxi- ol89to 20 ,015,000 1elevation was 155.82 acre-feet feet on June 14, 1966, correspond- of total storage. Minimum pool eleva- to 41 129.07 feet on September 16, 1965, corresponding aybr8 900 acre-feet of total storage. Benefits accrued to Sam $817000 Pro]ject: Flood damages prevented this fiscal year were 9)6 Weand accumulated damages prevented through fiscal year Iow W re $817,000; and other water uses: Releases for low- 8,090 ulation during fiscal years 1965 and 1966 were 10,200 and NScal acre-~feet, respectively, and accumulated releases through ConYde.ar 1966 were 18,290 acre-feet. onst tOnru at end of fiscal year. Project is 97 percent complete. ial rction was started August 1956 and project ready for bene- coll se in March 1965. Work remaining to complete project .tsof completion of land acquisition, SP railway relocation, ec lreational facilities, and additional relief wells, protective n, and operating equipment purchases. 736 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 New work: 748,000 55643, $6,550,000 1$9,295,500$10,406,500 $5,573 500 Appropriated.......... $3 Cost............... 6,421,503 29,405,671 45,890,7502,616,35 310,474,726 396,300 Maintenance: 325,900 383440 ....... .... ............... ..... Appropriated......... 70,400 Cost............................................. 68,320 315,120 x Includes $400,000 ARA funds. 2Includes $20,000 ARA funds. 8Includes $206,937 ARA funds. Includes $173,063 ARA funds. 5 Excludes $3 million expended for new work from contributed funds. 34. WHITNEY RESERVOIR, TEX. 1 above Location. Dam is on Brazos River, about 442 nl"d 8a.0tt mouth of river, 5.5 miles southwest of Whitney, Tex., ological 38 miles upstream from city of Waco, Tex. (See :12 5 ,000, Survey sheets: Waco, Cleburne and Granbury scale1: and Whitney, Blum, and Morgan, scale 1:62,500.) roveMet Existing project. For description of completed i~npsiated and authorizing acts see Annual Report for 1962. m cost of project is $41,925,000.o ue Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, applies. strutio 0f Operations and results during fiscal year. Construect oco recreation facilities and routine operation and maintenane tinued. Noteworthy rises on Brazos River above Whitney Resevoir ,, Whitney Reservoir Whitney Resrvoir Waco, Tex- - I . Outflow coincident Esticmated do with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- creest sponding enced staage EiIeiS Peak inflow flow from pool eleva- Date of (cubic feet uncon- tion (feet flood crest withlout (feet) peak inflow per second) trolled above mean control stage Whi tneyr area (cubic sea level) storage (feet) Rese rvoir feet per (acre-feet) (fe et second) 31.8 May 3, 1966...... 58,000 22,000 532.55 237 500 17.2 28.4 1 Appreciable overflow begins at 27.0 feet. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 519.85 feet above en sea level, corresponding to 376,800 acre-feet of total storag se at end of fiscal year elevation was 520.00 feet above mea a level, corresponding to 379,100 acre-feet of total storage. olding mum pool elevation was 532.55 feet on May 4, 1966, correS on WS to 616,600 acre-feet of total storage. Minimum pool elevat e.feet 511.51 feet on April 21, 1966, corresponding to 262,100 acrlo0 d of total storage. Benefits accrued to Whitney project:c cot damages prevented this fiscal year were $8,737,200 and aCO lated damages prevented through fiscal year 1966 were $60,8du and other water uses: Releases for low-flow regulation du.,. QENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-FORT WORTH, TEX., DISTRICT 737 fiscal Years 1965 and 1966 were 200 and 1,030 acre-feet, respec- i4,4ely and accumulated releases through fiscal year 1966 included emergacre-feet for low-flow regulation and 97,340 acre-feet for oNv'er Y rice irrigation. During fiscal years 1965 and 1966 reec generation was 24,477,000 and 43,430,000 kilowatt-hours, resejtively. Amounts 561,760 and 547,370 acre-feet reslpetively, of water, 1966 ely, were released through turbines. As of June 30, flio 0 0acre-feet of storage space was available for storage of Condito started ion at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was 1951 tJuie 1946, and ready for flood control use in December e1aiirstt power was placed on-the-line in June 1953. Work ties ralid to complete project is completion of recreation facili- d alteration of Hill County roads. Cost and financial statement 1962 [Total to ew1962 work: 1963 1964 1965 1966 June4130, 1966 ite0... . $169,247 $183,237 $132,098 $49,990 $37,000 $41,207,400 10:, 146,332 206,087 132,493 47,547 40,685 141,207,301 propriated. 288,250 309,000 320,000 356,000 388,000 3,590,993 . . . . 292,289 306,638 323,150 347,321 376,320 3,559,481 e$188,282, receipts from reconveyance of lands, deposited to miscellaneous receipts. P iscal 35. SURVEYS es1dalIYear cost of work performed on authorized reports in- basin 629,354 for flood control, $147,940 for comprehensive eh d $12,833 for review of watershed studies from other l, a total of $790,127. 36. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Completed flood plain studies Location Date Federal agency completed cost t o l TRequesting itRiver . Texas Water Commission and Tarrant County Water Con- Feb. 1964 $11,400 trol and Improvement District No. 1. o wst 37. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Ydrol(o Work performed during fiscal year included $7,493 for total Studies and $2,175 for civil works investigations, a $9,668. ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT * :rict comprises watershed of Canadian River and tribu- ring river west of Texas-New Mexico State line; water- 'kansas River and tributaries entering river west of and Walnut Creek, Kans.; watershed of Rio Grande and Sentering river west of and including Pecos River and fries; and watershed of Mimbres River and its tribu- ew Mexico. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. Ala Flood Control Flood Control-Continued ch ordo diversion B. Cochiti Reservoir, N. (canne Project, Tularosa Mex............. 752 2, Albosed) Basin, N. Mex. 739 C. Galisteo Reservoir, N. buuerque diversion Mex............. 753 1exnne ls project, New 8Coha ***............ Coexico ""............. 4dias.Reservoir, Cana- D. Jemez Canyon Reser- voir, N. Mex ...... E. Rio Grande Floodway, 4. DOd iver, N. Mex. .. . 742 N. Mex.......... 755 5 droe Citylocal protection Trinidad Reservoir, Pur- 11. SKpect, Kansas ....... 743gatoire River, Colo. ... 757 ,Paso local protection Two Rivers Reservoir, N. 12. GPrJect,Texas 6, 8p9 rojecteas Protection ........ M ex. ................. 759 Sat Bend local protection Inspection of completed 13. 7.J Project , Karnsas...... 745flood control projects .. Scheduling flood control 14. 8IArkansas River n Martin Reservoir, oo~r .. reservoir operations ... 760 . as AniItiver, Colo. 746 15. Other authorized flood con- 9 tion pas local protec- trol projects ......... 761 9.Las PCoject, Colo. ..... 747 16. Flood control work under 1 s Crio uces local protec- special authorization .. 761 I0 rioProject, New Mexico 748 A Arande Basin, N. Mex. 750 General Investigations Abuiu Reservoir, Rio 17. Surveys ................ 761 Ch ra, N. Mex .... 751 18. Research and development 761 ALAIOGORDO DIVERSION CHANNEL PROJECT, TULAROSA Det ~ (CLOSED) BASIN, N. MEX. caton. At Alamogordo, Otero County, N. Mex., at foot of ar ento Mountains near eastern edge of Tularosa (closed) p' Tularosa Basin extends north-south between Rio Grande ecos River watersheds in south-central New Mexico. (See loical! ,o00.) urvey Map, Alamogordo quadrangle, N. Mex., scale lytina project. Consists of a diversion channel aligned gen- wil a northsouth direction east of the city. Diversion chan- il be 7 miles long and have a trapezoidal section with ~, Widths varying from 20 to 90 feet, and a design discharge a0 cubic feet per second. Channel will intercept flows arrOYOs which head on west slope of Sacramento Mountains w westward through the city. Major problem streams are 'yeeman, and Marble Canyons. Channel will carry flood- s estward in Dillard Draw to an area of "alkali flats" where d ill be dissipated by evaporation and percolation. Esti- s" ederal cost is $2,190,000. Lands and damages are re- riility of local interests. Project was authorized by Flood tol Act of 1962 (HII. Doc. 473, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains published maps). 740 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. In addition to usual requirement interests must alter existing improvements, other than prevent encroachment on diversion channel in order toAn design capacity; and prevent encroachment on existing drainage channels within the city in order to maini en present capacities. Estimated costs for all requiremen $570,000. Estimated annual cost to local interests for tenance and operation is $5,000.i or Operations and results during fiscal year. Plannling.OJ suspended after city failed to pass bond issue in election 9, 1965. Assurances have not been accepted since city is1 of project to fulfill financial obligations in construction time. Five-year notice was issued city on November 25, Some administrative work was accomplished. , Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction plano about 98 percent complete, all planning about 92 percent cOn Plans and specifications are complete except for railrad cations. City expects to be able to finance its portion of before expiration of project authorization on November 2' Cost and financial statement 2 1963 196 1965 196 66 Fiscal year............... 19P New work:1 Appropriated.......... $............ $135,000 $15,000 $5,000 $ ,13 Cost............... ............ 38,586 116P558 20,764 379 2. ALBUQUERQUE DIVERSION CHANNELS PROJrC NEW MEXICO Location. In area which comprises watersheds of ephstAt streams entering a 15-mile reach of Rio Grande from the re Albuquerque, N. Mex., and vicinity. Combined drainag aoclY tributaries is about 276 square miles. Sandia Range of the:r Mountains, which is about 12 miles east of Rio Granderises eastern border of watersheds. Crest of mountain r3nge2 feet more than a mile above river to an elevation of 10,6lbuqu ~ete, above mean sea level. (See Geological Survey Map, A N. Mex., quadrangle, scale 1:62,500.) n trib Existing project. There is a serious flood problem On'ere, taries of Rio Grande from east in Bernalillo County, Albuq% city N. Mex., and vicinity. Small detention dams, constructed control on several of these tributary arroyos, are not adequate t.o o- floods. Flash floods originating on steep slopes of Sandiads area tains inundate large portions of highly developed lowlan divl adjacent to river. Central business district, mainland al sion shops of Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway, Fe d aSO State highways, and commercial, industrial, residential, a 211 urban properties in lowlands are subject to flood damages. nel$ of improvement consists of north and south diversion cS1 .are on high ground east of and parallel to valley. Channe oect designed to carry floods equal in magnitude to standard Pllon* flood from all tributaries. Estimated Federal cost is $16 FLOOD CONTROL---ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 741 00_0n.O-Federal ,0K cost, including required cash contribution is $12,925,000. Lands and damages costs are re- FiitOf local interests. Authorized by Flood Control Act . Doc. 464, 83d Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published cooper.ation. In addition to usual requirements, local meust alter existing improvements, other than railroads, veint further encroachment upon existing defined a tributaries by zoning or other means, or constructwater- ade- "rways,or provide other drainage facilities to prevent ,Oems in heights area of Albuquerque from developing Of serious proportions. Local cooperation requirements oue cash contribution toward cost of construction in lump Pults equivalent to about 1.3 percent of total first cost of Version channel and about 3.4 percent of total first cost of version channel. Total estimated cost to local interests, 9 cash contribution toward cost of construction is '000, Preconstruction planning was initiated in 1956. vas topped in fiscal year 1959 as a result of failure of .erests to comply with requirements. On November 21, Year notice of expiration of project authorization was o local interests. By act of State Legislature of New t 1963, Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control to was created to provide local sponsorship for project telection of Board Provide funds for theof authority. Directors and approval of bond On August 27, 1963, KPproved )Peratio a ot $9.5 million bond issue for funding necessary Peration costs and elected a board of directors to serve as bing body. Formal assurances were accepted by district Tber 19 1963. Since original bond issue is not sufficient all non-Federal costs, the authority plans to present an- d issue to the voters in general election in November tion and results during fiscal year. Construction of ,fnorth channel, Alameda outlet structure, was suspended completion of A.T.&S.F. Railroad bridge relocation and use Which crosses outlet structure. Construction of rail- idge relocation was initiated February 14, 1966. Con- 4 Of phase 2 of north channel, Alameda outlet to U.S. Y1-25, was initiated March 17, 1966. Planning work on remainder of north channel, was continued, detailed de- Morandum covering south channel was completed and t' specifications initiated. tion at end of fiscal year. Project planning is about 85 COmplete. Construction of phase 1 of north channel is Percent and phase 2 about 2 percent complete. Railroad elocation across Alameda outlet structure is about 50 per- 'Plete. Plans and specifications for phase 3, remainder of annel, are about 90 percent complete. 742 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS saya.9 13 1 15 1966 June Fiscal year. . .. .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 .__ OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: Contributed........... Cost...I ................ $450 5............ 000 .. 17,660 Cost...................... ........................ 179660 $406 3. CONCHAS RESERVOIR, CANADIAN RIVER, N. Location. Dam is in San Miguel County, N. Mex.,C dian River, about one-fourth mile downstream from coinf Canadian and Conchas Rivers. It is about 30 miles of Tucumcari, N. Mex., and 743 miles upstream from 1 Canadian River. Canadian River is about 906 miles long northeastern part of New Mexico, and flows south aln Arkansas River near Webbers Falls, Okla. (See Geolog vey State map of New Mexico, scale 1:500,000, andG Survey topographic map, Tucumcari quadrangle, scale 1:: Existing project. A concrete gravity main dam sect feet long with a maximum height of 200 feet above St located in Canadian River Canyon together with ear on each side having an overall length of about 3.7 mile; section contains conduits in its base for release of water tain low flows and for drainage of reservoir, and an ungated spillway 300 feet long. Earth dikes vary in 11 to 100 feet and north dike contains a concrete emergency spillway 3,000 feet long. Reservoir haS storage capacity of 550,800 acre-feet (198,200 for f trol, 273,000 for water conservation and irrigation, al dead storage). Dam controls 7,409 square miles of drain Federal cost is $15,811,171, including $2,279,326 for construction of project under authority of Emergent Appropriation Act of 1935. Project is based on report dian River, N. Mex., Tex., and Okla., dated June 1, 196 in compliance with House Document 308, 69th Congress sion, and approved by the President, July 29, 193 provisions of Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of FLOOD CONTROL--ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 743 1( o .o tngress in 1936 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 308, 0alocalg.,1stsess.).0 cooperation. None required. tions and results during fiscal year. Operation of reser- anltinued. Reservoir was operated for storage of floodwa- ed releases for irrigation purposes. Estimated total accum- 9c erod damages prevented by project through fiscal year Were $70,000. Estimated irrigation benefits for fiscal year were $217,367. Estimated total accumulated irrigation tartfrough fiscal year 1965 were $4,267,615. Pool elevation of fiscal year was 4,201 feet, with corresponding storage 'I acre-feet Maximum pool elevation of 4,201.83 feet, >Pesponding storage of 360,792 acre-feet occurred July 6, ,ono1 elevation exceeded spillway crest (elevation 4,201 st211 o u r occasions: July 2 to 19, July 31 to August 16, I Otto 31, and September 11 to 20, 1965. Storage decreased Oier 12, 1965, when irrigation releases were terminated. eigation rl releases began April 4, 1966. Total releases for er r were 155,378 acre-feet (127,320 for irrigation, 41 for ePoduction, 24,635 conduit and spillway releases, and 3,382 1 . cous losses). Releases of 124,996 acre-feet were made to ch. ey Conservancy District and 2,324 acre-feet to Bell n4 inimum pool elevation of 4,191.15 feet, with corre- 4 -8.storage of 290,201 acre-feet occurred June 30, 1966. p on at end of fiscal year. Existing project was essen- I cOt'lete in 1940. Reservoir and appurtenances are in e u ition and in operation. Irrigation of some lands under etWas begun in November 1945. Cost and financial statement ar. Total to 1962 19063 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 )oDriated *i... .. $50,000 $26,000 $16,390 -$2,595 -$11,810 1$13,309,176 arOcd ' 55,732 3,236 30,990 633 -2,540 213,309,176 ito riated 112,475 130,300 179,000 143,025 148,298 2,469,628 108,468 130,0090 182,605 145,814 148,234 2,467,947 492,696 maintenance and improvement funds and $869,978 emergency relief .ratio $2,279,326, cost of initiating project under authority of Emergency Relief 'n A Of,1935Act and $222,669 transferred to the Corps under Public Works Ac- ". $227 ',6 32 maintenance and improvement costs and $869,978 for emergency relief, A6eIt 6, 96cost of initiating project under the authority of Emergency Relief Ap- Sunde of 1935 and $222,669, the cost for work performed with funds transferred to erPublic Works Acceleration Act of 1962. 4. ]DODGE CITY LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, KANSAS CatI n . At Dodge City, Ford County, Kans., on Arkansas Sabout 130 miles downstream from Colorado-Kansas State 5,0ee Geological Survey map for Dodge quadrangle, scale in project. About 7 miles of levees of about 8.3 feet -height on both banks of Arkansas River (4.3 miles on left -d 2.6 m iles on right bank) and enlargement of river chan- orMn a floodway about 470 feet wide which will convey a 744 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Leves1 flow of 40,000 cubic feet per second through city. be protected by flexible-type steel jetties. Four reaches ife- walls about 100 feet long will be provided to insure contiruity oc tween levees and bridge abutments. Project also includes orks tion of a railroad bridge and grade raise. Appurtena n plant include interior drainage structures and fencing, a puImpsng d for disposal of sanitary sewage during high water perio' sti- minor alterations to local roads and a sanitary sewerline ges ' mated Federal cost is $3 million. Cost of lands and da ag 196s responsibility of local interests. Project was authorized coutins Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 498, 87th Cong., 2d sess., c. latest published maps). local Local cooperation. In addition to usual requirements lareas interests must acquire easement for flood-zoning purposes iel d that would be used for ponding of interior drainage waeron00 hold United States free from claims as a result of floodingeit ter oexI a residual interior drainage during operation of project; aa ing improvements, other than railroads, including prov'1scerned sewage disposal pumping plant; inform all individuals coporarY about residual flooding problem involved owing to temproved ponding; and provide assurances that encroachment on11 Pot be wilred P. river channels, interior drains, and ponding areas Iredy pro- permitted; and if ponding areas and capacities are impai~scitY' vide substitute storage capacity or equivalent pumping cto e A bond issue for flood control purposes 'in an amount io L96 ceed $700,000" was approved by the voters October d general Formal assurances will be requested as soon as revisedl 1 cost design memorandum is approved. Estimated non-Federa aiq" $700,000. Estimated annual cost to local interests for s tenance and operation is $16,000. eclaS Operationsand results during fiscal year. Project wacs Vas P fled to active category after bond issue for flood purposes Med' proved by the voters. Preconstruction planning was re Revision of general design memorandum was completed..ie are Condition at end of fiscal year. General design studilete percent co" complete. Preconstruction planning is about 70 Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1 Fiscal year................ New work:4 Appropriated.......... .......... $55,000 $122,142 ............ $68 000 Cost.....................52,912 124,230............ 47,056 5. EL PASO LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, TEXAS 1left Location. At El Paso, El Paso County, Tex., which iso bank of Rio Grande in reach that forms part of inters"t0" boundary between United States and Republic of Mexico.dangle, logical Survey map for El Paso, Tex.; New Mexico qua to. scale 1:250,000.) o l o r Existing project. Consists of a single-purpose flood ct@ocot system of detention dams, diversion dikes, and channels to regulate, and discharge arroyo runoff into Rio Grande. FLOOD CONTROL---ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 745 adjac lturary arroyos on eastern, southern, and western slopes of § outl ranklin Mountains often inundates sections of city and Ide pelyng suburban developments. Project is divided into four Jlits ( lent elements: Northwest area, Central area, and two rove~oPPer system and Bluff Channel) in Southeast area. Im- area aents for Central area and Copper system of Southeast hereare authorized for construction as soon as practicable, and i l. construction of remainder of project (Northwest area "1j s •~e Structi Channel of Southeast area) is to be deferred until con- -1 lissiol s initiated by International Boundary and Water Com- capacit on improvements which may be required to increase for cohof io Grande and its floodway. Elements authorized lue ~d~eruction as soon as practicable consist of seven reservoirs 01j oversionl and outlet channels in Central area to operate in with lon with existing facilities and two reservoirs together east rversions and an outfall channel in Copper system of South- diver., rea Deferred elements include three reservoirs and a sio channel with appurtenances in Northwest area and rlu area o hannel in Southeast area to intercept arroyo flows above aOted Prilcipal damage and convey them to Rio Grande. Esti- 1lood ederal cost is $14,400,000. Project was authorized by coot lotrol Act of 1965 (H. Doc. 207, 89th Cong., 1st sess., - o~c l latest published maps). terests cooperation. In addition to usual requirements, local in- Provflust alter existing improvements, other than railroads or reven,~Hents constructed and maintained by United States, heir cde.croachment on all of project works which would reduce e3istileigSn capacities; take steps to prevent encroachment upon eale& defined waterways tributary to project by zoning or other Waterl uch as enlargements, or other modifications, of existing rbt ay facilities to prevent minor flood problems in these roor 7waterwaysfrom developing into problems of serious o0trol'ons; and inform all concerned that project is designed to ofdgl oods originating above structures and that some residual tres migay be expected from precipitation occurring below struc- 11al ,stimniated non-Federal cost is $3,230,000. Estimated an- $100, " to local interests for maintenance and operation is C~ Ons and results during fiscal year. None. totbeetion at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning has 'A initiated. S EAT BEND LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, KANSAS fAr tion. At Great Bend, Barton County, Kans., on left bank (rto ansas River at river mile 873, about 4.5 miles upstream eol, con.fluence of Walnut Creek with Arkansas River. (See C.al Survey map, Great Bend quadrangle, scale 1:250,000.) iVet project. nI Consists of 6.2 miles of leveed channel to torainut Creek floodflows around and upstream from city Little p ansas River; a leveed channel 1.5 miles long to direct iles ofalnut Creek floodflows into Walnut Diversion Channel; 6 tieback improved channel with levees along Arkansas River; a levee 4.3 miles long on left bank of Arkansas River up- 746 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 strea fromjuncton eration stream from junction with Walnut Diversion Channel; alteTe or relocation of two railroad bridges; and appurtenant faas Project will protect city of Great Bend and vicinity frol reek River flows up to 86,000 cubic feet per second and Walnu cost is flows of 26,000 cubic feet per second. Estimated Feder of 1965 $4,530,000. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act ished latest pbl (H. Doc. 182, 89th Cong., 1st sess., contains maps). t local Local cooperation. In addition to usual requirements 0 ies interests must provide easements for flood zoning Pu~rpesultof ponding areas; hold United States free from claifs ofroect; p5arojecO flooding from residual interior runoff during operation ofeontipse inform periodically all concerned that some flooding will croc to occur because of temporary ponding; prohibit any nel, i ment on design capacities of river channel, diversion cha a1ties terior drains, and ponding areas; and if ponding area c States, are impaired, provide promptly, without cost to Unite existni substitute storage or equivalent pumping capacity; alter seco improvements, other than railroad bridges and approacdivri0 nected therewith; provide fences on both sides of Walnut d ri channel for structural protection and as a safety measure control periods of high flow. In addition, construction of the floo eplace- works will be initiated concurrently with or subsequent .ore. ment of U.S. Highway 281 bridge across Arkansas .1 elctioe bond issue to finance requirements was defeated in speciend city on August 10, 1965. After defeat of bond issue, Great B.l eople council started educational campaign to better acqualn. oteo with proposed project with view of presenting bond issue ~t000. in another election. Estimated non-Federal cost is $1 , 1d Estimated annual cost to local interests for maintenanc operation is $29,800. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. hs Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction plannig not been initiated. 7. JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER, COLO. its Location. On Arkansas River 1,159 miles upstrea'm rotY, mouth, 300 miles downstream from its source, in Bentsee Ge o about 18 miles upstream from city of Lamar, Colo.( , quad logical Survey maps for Lamar and Las Animas (Co010o./ rangles, scale Existing 1:125,000.) project. A concrete and earthfill structure bour bed ,6 miles long with a maximum height of 130 feet above strearo Reser'voir P. and an overflow, gated spillway 1,174 feet long. Reervo364400 vides storage of 278,000 acre-feet for flood control, and servoir acre-feet for conservation, a total of 642,400 acre-feet. rted controls a drainage area of 18,915 square miles and is opterol l as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for flood conistrl Arkansas River Basin. Federal cost is $15,233,366. EX' tite project was authorized by 1936 Flood Control Act under tlhe4t "Caddoa Reservoir, near Lamar in Colorado" (H. Doc. 308, art Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published maps). War pePf ment Civil Appropriation Act of 1940 provided that Caddoa FLOOD CONTROL---ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 747 artiroject in Colorado and Kansas should be known as John Jle 2 eservoir project. Public Law 89-298 modified the act of ginee, 1936 (49 Stat. 1570) to authorize and direct Chief of colte rs to use, not to exceed, 10,000 acre-feet of reservoir flood The Ch orage space for fish and wildlife and recreation purposes. of ocolef of Engineers provided this space and set top elevation 8,851.83rvation, fish and wildlife and recreation pool at elevation i act. feet contingent upon stipulations and limitations of 4a' coperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, Pllce Perations iayman ae rations and results during fiscal year. Ordinary mainte- age cant Operation continued. Regulation of conservation stor- 13actinued under rules and regulations of Arkansas River 1965IC - Estimated flood damages prevented during fiscal year agesere $52,417,000. Estimated total accumulative flood dam- 288 0 0revented by project through fiscal year 1965 were $71,- $24'600' Estimated irrigation benefits for fiscal year 1965 were al0 Estimated total accumulative irrigation benefits through 38 ear 1965 were $14,059,100. On July 1, 1965, pool elevation Jo'M 76 feet, with corresponding storage r of 338,348 acre-feet. "c hunder-storm activity 11gustt1965 on the watershed in July and 165 165 caused peak inflows of 14,951 acre-feet on August 1, elevat.and 24,484 acre-feet on August 24, 1965. Maximum pool acrefe Oof 3,856.16 feet, with corresponding storage of 429,557 Year we occurred on August 25, 1965. Total releases for fiscal releasesre 471,767 acre-feet (260,798 for irrigation, 209,840 flood aoun,and 1,129 miscellaneous losses). Releases for irrigation Was13 ed to 176,071 acre-feet. Pool elevation on June 30, 1966, feet. o836.96 feet with a corresponding storage of 221,518 acre- O ftion at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. 18 am and appurtenances have been in operation about dear Cost and financial statement e .1962 1963 1964 1965 19660 30,1966 Junie o riated $15,000 $40,000 $25,000..... 1$15,182,522 15,106 22,220 32,409 $2,268 $1016 115,173,389 rIted. ot .. 137,800 214,600 134,300 193,600 182,275 2,618,574 . . 179,649 10,672 201,137 188,611 188,450 2,617,656 e$59977 e ergency relief funds for new wvork. 8 LAS ANIMAS LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, COLO. 175 ation. At Las Animas, Bent County, Colo., at river mile Prgo1".Arkansas River, just upstream from its confluence with o,tire River, a major tributary that enters Arkansas River qadr south. (See Geological Survey map, Lamar, Colo.; Kans. i angle scale 1:250,000.) ki 't'g project. Consists of a levee 9.6 miles long on south Oaf Arkansas River and a levee about 1 mile long on north SAppurtenant works include levee protection measures; an 748 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 interior drainage system consisting of outlet structures, a ditch and ponding areas; a sewage pumping plant; and intakest sec- for irrigation canals. Design flood is 140,000 cubic feetodeith peak discharge of 187,000 cubic feet per second, reduced Y laced tory effect ofondwhih Dam, Barrierisequvalet t flod near oPueblo, recrdiJun 19 asbY Colo., whichWaFderal in operation shortly after June 1921 flood). Estimate ntro eAct cost is $1,770,000. Project was authorized by Flood Contest purol of 1965 (H. Doc. 165, 89th Cong., 1st sess., containslatestP" lished maps). local al Local cooperation. In addition to usual requirementsrd 0 t terests must at least annually inform individuals concerne odi0. residual flood problem involved owing to temporary Pce de-g prevent encroachment on river channel, which would redteareas sign flow capacity through leveed section and on pondide subr and interior drains; and if ponding area is impaired, pr vithoit stitute storage or equivalent pumping capacity promptly thaad cost to United States; and alter existing improvements, ther - railroad bridges and approaches in connection therewith. en to dition, construction will begin concurrent with or subser ka4s replacement of United States Highway 50 bridge across d tribute fish River; and in event local interests desire to create planned costt ofon ribat lake at time Federal project is constructed, they must con rate cost of excavating fishing lake in excess of cost of borrov ted rial from least costly alternative source, currently esti clail $33,000, and hold United States free from water rights clgiver Construction of U.S. Highway 50 bridge across Arkansa200,00 has been completed. Estimated non-Federal cost is e Estimated annual cost to local interests for maintena operation is $4,400. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. h Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction plan" not been initiated. 9. LAS CRUCES LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, NEW 3 p01 Location. On tributaries of Rio Grande at Las Cruces hant Ana County, N. Mex., about 87 miles downstream from ce4l,. Butte Dam. (See Geological Survey Map for Las Cruces, Mex., quadrangle, scale 1: 62,500.) 9a@ Existing project. Consists of two dams, Las Cruces ,a which extends across Alameda and Las Cruces ArroYS With Campus Dam, on Campus Arroyo. Both will be providt 000 uncontrolled outlets and spillways. Las Cruces Dam, abou, ri0 feet east of Las Cruces city limits, will be earthfill construc ted about 15,570 feet long and 67 feet high with both slopes Prote o Discharges from dam will be conveyed downstream in chaof qT Alameda Arroyo for about 10,968 feet and then by meandrande. unlined, trapezoidal channel for about 13,910 feet to Rio G~ae Reservoir capacity is 13,200 acre-feet at maximum water areA and 8,200 acre-feet at spillway crest. Controlled drainageltrc-r is 28.9 square miles. Campus Dam will be a small earthfil oyo ture 1,790 feet long and 34 feet high located on Campus L immediately upstream from campus of State UniversitY. PLOOD CONTROL-ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 749 'll Oe protected by 6-inch layer of spalls. Flows from Sbe discharged directly into channel of Campus Arroyo. Ir capacity is 190 acre-feet at maximum water surface R and 158 acre-feet at spillway crest. Controlled drain- 5is0.45 square miles. Estimated Federal cost is $3,800,- oject authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962 (S. Doc. SCong., 2d sess., contains latest published maps.) cooperation. In addition to usual requirements, local must alter existing improvements, other than railroads; Iencroachment upon outlet channel from Las Cruces Dam Grande in order to maintain a channel capacity of 275 SPer second; prevent encroachment upon existing channel Pus Arroyo from Campus Dam to point opposite present Of university sewage disposal plant in order to maintain a cdapacity of at least 30 cubic feet per second through this id Prevent encroachment, other than by natural sediment ,on the reservoir areas which would reduce their storage es. Estimated non-Federal cost is $810,000. Estimated annual cost to local interests for maintenance and opera- 13,000. Formal request for assurances was transmitted fLas Cruces by letter dated December 3, 1965, which con- ormal notification of commencement of 5-year period of authorization during which time local interests must ful- irements of local cooperation. City passed a bond issue OPletion of general design studies which included $536,- ,lood control purposes. The amount of the bond issue is Iient to cover all costs of local cooperation which are Y estimated to be $810,000. City completed sale of general 1 flood control bonds ($536,000 worth) in April 1966. e Presently acquiring lands required for construction of using ton Wouldproceeds from sale of bonds. They estimated land be completed in 1 year and that they would then another bond issue to voters to cover cost of additional r1ents. According to State law and city charter, city can eial elections for general obligation bonds at any time city ion deemrns it necessary. Expect next bond election to be )ut May 1, 1967. and results during fiscal year. Planning was sus- stions '1 May 1965. Expenditures were for necessary adminis- Work in dealing with local interests. .ton at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is Percent complete. All design memoranda are complete, Is and specifications for all of project except railroad tre about 25 percent complete. Negotiations for railroad )1have been initiated. Formal assurances of local coop- Will be requested as soon as general design memorandum ved, and plans and specifications will be completed as soon las specific plan for financing its additional costs. 750 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 10. RIO GRANDE BASIN, N. MEX. i di- Location. Improvements are on Rio Grande and tributari New Mexico. More definite locations and descriptions reports vidual projects are in following paragraphs and individu by projects. d edflood Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1948 authorl ater control phase of comprehensive plan of development 04,81st resources of Rio Grande basin in New Mexico (H. Doc. 2r .)p •g., Cong., 1st sess.) Ch with exception of Chiflo h eCO l . ervireco oDamm and Res spillway gate structure at Chamita Dam. Althoug thorized mended Chiflo Dam and Reservoir was deleted from au iderf plan, it was excluded without prejudice to future coates Of tion by Congress. It was requested at that time, by reg.ard Colorado and Texas, that project be deferred for restuY iie act ing required storage and methods of operation. By ,hase 0of Congress also authorized for construction irrigation c ofl0 comprehensive plan as recommended by Bureau of Rected th (H. Doc. 653, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). The act also stipularmet work should be prosecuted in accordance with joint agr of the approved by Secretary of the Army and Acting Secretar agree- Interior on November 21, 1957. In addition, under thafor co" ment Bureau of Reclamation was given responsibilitYicatiol, struction, operation, and maintenance of channel rect ed plan and drainage rehabilitation and extension phases of tunifiisteoe of improvement. Flood Control Act of 1960 authorized G rd on Rio Grade Reservoir on Galisteo Creek and Cochiti Reservoirfor Rio ,,94 as additions to authorized plan of improvement (S. Doc. 94, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). Flood Control Act o )e- authorized to be appropriated $3,500,000 to be expende dcbyre partment of the Army for partial accomplishment O o hensive plan for Rio Grande basin. Flood Control Actfr authorized to be appropriated an additional $39 millionf 000 to be prosecuted by Department of the Army and $30,179,0FI work to be prosecuted by Department of the Interiorditio13 Control Act of 1960 authorized to be appropriated an a~ rd ' $58,300,000 for work to be prosecuted by Department of the oC. Flood control projects included in comprehensive plan (): 243, 81st Cong., 1st sess., and S. Doc. 94, 86th Cong., 2d sess. FLOOD CONTROL----ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 751 Project Miles Drainage Total iver above Nearest area Description estimated mouth town (square cost mile) Rio Grande. 2445 Cerro, 5,498 Concrete-gravity 393 feet 3529,945,694 hatit 5 Dam. N. Mex. high, 816,000 acre-feet capacity. 4'. RioChama.. 5 Espanola, 3,126 Earthfil, 205 feet high, 328,702,975 e14 N. Mex. 945,000 4acre-feet a ayo Jemez capacity. .ne.. * 2 Bernalillo, 1,034 Earthfill, 136feet high, 54,177,417 l rade N. Mex. 115,800 acre-feet 2 t.capacity. . lodway Rio Grande.. 2123to39, .. Channel rectification, 3 610,160,000 luewater levee enlargement and Vloo4ra1 ulatconstruction. ay.7 ewater ............ Bluewater, 544 Diversion levea and 8586,000 chiti reek. N.Mex. floodway 8,300 feet long. RioGrande.. 2340 Cochiti, 8,491 Earthfill, 253 feet high, 950,000,000 alites D N. Mex. 602,000 acre-feet ]capacity. Creek. 12 Waldo, 596 Earthfill, 158 feet high, 916,000,000 N. Mex.O10 89,800 acre-feet I capacity. Pt Middle Rio Grande project authorization without prejudice to subsequent con- ile orail 8J s 0,Te, a . atintersection of New Mexico-Texas State line with international boundary S194Drice levels. Authorizing estimate. e 7o.000 acre-feet by elimination of gate structure at Chamita Dam. cost l D$160000 on-Federal costs. No breakdown estimate for levee and related work to (levees tsed I'b the Corps was given in H. Doc. 243, 81st Cong., 1st sess. Of the $10 mil- alnd C eral I cost of Rio Grande Floodway, portion of work to be done by the Corps frAi.horia"stabilization) was estimated at $3 million. Ya. ee 11 expired April 14, 1986. Notice of commencement of 5-year period was lerilO ater.-Toltec Irrigation District, Grants, N. Mex., on April 14, 1961. During the s9Y 1 96,loa 0 interests made no attempt to furnish assurances of local cooperation. e 1 rc e levels. Includes $76,000 non-Federal costs. eset site.Revised. ,All O~r )divio rations and costs for projects in authorized plan are in ual-reports on the following pages. S10.A. ABIQUIU RESERVOIR, RIO CHAMA, N. MEX. on . Project is one unit of flood control phase of com- he Sa1qui*v Plan for Rio Grande and tributaries, New Mexico. out 3o larn is on Rio Chama near town of Abiquiu, N. Mex., alde Yliles upstream from confluence of Rio Chama and Rio 1 . (See Geological Survey Map for plan and profile of C I ana, N. Mex., from mouth to mile 103, sheet 1, and Army 00.) ervice, Aztec, N. Mex.; Colorado NJ 13-10, scale 1:250,- eet tin prloject. An earthfill dam 1,540 feet long, rising 325 Sanove streambed, with a 12-foot diameter controlled outlet, o uncontrolled spillway in a natural saddle about 1 mile Srt h odf left abutment. Reservoir provides 579,000 acre-feet of West otrol and sediment storage. Total capacity at spillway rals2 e1,225400 acre-feet. Dam controls 2,147 square miles of rO. area. Estimated Federal cost is $21,275,240. Exist- S Ject was authorized by Flood Control Acts of June 30, 1948, test 17 1950 (H-. Doc. 243, 81st Cong., 1st sess., contains by 0 De blished maps.) btike fa on and results during fiscal year. Ordinary mainte- adi~operation continued. Regulation storage in reservoir 752 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 was continued under rules and regulations of Rio Grande rWs pact Administration. Pool elevation at start of fiscal Yregula%. 6,147.80 feet (storage 31,730 acre-feet). Flood control beteel t frotl tion was continued until July 20, 1965. Under agreement e the Corps and Bureau of Reclamation, transfer of stOr, 1965. El Vado Reservoir to Abiquiu Reservoir began July 96, whef Storage of El Vado water continued until January 6,19 elevti n Abiquiu Reservoir became empty. Maximum reservoir er 13, of 6,186.61 feet (storage 99,582 acre-feet) occurred SePt Jue .5, 1965. Sediment regulation continued from March 7 tos ae.P 1966. On June 6, 1966, transfer I of El Vado storage WCDtion yool eleyet initiated and continued through end of fiscal year. POore-feet June 30, 1966, was 6,142.60 feet (storage 24,493 acre pre During year an estimated $74,000 sediment damages epoect e vented, and accumulated sediment damages prevented bYto since completion were $125,000. Drilling and groutingf otrol grout curtain on right and left abutments and in area April 6, shaft of dam to correct seepage problem were initiated a 0toe 1966, and construction of drainage facilities along downstre of dam was initiated June 21, 1966. erati Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was placed in Opr,ctiof in February 1963. Extension of grout curtain and consot 30 of drainage facilities along downstream toe of dam are and 90 percent complete, respectively. Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 - 1964 1965 1966e019 Fiscal year................ 2f New work: 21 Appropriated..........$4,836,000 $1,047,000 $25,000 $121,895 $768,454 Cost............... 3,969,002 2,246,492 40,480 117,820 221,508 84'41 Maintenance: 1836 319, Appropriated.......... 18,625 67,800 89,200 100,500 108,33 Cost......... ... .. 17,069 64,028 91,942 100,225 106,200 SExcludes $265,825 appropriated and spent for planning Low Charnita Dam', whi 1 deauthorized. o10.B. COCHITI RESERVOIR, N. MEX. Mie Location. Dam is at river mile 340 on Rio Grande (riVerh 1 0 being at intersection of New Mexico-Texas State line Wochi ternational boundary at El Paso, Tex.), near village ofX veX' which is about 50 miles upstream from Albuquerque,('agle (See Geological Survey Maps, Cochiti Dam, N. Mex., Qu 24 o0 and Santo Domingo Pueblo, N. Mex., quadrangle, scale .1ile Existing project. Consists of an earthfill dam about d Froj long with a maximum height of 251 feet above streambe tndeo ect will extend generally in an east-west line across Rio G0 r a point about 2 miles east of Rio Grande and then So" 60" across Santa Fe River. An uncontrolled spillway Withn cef foot-long ogee-weir and a 160-foot notch 10 feet deep in er, will be at end of embankment on south side of Santa Fe adr Operational releases for flood control and irrigation will r d through a 3-barrel gated conduit in left abutment on Rio e No outlet will be provided on Santa Fe River. Dead stors FLOOD CONTROL--ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 753 elirt. lver and Canada de Cochiti arms of reservoir will be also rated by means of conveyance channels. Construction will ad a lve relocation of a gravel-surfaced Forest Service road Storag irrigation headworks and canal. Reservoir will have a aCre feeapacity of 492,000 acre-feet for flood control and 110,000 Dacity for sediment, a total of 602,000 acre-feet. Storage ca- ihtlyorPermanent pool for recreation will be provided by b lOjeetnodifying eeStructures the operating procedures. Modification of eece urs, except for specific recreation facilities, will not s$ o sary because of permanent pool. Estimated Federal cost ~ llon. Existing project was authorized by Flood Control A~t esr o 960 in lieu of authorized Low Chamita Dam of Chamita tait ubstitute plan" (S. Doc. 94, 86th Cong., 2d sess., con- o edifieb "Published maps). Existing project authorization was develod by Public Law 88-293 to provide for conservation and abotl 5 abotv 9ent of fish and wildlife resources and for recreation, Dool of ,000 acre-feet of water for initial filling of a permanent cielt 1,20o surface acres in the reservoir, and thereafter suf- 0e ater annually to offset evaporation from such area. erionst and results during fiscal year. Construction of ac- code ad and operations building was completed October 4, 1965. 'eltstudies of outlet works stilling basin by Waterways Experi- repra titon were completed December 30, 1965. Continued or te lon of detailed design memorandum on embankment and orks detailed design memoranda on relocations and outlet lok Additional core drilling contracts for foundation investi- tignSwere awarded in connection with preparation of detailed 011stru emorandum for embankment and conveyance channels. •d eation of spillway (portion) was initiated January 25, 1966. were acquisition was essentially completed. Cochiti Indian lands raili cquired under comprehensive easement on basis of memo- 4 of understanding with Bureau of Indian Affairs, whereby aigange for project Indian lands, Cochiti Indians reserve a f or commercial development, operation, and maintenance to~treagement of recreational facilities on premises over which was granted. Condiensive Peretion at easement end of fiscal year. Project planning is about 83 etio complete. Land acquisition is essentially complete. Con- t iO of access road and operations building is complete. Con- i of spillway (portion) is about 22 percent complete. proect is about 7 percent complete. Cost and financial statement year Total to r "" 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 or ae S. $380,000 $469,000 $293,000$1,220,000 $1,550,000 $3,965,354 70,245 474,345 201,260 1,058,5981,542,124 3.. 3,693,358 "ocO. 10.C. GALISTEO RESERVOIR, N. MEX. M1ita on. Dam is at river mile 12 on Galisteo Creek, a ary of Rio Grande. Definite project site is about 8 miles 754 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 upstream of project document site. Reservoir will extend o stream from dam for about 4 miles to near village of Walde N. Mex. (See Geological Survey Map, San Pedro 1,N.o MO quadrangle scale 1:24,000.) 0 feet loi1 Existing project. Consists of an earthfill dam 2,820 fee Will with a maximum height of 158 feet above streambed. Thereacii t be a 10-foot diameter uncontrolled outlet with dischargeelvatio of 4,980 cubic feet per second for pool at spillway crest elev glltt and a spillway with a broad crested weir 250 feet long inrigh abutment. At spillway crest elevation reservoir will haV pro- age capacity of 89,800 acre-feet for flood control, . ini whic sed or 1trol on vision is made for storage of 10,200 acre-feet of sediment l ro an estimated 50-year sediment depletion. Reservoir WY ghich a drainage area of 596 square miles. Santa Fe Rlv alisteo enters Rio Grande about 5 miles upstream from mouth o of Galisteo ,th8 Creek will be diverted into Cochiti Reservoir instead Reservoir as provided in project document plan (S. Doc. istin, Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost is $16 million. po. 94, project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1960 (. 86th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published maps.) .ecificv" Operations and results during fiscal year. Plans nd pleted tions for outlet works, embankment and spillway were od reloc Mach10 166 Construction radan of access road and county ro5 peci railroad adrlasand and riloa erati' tions was completed. Relocated railroad was placed in March 10, 1966. about S5 Condition at end of fiscal year. Project planning is aiof percent complete. Construction of access road, and relocat'pr 0 j county road and A.T.&S.F. Railroad are complete. Entire ect is about 30 percent complete. Cost and financial statement 1 65 30, 1 0966 June 10 2 1 063 1 4 year. Fiscal ....... New work:$4 Appropriated.......... $2,658,680 $145,000 $160,830 $238,000$1,205,000 4,3' Cost............... 130,120 169,726 158,742 466,875 3,420,421 10.D. JEMEZ CANYON RESERVOIR, N. MEX. . abotl Location. In Sandoval County, N. Mex., on Jemez Rive' del 2 miles upstream from confluence of Jemez River and Rio Grcal about 5 miles northwest of Bernalillo, N. Mex. (See Geoo. Survey Map for Bernalillo quadrangle, scale 1:125, 000.) i Existing project. An earthfill dam 780 feet long withlaucoil mum height of 136 feet above streambed, an a off-channe t"Cer trolled saddle spillway 400 feet wide, and 13-foot d gated outlet in left abutment with discharge capacity Ofge 05 onee'jV cubic feet per second with pool at spillway crest elevation. ervoir controls 1,034 square miles of drainage area, is oGralde of flood control phase of a comprehensive plan for Rio feet and tributaries, N. Mex., and has a capacity of 73,000 acol, i for flood control and 47,000 acre-feet for sediment corntr which 6,100 acre-feet of sediment have been deposited. 1 PLOOD CONTROL-ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 755 that 70,000 acre-feet of storage will be available in the for flood control after 50 years of project life. Federal 177,417. Existing project was authorized by Flood Con- 4f 1948 and 1950. ons and results during fiscal year. Ordinary mainte- I operation continued. Reservoir was empty at start ear and remained empty until December 9, 1965. Run- nt to require regulation for sediment control occurred 10-29. A peak inflow of 321 acre-feet occurred Decem- plow detention for sediment regulation of spring runoff trch 21. Maximum pool elevation of 5,149.2 (storage :eet) occurred March 31. Reservoir was empty at end ear. Damages of $34,000 were prevented which are at- to sediment retention. Estimated total accumulated sediment damages prevented by project through fiscal Were $538,000. on at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was Iay 1950 and completed May 1954. Cost and financial statement s ear . ., Total to S 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 wwork copriated * .$4,177,417 4,177,417 CoDPrkated .., *. $60,300 $50,700 $36,100 $34,475 $58,392 495,251 56,876 38,476 51,337 31,691 60,309 413,127 10 .E. RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, N. MEX. "On * Project is one unit of flood control phase of com- Wve plan of improvement for Rio Grande Basin in New It is on Rio Grande and covers section of river com- near Truth or Consequences (formerly Hot Springs) at Iver mile 123 and extends upstream to lower end of Rio Canyon about 14 miles upstream from Espanola, N. Mex., Lyer mile 394. (See table which follows.) en! project. Consists of flood protection and major e improvements by channel rectification, levee enlarge- Tconstruction, and bank stabilization work where needed ct levees. Construction of project is a joint undertaking au of Reclamation and the Corps. Portions to be (lone by 11 consist of levee enlargement, construction, and bank on Work, with channel-rectification and drainage-rehabil- Work the responsibility of Bureau of Reclamation. Lev- 1structed by local interests exist through reach of WVolved, but are not uniform as to grade, section, or d of construction, and in many places are threatened by ring river. Project is divided into five units as follows: 756 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 t Reach Location (river miles)' coo Truths.or Consequences unit.............. (formerly Ilot Springs).............. 123 to 129 ... ..... ...... (3 6200 San Acacia to Bosque del Apache unimt.......................... 155 to 226.................. 30 Cochiti to Rio Puerco unit (not including Albuquerque unit) ....... 236 to 340............ 1030,00 Albuquerque unit............................................ 28(6to 305............... , Espanola Valley unit .......................................... 366 to 394 .................. y--- 1River mile 0 being at intersection of New Mexico-Texas State line with interat boundary at El Paso, Tex. excluded r Truth or Consequences unit of Rio Grande floodway is to be restudied and eab e1.0 i estimated cost of project. Estimated cost of this portionP of floodway is u to Uencep S s udate not avala million. it was included as part of overall floodway project estimated at $3 million. tonrGoerit not provide a solution to flood problem on tributary arroyos at and near Truth howe. N. Mex. Work is being done by Bureau of Reclamation in this reach of the river 1w ch iinro involves channel rectification only, and does not include levee work for flood nOne desire responsibility of Corps. Tributary arroyo problem is considered different from r H. Doe. 243, and additional authorization may be necessary for its solution. t i porti STo be restudied and excluded from estimated cost of project. Estimated cost of of project, July 1960, was $6,200,000. 4In addition, $1,650,000 incurred by Bureau of Reclamation in this reach. 5 In addition, $75,000 incurred by local interests in this reach. Construction of Albuquerque unit of floodway for interdPo tection to city of Albuquerque cost $3,130,000 (1958)-25,000. 5 and $75,000 non-Federal for a total project cost of $3, phas Construction of Cochiti to Rio Puerco unit, which is secon 6 62 ,00 of construction of Rio Grande Floodway project, cost a$2,u Federal (1964). Estimated Federal cost of Espanola Vtotal is $1,030,000, and non-Federal cost is $130,000, for Acts Of $1,160,000. Project was authorized by Flood Control'g.s June 30, 1948, and May 17, 1950 (II. Doc. 243, 81st Con0 sess., contains latest published maps). local In Local cooperation. In addition to usual requirements, ~ tility terests are responsible for all highway, bridge, and pub iroject relocations or replacements required in constructionl o tal c 0ost Fully complied with for completed units of floodway. Todr terl for all requirements for completed Albuquerque unit undero t o of project authorization were $75,000. There were 10to0lo Federal costs in connection with construction of COctive for floodway. " Puerco unit of•l PY c est s L, Espanola Valley unit was ina'ces several years; however in December 1963, local inte d di.d affirmed need for flood protection for city of Espanola, ovide5 cated in writing that they were willing and able tO oatio necessary rights-of-way for levees and make utility re fied to required in construction of project. Project was reclasSin 0O active category, and funds were appropriated for initi tarto preconstruction planning in fiscal year 1966. Since sYa oi planning in November 1965, there have been continued de e t part of local interests in cooperation with Corps in develOPiog of project. The city failed to provide executed documents ed to that all owners of land involved in project have consen a further development, so that necessary surveys and maPPilig general design studies can be completed as scheduled. P0ad1, ' ' work, other than preparation of hydrology design memora has been suspended.tio Operations and results during fiscal year. PreconstrtCas planning was initiated. The hydrology design memorandl d completed and general design studies initiated; however, Plf FLOOD CONTROL---ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 757 Was suspended when local interests failed to provide right of for accomplishment of necessary surveys. During fiscal d Inpleted portions of floodway prevented estimated $40,000 d bmages. Estimated total accumulated flood damages pre- 44 .iloodway project through fiscal year 1965 were $290,000. ochit n at end of fiscal year. Construction of Albuquerque le'ti to Rio Puerco units of Rio Grande Floodways project 1 lete. San Acacia to Bosque del Apache and Truth or Con- ces (Hot Springs) units of floodway are deferred for re- letYdrology design memorandum for Espanola Valley unit ldedte. Work on general design memorandum studies was Cost and financial statement 10..0 13 9 195 106 Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 'opriated .$813,000 -$35,000 . ............$60,000 1$4,852,009 758,488 63,291 $2,036 $1,359 24,9790 24,812,052 de fullnd.. .. ~~~s ap propriated for completed Albuquerque and Cochiti to Rio Puerco units. atagr0 udeac transfered to Bureau of Reclamation under memorandum agreement be- .... cy and the Corps. S-Satonsa Incurred for completed Albuquerque unit. Excludes costs incurred by Bureau Sconstrufrom funds transferred to that agency under the memorandum agreement ction of Cochiti to Rio Puerco unit. 11. TRINIDAD RESERVOIR, PURGATOIRE RIVER, COLO. WIn. On Purgatoire River about 161 miles above its junc- i.t Arkansas River. Project is about 4 miles upstream City of Trinidad, Colo. (See Geological Survey Map, Trin- i10, quadrangle, scale 1:24,000.) i project. Consists of an earthfill structure 6,610 feet With a maximum height of 200 feet above streambed, an ot led spillway 1,000 feet wide in left abutment, and a ' iameter gate-controlled conduit in right abutment with at O capacity of 4,850 cubic feet per second with water sur- ,000op of flood control pool. Reservoir provides for storage 0 acre-feet for flood control, 39,000 acre-feet for sediment, acre-feet irrigation, and 4,500 acre-feet for recreation, a of 114,500 acre-feet. Reservoir controls a drainage area of ouare miles and will be operated for flood and sediment Sirrigation, and recreation purposes. Estimated Federal $21,600,000. Estimated average annual maintenance and 11ocost, including major replacements and estimated cost to ~trests, is $101,500. Existing project was authorized by aontrol Act of 1958 (H. Doc. 325, 84th Cong., 2d sess., con- latest published maps). An earlier authorization in Flood O Act of 1944 (I. Doc. 387, 78th Cong., 2d sess.) provided r1otection for city of Trinidad by means of channel improve- Authorization for Trinidad Reservoir project provides for fitionf of channel project at time of initiation of construction dlidad Dam. Flood Control Act of 1965 relieved city of dad of responsibility for cash contribution toward cost of ting project. C1Cooperation. Requirements based on approved general 758 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 design memorandum studies: Repayment by Purgatoire Water Conservancy District of first cost allocated to i tlsti established as 29.28 percent of total project cost prese ltma* mated at $6,435,000 generally in accordance with F ederal tcost tion law procedures, except that repayment of irrigatiol iyer may extend over a period not to exceed 75 years includingo period development period which results in an actual amortizatoColorado of 70 years; contribution of $21,400 annually by State 0 rmanent for replacement of exaporation and seepage losses from p'pre - fishery pool; Purgatoire River Water Conservancy Dist i fnual senting the irrigators) is required to bear 19.82 percen oent of joint-use operation and maintenance costs and 2.52 pe rially; major replacement costs presently estimated at $13,600oanrinD in addition, estimated annual cost to city of Trinidad 1Io,100. tenance of channel of Purgatoire River through city is n for In addition conservancy district must make arrangei from transfer of Model Land and Irrigation Co.'s storage rl~gt efor existing Model Reservoir to Trinidad Reservoir. Stora ho* recreation purposes not included in authorized project pl" ld be ever, project document noted that substantial benefits 0 rt for local su P derived from such use and that there was strongZ_3lor re 49500 acef such storage. Provision was made in project plan for c, ws of feet of permanent storage for recreation; however, sinc. l Ve to Purgatoire River are fully appropriated, water rights Wi iNitial be acquired by non-Federal interests. Estimated cost o sses filling of pool is $250,000 and replacement of evaporatiO ifor will cost an estimated $21,400 per year. Lands but and facliof waterce cost recreation will be provided at Federal expense, rights will be borne by the State of Colorado. Formal as~a iver were received from both city of Trinidad and PurgatOl r not Water Conservancy District. Resolutions were revieec ntract formally accepted for reason that irrigation repayment C of has not been executed. Stipulated decree changing Pr0 to storage of water rights decreed to existing Model Rec o proposed Trinidad Reservoir was approved by Las Aninlm aio l d District Court April 15, 1965, subject to ultimate exect i er approval of irrigation repayment contract. Purgatoir paies Water Conservancy District is negotiating with 11 ditch C clto on basis of approved cost allocations preparatory to final e os of repayment contract. Bureau of Reclamation indicae ad eX pects for successful completion of negotiations are good bel6 pects to have principal repayment contract signed by Sep 0 966. 1966. Court confirmation would be expected by October ection Attorneys for Conservancy District are confident that an eC after execution of contract will not be required. work Operations and results during fiscal year. AdministrativeS in and coordination with local, State, and other Federal ageec.ip0les connection with securing approval of project operating pri and irrigation repayment contract were continued.. i$ Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction plantract complete. Plans and specifications for first construction co are complete. PLOOD CONTROL-ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 759 Cost and financial statement Nealyear Total to 6 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 .. tor. $180,000 $242,170 $52,858 1$50,000 2$15,000 $849,458 . 180,013 248,428 47,933 45,482 22,104 845,878 S 000 retained in budgetary reserve pending consummation of irrigation repay- 70,trae tetu0i 000irevoked after it was determined irrigation repayment contract would not be . .toutilize funds in fiscal year 1966. Lo 12. TWO RIVERS RESERVOIR, N. MEX. l10 10aion. About 14 miles southwest of Roswell, N. Mex., on and do- Rio Hondo is formed at confluence of Rio Ruidoso .eiio Bonito, near village of Iondo, N. Mex., in foothills x.fSierra ]3Blanca in southeastern part of Lincoln County, Iver ,,and flows generally easterly to its confluence with Pecos oMo ar Roswell, N. Mex. (See Geological Survey Map, 1 s eservoir quadrangle, scale 1: 24,000.) l0 ng project. Two earthfill dams, Diamond "A" Dam on Arroy odo at about river mile 36 and Rocky Dam on Rocky Yoi0 t about river mile 14, which will form Two Rivers Reser- loeky iamond "A" Dam is 98 feet high and 4,918 feet long and site PDrais 118 feet high and 2,920 feet long. Topography of reserVoMits use of two natural saddles in limestone on rim of 0e oir for spillways which have a total length of 1,130 feet. of P ythe sillway saddles is between the dams and one is south 4 Damrn. There is a gated outlet works structure in Dia- "o rrovii - Dam and an uncontrolled outlet in Rocky Dam. No el easesI is made for storage except for flood control. Flood trog Will be controlled insofar as possible, so that flows Which isOswell will not exceed channel capacity of Rio HIondo, S 1,000 cubic feet per second. Capacity of Two Rivers acrefee aat spillway crest is 168,000 acre-feet, of which 18,000 b i t are provided for sedimentation reserve, but which will toUtized for flood control until filled with sediment. Dam con- q sCquare miles of drainage area on Rio Hondo and 64 ederaliles on Rocky Arroyo, a total of 1,027 square miles. .iel cost is $4,790,838. Project is based on interim report of 1er tlder te forRio authority on th Engineers Roswell, N. Mex., prepared Hondoonat Pecos a report River and tributaries, ~hoe43d New Mexico, granted by Flood Control Act of 1938 (H. isti6, 83d Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published maps). Local Project was authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act. otalocooperation. Complied with except for maintenace. atce Os to local interests, not including cost of annual mainte- acceas $144,000, of which $60,000 was for construction of e oad and $84,000 for lands and rights-of-way. )atee (tions and results during fiscal year. Ordinary mainte- 1965. and operation continued. Reservoir was empty July 1, te rlood control regulation was made July 28 to August 9 and 1 2el er 7 to 15. The pool at Diamond "A" Dam had a maxi- elevation of 3,985.7 feet, with corresponding storage of cre-feet. Rocky Dam had a maximum pool elevation of 760 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, Ui. S. ARMY, 1966 IVax"* 3,961.3 feet, with corresponding storage of 1,972 acre-feeta eMP mum pool elevations occurred July 30, 1965. Reservoir dama June 30, 1966. During 1965 an estimated $635,000 flood were prevented by project (first damages prevented). and v as Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete placed in operation July 1963. Cost and financial statement -- Fiscal year................ 1962 1063 1964 1965 19( June 30, 66alg New work: Appropriated.......... $2,200,000 $1,861,000.$ 4,162 47,7 Cost ............... 2,298,157 1,851,162 $100,503 $5,463... Maintenance: 10, Appropriated............................... 31,400 35,500 422,300 Cost.................................... 30,791 35:644 3 4,71 13. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PIR Included under this heading is inspection of conple control projects transferred to local interests for opero maintenance. Projects in Colorado and New Mexico spected. Fiscal year cost was $3,575, and total cost to 1966, was $23,769. 14. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPEI Pursuant to section 7, Flood Control Act of 1944, exP were made for scheduling flood control reservoir operal preparation of reservoir regulation manual for Plat( on Conejos River near town of Platoro, Conejos Colo. Platoro Dam was authorized by Interior APPr Act of 1941 (see H. Doc. 693, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). Con of project was completed by Bureau of Reclamationl year 1952. Reservoir elevation at start of fiscal year wt feet with corresponding storage of 39,300 acre-feet.I was held static, and inflow was passed until November Stored water was released from November 6 through 26 which time the reservoir elevation was 9,977.6 with corre storage of 17,300 acre-feet. Storage of about 17,300 acre maintained during the winter. In April spring rune reservoir elevation to 9,983.5 feet (storage 20,500 a Reservoir remained at this elevation until end of fiscal yet mated total accumulated flood damages prevented b through fiscal year 1965 were $620,000. Fiscal year c( $2,157. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX., DISTRICT 761 5 OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report see Annual -- Name of project Report Construction Operation and el .e ... _for- maintenance R1, ng •lueWater Creek, N. Mex.1.................... 1951 c^reedsay)2 ,ountaine que Bouille River, Colo. (Templeton Gap 1959 $881,262 (3) olo. e I t r C ,sC (floodway)2 ........................... 1952 219,789 (3) r 0e- ex.4 oi and modification of Alamogordo Dam, Pecos 1961 314862 ........... ntrol projects................. cood ............. 1960 93,370 TrFodive as River, Colo. (floodway levee extension)2.... 2 . ....... .. ... . . 19654 201,958 (3) y1 plOdWaael, tributaries of Rio .Grande, . . . . . .N. . . Mex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1965 2,259,328 (3) 'urgatoire River, Colo. 1951 53,028........... Crrlrzed* Authorization expired April 14, 1966. 16. LOO) CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Uasency floodcontrol activities-repair,flood fghting, and rescue work. e ublic Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) costs for fiscal year were $11,941 for advance prepara- o$l 2radl Qtdes 556 for flood emergency operations, and $203,538 (ex- etr.cti,000 contributed funds required in connection with con- ""-at Wilroads Gardens, Kans.) for repair and restoration. Energency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Pederal,4 Public Law 526, 79th Cong.) otecti tion costs at f for lTrinidad, fiscal year(Linden Colo. were $27,607 for emergency bank Ave. Bridge). merlenc ban proecio (sc 196Fod coodact o F1trol to 17. SURVEYS iSal Year costs were $274,131, of which $262,770 was for flood tdi es tUdies and $11,361 for special studies (coordination thnother agencies). ly d ro 18. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT asch'ogic studies involving collection and study of basic data, , retreamflow l data, collection of suspended sediment sam- 1eOdiretding rain gage data, hydrometeorological studies, and or hydeltion studies continued. Fiscal year costs were $6,530 "ogic studies. LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT * district comprises northern and western portions of Is, a portion of southern Missouri, and a small portion of Oklahoma embraced in drainage basins of Arkansas nd tributaries above and exclusive of Pine Bluff, Ark., QW mouth of Poteau River, near Fort Smith, Ark., and e River and tributaries above Peach Orchard Bluff, Ark. Lon, Little Rock District has responsibility for planning, Construction, and maintenance of navigation project on is River below Pine Bluff. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. Arkan Navigation Flood Control-Continued 2, Ar as River Basin, 16. Clearwater Reservoir, Mo. 778 ayOkla., -a and Kans. . 763 17. Little Rock levee, Arkansas 1 (East End-Fourche Ba- el Stabilization & chan- 779 kansarectification, Ar- you) .................. N, aid as0.'cirr" 770 18. Nimrod Reservoir, Ark.. 780 4 errylock o & dam 19. Petit Jean River, Ark ... 781 'Lo(k , 6 ), Arkansas ... . 774 20. Pine Mountain Reservoir, entrand dam No. 1 and Ark. ................. 782 kaance channel, Ar- 21. Village Creek, White River, 774 and Mayberry Levee Dis- 6 kanas dam No. 2, Ar- tricts, Arkansas ...... 782 6Lockas 774 22. White River Basin (Little Rock Dist.) .......... 783 S kaad dam No. 3, Ar- L.ock s .. . ......... 774 23. Inspection of completed g knan dam No. 4, Ar- flood control projects .. 787 Lock a ........... 775 24. Other authorized flood con- trol projects .......... 788 Lock as dam No. 5, Ar- 1' ~kaand 775 25. Flood control work under special authorization ... 788 e1 kansd dam No. "'dam.. .No. , Ar- 775 Multiple-Purpose Projects Including 11 kansa Lock 8, Ar- Power Lock d " . 775 26. Beaver Reservoir, Ark... 788 12 0tio. kansasd am No. 9, Ar- Prjs....... 27. Bull Shoals Reservoir, Ark. 789 Lock and ".............. 775 28. Dardanelle lock and dam 18. tasdam No. 13, Ar- (No. 10) Arkansas .. 790 kalt ean* . . . . . . 776 29. Greers Ferry Reservoir, fetande and repair 14, n 1,fleetpe marine termi- palst 0her au t**............ Ark...................791 30. Norfork Reservoir, Ark... 776 31. Ozark lock and dam (No. tio authorized naviga- 12), Arkansas ........ 792 ojects . . . . . . . . . . 776 32. Table Rock Reservoir, Mo. 793 1,. 1luFlood Control General Investigations ArklMountain Reservoir, 33. Surveys ................. 793 ................. 777 34. Research and development 793 1. ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, ARK., OKLA., AND KANS. at'on. Arkansas River rises in Rocky Mountains near r rad ' Colo., and flows southeastward 1,459 miles through 57 Kansas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas to join Mississippi 75 miles above Head of Passes, La. (See Geological Survey ei as, scale 1:500,000.) g us Projects. For details see page 1066, Annual Report t and pages 744 864, and 881, Annual Report for 1943. as roject. Provides for improvement of Arkansas Riv- Sby construction of coordinated developments for navi- hydroelectric power, flood control, water supply, sediment 764 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 control, recreation, and fish and wildlife propagation. N tion features provide for a channel 9 feet deep and 446 mil beginning at mouth of White River, which enters Miss River 590.5 miles above Head of Passes, La., thence 10 miy stream to mouth of Wild Goose Bayou; thence 9 mInles by cut, designated as Arkansas Post route to mile 42 (1943 S on Arkansas River; thence 374 miles along channel of latter to mouth of Verdigris River at mile 460.2; thence 53 m Verdigris River to head of navigation at Catoosa, Oklai way will be canalized throughout its length by constructio locks and dams. Dardanelle, Ozark, Robert S. Kerr alLo Falls are multiple-purpose projects including powVer. fLOC bers are 1.10 by 600 feet. A minimum channel width of1 s is proposed for Verdigris River and 250 feet for Arkan' White Rivers. Other coordinated developments consist of ervoirs, of which 13 are in Tulsa District, Kansas and Otel and 2 in Little Rock District. Pertinent data and estimate eral cost are summarized in following table: Navigation SMiles up- Eleva- tion Depth on miter/ sill Per- Total Feature stream Miles to nearest town Lock dimen- Lift (feet) upper Character of Kind of dam Type of construe- cent estimated from sions (feet) pool foundation tion com- cost ' mouthl (feet, Upper Lower plete I I I m.S. - './I 1.) (feet) L -W/ I (feet) %- , "f II vs I - - 1 1 1 - 1 - 1 *I ! I LITTLE ROCK z DISTRICT Lock and dam 1.......... 10.4 8 east of Arkansas Post, 110 by 800.... 30 max..... Ark. 142 16 15 Piles in sand. Fixed over- flow. Concrete......... 70 2 $32,000,000 , Lock 2................ 13.4 do..... 20 nom., 6 east of Arkansas Post, ..... 162 18 14 ..... do.... .. . . . . .............. .. Ark. 28 max. 36,200,000 Dam2................. 40.5 3 southeast Arkansas Post, .... . .. . ... do.... Movable.... Gated concrete 86 0 Ark. spillway with embankment ends. Lock and dam 3......... 72.3 5 north of Grady, Ark...... 110 by 600.... 20.... 182 18 14 ..... do.... .....do...... .. .do.......... 67 29,400,000 Lock and dam 4.... 87.7 7 east of Pine Bluff, Ark.... .... do....... 14.... 196 18 14 .do.... .... do...........do.......... 36 34,500,000 -+ Lock and dam 5..... 128.0 4 southeast of Redfield, Ark. .....do...... 17.... 213 18 14 Clay..... ..... do..... .....do... .... 44 27,400,000 - David D. Terry lock and 154.4 12 southeast of Little Rock, .....do....... 18........ 231 18 14 Piles in ..... do..... .... do... .... 34 49,600,000 dam (6). Ark. sand. Lock and dam 7........ 172.0 6 northwest of Little Rock, ..... do....... 18......... 249 18 14 Shale.... ..... do...... ...... do.......... 31 26,400,000 Ark. Lock and dam 8......... 201.2 6 west of Conway, Ark..... .....do...... 16......... 265 18 14 ..... do.... do....... ...do........... ..... 18 31,400,000 Lock and dam 9......... 224.9 3 southwest of Morrilton, ..... do...... 19......... 284 18 14 ..... do.... do...........do.......... ..... 12 31,100,000 O Ark. Dardanelle lock and dam 257.8 2 west of Dardanelle, Ark.. ....do.......54........ 338 17 14 Sandstone.. ..... do....... Gated concrete 83 79,000,000 (10). spillway with embankment end. Lock and dam 11......... Deleted................. ....... ... 72. .. .. ... s ... Ozark lock and dam (12)..I 308.9 ofOzark, Ark.......110 by 600.... 1 east 34........ Sandstone Movable Gated concrete 64,100,000 . and spillway with shale. embankment end. Lock and dam 13........ 346.5 7 east of Fort Smith, Ark.......do....... 20......... 392 18 .... do.... .... do...... .. .do.......... 36,700,000 TULSA DISTRICTS Lock and dam 13 (part).. Lock and dam 14......... 375.1 4eastofRedland,Okla.. 110 lby 600. . ........ ii Rock..... 8 ..... ............. .............. Movable..... Gated concrete spillway with 3 000,000 2,500,000 '-3 (' embankment ends. See footnotes at end of table. Navigation-Continued Miles Eleva- Depth on miter up- tion sill Per- Total Feature stream Miles to nearest town Lock dimen- Lift (feet) upper Character of Kind of dam Type of construe- cent estimated from sions (feet) pool foundation tion com- cost mouth' (feet, Upper Lower plete O m. s. 1.) (feet) (feet) ti Robert S. Kerr (lock and 395.4 1 north of Cowlington .....do....... 48......... 460 18 14 ..... do.......... do............do........... 30 $92,500,000 Mr. dam 15). Okla. Webbers Falls (lock and 432.3 30......... 490 1 northwest of Gore, Okla.. .....do....... 18 14 ..... do..... ..... do............do............ 11 477,200,000 dam 16). Lock and dam 17.........9.6 4 northwest of Okay, Okla.......do....... 21......... 511 18 14 ..... 2 36,400,000 doo..............do............do........... Lock and dam 18......... 35.5 8southwest of Inola, Okla.......do....... 21......... 532 18 do.......... do.............do........... 14 ..... 1 41,100,000 C) Additional features entering into cost of project Little Rock District: Upstream reservoirs: 0 Bank stabilization and channel rectification, mile 33.7 to 362 Oologah 90.2 miles upstream from mouth, Verdigis and Arkansas-White Cutoff, 82 percent complete ...... $120,300,000 River, 83 percent complete ............................ 4$44,050,000 Maintenance and repair fleet and marine terminals, 2 percent Keystone, 538.8 miles upstream from mouth, Arkansas complete .............................................. 9,700,000 River, 92 percent complete ............................ 123,000,000 z Total, Little Rock District ............................. 607,800,000 Eufaula, 27 miles upstream from mouth, Canadian River, complete .............................................. 121,000,000 Navigation aids (U.S. Coast Guard) ......................... 2,450,000 Subtotal ............................................... 288.050,000 zi Tulsa District: Bank stabilization and channel rectification, Short Mountain Total Tulsa District .................................... 578,050,000 Tulsa Districties.. GenToteal 578,050,000 r) 5................................ to Fort Smith, 98 percent complete ...................... $12,700,000 enera contingencies.................................. 13,50,000 Maintenance and repair fleet and marine terminals, 2 percent Total project cost, 53 percent complete .................. 1,201,850,000 x) complete .............................................. 1,600,000 Subtotal ............................................... 290,000,000 1M41ileage from 1940 survey for Tulsa and Little Rock Districts above Pine aDetail report of individual features in Tulsa District Report. Bluff and 1943 survey below Pine Bluff. 4 Includes $7,400,000 for additional water supply facilities. Estimated cost of Includes cost of entrance channel. ultimate development including power-$48,250,000. 17eserzo~rs Miles Drainage Height Reservoir Power Year or Total Reservoir and State River above Nearest town area of dam Type capacity development percent estimated mouth (sq. miles) (feet) (acre-feet) (kilowatts) complete cost Blue Mountain, Ark........... Petit Jean........ 74.4 Paris,Ark............... 488 115 Earthfill...................... 258,000 ............. 1947 $4,971,000 Canton, Okla.... . ........ INorth Canadian... 394 Canton, Okla.......... 12,483 73 Earthfill...................... 386,000 .............. 1948 10,838,855 Elk City, Kans. (Table Mound). Elk...............9 Independence, Kans... 634 107 Earthfill...................... 291,000 ........... . 91 18,932,000 Eufaula, Okla.1 2........... Canadian.........27 Eufaula, Okla......... 47,522 114 Earthfill..................... 3,848,000 90,000 1985 121,000,000 Fall River, Kans.............. Fall.............54 Fall River, Kans...... 585 94 Earthfill.................... 263,000 ............ 1949 10,494,413 Fort Gibson, Okla.1............ Grand (Neosho).. 8 Fort Gibson, Okla.... 12,492 110 Concrete gravity.............1,284,400 45,000 1953 42,535,000 Keystone, Okla. 2 3.......... Arkansas......... 539 Sand Springs, Okla.... 74,506 121 Earthfill......................1,879,000 70,000 92 123,000,000 Markham Ferry,5 Okla.1 .. . 4. . . . .. . . . . Grand (Neosho).. 47 Pryor, Okla........... 11,533 90 Earthfill...................... 444,500 100,000 1964 6,908,756 Neodesha, Kans ... Verdigris......... 223 Neodesha, Kans....... 1,152 74 EarthfiUl...................... 90,000 ............ 0 18,100,000 Nimrod, Ark.................. 2. . . . . . . . . . . . Fourche La Fave.. 62.6 Danville, Ark......... 680 97 Concrete gravity..............336,000 ............ 1942 3,937,000 Gologah, Okla. Verdigris......... 90 2 Claremore, Okla. ..... 4,339 129 Earthfill..................... 1,021,000 ........... .. 83 44,050,000 Pensacola, Okla.1 6 ... Grand (Neosho).. 77 Disney, Okla......... 10,298 147 Concrete arch................. 2,197,000............ 1941 2,090,000 Tenkiller Ferry, Okla.1......... Illinois...........13 Gore, Okla........... 1,610 197 Earthfill..................... 1,230,000 34,000 1953 23,581,000 Toronto, Kans................ Verdigris......... 271.5 Toronto, Kans........ 730 90 Earthfill...................... 195,300 ............ .. 1960 13,896,000 . Poteau........... Wister Okla.................. 61 Wister, Okla.......... 993 99 430,000 ............ Earthfill...................... 1949 10,501,226 Subtotal, exclusive of .................... ..................... ......... ......................................... .......... 166,785,250 Eufaula, Keystone and Oologah, 87 percent complete. Total, Arkansas River............................... ............................................................ 1,368,635,250 Basin, 57 percent com- plete. 1 Project includes facilities for production of hydroelectric power. (Lake Hudson). Estimate shown is for Federal participation. 2 Cost included in navigation project. 5 Inactive. Estimate is based on 1954 price levels. 3 Added as substitution for Mannford and by deletion of Taft and Blackburn 6 Constructed by State of Oklahoma under the name Grand River Dam Reservoirs. (Lake O' the Cherokees). Estimate shown is for Federal participation. SConstructed by State of Oklahoma under the name of Robert S. Kerr Dam Hq 0-= H 0O 0 00 CDOo 0a 0w- 0 C) C) 0 O " o Za Olt 00 C 0000 t+,PC 000 0 e 0 - N It z MM2 t12 %" o0 w GipiC d Cat 0 0 0 _o $_ o _Op O O O O O O O O R~IVER~S AND TARnw R rmrrTT T AP T TTT 7F9O eistinj t nimprovements, other than Federally owned. For reser- requirements for each individual reservoir. faCilitiesnal facilities. Port authorities were organized to develop l ins Oklahoma for Tulsa and Rogers Counties, Muskogee, Zed . Wrstream from Muskogee. Port authorities were organ- 08el lAilansa s to develop facilities for Van Buren, Dardanelle, Jeters ille, Little Rock, North Little Rock, and Pine Bluff and a elaSt' ounty. Tulsa-Rogers County Port Authority adopted oalee Plan for development of port facilities. A bond issue to rt lal C acquisit io n was approved in August 1965. Muskogee aeit of ussion contracted with an engineering firm for develop- aay master plan. Oklahoma Port and Development Author- tu Stt e authority, contracted with an engineering firm for Lttle oour port sites in Oklahoma, downstream from Muskogee. of ort 'k Port Authority adopted a master plan for development 4et Wad harbor facilities and a bond issue to finance its develop- forrt as approved in May 1964. Planning and land acquisition ?C are underway. Pine Bluff-Jefferson County Port Author- rei't leted an engineering study, drew up plans for develop- res f o Prt and harbor facilities, and took an option on 370 to development ,fae of industrial area and port. A bond issue ~r d e land acquisition and construction of the port was ap- ith iecermber 14, 1965. Development of asasn icoinnecti on with an industrial area port facilities at Fort has been initiated by OperCt Southern Railroad Co. ioerpl ts and results during fiscal year. Blue Mountain, P Sverat Dardanelle lock and dam, Canton, Eufaula, Fall e,] Rirt Gibson, Keystone (except powerplant), Markham evvIt ernod, Oologah, Pensacola, Tenkiller Ferry, Toronto, and oye re iln operation. Construction continued on Elk City and >ert l eservoirs; on David D. Terry, Dardanelle, Ozark, a4I4( Ierr, and Webbers Falls locks and dams; on locks and tios. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 9; and on bank stabilization. Con- etailof locks and dams Nos. 8, 13, 14, 17, and 18 was initiated. a s of navigation facilities and reservoirs in Oklahoma aeil ~t as, see report of Tulsa District. Details of navigation Co' aitnd reservoirs in Arkansas are shown on following pages. av aton at end of fiscal year. Status of individual items, %Istin~ Project, dams, and basin plan is shown in tables under 770 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement .. -~r'" REGULAR FUNDS to6 Total Fiscal year.............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 19 New work: 2079 785'74 Appropriated........ Dams............ $87,132,245$90,025,148 $86,727,543 $106,719,884 $125,2: 1,848,245 5,307,048 7,612,697 9,566,684 1,8 429908 1579,08 22,2245 639,479, 7?6,56,31 Navigation........ 85,284,000 84,718,100 79,114,846 97,153,200 123,3' 88,194 145'425,96 Cost.............. 88,007,564 92,753,501 85,033,952 101,092,524 125,2 Dams............ 1,723,309 5,457,559 7,346,902 9,155,417 2,285,302 311349 02,892 6 Navigation........ 86,284,255 87,295,942 77,687,050 91,937,107 123,0 27, 429255 Maintenance: Appropriated........ 2,424,566 2,470,709 2,630,734 3,562,185 4,8, 51,100 19,081 ams...... ..... 1,406,966 1,533,809 1,529,200 1,684,931 2,0 42,700 .'935 Navigation.... ,017,600 936,900 1,101,534 1,877,254 2,8 08,400 39,62 27,307'p78 17,699 Cost..............2,415,028 2,498,368 2,365,626 3,657,486 4,5 Dams...........1,370,300 1,526,345 1,571,957 1,691,604 1,783,243 59,019 9,90 291 106 Navigation. 1,044,728 972,023 793,669 1,965,882 2,7 Rehabilitation: 291,106 Tot 91t106 Appropriated........ 286,122 -2,516 ....... ................... Cost-Dams........ 118,869 166,671 "... _ __ _ _CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Tolt 66 Fiscal year................1962 1963 1964 1965 196 6 New work:21'0go Contributed... . 3191,492 586,005 2279 Cost.......... $62,574 $6,477 $7,681 3,600 9,179 19 2'76 Special funds......... 5,298,2381,774,5293,107,8031,507,812 93,587 19 3 ,36 Cost.................. 5,027,636 2,749,070 6,552,339 2,089,0415 391,677 23 Other contributions........... ........................ 531,336 ......... Cost.......... ................................... 8,987 19,736 2. BANK STABILIZATION & CHANNEL RECTIFICATION ARKANSAS eCtii Location. Several bank stabilization and channel rectIfic ed projects are laid' out in various reaches extending r 2 ile point to fixed point on Arkansas River from 33.7 to 3t 5-ile above mouth and across the Arkansas-White Cutoff, a 4- god natural channel joining Arkansas and White Rivers about 8 12 miles above their respective mouths. tificatiol Existing project. Bank stabilization and channel rec is a part of navigation plan on Arkansas River. Reach and location of each bank stabilizationand channel rectificat reseb LctoOf Reach Loto Fort Smith to Mill Creek Mountain................................................... Miles 362o Miles 327to2 * Mill Creek Mountain to Morrisons Bluff............................................... Dardanelle Rock to Morrilton Bridge........................ Miles 221to192. Nls25 Morrilton Bridge to Fourche La Fave................................................. Miles 192t Fourche La Fave to Little Rock.................................................. Miles 165.to Little Rock to Jefferson County Free Bridge.........................................Mies .7 Jefferson County Free Bridge to Rob Roy Bridge .ie.................................8es .Soto4,1 Rob Roy Bridge to Arkansas Post................................................... Miles 42t . Arkansas Post to mile 33.7......................................................... Miles 5 to Arkansas-W hite Cutoff..............................................................Miles 1 River mileage from 1943 survey. SArkansas-White Cutoff mileage from 1949 survey. Estimated cost is $120,300,000. For authorization see page Local cooperation. See requirements for entire project. RIVERS AND HARBORS-LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 771 fations and results during fiscal year. Inspection was ~~. existing works, and surveys made of damaged por- Pai 1neerng and design studies continued for new work irs to damaged works. Operations by reaches are sum- a1table below. alt on at end of fiscal year. Emergency bank stabilization towas rectification work on Arkansas River in Little Rock ti ~begun in March 1950 and completed in August 1961. fg bank stabilization and channel rectification work pro- or existing project was begun in February 1961. Com- Wock S82 percent of that proposed for existing project in i, strict Condition of each reach is summarized in Information by reaches on more important operations during fiscal year New work (contract) Maintenance repairs (contract) Reach (river miles) Completed Initiated or con. Completed Initiated or con. L-i . _____________ . . . -. . ____ ... _ Pilot channel Removal Cost _ - - _ . . .... 0 excavation of dikes of Revetments Dikes) Revetments Dikes (cubic yards) (in ft.) work Revetments Dikes Revetments Dikes (lin. ft.) (lin. ft. (ln. ft.) (ln. ft.) (lin. ft.) (Un. ft.) (ln. ft.) (in. ft.) 362to 327............................ 23,292 18,223 800 1145 completed ............ $1,280,802 178 ................................... 950,000 327to285............................ 7,720 1,220.. .... 130,292........................ ...................... 257 to221........................... 13,040 1,290 11,318 2,636 underway . ...........967,524................................ 1,130,000 C1 221 to 192........................ 27,306 5,700 .. 530 500,073 6,265 10,843............ 3,788 192to165.5......................... 6,882 9,118 5,591 4,178 .. ::... .. . ... .. 670,362............ ............ 4,755 4,422 165.5to 115.6 ....................... .. . ... . ................. 1,950 5,328 18,345 ............693,265 9,511................ 12,765 7,617 4,855 8,451 101.7 to891. 9,265 4,912...... ............ ........ ....... 156,867............ 11556.... . . ., 89 to 421......................... 11,863 17,636 5,128 4,090 completed . ..... ..... 2,077,112......................... 69 . 1,000 4,592,617 42to33.71.. ........................................ 4,297 1,488 underway ............1,074,896... ...................... ........... 884,000 completed 5,289,000 z 5to02..................................................................................................................... ............ Lands and damages ............................................................................. 131,764 ............ x River mileage from 1943 survey. H1 'Arkansas-White Cutoff mileage from 1949 survey-contract work was completed for capping out Arkansas-White River Cutoff closure structure in fiscal year 1965. Information by reaches on condition at end of fiscal year Completed work Work underway Maintenance repairs underway Reach (river miles) Date begun Percent Pilot channel Pilot channel Pilot channel complete excavation Dikes Revetments excavation Dikes Revetments exceavation Dikes Revements (eu. yds.) (lin. ft.) (ln. ft.) (cU. yds.) (lin.ft.) (lin. ft.) (cu. yds.) (ln.ft.) (Sn. ft.) 362 to 327................ 4,013,769 87,489 149,648 .............. . .1,145 800 ........ ................................ Jan. 1954... 79 327to285................ .. 799,065 53,760 97,485 ........................... ..................................................... Sep.1954... 79 257 to 221................ 916,448 88,219 147,577 1,130,000 2,636 1,290 .......................................... May 1950.. 87 221 to 192............... 2,087,889 74,131 106,910 ..... ................................................. 3,788 ............... Mar. 1950.. 74 192to 165.5.............. .............. 71,583 98,6311 .............. I 4178 5,591 ............... . 4,422 4,755 Mar.1960.. 76 to 115.6............. 117,006 222,166 ............... 9,511 18,345 .............. .8,451 4,855 June 1950... 80 165.5 1 ............... .. 9,860,931 101.7to0 15,021,984 225,463 367,647 884,000 5,578 9,425 .............. .1,000 69 1950 86 1 River mileage from 1943 survey. Includes Arkansas-White River closure structure. U) H Cl 774 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement J. Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $15,159,000 000 $8,000, $12,271,000 $14,280,000 $19,057,000 $ 8, 799184 Cost................. .15,972,784 19,576,012 13,993,4095 11,534,537 8,698,807 98 420,102 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 626,100 571,000 555,734 593,500 643,500 4,561 666 Cost..................657,901 642,422 241,429 681,093 713,863 , 3. DAVID D. TERRY LOCK & DAM (NO. 6), ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation, and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish ments with regular funds: Land acquisition $9,145; construction of relocations $6,092; boundary line surveys $1,509; dam $4,491, 451; and lock $6,535,313. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in January 1965 and is 34 percent complete. 4. LOCK AND DAM NO. 1 AND ENTRANCE CHANNEL, ARKANSAS ° Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperatiO and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish" ments with regular funds: Land acquisition $9,607; constructionl of dam $1,666; lock $3,836,817; fish and wildlife facilities $85,27S; channels and canals $1,158,192; and bank stabilization $571,406. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in May 1963 and is 70 percent complete. 5. LOCK AND DAM NO. 2, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperatiof and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- ments with regular funds: Land acquisition $664,827; construlc tion of relocations $325,886; dam $5,176,117; lock $5,894,302; flsh and wildlife facilities $28,300; roads $83,687; channels and canals $737,434; bank stabilization $107,905; and operating equipment $1,177. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in MaY 1963 and is 86 percent complete. 6. LOCK AND DAM NO. 3, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accorn" plishments with regular funds: Land acquisition $11,018; construction of dam $3,152,317; and lock $6,640,272. Major accomplishments with contributed funds. Start construction Of foundation for future bridge across dam, $5,176. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in IMaY 1964 and is 67 percent complete. RIVERS AND HARBORS-LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 775 7. LOCK AND DAM NO. 4, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation, and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- meats with regular funds. Land acquisition $163,474; construc- tion of relocations $50,200; dam $2,349,409; lock $4,477,901; per- manent buildings $3,616; and operating equipment $279. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in May 1964 and is 36 percent complete. 8. LOCK AND DAM NO. 5, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- ments with regular funds: Land acquisition $104,284; construc- ion of dam $3,270,870; lock $4,841,973; and roads $21,678. bCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Novem- er 1964 and is 44 percent complete. 9. LOCK AND DAM NO. 7, ARKANSAS SLocation, previous project, existing project, local cooperation and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- M'ents with regular funds: Land acquisition $26,434; relocations $9,069; boundary line survey $1,595; dam $2,169,082; lock $2,584,- 766; and roads $81,471. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Novem- er 1964 and is 31 percent complete. 10. LOCK AND DAM NO. 8, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation Qad terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- ments with regular funds: Land acquisition $70,517; construc- tiol of relocations $203,521; boundary line survey $877; dam $1,- 247,065; and lock $1,954,501. Major accomplishments with con- .ibuted funds and other contributions: Start construction of Highway bridge on dam $19,735. 1Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in July 65 and is 18 percent complete. 11. LOCK AND DAM NO. 9, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation, a4 terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- ments with regular funds: Land acquisition $105,235; construc- tiol of relocations $1,787; boundary line survey $617; dam $704,- 992; lock $2,552,434; and roads $44,550. Major accomplishments with contributed funds: Start construction of foundation for a future bridge across dam $2,188. 1 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in April 195 and is 12 percent complete. 776 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 12. LOCK AND DAM NO. 13, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation, and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish ments with regular funds: Land acquisition $96,651; boundary line survey $450; dam $50,862; lock $51,681; and roads $122,391. Major accomplishments with contributed funds: Start con- struction of foundation for future bridge on dam $1,814. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in October 1965 and is 6 percent complete. 13. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FLEET AND MARINE TERMINALS, ARKANSAS Location, previous project, existing project, local cooperation, and terminal facilities. See Improvement No. 1.. Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning and design continued at a cost of $73,242. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. Project is 2 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS isle Fiscalyear................1962 1963 .. 1964 1965 1966 Total to June 30, 1 9661 New work: Appropriated......... $1,199,500 $2,183,000 $9,380,000 $49,095,000 $71,300,000 $134,7871 71 Cost.................1,034,078 2,293,828 9,235,128 44,999,973 73,255,230 132,44 81415 x Includes $77,762 prior to 1952 and $1,552,416 for general studies. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Contributed....................... ........................ $191,492 $86,005 $27749 Cost.................. ............ ........................ 3,600 9,179 12,779 Other: 36 Contributed............................................... 531,336 .... 531 3622 Cost ............. ..... ............ ............ ............ 8,987 19,735 28722 14. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual d Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Black River, Ark. and Mo.1.................................... 1950 $80,000 $658222 Current River, Ark. and Mo.l..................................... 1964 217,000 132'178 Upper White River, Ark.3 4.................................... 1952 813,197 1,788' 374 White River, Ark. (above Peach Orchard Bluff)1 8...................1950 ...... 785,666 1Channel adequate for existing commerce. Completion not contemplated. 2 Includes $7,000 for previous project. 8 Federal operation and maintenance terminated June 30, 1952, due to lack of commerce. Facilities at locks and dams Nos. 1, 2, and 3 disposed of in accordance with authority in Public Law 996, 84th Congress. Completed. Responsibility for maintenance of project downstream from Newport, Ark., transferred to Memphis District in fiscal year 1962. FLOOD CONTROL--LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 777 15. BLUE MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR, ARK. Location. See table page 767. I.Existing project. Estimated cost is $4,971,000. For further Hlforrnation see pages 906 and 907 of 1962 Annual Report. For authorization see page 768. Local cooperation. Section 2, 1938 Flood Control Act applies. Operations ttenance and results during fiscal year. Operation and main- of project continued at a cost of $129,241. Additional recreational facilities were constructed at a cost of $16,404. Three notable rises occurred on Petit Jean River during fiscal year. looding was prevented on an average of about 7,685 acres of ~ Droved land for each flood. Results of flood regulation on the 1iVer stages at Danville are in following tabulation. Danville is 5.6 mIniles downstream from dam and just downstream from mouth of Dutch Creek, which is the principal tributary of Petit Jean River. Blue Mountain Reservoir Danville, Arkansasl Outflow coincident Estimated with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest Peak inflow downstream pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated Date of (cubic feet flow tion (feet storage crest without reduction Peak flow per second) (cubic above mean (acre-feet) stage Blue in stage feet per sea level) (feet) Mountain (feet) second) Dam (feet) 8e .22, 1965... 8,800 25 382.60 20,700 11.6 21.1 9.5 la61, 1966 15,200 15 391.13 49,320 18.2 24.2 6.0 Y 2,1966... 11,000 1,100 397.90 81,500 21.4 24.5 3.1 1ADDreclable overflow begins at 17 feet. Estimated monetary benefits for last fiscal year attributed to 1lue Mountain Reservoir for prevention of flood damages were $~40,000, at start ofa total of $4,574,000 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevation fiscal year was 376.11 feet above mean sea level, orresponding to 7,280 acre-feet of total storage. At end of scal year pool elevation was 385.05 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 27,850 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool evel during fiscal year was 397.90 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 81,500 acre-feet of total storage. Minimum ool level during fiscal year was 372.20 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 3,050 acre-feet of total storage. At request of Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, as an aid in the control of rough fish for improvement of game fishery, a drawdown of the conservation pool was started June 10 and completed November 5, 1965. The normal pool was lowered from elevation 384 to 372. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for additional recreation facilities. Construction of project be- gan in May 1940, and ready for beneficial use in March 1947. 778 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: ' 150 Appropriated.......... $20,000 $25,626 $25,666 $18,650 $15,000 $4,8 Cost.................. 19,987 25,619 17,957 24,700 16,405 4,894,875 Maintenance:36 Appropriated.......... 144,744 89,533 106,700 127,000 134,200 1,435,63 Cost................. 115,932 117,337 105,091 127,851 124,241 1,428,811 16. CLEARWATER RESERVOIR, MO. Location. See table page 784. Existing project. Estimated cost is $10,048,000. For further information see pages 897 and 898 of 1962 Annual Report. For authorization see page 785. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aP" plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main" tenance of project continued at cost of $127,210. Additional reC- reation facilities were constructed at cost of $9,179. Four notable rises occurred on Black River above Clearwater Reservoir. Flooding was prevented on about 20,160 acres of cultivated land. Results of regulation on river stages at Poplar Bluff, 46.4 miles downstream, are in following tabulation: Clearwater Reservoir Poplar Bluff, Mo.1 Outflow coincident Estimated with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest Peak inflow downstream pool eleva. sponding enced stage Estimated Date of (cubic feet flow tion (feet storage crest without reduction peak inflow per second) (cubic above mean (acre-feet) stage Clearwater in stage feet per sea level) (feet) Dam (feet) second) (feet) I 1.1 Sept.22,1965..... 16,400 600 510.6 59,200 10.6 17.7 Jan.2,1966....... 12,000 150 511.0 60,200 17.1 18.1 1.0 Feb. 10,1966...... 50,000 150 522.3 100,900 14.1 19.8 2.3 5.3 Apr. 23,1966...... 16,500 150 526.7 120,600 17.3 19.6 1Appreciable overflow begins at 12 feet. Estimated monetary benefits for last fiscal year attributed to Clearwater Reservoir for prevention of flood damages were $4,000, making a total of $5,612,000 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 494.84 feet above mean sea level, corre- sponding to 23,290 acre-feet of total storage. At the end of fiscal year pool elevation was 494.93 feet above mean sea level, corre- sponding to 23,440 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool elevation was 526.70 feet above sea level, corresponding to 120,600 acre-feet of total storage. Minimum pool level was 492.82 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 20,020 acre-feet of total storage. Conservation pool elevation was fluctuated during warm months as an aid in control of mosquitoes. Releases made from reservoir during low water periods were sufficient to supply municipal water for Poplar Bluff and other usages. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for FLOOD CONTROL---LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 779 additional recreation facilities. Construction of project began in JUne 1940 and was ready for beneficial use in March 1948. _.Cost and financial statement '"iSal Year Total to eal ear 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work:. oropriated.......... $11,328 $69,543 -$429 $11,177 $9,500 1$9,868,261 67,021 12,109 11,127 9,179 19,867,889 1tenance: ............. MainCostea.. 11,312 DPPropriated.......... 102,634 116,891 114,300 118,400 134,000 1,423,890 coat ................ 101,309 114,570 117,119 116,875 127,210 1,414,599 1Includes $47,103 Public Works acceleration funds. 17. LITTLE ROCK LEVEE, ARKANSAS (EAST END-FOURCHE BAYOU) Location. On right bank of Arkansas River between miles 164.5 and 161.2 in eastern part of city of Little Rock, Arkansas. (See Geological Survey Map of Little Rock, Ark.) a xisting project. Provides for levee 7.2 miles long beginning at high ground in Little Rock opposite mile 164.5 and extending downstream along Arkansas River to mile 161.2 near Fourche ayou, thence upstream along left bank of bayou to mile 14.5 Where it connects to high ground. Project also provides for a 1 p and borrow area 3,000 feet long on landside of levee fronting sun on Arkansas River, a channel cutoff in Fourche Bayou at a bend Which is crossed by levee, two pumping stations on Arkansas River Side, and five drainage structures through levee. A 45,000 gallons 'er minute pumping station in conjunction with excavated and natural sump areas will be constructed on Fourche Creek near end Of levee where gravity drainage through two 36-inch culverts is blocked by high stages. Completed levee cost $1,188,277, of which $883,277 was Federal and $305,000 local interest cost for rights- o-Way. Estimated cost of additional pumping station and sump area is $458 000, of which Federal cost is $363,000 and local inter- est cost is $75,000 for rights-of-way and $20,000 for a cash contribution toward construction cost to compensate for any encroachment on the sump area occurring after District Engineer's eport. Estimated cost of project is $1,646,277, of which $1,246,- 277 is Federal and $400,000 is local interest cost of rights-of-way and cash contribution. History of authorization Amount Act Work authorized authorized 193 Flood Control Act, Public No. Levees to provide flood protection to people and city prop- $110,500 738, 74th Congress, p. 9. erty, H. Doc. 308, 74th Cong., 1st sess., and supplemental 1944 Chief of Engineers. report in Office, 1944Flood Control Act, Public Law Modified and authorized local flood protection projects in 465,200 534, 78th Congress, p. 9. accordance with 11. )oc. 447which recommended raising grade and protecting additional area. 196Flood Control Act, Public Law Authorized project for flood protection in accordance with 363,000 80-298, p. 6. Senate Doc. 55,89th Cong., 1st sess., which recommended 45,000 g.p.m. pump station and excavated storage area. 780 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Congress authorized modification to project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Levee, two pumping stationls, sump area, channel cutoff, and five drainage structures completed and transferred to local interests for maintenance and operation, December 1950. No funds appropriated and no work performed on additional pumping station and sump area. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriation ......... .... $883 27 Cost................. .......... 883,:277 18. NIMROD RESERVOIR, ARK. Location. See table page 767. Existing project. Estimated cost is $3,937,000. For further information see pages 908 and 909 of 1962 Annual Report. For authorization see page 768. Local cooperation. Section 2, 1938 Flood Control Act applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and mainl tenance of project continued at a cost of $120,068. Additional recreation facilities were constructed at a cost of $5,939. Six notable rises occurred on Fourche La Fave River during fiscal year. Flooding was prevented on an average of about 1,840 acres of improved land for each rise. Results of flood regulation 0on river stages at Aplin are in following tabulation. Aplin is 13.7 miles downstream from dam and just downstream from mouth of South Fourche La Fave River, which is principal tributary. Nimrod Reservoir Ark.1 Aplin, Outflow coincident Estimated with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest Peak inflow downstream pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated Date of (cubic feet flow tion (feet storage crest without reductionl peak flow per second) (cubic above mean (acre-feet) stage Nimrod in stage feet per sea level) (feet) Dam (feet) second) (feet) Sept. 23,1965 ..... 11,000 80 346.27 47,290 21.1 27.3 6.2 Feb. 10,1966 ...... 21,800 15 352.24 83,850 11.8 31.8 20. Apr. 24,1966...... 30,000 70 362.00 173,510 32.1 34.0 1.9 Apr. 26,1966.... 17,600 10 (2) (2) 27.5 32.0 4.5 May 1,1966..... 8,800 10 365.00 209,760 8.0 24.6 16.6 May 18,1966.. 7,000 10 357.09 123,260 11.6 19.6 8.0 1 Appreciable overflow begins at 17 feet. 2 Pool continued to rise. Estimated monetary benefits for last fiscal year attributed to Nimrod Reservoir for prevention of flood damages were $25,000 making a total of $2,641,000 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was 343.38 feet above mean sea level corre- FLOOD CONTROL---LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 781 splonding to 34,170 acre-feet of total storage. At end of fiscal Year pool elevation was 342.85 feet above mean sea level, corre- Ponlding to 32,030 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool level uring fiscal year was 365.00 feet above mean sea level, corre- londing to 209,760 acre-feet of total storage. Minimum pool evel during fiscal year was 341.02 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 25,530 acre-feet of total storage. Conservation Dool was lowered gradually during warm months as an aid in control of mosquitoes. Sufficient releases were made from res- ervoir during low-water periods to meet water requirements downstream. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for additional recreation facilities. Construction of project began in anuary 1940 and was ready for beneficial use in January 1942. ________ Cost and financial statement SYTotal to a year. .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ork: AP]propriated..........$13,800 $11,123 $28,451 $15,183 $15,500 $3,872,214 t Mainte: .. 13,786 11,118 28,450 15,203 5,939 3,862,653 >nance: Apjpropriated..........106,422 99,576 117,700 122,000 136,000 1,639,327 t............... 105,234 98,633 119,161 121,869 120,068 1,622,427 19. PETIT JEAN RIVER, ARK. Location. From mile 51.0 to 38.5 near Danville, Yell County, Ark. (See Geological Survey, quadrangle map, Dardanelle, Ark., SCale 1:125,000). Existinq project. Provides for increasing channel capacity of river between miles 51.0 and 38.5 by clearing channel of timber and log jams and clearing banks of trees and brush. Estimated cost is $234,700, of which $220,700 is Federal and $14,000 non- ederal cost of rights-of-way. On January 7, 1963, Chief of Engi- neers approved and formally adopted existing project for con- Struction under section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Channel clearing Was performed. t Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete. Construc- tion started July 1965. Completed and transferred to local inter- eats for operation and maintenance in December 1965. Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 1965 x Includes $20,098 general investigations cost. 782 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 20. PINE MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR, ARK. Location. Damsite is at mile 35.7 on Lee Creek and 12 miles north of Van Buren, Ark. (See Geological Survey map "WinsloW, Arkansas-Oklahoma," scale 1:125,000.) Existing project. Provides for construction of a dam and reservoir for flood control, water supply, and recreation. Reser- voir would control runoff from 168 square miles. Capacity would be 124,160 acre-feet, of which 40,320 would be for flood control, 81,340 for water supply; and 2,500 for sediment reserve. Esti- mated cost is $10 million, of which local interests will repaY $200,000 for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement and $5,940,000 for water supply storage. Project was authorized bY 1965 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Section 2, 1938 Flood Control Act, Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, and Federal Water Project Rec- reation Act apply. Operations and results during fiscal year. Congress authorized project. Condition at end of fiscal year. No funds appropriated. No work performed on project. 21. VILLAGE CREEK, WHITE RIVER, AND MAYBERRY LEVEE DISTRICTS, ARKANSAS Location. On left bank of White River, 230 to 255 miles above its mouth, beginning about 2 miles southeast of Newport, in Jack* son County, Ark., and extending downstream to about 5 miles west of Tupelo, Woodruff County, Ark. (See Mississippi River Corn mission alluvial valley map, scale 1: 500,000 and 1: 62,500.) Existing project. Provides for a system of levees, necessary drainage structures, interior drainage and a 300,000 gallon per minute pumping station at Taylor Slough outlet. Levee is about 20 miles long, connecting, enlarging and extending former MaY* berry levee and Stevens-Keel levee. Ten drainage structures were provided, 2 of which are reinforced concrete and 8 corrtl- gated metal. Project protects 34,000 acres of farm land with crest grade 2 feet above confined height of 1927 flood. Interior drainage and pumping station would prevent flooding on about 9,000 acres when drainage structures through levee are closed. Estimated cost is $2,247,310, of which $1,577,310 is Federal cost of construction. Estimated cost to local interests is $670,000, of which $149,000 is cash contribution to cost of pumping station, $399,000 is cost of rights-of-way and $122,000 is cost of local drainage facilities. FLOOD CONTROL---LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 783 __ _History of authorization Amount Act Work authorized authorized 1936Flood Control Act, Public Approved levee protection as outlined in H. Doc. 102, 73d Cong., 1st $931,500 738 74th Cong., p. 12. N9"o. sess. 0Flood Control Act, Public Modified existing project to add interior drainage in accordance with 294,000 19Law 64586thCong., p. 13. plan I,H. Doc. 225, 86th Cong., and directed study of plan III. La62 Flood Control Act, Public Modified project to provide a pumping plant as recommended in 1,018,000 a 874, 78thCong., p 14. H. Doe. 577, 87th Cong., 2d sess. 2,243,500 Total authorization........................................ Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. In addition, provide lands for pondage area, alter existing improvements, construct on-farm drainage facilities, in- form individuals concerned about flooding due to temporary pond- l1g, prevent encroachment on improved channels and ponding areas, and make a cash contribution equal to 17.2 percent of Fed- eral construction cost of pumping plant estimated at $149,000. .Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning and de- 911 of interior drainage and pumping station continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of levee and drainage structures was completed in fiscal year 1941 and trans- ferred to local interests for maintenance and operation. Local interests organized to meet requirements of local cooperation. Planning and design of interior drainage and pumping plant are 90 percent complete. Project is 41 percent complete. Cost and financial statement ? Year............... 1962 sealTotal 1963 1964 1965 1966 to June 30, 19661 New work: Propriated. ................................. . $37,500 $31,000 $56,000 $656,810 ........................................ .*oat 30,421 31,960 43,582 638,272 SIncludes $532,310 for portion completed July 1940. 22. WHITE RIVER BASIN (LITTLE ROCK DIST.) Location. Improvements are on White River and tributaries, Arkansas and Missouri. More definite location of individual itemns is in following table. tExisting project. A general comprehensive plan for flood con- rol and other purposes in White River Basin. Plan now includes nine reservoirs, of which four are flood-control-only projects and five are multiple-purpose projects. Beaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, Norfork, Clearwater, and Greers Ferry Reservoirs were selected and approved for construction by Chief of Engineers, and individual reports on these six reservoirs are on subsequent pages. leservoirs in plan are listed in following table. 00i Drainage Miles area Height of dam above streambed Reservoir Power de- Total Reservoir River above Nearest town (square and type capacity velopment estimated mouth miles) (acre-feet) (kilowatts) costl 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O Beaver 3. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . White............... 609.0 Eureka Springs, Ark..... 1,186 228 feet concrete-gravity and earthfill...... 1,952,000 112,000 $45,040,000 Bell Foley 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . Strawberry ......... 26.2 Smithville, Ark.......... 520 133 feet earthfill......................245,000 (4) 9,750,000 418.6 Cotter, Ark............. 6,036 258 feet concrete-gravity....... ..... 5,408,000 340,000 88,448,000 h Bull Shoals2 . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .. . White.............. Clearwater ...2 . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . Black.............. 257.4 Piedmont, Mo.......... 898 154 feet earthfill....... 413,000 (4) 10,048,000 Greers Ferry ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Little Red........... .79.0 Heber Springs, Ark...... 1,146 243 feet concrete-gravity...... ......... 2,844,000 96,000 48,496,000 Lone Rock6 2 ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Buffalo............. . 3.6 Norfork, Ark............ 1,331 216 feet concrete-gravity................ 687,000 (4) 29,460,000 Norfork .... North Fork......... 4.8 ..... do................. 1,806 222 feet concrete-gravity............... 1,983,000 70,000 29,003,000 Table Rock2 ................ White............... 528.8 Branson, Mo............ 4,020 252 feet concrete-gravity and earthfill...... 3,462,000 200,000 66,036,000 Water Valley .................. Eleven Point....... 12.6 Pocahontas, Ark......... 1,152 157 feet earthfill.................... 1,563,000 (5) 18,300 000 Total........ .......... . . .................... . .............. ........... ... .................... 18,557,000 818,000 344,581,000 1 July 1966 price levels unless otherwise noted. 4 None. 2 For details of this project, see individual report. 5 Includes provisions for future power installation. 8 Inactive. Estimated cost based on July 1954 price levels. 6 To be restudied. Estimated cost based on July 1954 price levels. xj co2 FLOOD CONTROL---LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 785 History of authorization i Amount Act Work authorized authorized ........................ , I 1938Flood Control Act, Publioc $25,000,000 o 761, 75th Cong., p. 4. Approved com prehensive plan for White River Basin and authorized $25 million for initiation and partial accomplishment of the plan. Lone Rock Reservoir, Ark., Norfork Reservoir, Ark., Clearwater Reservoir, Mo., Water Valley Reservoir, Ark., Bell Foley Reservoir, 1941Flood Control Act, Public Ark., Grcers Ferry Reservoir, Ark., and White River emergency. Modified comprehensive plan to include projects in H. Loc. 917, 76th 24,000,000 Law 228, 77th Cong., p. 9. Cong., and modifications in Norfork Reservoir recommended in [I. Doe. 290, 77th Cong. Increased monetary authorization by $24 million. Bull Shoals Reservoir, Ark. and Mo., Table Rock Reservoir, Mo. and Ark., and Norfork Reservoir, Ark. anridMo. (power). Authorized $45 million for continuation of comprehensive plan........ 45,000,000 Authorized $40 million for continuation of comprehensive plan........ 40,000,000 Authorized $35 million for continuation of comprehensive plan........ 35,000,000 Authorized power in Greers Ferry Reservoir and added Beaver Res- ervoir to the plan. 57,000,000 Authorized $57 million for continuation of comprehensive plan........ 50,000,000 Authorized $50 million for continuation of comprehensive plan....... 8,000,000 Authorized $8 million for continuation of comprehensive plan......... 284,000,000 Total authorization...................... .................. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- Plies. Water Supply Act of 1958 applies to Beaver. Operations and results during fiscal year. Three notable rises occurred above Beaver, Table Rock, and Bull Shoals Dams on Up- Per White River above Norfork Dam on North Fork River during ]eservoir scal year. Regulation of flow on North Fork River in Norfork and on upper White River in Beaver-Table Rock- 11lull Shoals Reservoir system during fiscal year prevented flood- on 52,380 acres of improved land of which 39,300 and 13,080 as credited to Beaver-Table Rock-Bull Shoals system and Nor- fork respectively. Flood modifications on White River at Calico Rock, 17 miles downstream from mouth of North Fork River and 59 Miles downstream from Bull Shoals Dam, and at Newport, 102 miles downstream from Calico Rock, are in following tabulation: Peak Outflow Maximum Correspond- Storage inflow coincident pool ing available Project and date of peak inflow (cubic with peak elevation storage in power feet downstream (feet above (acre-feet) pool at start per flow (cubio mean sea of flood second) feetper level) (acre-feet) second) - - -III -1 Beaver: Jan.2,1966... .............. 20 1,086.5 885,200 870,900 Feb. 10, 1966...................... 32,000 58,000 215 1,097.2 1,092,600 763,800 TTablApr. 24 1966.... 5 Rock: ............. 40,000 20 1,109.7 1,379,200 444,400 Jan.2 1966.......................42,000 3380 904.4 2,272,300 619,500 Feb. 9, 1966..... ............ 82,000 31,020 911.7 2,561,500 528,600 Apr.24,1966..... ........... 45,000 140 915.0 2,702,000 225,800 dtll Shoals. Jan. 1,1966..... ............ 98,000 3350 653.3 3,016,500 278,400 Feb. 9, 1966.... 130,000 3,110 655.4 3,111,700 218,000 19 654.1 3,052,600 No fpork:23, 66...................... 36,500 1,440 209,000 Jan. 1,1966....................... 77,000 330 546.7 1,138,800 299,300 Feb. 9,1966..................... 100,000 1,210 555.6 1,332,600 152,000 Feb Apr. 23, ................ 1960....... 554.2 38,000 110 1,299,300 130,500 See footnotes at end of table. 786 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 4 5 Calico Rock, Ark. Newport Estimated Estimated Experi- crest stage Estimated Experi- crest stage Estimated Date peak inflow at Bull enced without reduction enced without reductionl Shoals crest Norfork, in stage crest Norfork, C i stage stage Beaver, (feet) stage Beaver, (feet) (feet) Table Rock, (feet) Table Rock, and Bull and Bull Shoals (feet) Shoals (feet) Jan. 1,1966.................. 3.3 17.1 37.8 20.7 27.6 30.9 6. Feb9,1966................... 22.3 43.8 21.5 24.7 31.5 2.9 Apr. 23, 1966(.................. 16.3 29.0 12.7 28.5 31.4 1Conservation release. SReservoir filling. 8 Flood regulated in power pool. Appreciable overflow begins at 19 feet. Appreciable overflow begins at 18 feet. Estimated monetary flood control benefits for last fiscal year attributed to Beaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, and Norfork Reser- voirs for prevention of flood damages were $35,000, $83,000, $245( 000 and $51,000, respectively, a total of $414,000. Total ilod damages prevented by reservoirs through fiscal year 1965 amounted to $17,505,000, of which $51,000 accrues to Beaver, $2,865,000 to Table Rock, $9,444,000 to Bull Shoals, and $5,145,0 000 to Norfork. Pool elevation at Beaver Reservoir at start, o fiscal year was 1,081.45 feet above mean sea level, correspondin to 798,200 acre-feet of total storage. At end of fiscal year pool elevation was 1,111.83 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 1,432,500 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool elevation Was 1,114.44, corresponding to 1,500,200 acre-feet of total storage. Minimum pool elevation was 1,079.90 corresponding to 772,800 acre-feet of total storage. Pool elevation of Table Rock Reservoir at start of fiscal year was 913.89 feet above mean sea level, corre- sponding to 2,654,400 acre-feet of total storage; and at end of fiscal year was 912.45 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 2,593,900 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool elevatiol during fiscal year was 915.18 feet above mean sea level, correl sponding to 2,709,700 acre-feet of total storage. Minimum poo elevation during fiscal year was 899.10 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 2,082,500 acre-feet of total storage. Pool ele- vation of Bull Shoals Reservoir at start of fiscal year was 650. feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 2,901,700 acre-feet Of total storage; and at end of fiscal year was 652.03 feet above mea-c sea level, corresponding to 2,959,400 acre-feet of total storage. Maximum pool elevation was 657.66 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 3,217,000 acre-feet of total storage. MinimiUM pool elevation was 647.44 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 2,760,500 acre-feet of total storage. Pool elevation of Norfork Reservoir at start of fiscal year was 548.82 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 1,182,600 acre-feet of total storage. At end of fiscal year pool elevation was 548.25 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 1,170,600 acre-feet of total storage. Maxi" mum pool elevation was 555.61 feet above mean sea level, corre sponding to 1,332,300 acre-feet of total storage. Minimum pool elevation was 536.15 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to FLOOD CONTROL---LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 787 936,100 acre-feet of total storage. Delivered 1,142,560,000 kilo- Watt-hours of electrical energy to Southwestern Power Ad- r1listration for marketing, of which 14,081,500; 340,589,000; 557,525,000; and 230,364,500 kilowatt-hours were generated at t.eaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, and Norfork powerplants, respec- tively. Peak demands of 101,000 kilowatts occurred June 6, 1966, at Beaver; 224,000 kilowatts on May 18, 1966, at Table Rock; 366,000 kilowatts on January 17, 1966, at Bull Shoals; and 8.2,000 kilowatts on June 7, 1966, at Norfork. There was suffi- cient power storage at all times to supply scheduled loads. In- stalled capacities of plants are 112,000, 200,000, 340,000, and 0,000 kilowatts at Beaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, and Norfork, respectively. During fiscal year 102,380; 1,876,820; 3,131,880; ald 1,502,840 acre-feet of water were released through turbines at Beaver Table Rock, Bull Shoals, and Norfork, respectively. At start of fiscal year 853,700, 47,600, 146,300, and 68,600 acre- feet of storage capacity were available for storage of floodflows IBeaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, and Norfork power pools, sPectively. At end of fiscal year there were 219,400, 108,100, 88,600 and 80,600 acre-feet of storage capacity available for sorage of floodflows in Beaver Table Rock, Bull Shoals, and Nor- ork Power pools, respectively. Capacities available in power Pools before each flood are shown in tabulation. During fiscal Year 21,900 acre-feet of water was released from Norfork Reser- voir for Fish and Wildlife Service trout hatchery, 14,600 acre-feet vas released from Table Rock Reservoir for Missouri Conserva- ton Commission trout hatchery, and Beaver Water District with- rew 621 million gallons from Beaver Reservoir. Condition at end of fiscal year. Beaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, Sorfork, Clearwater, and Greers Ferry Reservoirs are essentially 91oPlete and in operation. Progress on these reservoirs is in indi- Lual reports. Construction of Water Valley, Bell Foley, and cne Rock has not started. Preconstruction planning is 62 per- cit c(omplete for Water Valley Reservoir, 17 percent complete for oinle Rock Reservoir, and 10 percent complete for Bell Foley Reservoir. Cost and financial statement Ycar Total to .Year.... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work. A ropriated.......... $24,083,720 $20,722,251 $12,443,897 $4,496,167 $2,030,500 1$282,884,641 Maint- e. . . .. . . . . . . . 24 ,290,625 1 2 82 , 4 1 2 , 30 5 20 , 7 4 3 , 75 1 12 , 5 6 0 , 8 5 4 4 , 5 8 5 , 8 03 2,09 9,393 APropriated.......... 1202,434 1,363,891 1,873,000 1,915,300 2,467,572 17,061,234 . ,ost. . 1,185,405 1,370,607 1,694,968 2,080,75 2,282,39 16,827,345 Icludes $491,928 Public Works acceleration funds. 23. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS APproved regulations for operation and maintenance of flood control works, part 208 of title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Provide for periodic inspection of completed projects transferred local interests for operation and maintenance. Inspections of 788 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 local flood-protection projects were made October-March to de- termine extent of compliance with approved regulations for maintenance and operation of these projects. Responsib le o0 cials of improvement districts concerned were advised of inade- quacies in maintenance and operation of local flood-protectio n works under their jurisdiction where appropriate. Fiscal year costs were $5,979. Total cost to end of fiscal year was $54,099 24. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 301966 full report _ operationand Name of project see Annual ti Report Construction Operance for- Bell Foley Reservoir, White River, Ark.5.... $68,309 ...... Black River, Poplar Bluff, Mo., to Knobel, Ark.1 ................... 1958 584,315 .. District No. 2, Arkansas River, Ark.1....... 1951 919955 Carden's Ark. Drainage Clarksville,Bottom ........ .... " e........r 1962271,717. Conway County Drainageand Levee District No. 1, Ariansas iver, 1959 187,440 .. Conway County Levee Districts Nos. 1, 2, and 8, Arkansas River, Ark.l 1952 1,018,840 . Conway County Levee District No. 6, Arkansas River, Ark.1 .......... 1952 300,952. Crawford County Levee District, Arkansas River, Ark.l........... 1951 2,001820 East Poplar Bluff and Poplar Bluff, Mo..... ............. 1.58 304,699. Faulkner County Levee District No. 1, Arkansas River, Ark .......... 1941 99,511 Fort Smith, Arkansas River, Ark. 9......... 191 1077,546 . .. From North Little Rock to Gillett, Ark., (above Plum Bayou)1 ........ 1054 845,300 .. Holla Bend Bottom, Arkansas River, Ark.2......... ....... 1962 17,610 .. Lone Rock Reservoir, White River, Ark.6.................... .... . .16130,653 .... McLean Bottom Levee District No. 3, Arkansas River, Ark.1...........950 422,549 . Near Dardanelle, Arkansas River, Ark.1.... ........... 1953 198,069 Newport, White River, Ark.1. .......................... 19341 314276. North Little Rock, Arkansas River, Ark.. 1941 512,00176 . Roland Drainage District, Arkansas River, Ark.1...................1950 269,907 .. .. Skaggs Ferry, Black River, Ark.1 . ............ 1..... 1941 81,023 .. South 1 bank Arkansas River (Iead Fourche Island t Pennington Bayou), 1964 1,404:852 . Ark. South bank Arkansas River, Little Rock to Pine Bluff, Ark.:Tucker 1961 409,115 .. Lake. I Van Buren, Arkansas River, Ark.1............................1952 438,222... Village Creek, Jackson and Lawrence Counties, White River, Ark.3 ....................... # . Water Valley Reservoir, White River, Ark. and Mo.6 ........................... 414,011 . West of Morrilton, Arkansas River, Ark.1 4 . . . ...... 962 1.. 1,269,959 1Completed. O 2 Notice of commencement of 5-year limitation period of authorization of project issued Olt 23, 1962. a See 11. Doc. 352, 87th Cong., 2d sess., for description of project. SAuthorization of uncompleted portion of project expired Apr. 7, 1966. Inactive. Flood Control Committee Doc. 1, 75th Cong., 1st sess. * Deferred for restudy. Flood Control Committee Doc. 1. 75th Cong., 1st sess. 25. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Federal cost for fiscal year was $30,072, of which $22,893 was for advance preparation and $7,179 for repair and restoration Emergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Public Law 526, 79th Cong.) Federal cost for fiscal year was $46,446. Local interest coS was $6,000. 26. BEAVER RESERVOIR, ARK. Location. See table on page 784. Existing project. A dam 2,575 feet long with a concrete grav ity structure across main part of valley, rolled earthfill section on left abutment, and a hydroelectric power generating plant. Con" IULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 789 rete portion of dam is 1,333 feet long and 228 feet above stream- bed. It includes a spillway section 328 feet long bridged for a roadwayg(tesh tainter across dam. Flow over ove spillway controlled by seven ter gates 40 feet wide and 37 feet high. Flow through dam regulated by one 5-foot 8-inch by 10-foot conduit equipped with Ydraulically operated slide gates. Discharge capacity of outlet 9 ,830 cubic feet per second. Flow to powerhouse is through two t'5-foot diameter penstocks. Powerhouse at base of dam con- letais two 56,000 kilowatt generating units. Switchyard is on t0 1t abank downstream from powerhouse. Three saddle dikes, with rtotal length of 1,997 feet, constructed at low places on reservoir rn* Reservoir has a total storage capacity of 1,952,000 acre- feet, of which 300,000 is for flood control and 1,652,000 for hydro- ele tric power and water supply. Estimated cost is $45,040,000. Or authorization see page 785. pLocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 and ater Supply Act of 1958 apply. Perations and results during fiscal year. Results of operation Bzeaver Reservoir are shown on page 785. Major accomplish- atents with regular funds: Operation and maintenance continued at of $269,284; lands and damages $24,121; boundary line a cost$96,291; Strvey dam $36,937; powerplant $177,728; 4ods $274,991; operating facilities $158,002; recreationpermanent facilities $414,619; and operating equipment $53,053. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for tinlor cleanup items and additional recreation facilities. Con- struction of project began in October 1959 and was placed in Deration for flood control in December 1963, hydroelectric power generation in May 1965, and water supply in January 1966. Cost and financial statement li8c1 Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork: . Coat,.. eropariated.........$9,500,000$13,554,000$10,329,161$3,980,000 $1,339,403 $44,669,564 Ma tenanc ce: S9,468,587 13,518,733 10,135,805 4,052,091 1,396,637 44,387,610 Aplrop riated..................... Coat,.. ... ..................... 122,200 272,000 394,200 .......... ............ ....................... 120,727 269,284 390,011 27. BULL SHOALS RESERVOIR, ARK. Location. See table, page 784. Existing project. Estimated cost with eight generating units i o$88,448,000. For further information see pages 725 and 726 S1965 Annual Report. For authorization see page 785. ~l.Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- ti Operations and results during fiscal year. Additional recrea- o° facilities were constructed at cost of $93,375. Operation a~Bd maintenace of project continued. Results of operation of uil Shoals Reservoir are on page 785. adCondition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for additional recreation facilities. Construction of project began in 790 REPORT OF TIHE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966., April 1946 and was ready for beneficial use for flood control in February 1951 and generation of electrical energy with four uito in September 1952. Units 5, 6, 7, and 8 were p)laced inoperatOl January 1962, February 1962, August 1963, and September 1963, respectively. Cost and financial statement Tota1to66 year Fiscal ............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 New work: 261208 or Cost .................. 086,500 $2,246,727 $318,404 $22,412 2,990,2592,241,053 511,451 914,975 1 06 Maintenance: 61,937 97,988 8 5 0 80 Appropriated.......... 415,929 450,403 690,700 495,000 608,500 5433,221 cost............. 432,033 441,97 515,964 609,710 514.,225 1 Includes $259,312 public works acceleration funds. 28. DARDANELLE LOCK AND DAM (No. 10), ARKANSAS Location. See page 765. Existing project. Project is a unit of Arkansas River naviga' tion plan. Dam is 2,569 feet long, and 68 feet high. It ha ~ spillway with 20 tainter gates 50 feet long, and 39 feet ieet. Navigation lock will be 110 by 600 feet with a lift of 54 f eet Powerhouse contains four 31,000-kilowatt generators. Reservoir has a storage capacity of 486,000 acre-feet. Estimated cost $79 million. For authorization see page 768. Local cooperation. See page 768. ted Operations and results during fiscal year. Pool fluctuatel within 2-foot power pondage, elevation 336 to 338. Power 6 eration continued with unit 3 being added September 24, 19600 and unit 4 on January 14, 1966. Installed capacity is 124,00 1 kilowatts. Delivered 333,705,100 kilowatt-hours of elect"ca energy to Southwestern Power Administration for markleti B' Released 9,672,450 acre-feet of water through turbines. M"ajor accomplishments with regular funds: Operation and maintenance $392,593; land acquisition, $253,707; relocations $219 789; reSe. voir $90,780; powerplant $316,208; roads $59,021; levees $54, recreation facilities $412,018; operating facilities $270,475; af'n operating equipment $86,213.5 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began June 19517 and is 83 percent complete. Work remaining consists principally, of completion of lock which is 33 percent complete. Power unl were placed on line April 5, May 6, and September 24, 1965, January 14, 1966. Cost and financial statement Total 1to66 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,9 New work: os,57 264 10,00 $21,341,739 7,4,939 $991,00 $1M 00 $5654516 Appropriated.......... Cot.................. $7,475,000 $10,230,000 103 497 $9,9.1,000 2 ,896,155] 10,236,3,47 $1,950,000 165,36'2 2,001,295[ O, Maintenance: Appropriated.................... .......................... 203,700 398,600 59 720 Cost......2........................201,127 392,593 1 Includes $402,162 for general studies. MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 791 29. GREERS FERRY RESERVOIR, ARK. ocation. See table, page 784. initing project. Estimated cost is $48,496,000. For further tion ation see page 740 of 1964 Annual Report. For authoriza- tl See page 785. apLocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 pplies. OPerations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplish- aits with regular funds: Operation and maintenance continued $1 1 cost of $439,538; boundary line survey, $135,123; dam, 11,415; powerplant, $17,951; recreation facilities, $14,263; ildIngs, grounds, and utilities, $160,700; and permanent operat- 11 equipment, $5,300. Four notable rises occurred on Little Red aVver above Greers Ferry Dam. Flooding was prevented on an arage of about 6,010 acres of improved land for each rise. .eults of flood regulation on river stages at Judsonia, about 54 les downstream, are tabulated below. Greers Ferry Reservoir Judsonia, Ark.1 Outflow coincident Estimated with peak Maximum Corre- Experi- crest Date of Peak inflow downstream pool eleva- sponding enced stage Estimated Peak inflow (cubic feet flow tion (feet storage crest without reduction per second) (cubic above mean (acre-feet) stage Greers in stage feet per sea level) (feet) Ferry (feet) second) Dam (feet) i Oet 225ja .' . 48,000 20 451.87 1,635,300 16.1 31.7 15.6 10 196-****.- 60,000 20 454.68 1,717,500 32.9 36.5 3.6 24 196 * A~r. 53,000 1,450 456.43 1,769,900 22.3 31.5 9.1 S 69,000 1,020 462.06 1,943,900 29.2 37.1 7.9 'IDDreciable overflow begins at 30 feet. 'tstiniatedmonetary flood control benefits for last fiscal year rltbuted to Greers Ferry Reservoir for prevention of flood dam- 1ls were $7,000. Total flood damages prevented to June 30, 45719)Were $72,000. Pool elevation at start of fiscal year was ee10 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 1,790,000 acre- fee 4 of total storage. At end of fiscal year pool elevation was feet.48 feet above mean sea level, corresponding to 1,771,400 acre- b a4 of total storage. Maximum pool elevation was 462.60 feet ove nean sea level, corresponding to 1,961,200 acre-feet of total levrage Minimum pool elevation was 448.41 feet above mean sea Ca, corresponding to 1,538,500 acre-feet of total storage. ofDacity available in power pool for storage of floodflows at start 1O sceal year was 120,500 acre-feet and at end of fiscal year was ti,100 acre-feet. Delivered 164,088,600 kilowatt-hours of elec- izical energy to Southwestern Power Administration for market- 19 eak demand of 112,000 kilowatts occurred September 14, esed5 During fiscal year, 1,001,880 acre-feet of water was re- ased'through turbines. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for ( ditional recreation facilities. Construction of project began I June 1957, was ready for beneficial use for flood control in 792 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 January 1962, and power units 1 and 2 were placed in operation in March and May 1964, respectively. Cost and financial statement Total ,7 Year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1994 195 196 New work: $46 881397 Appropriated.........$11,356,192 $4,649,900 $1,702,000 $432,000 $516,000 46,62 339 Maintenance:, MaiCost.................. 11,387,129 4,796,352 1,720,963 361,933 521,767 1187,417 Appropriated..................... 57,117 278,000 375,300 477,000 1,142739 Cost...............3,76 278,094 371,431 439,538 30. NORFORK RESERVOIR, ARK. Location. See table, page 784. Existing project. Estimated cost is $29,003,000. For further information see page 896 of 1962 Annual Report. For autho zation see page 785. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 193 applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and n ae tenance of project continued. Additional recreation facilrties were constructed. Results of operation of Norfork Reservoir a shown on page 785. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for additional recreation facilities. Construction of project bega in October 1940, ready for beneficial use for flood control in Ju' 1943, and for generation of electrical energy in June 1944. Co.st and financial statement to Tots Fiscal year.............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $288637543 Appropriated... .. $66,700 $27,009 $50,832 $14,762 $$15,000 Cost .................. 70,350 40,925 34,739 1721 3I 14,750 26 Maintenance: , 3 721 14,7 5 66365 Appropriated.......... 308,867 289,923 422,500 370,800 454,972 5593135 Cost.................. 301,275 293,528 351,725 432,581 399,236 31. OZARK LOCK AND DAM (No. 12), ARKANSAS Location. See page 765. Existing project. Project is a unit of Arkansas River naviga tion plan. Damn will be 2,200 feet long and 58 feet above stream bed. It will have a spillway with 15 tainter gates 50 feet .lo and 46 feet high. Navigation lock will be 110 by 600 feet with a lift of 34 feet. Powerhouse will contain five 2 0,00-kilOwatt generators.. Reservoir has a storage capacity of 148,000 acre1 feet. In addition, 1 foot of power pondage is provided in po No. 13 between elevations 391 and 392. Estimated cost is $64 100,000. For authorization see page 768. Local cooperation. See page 768. , Operations and results during fiscal year. Major accomplise ments with regular funds: Land acquisition, $146,509; re locations, $17,326; reservoir, $46,846; lock, $4,497,176; d $3,587,281; powerplant, $720,517; roads, $98,184; and operatin equipment, $18,034. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-LITTLE ROCK, ARK., DISTRICT 793 bCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Decem- ber 1964 and is 19 percent complete. Cost and financial statement YaTotal iscal to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Rew Work: APPropriated.......... $130,500 $300,000 $313,000$1,150,000 $9,925,000 $11,986,512 .......... 128,418 297,082 293,576 1,140,5299,843,955 11,877,572 Ieludes $168,012 for general studies. 32. TABLE ROCK RESERVOIR, MO. Location. See table, page 784. i4 2'isting project. Estimated cost is $66,036,000. For further tioormation see page 893 of 1962 Annual Report. For authoriza- 0 see page 785. LOcal cooperation. Section 2, 1938 Flood Control Act applies. teO Perationsand results during fiscal year. Operation and main- stance continued. Additional recreation facilities were con- rutcted at a cost of $45,943. Results of operation of Table Rock eservoir are shown on page 785. O ndition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for itional recreation facilities. Construction of project began in Ctober 1952 and was ready for beneficial use for flood control in Ne'mber 1958 and for generation of electrical energy in May 19 .9 b Cost and financial statement eal YeTotal to ........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work. A ropriated. ......... $63,000 175,072 $43,929 $35,816 $ 55,622 1865,727,446 eance: 4aiat .62,988 89,667 145,787 63,994 59,092 165,727,389 CA ropriated.......... 375,004 449,557 427,500 433,600 521,100 2,881,481 S ............ 350,788 466,876 432,084 429,434 502,898 2,853,638 Icludes $185,513 Public Works acceleration funds. 33. SURVEYS o'iscal year costs were $349,230, of which $3,513 was for flood C0trol studies, $3,355 for special studies, and $342,362 for com- rehensive basin studies. 34. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ouring the fiscal year 150 stream-gaging stations were operated, Of Which 73 were operated cooperatively by Geological Survey of d the Corps, and remainder independently by one or the other O'fthese agencies. Suspended sediment samples were collected it 42 stations during the fiscal year in cooperation with Geolog- Cl.Survey, and suspended loads were determined at certain tions. About 98 rainfall and/or river reporting stations were 794 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 operated in a cooperative program by Weather Bureau and the at Corps for use in forecasting streamflow for flood warningacernd operation of reservoir projects. Records also were collected cer- prograt tain hydroclimatic rainfall stations under a cooperative of the two agencies. General hydrologic studies relatin*osts streamflow frequency and distribution were continued. Cr. for fiscal year were $3,065, of which $1,506 was for engineerin studies, and $1,559 for hydrologic studies. TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT * District comprises southern Kansas, small portions of south- estern n Missouri and west Arkansas, northern Oklahoma, north- oPortion of Texas Panhandle, and small portions of i d eastern New Mexico and southeastern Colorado, embraced 1 drainage basin of Arkansas River, and its tributaries above of Poteau River, inclusive, and below mouth of Walnut thek seek near Great Bend, Kans., exclusive of that portion of water- Ne of South Canadian River and its tributaries west of Texas- north exico State line; and a portion of western Arkansas, erned portion of Texas, and southern portion of Oklahoma braced in drainage basin of Red River and its tributaries above Ark. Pon, IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. Navigation Flood Control-Continued Arkansas River and tribu- taries, 17. Eldorado, Kans ........ 806 Arkansas and 18. Eldorado Reservoir, Ar- 2 Oklahoma ........... 796 kansas River Basin, 2. an k stabilization and Kans. ................ 807 channel rectification, Ar- 19. Elk City Reservoir, Arkan- ansas River, Fort Smith, Ark., to Robert S. sas River Basin, Kans.. 807 Kerr lock and dam, Okla- 20. Fall River Reservoir, Ar- . hom a .............. kansas River Basin, owkhead locks and dams, 797 Kans. ................ 808 klahoma ..... ...... 21. Fort Supply Reservoir, A. Lock and dam 798 North Canadian River, No. 14, p Arkansas River .... O kla. ................. 809 798 22. Gillham Reservoir, Red * Lock and dam No. 17, River Basin, Ark .... 810 SVerdigris River ... 798 23. Great Salt Plains Reser- L Lock and damrn No. 18, voir, Salt Fork of Ar- SO-h Verdigris River .... 798 kansas River, Okla. ... 811 ter authorized naviga- 24. Hugo Reservoir, Kiamichi ion project .......... 799 River, Okla........... 811 Bi. Flood Control 25. Hulah Reservoir, Caney ~SIill Reservoir, Verdi- River, Okla .......... 812 6. .gris River Basin, Kans. 799 26. John Redmond Dam and Irch Reservoir, Verdigris Reservoir, Grand (Neo- 7 River Basin, Okla.. ... 799 sho) River Basin, Kans. 813 anton Reservoir, Arkan- 27. Kaw Reservoir, Arkansas 8. Cedarsas River Basin, Okla.. 800, River, Okla........... 814 Point Reservoir, 28. Lake Kemp Reservoir, Grand (Neosho) River Wichita River, Tex ... 815 9. Basin, Kans. .......... 801 29. Lukfata Reservoir, Red Cherry and Red Fork .River Basin, Okla ..... 816 10. C reeks, Okla.......... 802 30. Marion Reservoir, Grand oan Reservoir, Verdigris (Neosho) River Basin, 11. River Basin, Okla .... ouncil Grove Reservoir, 802 Kans. ................ 816 31. Millwood Reservoir, Red Grand (Neosho) River River Basin, Ark ..... 817 12.Co asin, Kans........... 803 32. Oologah Reservoir, Arkan- 1 C oCreek, Kans..... 804 sas River Basin, Okla.. 818 14. Crutcho Creek, Okla. .... . 804 33. Optima Reservoir, North 14OeQueen Reservoir, Red Canadian River, Okla.. . 819 15. .River Basin, Ark....... 805 34. Pat Mayse Reservoir, Red lerks Reservoir, Red River Basin, Tex..... 820 16. D River Basin, Ark....... 805 35. Pine Creek Reservoir, Red oUglass Reservoir, Ar- River Basin, Okla .... 820 kansas River Basin, 36. Plum Creek, Wichita Falls, Kans ................ 806 Tex. ................. 821 796 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Flood Control-Continued Page Multiple-Purpose Projects Including Power 37. Polecat Creek, Okla. (Hey- Broken Bow Reservoir, Red burn Reservoir and chan- 53. 832 River Basin, Okla ... nel improvement) ..... 822 Denison Dam (Lake Tex- 54. 38. Red River Below Denison Dam (Tulsa Dist.).... oma), Red River, Tex. 823 and Okla..........*** .. 39. Sand Creek, Kans...... 823 Eufaula Reservoir, Cana- 40. Shidler Reservoir, Arkan- 55. dian River, Okla ....... * sas River Basin, Okla.. 824 56. Fort Gibson Reservoir, Ar- 41. Skiatook Reservoir, Verdi- kansas River Basin, 836 gris River Basin, Okla. 824 Okla............... 42. Toronto Reservoir, Arkan- Keystone Reservoir, Ar- 831 57. sas River Basin, Kans. 825 kansas River, Okla .".*. 43. Towando Reservoir, Ar- 58. Markham Ferry Reservoir, kansas River Basin, Arkansas River Basin, Kans. ................ 826 Okla............."" 44. Turkey Creek, Okla...... 826 59. Pensacola Reservoir, Ar- 45. Water quality study, Red kansas River Basin, River Basin, Tex ..... 827 Okla.............." d 46. Waurika Reservoir, Red 60. Robert S. Kerr lock and River Basin, Okla..... dam No. 15, ArkanSas 841 827 River, Okla........" 47. Winfield, Kans. .......... 828 61. Tenkiller Ferry Reservoir, 48. Wister Reservoir, Arkan-' Arkansas River Basin, 841 sas River Basin, Okla.. 828 Okla. ............. 49. Inspection of completed 62. Webbers Falls lock and flood control projects .. 830 dam No. 16, Arkansas 50. Scheduling flood control River, Okla.........**. reservoir operations ... 830 General Investigations 51. Other authorized flood con- 63. Surveys ....... trol projects . .......... 831 64. Collection and study of 52. Flood control work under basic data . special authorization . 831 65. Research and dlevelopment 1. ARKANSAS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ARKANSAS AND OKLAHOMA , Multiple-purpose plan authorizing features that serve naVod tion, flood control, and hydroelectric power purposes and a Feature River River mile Nearest town . ____________________ I Locks and dams: No. 14....... ............... Arkansas......... 375.0 Redland. Okla. Robert S. Kerr No. 15.............. do........... ..... 395.4 Cowlington, Okla. Webbers Falls, No. 16.............. ... do........... 432.3 Gore, Okla. No. 17...... ................ Verdigris........ 9.6 Okay, Okla. No. 18...... ................ ..... do........... 35.5 Inola, Okla. Appurtenant navigation features: Channel cutoffs and enlargements..... ...do........... Muskogee to Catoosa, Okls. Dredging..... ............... Arkansas......... to 362 1)395.4 1) ' Bank stabilization and channel recti- ..... do........... 395.4 to 362 Fort Smith, Ark., to Robert fication. lock and dam. Reservoirs: Keystone............................ Arkansas......... 539 Sand Springs, Okla. Eufaula............................ Canadian......... 27 Eufaula, Okla. Oologah ............................ Verdigris......... 90 Oologah, Okla. Toronto..................... .... do........... 271 Toronto, Kans. Neodesha2 ...... ............. . ..do........... 223 Neodesba, Kans. Elk City (Table Mound)....... Pensacola.......... ................ Elk River....... 9 Elk City, Kans. Grand (Neosho)... 77 Disney, Okla. Markham Ferry ................. ,.... ..... do........... 47 Locust Grove, Okla. Fort Gibson..... ............. ...do.... 8 Fort Gibson Okla. Tenkiller Ferry.................. Illinois........... 13 Vian, Okla., W ister......................... Poteau........... 61 Wister, Okla. Canton ...... ............. North Canadian... 394 Canton, Okla. Fall River.. .................. .... Fall River........ 54 Fall River, Kans. As required for channel 9 feet deep. $ See "Other authorized flood control projects." RIVERS AND HARBORS-TULSA. OKLA., DISTRICT 797 torage for water supply, water quality control, sediment con- tr, recreation, and fish and wildlife propagation in the Arkansas \T basin within Tulsa District are listed opposite. For a com- ver Pehensive understanding of overall work authorized and accom- Plished under this heading, see Little Rock District's section of this report. °he authorized to be appropriated for combined compre- lounts telve and(multiple-purpose plan total $972,773,000. Project fea- i"ion which preconstruction planning or construction has been ulated are reported separately in this section. 2. BANK STABILIZATION AND CHANNEL RECTIFICATION, ARKANSAS RIVER, FORT SMITH, ARK., TO ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND DAM, OKLAHOMA 1Ldocation.Bn tblz* elation. Bank stabilization, cutoffs, and channel improve- I) Work in reach of Arkansas River between Robert S. Kerr tiel site and Fort Smith, Ark., river miles 395.4 and 362, respec- Sayy (See Geological Survey maps for San Bois (Okla.), Salli- :125,00kla.), and Fort Smith (Ark.-Okla.) quadrangles, scale e isting' project. Consists of training dikes, cutoffs, revet- tioe n' and other channel work, forms a unit in plan for naviga- oauitf .Arkansas River. Estimated cost is $12,700,000. Project Colorized by 1946 River and Harbor Act (HI. Doc. 758, 79th r 2d ses). Cr Corrective bank stabilization in reach between aut'thk '~oear Bradens Bend, Okla. Therefore bank protection work ba sess). irlzed for that area by Flood Control Act of 1948 will not be req Uired Local cooperation. See requirements for entire project. t~ Perations and results during fiscal year. All project strue- Cs Were operated and maintained in a serviceable condition. ei' ondition at end of fiscal year. Bank stabilization and chan- hitirectification works from Wilsons Rock to Fort Smith were o bated May 1952. Construction was initiated in March 1960 1 bank stabilization work from Wilsons Rock upstream to Robert orerr Dam site. Bank stabilization and channel rectification rit are essentially complete from Robert S. Kerr Dam to Fort tiolho Work remaining to complete project consists of addi- anjd structures o1C1ehannel in and construction of protective works for bridges areas where degradation is expected from ration 1 of navigation channel. Cost and financial statement Pical yeaTotal yea............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1906 to June 30, 1966 NOWwWork. ated.......... $2,161,000 $620,000 $214,907 $500 $81 $11,772,481 aintlanee" 2,594,330 658,963 233,644 283 3 11,772,186 p13roprf: ated.......... 312,300 243,000 202,000 227,500 297,000 1,847,110 309,203 207,322 240,068 228,405 289,538 1,839,036 798 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 3. LOW HEAD LOCKS AND DAMS, OKLAHOMA There will be three lock-and-dam units on Arkansas and Ver digris Rivers in addition to Robert S. Kerr and Webbersi Faro* With some channel cutoffs and enlargement work they Wll pro- vide a navigable channel 9 feet deep from Fort Smith, Arlg.t vicinity of Catoosa, Okla., where a turning basin will be provier Work under this heading was authorized by 1946 River andar bor Act (H. Doc. 758, 79th Cong., 2d sess., contaad latest published map). A more detailed description for low heost locks and dams is in following paragraphs. Total estimated .Cnel of low head locks and dams, including turning basin, cha cutoffs and enlargement is $103 million. 3. A. LOCK AND DAM NO. 14, ARKANSAS RIVER Location. Four miles east of Redland, Okla. low Existing project. Consists of a gated dam consisting of d a concrete apron and sill on main stem of Arkansas River an lock chamber 110 by 600 feet having a lift of 20 feet. Local cooperation. See requirements for entire project. -tOD Operations and results during fiscal year. On-site constru toe has not started. Contract awarded for manufacturing miter fog and tainter valve operating machinery. Planning and desigu c tinued. m te Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is 5 percent co ple 3. B. LOCK AND DAM NO. 17, VERDIGRIS RIVER Location. Four miles northwest of Okay, Okla. f.vi- Existing project. This unit of multiple-purpose plan for gation on Verdigris River consists of a gated dam with a feet concrete apron and sill and an off-channel lock 110 by 6 having a lift of 21 feet. Local cooperation. See requirements for entire project. de- Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning and sign continued.lete Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is 2 percent comple 3. C. LOCK AND DAM NO. 18, VERDIGRIS RIVER Location. Eight miles southwest of Inola, Okla. vi- Existing project. This unit of multiple-purpose plan for o gation on Verdigris River consists of a gated dam with feet concrete apron and sill and an off-channel lock 110 by 6 0 with a lift of 21 feet. Local cooperation. See requirements for entire project. dde- Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning alnd sign continued. m p l et e Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is 1 percent co Cost and financial statement Total 19t0 3p year................ Fiscal 1962 1903 1984 1985 190806 J Lne New work: Appropriated.......... 10,000 $143,000 $300,000 $544,000 $2,200,000 212, Cost................. 1,691 148,226 270,746 563,720 1,793,341 FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 799 4. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECT s For last Co t to June 30, 1966t full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and 1__ie_,_ro__ ~for- maintenance fromFulton, Ark., to mouth of Washita River, Okla....... 1924 $378,574 $182,157 rtailment of project is recommended in I. Doc. 947, 64th Cong., 1st sess. 5. BIG HIILL RESERVOIR, VERDIGRIS RIVER BASIN, KANS. Lsocation. On Big Hill Creek about 5 miles east of Cherryvale, qUa (See Geological Survey map for Independence, Kans., h7rangle, scale 1:125,000.) feet isting project. Provides for an earthfill dam about 3,610 letong, including spillway, and 87 feet above streambed. Out- ete rks will include a drop inlet intake structure, a 4-foot diam- beOcnduit and a stilling basin. A 24-inch diameter pipe will ca arOcvided for water supply releases. Reservoir will have a total ity of 30,700 acre-feet, (12,600 for flood control and 18,100 afor tro 1cnservation and sedimentation reserve). Reservoir will con- cost iunoff from a drainage area of 36 square miles. Estimated (i Is$4,600,000. Project authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act C. 572, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). ,3O ca l cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, ,and Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. Ileerations erng and results during fiscal year. Continued engi- studies required before advertising construction contracts. eCondition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is 94 complete. Cost and financial statement seal Year Total to . *. .. a........ t 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 work. Aew 0 tropriated.................................. $43,700 $110,100 $131,000 $284,800 " . .................. ............ 40,322 109,173 117,481 266,976 6. BIRCHI RESERVOIR, VERDIGRIS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. diLocation. On Birch Creek, a tributary to Bird Creek in Ver- leds i River Basin. Damsite is about 20 miles southwest of Bart- 14ville, Osage County, Okla. (See Geological Survey map Paw- huska , O 1. Okla., quadrangle, scale 1:125,000 and Army Map Service, ,Okla., map scale 1:250,000.) eljdillitng project. An earthfill dam about 3,180 feet long, in- st g an uncontrolled spillway, constructed to 97 feet above feeetanbed. Reservoir will have a total capacity of 58,200 acre- flo" 9,000 for flood control, 15,840 for water supply and low- ar regulation, and 3,360 for sedimentation reserve. Drainage 0 0~a above damsite is 66 square miles. Estimated cost is $5,930,- (" Existing project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act 0C . 572, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). 800 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, and section 301, Water Supply Act of July 3, 1958, apply.ee Operations and results during fiscal year. Continued engineer ing studies required before advertising construction contracts. is Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning 99 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: $30507 Appropriated..................... $20,000 $125,000 $151,575 $8,50030092 Cost... ........................ 13,542 123,786 159,247 4,352 7. CANTON RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. Location. On North Canadian River about 394 miles abovea mouth and about 3 miles north of Canton, Blaine County, 000.) (See sectional aeronautical chart, Wichita sheet, scale 1:500, 00. Existing project. An earthfill dam and concrete spillwaY 100 feet long, 73 feet above riverbed. Reservoir provides Stor- age of 240,000 acre-feet for flood control, 107,000 acre-feet for con servation, and remaining 39,000 acre-feet for sedimentation reserve, or a total storage of 386,000 acre-feet. Of conservatio storage, 69,000 acre-feet is allocated for future irrigation a d 38,000 acre-feet for municipal water supply. In presentroper tions, 29,000 acre-feet of storage allocated to future irrigation is utilized for flood control and remaining 40,000 acre-feet is t1ti lized for water supply. Outlet works consist of three 7- bYV foot gated sluices through spillway weir. A concrete spillayt controlled by sixteen 40- by 25-foot gates on weir crest, provides for operation of reservoir for flood control. Reservoir contro a drainage area of 12,483 square miles, and is operated as aunita of coordinated reservoir system for flood control in Arkansa River Basin. Federal cost was $10,838,854. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports June 28, 1938 Construction of dam and appurtenant facilities........... H. Doc. 569, 75th Cong F3dIseCoo July 24, 1946 Irrigation storage in the reservoir........... ......... In accordance with see.8, Flood trol Act of 1944. 6 od'Coo June30,1948 Water supply storage in the reservoir.................. In accordance with sec. 6, Flo trol Act of 1944. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 3P" plies. Under terms of existing water supply contracts, beginring in June 1955, city of Oklahoma City, Okla., pays Treasuir $148,550 annually for water supply storage rights in reservoir. Operations and results during fiscal year. All project st111c tures were operated and maintained in a serviceable condition. One noteworthy rise occurred on the North Canadian River above the reservoir. Flooding was prevented on about 3,800 acresO land during the rise. Estimated monetary benefits 'attributed t FLOOD CONTROL-TULSA. OKLA. DISTRICT 801 Cant 0 - - 4 7 7 4n Reservoir operations for prevention of flood damages total ,100 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year I I I I . Start End Maximum Minimum 9 levntio 0 (fee n.. , Stera ( et)s.1......... . . .. 1,611.86 1,615.99 1,616.19 1,611.86 -feet . 94,182 124,878 126,518 94,182 io Ondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of dam was Pro n ijet December 1940, and impoundment began April 1948. Was completed in December 1953. Cost and financial statement 1 1 1 1 1 1 Be18al Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork. M. rooriated. s ce . •• $26,877 $35,913 ................... ......... $10,547,748 enan'C' .. 27,729 35,994.................................. 10,547,748 Rehabilitation:' 132,300 147,400 $198,300 $187,031 $181,500 2,135,266 oPPropriated** 138,263 143,471 197,447 195,180 156,867 2,110,268 Coatrprinted... 286,122 -2,516 .................................... 291,106 118,869 166,671 .................................... 291,106 CEDAR POINT RESERVOIR, GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN, a KANS. ac ocation. On Cedar Creek about 4.2 miles above its mouth Qe.l2 miles south of Cedar Point, Chase County, Kans. (See scal 1cal Survey maps for Cottonwood Falls, Kans., quadrangle, 1:125,000.) Ser s ting project. Provides for flood control and water con- ear tlo in Grand (Neosho) River Basin by construction of an ll dam about 3,580 feet long, 83 feet above streambed. e4rer0rvoir will have a total capacity of 55,000 acre-feet (36,200 Siltatod control and 18,800 for water supply, pollution abatement, ero ionrecreation, and preservation of fish and wildlife). Res- o1 Will be operated as a unit of reservoir system for flood $1 l in Grand (Neosho) River Basin. Estimated cost is '800,000. Project was authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act ocOc. 442, 80th Cong., 2d sess.). 4ies, a cooperation. Section 2,Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- DreOPerations and results during fiscal year. Additional data Cared on economic restudy of project. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Restudy report being reviewed higher authority. Cost and financial statement 802 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 9. CHERRY AND RED FORK CREEKS, OKLA. Location. Minor tributaries in Arkansas River Basin at Tulsad Tulsa County, Okla. (See Geological Survey maps Tulsa, sand Springs, Sapulpa and Jenks, Okla. quadrangles, scale 1 : Existing project. Plan of improvement provides for clear Mi,.ng widening, and deepening channels of Cherry and Red Creeks, and diverting the two streams into a common diver ti channel to Arkansas River. Project is about 2 miles long. mated Federal cost is $229,000. Project was approved forl ct,o" struction under authority of section 205, 1948 Flood Con t r ol 205, and modified by subsequent legislation, including section Flood Control Act of 1962.il Local cooperation. Assurances have been furnished. Loca ifled terests are in final stage of forming a drainage district qual o to fulfill local cooperation requirements. Total non-Federal Co estimate is $339,000. are Operations and results during final year. Local interests ,ly securing right-of-way and performing relocations. PreviotS proposed plans and specifications were reviewed for sufficienCly preparation for advertising construction work. ssary SCondition at end of fiscal year. Upon completion of necess relocations and acquisition of rights-of-way by local interestS construction contract will be advertised. Cost and financial statement Total to 6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 ju At New Appropriated.......... work:13 $1,155 .............................. :..... $170,000 1 1 Cost..................2,636 .................................... 7,875 10. COPAN RESERVOIR, VERDIGRIS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. Location. On Little Caney River, a tributary of CaneyRive in Verdigris River watershed, about 2 miles west of 0Copal Osage County, Okla. (See Geological Survey maps of Now ale Okla., and Sedan and Independence, Kans., quadrangles, .sc 1:125,000 and Army Map Service maps, Tulsa, Okla., and Wic and Joplin, Kans., scale 1:250,000.)et Existing project. Provides for an earthfill dam 7,730 feet long, including a gated spillway section, and a levee 17,000 tlet long. Maximum height above streambed will be 65 feet. utre works will include 36-inch low flow pipe and a 12-inch 0tu e water supply pipe. A total reservoir capacity of 222,600 aCre feet will be provided (34,300 for conservation and 188,3.000for" storage of floodwaters). Drainage area above damsite I ject square miles. Estimated cost of project is $36,700,000. P o7th was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 563, Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published maps). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June S 1938, and section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, apply. FLOOD CONTROL-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 803 iesOPerations and results during fiscal year. Engineering stud- 'required prior to advertising construction contracts continued. 66Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is SPercent complete. Cost and financial statement iscal .Year 102Total to ..... 192 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work. opriated.... .. .... .......... $85,000 $164,200 $191,900 $441,100 ............ 61,364 ........... 184,900 182,184 428,448 11. COUNCIL GROVE RESERVOIR, GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN, KANS. Location. On Grand (Neosho) River about 450 miles above I uth and about 1 mile north of Council Grove, Morris County, r-ans (See Geological Survey maps for Parkerville and Esk- lde, Kans., quadrangles, scale 1:125,000.) 96xistin project. An earthfill dam about 6,500 feet long and -ofeetabove riverbed, with controls composed of a 24-inch low- J ipe, a 17-foot-diameter outlet conduit, and an emergency gttcontrolled saddle spillway 500 feet wide. Reservoir has a total Storage capacity of 114,300 acre-feet (76,000 for flood control and 138,300 for conservation, including 24,400 for water supply and 3,9o00 for pollution abatement and sedimentation). Reservoir ontrols runoff from 246 square miles. Estimated Federal cost C, roject is $11,454,000. Project was authorized by 1950 Flood nrol Act (H. Doc. 442, Cong., 2d sess., contains latest pub- lishe d map). WLocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, and Qater Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. Cities of Council arove and Emporia, Kans., furnished resolutions of intent to re- ay costs allocated to future water storage. PO.erations and results during fiscal year. Construction of rec- e ation facilities completed. One noteworthy rise occurred on oQrand (Neosho) River above reservoir. Flooding was prevented rel about 14,800 acres of land. During low-flow water periods, soeeases totaling 1,025 acre-feet were made from reservoir to r lUpplement municipal water supply for downstream towns and 9 eases totaling 1,025 acre-feet were made from reservoir to uncil Grove Reservoir operations for prevention of flood dam- ages total $96,100 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum Minimum to, netm.s.l)............................ (e 1,275.50 1,269.71 1,277.95 1,269.70 .......................... .. ...... 55,640 37,480 64,470 37,450 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction initiated July 60 and impoundment began October 9, 1964. 804 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to66 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: 453,933 Appropriated..........$3,503,756 $2,794,300 $1,773,000 3795,900 -$3,853 11,443'300 M aintenan~ce:....... MaiCt ance: 3,494,581 2,793,975 1,801,194 804,830 64,147 240 200 Appropriated..........3........................ 34,200 206,000 Cost.............. 139,575 .. . .. . .. . .. 30,856 108,719 12. COW CREEK, KANS. Location. A tributary of Arkansas River in Rice and elo Counties, Kans. (See Geological Survey maps for Lyons, utice inson, and Yagger, Kans., quadrangles and Army Map Ser maps for Hutchinson and Great Bend, Kans., scale 1:250,000.)1 Existing project. Straighten, snag, clear and deepen 33 .s of existing channel, starting at a point south ofInsonLyons, 1tlc- occ,1protec and extending downstream to existing Hutchinson local prted tion project. Estimated Federal cost is $1,800,000 and esti 962 non-Federal cost is $1,160,000. Project was authorized bY 19 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contqa latest published map). ,ese Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, ese ments, and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from d ages; provide necessary alterations of highways, bridgeS ter utilities, except for railroads; maintain and operate project aie completion; prevent encroachment on improved channel; a ot form affected interests, at least annually, that project will provide complete protection against major floods.dies, Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies required for preconstruction planning, were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning percent complete. Cost and financial statement to T~otal Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juie30,196 New work: Appropriated.......... Cost....... .......................... 0......,000 $59,000 ,88 .................................... 11,988 1............ 13. CRUTCHO CREEK, OKLA. Location, Tributary of North Canadian River in Oklahor City, Midwest City, and Dell City, Oklahoma County, Okla. (Se, Geological Survey maps Midwest City, Choctaw, and Spene Okla., quadrangles, scale 1:24,000).t5 Existing project. Plan is to enlarge and straighten abot miles of channel, construct a diversion channel 7,000 feet 1edFaa and clear and snag about 2 miles of old channel. Estimated 00- eral cost is $1,870,000 and estimated non-Federal cost is $1,03c0. 000. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (S. Doe. 47, 89th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map). FLOOD CONTROL---TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 805 Loal cooperation. Local interest must provide lands, ease- dams, and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from relocdaxs; maintain and operate completed project; perform all ions, except railroads; prevent encroachment on existing cand Dloliproved channel; and inform affected interest annually of O'ible flows exceeding channel capacity. 0 2Perationsand results during fiscal year. None. PriaOndition at end of fiscal year. Funds have not been appro- lrted to initiate preconstruction planning. 14. DEQUEEN RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, ARK. i~Location. On Rolling Fork River, a tributary of Little River, Geovi e r County, about 4 miles northwest of DeQueen, Ark. (See haoOgical Survey map, DeQueen, Ark., quadrangle, and Army Ex ervices map, McAlester, Okla., scale 1: 250,000.) cois4ting project. Plan is an earthfill dam, 2,360 feet long, 200sructed to 160 feet above streambed. Uncontrolled spillway, te feet wide, will be about 1,400 feet west of main embankment. roVdoir will control 169 square miles of drainage area and CoPt Oe a total storage of 136,100 acre-feet (101,200 for flood ree storage and 34,900 for conservation and sedimentation arve). Outlet works will be a gated conduit, 12 feet in di- auther: Estimated cost of project is $11,500,000. Project was lt orzed by 1958 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 170, 85th Cong., L ess ., contains latest published map). set cal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, and ~io 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. etPerationsand results during fiscal year. Acquisition of lands, ca~~i1eering studies, and preparation of contract plans and specifi- ia1 ls initiated. Work started April 28, 1966, on project build- is and access road. 19 6-ondition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in April anld project is about 7 percent complete. . Cost and financial statement "ealYear Total to ....... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Nwork. Opriated .................... $25,000 $161,600 $285,000 $928,000 $1,399,600 ...... ............ 14,522 116,774 314,533 375,501 821,329 15. DIERKS RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, ARK. Location. On Saline River, a tributary of Little River, about ical a northwest of Dierks, Howard County, Ark. (See Geolog- SSqurvey map, DeQueen, Ark., quadrangle, and Army Map Ices map, McAlester Okla., scale 1:250,000.) ab project. Plan is an earthfill dam 850 feet long and fetZisting .136 feet above streambed. An uncontrolled spillway 300 cet Vide will be in a saddle at west end of dam. Outlet works vCdsisting of a gated conduit 19 feet in diameter, will be pro- arvd d. Reservoir will control a drainage area of 113 square miles 'PDrovide for storage of 66,000 acre-feet for flood control, 12,100 806 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 acre-feet for water supply, and 1,900 acre-feet for sedimentation reserve, a total of 80,000 acre-feet. Estimated cost of project $10,600,000. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Ac (H. Doc. 170, 85th Cong., 1st sess., for latest published map).d Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, al section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. ie s Operations and results during.fiscal year. Engineering studies required prior to advertising construction contracts continu ised Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning about 95 percent complete. Cost and financial statement rotal to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J New work: $521923 Appropriated.......... .......... $20,000 $153,833 $178,490 $169,600 4266 Cost............ . ..... 10,727 100,857 238,185 148,496 16. DOUGLASS RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, KANS. Location. On Little Walnut Creek, a tributary of Walnut Eiver, about 7 miles southeast of Augusta, Butler County, Kans. (S-ee Geological Survey maps of Garden and Augusta, Kans. quad rangles, scale 1:24,000.)g Existing project. An earthfill dam 11,640 feet long, includioot a gated spillway 136 feet long with three 40-foot-wide by 35-ut high tainter gates. Dam will be 89 feet above streambed. O let works will include 24-inch low flow and 24 inchwatersuP pipes. Reservoir will control a drainage area of 2 3 8 squareled and provide for 76,400 acre-feet of flood control storage ae- 95,500 acre-feet for conservation uses, a total of 171,900 acre feet. Estimated cost of project is $20 million. Project wr authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 232, 89th Co119' 1st sess., contains latest published maps).r9 Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aa Water Supply Act of 1958 as amended, apply. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Funds for preconstructiol planning have not been appropriated. 17. EL DORADO, KANS. Location. West Branch of Walnut River at El Dorado, Butler County, Kans. (See Geological Survey map El Dorado, Kals" quadrangle scale 1: 24,000.) est Existing .project. A local protection project to improve Branch channel for 1.6 miles through city of El Dorado. t proved channel will be 8,400 feet long, 13 feet deep with a botO width of 150 feet. Spoil bank levee will be 16,800 feet long, ao training levee 4,900 feet long will be constructed at upper end ed project. Estimated Federal cost is $1,320,000 and estim 05 non-Federal cost is $525,000. Project was authorized bY 1S Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 232, 89th Cong., 1st sess., conta" latest published map). Local cooperation. Local interest must provide lands, ease FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 807 eaIt s, forlages;andmaintain rights-of-way; hold the United States free from and operate all works after completion; per- form all relocations except railroads; acquire fee title to lands la borrow and ponding purposes and flowage easements over anad for ponding only; and prevent encroachment on existing Oimproved channel. OPerationsand results during fiscal year. None. Pr aOndition of fiscal year. Funds have not been appro- at endpreconstruction atedto initiate planning. 18. EL DORADO RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, KANS. abocation. On Walnut River, a tributary of Arkansas River, eolut 2 miles east of El Dorado, Butler County, Kans. (See eaological maps of El Dorado and De Graff, Kans., quadrangle, 1: 3e24,ooo.) •in Eiting project Provides for an earthfill dam 9,650 feet long, by ld ing a gated spillway 136 feet long with three 40-foot wide bed -foot high tainter gates. Dam will be 88 feet above stream- and' Reservoir will control 235 square miles of drainage area cod Provide a total storage of 167,500 acre-feet (75,200 for flood illrol storage and 92,300 for conservation uses). Outlet work wile consist of a 24-inch low flow pipe and a 24 inch water supply au' Estimated cost of project is $25,600,000. Project was 1sthorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 232, 89th Cong., tsess., contains latest published maps). WL' at oOl cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 and Oter Supply Act of 1958 as amended, apply. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. ateonditionat end of fiscal year. Funds have not been appropri- d to initiate preconstruction planning. 19. ELK CITY RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, KANS. eLOcation On Elk River about 7 miles northwest of Independ- roce, Montgomery County, Kans. (See Geological Survey maps SCaney-N1E24. NW. and SW. and Benton, Kans., quadrangles, ae 1: 24,0000.) Ox7isting project. An earthfill dam about 4,902 feet long and lon feet above streambed. An earthfill dike about 21,400 feet Sidand 43 feet in maximum height in a saddle along southeast da e of reservoir. Uncontrolled spillway in a saddle southeast of e"a1 With a net width of 400 feet. Reservoir will have a total caacity of 291,000 acre-feet (240,400 for flood control, 50,600 for col~seration storage and sedimentation reserve). Reservoir will $1rol runoff from 634 square miles. Estimated Federal cost is 19'932,000. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1I (f. Doc. 440, 76th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published MLcal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, and thater Act of 1958, as amended, apply. State of Kansas, roughSupply its Water Resources Board, furnished a resolution re- st esting minimum provision of 24,300 acre-fpet of water supply Orage in reservoir.I 808 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Major constructiJ and real estate acquisition are complete except for completio~en embankment and public-use facilities. Estimated monetary efits attributed to Elk City Reservoir for prevention of flood da ages total $14,800 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum Miium Elevation (feet m.s.l.).... 728 783.29 I Elevation (feet m l . ............. ......... ... ......... ..... 782.88 783.29 Storage.................................................... 10,580 11,300 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Febru ary 1962 and project is about 98 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19 New work: Appropriated......... $1,045,000 $2,082,000 $5,200,000 $8,544,000 $1,750,000 192;193 18, Maintenance: intance:ost.............. : 966,624 :2:0 2,122,093 4,950,280 8,100,988 2,223,085 Appropriated................... .................. ............ 117,000 Cost............... ....... 23,205 20. FALL RIVER RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, KANS. Location. On Fall River about 54 miles above its conflueTce with Verdigris River and about 4 miles northwest of Fall lver Greenwood County, Kans. (See Geological Survey maPs Eureka, Kans., quadrangle, scale 1:125,000; and Severy, quadrangle scale 1:62,500.)th Existing project. Ani earthfill dam and concrete spillway :d. a total length of about 6,015 feet and 94 feet above streambol Reservoir provides storage of 235,100 acre-feet for flood codi- and 23,900 acre-feet for water supply, pollution abatement, stal mentation reserve, recreation, and preservation of wildlife, a t of 259,000 acre-feet. A concrete channel spillway, controlled bY eight 50- by 25-foot gates on weir crest, provides regultio0one floodflows into river valley below. Outlet works consist of sev 5- by 8.5-foot gated sluices through spillway weir. Reservoir co," trols a drainage area of 585 square miles. Federal cost waS $10 494,413. Project authorized by Flood Control Act of 1941 (' Doc. 440, 76th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map SLocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 19 3, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. All project stru tures were operated and maintained in a serviceable conditO e During low-water periods, releases totaling 1,393 acre-feet ere made from reservoir to supplement municipal water supplY for downstream towns and other usages. Estimated monetary bel, fits attributed to Fall River Reservoir operations for preventO" of flood damages total $9,098,900 to June 30, 1965. FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 809 Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year SStart End Maximum Minimum tlrage ''U re ......... 948.50 048.55 953.75 947.96 eration (feet m.s.l.)........................... 048.50 48.55 953.75 947.96 S ....... 23,940 24,060 39,660 22,640 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of dam was Started May 1946 and completed May 1949. Cost and financial statement S1eal Year Total to ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Ne work: ~ A lroPriated..... Co priated........ ... -$348. ..................... $10,494,413 Maintenance:......... ...................................................... 10,494,413 opriated........... 104,500 $110,200 $94,000 $111,631 $98,000 1,393,307 101,425 108,135 100,234 112,580 93,940 1,389,012 21, FORT SUPPLY RESERVOIR, NORTH CANADIAN RIVER, OKLA. ocattion. On Wolf Creek, a tributary of North Canadian ker, about 12 miles northwest of Woodward, Woodward County, 1:p ,a (See sectional aeronautical chart, Wichita sheet, scale 'oi,3ti0g project. An earthfill dam and concrete spillway with aotcd length of 11,865 feet, 85 feet above streambed. Reservoir rovldes storage of 101,800 acre-feet (87,300 for flood control and co00 for recreation and perservation of wildlife). Outlet works gast of a semi-elliptical conduit controlled by three vertical-lift f alnd a stilling basin. A concrete chute-type spillway, 540 gl, fo log, controlled by a concrete weir at upstream end, provides 1passage of floodflows. Reservoir controls a drainage area of S square milesr and is operated as a unit of coordinated reser- co system for flood control in Arkansas River Basin. Federal cot was $7 ,560,158. Existing project was authorized by Flood ptrol Act'of 1936 (H. Doc. 308, 74th Cong., 1st session.). ,1Lcal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- Under terms of existing water supply contract, Board of P :blic fol Affairs, State of Oklahoma, pays Treasury $1,660 annually 3 Water supply storage rights in reservoir. t~ Perations and results during fiscal year. All project struc- Aues Were operated and maintained in a serviceable condition. Watotal of 181 acre-feet was made available from reservoir for ter Supply. Estimated monetary benefits attributed to Fort Supply Reservoir operations for prevention of flood damages total 263,100 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations during fiscal year Start End Maximum Minimum ien(aere-feet) t~ (feetm .s.1.)............................ . 2,004.80 2,003.88 2,005.97 2,003.08 ............................... 16,270 14,320 18,540 12,960 810 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for additional recreational facilities. Construction work on dai was started October 1938, and project placed in full operatio May 1942. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1906 June New work: Appropriated.......... $11, 756.... Cost .............. 12,688 .. . . ........ ....... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 92,000 $107,100 $135,300 $120,024 $142,500 1,582 88 Cost................. 91,484 106,554 137,733 120,871 138,459 22. GILLHAM RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, ARK. Location. Damsite is on Cossatot River in Howard COulnte about 6 miles northeast of Gillham, Sevier County, Ark. Sle Geological Survey Map, DeQueen, Ark.-Okla. quadrangle, e 1:125,000; and Atimony, Gilliam NE, Vandervoort and Empire Ark., quadrangles, scale 1: 24,000.) -ott Existing project. Plan provides for an earthfill darnm ab 1,750 feet long, 160 feet above streambed. Controlled spillWy' 240 feet gross width, will be in a saddle immediately west of d-0 Reservoir will provide a total storage of 221,800 acre-feet (18ei 700 for flood control, 33,100 for conservation storage and se mentation reserve). Reservoir will control a drainage areaO 271 square miles. Project will be operated as a unit in a seven reservoir system for flood control in Little River waterhect thereby reducing Red River floodflows. Estimated cost of proJet is$14,800,000. Project authorized by 1958 Flood Control Ad (H. Doc. 170, 85th Cong., 1st session., for additional details n latest published maps). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 1938, and of Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. Lakes Water District furnished a resolution of intent to repa costs allocated to water supply storage.d Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering5.s ies, acquisition of lands, and construction of project buildinc continued. Phase I of right access road is complete. Constru d tion of phase II of right abutment access road, outlet works, n relocation of Howard County roads initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began June 1963 and project is 24 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Tot." to Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 New work: 4 00910 Appropriated...........$130,000 $324,000 $900,000$1,205,000 $1,285 000 3,2,131 Cost.................. 155,202 309,378 837,334 950,338 1,188,324 FLOOD CONTROL-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT , 811 23. GREAT SALT PLAINS RESERVOIR, SALT FORK OF , ARKANSAS RIVER. OKLA. eastoca tion . On Salt Fork of Arkansas River about 12 miles (See sectional aero- Cherokee, Alfalfa County, Okla. CautC at.chart, Wichita sheet, scale 1:500,000.) 6,01 t ng project. An earthfill dam and concrete spillway age oqeet long, 72 feet above riverbed. Reservoir provides stor- sedif 242,700 acre-feet for flood control and 37,500 acre-feet for a to ntation reserve, recreation, and preservation of wildlife, or 310 feee of .280,200 acre-feet. A concrete cascade-type spillway vides t Wide, containing three gravity-type concrete weirs, pro- Wors or passage of floodflows into river valley below. Outlet consist cente sect of four ungated 10- by 12-foot conduits through of 3r ion of upper weir. Reservoir controls a drainage area rese,9 square miles, and is operated as a unit of coordinated elervoir system for flood control in Arkansas River Basin. Fed- trol $4,626,270. Project authorized by 1936 Flood Con- Wstwas liAct (I. Doc. 308, 74th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest lshed maps). L c l cooperation. Section DR 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 top erations and results during fiscal year. All project struc- ,isWere operated and maintained in a serviceable condition. erl"ated monetary benefits attributed to Great Salt Plains Res- torVoir SJuneoperations 30, 1965. for prevention of flood damages total $5,151,600 Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year Start End Maximum Minimum 6a.,... to (feet1m..)......................... 1,126.05 1,124.45 1,126.20 1,124.42 fe "kevatio 'a reteet)....... ..................... 47,160 32,860 48,650 32,610 SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction work on dam a4 initiated September 1938 and completed July 1941. Cost and financial statement CalYear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NeW Work: C roriated.......................................................... ............ $4,626,270 .. Mal nance . . .. .......... 72... ............ 4,626,270 0 ropriated.......... $68,800 $62,600 $69,700 $74,872 $62,500 1,281,343 ............... 63,143 69,026 60,320 75,235 55,517 1,274,000 24. HIUGO RESERVOIR, KIAMICHI RIVER, OKLA. hocation. On Kiamichi River, about 7 miles east of Hugo, hoetaw County, Okla. Oa, quadrangle, (See Geological Survey map for Alikchi, scale 1:125,000.) Dlisting w project. Provides for an earthfill dam and concrete ~~1ay about ill pray9,330 feet long, 99 feet above streambed. streambed. Spill-vides Spill- 812 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 way and outlet works will be combined in a concrete structure in flood plain near center of dam. Reservoir will have a total capacity of 849,500 acre-feet, with initial allocation of 809,500 for flood control and 40,000 for conservation and sediment, re- serve. Reservoir will control runoff from 1,709 square Inles Estimated cost is $30,700,000. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1946 (S. Doc. 145, 87th Cong., 2d sess., for latest published map).d Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, and Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. State of Okla homa through its Water Resources Board and local interest furnished resolutions of intent to repay costs allocated to water supply storage.std- Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineeringstud ies required prior to advertising construction contracts continus Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning 71 percent complete. Cost and financial statement to Total Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juneo301 New work: $454971 Appropriated.............................. $85,000 $125,700 $184,271 428746 Cost................. ....................... 72,773 137,797 158,175 25. HULAH RESERVOIR, CANEY RIVER, OKLA. Location. On Caney River, about 15 miles northwest of 13rat lesville, near Hulah, Osage County, Okla. (See Geological sr vey maps for Pawhuska, Okla., and Sedan, Kans., quadrangle scale 1 :125,000.) Existing project. Earthfill dam, including dike and concrete spillway, is 6,315 feet long and 94 feet above riverbed. Reservo provides 257,800 acre-feet for flood control storage and 34,70d acre-feet for conservation, sedimentation reserve, recreation, e preservation of wildlife, a total of 292,500 acre-feet. A concrehe channel spillway, controlled by ten 40- by 25-foot gates on th weir crest, regulates floodflows into river valley below. Reservoi controls a drainage area of 732 square miles. Estimated FederaI cost is $11,346,000. Project authorized by Flood Control Acto 1936 and modified by Public Law 843, 84th Congress which '.u- thorized sale of water-supply storage space to city of Bartlesvile Okla. (H. Doc. 308, 74th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest P lished maps). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, aP plies. Under terms of an existing 50-year water-supply contract beginning in June 1957, city of Bartlesville, Okla., pays Treasur $21,800 annually for water supply storage rights in reservor. Operations and results during fiscal year. One noteWorthy rise occurred on Caney River above the reservoir. Floodte prevented on an average of about 49,400 acres of land during the rise. Estimated monetary benefits attributed to Hulah Reser0 voir operations for prevention of flood damages total $12,77,0 to FLOOD CONTROL-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 813 6,0 28une 30, 1965. During low-water periods, releases totaling acre-feet were made from the reservoir to supplement usagecipal water supply for downstream towns and for other st aoes. A total of 4,648 acre-feet of impounded water supply 5~ ' and Oil Recovery Corp. PooI elevations and storages during fiscal year Start End Maximum Minimum to ( ...... ....................... 733.02 732.90 744.29 731.73 cre-eet).... ...................34,730 34,290 90,850 30,310 9COndition at end of fiscal year. Project was started in May ties and completed in June 1950. Additional recreation facili- are required to complete project. Cost and financial statement iscal year Total to 19.........1963 1962 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 N8% ork: opronrl oat ated " .. . $26,244 $58,693 .- $500 $19,877 $11,099,620 Ma1Aenance;' ... . S 25,992 62,773 $73 210 17,274 11,096,894 Cost opriated Rehab ilitatiari:..... " . 101,200 114,00 117,800 131,532 197,500 1,393,890 105,155 112,088 119,806 129,596 141,694 1,332,934 AD roPHated... -14,282.. .................................... 135,718 Coat' " " ' .. , 108,047 .............................................. 135,718 26. JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, GRAND Lo (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN, KANS. hortwtion. Dam is on Grand (Neosho) River about 2 miles SturvWest of Burlington, Coffey County, Kans. (See Geological scaley 1aps for Burlington and Emporia, Kans., quadrangles, e 1:125,000.) Way t'ng project. An earthfill dam and gated concrete spill- a Total length of structure including embankment, spillway bed 1kheads is 21,790 feet and height is 86.5 feet above stream- 8810eservoir has a total capacity of 644,600 acre-feet, of which ate1 acre-feet is for flood control and 56,500 acre-feet for and r Supply, pollution abatement, sediment reserve, recreation, dra .reservation of fish and wildlife. Reservoir controls a total 8,800,00. area of . 3,015 square miles. Estimated cost is $2aage xisting project was authorized by the following: Acts3 Work authorized Documents S Construction of reservoir........................... H. Doe. 442, 80th Cong., 2d sess.1 Renaming dam and reservoir to John Redmoind Dam and. . . Reservoir. 8 latest published maps. 814 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Localof 1938 and Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ais Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. Through State Water Resources Board, the State of Kansas furnished resolution requesting minimum provision of 34,900 acre-feet of water-supply storage in reservoir.e. Operations and results during fiscal year. Acquisition ofrle ervoir lands and construction of recreation facilities complebove One noteworthy rise occurred on Grand (Neosho) River aland reservoir. Flooding prevented on about 18,300 acres of la* during flood. Estimated monetary benefits attributed to res 0 voir operations for prevention of flood damages total $1,5, to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year Start End Maximum Minim ... ,._..__ r. a 1035, 1,050.30 Elevation (feet m.s.1.)............................ 1,036.01 1,050.306 1, 0 Storage (acre-feet)............................... 226,680 56,530 226,680 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was init i ntedd July 1959 and completed in December 1965. Project place in flood control operation in July 1964. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: 010 t.................. $6,711,600 Appropriated.......... Co 6360,20 $10,023,000 $4,530,000 $793,000 $267,000 2 3 Cost. .. . 6,793,10910,064,6364,593,376 692,081 360,299 40 Maintenance: 315'39 Appropriated........... ........... ........................87,400 228,000 242 Cost........ ...................................... 82,208 159,931 27. KAW RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER, OKLA. Location. On Arkansas River about 8 miles east ofr City, Kaw County, Okla. (See Geological Survey maps for Foraker, and Belford Okla., quadrangles, scale 1:250,00.) eet Existing project. flan is for an earthfill dam about 9,740f long, 129 feet above streambed, with a gate-controlled spill ra 3 A sluice through spillway section will provide for low flow red pins.t lation and a 48-inch-diameter water supply pipe will be through dam. Reservoir will have a total storage capacitYfor 1,348,000 acre-feet (919,400 for flood control and 428,600 oi conservation and sedimentation). Drainage area above reserVo contains 46,530 square miles. Reservoir will control runoff fted a normal contributing area of 7,250 square miles. EstmIands costs are $28,085,000 for construction, and $58,515,000 for 19 6 and damages; a total of $86,600,000. Project authorized by t1i Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 143, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contai latest published map). d Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 19381,and section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958 apply. FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 815 eOP erations and results during fiscal year. Acquisition of real ove was estooe, initiated. and Construction contract for project buildings, right access road awarded. Detailed engineering 8tilies arind investigations continued. J COndition at end of fiscal year. Project construction began in Ue 1966 and is about 1 percent complete. Cost and financial statement ical yTotal to ............. 192 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Work. opriated...... .......... $75,000 $186,000 $270,000 $664,000 $1195,000 .............. 64,755 O190,090272,576 528,261 1,055,682 28. LAKE KEMP RESERVOIR, WICHITA RIVER, TEX. iccatio n . On Wichita River about 40 miles southwest of 500,00ta Falls, Tex. (See aeronautical chart, Dallas, scale 1: 250, 0 0 .)nd Army Map Service map, Wichita Falls, Tex., scale 1: oisting project. Plan is to reconstruct and expand existing fll'Federal reservoir by raising dam 3 feet and providing a new total way and outlet works. Reconstructed project will have a 200o0 storage of 526,000 acre-feet (190,000 for conservation, xi or flood control, and 136,000 for sediment reserve). erautlg spillway will be abandoned and blocked off by improved contlkiment and a new controlled spillway and stilling basin aboructed about 2,500 feet from right abutment. Drainage area $8,e damsite is 2,099 square miles. Estimated Federal cost is 2ut a4 60,000 and estimated non-Federal cost is $320,000. Project horized by 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 144i 87th Cong., 2Sess., contains latest published map). al a4 c cooperation. Local interests will continue to operate localMaintain a en and alter entire project; operate flood control features; re- existing buildings, highways, bridges, sewers, ldrovspecial facilities; hold the United States free from damages; Carede lands for construction and operation; preserve existing the acity of channel through city of Wichita Falls; and reimburse tion ited States for cost of reconstruction allocated to conserva- Storage. OiesPerations required and to prior results during fiscal year. Engineering stud- advertising construction contracts continued. 84 Conldition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is Percent complete. Cost and financial statement year Total to ...... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New -ork,___ oariated.......... .............. ........ . $60,000 $124,800 $113,500 $298,300 ........................... .... 58,636 121,417 100,248 280,301 816 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 29. LUKFATA RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, OKLA. tl Location. On Glover Creek at mile 17.3, about 61/2 mileS nor of Glover, McCurtain County, Okla. (See Geological strel, map, Lukfata, Okla., quadrangle, scale 1:125,000; and Becale Smithville, Golden and Broken Bow, Okla., quadrangles, 1: 62,500.)bout Existing project. Plan provides for an earthfill dan 'aIoat 1,645 feet long, and 225 feet above streambed. Uncontrolledd a ural saddle spillway, will be about 21/2 miles southwest of feet Reservoir will provide a total storage of 206,600 ace0 for (172,000 for flood control, 30,900 for conservation, and , area sedimentation reserve). Reservoir will control a drainage a of 291 square miles. Project will be operated as a unit ~ d, seven-reservoir system for flood control in Little River waters ect thereby reducing Red River floodflows. Estimated cost of Pro ct is $13,400,000. Project authorized by 1958 Flood Control ad (H. Doc. 170, 85th Cong., 1st sess., has additional details latest published map).y Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ad Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. studies Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering 8 and investigations continued. . re- Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction plannlete. quired prior to initiation of construction is 41 percent coP Cost and financial statement Total t 60 Fiscal year............... 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June , New work: 21403 Appropriated.......... ............... -$373 $22,500 $146,50 0O 206 Cost.................. $848 $92 58 17,231 143,53 39 30. MARION RESERVOIR, GRAND (NEOSHIO) RIVER BASIN, iANS Location. On Cottonwood River, about 3 miles northwest O Marion, Marion County, Kans. (See Geological Survey rnXP Newton, Kans., quadrangle, scale 1:125,000.) bot Existing project. An earthfill dam and concrete spillwa.y aro1 8,403 feet long, and 67 feet above streambed. Reservoir Will pted vide a total storage of 146,800 acre-feet (60,000 will be allotjol, for flood control, 82,900 for pollution abatement and conserv~0 a and 3,900 for sedimentation reserve). Reservoir will cont"t is drainage area of 200 square miles. Estimated cost of proe eAt $13,600,000. Project was authorized by 1950 Flood Controatest (H. Doc. 442, 80th Cong., 2d sess., for additional details and la published map).P Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, plies. sttd Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering tiol ies, investigations, and land acquisition continued. Constru col' of spillway, project buildings, embankment, and relocations5 c tinued. Construction of right abutment access road initiated. FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, 817 OKLA., DISTRICT 19Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in June 64 and project is about 55 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Year Total to . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 work. New oriat ................. ... $88,00 $1,015,000 $3,500,000 $3,450,000 $8,222,000 .... 7,449 103,055 97,508 3,3s8,1553535,604 8,100,705 31. MILLWOOD RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, ARK. Lit~cation. On Little River about 2 miles northeast of Millwood, 'Lo River County, Ark. (See Geological 1o 2500Dorado, Ark. and McAlester, Okla.,maps NI-8 and 15-4 quadrangle, scale, a tting project. Earthfill dam, including concrete spillway streaonoverflow section, 17,554 feet long and 88 feet above 'ibed. 1ol Plan also provides for reservoir rim dikes to confine Pnov d Protect local improvements at Okay, Ark. Reservoir will control" a total storage of 1,858,000 acre-feet (1,651,400 for flood reserve" 154,600 for conservation, and 52,000 for sedimentation 1iles ),,.Reservoir,controlling a drainage area of 4,144 square ood 'will be operated as a unit in a seven-reservoir system for o oontrol in Little River and Red River Valleys. Estimated oS Pt roject is $43,077,000. Project was authorized by Flood (Io1rol Act of 1946, and modified by Flood Control Act of 1958 L 0 .170 85th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map). 1938 ct cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, West' and Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. South- bu -rkaansas Water District entered into a contract to reim- age a the United States for costs allocated to water supply stor- Sad facilities. .erations and results during fiscal year. Acquisition of res- rvletr lands continued. All major construction essentially com- Reservoir placed in flood control operation in June 1965. Re - Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year Start End Maximum Minimum 0lv 6lt~ofa ''l (feet ma,. r fee t m..l.)........ .......... ......... 255.50 232.30 268.02 229.70 ..........................111,640 1,530 542,190 1,066 COndition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated eptember 1961 and is 99 percent complete. 818 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1 964 1965 1966 une 30 New work: $43076 892 Appropriated.......... $2,525,330 $5,600,000$18,066,500$12,587,849 $3,337,897 732,568 Coste.................. 2,259,453 4,983,585 18,545,123 11,801,223 4,362,105 Maintenance:. 496 Appropriated.................... ......... .. 49,500 4,206 Cost............... .. .4,206 32. OOLOGAH RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, OKLA.o Location. On Verdigris River about 10 miles northwest f Claremore, Rogers County, Okla. (See Geological Survey 0i for Claremore and Nowata, Okla., quadrangles, scale 1:125,00 Existing project. Earthfill dam is about 4,000 feet long ro- 129 feet above riverbed. Reservoir, as initially operated, acre vides 963,000 acre-feet for flood control storage, 48,700v are feet for water supply and 9,300 acre-feet for sedimentatiodlr serve, a total of 1,021,000 acre-feet. Two gated concrete condt extend through embankment to form outlet works. An off-ch'u* nel uncontrolled saddle spillway about 2 miles east of left abl* ment provides for passage of floodwater into valley below d Reservoir controls a drainage area of 4,339 square miles. s to includes provisions for additional storage by addition of gatedi- initially constructed spillway, a dike east of spillway, and thor. tional reservoir clearing. Ultimate project is a unit in au ized Arkansas River navigation plan. Estimated cos $44,050,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents June 28, 1938 Construction of a flood controlreservoir................. Committee Doc. 1, 75th Cg'se H. Doc. 758, 79th Cong. 2d July 24, 19461 Installation of hydroelectric power facilities.............. SHydroelectric power features considered inactive, because under present criteria Powe not justified and they are excluded from present plan of improvement. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1 983S section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958 ap)ply. Under terms 0nof existing water supply contract, beginning in June 1963,yFulb Service Co. of Oklahoma, Tulsa, Okla., pays Treasury $5, ct$ annually for water supply storage rights in reservoir. Contred for municipal and industrial water supply storage were appro of with cities of Tulsa and Collinsville, Okla., and with a groUtP citizens of Claremore, Okla. tre" Operations and results during fiscal year. All project sOe tures operated and maintained in serviceable condition- re noteworthy rise occurred above the reservoir. Flooding P vented on an average of about 500 acres during the 3 Public Service Co. of Oklahoma and Collinsville, Okla., used 2, FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 819 Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year End Maximum Minimum fei "----Start 'levation tor ~ (nc etm.8.s1.)60 (feet), .... ..................... . 6 .22 608.11 61.5.077 637.50 007.77 59,350 58,680 139,200 56,640 aeref eo ateeet of water from reservoir. Estimated monetary benefits eltio tedito operation of partially completed reservoir for pre- n of flood damages total $4,064,600 to June 30, 1965. bCodition at end of fiscal year. After construction of right ctobernt access road, project was placed in standby status in olpler 1ol. Construction was resumed in December 1955 and Peted in May 1963 for initial development. Cost and financial statement l Year....Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork; ..$1,539,000 $1,195,000 $525,000 $260,000 $73,000 1$36,678,591 1,817,618 1,498,332 699,328 253,252 90,958 136,673,404 Coat pratd 79,200 122,900 171,200 198,251 185,000 815,801 contributed P......... 77,624 122,278 ,2fund1. 159,577 210,031 181,210 812,126 .... S ,430,275 contributed funds. 33 OPTIMA RESERVOIR, NORTH CANADIAN RIVER, OKLA. ofLcation. On North Canadian River about 42 miles northeast thatardesty Texas County, Okla. (See sectional aeronautical ,. Wichita sheet, scale 1:500,000.) colstiting project. Provides for flood control and irrigation by a totuction of an earthfill dam and uncontrolled spillway with leseal length of 16,700 feet and 120 feet above streambed. florvoir provides for storage of 100,500 acre-feet of water for feet control, 117,650 acre-feet for water supply, and 11,350 acre- acreor sedimnentation reserve, making a total storage of 229,500 reseet. Reservoir will be used for recreational and wildlife liuedvation purposes. Outlet works will consist of a 13-foot c gate tower. Estimated cost is $24,900,000. Author- ized brlcal se, Y Flood Control Act of 1936 (H. Doc. 308, 74th Cong., 1st is as modified by Flood Control Act of 1950. Present damsite ee d alternate site about 15 miles downstream from that consid- iln project document. Di cl cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- O for flood control features. iestgreatrions and results during fiscal year. Engineering stud- Coequired prior to advertising construction contracts continued. airstlruction of project buildings, right abutment access road, litiel d and relocations initiated. Acquisition of real estate 1,Cndition at end of fiscal year. Construction started March 6 , and is about 5 percent complete. 820 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Appropriated.......... $9,434 $40,000 $160,000 $201,000 $822,000 ,329 Cost................. 65,376 42,788 128,564 234,537 666,937 34. PAT MAYSE RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, TEX. Location. On Sanders Creek, a tributary of Red River,lical 12 miles north of Paris, Lamar County, Tex. (See Geolog Survey map, Grant, Tex., quadrangle, scale 1: 62,500 and A Map Service Texarkana, Tex., map, scale 1: 250,000.) t 7 080 Existing project. Provides for an earthfill dam abou feet feet long, including an uncontrolled spillway, 96let a above streambed. Outlet works will consist of a drop illI 512-foot diameter conduit and a stilling basin. A 2 4-inch 1m flow pipe and a 12-inch water supply pipe will be installed in daol, Reservoir will have 64,600 acre-feet reserved for flood contIon, and 124,500 acre-feet will be for conservation and sediments to making a total of 189,100 acre-feet. Channel from dansite t mouth of stream, about 2 miles, will be improved by clearing a snagging. Drainage area above dam is 175 square miles. oo mated cost is $7,700,000. Project was authorized by 1962 Fte Control Act (H. Doc. 71, 88th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map).d Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 or section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, apply. Contract fis municipal and industrial water supply storage with city ofaris- Tex., for $31,284 has been approved. td Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering Sted. ies required prior to advertising construction contracts contil . u ild ' Construction on embankment, access road, and project b i and acquisition of real estate continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in 1arc 1965 and project is about 52 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total t Fiscal year ................ 963 3964 1866 3966 Jue 91962 work: Now Appropriated.................... 000 .........$ 125,000 $900,000 $4,075,000 :, Cost................. ........... 122,129 634,603 3,222,235 35. PINE CREEK RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, OKLA . Location. On Little River, about 5 miles northwest of rh City, McCurtain County, Okla. (See Geological Survey it Alikchi, Okla., quardrangle, scale 1:125,000; and Wrighit S cale ale and Pickens, Okla., quadrangles, NE, NW, SE, and SW, 1:24,000.) Existing project. An earthfill dam about 8,300 feet long, feet feet above streambed. Controlled spillway will be about 630fee FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 821 vid7e, Id a and t o t alocated t r gat fright 4 5 8abutment 0 a r of dam. Reservoir will pro- 70o5 total storage of 465,800 acre-feet (388,100 for flood control, eery0for conservation, and 7,200 for sedimentation reserve) ect oir will control a drainage area of 635 square miles. Proj- operated as a unit in a seven-reservoir system for flood botbe ool in Little River watershed, thereby reducing Red River wa~os. Estimated cost of project is $21,200,000. Project Col uthorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (see H. Doc. 170, 85th 1st sess., for additional details and latest published map). 19 8ola cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, 81 and title III, section 301, of Water Supply Act of 1958, ie itMountain-Lakes Water District furnished a resolution of ltto repay costs allocated to water supply storage. e alatons and results during fiscal year. Engineering stud- let W~Woacquisition of real estate continued. Construction of out- oetr s, main dam, dikes, and relocations initiated. ebr ditonat end of fiscal year. Construction was started in R6dlvvest uary 1963 and project is about 25 percent complaete. Cost and financial statement Year Total to ... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ......... . $213,000 $555,000 $925,793 $915,000 $3,335,000 $6,159,293 .. 175,143 535,531 972,443 888,694 2,600,137 5,384,259 36. PLUM CREEK, WICHITA FALLS, TEX. W.Ocation. A tributary of Wichita River at Wichita Falls, 11)-hita County, Tex. (See Geological Survey map for Wichita s West, Tex., quadrangle, scale 1: 24,000.) eu' sitinq. Project. Plan provides for clearing, widening, deep- tribu, realigning and grading 8 miles of Plum Creek including its an e aRries Pia lcal and -- laterals. "Pg Channels will be from 5 to 15 feet deep roje 1in 4 to 30 feet wide. Estimated Federal cost is $595,000. loodC Was approved for construction under section 205, 1948 .d Control Act, as amended. Fig hcal cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and cost s-of-Way for construction and future maintenance, bear the pleti for relocations, maintain and operate all works after com- is*Uek, and hold the United States free from damages. Bond 1963 to defray expenses of local interests was passed June 4, ie O Total estimated non-Federal costs are $756,000. le Perations and results during fiscal year. Engineering stud- quired prior to advertising construction contracts continued. tioCdition at end of fiscal year. Detailed plans and specifica- quiredare pending assurance of local interests in providing re- local cooperation. 822 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to year Fiscal ............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 u 3 New work: 59 Appropriated.......... $3,000 $6,800 $50,300 $200,000-$239,91 6 59, Cost.................. 1,716 3,990 12,347 2,575 75 37. POLECAT CREEK, OKLA. (HEYBURN RESERVOIR AND Loatn CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT) pulp Location. A minor tributary to Arkansas River near alp Creek County, Okla. (See Geological Survey maps for 0. and Hlominy and Claremore, Okla., quadrangles, scale 1: 250,00 Bristow and Kiefer, Okla., quadrangles, scale 1: 62,500.) ile 48.6, Existing project. A reservoir on Polecat Creek at mile near Heyburn, Okla., and channel improvements at Sapulpal0 V Rock Creek, its major tributary, and on Polecat Cree 2 feet mouth of Rock Creek. Dam is an earthfill structure 2,920 fare long, 89 feet above streambed. Reservoir controls 123 qge miles of drainage area and provides 49,100 acre-feet of sto oT for flood control and 8,200 acre-feet for conservation, total' r 57,300 acre-feet. Outlet works consist of an uncontrolled cirelled drop inlet conduit 8 feet 3 inches in diameter. An uncontrolledt saddle spillway is about 1,000 feet west of right abtnet red by Channel of Rock Creek from mile 4.4 to mouth has been cleare ed removal of debris and about 0.6 mile of this length was deePleel Channel of Polecat Creek was cleared from mouth of Roclc3 (i* (mile 21.2) to Arkansas River. Federal cost was $2,446,8 t oil cluding $135,300 for construction of channel improveme Flood Polecat and Rock Creeks). Project authorized by 1946 ate Control Act (11. Doc. 290, 80th Cong., 1st sess., contain lates published maps).ted Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total est i Q costs for all requirements of local cooperation were $110er (July 1963). Under terms of existing contracts, city ofie Oklahoma and Rural Water District No. 1 pay TreasurY$'1,44 and $2,725 annually for water supply storage in ley Reservoir. tr#* Operations and results during fiscal year. All project sition- tures were operated and maintained in a serviceable con oir. Kiefer, Okla., used 348 acre-feet of water from the reserd to Estimated monetary benefits for fiscal year 1965 attribute aes Heyburn Reservoir operations for prevention of flood dame were $9,100, making a total of $1,079,300 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum ] t 76.0I Elevation (feetm.s.l.).......................... 761.76 761.51 765.50 7 Storage (acre-feet).............................. 8,420 8,160 12,810 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was tSed March 1948 and project ready for beneficial use in October FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA. 823 OKLA., DISTRICT b annel improvements below reservoir were completed Septem- ~Cost 1952Cost financ statement and financial and scalyear, Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 I. .1 I I -- -I--- -- - Newwork: os prHated,.*...... $13,200 $13,073 ... $2,446,873 0anit.." 2,446,873 lenane. "......... 14,854 13,112 .. .. .. . t .oprkted.. ..... 61,500 67,900 $75,000 $88,518 $90,000 791,489 50,015 70,970 70,665 91,234 79,114 777,930 .I... I- L 1_______________ 38. RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAM (TULSA DIST.) aLocction. On Red River and its tributaries below Denison a iinO-.Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas, and Louisiana. trol Sting Project. Provides for construction of nine flood con- a reservoirs in combination with existing or authorized Fed- e~al r l and non-Federal levee improvements, modified as required, id' channel stabilization at locations where levee setbacks are insCiUble or uneconomical. Following water-control projects general flood control plan for Red River below Deni- am inwithin sop ed Tulsa District: I 'I Reservoir Riv er Sitel Nearest town BulsseellReservoir. -1-1 Cl maRe sevoir2 .. Boggy Creek..... 18.9 Boswell, Okla. lonReser .... .rvoir2. . .. Kiamichi River.. .. ............. 118.5 Tuskahoma, Okla. .r*v*ir o resei *..... ............ Jackfork Creek... 2.8 Clayton, Okla. ,ukf eek eservo ................. Kiamichi River.. 17.6 Hugo, Okla. f eservor3.................. Little River...... ............... 145.3 Wright City, Okla. Boke 0 o oir*................. Glover Creek.... ............... 16.8 Glover, Ok a. ............... Uee eservoir.............. Mountain Fork Ri .... ........... 20.3 Broken Bow, Okla. b. aRes rvoir3.................. Rolling Fork River 22.8 ............... DeQueen, Ark. .. .. .. .. ... ... ... S eservoi i C.ossatot River... ver............47.7 Gillham, Ark. ko R eei ................... Saline River..... 57.0 r............... Dierks, Ark. voitarii*•................. Little River.... .16.0 .............. Millwood, Ark. a ouaYO2 .... Redd................. River....... 485.3 Index, Ark. S .................. ..... do......... 509.2 Foreman, Ark. le 8eeermi above mouth. i i Prject "er authorized flood control projects." s reported separately herein. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized in Tulsa Dist. Documentsl July 24, 146 S 24 1946 Construct of Boswell, Hugo, and Millwood Reservoirs I. Doc. 602, 79th Cong., 2d sess. A* 3,1955 and bank stabilization. July 3.1958 Brown Creek and Walnut Bayou channel improvements. HI.Doc. 488, 83d Cong., 2d sess. S Modify Millwood; construct Pine Creek, Lukfata, Broken HI.Doe. 170, 85th Cong., 2d sess. Oet.23, 1962 3ow. D)eQueen, Giltham and Dierks Reservoirs. onstruct Clayton and Tuskahoma Reservoirs............. C1962 S. Doe. 145, 87th Cong., 2d sess. ains latest published maps. foTotal estimated Federal cost in Tulsa District is $255,316,800 Construction, lands, and damages. r 39. SAND CREEK, KANS. NOCation. Sand Creek, a tributary of Little Arkansas River, at Neton, Harvey County, Kans. (See Geological Survey map for on, Kans., quadrangle, scale 1:24,000.) 824 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Plan provides for about 5 miles of channel improvement through town of Newton and clearing and snaggin~g old channel for 2 miles upstream and 2 miles downstream froet town. Improved channel will have an average depth of 16 fet and vary from 100 to 150 feet wide. Estimated Federal cost05 $387,000. Project approved for construction under section 205 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended.d Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands an rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance; bear co of relocations, except railroads; maintain and operate all work after completion; and hold the United States free from dama'ge Estimated non-Federal cost is $144,000.ies Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering stud. required before advertising construction contracts were comple ne Condition at end of fiscal year. Work advertised for bids Ju 28, 1966. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 196 New work: 17 1$3 Appropriated.......... $2,170 $400 $700 $32,000 $324,197 63,016 Cost............... .. 11,310 4,100 1,120 12,199 22,753 40. SHIDLER RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. Location. On Salt Creek, a tributary of Arkansas River, about 1 mile east of Shidler, Osage County, Okla. (See Geological sr vey maps for Fairfax, Okla., quadrangle, scale 1:24,000.) Existing project. Provides for an earthfill dam 3,000 feet long and a maximum height of 106 feet above streambed. Uncol trolled spillway 300 feet wide will be east of dam. Outlet work5 will include an uncontrolled circular drop-inlet with a conduit .tr feet in diameter. A 24-inch low-flow bypass and a 24-inch wate supply line will be provided. A total reservoir capacity of 45,000 acre-feet will be allocated, 29,500 for flood control and 16,0 for conservation. Reservoir controls runoff from 111 square miles. Estimated cost of the project is $6,600,000. Project w authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 242, 89th Congo' 1st sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 and Water Supply Act of 1958 as amended, apply. Operations and resu'ts during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Funds have not been appro" priated to initiate preconstruction planning. 41. SKIATOOK RESERVOIR, VERDIGRIS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. Location. On Hominy Creek, a tributary of Bird Creek, in Verdigris River Basin about 5 miles west of Skiatook, Osa County, Okla. (See Geological Survey map, Hominy, Okla., oqua rangle, scale 1:125,000 and Army Map Service, Enid, Okla., vap' scale 1:250,000.) Existing project. Provides for an earthfill dam 3,590 feet long, including a gated spillway section, 143 feet above stream FLOOD CONTROL---TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 825 Pip, UUtlet2 works will include a gated sluice, a 48-inch low-flow t atnd a 4-inch water supply pipe. Reservoir will provide a a tdorage of 513,500 acre-feet (331,200 for conservation storage area4,3 for flood roof 354 square control). Reservoir will control a drainage miles. Estimated cost of project is $30 million. poiect W 563 8 't as authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962 (H. Doc. oc7th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published maps). and l .cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, apply. ies eraeto n s and results during fiscal year. Engineering stud- Conduir.ed prior to advertising construction contracts continued. 34 ierton at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is ecent complete. Cost and financial statement caeTotal to .......... 1962 *------.-. 1963 ., . 1964 . .June..30,..1966 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork. . APl~llriated.... Aer ..... ...... o ated . .$43,500 $196,375 $200,000 $439,875 ...... ......... ....... 32,232 198,225 204,667 435,124 42 TORONTO RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, KANS. noation On Verdigris River about 271.5 miles above its ,,t and 4 miles south and east of Toronto, Woodson County, ajl- (See Geological Survey map for Fredonia, Kans., quad- , scale 1:125,000.) abo sting project. Earthfill dam is 4,712 feet long and 90 feet oerestreambed. Spillway and control works are combined in a storae e. structure near right abutment of dam. Total reservoir cotse dr-ervatis o195,300 acre-feet (172,000 for flood n control, 10,300 Reevi cnrl for drai1 rvaton and 13,000 for sedimentation). Reservoir controls ect age area of 730 square miles. Costs were $13,896,000. Proj- lst uthorized by 1941 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 440,76th Cong., Loess, contains latest published map). Diles '1cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- ToroK' Under terms of existing water supply contract, city of stor-a 0 Kans., pays Treasury $858 annually for water supply rights in reservoir. 0e ations nier and results during fiscal year. Acquisition of oc.u. Parcels of project lands continued. One noteworthy rise vo, rred on Verdigris River above reservoir. Operation of reser- ofo revented downstream flooding on an average of 8,600 acres triand. Estimated monetary benefits for last fiscal year at- aties ed to operation of reservoir for prevention of flood dam- elWere $978,400, making total of $6,122,900 to June 30, 1965. blaienses totaling 1,699 acre-feet were made from reservoir to oro nroto a minimum ain)Kans. streamflow for pollution abatement. used 31 acre-feet of water from reservoir. 826 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum Elevation (feet m.s.l.). ............. 901.47 901.23 911.32 22,45 Storage ... ............................. 23,209 22,561 57,795 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began ovember 1954 and project placed in a full operation March 1960. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year ............... 1962 1963 Totalto6 196 1965 1966 June 30,1i966 New work: 1389400 Appropriated.......... $12,500 $13,161 ......... -$750 -$477 13894,002 ain ance:ost .................. 7,031 568 $13,3621 3,214 ........... 62 Maintenance: 62302 Appropriated.......... 75,500 112,000 74,200 83,496 107,00061018 (Cost.......... .... .. 74,969 109,708 76,794 84,152 98,190 43. TOWANDA RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, KANS' Location. On Whitewater River, a tributary of Walnut Riee about 1 mile northwest of Towanda, Butler County, Kans. leS, Geological Survey maps of Benton and Potwin, Kans., quadran' scale 1:24,000.) feet Existing project. Provides for an earthfill dam 11,460 feeoot long, including a gated spillway 184 feet long with four 40-oo wide by 35-foot tainter gates. Dam will be 82 feet above streto bed. Two 24-inch pipes will be through left nonoverfloW se tlo one for low flow and the other water supply. Total capacitY O reservoir will be 208,000 acre-feet (133,500 reserved for flood COre trol storage and 74,500 for conservation uses). Drainage a5, controlled is 422 square'miles. Estimated cost of project is $5. 500,000. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act ( Doc. 232, 89th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published maP) ~d Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 a Water Supply Act of 1958 as amended, apply. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Funds have not been aPPr ° priated to initiate preconstruction planning. 44. TURKEY CREEK, OKLA. Location. A tributary of Caney River, at Bartlesville, as ington County, Okla. (See Geological Survey map for Nowact Kans., quadrangle scale 1:250,000.) e Existing project. Plan provides for 2,100 feet of improreet. channel with a bottom width of 45 feet and depth of . e About 11/ miles of channel downstream from project Willoj cleared and snagged. Estimated Federal cost is $282,000. o1 ect approved for construction under section 205, 1948 Flood trol Act, as amended.e- Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, eae ments and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from da0 FLOOD CONTROL--TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 827 provide necessary relocations, except railroads; maintain Operate project after completion; prevent encroachment of ag rOved channel; and annually notify affected interests that dam- Fae May result from extremely high floodflows. Estimated non- Costeral, cost is $300,000, including a detention reservoir being 0Ptructed by local interests upstream from project. ePerationsand results during the fiscal year. Initiated detailed lneering studies. ratofition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies for prepa- tial n of construction contract plans and specifications are essen- 7ay COmplete. Cost and financial statement yearI Total to 1962 1983 1904 1965 1966 June 30, 196 Work copriated$41,000 -$3,700 -$1,200 $20,000 $221,000 $277,100 1,901 20,454 6,743 5,096 7,700 41,894 45. WATER QUALITY STUDY, RED RIVER BASIN, TEX. °LOcation. Part of project is on Prairie Dog Town Fork of Red aer, in Hall County, about one-half mile east of Estelline, Tex., CouPart of project is in South Wichita River watershed in King S y about 6 miles east of Guthrie, Tex. (See Army Map p ice maps for Plainview and Lubbock, Tex.) blitaisting project. Experimental structures to determine feasi- cou't of controlling and abating chloride flows by applying a tureit e r balancing, hydrostatic head on two brine springs. Struc- ' a Consist Itear an earthen dike and a weiraround a large spring nstelline,ofTex., and a concrete plug, pipe and weir at one of steral salt springs near Guthrie, Tex. Project will include in- Of urn entation and performance of tests to determine effectiveness autOnstruction work. Estimated cost is $300,500. Project seasorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 105, 87th Cong., 2d ', contains latest published maps). ocal cooperation. None required. t POerations and results during fiscal year. Construction of e protection dike was completed. has ondition at end of fiscal year. Structure near Estelline, Tex., rie been prepared for permanent operation. Project near Guth- Tex., proved ineffective for salinity control. SCost and financial statement ea Total to ear, .............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Wrk.-____ - Opr ted.................... . $300,504 .. ..... $300,504 ....................172,777 $86,918 0 58 $9,770 299,553 46. WAURIKA RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, OKLA. 14cation. Beaver Creek, a tributary of Red River, about 6 1es northwest of Waurika, Jefferson County, Okla. (See Geo- 828 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 logical Survey Map for Hastings, Oklahoma-Texas, quadrangle, scale 1:62,500.) 1450 Existing project. Plan provides for an earthfill dam 14,593 feet long, including an uncontrolled spillway 200 feet long, and93 feet above streambed. A dike 3,100 feet long with a maxillM height of 9 feet will be 1 mile northeast of dam. Outlet workswl include a gated conduit 8 feet in diameter and two water supt pipes. Reservoir will provide a total storage of 290,300 acre-fd (155,000 for conservation storage, 95,300 for flood control, 8a 40,000 for sedimentation reserve). Project will control a dra0 age area of 562 square miles. Estimated cost is $27,300,000 Project was authorized by Public Law 88-253 (S. Doc. 33, s Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map). a Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 a section 301, Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply.-jg Operations and results during the fiscal year. Engineerre studies required before advertising construction contract 've initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning s 64 percent complete. Cost and financial statement i Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Ju e 30 New work: fB000 Appropriated...................... ... ........................ $75,000 271 Cost.... ................................... . .. . 55,271 47. WINFIELD, KANS. Location. On Walnut River at Winfield, Cowley County, { (see Geological Survey Map, Burden, Kans., quadrangle, scale 1:24,000). 23,050 Existing project. Enlarge and extend existing levee to 23,0h feet long. Interior drainage will be provided through a 72,18 gated pipe. Estimated Federal cost is $315,000 and estirmat6 non-Federal cost is $245,000. Project was authorized by 196 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 232, 89th Cong., 1st sess., contain latest published map). Local cooperation.. Local interest must provide lands, ease ments, and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from daf" ages; maintain and operate completed works; perform all reloca tions, except railroads; and acquire fee title to lands for borroW and ponding purposes and flowage easements over lands for ponding only as may be required. Operations and results during the fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Funds have not been apprO priated for initiation of preconstruction planning. 48. WISTER RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. Location. On Poteau River about 2 miles south of Wister, Le Flore County, Okla. , (See Geological Survey map for winding Stair, Okla., quadrangle, scale 1:125,000.) FLOOD CONTROL-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 829 99 Existing project. Earthfill dam is about 5,700 feet long and ac eet above riverbed. Reservoir provides storage of 400,000 sedrfeet for flood control and 30,000 acre-feet for conservation, toSlentation reserve, recreation, and preservation of wildlife, a trotal of 430,000 acre-feet. An uncontrolled concrete spillway ProVdes for passage of floodflows into valley below dam. Outlet ab s are two 15.8- by 14-foot elliptical-gated conduits. A dike abuut < 400 feet long and 40 feet in maximum height is in right ed en t . Reservoir controls 993 square miles of drainage area. Ploeral cost was $10,501,226. Project was authorized by 1938 15 o'd Control Act (Flood Control Committee Doc. 1, 75th Cong., sess., contains latest published maps). ieLocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- 19l s . Under terms of an existing 50-year contract, executed in ally , Ileavener Utilities Authority pays Treasurer $1,723 annu- Voir.lor use of 1,600 acre-feet of water supply storage in reser- 4OPerations and results during fiscal year. Project structures ot perated and maintained in a serviceable condition. Three pe vo eWorthy rises occurred on Poteau River above Wister Reser- la 0 Flooding was prevented on an average of 11,500 acres of at ifor each rise. Estimated monetary benefits last fiscal year dtributed to Wister Reservoir operations for prevention of flood 30lAges were $1,884,100, making a total of $13,466,500 to June feet ) 65. During low-water periods, releases totaling 2,013 acre- su Were made from reservoir to supplement municipal water atPly for downstream towns and other usages. A total of 227 tre-feet of impounded water supply storage was withdrawn from reservoir during the year by city of HIeavener, Okla. -Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum Minimum "Zion (fe 8l to eet m.s..) ..................... 471.59 471.17 489.38 471.08 .... ..................... 29,910 28,252 186,758 27,896 ~9Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was started April 1oa and completed May 1949. Oklahoma Planning and Resources 1la d leased 3,040 acres for development of State park areas, and a~chofma Department of Wildlife Conservation is utilizing 17,996 es f project lands for game management purposes. Cost and financial statement ear............... Total to 2 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NeWwork. ed......... $10,501,226 ropriat 10,501,226 Coat. ed.......... $94,600 $117,800 $117,500 $116,144 $155,000 1,542,200 94,614 116,508 117,751 115,660 151,430 1,534,746 830 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 49. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Semiannual inspections are conducted to see if local interests are complying with existing regulations and requirements in aa' taming and operating projects constructed with Federal funds alnd transferred to them. Inspections conducted during fiscal year" shown, indicate existing agreements and regulations are bein complied with at the following projects. Inspections indicate ad ditional maintenance needs to be programed by local interess during ensuing years at Oklahoma City Floodway, Okla., and Pole- cat Creek channel improvement works constructed below Ileyblir Dam. Fiscal year cost was $7,976. Total cost to June 30, Y1966', was $43,356. Inspection dates Project 19(35 1966 Jenks levee, Oklahoma.......... June ........ IJune Tulsa-West 'Tulsa Carthage levee, levees, Oklahoma .. * Missouri........................................ ................................. October November...... June Enid diversion channel and levee, Decemtober...... Oklahoma. .... ................ April Hutchinson levee, Kansas.............. Wichita and Valley (Center, Kansas ........... ................................ November...... November mMay ...... /Ma Walnut Bayou channel improvement, Arkansas... May ..................... December... . June . Augusta levee, Kansas........................... South Deer Creek levee, Oklahoma l)ecember..... Oklahoma City floodway, Oklahoma ............................... .......... ..... ....... November...... June Polecat Creek channel improvement, Oklahoma........................ November June ,. oloaenelevee,anss.................................... lola levee, Kansas. )ecember...... Florence levee, Kansas .............................................. November.... October. June 50. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIONS Flood Control Act of 1944 authorized the Secretary of War to prescribe regulations for use of storage allocated for flood cot trol or navigation at all reservoirs constructed wholly or in par with Federal funds., Under the purview of this act, operatis of the flood control storage included in following reservoirs prescribed by the Corps: -r Year Project Location Construction agency pleted ---- I I- Grand River (Pensacola) Dam Grand (Neosho) River, Okla...... 1940 and Reservoir. Grand River Dam Authority, Altus Dam and Reservoir..... State of Okla. North Fork of Red River Okla... Bureau of Reclamation........... 1948 Fort Cobb Dam and Reservoir. Pond (Cobb) Creek, Okla........ 1959 ....do ......................... Foss Dam and Reservoir...... Washita River, Okla......... 1961 Markham Ferry Dam and Res- ... o ......................... Grand (Neosho) River, Oki.. . Grand River Dam Authority...... 1964 ervoir. Norman Dam and Reservoir... Little River, Okla........... 1964 Cheney Dam and Reservoir... Bureau of Reclamation........... 1965 North Fork of Ninnescah River, ....do..... ............. Kans. Sanford Dam and Reservoir... Canadian River, Tex............ 1965 ....do ......................... Work accomplished consists of operating activities necessary in basin-wide coordination of functional scheduling of release from reservoirs operated by other agencies and preparation of flood control operation and maintenance manuals for projet underway. Fiscal year cost from maintenance funds $88,939. FLOOD CONTROL-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 831 1. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Forlast Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance r dRiver and tributares. ser ib u .... ..................................... ca. .............. ............................. eserv, kla :::... 1963. 193. ......... ........... O k 3.......... ........................... 1063 743612.............. if rcei(ans ......... 1965 369,781 .............. loaK , y', 3 ans..................................... 1956 3,497,718 ............. e k ,A . ............ ............... ............1939 22,290............. t 'eser *e . .................. ...... dsha ... . . . . ...#........... . . ... . 1950'9 9 0 .............. 344,797 lah a , eservoir, Kans.... ............................. 1952 97,910 ............. dma rCity, Okla.3....... . ................ 1960 8,047,512 .............. es.ervoir,Okla: ... ............. lH daWes 3. . . . . .. .. .. .. ... ..... .. . 1963 ",k'a................................... ,196 .... W rnd Wit West Tulsa, Okla. anchChisholn 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . 1954 2,785070.. Creek, Kans. 1965 364,220........... ed a - eyy (enter, neield, . 3.................... ........ 1960 kaKans.3 Center, 12,247,379 12 .............. A- tr ban.. . ................................ 1 9371 .............. ............. dt ributaries: uReservoir,Okla.6 . .. 1942 22 0 nkS rvo il ,a 6 . ................................. 1942 Ooswell e S inReservoirOklad. Reservoir, .... .............. I T'................................... 19653 '.. ............ 1..0 .... t eservoir kla ................................. 1963 . ..... ......... InReservoir, Okla....... ................. ....... .... 5 a o ur k.3............... ........................ 1963 WnUt BaYou, Ark.J .1963 ........ PCOploe'edby Memphis District in 1937; by Little Rock District in 1938 and 1939. C,'Dleted by Kansas Works Progress Administration. 8 etive. orIsbSurvey report on advisability of including water supply and alternate upstream ostSb eing processed. lace 0 tioln by Bureau of Reclamation. Participation by Department of the Army to Icontrol portion is complete. 52. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION 'lood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Fiscal Study identification year Illed____________ cost ____O__ Crttoeek kiatook, Okla...................................................... $3,742 vat0 reanyonCreek, Cherokee, Okla............... ............................... 3,482 lr anreek, Lawton, Okla............ .......................................... 15,439 Jo' and D r ....... sa................................................................ " * .1660 1,660 $ul Drye ke , Wichita, Kans.......................... .............................. 1,774 e k kla.....3...5 a, 35,322......... at ree River, Sedgwick, Kans... .................................................. 2,467 al e eneca,Mo............... 19,827 l Creek h olm Creek, W ichita, Kans..........................................10,519 r Ornithi t- netrt ith,Ark.... Ark............... en27. ........................................... 427 1Creek, Witer Okla.... ..................................................... 747 Wter6-Springdale, Ark... .................................................... 55,961 r Creek andtributaries, Stillwater, Okla.... ............... ....................... 27,773 itie re ,rumright, Okla......................................................... 396 uk k la................... ..... ....................................... 14,186 4ergency flood control activities--repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) $52 e0eral t cost for fiscal year was $20,965 for advance preparation, % or flood lrtoll* emergency operations, and $66,623 for repair and 832 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Emergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Public Law 526, 79th Cong.) Toe trench revetment and bank paving project on Chi River at Blackwell, Okla., disposal plant. Work initiated Decen" ber 28, 1965, and completed March 14, 1966, at cost of $48,660. 53. BROKEN BOW RESERVOIR, RED RIVER BASIN, OKLA. Location. On Mountain Fork River about • 9 miles northeast Geolgical o survey Broken Bow, McCurtain County, Okla. (See Geological Surve maps for Broken Bow and Smithville, Okla., quadrangles.) 225 Existing project. An earthfill dam about 2,820 feet long, de feet above streambed. A gated concrete spillway, 376 feet Wide, will be in a saddle about 11/,1 miles north of dam. Reservior which will control 754 square miles of drainage area provides,fo00 storage of 1,368,800 acre-feet (450,000 for flood control; 470,100er for power and water supply, and 448,700 for inactive or Poe. head). A penstock tunnel will be constructed through left ab.r. ment to powerhouse located below a horseshoe bend in rifled Hydroelectric development consists of two units with an instal t capacity of 100,000 kilowatts. Project will be operated as a er in a seven-reservoir system for flood control in Little River Wated shed and for reduction of floodflows on Red River. Estinated project cost is $39,600,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents July 3, 1958 Construction of a flood control reservoir....................H. Doe. 170, 85th Conr., stsess. Oct. 23, 1962 Instalation of hydroelectric power facilities.... ........ S. Doe. 137, 87th Cong.,2se Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of Juneo22S, 1938, and Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, apply. oto tain-Lakes Water District furnished a resolution of inten repay costs allocated to water supply storage.die, Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering stuidtio5 preparation of contract plans and specifications, and acquisi t of required real estate continued. Work continued on er b d ment, dikes, left abutment access road, relocations, recreation rl power facilities. Acquisition of reservoir lands continued. initiated on spillway and spillway bridge. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Nove her 1961 and project is 51 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: $2048 Appropriated.......... $835,000$2,655,000 $3,871,500 $4,500,000 $8,000,000 20308,2 Cost.................. 781,578 2,532,2113,783,9314,573,6238,024,449 54. DENISON DAM (LAKE TEXOMA), RED RIVER, TEX. AND OCLA Location. On Red River, about 5 miles northwest of Deniso MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 833 T o (See Geological Surveys maps for Denison, Tex., and DaMornin g Okla., quadrangles scale 1:125,000; and Denison E d Cordonville, Tex., quadrangles, scale 1:62,500.) 165 ting Project. Rolled-earthfill dam is 15,200 feet long and capac. e t above streambed. Reservoir provides a total storage ( 79 8 ty of 5,382, 0 0 0 acre-feet, with 2,660,000 for flood control o80 acre-feet of this amount is used jointly for flood control, re and Water supply), 1,673,000 for power drawdown, and let IngMg 1,04 9,000 acre-feet is inactive storage for power head. duits works, consisting of a gate-control house and three con- abuts each 20 feet in diameter, and powerhouse are on right on rgent. A chute-type spillway 2,000 feet wide is in a saddle Doi0" t bank which discharges floodflows through a creek to a sio~~ mile below dam. Improvement also provides for diver- oilfieOf Washita River, and provides levees to protect Cumberland A deld from inundation, which levees have a length of 23,480 feet. bank e is provided across a saddle near Platter, Okla., on left cor of Washita River, which is 5,870 feet long. Improvement ,426rol 39,71 9 miles of drainage area above damsite. A bridge Wide feet long near Willis Ferry site provides a highway 28 feet tric d ron Oklahoma to Texas across Lake Texoma. Hydroelec- o 7development consists of two units having an installed capacity kilowatts. Ultimate installation planned is for five wf70,000 its With a total of 175,000 kilowatts. Estimated costs: iitial development including 2 power units with provisions for M1oT ate installation of 5 power units.................... $63,729,000 Instal1 - ion ofNo. ,iflon 2-Additional 3d Power unit public use facilities .......... 2,878,000 10p lVodifica n- of 3d power unit ............................... 9,310,000 ation No. 4-additional work .......................... 1,040,000 S Total estimated cost ................................ 276,957,000 SE 1 8 299,000 for lands and damages. " ed ederal cost is $76,957,000 and estimated non-Federal cost is $1,212,000. bProject was authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act and amended 4, Public Law 868, 76th Congress, 3d session (H. Doc. 5 4 1,Sec7tion th Cong., 3d sess., contains latest published maps.) Other enabling legislation: Congressional act Work authorized bi aw 868 76th ?pbl Law 454'78thCong., Cong., 3d sess., Oct. 17, 1940.... Use of water for navigation and other beneficial purposes. 2d sess., Sept 30, 1944 ... Designating impounded waters to be known as Lake Texoma. taw 273,83d Cong., Istsess., Aug. 14, 1953 .... Water supply storage for Denison, Tex. Puhli PubiI W 164,a84th Cong.,1st sess., July 15, 1955.... Highway bridge across Lake Texoma. near Willis, Okla. iclaw 85-146Aug. 14, 1957....... .......... Water-supply storage for Sherman, Tex. L3,-500:uy,1958 .................. Water-supply storage. DiiLo cal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- tera, except for highway bridge at Willis Ferry site. Under e's of an existing 50-year contract, executed in 1953, city of acre on Tex., pays Treasury $13,800 annually for use of 21,300 a 50, eet of water-supply storage in reservoir. Under terms of 5Year C contract approved August 8, 1961, Texas Power & Light ' Tex., pays Treasury $9,850 annually, plus a pro- tenison, 834 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 portion of annual operation and maintenance costs, for usedf 16,400 acre-feet of water-supply storage in reservoir. Under terms of a 10-year contract approved December 1963, Sincl"r Oil & Refining Co. pays $800 annually for use of 1,150 acre-feet of water-supply storage. City of Sherman, Tex., has co0 ngreSr sional authority to contract for use of 41,000 acre-feet of water supply storage in reservoir. Texas and Oklahoma each Colle tributed $606,000 toward cost of constructing highway bride across Lake Texoma at Willis Ferry site. In addition, Texas col" tributed $44,068 for modification of bridge abutment on Texs end. Operations and results during fiscal year. Work was pe-r formed to provide additional recreational facilities and mna tain existing structures. Estimated monetary benefits attribute s to Denison Reservoir operation for prevention of flood dani g downstream to Fulton, Ark., total $27,760,000 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum ii 1 Elevation (feet m.s.1.)........................ .. 614.26 613 617.63 20 Storage (acre-feet)................ ............ 2,49,00 2,446,700 2,789,200 A total of 1,426 acre-feet was made available from reservoirlo water supply for city of Denison, Tex. Delivered 174,548,.00 kilowatt-hours of electric energy to Southwestern Power AdMoee istration for distribution and sale, and released 1,987,211 acre f of water through turbines. Condition at end of fiscal year. Impoundment of power Pool began January 1944 and commercial power generation was started March 1945 with first unit operating. Cost and financial statement Fi scalyear................ Total to 6 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 301 New work: 17 897 Appropriated..........$506,610 Cost................. 337,536 $502,636 539,152 $282,000 439,821 $507,400 292,303 $226,500 437,379 $6 ,199 167,084 Maintenance: 1 056 Appropriated.......... 758,800 772,000 792,600 770,000 898,000 1114, Cost.................762,494 760,592 815,414 765,936 798,607 R ehabilitation: 33,0 Appropriated.......... -22,415 . 33 Cost................. 31,082 .......... ..................... 1 Includes $433,539 emergency relief funds. Excludes $1,256,068 special contributed fod 55. EUFAULA RESERVOIR, CANADIAN RIVER, OKLA. Location. On Canadian River about 12 miles east of Eufaula' McIntosh County, Okla. (See Geological Survey maps for Okyt gee, Canadian, McAlester, and San Bois, Okla., quadrangles, scal 1:125,000.) Existing project. Concrete and earthfill dam is 3,200 feet lofg and 114 feet above streambed, and reservoir has a storage capac- ity of 1,470,000 acre-feet for flood control, 1,481,000 acre-feet for MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 835 Seerio of power, and provide a permanent pool of 897,000 of Wil feet for sedimentation reserve, recreation, and preservation sO.Wildlife, a total of 3,848,000 acre-feet. A concrete ogee weir Wvay controlled by eleven 40-by-32-foot gates on weir crest, ticedesfor passage of floodflows into valley below. Hydroelec- fro evelopment has a total installed capacity of 90,000 kilowatts trol three .hydroelectric generating units. Reservoir, which con- of- a drainage area of 47,522 square miles, is operated as a unit 1ascomrprehensive system for improvement of Arkansas River Ot1i for flood control, navigation, hydroelectric power, and Oher Purposes . Estimated Federal cost is $121 million. Project Lauthorized by 1946 River and Harbor Act. 19%8 Ocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, at '. applies. State of Oklahoma indicated a desire to partici- bae in relocation of certain State and Federal highways affected b~i.colnstruction of reservoir, and agreed to pay added cost of Odilng highways of greater width than project requirements. tio Perationsand results during fiscal year. All major construe- c01 was completed in December 1965. One noteworthy rise oc- 0 Nrred.on South Canadian River above reservoir during year. averation of reservoir prevented downstream flooding on an aerage of about 300 acres of land. Estimated monetary benefits attributed to Eufaula Reservoir operations for prevention of flood ItIlages total $255,500 to June 30, 1965. Delivered 83,295,800 itoW stir attn hours of of electric energy to Southwestern Power Admin- for distribution and sale, and released 1,215,590 acre-feet fater through turbines. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum Minimum r t...1.) .................... 584.19 582.35 584.57 575.90 2,294,200 .)............................. 2,116,030 2,332,350 1,569,890 Ctondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project, ini- ated in December 1956 and completed in December 1965. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Neal Year Total to ,° 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork: MaC oria ted.........$29,300,000 $29,922,000$17,275,000 $4,076,000 $106,000 $120,897,901 htenance* a 28,706,400 30,783,554 .. 17,248,4293,775,836 876,408 120,820,348 Copropria ted.......... ............172,600423,S00 791,000 ............ 1,387,400 ........... 152,595 424,608 731,195 1,308,398 836 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 S CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to year............... Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 . 3019 •- ----------- New work: $299803 Contributed... 3.................. Cost.............. ... $59,6492 $2,058 . 28.... New work special funds: '13,2118 Appropriated.........4,462,180 2,083,796 $2,732,853 $1,507,812 384,358 13.211:128 Cost............. .. 2,604,029 1,406,8856,026,3631,897,825 395,070 56. FORT GIBSON RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, 0O LA' Location. On Grand (Neosho) River about 5 miles north tl east of Fort Gibson, Muskogee County, Okla. (See eolo'sle Survey maps for Muskogee and Pryor, Okla., quadrangles, scale 1:125,000; and Wagoner, Okla., quadrangle, scale 1:62,500.) long Existing project. Concrete gravity-type dam 2,990 feetlo at top, 110 feet above streambed, with a reservoir providing for storage of 919,200 acre-feet for flood control and 365,200 acrjee. for storage to top of power pool, a total of 1,284,400 acre- Project includes a powerhouse structure, a gate-controlled Ph way, and two nonoverflow abutment sections. Reservoir, 'eted controls a drainage area of 12,492 square miles, will be oPerho) as a unit of three-reservoir system on lower Grand (Neos River, and as a unit in comprehensive plan for Arkansas .h1a Basin. Hydroelectric development consists of four units Wltio installed capacity of 45,000 kilowatts. Ultimate install 5ti planned is for six units with a total of 67,500 kilowatts. .qtiol mated cost is $42,535,000. War Department Civil ApproprcaCon Act, 1947 provided that in construction of Fort Gibson flood and trol project in Oklahoma, Chief of Engineers is authorize. directed to cooperate with officials of city of Muskogee in Ked tecting domestic water supply of that city. Project author by 1941 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 107, 76th Cong., 1st seS contains latest published map). 1 Act:onsructed Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control of 1938d In p plies. Parts of highway relocation work were constructeti accordance with desires of Oklahoma Highway Department, ted lizing their specifications, and State of Oklahoma contrib t $34,340 for fiscal year 1950, and $80,934 in fiscal year 19511i defray extra expense incurred by the Government in construe3d of improved facilities. In accordance with Public Law 663,rd Congress, $200,000 was contributed to city of Muskogee, tove construction of a waterline from existing intake on Grand ly to Fort Gibson Dam, in settlement for all damages to water suP of city of Muskogee, resulting from construction and operatio of Fort Gibson Reservoir. truc Operations and results during fiscal year. All completed stO tures were operated and maintained in a serviceable condiOne Additional needed recreational facilities were provided. one noteworthy rise occurred on Grand (Neosho) River above re in voir during fiscal year. Operation of reservoir for flood contro coordination with other reservoirs in Arkansas River Bla. prevented flooding on an average of about 800 acres of MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 837 eirmat e d monetary benefits attributed to Fort Gibson Reservoir e t"ons for prevention of flood damages total $8,896,600 to roe~e01965. Muskogee, Okla., used 9,924 acre-feet of water ervPool irnd elevations sorages durin fiscal year: ool0 elevations and storages during fiscal year: . Start End Maximum Minimum , FleVation i -- Storage (feet rn.a.l.) (acre-feet) ..... ............. . 554.46 552.88 558.22 551.76 ..................... 373,940 344,340 451,840 324,220 belvered 150,648,800 kilowatt-hours of electrical energy to South- reler Power Administration for distribution and sale and released 21860 ed. 2,860,544 acre-feet of water through turbines. 1942 dton at end of fiscal year. Construction began in March furthe ith construction of temporary field office buildings, but WorlCerconstruction at project was held in abeyance during 1sil War II. Construction of concrete dam and spillway, largest Julle lf9 ture of project, started May 1946 was completed in Cost and financial statement Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NowWork: A Pro' Hat'ed kla o t e$133,514 $181,225 1$112,581 $45,000 $50,975 2$42,140,606 nac144,427 176,312 3115,477 1 42,932 36,048 242,120,774 o8fropriated 441,300 498,600 468,900 538,132 641,500 5,525,238 . ........ 484,803 8427,885 489,001 532,556 598,346 5,464,480 u 'clud s $$419 1 .cl4, 9credit to public works acceleration funds. 19 contributed funds. Includes $49,581 public works acceleration funds. -$2,630 public works acceleration funds. 57. KEYSTONE RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER, OKLA. 15cction. Arkansas River near Sand Springs, Okla., and about lio 4es west of Tulsa, Okla. (See Geological Survey Map for 0kinY, Okla., quadrangle, scale 1:125,000; Skedee and Yale, scale, quadrangles, scale 1:62,500; and Keystone Dam quadrangle, .11l:2 4,000.) eot esing project. An earthfill dam 4,600 feet long, with a gate- eroll concrete gellera. nrt spillway structure sila, c and a hydroelectric power feet atng1 plant near left abutment. Concrete section is 1,600 orng, 121 feet above riverbed, and includes power intake 151 and an 856-foot spillway section. Oklahoma State Highway 8 'averses crown of dam. Flow over spillway is controlled by is foot'taiter by 40 gulatedgates feet wide 9 gated and 35 feet high. Low-flow releases sluices through spillway weir. Two 27- i enstocks and two 35,000-kilowatt generating units will be t10 lled. Project is a unit of authorized Arkansas River naviga- dr an. Reservoir controls runoff from a normal contributing )87iage area of 22,351 square miles. Reservoir storage totals dre,000 acre-feet (1,216,000 for flood control, 351,000 for power down, and 312,000 for power head). Normal or power pool 838 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 has a surface area of 26,300 acres. Estimated cost is $123 nI lion. Project authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act(. )C. 107, 81st Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map) p. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 plies. State of Oklahoma participated in relocation of cera r State and Federal highways affected by construction of reservoir Extent of their participation to end of fiscal year, $5,366,2 3 1 ork Operations and results during fiscal year. Relocation Wrc completed. Acquisition of reservoir lands continued. COnst cd tion of power facilities continued. One noteworthy rise occurr on Arkansas River above reservoir. Flooding prevented ontary average of 900 acres of land during the rise. Estimated monele. benefits attributed to operation of Keystone Reservoir for pre tion of flood damages total $3,231,300 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum Elevation (feet,m.s.l.)............................ 723.37 722.95 728.23 6540 Storage (acre-feet)............................... 672,300 661,400 810,400 1 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction, initiated il J" uary 1957, is 92 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: ,20 093 Appropriated.......... $28,025,000 $20,290,000 $12,344,300 $6,300,0005,600 000 851,0 Cost............. 28,398,300 20,160,019 11,676,4006,381,6585,853 1 723,5 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... ............ ............ ............ 230,503 493,000 652 Cost..................220,618 444,628 SPECIAL DEPOSIT Total 1o 6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jone 30, New work:$ 6:231 Special funds.......... $834,239 -$303,216 $374,950 .......... -$9,229 $ 36,31 Cost.................. 2,465,735 1,303,285 525,976 $191,220 -3,393 58. MARKHAM FERRY RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. ste t Location. On Grand (Neosho) River, about 8 miles sothe of city of Pryor, Mayes County, Okla. (See Geological Sr) maps for Pryor and Vinita, Okla., quadrangles, scale 1:125,0b Existing project. Construction of Markham Ferry projecz y Grand River Dam Authority, an agency of State of Oklahoma, 55, authorized by Public Law 476, 83d Congress. On June 22, i9 Federal Power Commission adopted an order issuing a licelld to Grand River Dam Authority for construction, operation, ver maintenance of reservoir for flood control and hydroelectric POds at Markham Ferry site. Earthfill and concrete-gravity-type.des is 4,494 feet long at its crest, 90 feet above streambed, and inclu MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 839 a gat-enr•"ow - gate-controlled concrete spillway, a power intake, and a power- itse equipped with four power-generating units, providing an st1 led capacity of 100,000 kilowatts. Reservoir has a total (elage capacity of 444,500 acre-feet at top of spillway gates feI at Ion 636 feet above mean sea level), of which 244,200 acre- 200 s reserved for temporary storage of floodwater. Remaining o2 0 acre-feet provides powerhead and storage for generation Gr,, roelectric energy. There are 11,533 square miles in the co ant (Neosho) River drainage area above the damsite. Flood reserl 01 storage in this reservoir is operated as a unit of the three- ibsvoir system, including Markham Ferry, Pensacola, and Fort tio Reservoirs, all on lower Grand (Neosho) River. In addi- reeach of these reservoirs will be operated as a unit in com- recenslve plan for Arkansas River Basin in accordance with rstenmendations of Chief of Engineers (H. Doc. 107, 76th Cong., , ess.). Cost was $6,908,756. oc Cooperation. 0O erations None and results required. during fiscal year. One noteworthy rise ofcurred on Grand (Neosho) River during fiscal year. Operation ir servoir for flood control in coordination with other reservoirs ab arkansas River Basin, prevented flooding on an average of to t 200 acres of land. Estimated monetary benefits attributed $10h peration of the reservoir for flood damage prevention totals, Sto June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: re Start End Maximum Minimum 1leatio0 f. - (a 111mefe oage ) ........ 618,71 619.01 619.57 618.47 ............................ 197,150 200,410 206,560 194,570 ect idition at end of fiscal year. Federal participation in proj- devel complete. Basic hydrologic data and site investigations, 19410ped under authorization provided by Flood Control Act of W ' and certain Federal-owned land acquired under that act 1 e made available or transferred to Grand River Dam Author- ity ld..Tulsa District aided that agency in preparation of their ap ication for license and review of working drawings. Cost and financial statement Year .Total to .1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30.1966 Ne~ ok ropriated.......... $501,000 $2,813,000 2,172,000 $919,101 ............ $6,908,756 ........... 375,10 2,938,148 2 147,980 43,822............ 6908,76 . PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. ocation. On Grand (Neosho) River, next to town of Dis- Py1Vayes County, Okla. (See Geological Survey maps for qla r, Wyandotte, Vinita, Okla., and Siloam Springs, Ark., qtradngles, scale 1: 125,000.) Alit tng project. During fiscal year 1941 Grand River Dam byhprity, an agency of State of Oklahoma, under a license issued i'ederal Power Commission, completed construction of a reser- 840 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 voir for flood control and hydroelectric power at PensacOl"t cite in Arkansas River Basin. Dam is concrete, multiple arch tped 6,565 feet long and 147 feet above streambed. Existing dam alerd reservoir provides 1,653,000 acre-feet of storage to top o f ntrol pool and 245,000 acre-feet of flood control storage. Flood cofnder storage lies between elevations 745 and 750. However, u rte- terms of Federal Power Commission license, dam and appllo9 nant structures were constructed to a height which woUlda hen storage of floodwaters to elevation 755 (Pensacola datum) 1 Gov necessary lands or rights-of-way were acquired by Federalspre- ernment. Flood Control Act of 1941 modified general co as hensive plan for flood control and other purposes for Arkaort River Basin to include Pensacola, Markham Ferry, an hora Gibson Reservoirs in Grand (Neosho) River Basin in O~klaf of and Missouri, in accordance with recommendations of C etl Engineers (H. Doe. 107, 76th Cong., 1st sess.). Improve Mco recommended in that document included a reservoir for fflood trol at Pensacola site which provided for 960,000 acre-feet of.flo control storage. Existing project, which controls adrafl area of 10,298 square miles, provides 280,000 acre-feet of fl tor control storage between elevations 750 and 755 in addition to age provided in project as constructed by Grand River -Dama thority. Flowage easements for certain portions of necessth lands have been acquired by Federal Government through Nod western Power Administration, Department of the Interior,0 Federal Works Agency. Estimated cost (July 1959) for ac4 tion of addition flowage easements necessary for operatiol reservoir to elevation 755 is $2,090,000. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Flood control s (a age in project was operated by Grand River Dam Authorit r.s agency of State of Oklahoma) under direction of the d l Grand River Dam Authority was reimbursed for its experlks connection with maintaining and operating local protection *-eo at Wyandotte, Okla. One notable rise occurred on Gran (dind sho) River. Operation of reservoir for flood control in coorveted tion with other reservoirs in Arkansas River Basin, preve flooding on an average of about 500 acres of land. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum i 3 0 Elevation (feet, m.S.1.)............................ 745.41 743.46 745 41 1,920 Storage (acre-feet).............................. 1,691,300 1,601,700 1,691,300 Reservo Estimated monetary benefits attributed to Pensacola operations for prevention of flood damages total $17,429,500o June 30, 1965. dies Condition at end of fiscal year. Real estate planning in., necessary prior to completion of land acquisition program, itiated by other agencies, are essentially complete. MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 841 Cost and financial statement Year Total to . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, 1966 " 11I........ S o~riate....................... . ...................... $52,126 mailenanc :..........1.. Oloraed. M ant&:*............. ............ ............ ............ . ....... 216 roriated.......... $6,100 $6,900 89,500$11,073 $10,000 93,383 . 6,055 7,292 9,803 11,242 8,534 91,902 60. ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND DAM NO. 15, ARKANSAS RIVER, OKLA. L cation On Arkansas River about 8 miles south of Sallisaw, e lore County, Okla. apxusting project. A dam, powerplant, navigation lock, and exPUrtenant facilities, with a slackwater pool about 37 miles long, 75 eI n g to Webbers Falls lock and dam. Structure will rise t above streambed and have an overall length of 7,360 feet, lift ding a gated concrete spillway, a power intake and a single- wia navigation lock. Navigation lock chamber will be 110 feet Po and 600 feet long and provide a normal lift of 48 feet. of 2 ,thouse will provide for installation of four generating units of ,500 kilowatts each. Reservoir will have a storage capacity fulti 600 acre-feet at top of power pool. Project is a unit in ate1dePurpose plan for navigation of Arkansas River. Esti- Scost is $92,500,000. OLeal cooperation. See Little Rock, Ark., District. o eerations and results during fiscal year. Work is continuing o gineering studies for contract plans and specifications. cat1truction of project buildings, access road, embankment, relo- of ro s , lock , spillway, and powerhouse continuing. Acquisition Ceservoir lands was continued. aonitionat end of fiscal year. Project was started April 1964 i about 31 percent complete. Cost and financial statement rseal yrear, Total to ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NwWork. o riated ..........$285,000 $475,500$2,645,000 $10,650,700 $18,100,000 $31,277,149 ............ 273,372 427,545 2,679,827 10,360,242 16:238,55030 ,100,485 61. TENKILLER FERRY RESERVOIR, ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, OKLA. aLocation. On Illinois River about 7 miles northwest of Vian - 7o iles northeast of Gore, Sequoyah County, Okla. (See Geo- a l Survey maps for Muskogee, Okla., and Tahlequah, Okla., qu-Ark., quadrangles, scale 1:125,000; and Webbers Falls, Okla., ,rangle scale 1: 62,500.) aboV iSting project. Earthfill dam is 3,000 feet long and 197 feet 1,61 0 riverbed. Reservoir, which controls a drainage area of floo square miles, provides for storage of 600,000 acre-feet for control and 630,000 acre-feet of storage to top of power pool, 842 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of which 345,000 acre-feet is for power drawdown and rem'i 285,000 acre-feet is dead storage for powerhead. Total caPa'de, is 1,230,000 acre-feet. A gated-concrete spillway, 590 feet Wter is provided at a saddle in right abutment and a 19-foot d9fo0t gated conduit through ridge forms outlet works. A second 1-tock. gated conduit, adjacent to outlet conduit, forms a power petends A dike 1,350 feet long with a maximum height of 35 feet ext de- along saddle ridge between dam and spillway. Hydroelectric Of velopment consists of two units with an installed capaci 34,000 kilowatts. Estimated cost is $23,581,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents June 28, 1938 Construction of a flood control reservoir.................... 11. Committee Doc. 1 75th og 1 8 Ms. 2d ses July 24,1946 Installation of hydroelectric power facilities................ .H.Dec. 758, 79th Cong., Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, d plies. A bridge requiring relocation was constructed in lors ance with desires of Cherokee County highway commiss 9 46 utilizing their specifications. Cherokee County contributed r in fiscal year 1952 to defray extra expenses incurred by Gove ment in constructing improved facilities. Under terms of exs the contract East Central Oklahoma Water Authority pays Treasury $809 annually for water supply rights in reservoir,to Operations and results during fiscal year. Ordinary o p erads and maintenance continued and certain needed additional r'iseS and recreational facilities were provided. Two noteworthY ted occurred on Illinois River above reservoir. Flooding prevefits on an average of 500 acres of land. Estimated monetary .ben1Of attributed to Tenkiller Reservoir operations for preventlo flood damages total $2,541,100 to June 30, 1965. Pool elevations and storages during fiscal year: Start End Maximum Elevation (feet, m.s.l.)........................... 627.40 625.60 631.16 476 Storage (acre-feet)............................ 596,700 575,400 643,100 Delivered 76,646,500 kilowatt-hours of electrical energy toS western Power Administration for distribution and sale a sed leased 602,561 acre-feet of water through turbines. Relefs 53 acre-feet from reservoir to East Central Oklahoma WaterA thority. .rted Condition at end of fiscal year. Initial construction was st P er June 1947 and completed in July 1953. Commercial sale of P0co- started November 1953. Work required to complete projec sists of additional recreational facilities. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-TULSA, OKLA., DISTRICT 843 Cost and financial statement Year ....... 1962 1Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 a priatd. * $95,902 $145,000 173,999 $25,000 $12,000 2523,387,885 "tenance: .............. 168,575 147,707 173,137 24,558 3,825 223,377,973 A ropriaed. opriated 301,500 351,800 342,400 389,524 462,500 3,485,889 . 305,923 340,458 356,648 390,514 403,422 3,419,210 946 contributed funds and includes $39,999 public works acceleration funds. 62. WEB3BERS FALLS LOCK AND DAM NO. 16, L ARKANSAS RIVER, OKLA. ocation. On Arkansas River 1 mile northwest of Gore, Okla. purte Sting project. A dam, powerplant, navigation lock, and ap- ext ant facilities, with a slackwater pool about 37 miles long Will hlng to lock and dam No. 17 on Verdigris River. Structure above e an overall length of 4,370 feet, a height of 84 feet aove Streambed, and will include a gated spillway, a concrete erboverflow and power intake section, and a lock flanked by earth lift kinents. Navigation lock will be 110 by 600 feet with a capcit 30 feet. Reservoir formed by dam will have a storage ac tY of 165,200 acre-feet. Estimated cost is $77,200,000. i ocal cooperation. See requirements for overall Arkansas Over and tributaries multiple-purpose project. eserations and results during fiscal year. Acquisition of real str"ce and engineering studies for contract plans continued. Con- eribaon-1 of left abutment access road, 1st stage cofferdam, initial ln k irnent and project buildings complete. Construction of tiat)oWerhouse, completion of embankment, and relocations ini- JaCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project started "Uary 1965 and is 10 percent complete. Cost and financial statement aYear.,. ......... 1962 Total to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 1 - - l ______ - I-____.._._._..--i Pr ted ............. $6,125,000 $302,600 $495,900$2,875,000 $9,872,469 .............. 297,403 460,322 2,684,7274,348,864 7,865,284 . 63. SURVEYS al 33gc year cost was $586,974, of which $347 was for navigation, 3e3'40 for flood control, $20,420 for coordination with other eclale, $168,095 .for comprehensive studies, and $64,572 for a Studies. S 64. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA scal year cost was $4,091 for flood plain information studies. 65. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Scal year cost was $9,493 for hydrologic studies. KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT* Te1isdistrict comprises a portion of southwestern Iowa; north- ern N3, central, and western Missouri; northern Kansas; south- rn dr raska; and a portion of northeastern Colorado embraced Nebranage basin of the Missouri River and tributaries from Rulo, ris u to the mouth. Report on navigation project for section of of 0mariaRverfrom Sioux City, Iowa, to Rulo, Nebr., is in report a District.IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS, Page Page 1. i. Navigation Flood Control-Continued isouri River, Sioux City, 25. Little Nemaha River, Iowa, to mouth (Rulo, Nebr ................. 863 2, Ot ., to mouth).... 846 26. Long Branch Reservoir, t authorized naviga- Little Chariton River, tion projects .......... 849 Mo .................. 863 27. Lower Grand River, Mo... 863 S Flood Control 28. Manhattan, Kansas River, Atchison, White Clay K ans ................ 864 C 4,S dfeord, nWhteekeyKans. 29. Marysville, Big Blue River, FEast Fork 102 849 Kans................ 864 . )RvetIowa ......... 30. Melvern Reservoir, Osage 850 (Marais des Cygnes) 6 yMer Reservoir, Shoal 6., Creek, Mo........... River, Kans.......... 865 850 31. Mercer Reservoir, Weldon rookfield Reservoir, Yel- River, Mo ........... 866 7.cO w Creek, Mo........ rhariton-Little Chariton 851 32. Merriam, Turkey Creek, Kans ............... 866 S asinsMo o.. 8.chariton River, Mo. ........ 851 33. Milford Reservoir, Repub- 851 lican River, Kans .... 867 Clinton Reservoir, Waka- 10, rusa River, Kans. 852 34. Missouri River agricul- rj Fork and East Fork tural levees, Sioux City, Iowa, to mouth (Rulo, Reservoirs, F i sh i i g 853 Nebr., to mouth) ...... 868 I.]River, Mo............ st 12. paarbury,Muddy Creek, 35. Missouri River B a sin Little Blue Mo.. River, 854 (Kansas City Dist.) ... 870 . .o ebr * ................ 36. Osawatomie, Pottawatomie 854 Creek, Kans .......... 872 xaort Scott Reservoir, Mar- 37. Ottawa, Osage (Marais 4. rnkfort,River, rnaton BlackKans... Vermil- 854 des Cygnes) River, Kans. 872 15. ion River, Kans ...... 38. Pattonsburg Reser- 1 rve Reservoir, Soldier 855 voir, Grand River, Mo.. 873 16. reek, Kans......... 855 39. Perry Reservoir, Delaware 1 Ysum Gypsum Creek, River, Kans. ........ 873 r 40. Platte River, Mo....... 874 17. arlan Reservoir, .ty 856 41. Pomme de Terre Reservoir, Pomme de Terre River, 18. Republican River, Nebr. 857 Mo.................. 874 19 Rays, Big Creek, Kans. . . 858 42. Pomona Reservoir, One iislldale Reservoir, Big 20. t1ull Creek, Kans ....... Hundred Ten Mile 858 Creek, Kans ......... 875 I ,anoPolis Reservoir, 21. SMoky Hill River, Kans. 859 43. Rathbun Reservoir, Chari- ansas City, Kansas ton River, Iowa 876 22 sRiver, Kans. (1962 mod.) 859 44. Smithville Reservoir and ansas Citys on Missouri channel, Little Platte and Kansas River, Mo. River, Mo. ............ 877 2 and Kans............. 860 45. Stockton Reservoir, Sac (avysinger Bluff Reservoir, River, Mo ............ 878 46. Topeka, Kansas River, 24, OSage River, Mo ...... 861 Kans............... 879 Lawrence, Kansas River, 47. Trenton Reservoir, Thomp- Kans. ....... 862 son River, Mo........ 881 846 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Flood Control--Continued Flood Control--Continued 48. Tuttle Creek Reservoir, 53. Flood control work under Big Blue River, Kans... 881 special authorization ." 49. Upper Grand River, Mo... 882 50. Wilson Reservoir, Saline General Investigations 885 River, Kans .......... 883 54. Surveys .............. * 51. Inspection of completed 885 flood control projects .. 884 55. Collection and study of basic data .......... 885 52. Other authorized flood con- trol projects .......... 885 56. Research and development 1. MISSOURI RIVER, SIOUX CITY, IOWA, TO MOUTH (RULO, NEBR., TO MOUTH) .ait Location. Jefferson, Madison, and Gallatin Rivers con.uh* Three Forks, Mont., to form Missouri River, which flows so easterly 2,315 1 miles across or along seven States to Mississ',P River, 17 miles above St. Louis. For description see page tio9 Annual Report for 1932. Practically entire length of secti0 from Kansas City to mouth is within State of Missouri. ort Previous projects. For details see page 1891 of Annual IRep for 1915, and pages 1153 and 1175 of Annual Report for 193ls s Existing project. A channel of 9-foot depth and width not lio than 300 feet, to be obtained by revetment of banks, construs to of permeable dikes to contract and stabilize waterway, cutoffs to eliminate long bends, closing minor channels, removal of . ho and dredging as required. Section under improvement (Moud o' upper end of Rulo Bend) is 514.8 miles 1 long. Ordinary anslti- treme fluctuations of stage are 16 and 38 feet, respectively. * of mated cost for new work is $192,200,000 (July 1966) exclusive amounts expended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents _________________ -- I 3d ses. July 25, 1912 Project adopted for securing a permanent navigable chan- I. Doc. 1287 61st Cong., nel of 6-foot depth. (contains latest published m~ e . Aug. 8,1917 Fixed upstream limit of improvement at upper end of Quin- H. D)oc. 463, 64th Cong., 1 daro Bend (374.8 miles from mouth) and provided for (contains latest published am dredging. Mar. 3,1925 For a minimum width of 200 feet, with a reasonable addi- tional width around bends. 2d see' Jan. 12, 1927 Appropriation of $12 million authorized for existing project. H. Doc. 1120, 60th Cong. July 3,1930 Appropriation of $15 million additional authorized; addi- tional allotments totaling $29,153,108 were made by Public Works Administration under provisions of National Indus- trial Recovery Act of 1938, and $9,669,791 allotted under provisions of Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935. es.(cow- Aug. 30,1935 Completion of improvement from mouth to Sioux City, Iowa. H. Doe. 238, 73d Cong., 2dess (, tains latest publishednmap) . (con Mar. 2, 1945 Securing a navigable channel of 9-foot depth and a min- II. Doe. 214, 76th Cong., lstse imum width of 300 feet. tains latest publishdmaP. Local cooperation. Project provides that cooperation o benefited localities may be required, in case a comprehensive pe is adopted by Congress, for an apportionment of expense, wher any improvement confers special benefit; and receipt of contid~e tions from private parties, to be expended with Government Iu . upon authorized works where such would be in interest of naViof tion is authorized by 1915 River and Harbor Act. Secretaryo the Army approved general principle of cooperative constructiol 1 1960 adjusted mileage. RIVERS AND HARBORS-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 847 o Missouri River below Kansas City on basis that 25 percent of and 7 any special installation shall be paid by the United States interest percent by local interests. Total contributed by local Srests in cooperation with the United States from 1918 to June 96 , trju tributors. was $675,663, of which $8,647 was returned to con- leuerminal facilities. Facilities for transferring grain, petro- lo at . products, and other commodities are maintained at various aions on this section of the river. Facilities are listed below: Miles Description of facilityl above 2 Bank Nearest town mouth nand and gravel............... .......... 498.6 Right.... Rulo, Nebr. "g facility ............... .......... 488.0 do... White Cloud, Kans. ..... ravel transfer........................... 449.0 Left..... St. Joseph, Mo. tmaterial yard..........................448.1 .....do... Do. Ingcliy ........................... 447.8 .....do.. Do. facility........................ 446.0 do... ..... Do. 423.1 Right.... Atchinson, Kans. g facilies, i;ubl.cly owned, privately op.- 422.9 do... ..... Do. ravel transfer...... ............. 422.7 Left .... Winthrop, Mo. ck ...... 421.1 Right.... Atchinson, Kans. ravel transfer.......... ......... ... do... South Leavenworth, Kans. 395.8 nd ways for manufacturing, repairing, and 395.7 ... do... Do. Sfloating equipment. Ingfacility ................... 386 5 .....do... Walcott, Kans. grain loading facility....... ......... 386.4 ..... do... D)o. hoist... 386.2 ..... do... Do. )ck............... 386.1 .... do... D)o. nloading and storage.................... 382.1 ..... do... Pomeroy, IKans. Lt-ownel bulk petroleum storage............ 376.3 Left... Parkville, Mo. 'ck.. ........... ............... 375.6 .. do... Do. (standby).................... 373.1 Right... Kansas City, Kans. ng conveyor and dock.................... 373.0 ... do... D)o. ding.. 372.4 .. do... Do. sand and grave. ................... 371.3 Left..... N. Kansas City, Mo. .......... ..... .. . 368.3 Right... Kansas City, Kans. ng, conveyer, and dock.................... 367.7 ..... do... Kansas City, Kans. ,bulk handling dock and unloading platform. 367.1 ..... do... Kansas City, Mo. ng.. ....... Iodm .. .......................... oading.......'............. .... 367.0 ..... 366.9 ..... do... do... Do. Do. and loading platform... ............ 365.9 ..... do... Do. sand and gravel....... ........... 365.7 ..... do.. Do. sand and gravel......................... 365.4 ...do... D)o. ng........ 364.2 ..... do... Do. g ......................... ........... 364.1 .....do... Do. ng ... ....................... ........... 361.6 Left..... Do. nR............... 361.0 ..... do.. Randolph, Mo. rpose dock, transfer and storage of pipe and 360.1 ..... do.. Do. ing dock................... ............ 355.7 Right.... Sugar Creek, Mo. sand and gravel......................... 355.4 ..... do... Do. Ig... ng... . ....................... 358.8 ..... do... Do. 354.8 ..... do... Do. ipany)............... ...... .... 345.3 Left..... Missouri City, Mo. Ig............... ........... 534.8 do... Orrick, Mo. ..... t material yardl.......................... 328.6 Right.... Napoleon, Mo. ng ................ .............. ..... 328.3 ..... do... D)o. ..................................... ni... invg . . . . . . . ....................318.2 ..... do... Lexington, Mo. 317.9 ..... do... Do. aIg...... ...................... 317.2 rLeft..... Do. ng ..... ............ '................. . 313.2 .... do... Do. Ing.... ................ 293.4 Right.... Waverly, Mo. it yard..... . .............. 293.2 ....do.. Do. SSandand gravel....................... 293.1 ..... do... Do. ing ... ......................... 293.0 ..... do... Do. rig ............................. 270.0 Left.... Wakenda, Mo. ing. ... ... ........................262.7 Right.... Miami, Mo. iag .... ............................. 249.3 Left.... Brunswick, Mo. sand and gravel...................... 226.6 ..... do... Glasgow, Mo. it material yard......................... 226.4 ..... do... Do. ator, conveyor and dock.... .......... 226.4 ..... do... Do. sand and gravel........................ 197.0 Right.... Boonville, Mo. ing............. .............. 196.8 ..... do... Do. nsand and gravel... ................ 186.4 Left..... Rocheport, Mo. ng............................ 148.6 ..... do... Jefferson City, Mo. ites at end of table. 848 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Mileg Description of facilityl above 2 Bank Nearest town mouth Transfer of sand and gravel.......................... 143.6 Right.... Do. Bulk handling............................... 143.6 Le.t..... Do. Transfer of sand and gravel.... ................. 124.5 ..... do... Mokane, Mo. Coal unloading... ............................ 117.1 Right.... Chamois, Mo. Transfer of sand and gravel......................114.1 Left..... Portland, Mo. Boatyard and launching ways... .................. 104.7 Right.... Gasconade, Mo. Transfer of sand and gravel............... .96.9 Left..... Herman, Mo. Transfer of sand and gravel..... .................. 68.1 Right.... Washington, Sand Co. Transfer of sand and gravel....................... 28.0 ..... do... St. Louis Co. Mo. Transfer of sand and gravel and bulk cargo deck ....... 27.9 Right.... St. Charles, Mo. Marine railway............................... 8.6 ..... do... Ruegy, Mo. Transfer of sand and gravel.... ................ 8.5 ..... do... D)o. Proposed facilities: Grain wharf... ............................ 396.1 Riht.... Leavenworth, KanS. Cement unloading.............................. 360.6 Left..... Kansas City, Mo. Coal unloading....... .............................. 336.4 Right.... Sibley, Mo. Grain loading................................255.7 Left..... Brunswick, Mo. Grain loading... ............................ 255.5 ..... do... Do. General purpose wharf .......................... 197.9 Right.... Boonville, Mo. 1Privately owned and operated unless otherwise indicated. 1960 adjusted mileage. Note: Above facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Construction by contract of 56 dikes and 433 dike ent tensions totaling 83,291 linear feet, 54 lengths of revet~le totaling 22,700 linear feet, and initiation of construction o r0 dike and three dike extensions totaling 717 linear feet and to lengths of revetment totaling 2,050 linear feet at a total cosdke $3,317,408. Operations by hired labor consisted of one dike totaling 100 linear feet constructed with rock salvaged from struc- ture removal operations and removal of 10,369 linear feet of existing structure and 50,700 cubic yards of material to improve alinement at a cost of $356,466; engineering and design, surtad and layouts of construction work, $154,724; and supervision it administration, $231,441. Regular funds, maintenance: Eeyet. by contract of 5,883 linear feet of dike, 96,623 linear feet of refeet ment and initiation of repair of two dikes totaling 247 linear ost and one piece of revetment totaling 2,100 linear feet at a total de of $2,679,216. In addition, following work was accomplished by hired labor: repair of 4,272 linear feet of dikes, 48,922 li e feet of revetment, 1,172 linear feet of chute closure strUcture initiation of repair of two dikes totaling 370 linear feet anid f moval of 6,579 linear feet of existing structure at a cost n $808,091; placing 1,226,870 cubic yards of material in connection with repair of structures at 11 localities and removal of 1,945,470 cubic yards of material from 19 localities by U.S. dredges Black and Mitchell at a cost of $988,558; real estate management I70; cost of $2,565; snagging and clearing channel at a cost of $ 1 'tiol channel reconnaissance, $252,181; marking channel for naviga ad between Rulo, Nebr., and Kansas City, Mo., $112,746; surveYs at mapping, $163,186; stream gaging and special working data at cost of $142,948; engineering and design, $88,718; surveys andt# out of construction work, $9,439; and supervision and administra- tion, $464,131.te Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on this section of A1he project (Rulo, Nebr., to mouth) is about 98 percent complete. ul' though additional dikes and revetment are required to attail FLOOD CONTROI-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 849 isoect dimensions, a channel with a minimum depth of 71/ feet th available throughout the navigation season (generally Mar. .ov.). Planning of recreational facilities is progressing. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Total Ntgular Orenrfy........... $169,942,720$122,810,334$292,753,054 Abrc Works ......................................... 2362,598 10,401 2,552,999 pjfiic erated .... 17,181,145 ..................................... 114,180 17,295,325 works ............ .................................. 393,261 393,261 Total- - - 312,994,639 ............ .. . 189,486,463 123,508,176 Cost and financial statement sal year , . .Total to .. 162 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 1NewWork. $3,300,000 $199,593,164 $5,400,t00 $4,000,000 Sropriated ........ $4,970,000 $4,230,000 a ....... 4,707,9514,460,6993,855,2204,0,557 'tenan.ce 4,060,039 198,796,432 ..... op4riated. 4,963,5005,955,4005,525,4616,243,7375,405,000 2125,494,279 4,484,940 6,362,557 5,435,605 5,340,241 5,723,649 ......... 2124,662,188 $8,659644,374 costsof new work and $22,642 for maintennce from contributed funds celudeB94,costsof new work and $738,109 for maintenance for previous project. S $393,261 Accelerated Public Works funds. 2. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report - see Annual Name of project Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance ort ., F Gasc~nonworth B gag55e River M , Mo:, lMridge removal................................ hsgelive 0.12. . . . . . $270,393. 139,003 85, $8577 ck and dam3...... ....................... 1952 658,076 850,495 ",provern 2 Urtailr ement de dequate for existing needs. Project for maintenance only. O erationt of project In H. D)oc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st seas. ton of lock and dam placed in standby status. S3. ATCHISON, WHITE CLAY CREEK, KANS. Iocation. On White Clay Creek, a tributary of Missouri River his 0on, Atchison County, Kans. Cla istng project: Consists of a cut and cover conduit for White Atchy.Creek about 2,500 feet long under Main Street of city of iZed ion, Kans., to empty into Missouri River. Project author- 1st 111 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 151, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). est.imated Federal cost of construction (1966) is $4,370,000 and L1ated non-Federal cost of lands and damages is $255,000. 19 3 Ocal cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1ol applies. Local interests indicated necessary assurances O, be furnished when requested. oeerrations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new to 5'0 Plans and specifications for conduit construction advanced Percent complete. is 0ndition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum coimplete and plans and specifications for conduit construction ae il Preparation. 850 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year ............... 1962 1963 19064 1965 4. BEDFORD, EAST FORK 102 RIVER, IOWAr Location. At Bedford, Taylor County, Iowa, on righPlatte of East Fork One Hundred and Two River, tributary of River, 8 miles north of Missouri-Iowa State line. dwaY Existing project. Plan consists of channel and floonel improvement by clearing and excavating existing chaneers Project was authorized for construction by Chief of ngi nFlod on April 23, 1965, under authority of section 205, 1948 tio Control Act, as amended. Estimated Federal cost of construLdel (1966) is $365,000 and estimated non-Federal cost of landS,a' ages, and relocations is $29,500. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1936, applies. Rights-of-way furnished by city of Bedford. ev Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fundsd for work: Plans and specifications were completed and submittescl approval. Construction was advertised for bids late in the year.ised Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction plans advert for bids. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966J 0 6 New work: 000 $242 Appropriated.......... ........................ $7000 $35,000 $200,000 3563 Cost..................................... 1,742 10,599 23,295 5. BRAYMER RESERVOIR, SHOAL CREEK, MO. Location. Damsite is on Shoal Creek, a tributary of Grd River, about 6 miles northeast of Braymer, in Caldwell CountY Mo. earthfi Existing project. Preliminary plan provides for an earth dam about 8,200 feet long and about 85 feet high with aP nvoir controlled service spillway in right abutment. Total reserco,. storage capacity would be 573,500 acre-feet (299,500 for flood con trol, 58,200 for sediment reserve, and 215,800 of conservA ° storage for water quality control and recreation). Project authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 241, 89th Co1 1st sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $29,300,000. e0 Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 1938, applies. Local interests must share in cost of recreation facilities in accordance with Federal Water Project Recre, Act of 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. FLOOD CONTROL-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 851 Lfaocattion. 6. IROOKFIELD RESERVOIR, YELLOW CREEK, MO. Damsite is on Yellow Creek, a tributary of Grand Ver, about 5 miles northeast of Brookfield, Linn County, Mo. damasting project. Preliminary plan provides for an earthfill an un- led 4,800 feet long and about 90 feet high with cont-about stor 0 rol service spillway in right abutment. Total reservoir trolage capacity would be 215,600 acre-feet (117,200 for flood con- stora,0900 for sediment reserve, and 77,500 of conservation autge for water quality control and recreation). Project was 1 t orized by 1965 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 241, 89th Cong., Less.). Estimated cost (1966) is $14,300,000 19 ocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, 19f iapplies. Local interests must share in cost of recreation ftlies inaccordance with Federal Water Project Recreation Act Condition at end of fiscal year. No operation to date. Lo 7. CHARITON-LITTLE CHARITON BASINS, MO. n . Project is in Chariton and Little Chariton River .ca tio tsi Charn in north central Missouri, the Mussel Fork unit is in Iaqiton County, the Little Chariton River unit in Chariton and xolph Counties, and Shoal Creek unit in Putnam County. realisting project. Preliminary plans provide for improving and fling Little Chariton River channel resulting in a shortening olength from 17 miles to 8 miles. Channel of Mussel Fork, a tibutary of Chariton River would be straightened and improved R-about 23 miles. Middle and East Forks of Little Chariton vo and lower 2 miles of Silver Creek, a tributary of East Fork, for 'lbe improved by realinement and enlarging existing channel be s-total of about 51 miles. Lower 5 miles of Shoal Creek would ChaSortened to about 2 miles by construction of a cutoff to new Potlon River channel constructed under a previous project. 8 9 ect Was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H11. Doc. 238, h Cong., 1st sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $5,385,000,and of reloc $44450,000 is Federal and $935,000 for lands, damages, Loation to be borne by local interests. 1938ca1 cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 28, 8 applies. Cndition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. L .8. CHARITON RIVER, MO. eaocation. Rises near Osceola in south central Iowa and flows li terly and southeasterly about 140 miles to Iowa-Missouri State Ivl,thence south about 138 miles to its confluence with Missouri Ch about 7 miles above Glasgow, Mo. Drainage basin of r.ton River about 150 miles long and 25 miles wide. e Y!Sting project. Intermittent channel enlarging and straight- ofe Chariton River from near Missouri-Iowa line to confluence aefChariton with Missouri River, together with tieback levees aloss Missouri flood plain along the improved channel, a levee SMissouri River from mouth of Chariton to mouth of Little ft2 Little ariton Chariton River, and a River levee Missouri tiebackacross Riverimprovement and channel flood plain. 852 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by 1944 Flood Control Act(' Doc. 628, 78th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated cost of project (1966) is $9,400,000, of which $8,700,000 is for Federal cost for construcl tioin and $700,000 is cost of lands and damages to be borne by local interests. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Right-of-way for all completed channel improve ment has been furnished. Assurances of cooperation applicabe to tieback levees along improved Chariton River channel at the mouth were received April 26, 1965, and right-of-entry for coe r struction was furnished May 26 1965, and approved. LOwer Chariton River Levee District will sponsor main stem and tieb.e levees on Little Chariton River and furnish assurances requested. new Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, el work: Planning for construction of tieback levees and channe improvements along Little Chariton River and for main sten1 Missouri River levees between Chariton and Little CharitOve Rivers, was continued; planning for additional channel imiproV ment in Macon-Adair unit was completed and work advertisoed' Construction of tieback levees along the new channel of Charitol River advanced to 18 percent of completion by contract. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project.Wa initiated in February 1948. Construction of cutoffs enlargIn Chariton River channel from mile 13.6 to mouth and constructon of revetment and bank protection at mouth is complete. Coe' struction of cutoffs, enlarging, and clearing of Chariton g iti is channel from mile 13.6 to 19.9 in upper Chariton County untd complete. Construction of ditches, cutoffs, and enlarging and clearing of Chariton River channel in Macon-Adair Counties nel Reinhart Ranch units is complete. Levees along the new chanin to Chariton River at its mouth are 18 percent complete. E g neering and design Is in progress for the tieback levees a 1 the Little Chariton River across Missouri River flood plain and forthe main stem levees between Chariton and Little Chariton Rivers. Cost and financial statement Totfalto66 Fiscal year.............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 june New work:$3 Appropriated................... $55,000 $400,011 $548,914$1,400,00047 Cost........................... 50,741 133,273 108,599 487,698 9. CLINTON RESERVOIR, WAKARUSA RIVER, KANS. Location. Damsite is on Wakarusa River about 5 mile southwest of Lawrence, Kans., in Douglas County, reservoir e% tending into Shawnee and Osage Counties, Kans. out Existing project. Plans provide for an earthfill dam about 9,600 feet long to be constructed to an average height of botal,tor 90 feet, with an uncontrolled spillway in left abutment. reservoir storage capacity would be 384,000 acre-feet (255,000 flood control, 20,000 for sediment reserve, and 109,000 of conserva FLOOD CONTROL--KANSAS CITY. MO.. DISTRICT 853 Stio. tio Storage for municipal and industrial water supply and recrea- 000. Estimated Federal cost of construction (1966) is $33,566,- 7th "Project authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 122, Ctong., 2d sess.). 19 cal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, stor applies. Reimbursement will be required for water supply 1958ge to be provided in accordance with Water Supply Act of Woerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new gener~Surveying rastk and mapping were completed. Preliminary Plan Richland land acquisition design memorandum and rad, design memorandum were completed. Design memo- rarkm covering geology, access roads, and boundary survey and n pin were completed. co" Real estate design memorandum neared rials etion. Engineering studies pertaining to construction mate- ',outlet works embankment, and relocations were in progress. condition at end of fiscal year. Surveying and mapping, are i"MPlete Z- ig studeies General design memorandum is complete. Engineer- pertaining to specific components in progress. Cost and financial statement iecalyea Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 opriated.............................. $60,000 $235,000 $400,000 $695,000 ....... 20,184 176,023 252,414 448,621 10. DRY FORK AND EAST FORK RESERVOIRS, r FISHING RIVER, MO. ofLocation. Damsite for each of these reservoirs is on a tributary Vo 'shing Iee River about 1 mile upstream from Excelsior Springs, Dry Fork Reservoir site is in Clay County and East Fork Rservoir site in Ray County. Of isting project. Preliminary plans provide for construction o reservoirs as follows: 0 Dry Fork East Fork f darn in linear feet .................... ......... 940 1,900 al ghtof darn above valley floor ......................... 95 135 otalstorage capacity (acre-feet) ..................... 3,670 27,000 di "control storage (acre-feet) ....................... 1,620 11,360 osent reserve (acre-feet) ............................. 320 1,940 coevation storage for water supply water quality ol, fish and wildlife and recreation ................ 1,730 13,700 13othd th dams would have an uncontrolled outlet conduit, and an llo itrolled service spillway. Project was authorized by 1965 4'atd Control Act (H. Doc. 281, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). Esti- a.ed cost (1966) is $7,800,000. 19 cal'cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, 9 plies. Local interests must share in cost of recreation actties in accordance with Federal Water Project Recreation eas of 1965, reimburse the United States for the cost of lands, e ents, rights-of-way, and relocations allocated to flood control 854 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and reimburse costs allocated to water supply provided in accord ance with Water Supply Act of 1958. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 11. EAST MUDDY CREEK, MO. Location. Along East Muddy Creek, a tributary of TholPson River, in north central Missouri about 2 miles east of Spickard ville in Grundy County.d Existing project. Preliminary plans provide for clearing ~ straightening about 3.2 miles of channel in a reach of East Mtid 4as Creek which has not previously been straightened. Project as authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 241, 89th Cofl' 1st sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $189,000 of which $168,0 is Federal and $21,000 for rights-of-way to be borne by local terests. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 2 1938, applies. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 12. FAIRBURY, LITTLE BLUE RIVER, NEBR. Location. At Fairbury, Jefferson County, Nebr., on left bal of Little Blue River about 13 miles above Kansas-Nebraska Sate line. Existing project. Plan consists of levees, floodwalls, and drai age structures. Project was authorized for construction bY t194 Chief of Engineers on March 10, 1966, under section 205, ted Flood Control Act, as amended by Public Lawxv 87-874. Estimo Federal cost of construction (1966) is $330,200 and estimnated On Federal cost of lands, damages, and relocations is $21,400. a Local cooperation. City Council, on June 18, 1963, gave 3, surances that city would comply with requirements. Sectiol Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fun'ds, e work: A revised detailed project report was completed. pirepa ration of contract plans and specifications was initiated. eci Condition at end of fiscal year. Preparation of plans and spe fications for construction of levees and floodwalls initiated. Cost and financial statement Total to 6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jue 30, New Appropriated.......... work: $9,002 $4,000 . $2,000 $50,00014 $65380 Cosat............. . 8,953 1,842 $2,125 577 886 13. FORT SCOTT RESERVOIR, MARMATON RIVER, KANS' Location. Damsite is on Marmaton River about 55 miles abo 'its mouth and about 6 miles southwest of Fort Scott, iBoul County, Kans. Existing project. A preliminary plan provides for a. about 6,000 feet long to be constructed to an elevation abou FLOOD CONTROL---KANSAS 855 CITY. MO., DISTRICT reet above valley floor, with an uncontrolled spillway. Total flervoir storage capacity would be 235,500 acre-feet (149,000 for tion control, 12,500 for sediment reserve, and 74,000 of conserva- tion)sorage for water supply, water quality control, and recrea- coist , Project is a unit of general comprehensive plan for flood and other in Missouri River Basin, authorized by Flooi li Control Actpurposes of 1954 (II. Doc. 549, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). t lated cost (1966) is $19,300,000. L Plie ocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- oNetraions and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new coi urveying, mapping and general design memoranda were C .eted. Preliminary master plan under preparation. in ridition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is Progress. Cost and financial statement 11ear Total to .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 ework: OPWroriated. ated ..... $10,000 $29,200 $800 $100,000-$200,000 $340,000 .. 7,218 21,317 10,910 64,998 149,333 253,776 14. FRANKFORT, BLACK VERMILLION RIVER, KANS. for°tion. On right bank of Black Vermillion River at Frank- ' )ottawvatomie County, Kans. d e project. Plan consists of levees along east, south, iq woest sides of Frankfort, alteration of railroad bridges and ~1 1 rOvement of channels of Little Timber Creek and Black Ver- Coto River. Existing project was authorized by 1958 Flood edetrol Act (II. Doc. 409, 84th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated o1 a.l cost of construction (1966) is $1,294,000 and estimated e deral cost of lands, damages and relocations is $124,000. 0 Ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. WorkPrations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new labor Placement of additional riprap was accomplished by hired Cfndition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was r tiated March 1962 and completed in 1963 except for a minor fortuat of riprap work. Project was transferred to city of Frank- riraporloperation and maintenance October 1963. Additional P aced. Cost and financial statement "seaa Total to .... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 p $375,000 .......... $850,000 ... $1,294,000 ..... 148,613 932,065 $139,429 -$10,942 $5,553 1,271,025 15. GROVE RESERVOIR, SOLDIER CREEK, KANS. 1j0ocation. Damsite is on Soldier Creek about 26 miles above its ~(tlat and about 15 miles northwest of Topeka, Jackson County, 856 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. A preliminary plan provides for an earth' fill dam about 2 miles long and about 90 feet high, with an uCnld trolled flat crest spillway. Total reservoir storage capacitY ment be 157,000 acre-feet (104,000 for flood control, 8,000 for sediand reserve, and 45,000 of conservation storage for water supp y . recreation). Project authorized by 1962 Flood Control Actn Doc. 122, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated cost of constructi (1966) is $15,100,000.o Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of JuneP 1938, applies. Reimbursement will be required for water suOP& storage to be provided in accordance with Water Supply Ac 1958. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, ne work: Preparation of hydrology design memorandum was co pleted. Site selection design memorandum initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Hydrology design memoranledm n is complete. Surveying, mapping, and general design em randum are in progress. Cost and financial statement Tots to 6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J Je.30,jg66 New work: $7500 Appropriated... .............................................. $75,000 6908 Cost............. ................................... 6... 9,085 16. GYPSUM, GYPSUM CREEK, KANS. Location. At Gypsum, Saline County, Kansas, on the left ban of Gypsum Creek, 10 miles south of its confluence with the River, 15 miles southeast of Salina, Kansas. . Existing project. Plan consists of a levee around the citY, diversion channel and channel improvement work.Project s ing considered for selection under section 205, 1948. Floo deral trol Act, as amended by Public Law 87-874. Estimated Federal r cost of construction (1966) is $932,000 and estimated nonFe cost of lands, damages, and relocations is $268,000. a reoluionof inltelnt Local cooperation. City Council adopted a resolution of o" to sponsor the project on January 3, 1966. Section 3,Flood trol Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds iled work: Completed reconnaissance report and initiated a deta project report.der Condition at end of fiscal year. Detailed project report is nder preparation. Cost and financial statement sg1966 Tot Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Ju~e work: New Appropriated.......... ................... ........................ $38,000 $38' Cost..............................28,887 FLOOD CONTROL--KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 857 1' HARLAN COUNTY RESERVOIR, REPUBLICAN RIVER, NEBR. Dam 23Location.l is on main stem of Republican River about siteules above confluence of stream with Smoky Hill River. City iSin Harlan County, Nebr., about 3 miles east of Republican Y Nebr., and 13 miles west of Franklin, Nebr. strea s ti n project. An earthfill dam about 107 feet above cotrolbed and a total length of 11,827 feet, including a gate- da e concrete gravity-type spillway section near center of sto > iMpounds floodwater within reservoir which provides 350 e capacity of 850,000 acre-feet (500,000 for flood control and ui00 for irrigation and sedimentation allowance). Project is Mrhi of general comprehensive plan for flood control and other trolposes in Missouri River Basin authorized by 1938 Flood Con- as et c(Flood Control Committee Doc. 1, 75th Cong., 1st sess.), 8 ifed by 1941 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 842, 76th Cong., tro s.), to include this project, and expanded by 1944 Flood Con- sess. ct (. Doc. 475, and S. Docs. 191 and 247, 78th Cong., 2d 050,00 Estimated cost (July 1966) is $46,818,532 including $1,- (rec0'0 for major rehabilitation and $489,000 Code 710 funds oceation at completed projects). a Ooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 Clie o} rations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new lat Constructed, by contract, additional roads and a shower- iitin building in the Hunter's Cove area; and, by hired labor, init".-ted clearing for mosquito abatement near Alma, Nebr.; addaitted construction of a beach in South Shore area, developed f ditioonlal picnic facilities in Alma Vista area and accomplished con Oation work. Regular funds, rehabilitation: Repaired, by cost o I,damage to roads caused by hauling riprap material at a hired 1 $36,272. Supervision and engineering for repair work by tiol fabor cost $2,043. Regular funds, maintenance: Comple- eDa •silt removal from Gremlin Cove, by contract, cost $29,837. tank i of roads, by hired labor, cost $3,980. An asphalt storage Cella and heater, tractor with mower, outboard motor and mis- oereeous equipment was purchased at a cost of $8,128. Routine hire ons, ordinary maintenance and real estate management by ofre or cost $151,502. Proceeds of $51,034 from outleasing as servoir land , sale of fee land and collection of recreation fees laid ,deposited in the Treasury. Local governmental units will be Co Percent of $49,735 received for outleasing of reservoir. S.d itidton at end of fiscal ?year. Construction of project was raited in August 1946 and construction of embankment and str~ut spillway section was completed December 1952. Con- of supplemental recreation facilities was underway. flon 858 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to year............... Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,.96 New work: 450 032 Appropriated.......... $1,000 $16,000 ............$80,000 $50 000 405,398 Maintenance: Mainance: ....... 3,141 5,334 $8,256 12,530 76,759 1,885 68 Appropriated.......... 165,500 158,100 201,600 170,700 172,600 1862,846 Cost .................. 131,359 188,643 182,436 154,616 189,157 1 50 Rehabilitation: 10 0 O Appropriated...... *......... ....................... 1,050,000 ... 1 006:641 Cost............ ...... ...................... 968,326 33,315 18. HAYS, BIG CREEK, KANS. Location. At Hays, Ellis County, Kans., on left bank of 3g Creek about 30 miles upstream from its confluence with Soy Hill River. Existing project. Plans provide for channel improvement'Ctrol offs and levees. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Concost Act (H. Doc. 160, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). Estimated Federalce of construction (1966) is $2,960,000 and estimated non.Feder cost of lands, damages, and relocations is $1,110,000.o 2 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1936, applies. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 19. HILLSDALE RESERVOIR, BIG BULL CREEKt KANS. Location. Damsite is about 12 miles above mouth of 13 1 Creek, a tributary of Marais des Cygnes River, and about 5 ile north of Paola, Miami County, Kans. rt1fill Existing project. Preliminary plans provide for an eard a embankment about 2,150 feet long and about 53 feet high, anda gravity type overflow spillway section. Total reservoir stora0 capacity would be 90,000 acre-feet (77,000 for flood control, ~'ter for sediment reserve, and 7,250 of conservation storage for 1954 quality control and recreation). Project was authorized bY ted Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 549, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Esti at is Federal cost of construction (1964) is $12,600,000. Pro3ecic currently in "deferred" category pending reevaluation of econou justification. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aP plies.N Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, ne work: Engineering and economic feasibility studies were tiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Reexamination of project underway. Cost and financial statement FLOOD CONTROL--KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 859 20. KANOPOLIS RESERVOIR, SMOKY HILL RIVER, KANS. anLcati on . Dam is on Smoky Hill River about 19 miles west abo1 miles south of Salina, Kans., and about 205 river miles boe.mouth of stream. str mstin! e project. An earthfill dam about 131 feet above of d d and a total length of 15,360 feet, including 4,070 feet d righ e section on left abutment and 2,550 feet of dike section on ro abutment impounds floodwater within reservoir which ac-'vides storage capacity of 450,000 acre-feet, of which 400,000 rereat of capacity is for flood control and 50,000 acre-fettacre-feet for are at1 on and streamflow regulation. Outlet works and spillway " in right abutment. Project is a unit of general comprehensive aufto r flood control and other purposes in Missouri River Basin ) rized by 1938 Flood Control Act (Flood Control Committee Act 1, 75th Cong., 1st sess.) as modified by 1941 Flood Control .expanded by 1944 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 475, and S. doesa is $12191 and 247, 78th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated cost (1966) facilitea98,735, including $471,000 Code 710 funds (Recreational 14oces at completed projects). O1 cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act 1938, applies. or erations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new area"rk Provided additional facilities for recreation use in outlet areab isting of construction of additional roads and parking freY contract; constructing additional sanitary facilities and Ost on work by hired labor. Regular funds, maintenance: bent storage tank and heater and other miscellaneous equip- ordill'Were purchased at a cost of $2,497. Routine operation, e't $ r y maintenance, and real estate management by hired labor cellal 14,083. Income from collections for quarters and mis- leasceous receipts totaled $2,297. Proceeds from sale of fee land, de oirentals and collection of recreation fee of $58,571 were in the Treasury. Local ercent of the income from leasegovernmental 7 r-Sted rentals. units will be paid " ition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was readyed June 1940 and dam and spillway were completed and tiry for use in May 1948. Construction of supplemental recrea- Sfacilities is underway. Cost and financial statement Year Total to 0..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19066 New work. c roPriated -$1,000 $13,000 ............ $50,000 $38,000 $12,434,735 ltenaee*........... 5,086 6,777 $2,807 10,290 78,172 12,439,475 ropriated..... 124,000 94,030 110,900 98,500 r I O,00I 08 1 110,400 I0 !1,40 1,040,410 ........... 138,405 89,107 109,075 103,057 114,283 1,0 ,521 i 21. KANSAS CITY, KANSAS RIVER, KANS. ation. Along the Kansas River at Kansas City, Kans. flood18ting project. Provides for raising existing levees and dsta~all protection in Argentine, Armourdale, and Central In- al units, and includes necessary bridge alterations and modi- 860 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 fication of appurtenant facilities. Existing project was autho ized by 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doe. 122, 87th Cong.210 sess.). Estimated Federal cost of construction (1966) is a2 600,000 and estimated non-Federal cost of lands, damages, relocations is $3,700,000. 2 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of Juneet 1936, applies. Local interests indicated requirements will be when requested. eW Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, work: Planning continued on general design memnoran studies. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planni i underway. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1062 1963 1961 1965 1966 Jule30 New work0 525 Appropriated.......... .......... .......................... $100,000 $105,000 6 Coat................ ....................... 16,051t 5,461 22. KANSAS CITYS ON MISSOURI AND KANSAS RIVER MO. AND KANS. ood Location. Municipal and industrial areas which requirel protection extend from mouth of Kansas River about 61/2 miler. and 91/2 miles down Missouri River and 91/2 miles up Kansas ates Existing project. General plan of improvement conteMPll, protection works consisting principally of levees and floodwalse; for 13 separate project units, which are: Argentine; Armourd ; Central Industrial; Fairfax-Jersey Creek; North Kansas a, East Bottoms; channel improvement, Kansas River ; bridg approach alterations, Kansas River; channel improvementm; souri River; floodway improvement, Missouri River; Birming a Blue Valley Industrial; and Liberty Bend Cutoff. See 196) Report for 1964 for detailed description. Estimated cost (ofor is $47,620,000, of which $42,500,000 is Federal cost, $619,50O, work done with funds contributed by local interest, and $4,ocal 200 for lands, damages, and relocation to be borne bY interest. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Document June 22, 1936 Levees and floodwalls for protection of Kansas Citys, at an H. Doc. 195, 73d Cong., 2d se~' estimated construction cost not to exceed $10 million, esti- mated cost of lands and damages $8 million.stse Dec. 22, 1944 Modified and extended project to provide construction of H. Doe. 342, 78th Cong., sl ' cutoffs and protection for additional areas at an estimated additional cost of $8,445,000. uly 24, 194,16 Authorized Chief of Engineers to include necessary railroad bridge and approach alterations as a Federal responsibility. Sept. 3, 1954 Alternate plan of improvement proposed by local interests for Armourdale unit (downstream section). Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed word See Annual Report for 1964 for details. FLOOD CONTROL--KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 861 W utaons and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new ork- Bridge and approach alterations: Repaired nitrogen raof ad Fseraltion Kansas City Terminal Railroad bridge by contract. maintenance manual was prepared by hired labor. leera year cost was $10,194. Central industrial unit: Engi- aidung Studies in connection with preparation of design memo- Creek" for protection of unit from sidehill runoff from Turkey hired and outlet of Turkey Creek diversion tunnel continued by r. leCoredabo Fiscal year cost was $3,111. East Bottoms eaindrawings were prepared and revision to operationunit: and 1ost nance manuals were made by hired labor. Fiscal year C Was $1,276. for 0ree fdition A at endfacilities key Creek of fiscal year. Project was complete except required for Central Industrial Unit. SeeAnual Report for 1964 for detailed description. Cost and financial statement .. ........ Yer. 196 .to. Total..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 4work. ,New prtI "iaed S ....... $910,000 $1,300,000 $81,000 8 $35,000 1. 4, . $42,241,510 . 1,o49,o3o 1,545,618 16s,oos 17,232 $14,581 42,225,267 23. KAYSINGER BLUFF RESERVOIR, OSAGE RIVER, MO. 10caItion . Damsite is on main stem of Osage River about exteld s northwest of Warsaw, Mo., in Benton County, reservoir CoUtiln~ g into Bates, Henry, Hickory, St. Clair, and Vernon clan iting project. Preliminary plan provides for an earthfill of abo Out 5,000 feet long to be constructed to an average height etio anut 96 feet, including a gate-controlled overfall spillway Du and a power installation consisting of four reversible Droj. generating units with capacity of 151,300 kilowatts. This and a unit of general comprehensive plan for flood control ItIs authother purposes in Missouri River Basin. Project was d orized by 1954 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 549, 81st Cong., 7tsess.), 7t -ag., as modified by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 578, 2d sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $185 million. l lies ' cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- oeraons and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new relo .Contract with Missouri State Highway Commission for at "8tionof highway 13 was advanced to 72 percent completion o Of $942,283. Contracts for right abutment access road c"struction s0 of temporary office (storage building) and over- at ere initiated and advanced to 97 and 95 percent completion r ost of $160,593 and $137,948, respectively. Relocation of aed rom road right-of-way cost $99. First stage excavation ion ankment was initiated and advanced to 38 percent com- Iat a cost of $402,584. Hired labor operations consisted of estate Con of observation devices and radio equipment, real Management, provision of temporary construction facili- 862 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ties, engineering and design, and supervision and administrated of construction at a cost of $625,984. Land acquisition cons'st of 18,457 acres in fee and 180 acres flowage easements at ac of $4,263,487.er Condition at end of fiscal year. Entire project is aboutt 6apet cent complete. Removal of unsuitable material from east of ment of damsite complete. Construction of relocatiod isl Missouri Highway M-13 was initiated September 1964 a' fee 72 percent complete. Acquisition of 19,366 acres of land Con* simple and flowage easements acquired for 189 acres. of struction of right abutment access road and construct lte temporary office and overlook are 97 and 95 percent1per* respectively. First stage excavation and embankment is 3ped cent complete. Planning was underway on design nemo rd and contract plans for other construction features. Cost and financial statement Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $12700000 Appropriated.......... $1,250,000 -$56,000 $7,000,000 1079334 $1,015,000 $2,900,000 Cost ................. 355,681 324,391 785,586 2,309,5296,532,978 24. LAWRENCE, KANSAS RIVER, KANS. Location. On Kansas River about 50 miles above its rOU at Lawrence, Douglas County, Kans.iver Existing project. Levees along both banks of Kansas gd and right bank of Mud Creek, channel improvement forecti0 Creek, bank protection, and appurtenant facilities for proe rVas of North Lawrence and South Lawrence, Kans. Projec o., authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (IH. Doc. 642, 8 1st C 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost of construction (196S 1 d $5,340,000 and estimated non-Federal cost of lands, damages ard relocations is $570,000. S, Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of Juneece 1936, applies. Board of Commissioners of city of LaWe of furnished required assurances June 8, 1965. Acquisitiol rights-of-way is underway.e Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fundsd ~d work: First stage plans and specifications were complete reed n second stage plans and specifications advanced to 45 pere complete.do Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memor 'ond and first stage plans and specifications are complete. stage plans and specifications are in progress. Cost and financial statement plete. Sec Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $65,000 $78,000 $5,000 $270,000 950,000 3 Cost............... ... 10,944 101,279 34,528 cuf i1 77,595 FLOOD CONTROL-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 863 25. LITTLE NEMAHA RIVER, NEBR. tr1ia t i on . Along both banks of Little Nemaha River and its lI548arY streams from existing Missouri River levee system unit 1Co54 upstream about 20 miles to vicinity of Brock, Nemaha vOU1nty, Nebr. Eoistiing project. Preliminary plans provide for construction hrotieback levees along both banks of Little Nemaha River to WOVid e protection from floods of a 30-year frequency. Levees drail, be constructed on about 500-foot centers with necessary b structures and appurtenances. Project was authorized bflge Sst1965 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 160, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). ealcted cost (1966 is $1,910,000, of which $1,650,000 is Fed- rh cost and $260,000 is non-Federal cost for lands, easements, riohtsofway and relocations. Loc1936a cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 2* LONG BRANCH RESERVOIR, LITTLE CHARITON RIVER, MO. il~ocation. Damsite is on East Fork of Little Chariton River ih1]rth central Missouri about 4 miles west and north of Macon vceon County. datiinq project. Preliminary plans provide for an earthfill cottrolOut 3,550 feet long and about 65 feet high with an un- riht~bled outlet conduit and an uncontrolled service spillway in 900 autment. Total reservoir storage capacity would be 67,- Servee-feet (29,300 for flood control, 7,700 for sediment re- trol -and 30,900 of conservation storage for water quality con- 1i sh and wildlife and recreation). Project was authorized 1st 5 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 238, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). ouated cost (1966) is $6,600,000. 198 cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, ftc' apPlies. Local interests must share in cost of recreation Actof e1 i accordance with Federal Water Project Recreation CY_1965. Cndition at end of fiscal year. No operation to date. 27. LOWER GRAND RIVER, MO. IS cu t i on .' Along both banks of Grand River in north central Qra, ri from near Chillicothe, Mo., downstream to mouth of Livi River with tieback levees along major tributaries in Pi'pSton, Linn, Carroll, and Chariton Counties. nits d' n 0 project. Preliminary plans provide for three major Creek esignated-Main , Stem; Medicine-Muddy Creeks; and Big 'it C arroll County. Plan of improvement for main stem h rovides for excavating and improving about 25 miles of iel'and constructing about 113 miles of levee along both arti of lower reaches of Grand River with tieback levees along ro i es . 0 ~1 r Preliminary plans for Medicine-Muddy Creek unit ostre for clearing and improving about 12 miles of channel and (lo ucting about 34 miles of levee at intermittent locations Sboth banks of Medicine and Muddy Creeks. Preliminary 864 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 plans for Big Creek Carroll County, unit provide for cleail' and channel excavation to improve about 10 miles of ch 2 4 1, Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. ) oc%0 of, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $25,040,00 cost which $23 million is Federal and $2,040,000 is non-Federa for lands, easements, rights-of-way and relocations.o, Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1936, applies. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 28. MANHATTAN, KANSAS RIVER, KANS. atga Location. Project is along both banks of Kansas River atnsMa hattan, Riley, and Pottawatomie Counties, Kans.. between 1 River miles 147.7 and 150.5. Existing project. Levees and appurtenant structures a.li south and east sides of city, channel improvement along ghnd bank of Kansas River downstream of Rock Island Railroard Highway 13 bridges, two pumping plants for removal of irot drainage, and modification of Rock Island Railroad bridge. 64, tection was authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. D)oc ctio 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost of constru (1966) is $2,490,000 and estimated non-Federal cost of damages and relocations is $265,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. e Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, 'e work: Preparation of record drawings, operation and i tenance manual, and supervision and administration. tbeg Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of projec 963. in May 1961 and was turned over to local interests July 1 Project is complete except for settlement of pending claim. Cost and financial statement Fical year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: Appropriated..........$710,000 $950,000 $120,000 .. ... 14 Cost................. 679,191 856,249 613,743 $87,769.$3,018 29. MARYSVILLE, BIG BLUE RIVER, KANS. Location. On left bank of Big Blue River at Marysville, shall County, Kans. Existing project. Plan consists of new levee and ra3il existing levees along left bank of Big Blue River and right baq. of Spring Creek; channel cutoffs and improvement of 10 0 d Creek Channel. Existing project was authorized by 1954 . of Control Act (H. Doc. 642, 81st Cong., 2d sess.), as a ulitd comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. Estimatedted eral cost of construction (1966) is $1,140,000 estimad0e non-Federal cost of lands, damages and relocations is 3000. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1936, applies. City furnished assurances October 16, 1964,ie cept required State permits, for which city has made applica4 FLOOD CONTROL---KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 865 oerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new m eted plans and specifications for levee and channel uanyPrOVements. ACondition at end of fiscal year. All planning complete. 1aitinge fulfillment of local cooperation requirements. Local of necessary rights-of- ay inersts future.to initiate acquisition expected Waynear Cost and financial statement YSetl Year...... .. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Nwwork. 4roPriatoJ. $10,000 $500 $200,000 $902,000 $1,140,000 4,573 $.. 63 9,505 67,000 25,215 129,s830 8o. IELVERN RESERVOIR, OSAGE (MARAIS DES CYGNES) LcationRIVER, KANS. s ation. Damsite is on Marais des Cygnes (Osage) River in CounIty, Kans., about 2 miles west of Melvern, Kans. abUtistin. project. An earthfill dam about 9,700 feet long and ta 8 feet high with an uncontrolled chute-type spillway in 0 butrnent. Total reservoir storage capacity would be 363,- serv cre-feet (200,000 for flood control, 26,000 for sediment re- Q0trol Serve oandn 137,000 of conservation storage for water quality Drehllen .and recreation). Project is a unit of general com- Rive r Ie plan for flood control and other purposes in Missouri 81st C asin,' authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 549, L 0 onag., 2d sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $25,800,000. PliesCa cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- oerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new 1g Preparation of design memoranda for embankment de- acilitea l estate acquisition, and relocation of AT&SF Railroad ess es and contract plans and specifications for the initial ac- cotrr1Ids and administrative facilities were completed, and tt Plans and specifications for the embankment, spillway lb autlet Works were advanced to 85 percent complete by hired or at a cost of $269,146. Acquisition expenses in preparation eaodd acquisition cost $22,041. Supervision and administra- ost $22,974. SCoditation at end of fiscal year. All planning necessary to aiadte land acquisition and construction of project is complete, anning for remaining work is underway. Cost and financial statement 1962 Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 .......... 9 2, 4 ... $75,000 $145,000 $250,000 $230,000 $750,000 $1,450,00a .. o0,696 149,046 155,213 253,129 314,161 902,245 866 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 31. MERCER RESERVOIR, WELDON RIVER, MO. Location. Damsite is on Weldon River, a major tribut Iyo3 the Thompson and Grand River, in north central Missouri aiercer miles southwest of Mercer and 6 miles north of Princeton, tear County. Reservoir at full pool elevation would extend uPSt 60 into Decatur and Wayne Counties, Iowa, and to within aboU miles of Des Moines, Iowa. Existing project. Preliminary plan provides for an earthi dam about 6,700 feet long and about 91 feet high with af oir controlled service spillway in right abutment. Total reseflood storage capacity would be 625,700 acre-foot (326,000 o rsatio control, 63,900 for sediment reserve, and 235,800 of conservrea rec storage for water quality control, fish and wildlife, and tion). Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control ActS Doc. 241, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). Estimated cost (1966) $24,300.00. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of Juletion 1938, applies. Local interests must share in cost of recreation facilities in accordance with Federal Water Project Recre Act of 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 32. MERRIAM, TURKEY CREEK, KANS.t Location. On Turkey Creek about 7 miles above its mouth a Merriam, Johnson County, Kans. botl Existing project. Proposed plan consists of improving ree 2.1 miles of main stem and .6 mile of West Fork of Turkey hort and construction of about 3.1 miles of levee and a at section of floodwall along both banks. Existing project Wqv6 thorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 642, 81st g r 2d sess.) as a unit of comprehensive plan for Missouri 140y* Basin. Estimated Federal cost of construction (1966) is$1c 000 and estimated non-Federal cost of lands, damages, and relO tions is $890,000.e 2' Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of J.udA 1936, applies. Merriam Drainage District Board furnsl 1 ber resolution of intent to provide required assurances on SePteost. 14, 1964. A bond election will be held to finance local c Date not yet established. el, Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, til work: Suspended work on general design memorandtun 'u vote on bond issue is resolved.g Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction pla suspended pending receipt of necessary local cooperation. Cost and financial statement t fTotsil o~6 Fiscal year.. ............ 1962 1,963 1964 1965 196 J $20 New work: Appropriated.......... I$10,000 . $50,000 $40,000 oo ,003 cost....4,963 $4,852 8,882 18,472 1,197 FLOOD CONTROL-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 867 33. MILFORD RESERVOIR, REPUBLICAN RIVER, KANS. ALOCation. Damsite is on Republican River near village of i da and about 8 miles downstream from Milford, Geary County, Xa"s. and about 10 miles above confluence of Republican and Man y Hill Rivers which form Kansas River near Junction City, 125 tin project. An earthfill dam about 6,300 feet long and saddleet high with an uncontrolled service-chute spillway in a projeeon right abutment. Water-supply storage is included in ecdt at request of Governor of Kansas under provisions of coderal Water Supply Act of 1958. Project is a unit of general vPrehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in I) sori River Basin authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (I. 8 1st Cong., $49700,000.t"I $49'r,642 2d sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is liLocal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- S..* Local interests must make reimbursement for water- Dly storage in accordance with Water Supply Act of 1958. o Perations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new accrk Contract for construction of dam, spillway, outlet works, Deress and service roads in vicinity of dam was advanved to 78 168cent complete at a cost of $394,117. Fee simple title to eeacres of land and flowage easements acquired for 352 acres ere acquired at a cost of $547,837. Relocation of State high- -cost $1,436,553. Relocation of county roads in Geary, C 1son , and Clay counties cost $519,326. Relocation of or. Railroad facilities by contract cost $101,370 and hired c ~I connection with this cost $520. Cemetery relocation tric'ot $0. Relocation of facilities for Geary County School Dis- tio .2 at Milford was completed at cost of $11,687. Reloca- 8 fm unicipai facilities at Wakefield and Milford, Kans., cost tel 6 4 . Alteration of gas pipeline, relocation of power and areDhone lines cost $233,661. Continued clearing of reservoir cos c st $146,503. Construction of access roads by contract a' $143,632. Construction of roads, boat ramps, parking areas, PO ater wells in public-use areas by contract cost $61,752. 0orl'estation work in public-use areas in cooperation with the stallat Service, Department of Agriculture, cost $17,862. In- cos 1 n of sedimentation and degradation ranges by hired labor sty $6),536. Installation of telemark gauge and wave height Dlan equipment by hired labor cost $1,192. Maintenance land facili t. urchased at cost of $4,167. Maintenance of completed " l'es, including real estate management expense, supervision coSt 1ministration, and engineering and design by hired labor $5 2,533. Juid ition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began 1tr t961r l and entire project is about 83 percent complete. Con- li i C on of administrative facilities, cemetery relocation, pipe- Rourelocation and relocation of Southwestern Bell, Upland, and uisiton recentering of telephone lines are complete. Ac- tlesq 'Itfor of ion acresacres 44,520 4,900 of land has been in fee simpleA and flowage ease- accomplished. contract for con- ruCtion of embankment, spillway, outlet works, and access and 868 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 service roads is nearly complete. Relocation of Kansas Stare highways is 74 percent complete. County road relocatio ent 77 percent complete. Relocation of rail facilities is 19 perare complete. Relocation of school facilities at Milford, KanS., d complete. Relocation of municipal facilities at M1ilford.a 57 Wakefield, Kans., is complete. Relocation of powerlines iIete* percent complete. Reservoir clearing is 90 percent colPand Construction of access roads, boat ramps, parking areas of recreation facilities is 13 percent complete. Acquisition for permanent operating equipment is underway. Planning for completion of reservoir clearing, access, and interior roads for public-use areas and facilities at the public-use areas is under Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 66 New work: 5800 Appropriated..........$2,275,000 $10,120,000 $14,970,000 $13,400,000 $4,101,000 Cost............ ... 2,189,024 10,101,250 14,379,5309,363,8304,208,362 34. MISSOURI RIVER AGRICULTURAL LEVEES, SIOUX CITY, IOWA, TO MOUTH (RULO, NEBR., TO MOUTH) citY Location. On both banks of Missouri River from Sioux Ciof Iowa, about 760 miles to mouth near St. Louis, Mo. Portio, 49 project in Kansas City District extends from Rulo, Nebr., miles to mouth. tenant Existing project. A series of levee units and appurte 8, works along both sides of Missouri River from Sioux CitYl com' to the mouth, for protection of agricultural lands and small rtio f Which th, 0 60,00. munities against floods. Cost estimate (1966) for active Pohich of project from Rulo, Nebr., to mouth is $90,680,000 of Vor $82,350,000 is Federal cost for construction and $8,330,00. 0f lands and damages to be borne by local interests. Rer a in portion of project consists of units on which planning and re struction were deferred pending completion of restudy to st that additional levee construction is economically justified. Cot estimate for deferred portion of project Rulo, Nebr., to Wo1h is $248,821,000, of which $228,835,000 is Federal cost for C struction and $19,986,000 for lands and damages to be borne 9 64 local interests. Unit prices for deferred units are based on price levels. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Aug 18, 1941 Levees along both sides of river from Sioux City to Kansas II. Doc. 821, 76th Cong., 3d seso. Dec. 22,1944Extended project from Kansas City to the mouth provided 11. Doe. 475 and S. Does. 191 d for increased protection. 78th Cong., 2d sess. 36 " Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 19 , fL plies. Fully complied with for all completed units and Ui under construction. FLOOD CONTROL---KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 869 WOPerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new ofrk: Restudy of agricultural levee program initiated by the Chief cl nglineers in October 1959, giving proper consideration to physi- auhand economical relationships, is under review by higher wer "oritY. Plans and specifications for levee unit R 471-460 bhr completed and a contract for this construction awarded, all speciired labor, at a cost of $160,532. On unit L 455, plans and Voeriications for a pumping plant were completed, work ad- Cortised and a contract awarded and advanced to 40 percent of acOlletion at a cost of $26,953. Cleaning out of drainage ditches la4b restoration of access roads and damaged levees by hired ador cost $6,640. Engineering and design and supervision and uitnistration by hired labor for this unit cost $40,178. On Co .51, contract for section II advanced to 80 percent of A14pletion at cost of $449,683. Final audit of contract for Cla& S ' railroad sandbag sill increased the allowable cost $899. Ceea l out of drainage ditches by hired labor cost $9,913. Engi- eranu and design, preparation of operation and maintenance tioa 1 repair of flood damage and supervision and administra- desion this unit by hired labor cost $92,816. Engineering and stu ' Supervision and administration and general engineering Cles pertaining to all units cost $228,095. ioitidcition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was th ate in June 1948. Report on restudy of deferred units of ditroject is being reviewed by higher authority. Status of in- iial units of active portion of project at end of fiscal year: Unit Miles of Status levee ............ ...... L497 19.1 Complete. 4 ' .4.1 Do. 482' 13.4 Do. . .1 . L ................ . . . 11. 5 D o. 471 8.3 Do. 45 . . . . 5.7 Do . .- .............. . 14.5 Under construction. 44 ............ 15.6 Under construction. ............... 16.8 Complete. 8 .......... ra'lroad' . 10.6 Do. L d e.enworth ans.. lad ..........Design memorandum complete. L.. ... o. ............. L8.5" . ...... 12.5 Design memorandum is 95 percent complete. 31 ' ............... 7.4 Work complete. L351" ......: 0.............6.5 Preliminary planning initiated. 325 ........ 13.4 Under construction. L319...... ................ 43.4 General design memorandum is complete. L246 .............. . .. . 15.3 Planning initiated. Li . . ................ 19.7 Do. * ................. 20.0 Do. .................... 40.5 Do. its ............... ....... Detailed planning not initiated. Cost and financial statement Fial year. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Ne rWorki ..... CDopriaated..... $610,000 $1,450,000 $4,220,000 $1,583,284 $1,028,599 $27606781 417,624 1,702,690 3,852,507 1,552,348 1,015,709 27,096,208 870 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 35. MISSOURI RIVER BASIN (KANSAS CITY DIST.) Location. Flood control improvements included in this pr J ect are on and along Missouri River and several principal trib utaries of Missouri River and in States comprising MiSsou River Basin.project. Existing General comprehensive plan for flod cor trol and other purposes in Missouri River Basin provides for levees along Missouri River between Sioux City, Iowa, and the mouth, flood-protection works at certain municipalities, and re5 ervoirs on main stem of Missouri River and on tributaries for control of floodflows at damsite. Existing project was authorized by the following : Acts Work authorized l)ocumentsl --- 1 1. Doe. 1,75th June 28, 1938 Adopted general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Flood Control Committee Basin and authorized $9 million for initiation and partial sess. Cong., e1st accomplishment. Aug. 18, 1941 Modified general comprehensive plan to include Harlan H. Doc. 842, 76th Cong., 3d es1S County dam and reservoir on Republican River, Nebr., other supplemental flood control works on upper Republi- can River, and authorized $7 million additional expenditure. Dec. 22,1944 Expanded general comprehensive plan for Missouri River 1H.Doc. 475 and S. Does.191 and 1 Basin and authorized $200 million additional expenditure. 78th Cong., 2d sess. July 24, 1946 Additional expenditure of $150 million for prosecution of gen- eral comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. May 17, 1950 Additional expenditure of $250 million for prosecution of gen- eral comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. 2d Sept. 3, 1954 Expanded general comprehensive plan for Missouri River H. Does. 642 and 549,81st Cong Basin and authorized $217,710,000 additional expenditure. sess. May 2, 1956 Modified general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin by deletion of construction of Red Willow Dam and Reservoir, Nebr., and addition of construction of Wilson Dam and Reservoir, Kans. July 3, 1958 Expanded general comprehensive plan for Missouri River H. Doc. 409, 84th Cong., 3dae Basin and authorized $200 million additional expenditure. July 14,1960 Additional expenditure of $207 million for prosecution of general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. Dec. 30, 1963 Additional expenditure of $80 million for prosecution of gen- eral comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin and modified plan to include bank protection or rectification works below Garrison Dam. June 18, 1965 Additional $116 million for prosecution of general compre- hensive plan for Missouri River Basin. 1 Contains latest published maps of Missouri River Basin. FLOOD CONTROL--KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 871 .. ansas City District projects included in comprehensive plan Estimated Estimated Project Federal non-Federal cost cost Abliln ___________o__ Arli Iloky 1ill River, Kans................................... $1,099,350 $287,000 tarti e hervoir, ' i Sl r waconadeRiver, ad b ivrM Mo"" ................................... .... 127,20 0.(000 ........... rietrie • , NeMr.............................................118,269 eRiver, 5. 9,50 t itue iver, Nebr.............................................. lort 2685,000 524,000 aret1 eservoir, Marnaton River, Kans..................... ......... ... 19,300,000 .............. ,ervoir, n Pottawatomie Creek, Kans ................................. 22,000,000 ............. a Co o - era r Cedar Creek, Mo........ ,,eservoir, ......................... 218,100,000 ........... Yl 0 Rth[ seservoir, Republican River, Nebr. ........ a_ .................... 85,032 ........... dS ie vr, BI Bull Creek, Kans........ .. ...................... 312,600,000 ...... allo 16 ?can River, Nebr............6725.5.......................... . 67,2 ,92 evra ir, Smoky Hill River, yans....... 129........................ 12,708,765 .............. 5htu t , v, lr'.River,'ans. ore a rvoir sage River, ........................................... Mo ............................. 18 5,340,000(........... 570,0000,000 rYl eavil as River, Kansl......... 2,490,000 265,000 2,490.............................. ei s lue 0 River, Kans... .................... ....... 1140,000 130,000 ek , rvoir, sage Marais des C ygnes) River, Kans........................ 2 0,000 .............. lr a a s...... bCreek, i u...... ... ........................ 1, , 0 890,000 leuri1jivr., sel)bica River , Kans........4. .............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .49,700,000 .............. asens . Sa oIlturaleaee River, o noana............................442,((11 ut 82,3050,000 . 876,000 8,330,000 ra, 5ages PReservoir, Arikree a Marais River, Col. and ans.........................120,100,000............ e Cyges)Iiver, Kan... .................... 3.....1,520,000 355,000 io oRc R e t teaervoir, elaware River, .ervoir, Pomse deKans.. .... River, Terre ................................. ,471200,000........... 40...........................15,588,820........... 8 R eervoir, Osage River Basin, K ans........ .............................. 13,200,000 .............. lia servoraonad of roect M Deferredr, porton of roect curren...............................33,3,.........tly estimated to cost.. Stck Rsevir, 4,alm 5 RIiver, y1i,835,000 FederalKansand ...................................... $19,983,800 non-Federal. ... 20,000)000............ 3881,000 1,960,000 1 954ea______ a2 estimate eOkFerr 11964 9tiate. projees erations together with costs and expenditures for those............................ Act' 5 5 imtralte on which .s plans were in preparation or construction was........................... l, rIea are shown and 4) ,.81035,000,Federal individual in $19,983,800 reports. non-Federal. 80,188,000........... Under section 7 and............. (196Overations 'Y 4 Flood and results Control during Deferred AfProject. fiscal portion year. of project is Regular for funds, curreresponsible new detailed wrtn(fd results during fiscal year. Regular f unds, new Pro0-e4Operations together with costs and expenditures for those i11itiaIt rTic ln were in preparation or construction was 91944 cr shown in individual reports. Under section 7 and Rkhedu'1. Flood Control Act, the Corps is responsible for detailed Sieuling of operations of storage capacity reserved for or as- eld to flood control in reservoirs constructed by Bureau of tee auation as well as those constructed by the Corps. Main- $1"e e 5$804. (scheduling of flood control reservoir operation) cost Condition at end of fiscal year. See individual reports. Cost and financial statement ear, .. seal1962 1963 yearTotal 1904 1965 1966 to June 30, 1966 o,... work. e' ... ... ... .: ......... .... iiii. .................. .1$55,569 ... Na costopriated.......... ............ ............ ............ ............ Ofropr ated...........$89,100 ............ $106,000 $145,000 $165,000 $175,000 21,275,320 . . . . 889,670 , 7 106,925 10 ,.. 143,892 ... 165,623 175,804 21,275,308 vOrer 96X3122 construction, general, funds allotted to the "Republican River Basin Reser- ea teirne i( Crek Reservoir), Colo., Nebr., nd Kans." ef110vr 96X3RI :.' . .. , rol r 12 operation and maintenance, general, funds allotted to "Scheduling of flood eservoir operations." 872 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 36. OSAWATOMIE, POTTAWATOMIE CREEK, KANS. Location. At Osawatomie, Miami County, Kans., on left bej of Pottawatomie Creek and right bank of Osage (Maralsd Cygnes) Rivers about 425 miles above its confluence. Existing project. Plan consists of channels, levees, and p in: 2d sess.). under ing facilities. This protection was authorized Control Act (H. Doc. 549, 81st Cong., loed 1954 Fed Estimated " ted noll," eral cost of construction (1966) is $1,520,000 and estimate Federal cost of lands, damages, and relocations is $355,000. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of Junecet 1936, applies. Local interests indicated necessary assuran will be furnished when requested.e Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, 1e1 work: General design memorandum was completed and P1" and specifications advanced to 50 percent complete. e oda du Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memoranre is complete and plans and specifications for levee constructio progressing. Cost and financial statement Total to 66 Fiscal year................ 1962 1903 1984 1965 1966 Jue New work: $2S32 .$40,000 Appropriated.......... ............ $38,200 $5,000 $200,000 126,11 Cost........................... 12,525 31,998 38,112 43,482 37. OTTAWA, OSAGE (MARAIS DES CYGNES) RIVER, KAN' Location. On both banks of Osage (Marais des Cygnes) Rive at Ottawa, Franklin County, Kans.* oV Existing project. Consists of 2.3 miles of channel imprsto ment through city, 4.2 miles of levees, three pumping p.lan$ ' remove interior drainage, railroad track raise and bridge trol struction. This protection was authorized by 1954 Flood CoStOf Act (H. Doc. 549, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Actual Federal cos construction is $4,462,661 and estimated non-Federal coSt lands, damages, and relocations is $876,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with.e Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, e work: Missouri Pacific Railroad accomplished deferred 1 ' tenance work on their line.s Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project ber initiated September 1958 and physically completed Dece d 1962. Project transferred to city of Ottawa for operationi1. maintenance December 1962. One small item of deferred m tenance is completed. Cost and financial statement Total t1 6 6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3 FLOOD CONTROL--KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 873 38. PATTONSBURG RESERVOIR, GRAND RIVER, MO. 1ioCation. Damsite is on Grand River, a major tributary of froWl Giver, in north central Missouri about 5 miles upstream u1p.. allatin, Mo., in Daviess County. Reservoir would extend eaIniinto Dekalb, Gentry, and Harrison Counties. dq_ aing project. Preliminary plan provides for an earthfill trolledOut 6,500 feet long and about 103 feet high with an uncon- stora service spillway in right abutment. Total reservoir od 6ecapacity would be 2,720,000 acre-feet (1,430,000 for 1938,cal cooperation. itiapples. Section 2,must Local interests Flood Control share Actofofrecreation in cost June 28, at of5lo accordance with Federal Water Project Recreation COndition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 39. PERRY RESERVOIR, DELAWARE RIVER, KANS. ~olion. Damsite is on Delaware River about 5 miles above Perl Jefferason County, Kans., and about 3 miles north of 7, 7 5 sting project. Plan provides for an earthfill dam about above eet long to be constructed to an elevation about 95 feet SAill valley floor with gated-outlet works and an uncontrolled Droj aY in left abutment. Water-supply storage is included in ctz Plan at request of State of Kansas under provisions of &crl Water Supply Act of 1958. Project is a unit of general sotii leensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Mis- OeIiver081st $47(, Basin, authorized Cong., by 1954 2d sess.). Flood Control Estimated Act (H. cost (1966) is local coPeration. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- oPerationsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new locarty esign memoranda completed for reservoir clearing; re- facilitleof Gas Service Co. pipeline and relocation of municipal Acqies at Valley Falls. Cemetery relocations were completed. at ired 11,641 acres in fee and easements taken on 540 acres loc t ot of $3,440,792. Planning by owner on State highway re- tioQ 0 °ns cost $71,000, and right-of-way studies for other reloca- bcat cost $4,542. Relocations of powerlines cost $26,754. Re- cost ion of telephone lines cost $19,724, and relocation of schools and O$53,053. Contract for first stage of embankment, spillway Vneeutlet aed to work and maintenance 85 percent of detour of completion costaccess at a and roads ad- of $4,937,803. estation planning cost $1,449. Completion of administrative a ,tioperators quarters and landscaping by contract cost io ' Construction by hired labor included installation of equipment, telemark gage, observation devices, installation 874 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of a drainage structure on access road, and installation of rad building fencing at a cost of $35,277. Maintenance of com1plPd facilities including real estate management costs, engineering ost design, and supervision and administration all by hired labor ~ed $852,079. Proceeds from lease rentals of $39,635 were deposie in the Treasury of which 75 percent will be paid to local gover* mental units. i Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Mnarcf 1964 and project is about 44 percent complete. Constructionrf access and detour roads, relocation of cemeteries, and construe tion of administrative facilities and operators' quarters is are plete. First stage embankment, spillway, and outlet work s re 85 percent complete. Acquired 35,501 acres of real estate in for and flowage easement on 831 acres.. Plans and specifications ad county road relocations and for access roads, parking areas, boat ramps are progressing. Cost and financial statement tt6 Toteg Fiscal year ................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 Ju 66 New work: 4319000 Appropriated.......... $210,000 $025,000 $2,315,000 $9,200,000 $11,500,000 , 30,736 Cost............... 260,532 265,183 2,427,941 7,991,684 9,479,601 40. PLATTE RIVER, MO. Location. Along Platte River from Agency, Mo., to its 1 ot in Buchanan and Platte Counties. . 3d Existing project. Preliminary plan provides for clearingn enlarging about 10 miles of Platte River channel near Agcs Mo., and enlarging and straightening by construction of cut. the remaining 56 miles downstream from Agency to the rno , Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 0 1 89th Cong., 1st sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $6,230,00 0 srt which $5,670,000 is Federal cost and $560,000 is non-Federal' for lands, easements, rights-of-way and relocations. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1938, applies. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 41. POMME DE TERRE RESERVOIR, POMME DE TERRE RIVEIr j 0 ' Location. Dam is on main stem of Pomme de TerreRi about 44 miles above mouth of stream in Hickory CoU's Mo., reservoir extending upstream into Polk County, Mo. te O about 3 miles south of Hermitage, Mo., and 20 miles nort Bolivar, Mo..fee Existing project. An earth and rockfill dam about 4,63 fto long constructed to about 155 feet above riverbed with mini .ie provisions for future installation of power-generating facili and a dike section on left abutment about 2,790 feet long, pounds floodwater within reservoir which provides Stora capacity of 650,000 acre-feet (407,000 for flood control and 24 000 for sedimentation and conservation). Project is a unit FLOOD CONTROL-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 875 'ai Comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes issouri River Basin, authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act d Control Committee Doc. 1, 75th Cong., 1st sess.), as fed by Flood Control Acts of December 22, 1944, and Sep- er 3, 1954 (H. Doc. 475, and S. Docs. 191 and 247, 78th . 2d sess. and I. Doc. 549, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated (1966) is $15,588,820 including $329,140 Area Redevelop- Act funds and $302,000 Code 710 funds (recreational facili- t completed projects). cal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, ap- erations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new : Contracts for Wheatland area access road extension, im- ellent of Damsite Drive road, and development of Hermitage Wheatland public-use areas were completed at a cost of * Hired labor operations consisted of installation of 'Meter tubes, improvement of boat ramp and parking facili- Infstallation of guard posts in parking areas, tree planting, caping and guard rails, procurement and installation of .tables grills and cans, real estate acquisition expense, Vision and administration, and engineering and design at a of $33,692. Maintenance: Purchase of a Jeep station ' Pickup truck, asphalt storage tank with heater and mis- teOus equipment cost $7,671. Repairs to water system and lation of septic tank cost $2,566. Routine operation, 1"rY maintenance and real estate management by hired labor e48,060. Income from collections for quarters was $1,599. eeds from lease rentals and other nonoperating income of 89 Were deposited in the Treasury. Local government units be Daid 75 percent of income from lease rentals. te, tion at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was t td January 1957 and placed in operation in October 1961. t is complete except for remaining public-use facilities. ' "., Cost and financial statement NCYear, Total to ... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NWork.:--ro ro.riated.**. .. $1,300,000 2-$51,860 1$947,000 $229,0 00 $172,000 3$15,458,820 n6ance'.... 1,678,614 4806,391 5103,914 205,65.5 115,184 315,308,939 S r ed .......... 88,900 116,000 134,0 00 170,000 509,800 86,678 .... ........... 114,005 122,6 38 156,698 480,019 sIu es $347,000 Area Redevelopment Act funds 4 tel revocation of $17,860 Area Redevelopment Act funds SIneludes$32 ,140 Area Redevelopment Act funds el$29ude4.878 I Area Redevelopment Act funds $34,262 Area Redevelopment Act funds 42. POMONA RESERVOIR, ONE HUNDRED TEN MILE CREEK, L KANS. ocation. Dam is on One Hundred Ten Mile Creek, a tributary earais des Cygnes (Osage) River, 7 miles above mouth of 8a n OsageC~ounty, Kans., about 7 miles northwest of Po- Ians., and 34 miles upstream from Ottawa, Kans. K 876 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. An earthfill dam 7,750 feet long constructa to an average height of about 85 feet abovenstreambed, wlft gated-outlet works and an ungated chute-type spillway nearplaf abutment. This project is a unit of general comprehensiveasi for flood control and other purposes in Missouri River CnJ., authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 549, 81st C01, 2d sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $13,290,000 including $ 000 for provision of supplemental recreation facilities. P Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 193 a plies. Ile" Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, work: A contract for construction of sanitary facilities ase water supply for the Michigan Valley and Wolf Creek publiCsal areas was awarded late in the fiscal year. Real estate disP 0 receipts of $26 were credited to the project. Hired labor Opio tions consisted of installation of observation devices; constra ro of access roads; tree planting; procurement of miscellaneous Pr°t0 ect equipment; supervision and administration, survey and laYc e of construction work; preparation of operation and maintelVaiD manuals, and engineering and design at a cost of $20,321. eof tenance: Repair of erosion damage to downstream slope and dam, by hired labor, cost $4,158. An asphalt storage ta ers heater and miscellaneous equipment cost $1,331. Routine opcost tion, ordinary maintenance, and real estate managemen Cs. $129,790. Income from collections for quarters was $1te Proceeds of $13,098 from outleasing reservoir land, sale of Water and collection of recreation fees was deposited in the rTre surY Local government units will be paid 75 percent of the $10,555 r" ceived from lease rentals. Jul 1959 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began jeCt is and project was placed in operation October 1963. ProJe complete except for public-use facilities. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3' New work: 90OW $4,285,000 Appropriated.......... $2,000,000 $977,000 $116,000 ...... ...... 31 80 Cost... ..... .. 3,345,198 3,134,423 1,183,000 174,926 $20,295 Maintenance: 265 1 Appropriated.............................................. Cost..............................................15,214 127,500 138,000 1334940 24 Cost...115,214 133,494 43. RATHBUN RESERVOIR, CHARITON RIVER, IOWA Location. Damsite is on Chariton River about 7 miles po0 of Centerville and 1 mile north of town of Rathburn, AppanoO County, Iowa. con Existing project. An earthfill dam 10,600 feet long 'il l structed to an elevation about 86 feet above valley floor,yW gated outlet works and an uncontrolled service chute with P.C sill spillway about a mile upstream from left abutment. FroJej authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (HII.Doc. 561, 81st Cong., sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $23,600,000. FLOOD CONTROL---KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 877 1Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- WoPerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new cati0o Design memoranda for real estate, for county road relo- clearj, Power and telephone line relocations, and reservoir asng Were completed. Work continued on supplement to the plan for reservoir management and public-use develop- laenster reloct. Plans and specifications were completed for county road Lrelandions and were 30 percent complete on reservoir clearing. of 17 acquisition by hired labor included acquisition in fee simple acres,'523 acres and flowage and access road easements on 658 for adco st $2,724,962. Construction contracts were completed I .nministrative facilities, a segment of Appanoose County ace'Way "M", and remainder of service road "A" and south advss road. A major contract for construction of the dam was ced to 18 percent completion. Construction by contract aostn stall$ i608,451. Other hired labor operations consisted of in- equi on of observation devices at dam, purchase of radio station elailip ent, climate and evaporation equipment, operation and inagten.ance during construction, surveys and layouts, engineer- Coesgn, supervision, administration, at a cost of $477,827. Dlaln W on at end of fiscal year. Additional work on master co untas in progress. Plans and specifications are complete on elea road relocations and 30 percent complete on reservoir a e Land acquired consists of 21,029 acres in fee simple tin 3 acmpletes in flowage and access road easements. Construc- o0 es c plete on administrative facilities, a segment of Appa- ands County Highway "M", and remainder of service road "A" outh access road. Construction on the dam is 18 percent Soq Of ete. Other hired labor operations underway are purchase t ordio station and climate evaporation equipment, and installa- observation devices at the dam. Cost and financial statement Year Total to ...... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork: e Ctropriat d $120,000 $219,000 $300,000St,925,000 $6,000,000 $8,759,000 85,758 266,805 305,684 1,322,8774,811,240 6,957,062 44. SMITHVILLE RESERVOIR AND CHANNEL, L LITTLE PLATTE RIVER, MO. oocation. Damsite is on Little Platte River about 1 mile in C east of Smithville and about 5 miles north of Kansas City, S iand Clinton Counties, Mo. Channel improvement is at yit da 'sting project. Preliminary plans provide for an earthfill arbout 4,200 feet long and 95 feet high with an uncontrolled structe Storated spillway. dike about 2,000 feet long would be con- across a A saddle in left abutment. Total reservoir strage capacity 0trol, 89,000 would be 299,000 acre-feet (105,000 for flood for sediment reserve, and 105,000 of conservation 878 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 storage for water supply, water quality control and reCreatio~ Project also provides for about 2.4 miles of channel improve n~n downstream from dam. Estimated Federal cost of construc000. (1966) is $23,700,000 and estimated non-Federal cost is $14, 22 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of Jun lood 1936, applies for the channel improvement and section 2,peint Control Act of June 28, 1938, applies for the reservoir. ero- bursement will be required for water supply storage Z-,) d for to bepr vided in accordance with Water Supply Act of 1958 andeCt recreation provided in accordance with Federal Water Proj Recreation Act of 1965. Local interests indicated necessary surances will be furnished when requested. Condition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 45. STOCKTON RESERVOIR, SAC RIVER, MO. t Location. Damsite is on Sac River about 49.5 miles abovet confluence with Osage River, and about 2 miles east of Stockt Cedar County, Mo., reservoir extending into Dade and Polk Cot ties. 5 hell Existing project. Preliminary plan provides for a rock-s ted dam with impervious core about 5,100 feet long to be constructal to an average height of about 128 feet, with a gated ove a *, spillway and a 45,200-kilowatt power installation. Project her unit of general comprehensive plan for flood control and °o0 purposes in Missouri River Basin, authorized by 1954 Flood cost trol Act (HI. Doc. 519, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated (1966) is $63,200,000. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938, a plies. ne Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, ad- work: Construction by contract of boundary fencing in930; ministrative area, $5,553; relocation of 11 cemeteries, $39'ed continued stage I embankment to completion, $968,681; contint procurement of turbine to 5 percent of completion, $,9 initiated relocation of power transmission lines, $1 ed initiated fabrication of gates and bulkhead, $2,665; and initiate, construction of spillway, powerplant intake and substructue completion of embankment and relocation of Misso1urt in- Highway 32, $263,033. Hired labor operations consisted Of for stallation of piezometer tubes, supplemental constructiOnion operators' quarters, signs and markers, display model, exten5 of of overlook area, procurement of equipment for operatiCo' project, real estate management, provision of temporary and struction facilities, engineering and design and supervision ~ d administration of construction at a cost of $1,082,971. oi acquisition consisted of 18,566 acres in fee and 359 acres flo" age easements at a cost of $2,563,092. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project belne. October 1963 and entire project is about 25 percent comptge Acquisition of 45,275 acres of land in fee simple and flosge easements acquired( for 427 acres. Construction of first 5ste embankment, access road, initial service roads, administrile facilities, operators' quarters, and tree planting are comnP FLOOD CONTROL---KANSAS CITY. MO.. DISTRICT 879 Reo,- -I _JL% A, X J , llo of 11 cemeteries is complete. Contracts for procure- caton turbine, gates and bulkheads, relocation of power trans- fissi, Subr.lines and construction of spillway, powerplant intake and u r e , completion of embankment and relocation of Mis- SOuri Lct ate 7Highway 32 are underway. Cost and financial statement ... lye02Total to . 1962 1963 164 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New ork: CoPriated .......... $232,000 $000,000 $2,505,000 $6,700,000 $11,500,000 $22,399,500 .... .. 204,144 62,030 2,75,212 6,620,7695,131,1 15,s10,330 46. TOPEKA, KANSAS RIVER, KANS. a~ocation. On right and left banks of Kansas River at Topeka, U sting Project. Project was divided into eight separate Dos as follows: Auburndale unit: Adapting 1.1 miles of pro- rot interstate limited-access (4-lane) highway to serve as levee Rock Ion . Highway is on landside, roughly parallel to Chicago, tha sland & Pacific Railroad, and from 2 to 4 feet higher e required levee, which averages 13 feet high throughout the Matech Dlat Kansas Waird Creek will be diverted to river opposite approxi- River mile 87.3 by local interests. Two pumping War . d CreeZ, Lnd gating of highway drainage structure over diverted ldit f Creek Channel complete primary features of Auburndale Briood protection. road'b e and approach alterations unit: Alterations of two rail- h ridges over Kansas River. tioan rO and floodway improvement unit: Removing obstruc- ,,( MKansas River Channel at critical points. to't opeka unit: Levee and appurtenances starting at june- e IVenoken Road and right bank of Soldier Creek diversion l' thence south and southeast, paralleling raised Menoken 4g grade and Union Pacific Railroad tracks to Kansas State lft bWay and embankment, serving as a levee, thence south to lDoi nk of Kansas River at approximate mile 88.8. From this old evee generally follows left bank of river to mouth of new str r Creek diversion channel at approximate mile 81.9. Con- Savtrtion features of this unit consists of 8.6 miles of levees ft rainlg 11.7 feet high; 84 feet of floodwalls averaging 11.6 raise gh, relief wells and collector system; 3,000 feet of road tion. veraging 1 foot to serve as a levee, 4.5 miles of bank protec- iel rainage structures and alterations to sanitary sewer; chan- el llargement; one stoplog and one sandbag gap; and two new Dlping plants and alterations to one existing plant. feetkland unit: About 515 feet of floodwall averaging 12 lt high; 120 feet of retaining wall averaging 10 feet high; 10.1 exist of levees with average height of 10 feet, extending from 1a 1ing South Topeka floodwall downstream along right bank of aosas River to mouth of Shunganunga Creek, thence upstream 9 left bank of creek to vicinity of 12th and Jefferson Streets; 880 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 improvement of Shunganunga Creek Channel; relief wel , and collector system; drainage structures and alterations to safnlt sewers; one new railroad overflow structure and removal fo existing highway bridges; railroad track raises at three localtioll, and 1 pumping plant. nnel Soldier Creek diversion unit: Realine and straighten chiles of Soldier Creek along north bluff for about 9.2 h fores to Indian Creek so as to enter Kansas River via new mouthor Indian Creek, and includes about 14.6 miles of levees avers i 8.7 feet high, 2.6 miles of tributary tieback levees, 0.7 mnEOcl( levee raise, and new bridges for Union Pacific; Chicag, Island, Pacific; and Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroads. ad South Topeka unit: Under previous authorization, leveesuic- floodwalls were constructed, which provide protection to fg to ipal waterworks extending from approximate river mile cted 88.3. In addition, a short floodwall and levee were constri along right bank from approximate river mile 84.8 to 86.2.te addition to work done under previous authorization, it is conro plated to raise and reinforce existing levee and floodwalp lait approximate river mile 84.8 to 86.2, construct a pumping l and modify an existing stoplog gap. dwalls Waterworks unit: Under previous authorization, floo fr0 were constructed as a part of South Topeka unit extending f this approximate river mile 88 to 88.3 to provide protection 0o hios unit. In addition to work done under previous authorizatilst work included in current authorization provides for raisingelIc ing levee at west end of floodwall, construction of a new t i levee at east end to incorporate a larger waterworks area, a i stallation of pressure-relief wells to dispose of seepage water.195 Protection authorized by 1936 Flood Control Act (H. Doclood 73d Cong., 2d sess.), was modified and expanded by 1954 yed- Control Act (HI. Doc. 642, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estirmate.s ted eral cost of construction (1966) is $20,500,000 and esti% 00 non-Federal cost of lands, damages and relocations is $10,800, to be borne by local interests.ere Local cooperation. Assurances for Soldier Creek unit 9W,5 furnished by North Topeka Drainage District on March 12,7nits and assurances for waterworks unit, and other remaining U0f were furnished by city of Topeka on June 14, 1957. Ri(ghts way for Soldier Creek diversion, waterworks, Auburn Il Lnd North Topeka units, and first stage of construction in O q unit have been furnished. Ie" Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fundsCOn work: Design memorandum for South Topeka unit Weas leted pleted. Stage I construction in North Topeka was comPo d Construction of North Topeka stage II channels, levees, and flo walls, and pumping plants was advanced to 88 percent Copear Oakland stage II was advertised for bids late in the fiscaSyliex Preparation of operation and maintenance manuals for °oad Creek Diversion bridge alterations, North Topeka, and sOak units, by hired labor, cost $17,271. Engineering and des5i Ct hired labor and contract cost $105,748. Construction by co1l0t cost $1,808,401. Preparation of record drawings for FLOOD COJTpfl-TKAMsAs fTTV 1sf0TDTSTRIT 881 eka and Oakland units, by hired labor, cost $725. Super- $110,15and administration of above work by hired labor cost ecCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of original proj- eas ivanitiated April 1938 and construction of expanded project cornletiated March 1957. Expanded project is about 79 percent bletee Dtesign memorandum for South Topeka unit is com- struc Onstruction of stage I in Oakland unit is complete. Con- 8 8 8 1on of stage I in North Topeka unit is complete; stage II brid8 Percent complete. Santa Fe and Rock Island Railroad tio oesin the bridge alterations unit are complete. Construc- t Aub evees, drainage facilities, relief wells and pumping plants div ersurndale unit are complete and in service. Construction of are 1onchannels and levees in Soldier Creek diversion unit Creek0nplete and in service. Railroad relocations in Soldier Isla diversion unit are complete, including removal of old Rock o"daislroad bridge over old channel. Construction of Water- unit iscomplete and in service. Cost and financial statement year Total to 1962 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 10661 Ca%°9riated .O I .. 00. o i .. 1,00,000 $1,750,000$3,260,000 $1,650,000 $1,246,000 $16,531,851s .. 820,550 2,417,6773,056,4051,019,5962,042,301 16,134,397 C de $97,659 contributed funds. o 47. TRENTON RESERVOIR, THOMPSON RIVER, MO. of Gcation. Damsite is on Thompson River, a major tributary Westrand River, in north central Missouri about 5 miles north- stre of Trenton, Grundy County. Reservoir would extend up- . i.nto Daviess, Harrison, and Mercer Counties. datal in9 project. Preliminary plan provides for an earthfill %orolbot 2,600 feet long and about 97 feet high with an un- storalled service spillway in right abutment. otal reservoir co t, capacity would be 1,675,000 acre-feet (748,000 for flood tio , 161,100 for sediment reserve, and 765,800 of conserva- Was torage for water quality control and recreation). Project Co authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 241, 89th VStsess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $48 million. Loct 0, 38 cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, t'ilapplies. Local interests must share in cost of recreation Act tes in accordance with Federal Water Project Recreation C of 1965 ondition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 48" TUTTLE CREEK RESERVOIR, BIG BLUE RIVER, KANS. 1214catiOn. Dam is on main stem of Big Blue River, about o1t es ~above mouth of stream in Riley and Pottawatomie ang les,Kans. Site is about 12 miles northwest of Manhattan, ing unit ret S project. of general 7,500 feet long A damcomprehensive andfor157 feet high. plan flood control 882 REPORT OF TIHE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and other purposes in Missouri River Basin authorized byC1938 Flood Control Act (Flood Control Committee Doc. 1, 75th do; 1st sess.), as modified by 1941 Flood Control Act, and expanded $* Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (II. Doc. 475, an966) Does. 191 and 247, 78th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated cost tional $80,188,000 including $205,000 Code 710 funds (recrea° facilities at completed projects.) Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aP plies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fundS, De work: Contract operations consisted of minor alteratiols o complete Pottawatomie County road relocations at a costd of $4,600. Real estate acquisition of reservoir lands consisefg3 payments in settlement of deficiency judgements at a cost ofrry" 777. Hired labor operations consisted of acquisition of ps of nent operating equipment; preparation of as-built recor and construction, reservoir regulation manual and operationfl oD maintenance manual and engineering work on plans for eroclar repair at mouth of Wolf Creek at a cost of $8,751. Regat funds, maintenance: Roads were resurfaced by contrac g cost of $7,293. A tractor with high loader, a sign staq t machine, and other tools and equipment were purchased t of cost of $9,752 and the heating system was repaired at a creal $1,926. Engineering and supervision of above activitiestine estate management, repairs to relief well drainage, and r tion operation and ordinary maintenance of project and recreA48. areas was accomplished by hired labor at a cost of $.coIe Income from lease rentals and other non-operating 1 cal amounting to $4,894 was deposited in the Treasury. lease government units will be paid 75 percent of income froMlse rentals. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project be, in October 1952 and is complete except for installation ofadd- tional radio equipment, final cleanup on railroad reloc a strict settlement of land condemnation cases pending in U.S.. Di nd Court and completion of reservoir regulation and operatione to maintenance manuals. Filling of reservoir has been effee conservation pool elevation. Cost and financial statement Total gab Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 30, .0 oune New work: g 00 Appropriated......... $2,070,000 $3,247,000 $1,110,000 $223,000 $128,000 79,881 Maintenance: 6,206,326 5,132,870 1,459,915 617,323 59,120 Maintenance: Appropriated..................... 115,370 156,600 183,500 161,500 616406 Cost................ ......... 113,609 154,271 151,896 185,719 49. UPPER GRAND RIVER, MO. Location. Along both banks of Grand River and tiebackS o major tributaries near Albany, Mo., in Gentry County. FLOOD CONTROL-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 883 G'rption. Preliminary plan of improvement provides for ating and improving about 38 miles of channel, alteration of ailroad bridges and construction of about 62 miles of levee. t Was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (11. Doc. 241, CRg., 1st sess.). Estimated cost (1966) is $6,820,000, of $5 ,750,000 is Federal and $1,070,000 is non-Federal cost lds, easements, rights-of-way and relocations. 'al cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, applies.,. idition at end of fiscal year. No operations to date. 50. WILSON RESERVOIR, SALINE RIVER, KANS. ation. Dam is on Saline River about 130 miles above its I near eastern edge of Russell County, Kans., about 50 West of Salina, 10 miles north of Wilson, Kans., and 20 east of Russell, Kans. 'Sting Project. An earthfill dam about 5,600 feet long and et high with a gated-outlet works, chute spillway and struc- p"rovision for irrigation. Project is a unit of comprehensive or flOod control and other purposes in Missouri River Basin, rized by 1944 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 475, and S. Docs. 247, 78th Cong., 2d sess.). Report of Chief of Engineers tfication of Wilson Dam and Reservoir, submitted in compli- ieth Public Law 505, 84th Congress, published as Senate elt 96, 86th Congress, was approved July 14, 1960 (Public 45, 86th Cong.) Estimated cost (1966) is $20 million. cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- rations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new Supplement No. 1 to master plan for outdoor recreational land vegetation management plan (phase I) was completed "anting (phase II) was underway in five public-use areas. and Specifications for right abutment overlook and parking ere 10 percent complete. A contract for public-use facili- as completed. A contract with Russell County for reloca- f county and township roads was completed. A contract astruction of aircraft landing strip was awarded and com- SDeficiency judgments on land previously acquired cost )0* Construction by contract cost $243,663. Other hired Operations consisted of purchase of maintenance plant and tools, installation of landing strip markers, purchase of cans, picnic tables, outdoor grills, construction of boat tree planting, supplemental construction in operators' r, Operation and maintenance during construction, surveys youts engineering, design, supervision and administration 71,392. Maintenance, regular funds: Asphalt distributor her miscellaneous equipment cost $3,887. Routine opera- rdinary maintenance and real estate management by hired cost $121,510. Income from collections for quarters and aneous receipts totaled $1,965. Proceeds from lease 8 of $24,963 were deposited in the Treasury. Local nlental units will be paid 75 percent of the income from 884 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 rel o- Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project beg April 1961 and is about 98 percent complete. Utility cations are complete. A contract with Russell CountY fotract for rineloca tion of county and township roads is complete. A con la public-use facilities is complete. Forest and vegetative plantin was underway in five public-use areas. Land acquisit on aes 21,841 acres in fee simple and 12,526 acres in flowage and are road easements. Other hired labor operations under as purchase of maintenance plant and small tools, and refuse ca picnic tables, and outdoor grills. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Newwork:$$20,0 Appropriated.......... $3,200,000$5,093,000 $2,250,000... $7,595,000 ., Cost.................. 3,530,4595,239,9897,127,0891,727,156 $589,335 200 Maintenance: ............ ............ 58,500 Appropriated.......... ............ 123 700 16 Cost...................................................... 32,569 123,432 51. INSPECTION OF •COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT bseuent cts re- Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, and subsequent act quire local interests to furnish assurances that they w i N ple- tain and operate certain local protection projects after cortart tion in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Sec.stra" of the Army. District Engineers are responsible for adm'' etive tion of these regulations within boundaries of their resp8 District. Location Month inspected Missouri River agricultural levees R513-512, R500, L497, L488, R482, L476, Oct.-Nov., Apr., and May L455, L448-443, R440, and L400. Kansas Citys-Argentine, Armourdale CID Kansas and Missouri, upper and Nov.-De., May-June. lower Fairfax, North Kansas City, airport, and East Bottoms units. New Haven, Mo., and mouth of Osage diversion levee.................... Nov. and May. Grand River at Brunswick, Mo.... ...... ................... .....Do. Ottawa, K ans.......................................................... Sept. and Apr. Topeka, Kans., Auburndale waterworks, North and South Topeka units ..... Oct. and Apr. Manhattan, Kans ................................................ ... Sept. and Mar. Lawrence, Kans......................................... Mar. and Sept. Stonehouse Creek, Kans., channel improvement..... ............... Oct. and Apr. Eudora bridge protection.... ............................... Sept. and Mar. Big Stranger Creek, Kans.......... ........................ Nov. and June. Republican River, Bartley, Nebr........ ...................... Oct. and Apr. Indianola, Nebr......................................... .....Do. McCook, Nebr.......................................... Oct. and Apr. Elk Creek, Clyde, Kans.......... ......................... Sept.-Apr. Smoky Hill, Solomon, Kans., bridge protection.......................... Oct. and Apr. Abilene, Kans,.......................................... Sept. and Apr. Salina, Kans........................................... Oct. and Apr. Salt Creek, Barnard, Kans.................................. ..... Do. Blue River, Seward, Nebr..... ............ ................ Oct. and May. Mouth of Delaware River............................ ....... Sept. and Mar. Frankfort, Kans.... .................... ........... Sept. and Mar. Chariton River ....................................... ........ Nov. and May. I Fiscal year cost was $11,974. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-KANSAS CITY, MO., DISTRICT 885 52. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance ........ 1 65 $..... 0......... $10993.................... , i ie.br. r ii- *River Seward oi ir. N ................................... -.....' ... ... 148,br.1 1948 8,651 ... ................... .................... 1951 1953 ,1 ........... 118,260 . .. . . . . N't,e v. Mard. N S I e nuer er, Nebr................................. t 1965 16,317 .............. 126,887........•.......... e , C SeWardeN ebr. b...................... ....................... . 337,131 .............. tee S ne-1 ....... .337,131. aec re e 5...e.i a.eans.1 ... 394,028 ........... , o Rver a watomic reck, Kan.............................. . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ 0 . . 4ne Neervner ser voirine , Cedar Creek, M. .. ........... .......... , . i Ro ,rNi . . . 19506.. . . . . .. 7,2 75 . . . . . . . . . . . ... itep te. , 01al oieir rvM.oe Nerna .. ..... r.i ....................... ............ 4...............9.,5 ... ;or , i.l .. eea................................ .1948 8,548........... 1165... . C 8ekBnard er oiv LerIars.1... Kans. . .......... . .. ::: ::::::::::............. ...... ........... s~ 0 ... .............. 3,870,8.7 127,860 'ReRs rek"9 , ....................................... Lan1 Creek, n.4.................... ............ 142,552 1252 ..... . rLyon Creek, Kan. .. Ctive. a CoDieted,. eferre~dfo A hr( for restudy. a~ h~ ition° deferred subject to feasibility report. e ed by the Chief of Engineers under section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as 3 PLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION enc'nyflood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) to ederal costs for fiscal year were $45,030 for advance prepara- re.$201,955 for flood emergency operations, and $276,331 for reaand restoration. PO 54. SURVEYS for leal Year costs were $13,023 for navigation studies, $142,089 ood control studies, and $12,902 for special studies. S 55. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA ttjsde a l year costs were $21,227 for flood plain information tivelesx0 nKansas and Wakarusa Rivers at Lawrence, Kans., Blue "atKansas City, Mo., and Smoky Hill River, Kans. i 56. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ve's cal Year costs were $733 for completion of civil works in- etion on runoff from bottom land and hillside terrain. OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT * This district comprises portions of Montana, Wyoming, North Dorti a , South Dakota except a small northeastern portion, a tio°n of north central Colorado, Nebraska except southern por- sot' western Iowa, and a small portion of southwestern Minne- ste an embraced in drainage basin of Missouri River along main S a nd tributaries to Rulo, Nebr. 1oav igation improvement of that section of Missouri River from juri'd ebr., to Kansas City, Mo. (Quindaro Bend) is under edltion of Kansas City, Mo., District. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page 1. . Navigation Flood Control-Continued lssouri River at Fort 25. Missouri River, Kenslers 2. J eck, Mont .......... 888 Bend, Nebr., to Sioux i5ssouri River, Sioux City, City, Iowa ............ 907 COWa, to mouth (Sioux 26. Norfolk, Nebr ......... ... 908 .bity, Iowa, to Rulo, 27. Pierce, Nebr............. 909 Neh.r.) ............... 889 28. Pipestem Dam and Reser- ther authorized naviga- voir, N. Dak...........909 ion projects .......... 891 29. Salt Creek and tributaries, Nebr. ................ 910 4 -at Flood Control 30. Sheridan, Yellowstone .' attle Creek, Nebr.. ... 892 River, Wyo...........911 lge Fourche, Redwater 31. Sioux Falls, S. Dak..... 912 ivrer and Hay Creek, 32. Vaughn, Mont. .......... .912 6. i nDak . .............. 892 33. Vermillion River, S. Dak. 913 7. 1igs, ackbirdMont .......... 893 34. Waterloo, Nebr.......... 914 Creek near 35. West Point, Nebr....... .915 8. 0 acy, Nebr.. ...... 894 36. Inspection of completed o°rnan-Haley Reservoir, flood control projects .. 915 10.9. Chatfield N . Dak.............. Dam, Colo. 894 37. Scheduling flood control reservoir operations . . 916 t''hory Creek Dam and 895 38. Other authorized flood con- 11. Claeservoir, Colo. ....... 895 trol projects ............ 916 Prkson, Nebr., Middle 39. Flood control work under 12 Plork of Maple Creek. 896 special authorization . .. 917 13, 4 River Basin, S. D)ak. 897 l oyd River, Sioux City, Multiple-Purpose Projects Including 14 1owa ....... ........ Power 15 ering1 Valley, Nebr. 899 40. Big Bend Reservoir, Mis- 16 ~reat Falls, Mont ....... 900 souri River Basin, S. 17, 0Per, Nebr . ......... 901 Dak...................917 18 dian Creek Dam, Iowa . 902 41. Fort Randall Dam, Mis- 9 Ltle Papillion Creek, souri River Basin, S. 19 Nebr. .............. ". 902 Dak. ................. 918 Little Sioux River and trib- 42. Garrison Reservoir, Mis- 20 utaries, Iowa.......... 903 souri River Basin, N. (ower Big Sioux River, Dak. ................. 919 21. aowa and S. Dak ....... 904 43. Gavins Point Reservoir, alison, Nebr., Union and Missouri River Basin, S. 22. .Taylor Creeks ....... 904 Dak. and Nebr......... .920 Ssouri River agricultural 44. Oahe Reservoir, Missouri levees, Sioux City, Iowa, River Basin, S. Dak. and o mouth (Sioux City, N. Dak............... 921 23. 1, OWa, to Rulo, Nebr.).. 905 issouri River Basin General Investigations 24, .(Omaha Dist.) ......... 906 45. Surveys ... ........... 922 Mssouri 1 River, Garrison 46. Collection and study of .am to Oahe Reservoir, basic data ............ 922 N. Dak . . ........... 907 47. Research and development 923 888 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 1. MISSOURI RIVER AT FORT PECK, MONT. Location. Reservoir is in Missouri River Valley in 1 oet Valley, Garfield, Phillips, Petroleum, and Fergus Counties,. River. Dam is about 1,771.5 miles above mouth of Missourithe 9 Nearest towns are Glasgow, 17 miles northwest, and Nash ua, miles north. Existing project. A hydraulic earthfill dam with a maxim height of 250.5 feet and a reservoir for flood control, irrigrosats navigation, hydroelectric power, and other purposes, With agros storage capacity of 19,400,000 acre-feet at maximum operatih pool. See page 818 of 1965 Annual Report and page 905 of thr 1958 Annual Report for project details. Estimated cost ofode all project (July 1966) is $157,215,500 including $663,900C 710 funds. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. None.ne Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fundsitie$ work: Design was continued for additional recreation faci ad Boat ramps were constructed in Hell Creek, Rock Cree1ul Pines recreation areas. Prototype studies were continued onco nel No. 3. Regular funds, maintenance: Design studies 1,vay tinued for permanent housing, penstock repainting, and spI1 cl repair. Resurfacing of project roads was continued. Fort ve, Reservoir was operated in conjunction with other Missouri reservoirs for flood control, navigation, power production,~d to other multiple-purpose uses. Reservoir releases arnmotnlteb i about 9,476,000 acre-feet, or an average discharge of 13,100 0 00 feet per second. Generating facilities produced 1,572,594 ,d gross kilowatt-hours maintenance of electricity. Total cost of operation•...l during fiscale maintenance during fiscal year was $1,349,349, however, ret bursement from Bureau of Reclamation for pro rata share for of operation and maintenance of powerplant, reimbursement or furnishing operators' village facilities, and distribution of rata share of camp operation cost reduced net cost to $662,206.0 Condition at end of fiscal year. Work started on original po. ect in October 1933 and on second powerplant in August 1956. Project is complete. Additional recreational facilities are beil constructed utilizing Code 710 funds. On June 30, 1966, theil was at elevation 2239.0 and 16,530,000 acre-feet of water was I pounded in reservoir. Cost and financial statement Tot)tal to° Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, i9 New work: . AppropriatedX... .. $825,000 $356,900 $31,000 $117,000 $90,689 $15 Cost.................. 1,190,038 374,598 59,795 138,864 111,924 156,820 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 312,000 388,000 376,000 461,000 740,800 1 Cost................. 326,838 370,931 393,280 465,307 662,206 9949 ,5 RIVERS AND HARBORS-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 889 2. MISSOURI RIVER, SIOUX CITY, IOWA, TO MOUTH & f (SIOUX CITY, IOWA, TO RULO, NEBR.) Trocato n . Jefferson, Madison, and Gallatin Rivers conjoin at eaSt Iorks Mont., to form Missouri River, which flows south- to 1q y 2,315.1 miles (1960 mileage) across or along seven States beissippi River, 17 miles above St. Louis. River is boundary de en States of Missouri Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa. For Pr1ion see page 1149, Annual Report for 1932. for ?9vious projects. For details see page 1893, Annual Report it, and page 1175, Annual Report for 1938. Width tng project. Provides for a channel of 9-foot depth and bank not less than 300 feet, to be obtained by revetment of Water construction of permeable dikes to contract and stabilize riels ay, cutoffs to eliminate long bends, closing of minor chan- removal of snags and dredging as required. Section under 1111es overa en t (upper end of Rulo Bend to Sioux City) is 236 fluctut og. Ordinary fluctuation is about 14 feet and extreme 1966 i )on about 38 feet. Estimated cost of new work (July 1)roject $184,400,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previous Rxisting project was authorized by the following: Acts 1 Documents- - - Work authorized Jae- 12, 1927 --- Jl 3:1 Appropr!ation of $12 million authorized for existing project. H. Doc. 1120, 60th Cong., 2d seas. ppropriation of $15 million additional authorized; addi- tional allotments totaling $29,153,108 were made by Public Works Administration under provisions of National Indus- At, 30 trial Recovery Act of 1938, and $9,609,791 allotted under S1935 provisions of Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935. 1945 ompletion of project from mouth to Sioux City, Iowa . H. Doe. 238, 73d Cong., 2d seas. Aochannel of 9-foot depth and 300-foot width........ .... H. Doe. 214, 76th Cong., 1st sess. latest Published maps of Missouri River. c oo.Operation. None required. rail"flal facilities. Facilities for loading and unloading P'etroleum products, and other commodities are: 1 Miles Description of facility above2 Bank Nearest town "- ba Rlock ouI mouth b l.Oing ........... 731.7 Left. ... Sioux City, Iowa. ig Pey wed ........ *.................. ...... 731.4..do. Do. er..ned...... ....... 731.4 ..... do... Do. Do 2 682. ....... do... a ..... do... and . ........ tay ) 5 ating :::l ...... 727.8 6oc do. 6............................... Do. Do. , 0.way ra a milling........................... 648.6 Right. ... Blair, Nebr. S adi n...... ........ . ..................... . 648.2 .... do... Do. ed Wayst . eelu a . . . 616.. 3 .... do... Omaha, Nebr. t o in .... ..... 1624.5..... do... Do. ' rrier d............2...41...................... 624.1 ..... do... 1)o. Ozdilloaind s.... .......................... 624 ..... do... D)o. c la unloading .... aseNS .................. 612.3. gdo... o. O oiOwned................ ........... 61. .... do...a o. ]lo 1 ,1S lo gn.....::: ::::and:::::::Iii:: ... .. ........................... 7 .5 .6... ..... . ..... do.. do... Do. Do. alt nOd fertilizer unloading................... ock toadi8O ***oa 614.4 ...Left.... Bluffs, Iowa. CouncilBlfb ,ai, Ubliciy_wno snes aiid salt unloading . ................. . . . 584.5 8. 612.2 . d o. Right. o Omaha, Nebr.. dodi Rock Owned.... . '.. .... .... ... 5916 Right.... Plattsmouth, Nebr. L . ................................. .. do RocknBluff, Nebr. ftfid . ... ....................................... 5o N . erunloagin.. ............ ................... 574.4 , Nebr. ..... do... Nebraska Cityion moorins..... ......................... 562.4 Do. City, Nebr. ..... do... Nebraska e footnot eat end of table. 890 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Description of facilityl above Bank Nearest town mouth Grain loading........... .. .................... . . 562.4 ..... do... Do. Grain loading..................... ... ......... . . 562.4 ..... do... Do. Steinhart terminal dock.... .................... 562.3 ..... do... Do. Grain loading (Consolidated Blenders)........................ 561.8 ..... do... Do. Boat ways................................................. 556.5 ..... do... Do. 1 Privately owned and operated unless otherwise indicated. 2 1960 adjusted mileage. Above facilities are considered adequate for existing commeCe. In addition, boat docks, boat ramps, and marinas have beentruc structed by local interests for recreational facilities. C loca tion by local interests of additional facilities at followinSiotl tions, as soon as conditions warrant, is contemplated: va; City, Sloan, Whiting, Onawa, Blencoe and Council Bluffs, Oa South Sioux City, Decatur, Tekamah, Blair, Omaha, Nebrs City, and Rulo, Nebr. ev Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new work: Consisted of construction, by contract, of 4 dikes d re- dike extensions, totalling 17,690 linear feet, and raising anross storing 53,028 linear feet of dikes to original grade, and f eet, section, 37 lengths of revetments totalling 27,613 liner total raising and restoring 88,012 linear feet of revetment at aqtio cost of $6,698,548; initiating work on Chief Big Elk recre 1 o facilities, at a cost of $6,240; and dredging and point removal of 909,989 cubic yards of material in connection with construction at a total cost of $168,128; hired labor placed 10,400 cubic yards of material in chute closure structures at two locations in con- nection with recreational facilities at a total cost of $7,414; re- moved 90 linear feet of existing structures, 20,850 linear feet high mattress, 48,420 tons of stone and 77,757 tons of common material at a total cost of $286,684; removed 20,180 cubic yards of material in connection with point removal, at a cost of $17,345 payment for lands and damages of $5,718; and surveys an 2dl outs in connection with construction at a total cost of $4d engineering and design cost $199,889; and supervision anco ministration cost $400,982. Regular funds, maintenance: Con sisted of construction, by contract, of repair and replacerne.tna 3,939 linear feet of dikes and 68,855 linear feet of revetruent e total cost of $1,680,964; accomplishment by hired labor of dl and revetment repair research at a total cost of $13,287; removal of 1,485,088 cubic yards of material from the channel at 14 locali- ties by U.S. dredge Lewois at a total cost of $386,848; placing 3,063,760 cubic yards of earthfill in connection with structure repair by dredge Lewis at a total cost of $118,546; and removal of underwater obstructions at a cost of $10,311. Other mis- cellaneous costs, all charged to maintenance were strearng1no and special studies cost $27,729; surveys and mapping 05 $97,599; channel reconnaissance and channel marking cost $ 0 458; engineering and design cost $37,950; supervision andd ministration cost $173,037. RIVERS AND HARBORS-OMAHA, 891 NEBR., DISTRICT SeeCtol. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began on this aten is91n of project (Sioux City to Rulo) in fiscal year 1928. Work t- percent complete. Work remaining to complete this sec- f pr o j ect (Sioux City to Rulo) consists principally of con- ost Streon .of additional bank stabilization structures and ess atening of existing structures to improve their effective- of bad to prevent their deterioration prior to final stabilization above iksand construction of recreation facilities. Although ~die additional construction is required to attain full project ordiuslon, a channel with a controlling depth of 71/ feet at Co rY river stages is available for entire navigation season. 193iercial navigation was inaugurated on this section in May i O1 ' nd common carrier transportation service was inaugurated e cistober 1946. Under this section (Sioux City to Rulo) of "'footg hroject work ofreochannel, (Sioux City to mouth) for systematic work on accomplished includes 1,649,271 linear feet of 'etilent for permanently fixing banks, 2,242,021 linear feet an d feet ',2 88 rock dikes, 115,833 linear feet of abatis, 48,237 linear asphalt revetment, 11 channel cutoffs, and removal of ti 8,831 cubic yards of material dredged from channel to ob- ia' Project depth and width. Planning of recreational facilities r gressing. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966. a ~~---- Seu Funds .- - New Maintenance work [_____ ........ Total S works........ ...................................... $140,574,908$45,642,262$186,217,170 a ery eli " ................................... .............. 18,325,581 ....... 18,325,581 le ..... .................................. .............. 8,625,718 8,625,718 167,526,207 45,642,262 213,168,469 Cost and financial statement N'ecal year, Total to . .. . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Newwrk: M~gtre~ratfed..........$7,740,000 $7,948,739 $7,935,000 $8,675,000 $7,500,000 1$168,926,491 7,745,398 7,966,770 7,956,702 8,452,763 7,566,405 1168,707,333 CPtropriatfed.......... 2,482,500 2,646,000 2,366,300 2,494,000 2,666,700 245,933,921 2,335,355 2,532,012 2,585,211 2,508,933 2,647,628 245,877,384 fun7nclude 5 $18,325,581 National Industrial Recovery Act funds, $8,625,718 emergency relief Incudes 8 1,181,125 for previous pro.iect. $235,122 for previous project. 3. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Maintenance for- *. . Dak. and lowal...... .... ................... 1952. Sioux City, Iowa, to Fort Benton, Mont.2............. 1948 $3,123,141 $644,863 COmD1e e, 892 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 4. BATTLE CREEK, NEBR. Location. In Madison County in northeastern NebraskaO l right bank of Battle Creek near its confluence with Elkh River. dsothp Existing project. Plan provides for a ring levee around c west, and north side of Battle Creek, channel cleanout, an tro nel realignment. Project was authorized by 1950 FlOO'd Co3000 Act. Estimated cost (July 1966) is $266,500 of which is Federal cost and $53,500 local cost.22 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June ' 1936, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. al d Condition at end of fiscal year. Design work on plan sded specifications, which were 90 percent complete, was susilage during fiscal year 1965 at request of local interests. ,Co1. Board of Trustees for Battle Creek, Nebr., resolved to defer ef sideration of project until 1967 when funds for local costs are pected to be available. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: Appropriated...................... $35,000....................... . -$9,403 $2591 Cost.......................... 10,197 $13,4163 $1,9325 5. BELLE FOURCHE, REDWATER RIVER AND HAY CREEK, S.DA. Location. At Belle Fourche, in Butte County, in west cen.t r South Dakota at confluence of Hay Creek with Redwater and Redwater River with Belle Fourche River. e Existing project. Channel changes on Hay Creek andte water River; levees on Hay Creek and left bank of Red ct River, and a new 10th Avenue bridge over Hay Creek. ProosJ was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act. Estimateda cnd (July 1966) is $365,000, of which $287,000 is Federal cost $78,000 local cost. Local cooperation. Furnish all lands, easements, and right of-way for construction of project; make necessary road, hfor way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; assume liabilitY all damages due to construction works; maintain and operat e o works after completion in accordance with prescribed regulatitol By letter dated May 27, 1966, Belle Fourche Flood Ctie Committee indicated the city was not financially able at this to fulfill local responsibility of entire project.o Operations and results during fiscal year. A review of ith nomic feasibility of project was made, contacts continued ti til local officials. Further planning for construction suspended u receipt of local cooperation. Condition at end of fiscal year. All planning deferred ui receipt of local cooperation. FLOOD CONTROL--OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 893 Cost and financial statement al ear Totalto 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1966 June 30, Ap1Prpiated. .... 19o ...... .e.*$32,000 .. ......... ........ . $32,000 ...... 639639 639 6. BILLINGS, MONT. 0otcation . .At Billings and vicinity lMio on Yellowstone River, Missorir~ 46 river-miles upstream from River. its confluence with the es'ting Project. Plan consists of a system of ditches, chan- fr and levees by means of which floodwaters approaching city ject ivet, east, or south may be diverted away from area sub- uits,)1o oding. Proposed plan is divided into three separate autho, amely, western, eastern, and southern units. Project was lt rize d by 1950 Flood Control Act (H-. Doc. 216, 81st Cong., etijC ) Estimated Federal cost (July 1960) is $4,590,000; law, ed local cost (July 1960) is $353,000 for relocations, becaIand damages. Modification to project plan is necessary takel e of the rapid expansion of city of Billings, which has extelldlace since preparation of project document in 1946, has projet d the city beyond protection limits proposed by authorized eategoy Accordingly, this project was reclassified to "deferred" sc l cooperation. Provide lands and rights-of-way required; 1 o for damages due to construction works; maintain rliability to0 erate all works after completion in accordance with regula- tt rescribed; and provide all necessary relocations and recon- r on required by project. City Council of Billings, Mont., -Ioed a resolution dated January 7, 1964, agreeing to provide Jioi.Wbvay acquisition with complete acquisition to be financed hioy city of Billings and several irrigation companies. In adie s G to formal resolution from city, combined irrigation com- COMe-. have pledged $20,000 toward right-of-way and County DroblessiOners have taken action toward the local bridge e rations and results during fiscal year. Economic and engi- eC &gfeasibility studies are in progress. terldition at end of fiscal year. Restudy of project to de- coliplee economic feasibility is in progress and about 43 percent Cost and financial statement 894 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 7. BLACKBIRD CREEK NEAR MACY, NEBR. Location. On Blackbird Creek, a right bank tributary Missouri River, near village of Macy in northeastern Nebraska Existing project. Channel realignment along with con strt tion of a berm and levee on each bank of Blackbird Creek for about 2.5 miles. Project was authorized for constructionV Chief of Engineers on November 9, 1965, under authoritYEPti vided by section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. F~lt mated cost is $352,000 (July 1964) of which $315,000 is ede and $37,000 non-Federal. re- Local cooperation. Provide all lands and rights-.of~ar s; quired; assume liability for damages due to construction ce maintain and operate all works after completion in accor all1 with regulations prescribed; assume full responsibility bidge project costs in excess of $1 million; and undertake any 'Irial alterations needed for construction of project. Omahna ig Council passed a resolution September 14, 1964, expres willingness and ability to furnish required local cooperation'"ect Operations and results during fiscal year. aled Projec Detailed Pfrs report approved by higher authority and preparation o and specifications for construction initiated. p ad Condition at end of fiscal year. Preparation of pln sed specifications in progress, construction has not been initi Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 j et 1 New work: $21,000 $312 Appropriated.......... ............ ............ $10,000 $192 $210001 Cost... .................................. 8,193 2,038 3,642 8. BOWMAN-HALEY RESERVOIR, N. DAK. ter Location. On North Fork of Grand River in southes North Dakota, about 6 miles above Haley, N. Dak. h Existing project. A multipurpose dam and reservoir ef conservation capacity of about 26,700 acre-feet for sediMl storage, fish and wildlife conservation, general conservation 0of eral recreation and future water supply for comnmulinitieS ro Bowman, Reeder, Scranton, and Gascoyne, N. Dak. AlsorPe, vided would be 59,300 acre-feet of exclusive flood control sto Estimated cost is $3,800,000 (July 1966) of which $3,116,0e1 ultimate Federal cost and $684,000 future non-Federal bursement for water supply. • 8cl- Local cooperation. Local interests must prevent encrain ment on capacity of North Fork channel below reservoir'0 ted water rights for storage; pay the United States for costs allocgea to water supply; and hold the United States free from dant Assurances were approved June 19, 1964. sd: Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular t of Dam and appurtenant work was initiated at a fiscal year coso $845,000. Acquisition of reservoir area was continued. FLOOD CONTROL-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 895 19nditionat the end of fiscal year. Construction began July is coad project is 50 percent complete. Outlet works conduit 94 eomplete and dam is 37 percent complete. Land acquisition is of e cent complete. Work remaining consists of development aess and recreation facilities. Cost and financial statement Year Total to 1062 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 roated..$135,000 $125,000$1,095,000 $1,350,000 $2,705,000 ........... 16,27 110,35 475,318 1,219,533 1,921,735 9. CHATFIELD DAM, COLO. Creeakon. On South Platte River, just below mouth of Plum i, bout 8 miles upstream from Denver, Colo. u stiin project. Consists of rolled earthfill dam with a maxi- ity oheight of 156 feet and a reservoir with flood control capac- feet 215,000 acre-feet and sediment capacity of 20,000 acre- fro ich will be used for recreation and an enlarged channel 1 leaseadownstream to Denver to accommodate reservoir flood 820 Estimated cost is $84,270,000 (July 1966) of which cost i ,000 is Federal cost for construction and $1,570,000 local Lo Iconnection with downstream channel improvement. 1936 ca ooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, asu applies to downstream channel improvement. Preliminary rado~ ces of local cooperation received from director of Colo- S ater Conservation Board on July 6, 1966. Dlaiarations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction a1d h~t resumed. Feasibility report, preliminary master plan, aller ouYdrology design memoranda completed. General design tCandum advanced. Dercetition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning 53 c"" Olmplete. Construction not started. Cost and financial statement Neal ear.Total to ........ ".... 1962 1063 1964 1065 1966 June 30, 1966 CAprriated opt. . .................. ........................ $415,000 $433,817 412,657 . ................................................ 431,474 10. CHERRY CREEK DAM AND RESERVOIR, COLO. Location.abu 6 ic.l On Cherry Creek in Arapahoe County, Colo., about Plattle southeast of Denver, Colo. Cherry Creek joins South i iver within city limits of Denver. of 140 ting project. A rolled-earthfill dam with maximum height lude,,feet above streambed and 14,300 feet long. Project in- Side ha reinforced concrete outlet works and an uncontrolled reletannel spillway canal discharging into adjacent Toll Gate S thus bypassing city of Denver, Cherry Creek project 896 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 provides reservoir storage capacity of 95,000 acre-feet et spillway canal invert and surcharge storage of 136,400 acre dco above this elevation. Initial plan for operation is ifor flood for trol only. Plan of operation in ultimate developmnient fo' multiple-purpose uses includes 10,000 acre-feet for Sedi ur-et storage, 85,000 acre-feet for conservation purposes, ayd'*po. charge for flood control purposes. Estimated cost of niti 0fnpd s ect is $15,136,415 (July 1966) including $467,000 Code 710 (recreational facilities on completed projects). Existing project was authorized by the followid Acts Work authorized Docum ets Aug.18,1941 Initiation and partial accomplishment of project............. H. Doc. 426, 76th Cong., 1st Od241 Dec. 22, 1944 Completion of plan approved in act of Aug. 18, 1941......... Do.19 Do...... General comprehensive plan, Missouri River Basin........H. Doc. 475, and S. Docs- 78th Cong., 2d s8e. Act of 1938, ap" Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control plies. foraddi- Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning foi tional recreational facilities continued. A contract for as nous surfacing of circulation roads in recreation areai completed. Operation and maintenance activities include adiI istration of project area, continuation of sediment stu diesten stream gaging activities, and continuation of miscellaneOu the of ordinary repair and maintenance. Severe flooding . of Denver area during June 1965 resulted in an accumulatiomn logs and debris in reservoir. Removal of this debris as pleted by contract. ca Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began fI tion year 1943 and was completed in June 1961 exclusive of recre facilities. Cost and financial statement Total 196 Fiscal year.................1962 1963 1964 1965 1986 New work: Appropriated.................... $34,843 ... $28,000 $20,000 Cost.................. $612 30,782 $3,024 3,964 45,201 Maintenance: 6920 Appropriated.......... 43,600 45,500 45,000 132,200 60,000 619 Cost.................. 43,525 48,097 44,137 64,596 115,376 11. CLARKSON, NEBR., MIDDLE FORK OF MAPLE CREf p Location. In east-central Nebraska on Middle Fork of 0 Creek, a tributary of Elkhorn River, in Colfax County, abot miles northwest of Omaha, Nebr. of Existing project. Plan provides for levees on both bantel Maple Creek, enlargement and realignment of existing chaoject and construction of appurtenant drainage structures. P rye was authorized for construction by Chief of Engineers etion 26, 1963, under special continuing authority provided bytCost 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Estimated tota FLOOD CONTROL-OMAHA, 897 NEBR., DISTRICT cost.98,400, of which $191,000 is Federal cost and $7,400 is local i$198,400, aLOcal cooperation. Provide lands and rights-of-way required; a" 1' e liability for damages due to construction works; maintain catioper te all works after completion; provide necessary relo- lion. sanld assume responsibility for project costs over $1 mil- O' ully complied with. Opeatzons and results during fiscal year. Operation manual Coleted by hired labor. icialO'nditiOn at end of fiscal year. Project complete for bene- ial use. Cost and financial statement Year Yt Total to .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NWWork.- AP~ropria o t. .... $2,000 $16,833 $165,000 ..... $192,005 ...... 3,477 257 38,217 $140,03 $1,743 10,819 ocatio 12. FALL RIVER BASIN, S. DAK. ear toi of In Custer and Fall River Counties, S. Dak., in and spritowofIHot Springs. Hot Springs unit is in town of Hot brook w himmediately south of junction of Cold Brook and Hot unit i ich combine to form Fall River; Cold Brook Reservoir troos about h1, miles north of town of Hot Springs on Cold tow, ; and Cottonwood Springs unit is about 41/2 miles west of ofile - ot Springs on Cottonwood Springs Creek, one-half 8s Pstream from its confluence with Hot Brook. Act -sng Project. Project as authorized by 1941 Flood Control . a plan of flood protection on Fall River and tributaries, Chietf substantially in accordance with recommendations of plan of ERngineers (HI. Doc. 655, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). General of improvement provides for protection from flood damage riPeole and property of town of Hot Springs, S. Dak. Hot enig channel improvement unit provides for widening, deep- ea" and straightening channel of Fall River from a point belo confluence of Hot Brook and Cold Brook to a point 400 feet g 8' ighth Street Bridge or a total of about 6,000 feet. Clear- Dro es, boulders, concrete slabs, and all obstructions to flow is a"vied for.- Cold Brook Reservoir unit is designed to control feet aeta Of 70.5 square miles, and has a capacity of 6,000 acre- acre.~ft spillway crest, with surcharge at maximum pool of 5,114 earth e t . Following features are included: Construction of an co nr dam with uncontrolled outlet; uncontrolled reinforced ea ete conduit under dam; and a spillway with a discharge 1ti o YOf 85,000 cubic feet per second at maximum pool eleva- rthrough solid rock adjacent to reservoir. Cottonwood s an} hE schaveReservoir unit will control an area of 26 square miles a capacity of 8,340 acre-feet at spillway crest with a feat aeat maximum pool of 3,295 acre-feet. Following Co tres are included: Construction of earthfill dam with an un- ro rolled outlet consisting of a reinforced uncontrolled concrete d) intake, with a reinforced concrete conduit extending 898 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 through base of dam; and an uncontrolled spillway in right abut ment. Estimated Federal cost is $4,375,000 (July 1966) esti mated local cost is $143,000 (July 1966). Hot pringsChanel Local cooperation. Required only for HotCSp n lied improvement. These requirements have been fully compi with. of Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparatiol m, general design memorandum, hydrology design menorervoir and preliminary master plan for Cottonwood Springs w e ac was initiated and completed. Operation and maintenancevoir tivities included continuation of sedimentation studies, reservornd regulation studies, and intermittent inspections of dams . structures. rOs Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of Hot p 1d unit was completed in fiscal year 1951. Construction o ear Brook unit dam and appurtenances was complete in fisc c 1953 with exception of a road and parking area which wasster pleted by contract in fiscal year 1955. Preparation of .' de- plan for Cold Brook Reservoir management and public'utls o velopments is complete. The hydrology design menor d" for Cottonwood Springs Reservoir is complete. General wy memorandum and master plan for reservoir are under revie' higher authority. Cost and financial statement Tot"l to.. Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 19064 1965 1966 June 0 793 0 New work: Appropriated ......................$15,000 . $8........................ 5,000 00 2,761 49 Maintenance:I Maine ance:**........................ ' ..... 4,840 I ' I •52,937 ' ...... $2,223 I Appropriated.......... $4,900 5,000 5,000 5,000 $6,000 595 Cost................ . 4,081 5,424 4,235 5,282 6,302 13. FLOYD RIVER, SIOUX CITY, IOWAt Location. Along Floyd River in Sioux City, Woodb County, Iowa. d e1 Existing project. Plan provides for straightening avlees larging existmng channel above 18th Street with earth froo along each bank and construction of a relocated channelctiom* 18th Street to mouth with levees and riprapped channel Sector* A project for flood protection on Floyd River, Iowa, was ded bY ized by 1958 Flood Control Act substantially as reconmmend as Chief of Engineers (H. Doc. 417 84th Cong., 2d sessco'. byf 1962 Flo amended stucin Cnro Act Flood Control ctIwhich chf2d provides sess. for 4ev struction of Interstate Highway 29 twin bridges acrOS 0s .is Floyd River channel at Federal expense. Estimated cs for $18,366,000 (July 1966), of which $11,566,000 is Federal .c re- construction, and $6,800,000 (including cash contribut o rtC- quired by law) is local costs for lands, damages, bridge consower tion, bridge alterations, relocations of roads, buildingS, and telephone lines, and pipeline. ad Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish landsfro rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States freefr lFLOOD CO(NTRO.--OVTAH14A. NEBR..1DISTIJCT89 899 d1 raa , '-j-,~~ dames; make road, highway, highway bridge (other than those i uerd to carry Interstate Highway 29 over relocated Floyd cent) and utility alterations, and additions; contribute 84 per- oul of estimated first cost of work for which the United States coUld ebe responsible; and maintain and operate all works after O Pletion . Fully complied with. Iiscer1ations and results during fiscal year. Minor planning for tios ~aneous items was continued. Channel and levee altera- tios between 18th and 46th Streets and railroad track altera- Vere In connection with new Great Northern Railway bridge above completed. A contract for channel and levee alterations Ce 4 6th Street was initiated and essentially completed. Suldition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began trct 196 1 and is 99 percent complete. Only construction con- 46th still in progress is for levee and channel alterations above Ste treet. This contract is complete except for seeding, minor Pl acement, and miscellaneous cleanup. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS alYear. Total to 1962 1963 1904 1965 1960 June 30, 1966 N~ew work. DCrOpriated. .$1,320,000 $2,212,000-$25,000 $3,700,000 $3,450,000 $11,566,000 1,492,9843,627,4083,761,6641,394,188 924,400 11,544,552 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Year Total to ... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juno 30, 1966 work. . ... ontributed . $ 9,000 cs . .......... $15,555 .. o, . .31,8(5 i, .. ....... 90o,ooo000 L. 14. GERING VALLEY, NEBR. Scotca~ton. In western extremity of Nebraska panhandle near .0,-1u.f Nebr. a~,sting project. Authorized by Flood Control Act of 1958 Land o°dified by Flood Control Act of 1960. Plan includes: (a) be a treatment and conservation measures as determined to i aessary by Soil Conservation Service. These are described 17 ro grk, plan prepared by that agency; (b) 24 drop structures, w ci sills with parallel fencing, and 3,800 linear feet of rock by he to be constructed on Main Gering drain and its tributaries barrie Corps; (c) about 125,000 linear feet of continuous earth Reedrs 1 along Main Gering drain and its tributaries, where i4 together with grassed waterways having about 37,900 Seartheet of concrete trickle channels, where needed, landward ater t barriers to convey interior drainage and waste irrigation the .o selected inlet points. These would be constructed by ould brs; (d) a system consisting of 54 inlet structures, which tlterio e constructed by the Corps, for conveying runoff from r to main drain and its tributaries; (e) 7 culvert 4areas 900 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 type drop structures in upper drain below Roubade'au DJcn system of eight reservoirs to achieve downstream flow Iit channealr tions, to be constructed by hoil Conservation Service;320 provement on two tributaries of main drain, o-ane stabilization structures, and 4 large channel stabilization strlo tures on tributaries, to be constructed by Soil Conser00 for Service. Estimated Federal cost (July 1966) is $5,880,0ervice. Estimated local cost is $273,000 for Corps portion of const y, work, $315,800 for Soil Conservation construction work, a 015,400 for Soil Conservation land treatment measures. an-d Local cooperation. Local interests must provide landsfro rights-of-way for project; hold the United States on0 cree damages; operate and maintain project after completion ,nd agr. ree struct any future drainage outlets at their expense and riort that such works be located only at drop structures, with priet approval of Secretary of the Army; accomplish land tre I ,. and conservation measures as determined necessary by .SO ser- servation Service; and provide, in cooperation with Soil uOdid vation Service under continuing authorizations and f ieVe arrangements, an adequate system of small reservoirs to ar downstream flow reductions essential to safety of downsr improvements, channel improvements on tributaries Of ael drain, and on-farm stabilization structures and tributary Gn stabilization structures, all generally as contemplated inder- prehensive plan, construction of small reservoirs to be l i - taken prior to or concurrent with construction of channe provement and stabilization works in comprehensive plan. of Operations and results during fiscal year. Constructo. the channel control structures was initiated and completed Ili9 Main Gering Drain above Wells Drain and initiated in the The Gering Drain between Yensen Drain and Wells Drain.vere work in Wells Drain and the downstream earth barrier initiated and completed. 1iated Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was in side in February 1963 and is 64 percent complete. Work in al drains are complete. Work in Main Gering Drain above ic Drain is complete or under construction. Plans and spec'0. tions for balance of Main Gering Drain above drop structur be 1 is completed and ready to be advertised. Additional wo] low drop structure No. 1 is under design. Co.t and financial statement Total to06 Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: ............ $1,520,0003 $823,000$1,140,000 $4,289 Appropriated.......... $530,000 Cost.................. 103,928 $304,505 959,934 1,036,8181,098,566 15. GREAT FALLS, MONT. Location. In Great Falls, Cascade County, Mont. at co fluence of Sun and Missouri Rivers. FLOOD CONTROL---OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 901 Sul tn! project. Provides for levees along both banks of ceptoi"'ver and along left bank of Missouri River and an inter- Projeditch to collect and convey side-hill runoff around city. by 19e was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act and amended ti 65 Flood Control Act to waive required cash contribution. Ped!ated cost is $5,230,000 (July 1966) of which $4,280,000 is relocat cost of construction and $950,000 local cost for lands and 1936 oalCoperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, Dort. applies. In addition local interests must zone unleveed Ca i of flood channel through the damage area to preserve its and to prevent further encroachments. City of Great Mallo oet yer2, 1964. rovided preliminary assurances by resolution dated Pn.,1 ierperations and results during fiscal year. General design C'o ndum was essentially completed. is ~ton at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum sentially complete. -Cost and financial statement. loal eTotal to ...... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ..... ...... ...I... ........ oprated ...... $15,000 11,165 $110,000 68,847 $125,000 80,012 Lo . 16. IHOOPER, NEBR. 4 0 Cation. On Elkhorn River in Dodge County, Nebr., about xi es northwest of Omaha, Nebr. the isting project. Levee and appurtenant structures around iZed est, north, and east sides of Hooper, Nebr. Project author- Ude or construction by Chief of Engineers on March 11, 1965, plooSpecial continuing authority provided by section 205, 1948 SControl Act, as amended. quirecdal cOOperation. Provide all lands and rights-of-way re- in" ';.assume liability for damages due to construction works, with am and operate all works after completion in accordance reo regulations prescribed; provide all necessary relocation and bridd .cruction of streets, highways, railroad lines, buildings, an 4 utilities, and other publicly or privately owned property exCesacilities; assume full responsibility for all project costs in City s of $1 million. Formal assurances were accepted from YOf roper, Nebr.,' on November OPerato " 16,' 1965."Pannwscm Dlet ati.ons and results during fiscal year. Planning was com- ADril 1 ontract for levee and appurtenant structures awarded Condition at end of year. Contract 37 percent complete. 902 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 17. INDIAN CREEK DAM, IOWA Location. On Indian Creek, a minor left bank tributary Missouri River, near north city limits of Council Bluffs, loWvfill Existing project. Provides for construction of an eartf dam in conjunction with upstream erosion control measurestio Soil Conservation Service. Estimated total cost of Corps po . (1966) is $2,500,000, of which $1,250,000 is non-Federal. prJ ect was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962.er Local cooperation. Local interests must provide, in cooPra tion with Soil Conservation Service under continuing author1ol tions and funding arrangements, an adequate erosion Col" program as developed by Soil Conservation Service and as ch templated in overall plan of improvement, installation of , program to be undertaken in advance of, or concurrently and construction of dam and reservoir by Corps; furnish landsd the rights-of-way required for dam and reservoir project; hod1 d United States free from damages; perform road, highNaYtr't utility alterations and modifications; and enter into conttof providing for reimbursement to United States of entire cOsi6 operation and maintenance. Under provisions of section 919:36 , local Flood Control Act, the Federal Government will reimburse CO interests for one-half of their cost which is in excess Ofdas struction cost of project. City of Council Bluffs furnishe surances by resolution dated June 1, 1964. gs Operations and results during fiscal year. All planningret suspended because of the difficulty experienced by local inte in meeting financial requirements for local cooperation. 9eo- Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on general design .plete. randum and supplemental design memorandum co'P. Further design effort deferred until local interests are financial position to provide necessary local cooperation. Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966ot3, o Fiscal year. ............. New work: $15 Appropriated.......... ............$50,000 $45,000 $300,000 -$240,000134 Cost ........................... 44,621 43,395 41,401 5:294 18. LITTLE PAPILLION CREEK, NEBR.reel Location. In Douglas County along Little PapillionCi from a point south of Irvington, Nebr., through metropolit1 Omaha to its confluence with Papillion Creek. loa Existing project. Provides for channel improvements 1 FLOOD CONTROL---OMAHA. NEBR.. DISTRICT 903 ol Papill. Little PapillionCe1 Creek. Project -'- was .. authorized atoie by 1962 Flood $2,9tI Act. Estimated cost is $4,720,000 (July 1966), of which 0L ,Cost is Federal cost for construction and $1,810,000 local or000 lands and relocations. 1936 acooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, S\eb lipes. Assurances were furnished by Douglas County, Ne , in June 1964. Conlterations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: Qroveution was initiated on channel improvements below ride Street and channel structure under Union Pacific Railroad Grov * Plans and specifications for channel improvements from Con St r eet to 72d Street were essentially completed. 0Ctobe ' ton at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated below r 19 6 5 and is 36 percent complete. Channel improvements Under Street is 67 percent complete and channel structure .rover 41las union Pacific Railroad bridge is 91 percent complete. Stre et and specifications for channel improvements from Grover Loea to .72d Street are essentially ready for advertisement. tioo 11terests are acquiring required rights-of-way for construc- thiss section. Planning for additional work is continuing. Cost and financial statement alYear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work. Apr o$..... .. 501000 $80,000 $80,000$1,014,000 $1,224,000 26,524 14,366 105,130 902,855 1,048,875 19. LITTLE SIOUX RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, IOWA on tion . Along Little Sioux River and its tributaries in ,,t Harrison, and Woodbury Counties in northwest Iowa. cost jin 1 project See Annual Report for 1962. Estimated cost s $ 8,470,000 (July 1966) of which $15,470,000 is Federal ages r construction and $3 million is local cost for lands, dam- ot'bidge roads ds)buildings, poeIad construction, bridge "alterations, onroand ctofJneI relocations of Loca uld , power and telephone lines, and pipeline. 1936 cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, ene appies, except highway bridges are raised at Federal ex- S Fully complied with for all work. r" Con ations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: iver eted levee and channel improvements along Little Sioux slide ~frot Monona-Woodbury County line to Smithland and Coan.d erosion repairs. A rilation at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated errd 1956 and is physically complete. Final unit was trans- teans eto local interests rManuals remain to June 6, 1966. Operation and main- be completed. Cost and financial statement seal r Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ro.piated . . 0 .. 07 4 , 2 06 co t . $2,205,000 $500,000 $726,284 $210,494 $207,000 $15,469,878 1,601,971 975,146 752,222 423,159 248,119 15,449,756 904 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 20. LOWER BIG SIOUX RIVER, IOWA AND S. DAK. Location. On lower reach of Big Sioux River, a manor lefrom bank tributary of Missouri River. Project would extentoqabout mouth of Big Sioux River, just above Sioux City, Iowa, 2 miles above Akron, Iowa. te Existing project. Provides for channel cutoffs to eliment larger bends together with cleanout, deepening and enlargen re- of existing channel, where necessary. No levee constructionl be quired except at upper end of project where earth levees o ir* constructed on each side of the river to prevent flanking of1ct proved channel. Project was authorized by Flood o ohich of 1965. Estimated cost is $7,272,000 (July 1966), of00 ocal $6,860,000 is Federal cost for construction and $412,00 costs for lands and relocations. 22 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June ' ds 1936, applies. In addition local interests must provide lan required for fish and wildlife mitigation measures; develop,' eas; age, and maintain fish and wildlife facilities and bitat ec- and keep local interests advised of effectiveness of flood pr tion offered by improvement. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work has not started. 21. MADISON, NEBR., UNION AND TAYLOR CREEKS Location. In east-central Nebraska on Union and iso Creeks, tributaries of Elkhorn River, in city of Madison, MlM County about 90 miles northwest of Omaha, Nebr. t of Existing project. Channel enlargement and realignm eiage existing channel and construction of minor appurtenant drahief structures. Project was authorized for construction bY hr of Engineers on March 19, 1965, under 1-1special continuing author. at0 ded. ity provided by section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as am'std Estimated cost is $289,300 of which $239,300 is Federal cos $50,000 local cost. re Local cooperation. Provide all lands and rights-of-i nvavorl res; quired; assume liability for damages due to construction dace maintain and operate all works after completion in accordand with regulations prescribed; provide all necessary relocationi s ' reconstruction of streets, highways, railroad lines buildi rgrt bridge, utilities, and other publicly or privately owned prope t and facilities; assume full responsibility for all project cost excess of $1 million. Formal asurances were accepted fro city of Madison, Nebr., on December 15, 1964. levee Operations and results during fiscal year. Contract for and channel alterations was completed. eficial Condition at end of fiscal year. Project complete forbenes i use. Work on operation manual and as-built drawild progress. FLOOD CONTROL-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 905 Cost and financial statement Year. Total to ..... ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 ort ......... $25,000 $360000 -$160,700 $239,300 ..* . $6,128 $5,618 2,237 18,927 199,589 233,484 22. MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, SIOUX CITY, OWA, TO MOUTH (SIOUX CITY, IOWA, TO RULO, NEBR.) Ciction.On both banks of the Missouri River from Sioux ect W about 760 miles to St. Louis, Mo. A portion of proj- ow, Nebr Oraha District extends from Sioux City, Iowa to Rulo, woi5sting project. A series of levee units and appurtenant o te alto t both sides of Missouri River from Sioux City, Iowa, aong outh, for protection of agricultural lands and small com- D)roje ies against floods. Cost estimate for active portion of $21,30~ ~7from Sioux City, Iowa, to Rulo, Nebr. (July 1966) is an'd ,00, of which $19,350,000 is Federal cost for construction Dortio,95'7,000 local costs for lands and damages. Remaining Struct of project consists of units on which planning and con- assurn have been deferred pending completion of restudy to ostr that additional levee construction is economically justified. an (nlMate for deferred portion of project between Sioux City cost fo is $9,798,000 (July 1966) of which $8,875,000 is Federal da o construction and $923,000 is local costs for lands and es;cand cost estimate for inactive portion is $23,850,000, of or lanc$ 2 1,300,000 is Federal cost and $2,550,000 is local cost ds and damages. project was authorized by the following: gExisting Acts Work authorized Documents 8u18, 1941 ' . .. .. .. . . . . ..... ... , 1944 bt1)ee 22, 19 C' es Leve t y. along both sides of river from Sioux City to Kansas H. Doe. 821, 76th Cong., 3rd sess. Extended project from Kansas City to mouth and provided I. Doc. 475, 78th Cong., 2nd sess. S. for increased protection Does. 191 and 247,78th Cong., 2d sess. COM ltesta ublished maps of Missouri River Basin. 193cal cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936 applies. Fully complied with for all completed units and Ounder construction. or.'rationsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new WasI Co. mplete review for restudy of the levee system program ive 'nitiated by Chief of Engineers in October 1959, which will 'per consideration to physical and economic relationship. 1estd tract of program is under review by higher authority. Con- %olt for remedial work on unit R-520 was completed and QenllejCution of unit L-601 levees was continued by contract. corral design memorandum for unit R-613 was initiated and eected. General engineering studies pertaining to all units continued. 906 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project Ws initiated June 1948. Agricultural levee restudy prog-%24 under review by y higher .r•authorit. b Levee units L- 2 , authority."Lev•ee54,53 L-594; R-580; L-575; R-573; R-562; rL-561-550; R-548, i1f and R-520 are complete. Construction of unit L-601 levees udm progress and 69 percent complete. General design memoran for unit R-613 is under review by higher authority. Cost and financial statement 966 June 30, l Totalt966 Fiscal year................ 1 962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $17,424,2000 Appropriated.......... $1 25,000 $649,950 $414,000 $600,000 $808,000 16,961, Cost.................. 1226,343 264,223 791,854 60,911 915,751 23. MISSOURI RIVER BASIN (OMAHA DIST.) are Location. Flood control improvements in this project nd along Missouri River and several of its principal tributaries in States comprising Missouri River Basin. d Col Existing project. General comprehensive plan for flods for trol and other purposes in Missouri River Basin providesl t~l levees along Missouri River between Sioux City, Iowa, and TrieS and reservoirs on main stem of Missouri River and triblui for control of floodflows at damsites. Existing project was authorized by tihe following: Acts Work authorized Documents' - - I June 28,1938 Adopted general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Flood Control Committee poc. , Basin and authorized $9 million for initiation and partial Cong., 1st sess. accomplishment. Aug. 18, 1941 Modified general comprehensive plan to include Harlan H. Doc. 842, 76th Cong., 3d se' County Dam and Reservoir on Republican River, Nebr., and authorized additional $7 million. 8sog71 Dec. 22, 1944 Expanded general comprehensive plan for Missouri River . De-191 H. Doc. 475 and S. Does. 191 d Basin and authorized additional $200 million. 78th Cong., 2d sess. July 24, 1946 Authorized an additional $150 million for prosecution of gen- 2d eral comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. 642, 81st Cog"2d May 17, 1950 Authorized an additional $250 million for prosecution of gen- H. Does. 549 and eral comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. sees. Sept. 3, 1954 Expanded general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin and authorized additional $217,710,000. May 2,1956 Modified general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin by delotion of construction of Red Willow Dam arind Reservoir, Nebr., and addition of construction of Wilson Dam and Reservoir, Kans. " July 3, 1958 Expanded general comprehensive plan for Missouri River H. Doc. 409, 84th Cong., d sOes. Basin and authorized additional $200 million. July 14, 1960 Authorized additional $207 million for prosecution of general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. Dec. 30,1963 Authorized additional $80 million for prosecution of general comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin and modified the plan to include bank protection or rectification works below Garrison Danm. Juine 18, 1965 Authorized an additional $116 million for prosecution of gen- eral comprehensive plan for Missouri River Basin. 1 Contains latest published maps of Missouri River Basin. FLOOD CONTROL---OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 907 Procts in Omaha District included in comprehensive plan Estimated Estimated Project Federal non-Federal cost cost BhIoReer lv , eesystemS" . Dak. i .... ' ............ ......... ............ 1319,350,000 ...... ..... $1,957,000 . $293,000,000.............. S eoirervoir. k. yste SiouxCity, Iowa, to Rulo, Nebr.1 3 .................. SRes and, N. Dak ......................... ................. 338,0)0,00 .............. S r voir, 8. Dak...... .................................. 103,000,00 ........... 0i D in esevoir, 8. Dak.1. .. ...... 197,700),000 720,000 %ni Nraha b.ervo,, I S. Dak. and i n. ~2 0wa ,93,7 49,524,650. 362,000 4ebr9.5...24................... uni .I .... ... * ** ................................................... 5,903,874 362,000 ver, Garri .. ........ 2,557,680 145,800 onDam to Oahe Reservoir, N. Dak....................... 3,000,000 20,000 a etresented in individual report. tive Dortion of project. po rerations and results during fiscal year. See individual re- Condition at end of fiscal year. See individual reports. 24. MISSOURI RIVER, GARRISON DAM TO o OAHE RESERVOIR, N. DAK. a cati on . Along channel of Missouri River between Garrison k-and headwaters of Oahe Reservoir in North Dakota. tio: t.ng project. Consists of bank stabilization and rectifica- woDerks required to stabilize banks of Missouri River in throfc areas and prevent further loss of agricultural lands of Whih erosion. Estimated total cost (July 1966) is $3,026,000, eet Wch $3,000,000 is Federal and $26,000 non-Federal, Proj- L-as authorized by Flood Control Act of 1963. 193 l cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, baioplies. Sponsorship of project is being provided by North O Stater Water Commission. qu eratons and results during fiscal year. Construction in stabie Butte area was completed and construction of bank Coi ization work in Lake Mandan area was initiated. 196 "litton at end of fiscal year. Construction began January tio and project is 50 percent complete. Plans and specifica- advefor Fort Clark area are completed and work was under Irtisement. Cost and financial statement Year Total to ... 863 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 N work. 0 Prated ...... ................... .$35,000 $650,000 $813,000 $1,498,000 ........................29,372 231,749 1,234,344 1,495,465 25. MISSOURI RIVER, KENSLERS BEND, NEBR., TO tSIOUX CITY, IOWA an ocation. Along Missouri River between Ponca Bend, Nebr., 1?mInbination bridge at Sioux City, Iowa. rAoj75inq project. Authorized by 1941 Flood Control Act, and d by 1948 Flood Control Act, provides for construction of 908 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 dikes, revetments and channel improvement along Missouri River from Miners Bend and vicinity, S. Dak. and Nebr. to io City, Iowa. Cost of new work under project is $11,294,414. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenancetct. .Re- l ske y c o tra c ' t pair and/or replacement of 4,622 linear feet of dikes by con June Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was started in 1946 and completed in June 1961. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $11,294,414 Appropriated.......... -$355 . . . Cost................. 1,039 . . Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 1969920 218,800 $207,900 $189,900 $207,900 $183,20 0 :96761 Cost.................213,804 210,971 194,830 205,011 183,7977I 26. NORFOLK, NEBR.CO Location. In Madison County in northeast Nebraska at iver fluence of Elkhorn River and North Branch of Elkhorn about 110 miles northwest of Omaha, Nebr.e Existing project. Consists essentially of excavation of eits f channel, from existing North Branch channel on north lir1 eor, city, to convey floodflows to east and south, around city propi. and back into existing channel, downstream of south citY lico A diversion control structure and stilling basin will beied structed under new C&NW Railway bridge and culverts of li al- capacity will be constructed upstream of control structure st lowing diversion of normal stream discharge into presently e_ A ing channel permitting operation of an existing Mill 9 ;l right bank levee, paralleling the channel will be constructedbaC north side of city above drop structure, a short left bank tieveec levee will be constructed upstream of drop structure, leted ,an on both sides of new channel below drop structure. Estigd- total cost (July 1966) is $4,900,000, of which $3,940,000 isd bY eral and $960,000 is non-Federal. Project was authorizi Flood Control Act of 1950. d Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish all landsttes rights-of-way required for construction, hold the United ,Idge free from all damages; make all highways and highway b ite alterations except raising bridges, which will be done Y l United States. By resolution dated April 30, 1962, CitY Co tlity of Norfolk, Nebr., agreed to assume and undertake responSibthis of providing local cooperation required for construction o 0 ~ der project. Rights-of-way have been furnished for work now uf contract. Were Operations and results during fiscal year. Contracts ove awarded and construction initiated on levees and channels acol' Benjamin Avenue, railroad bridge alterations, and diversio a"d trol structure. Preparation of construction plans for levee s channel improvement downstream from Benjamin Avenue in progress. FLOOD CONTROL--OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 909 be e'tu4zon at end of fiscal year. Construction of project has ch ilitiated. Plans and specifications for remaining levee and adlv el Work are nearing completion and will be scheduled for quiditisement as soon as local interests complete remaining ac- atorequirements. Cost and financial statement .1rTotal al. to S Year 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 blWWork -- _ _ __ _ _ _ t...... $80,000 $45,000 $70,000$1,050,000 $1,250,293 .. 28,755 00 62 99 45,465 152,834 295,346 Location 27. PIERCE, NEBR. colIty NebrOn North Branch of Elkhorn River in Pierce of . g project. A levee along south, east, and north sides lherce, Nebr.; channel improvements along North Fork of Qi zln River including a channel cutoff to bypass flows around auth . ~ake; and straightening Willow Creek channel. Project cost Ofized by Flood Control Act of May 17, 1950. Estimated Plede is Lo mprovement (July 1966) is $316,500, of which $296,500 ral cost of construction and $20,000 local cost. Ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. otaPerations and results during fiscal year. Operations and C~onance manual completed by hired labor. feial uitiOn at end of fiscal year. Project completed for bene- .Cost and financial statement i a..... .. Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 . ......... $20,000 $302,000 -$20,000 -$500 ............ $301,600 .......... 5,051 16,173 273,487 -301 $1,931 296,341 28. PIPESTEM DAMAND RESERVOIR, N. DAK. 3 LIcation. On Pipestem Creek in Stutsman County, N. Dak., towes ulpstream from its junction with James River at James- S,.NDak. A ;Z ltng project. Authorized by Flood Control Act of 1965. 500 e d earthfill dam about 103 feet high with a crest length of cou.teet. Outlet works consist of a gated reinforced concrete flod t Reservoir will provide 186,500 acre-feet of storage for roVidentrol and surcharge storage. Conservation pool will Nh Wldspace for silt storage and 830 acres of water surface for ll Wildlife and recreation needs. Estimated cost is $3,300,000 $1450 1966) ,tiesofuture which $3,155,000 of non-Federal is ultimate Federal cost and reimbursement for recreation facili- tie Cost sharing. lad cal cooperation. Local interests must administer project and Water areas for recreation and fish and wildlife en- 910 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 hancement and to bear first cost of associated improvementsai wildlife management area; pay, contribute in kind, or'r of which may be through user fees, with interest, one-h'ild- separable cost of project allocated to recreation and fish and wild-e life enhancement; and bear all costs of operation, maintenaned and replacement of recreation and fish and wildlife lands facilities. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work not started. 29. SALT CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, NEBR. Location. Salt Creek Basin comprises an area of abott 1j. square miles in and around Lincoln in southeastern Nebra' ser- Existing project. Consists of a system of 10 damrns and rsand voirs, channel clearing, enlarging and realinement, levees was necessary bridge alterations. Project for flood protectionChief authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act as recommended by Cted of Engineers (H. Doc. 396, 84th Cong., 2d sess.). Esi ul cost of improvements for active program is $11,877,00 1966), of which $11,700,000 is Federal cost and $177,000 t Federal cost. Pursuant to Senate Resolution adopted AUgUsor 1964, which authorized a review of Salt Creek survey reP er proposed improvements in Wahoo Creek Basin, along Salt Cree downstream from Lincoln, above Lincoln, and ultimate 9til through Lincoln have been placed in "deferred" classificati° pending completion of review. ro)* Local cooperation. For channel-improvement and levee P re- ects, local interest must provide lands and rights-of-w'\a\Y a quired; hold the United States free from damages; and mainro- and operate all works after completion. Requirement fr Pof vision of lands, easements, and rights-of-way includes righsio way for temporary ponding of interior drainage and bridgprovioeoOr at non-Federal expense of all new highway and road brid .ry alteration of such bridges, including approaches made necesder- by improvement, other than raising existing bridges and on at pinning of existing piers and abutments which will be done Federal expense. Local interests must provide all fencingrvoir special costs related to recreational development inreser areas and pay 4.3 percent (currently estimated at $85,00v)ee Federal costs of construction of channel improvements and hare project through Lincoln which represents appropriate locals ri. of property costs attributable to higher utilization of propertY Rights-of-way must be made available prior to initiation of co struction in affected area. feil Operations and results during fiscal year. Continued desreal by hired labor and aerial surveys by contract. Continued 10 estate acquisition. Construction was completed on dams No.0 and 13 and channel improvement and levees through LincO11 above Oak Creek. Construction was initiated on Branche Dam. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project bes in spring of 1962 and is 72 percent complete. Dams and reser voirs No. 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, and 17 along with channel in- PLOOD CONTROL---OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 911 oaveplents and levees through Lincoln, above Oak Creek are is 3 P e e and in operation. Construction of Branched Oak Dam leeercent complete. Major item of work remaining to com- levee under active project, in addition to Branched Oak Dam, is Creek. and channel improvement through Lincoln below Oak Cost and financial statement Ca,Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ewWork . o.riated . . $1,600,356 $1,488,859 $1,809,000$1,990,000 $1,607,000 19,030,000 Maitenance. .... 1,240,4691,666,5751,678,4351,737,8141,664,996 18,503,302 o riated.......... .. 9,400 24,000 24,100 57,500 .......... .9,245 14,005 25,199 48,449 eta $23,000 atus of government cost applicable to that portion of project which is in a L 30. SHERIDAN, YELLOWSTONE RIVER, WYO. Littc, tio n . At Sheridan and vicinity on both sides of Goose and Creel Goose Creeks about 11.6 miles above junction of Goose With Tongue River. tectilnl project. Overall plan of improvement for flood pro- iI coat Sheridan consists of a system of levees and floodwalls Goos Cbination with alterations of channels of Goose and Little abot Creeks. Area subject to flooding will be protected by of c~37,70 feet of levee, 4,810 feet of floodwall, and 30,140 feet was atne l improvements including a concrete chute. Project Con utaorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 216, 81st $2,16 1st. sess.). Estimated Federal cost (July 1966) is reloca 00 Estimated local cost (July 1966) is $273,000 for Loci n s , lands, and damages. 1936, 1cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, tde'i applies. Fully complied with for all work completed or fulfil contract and local interests indicated they will be able to Srequirements for remaining work as scheduled. alte rattions and results during fiscal year. Levees and channel Work ions on Little Goose Creek were initiated and completed. city of81 in.tiated on Work Street Bridge under a contract with SConditio t"no 0eridan. t~e n C are 1in at end of fiscal year. Construction of stages I and hitiatecomplete. Construction of Work Street Bridge has been ect re : ~Construction plans for stage III, for remaining proj- Srequirements, are nearly completed. Cost and financial statement Year Total to NOW .... [ _1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 e ork o riated $355,000 $450,000 $115,000 $30,000 $360,000 $1,867,000 .. 399,004 661,519 174,00 27,356 362,277 1,847,331 912 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 31. SIOUX FALLS, S. DAK. S Location. Local protection project is on Big Sioux River f its tributaries at Sioux Falls, S. Dak.levee Existing project. Consists of channel improvement and leVe , along Big Sioux River and lower one-half mile of Skuntkcrete and diversion headworks, a diversion channel and a cWaters diversion chute and stilling basin to carry diverted flood. ed bY to Big Sioux River below the falls. Project was authorizuly 1954 Flood Control Act. Estimated cost is $5,928,70t'ad 1966), of which $5,288,707 is Federal cost for construction, $640,000 local costs for lands and relocations. Local cooperation. See Annual Report for 1962. d mai* Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation an tenance manuals were completed by hired labor. .may Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in 1956 and is complete. Cost and financial statement Ttal to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 J New work: 5,28870 Appropriated...........0........... .- o $40,000 -$1,000 -$6 ,87 5,288 Cost................. $6,040 1,996 16,626 22,002 4,040 32. VAUGHN, MONT. bove Location. On right bank of Muddy Creek, about 1 Inilea its confluence with Sun River and about 15 miles west of Gre Falls in west central Montana. ad Existing project. Levees along left bank of Sun Riverres right bank of Muddy Creek with appurtenant drainage struewas and minor channel improvements on Muddy Creek. Project , authorized for construction by Chief of Engineers on IVIaYcon' 1966, under authority provided by section 205, 1948 Flo 6 5 of trol Act as amended. Estimated cost is $410,000 (July 19 which $394,000 is Federal and $16,000 non-Federal. re- Local cooperation. Provide all lands and rights-of-Wa3'Yrs; quired; assume liability for damages due to construction ance maintain and operate all works after completion in acco r all with regulations prescribed; assume full responsibility forrea project costs in excess of $1 million; and provide necessary ars8 for ponding interior drainage and prescribe and enforce re tions to prevent encroachment. Local interests are form1in drainage district to sponsor local cooperation requirements. ject Operations and results during fiscal year. Detailed pro'als report approved by higher authority and preparation of P and specifications for construction initiated.d Condition at end of fiscal year. Preparation of plafns and specifications in progress, construction has not started. FLOOD CONTROL---OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 913 Cost and financial statement .. 1962 1963 19641 1965 1966 L 33. VERMILLION RIVER, S. DAK. ab t ion. Along Vermillion River from its mouth to a point 2rinc2miles north of Davis, S. Dak., and on Clay Creek, its ailrCiPal tributary, from its mouth to Chicago & North Western :ada bridge near Volin. lef'sting project. Consists of channel cleanout and a levee on chan i~l.of Vermillion River from mouth to near Vermillion, to a 1-1mprovements, straightening and levees from Vermillion o0 15on'It about 2 miles north of Davis, S. Dak., tieback levees Ville toSmaller tributaries, removal of an old mill dam at Center- enlarg provide for unrestricted passage of design flow, channel the oe en t , straightening and levees along Clay Creek from Volil outh to Chicago & North Western Railroad bridge near EsIt; and tieback levees along lower mile of Turkey Creek. edated cost is $9,164,000 (July 1966), of which $7,870,000 is nclud cost and $1,294,000 is non-Federal cost. Federal cost Th i s r an estimated $422,000 reimbursement by local interests. etc eMbursement is in addition to local cost of rights-of-way, Co, estimnated at $1,294,000. Project was authorized by Flood CA"lend l. Act of 1960 substantially in accordance with recom- sess.) atons of Chief of Engineers (H. Doc. 426, 86th Cong., 2d ri 'cal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and iter r-of-'Way required, including rights-of-way for ponding of brid r drainage, provisions for all new highway and road 11e es or alterations of existing bridges and approaches made ulitil ity arY by project; relocation or modification of existing Prov7 knes and systems; and removal of all buildings and im- eral fuments within right-of-way limits. No obligation of Fed- contUnds shall be incurred for cost of this project where flood terlz "0 benefits are exclusively for local flood control, as de- des igined by Secretary of the Army (except costs of planning, one 1, and acquisition of water rights), unless the State or agre more other non-Federal entities shall have entered into an cept ement in advance to assume at least 20 percent of cost (ex- of'csts of planning, design, and acquisition of water rights) belle'Pleted project allocated to production of local flood control cont s , Payable either as construction proceeds, or pursuant to a Actlr a c t Providing for repayment with interest within 50 years. Way cost, or fair market value of lands, easements, rights-of- tio and Work performed or services rendered prior to comple- Pedeo r con struction of project, which are furnished by a non- o101pa entity, shall be included in share of cost to be borne by rivdg at entity. Chief of Engineers considers that, in ar- Sat amount which local interests should contribute to meet 914 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Aed 20 percent requirement, they should be credited with estu'Ive value at time of Federal construction, of work which theYedh by performed since project plan was presented to and accpepuctio local interests, and which will contribute directly to '1otrestS of local flood control benefits related to project. Local iner 0 must operate and maintain project after construction-itiate October 26, 1961, a meeting was held by local interests to in ntitY formation of Lower Vermillion Watershed District as legal e ril to furnish localad"cooperation for project. A court i. 1964decare te idtict order ditrict 194 declared a deficiency in the petition to organze t Local which required a new start in organizational procedures. interests are reorganizing the District. ctivit Operations and results during fiscal year. Planning ciet was limited to contacts with local interests pending establish of local cooperation.re Condition at end of fiscal year. General design studies were essentially completed. Cost and financial ... 1963 statement "" 1965 ' [ Tot3I to . 1966 June 30,16 Fiscal year.............. ..1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $21319 Appropriated.... $118,195 $15,000 ... 206, Cost............ 121,726 10,289 . $1022 . 11 $. 34. WATERLOO, NEBR. Location. On Elkhorn River in Douglas County, Nebr., abot 23 miles west of Omaha, Nebr. Existing project. Plan includes a system of levees that bethe at high ground northwest of Waterloo, encircles town on.1 5 north and east, and ties into embankment of U.S. IHighWea yol southeast of town. Project was authorized by Flood f Whico Act 1950. Estimated cost (July 1966) is $300,000, of $260,000 is Federal cost of construction and $40,000 local co , Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1936, applies.# Operations and result during fiscal year. Plans and p dedc tions completed. Contract for levee construction was awair May 27, 1966. Negotiations underway with railroad for stallation of 60 inch culvert. Condition at end of fiscal year. Levee construction was itiated. Cost and financial statement FLOOD CONTROL-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 915 L 35. WEST POINT, NEBR. baLO tion. In southwest corner of Cuming County along left , i ftElkhorn River. Ito c.n! project. Plan provides for a system of levees tying South icago & North Western Railway embankment on both lyih and north ends of town, encircling that portion of town lloo'd estof railroad embankment. Project authorized by 1950 WVhich $15on0rol Act. Estimated cost (July 1966) is $158,500, of cost. $5,500 is Federal cost of construction and $8,000 local 'I1 Local cooperation. Fully complied with.. , Ocel aintrions and results during fiscal year. Operations and Concitance manual completed by hired labor. icial use o n at end of fiscal year. Project complete for bene- ' Cost and financial statement ieal earTotal to 1962 1963 1064 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 CDPropriated. $16,000 $175,000 -$25,000 $136 $166,136 5,722 10,988 133,600 -1,768 $1,054 149,596 3~. QoSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS quile-o Control Act of June 22, 1936, and subsequent acts re- ad ocal interests furnish assurances that they will maintain aCcorderate certain local protection projects after completion in istri nee With regulations prescribed by Secretary of the Army. legilat Engineers are responsible for administration of these eetilo Is within boundaries of their respective district. In- of completed local protection projects turned over to insslocal low, dterests for maintenance and operation were made as fol- uring the fiscal year: Air1 Colora, Cobr Location Month inspected r lot ra,do, detention dam ........................... June 1966 S I rche, S. .............. ...................... .. Oct. 1965 ufralor River, Greybull, Wyo.......................Sept. 1965 CaC Scranton, N. Dak...................Oct. yreek, 1965 COU1cil yon Dam, Red Dale gulch, Rapid City, S. Dak........ Oct. 1965 r CreelcuIs, Mo. R. Basin, Iowa ......... July 1965 thru June 1966 1t 9 h Hawarden, Iowa ................... July 1965, June 1966 t. nabotna River, Red Oak, Iowa...........Nov. 1965, May 1966 ,0 Iangs channel improvement, Fall River Basin, oyd 1. ........................ Oct. 1965, May ........... 1966 i ring er, Sioux City, Iowa .......... o.....July 1965 thru June 1966 Vat ley, Nebr...................Nov. 1965, May 1966, June 1966 Little ver, Mandan, N. Dak... ............................. Aug. 1965 le SSSouri River, Marmarth, N. Dak................ .... Oct. 1965 ovell, ow r 1, ux River, Iowa ...................... o 0e 0 -. - 00... o .... . .o. 900*0to ......... July 1965 thru June 1966 0010004,044*0-0*040000000 ...................... ...... Sept. .1965 Sept. 1965 Wer eart River, N. Dak. ............................. Aug. 1965 l4 adison River, Three Forks, Mont... ... Sept. 1965, June 1966 lk River, Glasgow, Mont. .................... Sept. 1965, June 1966 i "ver, lavre, Mont .......................... Sept. 1965, June 1966 R , Saco, Mont. ......................... Sept. 1965, June 1966 N1 habotna ot 1"er levee system ........... ..... River, Hamburg, Iowa ................. .. July 1965 thru June 1966 Oct. 1965, May 1966 916 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 in Location monthy pected Omaha, Mo. Riv. Basin, Nebr. ................ July 1965 thru June 1966 Pierce, Nebr. ........... ...................... Nov. 1965, Feb. 1966 Platte River, near Schuyler, Nebr ...................... * 1966 eJune Shields River, near Clyde Park, Mont. ......... .Sept. 1965v,, 1966 Sioux Falls, S. Dak.. ..................... Dec. 1965, July 1965 aJune Sheridan, Wyo. .................... Sept. 9 65, Oct.1965 Spring Creek, Herried, S. Dak....................... Feb.6 W est Point, Nebr. ................................ Nov. 1965, Sept 196 Willow Creek on Jefferson River, Three Forks, Mont.... .. *June Yellowstone River, Billings, Mont..................o ....... *' 1966 e1J Yellowstone River, Forsythe, Mont. .............. Sept. 1965, June 1966 Yellowstone River, Livingston, Mont.................... 'June Yellowstone River, Miles City, Mont...............Sept. 1965, June 1966 Yellowstone River, near Sidney, Mont. ................ *~ 'une 1966 Yellowstone River, West Glendive, Mont...........Sept. 1965, Fiscal year cost was $17,802. 37. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIo Under sections 7 and 9, Flood Control Act of 1944, Corp'f Engineers is responsible for detailed scheduling of operatiorser* storage capacity reserved for or assigned to flood control inthose voirs constructed by Bureau of Reclamation as well as constructed by the Corps. Fiscal year costs were $108,08 * 38. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS 30,966 For last Cost to June full report ------ Name of project see Annual s d Ope~rst10ee Report Construction maintea for- Belle Fourche,4 Cheyenne River, S. Dak.2........................... 1940 $37,410 Boulder, Colo. ... 15..2............................195212, 4 . . . N. Buffalo Creek, Scranton, . . . Dak............................... . . . . . 1960i 980 .. ,° Buffalo Creek, Wyo. ............ ............... Castlewood Dam and Reservoir, Cherry Creek and tributaries, Colo.4 .. 1943 ....... 56,'721 .* ,, City of Aurora, Westerly Creek, Colo.5......................... 1955 150,000 -° Council Bluffs, Iowa (act of 1936)2................ ................ 1939 325 Council Bluffs, Iowa (act of 1944)5................................ .............. .. .. .............. 1954 2,557,680 °* Dayton, Wyo.4 .................. 1956 .0 Dry Creek, Hawarden, Iowa...................................... 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1964 400 East Nishabotna River, Red Oak, 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 1963 400,000 .°, Forsyth, Mont. 1950 255,177 0 0 933 Giles Creek, Elkhorn River, Nebr.1 4 ............................ 1952 . o °, 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . Glasgow, Mont. ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 1939 16,832 Greybull, Wyo.......... 1960 248,507 ' Havre, Mont.5......................................... 5. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1958 1,825, 881 - °° Herreid, Spring Creek, S. Dak. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1954 50,216 Jamestown Reservoir, N. Dak.5...... 1960 40,000 Lower Big Sioux River, Iowa and S. Dak....................... .............. Lower Heart River, N. I)ak.S...................................... 1964 i961,173 .°. McCook Lake, S. Dak.5........................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 1958 147,627 Mandan, Heart River, N. Dak.... 1960 676,916 6, Marmarth, N. Dak.5.......................................... 4 . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1960 169,498 Miles City, Mont. 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1956 Missouri tivee, Aten, Nebr. 1951 578,791i .°, Missouri River, Niobrara, Nebr.8........... .................. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . 1945 99,370 .* Morrison, Bear Creek, Col. . 1950 30,000 .° M ott, N. Dak.4....................... .. ...... ..................... ,o* Nishnabotna River at Hamburg, Iowa... ........................ 1948 236,000 Omaha, Nebr.5.......................1954 5,903,874 Pipestenm Dam and Reservoir, N. 5 Dak................................... . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platte River near Schuyler, Nebr. 1948 74,940 Red Dale Gulch, Rapid City, S. Dak.......... ................. 1960 120,482 Redwater River and Hay Creek, Belle Fourche, S. Dak............ .................. Saco, M ont.................................................... 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1958 62 67,793 7 1,314 Shell Creek, Nebr. ......... 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 ,o° °o Shields River near Clyde Park, Mont. 5 ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1951 25,747 Shoshone River, Lovell, Wyoming .... 1963 14,350 See footnotes at end of table. MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 917 Other Authorized Flood Control Projects-Continued Pat S0uth i ... o o 'tir 1t er lve and channel improvements, Chatfield Reser- 1957 $10,000.. Yellownoe . ,organclo.. .... 1957$20,204 .......... SverWont. ...................... 1960 230 294 .. ..... in a orDlet d 1952 as "Elkhorn River Basin Omaha District." be. 4 aCeered, as a Public Works Administration project. Iroject complete. 39' PLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Hlood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Atl Stud Fiscal year costs elt oIowa.. ....................................... $14,556 4oditr Colu ...bus Nebr.::::: k Ri$'Mont. rot . Daklnt .. .............. ....... ...................................... .................................... 1,4583 1,4185 es. Cni No 1.64ar .amburg.. ow... .................... 2,33567 l ol eitv roken Bow, 6 near Nebr... Iowa ......... Hamburg, ............... ............... 12,88435 2 5 l 1., Wyont.. ................................ 148077 Moe.. & Maple OeboltIt>rdt,'1Leek& Ioeek ' Maple River, "Mont...................................1,49783 River, Ida Grove, Iow . .. .. .. . ... . .. .. 25,149 Ida Grove, Iowa................. 25,149 dlbcreek, Nebr ............................ n Bow,Colo 12,88465 1 6.............. 'R ane. C.eek, Sun.ance, Wyo. ......... tnC. yo..............01P359 ............................... UlakC 0 "64* 8 elb reek,Nebr........... ............................ 440 llrinan Cre YQl( (lance ler, Co................................ Sundance, Wyo...............1,660 alnt )dYo......................392 Creek, Nebr. .. ................................... ' 440 aergency flood control activities--repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) ordVeral Cost for fiscal year was $618,407, of which $26,331 was troi s o,a 4a1d e$306,602 preparation, $285,474 for flood emergency opera- for repair and restoration. Snagging and clearing navigable streams and tributaries in interest of flood control (see. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Cong.) Cntract Work for additional channel cleanout of Papillion was completed at a cost of $14,421. 40. 1IG BEND RESERVOIR, MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, S. DAK. oroction. On Missouri River, 987.4 miles above mouth, near Chai~slompson, S. Dak., and about 20 miles upstream from Reser lain S. Dak. Dam is in upstream reach of Fort Randall 1eis7r and reservoir extends upstream to Pierre, S. Dak. electri ting project. A rolled-earthfill dam 95 feet high, a hydro- gd c generating plant consisting of eight 58,500 kilowatt units, atorgchute-type gated spillway. Reservoir provides gross % cge of 1,900,000 acre-feet. Project operated as a unit in ti ,rehensive basin plan for flood control, navigation, conserva- y OWer development, and other uses. Project was authorized iood Control Act as part of general comprehensive plan 918 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 River 13si. for flood control and other purposes in Missouri Estimated cost (July 1966) is $103 million. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 P plies. dsnew Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fiunds'Dnd work: Three additional power units placed in service. no* acquisition completed except for pending court actions ofi c demnation cases. Preparation of contract plans and specifig h tions continued. Work by contract was completed on Statel9 5 0; way 34, $227,700; Crow Creek municipal building, '2a-o Crow Creek water supply, $129,800; governors, $35,200cto - control boards, $35,900; and other minor relocation, constru and supply contracts. Work continued on powerhouse to structure, $1,250,000; turbines, $292,600; generators, $32 0; reservoir access roads, $288,700; recreation facilities, $ ated tree planting, $117,000; and other minor contracts. In iain* contracts for service roads and crest road lighting. i- tenance: Project was operated in conjunction with oter over souri River reservoirs for flood control, navigation, ~Palled production and other multiple uses. Reservoir releases tsecond, 15,671,000 acre-feet, an average of 21,600 cubic feet perS eed. 919,823,000 gross kilowatt hours of electricity were prod eber Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began Sepgelete. 1959 and is 90 percent complete. Land acquisition romtioll Planning underway for remaining relocation itemns, recr col" facilities, and miscellaneous contracts. Major constructones, tracts were in force for service roads, powerhouse, tu 30, generators, access roads and recreation facilities. On June f 1966, pool elevation was at 1419.9 and 1,718,000 acrefee water were impounded. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $19,650,000 Appropriated.......... $2,1200,000 $22,515,000$13,150,000 $4,830,000 Cost.............. 18,145,912 24,566,747 23,276,724 12803185 4,901,155 Maintenance: Appropriated......... ...................... 60,100 189,000 544,00 786 b1 Cost................. .......... 57,489 186,777 542,129 41. FORT RANDALL DAM, MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, S. DA. * Location. On Missouri River in Charles Mix and Greite Counties, S. Dak., about 82 miles above Yankton, S. Dak ve is 880 miles above mouth of Missouri River and 148 miles a Sioux City, Iowa. m1 Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam with a ma xition r r height of 165 feet and a reservoir for flood control, i gis? navigation, hydroelectric power, and other purposes, widt gross storage capacity of 6,100,000 acre-feet at max i operating pool. It provides for a power installation of th*ee units nominally rated at 40,000 kilowatts each. Project au toe ized by 1944 Flood Control Act as part of general compret si plan for flood control and other purposes in Missouri River MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 919 87aated cost of project is $198,420,000 (July 1966), of which cost 0V0 00 is Federal cost for construction and $720,000 local ofor approaches to Platte-Winner Bridge. ies. a cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- Perationsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new labor "Preparation of contract plans and specifications by hired Charcontinued. Removal of old highway bridge piers at accom erlain and addition to sewage lagoon at Pickstown was col~4 tlished. Repairs to piling for Platte-Winner Bridge was cureted' and erection of superstructure was continued. Pro- ectillent Of additional oil circuit breakers and disconnects for itiated alzing the switchyard was completed and installation in- strcte Additional access and recreation facilities were con- tretl e , in 14 public-use areas Removal of access railroad road. embankment crest road lighting and embankment toe to 'psurfacing were initiated. Minor alterations and additions ODeroteerplant were continued. Maintenance: Project was ood "n conjunction with other Missouri River reservoirs for Uses control, navigation, power production, and other multiple equivTotal releases from reservoir were 16,433,000 acre-feet; Provalent to an average flow of 22,700 cubic feet per second. Co ced 1,531,015,000 gross kilowatt-hours of electricity. in ayition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated 1 946 data and is 99 percent complete. Acquisition of land for except reservoir is essentially complete. Relocations complete Platte or removal of access railroad trestle, and completion of Dletet -inner Bridge. Major items of work remaining to com- Platteare additional reservoir access and recreation facilities, elbanWinner Bridge sectionalizing present switchyard, lighting terati lent crest road, surfacing embankment toe road and al- Otn us to the powerplant to provide central automatic control. rean n5e 30, 1966, reservoir pool was at elevation 1358.8 feet Was im ea level and a total volume of 4,533,000 acre-feet of water Dounded. nCost and financial statement C o ot and lYear Total to .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1066 June 30,1966 roprate d........$905,000 $1,874,185 $1,840,000 $1,271,000 $2,622,000 $107,125,000 Anace: . 777,011 1,131,108 2,616,284 1,017,044 1,076,255 105,950,339 oat ....... 820,000 005,000 874,000 945,000 1,023,300 9,026,300 81,8 937,507 862,218 029,648 1,015,080 8,067,236 t CARRISON RESERVOIR, MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, N. DAK. Missouri River in McLean and Mercer Counties, k.o aboutOn11 miles south of Garrison, N. Dak., and 9 miles West .,Zc1)akt. and 7f Coleharbor, N. Dak., 1,389.9 miles above mouth of river V ' tliles above Bismarck, N. Dak. a i ' n project. A rolled-earthfill dam 11,200 feet long with irri atlnlu height of 202 feet and a reservoir for flood control, t navigation, hydroelectric power, and other purposes gross storage capacity of 24,500,000 acre-feet. It provides 920 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 five power units rated at 80,000 kilowatts each, three floodJC1 trol tunnels and a gated spillway. Existing project was usive ized by 1944 Flood Control Act as part of general compre.ei.ver plan for flood control and other purposes in Missouri l.ui Basin. Estimated cost (July 1966) is $293 million includjn $760,000 Code 710 funds.38 Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 aP plies. neW Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds ere work: Major work items completed during the yeareo, recreation facilities, $291,900; Four Bears bridge protecai $199,000; and for additional riprap on Snake Creek and' T fort embankments, $238,000. A contract was awarded for co ce: stations to be constructed with Code 710 funds. MaintenalIis- Garrison Reservoir was operated in conjunction with other ro- souri River reservoirs for flood control, navigation, power eses duction, and other multiple-purpose uses. Reselo i r recond. were 14,539,000 acre-feet, or about 20,100 cubic feet per sehors Generating facilities produced 2,134,238,000 gross kilowatt of electricity. pot began Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of projectress April 1946 and is essentially complete. Planning is in proCe for recreational facilities, differential switchyard protectionllal tralization of controls, rehabilitation of Snake Creek e 'con* ment protection and minor remaining items. Construction Co01 tract is in force for recreation facilities. On June 30, 1966, p elevation was 1844.1 and 20,704,000 acre-feet of water was pounded. Cost and financial statement Totl]o Fiscal year ................ 1062 June3, 1063 1964 1965 196 New work: $291,33 Appropriated.......... $945,000 $714,000 $770,000 $1,525,000 $245,000 , 291. Cost............... .. 916,158 1,182,334 783,632 812,228 902,179 aintenance. Appropriated.......... 0964,000 1,018,700 1,014,700 1,030,000 1,184,000 g,418 Cost................. 856,301 1132191 1008,273 1,029,448 1,163,452 43. GAVINS POINT RESERVOIR, MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, S. DAK. AND NEBR. Location. Dam is on Missouri River in Yankton CoUntfog Dak., and Knox County, Nebr., about 4 miles upstreac Yankton, S. Dak., and about 811.1 miles above mouth of ri.th ' ver Existing project. A concrete and rolled-earthfill dam trol maximum height of 74 feet and a reservoir for flood co°oses irrigation, navigation, hydroelectric power, and other purPO aO with a gross storage capacity of 540,000 acre-feet at max1h'ree operating pool. It provides for a power installation of ro units nominally rated at 33,333 kilowatts each. Existing erl ect was authorized by 1944 Flood Control Act as part of ge 1 comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes iii n souri River Basin. Cost estimate July 1966 is $49,524,650, ,o cluding $1,468,100 Code 710 funds (recreational facilitis completed projects). MIULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 921 cal cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- WOerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new Deve- Preparation of plans continued for recreation facilities. fun)dolent of recreation facilities continued using Code 710 other ldssMaintenance: Project was operated in conjunction with ower Missouri River reservoirs for flood control, navigation, relear Production and other multiple-purpose uses. Reservoir feet s ere 17,481,000 acre feet or an average of 24,100 cubic erar second. Three generating units were in commercial electrio,n and produced 657,317,000 gross kilowatt-hours of Sively 7 dYduring fiscal year. Recreational areas were exten- owVel"Used by the public. Contracts awarded for repair of bahPrsouse parking, recreational road resurfacing, downstream C 5tabilhzation and spillway boat barriers. 1952Cdition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in March 5ient and is complete except for additional recreational develop- Sttude ich is being accomplished with Code 710 funds. Design re arein progress for additional recreation development and for rultpl'Docartion of maintenance facilities. Project is providing its an lthPle-Purpose benefits for flood control, navigation, power, d 455ues. On June 30, 1966, pool elevation was 1207.3 ,000acre-feet of water was impounded. Cost and financial statement Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 cost inted .......... 5000$3 ,4 4 Newwerk. an . . $520,000 $101,100 $145,000 $139,740 $95,000 $48,617,650 Aenance.. . 188,782 465,297 170,813 144,976 83,684 48,508,294 S t .......... 528,000658,700 630,100 731,0001,006,600 ,370,330 o947 02. 674,867 o69,346754,985 766,816 ,070,075 44. OAHE RESERVOIR, MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, S. DAK. AND N. DAK. Cocation. Dam is on Missouri River in Hughes and Stanley 1o0 7ties, S. Dak., about 6 miles northwest of Pierre, S. Dak., and istin ls above mouth of river. height n project. A rolled-earthfill dam with a maximum Cavi of 245 feet and reservoir for flood control, irrigation, Storagaten, hydroelectric power, and other purposes with a gross lool ge capacity of 23,600,000 acre-feet at maximum operating blow~t contains seven power units nominally rated at 85,000 cotrots each. Existing project was authorized by 1944 Flood trol I Act as part of general comprehensive plan for flood con- (Jul ld other purposes in Missouri River Basin. Estimated cost jLocal 66) is $338 million. Mlies, cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of 1938 ap- Oerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new $45' Acquisition of reservoir lands continued, at a cost of o,_00 Preparation of plans and specifications continued. uction contracts were in progress for relocation of 922 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Northern Pacific Railroad, $2,483,000. Initiated service roadS stage V, $460,000 and crest road lighting, $82,800. Conaccess contracts for switchyard facilities, $22,500; reservoirtued roads, $55,600; and recreation facilities, $365,300. ContC m procurement of permanent operating equipment, $69,9009 nd pleted contracts for surge tank winter protection, $655, 900eser service roads stage IV, $283,200. Maintenance: OahelIissouri voir project was operated in conjunction with other ductiol River reservoirs for flood control, navigation, power prouron and other multiple-purpose uses. Total water releases ora reservoir in fiscal year 1966 were 15,914,000 acre-feet aOtin average discharge of 22,000 cubic feet per second. Gener eleC- facilities produced 2,304,237,000 gross kilowatt-hours 0 tricity. Condition at the end of fiscal year. Construction bega August 1948 and is 97 percent complete. Land acquisition o er. percent complete. All power units on line and producing POVer Design studies in progress and plans and specifications being lpr pared for remaining Northern Pacific Railroad relocations Pald ect roads, maintenance facilities, centralization of control recreation facilities. On June 30, 1966, pool elevation was 1 and 14,455,000 acre-feet of water impounded. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 u New work:0053O Appropriated.......... $33,980,000$17,349,986$6,540,000$4,000,000$6,02032,000 0943 Cost..................31,827,9,721,425,4907,944,0283,320,8246,135 7621 0 Maintenance: 367 15 Appropriated........... 291,600 528,800 661,000 802,000 953,600 3,653, Cost............. .. 291,800 529,543 656,593 821,163 919,471 45. SURVEYS Fiscal year cost was $705,433, of which $3,976 was for naV"al tion studies, $434,458 for flood control studies, $13,766 for s9 studies, and $253,233 for comprehensive basin studies. 46. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA for Volumes I and II of scheduled seven volume series streams in Denver, Colo., area were released to local intere sor 1964. Volume III of this series was presented to the ~pfcal April 6, 1966. Studies for volume IV were initiated late in tha year. Local officials stated after major flood of June 1965to be data in volumes I and II were utilized in determining arefS 00. evacuated. Fiscal year cost of Denver area studies vas $229 Volume I of scheduled four volumes for streams in Lincoln, a$ area was released to local people in March 1965. Volume hId submitted for local review May 11, 1966. Local commentS le not been received by end of fiscal year. Completion of' voited III was well advanced by end of fiscal year and studies !,it, eof for volume IV. A request from local people expanding scope volume IV was approved. Fiscal year cost of Lincolclrea studies was $16,230. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-OMAHA, NEBR., DISTRICT 923 Completed flood plain studies I Stream and location Requesting agency Date completed Federal cost eb.ranch Papillion Creek, Papillion, City of Papillion, Nebr................... Nov. 1963.. $650 145tdIsIa Wood p. >rand IsIamd, Nebr..... Denver"tt River Wa terton to Brighton, City of Grand Island, Nebr.............. Inter County Regional Planning Commission, Aug. 1964.. 9,372 Van-d ,Colo. a Oct. 1963... 52,000 S, Toll ( ,at.nd.ov Denver, Colo. wer Cherry Creeks, Inter-County Regional Planning Commission Aug. 1964.. 25,000 earCreeks, D enver, and City of Aurora, Colo. Colo...... Inter-County Regional Planning Commissicn, Jan. 1966... 38,000 L Cole inesBranch UlClNebr. Denver, Colo. h,and Beal Slough, Lincoln eCity - Lancaster County Planning Aug. 1964 15,000 Commission, Lincoln, Nebr. log iScal 47. RIESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT stucalear costs were $26,952, of which $6,632 was for hydro- es and $20,320 for civil works investigations. OHIO RIVER For actual construction of locks and dams, and operation and care of completed structures, river is divided into three sections under immediate supervision and direction of district engineers at Pittsburgh, Huntington, and Louisville. Pittsburgh section ex- tends 127 miles from head of river at Pittsburgh, Pa., to a point near Hannibal, Ohio, and, includes Emsworth, Dashields, Mont- go1ery, New Cumberland and Pike Island locks and dam, and locks and dams 12, 13 and 14. Hluntington section extends 311 miles from mile 127 to 438 immediately upstream from Foster, KY., and includes locks and dams 15 to 23, inclusive, Gallipolis, oreenup, and Captain Anthony Meldahl locks and dams. Louis- VIle section extends 543 miles from mile 438 to mouth of river, and includes Markland and McAlpine locks and dams (with Louisville and Portland Canal) and locks and dams 43 to 53, inclusive. IMPROVEMENTS 1 Navigation 2 onstruction of locks and dams on Ohio River ..... ...... .925 Open-channel work, Ohio River ................................ 932 re'ote Tributary navigation projects and all flood control projects in Ohio River Basin are in D of districts included in Ohio River Division. 1. CONSTRUCTION OF LOCKS AND DAMS ON 01110 RIVER Location. Ohio River is formed by junction of Allegheny and onngahela Rivers at Pittsburgh, Pa., and flows generally south- westerly for 981 miles to join Mississippi River near Cairo, Ill. For description of river see page 1227, 1932 Annual Report. Previous projects. For details see page 1907 of Annual Re- Port for 1915. Existing project. Provides for improvement of entire river by construction of locks and dams to provide a channel depth of 9 feet and for widening Louisville and Portland Canal at Louisville, Y. Project provides for a lock with usable dimensions of 110 by 600 feet at each of the dams and, in addition, an auxiliary lock 56 by 360 feet is available at Emsworth, Dashields, Montgomery, .dMIcAlpine locks and dams with an auxiliary lock at Gallipolis eIng 110 by 360 feet. Dashields is a fixed dam, while Emsworth, otgomery, and Gallipolis are fixed dams with movable crests. ientainiing dams are movable type, with navigable pass varying nWidth from 600 to 1,248 feet. -Inaddition to navigable pass, 4iovable-type dams are also provided with one or more regulating Weirs. At McAlpine locks and dam a canal (Louisville and Port- land) extends along left bank for 2 miles, with locks at lower end. Modifications to existing project under purview of section 6, act of March 3, 1909, provide for fixed dams with movable crests With two locks (110 by 1,200 feet and 110 by 600 feet) at New u Unberland, Pike Island, IHannibal, Willow Island, Belleville, t acine, Greenup, Captain Anthony Meldahl, Markland, Cannel- toln, Newburgh, Uniontown, Smithland, and Mound City, recon- struction to provide a 110- by 1,200-foot lock in addition to exist- 926 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ing locks and a fixed dam with two sections of movable crest at McAlpine locks and dam, and widening Louisville and Portland Canal to 500 feet. Operation and care of locks and dams were included in project July 1, 1935, under provisions of Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act of June 26, 1934. Estimated Federal cost of new work (existing project) (1966), exclusive of Gallipolis locks and dam reported under Kanawha River project is $1,162,367,650; estimated non-Federal cost is $7,691,000. Foregoing estimate does not include expenditures on previous projects. Following items previously included in this project are considered inactive and excluded from foregoing cost estimate: Raising crest of dam 14; construction of beartraps at dam 21; construction of additional beartraps at dams 18, 22, 23, and 43 and construction of guard wall and guide wall extensions at locks and dams McAlpine, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 52. Estimated cost (1954) of these items was $8,970,100. Under authoritY granted in 1910 River and Harbor Act, Louisville and Portland Canal was widened to 200 feet; locks and dams 40 and 42 eliml- nated; locks and dams 1 and 2 replaced by Emsworth locks and dam; lock and dam 3 replaced by Dashields locks and dam; and locks and dams 4, 5, and 6 replaced by Montgomery locks and dam. Locks and dams 24, 25, and 26 were replaced by Gallipolis locks and dam which was authorized by act of August 30, 1935, and constructed under project for improving lower Kanawha River. Locks and dams 7, 8, and 9 were replaced by New Cumberland locks and dam, locks and dams 10 and 11 were re- placed by Pike Island locks and dam, locks and dams 27, 28, 29, and 30 were replaced by Greenup locks and dam, locks and dans 31, 32, 33, and 34 were replaced by Captain Anthony Meldahl locks and dam, locks and dams 35, 36, 37, 38, and 39 were re- placed by Markland locks and dam, and the Louisville and Port- land Canal widened to 500 feet, as modifications to existing proJY ect under purview of section 6, act of March 3, 1909, reducing total number of structures to 33. Table A contains data relative to various features of locks and dams included in existing project. For list of principal towns and cities along Ohio River with their mileage below Pittsburgh, Pa., see page 1060 Annual Report of 1962. Licenses. Federal Power Commission licenses at locks and dams, Ohio River: Markland Dam McAlpine Dam F.P.C. License No ....... 2,211 .............. 289; 1,000 Licensee ............... Public Service Co. Louisville Gas & of Indiana Electric Co. Annual charge .......... $49,950 ............... $ 95,000 (#289) $ 6.60 (#1,000) Collections to end of None (project under $3,610,245.16 fiscal year 1966 construction Table A I Lock dimensions Upper Depth on miter sills Character of foundation normal -1 t _. Lock Miles pool ele- Percent Year Actual cost and below Distance from nearest town Width Greatest vation com- opened to date of dam Pitts- of length (feet plete to navi- each lock burgh cham- available Lift mean sea Upper Lower Lock Dam gation and dam ber for full (feet) level) (feet) (feet) (feet) width (feet) 1 f t 1 ! i 1 i 1 1 1 Replaced................. Emsworth locks and dam, Emsworth, Pa. , 56 60 1.0 710.0 117.0 .12.9. Rock............. Rock and piles... 100 192 $870,034 25,861,765 2 Replaced...... ............. ... .... . ...... .. ......... 976,767 .do................... 3 6213.3 0 ..... 92 113.4 317.5 : :"Ro ck'."............ R"fock'............. ::: 100 1929 1,144,588 Dashields locks and dam, 1.6 miles 10.0 3,528,955 below Sewickley, Pa. 56 360 C 4 Replaced..... .............. /110o 7 ....... . ... ... ...... ...... k........ ........ .. ...... 1,071,472 cx 5 .....do ............................ 1,080,132 6 .. do............ ..... 1,123,442 0 31.7 Montgomery locks and dam, 1.4 miles above Industry, Pa............... { 56 1,200 17.5 682.0 116.0 12.9 Rock and piles...... Rock and piles..... 100 1936 5,737,611 Replaced.......................... ... do... .. .. ....... ......... f 110 664.5. .. 19.2. ... "."'i......1".7Rok'.........."o... Rock.................19 .... " 1,075,000 1,167,456 54.4 .. ,... . New Cumberland locks and dam, Stratton, Ohio. 1 110 J .422.6 38,770,434 9 Replaced ......................... . ......1,200 ... 1,177,100 10 .....do... W . ................... 1,138,000 11 600 84.3 .... do .... . ................. .... { 110 1963 1,162,165 ..... 12 87.4 Pike Island locks and dam, 2 miles up- stream from Warwood, W. Va.. Warwood, W. Va................... 1 110 110 1,200 8.4 644.0 626.2 28.0 15.4 15.3 11.0 Rock.............. Piles in sand and Rock.............. Piles in sand and 55,425,380 1,166, gravel gravel. 100 13 96.1 McMechen, W. Va.................. 110 600 7.3 617.8 13.8 10.4 ..... do...... ....... Rock; piles in sand 1911 1,222,389 11.0 and gravel 100 14 114.0 Woodland, W. Va................... 110 600 8.3 610.5 16.4 Rock....... ... Rock............. 1917 1,133,371 .. °..... 126.4 Hannibal locks and dam, 1.6 miles up- { 110 600 1 21.0 623.0 38.0 17.0 ..... do............ .....do............ 2 41,763,260 stream from New Martinsville, W. S 110 Va. 600 15 129.11 New Martinsville, W. Vs ............. 110 600 7.8 602.2 15.4 11.0 ..... do........... .... do......... 100 1916 1,180,478 16 146.5 Bens Run, W. Va ................... 110 7.8 594.4 15.4 11.2 ..... do........ ..... do............ 100 1917 1,275,532 See footnotes at end of table. Table A-Continued Lock dimensions Depth on miter Character of foundation Upper sills _ _ _ _ normal Lock Miles pool ele- Percent Year Actual cost and below Distance from nearest town Width Greatest vation corn- opened to date of dam Pitts- of length (feet plete to navi- each lock burgh chain- available Lift mean sea Upper Lower Lock Dam gation and dam ber for full (feet) level) (feet) (feet) (feet) width tj (feet) O 161.7 Willow Island, erly, W. Va. 2.7 miles above Way- { 1,200 S20.0 602.0 35.0 15.0 Rock and piles Rock............. I 2 5$1,145,237 17 167.5 4.5 miles above Marietta, Ohio....... 600 8.2 586.6 15.4 11.0 Rock.............. .... do............ 100 1918 1,362,591 110 6.2 578.4 14.2 11.0 ..... do......... ... do............. 100 1910 927,091 18 179.9 4.7 miles above Parkersburg, W. Va.... 110 600 19 192.2 Little Hocking, Ohio................ 600 7.7 572.2 16.9 11.0 Piles in sand, gravel ..... do............ 100 1916 1,213,848 110 and rock. 20 202.5 Belleville, W. Va..... . ... 600 7.5 564.5 15.4 11.0 Rock... ..... do...... ..... ... 100 1917 936,696 I 110 1,200 582.0 37.0 15.0 Rock and piles..... 70 643,919,113 203.9 Bellevilie locks and dam, 0.3 mile be- { 110 t 22.0 ... do...... ..... ........ low Reedsville, Ohio. 110 600 21 214.6 1.4 miles above Portland, Ohio...... 600 5.6 567.0 15.4 11.0 ..... do............. 100 1919 1,484,562 z .... do...... ...... 110 551.4 15.4 11.2 do................do........... ..... 100 1918 1,218,798 22 220.9 Ravencewood, W. Va................. 600 7.8 110 600 5.6 543.6 15.4 13.5 do................do............ 100 1921 ..... 1,851,488 23 231.4 Millwood, W. Va.................... 237.5 Racine locks and dam, 1.5 miles below ]1 110 1,200 22.0 560.0 18.0 15.0 do............ .................................................... ..... do........... 27 719,169,840 Letart Falls, Ohio. 110 600 24 ........ j Replaced...... ............. 1,187,542 25 ..... do............................ ... ii6 6"' .100.. ........ 1,925,205 26 do.................... ..... 110 1,307,241 .12.0 Rock... 1937 279.2 Gallipolis locks and dam, 0.7 mile be- 538.0 18.0 .........Rock .......... (8) ........ low Hogsett, W. Va. 110 .. ............ ........ ........ Replaced...... .....do...... do ...... . . . . .. . . . . . ..... ............. ............... .....do............................ . L110 J 110 1.. 515.0i 118.0o13.0 .............. 100 2,015,601 1,063,133 I- 1,0S8,802 wo 1,579,618 341.0 Greenup locks and dam, 4.9 miles be- 1,200 Rock............. Rock............. 55,195,512 low Greenup, Ky. ... 600 31 Replaced.......................... ........ 1,359,231 32 2,951,216 .... do............................ \110 ................. ................... 1,937,166 .....do............................ .. do............ . ... { 110 15.0 Rock..............' Rock.............. 1962 3,437,057 73,212,293 436.2 Captain Anthony Meldahl locks and 485.0 118.0 dam, 2.2 miles above Foster, Ky. ... 1,200 l 30.0 35 ........ Replaced.......................... ................................................ I........ ........1,894,942 36 .. ...... . .... do ... ....................... ..................... ........ ..... ........ ................................................ 3,704,53 .. ..do......................... do................ .......... ................... ................................. ............... . 1,297,924 ............. 38 d............................................................... 2,857,040 ......... 531.5 Marklandlocksand dam, lmileabove 110 1,200 35.0.455.0.50.0 15.0 Rock............Piles................ 100 1963 61,421,360 Markland, Ind. 1 110 600 f 39 ....... Replaced.. ............................ ........ ............................. ...... ................. ... .................................... 2,222,44 40 . . Eliminated................................. .......................... ........ .. .................................................................... 41 . ............ 97,658,134 3........4........4.. 7.8..1..................... 604.4 'McAlpine locks and dam. (Recon- 110 1,200. . . 49.0 12.0 struction of locks and dam 41). 110 600 37.0 420.0 19.0 11.0 Rock......... 80 1961 ........................... 45,099,389 56 360 J 19.0 11.0 43 633.2 3.3milesbelow WestPoint,Ky....... 110 600 9.0 383.0 15.0 11.0 Pile............... 100 Pile................ 1921 2,592,242 44 663.2 Leavenworth, Ind ....................110 600 7.0 374.0 15.4 13.0 ..... do.............Rock and pile....... 100 1925 2,819,930 45 703.0 Addison, Ky........................110 600 9.0 367.0 17.4 13.0 Rock.............. do........... .. 100 1927 3,202,890 ....... 720.7 Cannelton locks and dam 3 miles above f 110 1,200 1 25.0 383.0 38.0 15.0 Rock.............. Rock.............. 44 ........ 1037,332,164 Cannelton, Ind. 1 110 600 [ 46 757.3 Owensboro, Ky................... 110 600 11.0 358.0 17.4 11.0 Pile................Pile................100 1928 3,129,028 ..776.1 Newburgh locks and dam l6 miles above 5 110 1,200 1 16.0 358.0 32.0 12.0 Rock.............. ..... do.............. 8........ 116,233,279 Evansville. Ind. 1 110 600 J 47 777.7 Newburgh, Ind...................... 110 600 9.0 347.0 15.4 11.0 100 Pile.....................do............. 1928 4,415,526 48 809.6 5.8 miles below Henderson, Ky ........ 110 600 7.0 338.0 15.4 13.0 ....do.................. do............. 100 1922 3,062,710 Q 49 845.0 2.4 miles below Uniontown, Ky....... . 110 600 11.0 331.0 17.4 13.0 Rock............. Rock.............. 100 1928 3,325.064 846.0 Uniontownlocksanddam3.Smilesbe- I 110 ....... 1,200 1 22.0 342.0 34.0 12.0 Rock............. Rock.............. 13 ........128,008,436 low Uniontown, Ky, 1, 110 600 f 0 50 876.8 1lmilebelowWeston, Ky............. 110 600 10.0 320.0 17.4 do............ Rock and pile....... 100 11.0 ..... 1928 3,751,762 51 903.1 0.6 mile below Golconda, Ill........... 110 600 8.0 310.0 15.4 11.0 Rock and piles...... Pile............... 100 1929 4,370,566 918.5 Smithlandlocksanddam2mile tributable to reservoir effect in reduction of floodflows on lower Ohio and Mississippi Rivers estimated as $86,900. Activities under reservoir management program, comprising shoreline san" tation, malaria control, conservation, land management and dis- posal, and operation and maintenance of public-use faciilties con" tinued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed for full beneficial use April 1951. For chronology of construction and major items of work performed, see page 1101 of Annual Report for 1962. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: 29 754 Appropriated.......... $5,300 $13,525 -$104 $135,088 $70,000 i$14,7 141 Cost............. ..... 5,300 43,421, 24,845 159,630 244,7090 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 359,700 440,000 358,300 406,600 454,000 4,870 140 Cost................. 355,809 347,547 453,236 390,332 444,328 34,840 '822 1 Includes $35,896 public works acceleration funds. Includes $35,896 public works acceleration funds. In addition, surplus property valued at $55,528 transferred to project without reimbursement. Excludes surplus property valued at $3,526 transferred to project without reimbursement' 15. DALE HOLLOW RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, TENN. AND KY. Location. Dam is on Obey River, 7.3 miles above its confltl ence with Cumberland River (mile 380.9) at Celina, Tenn. It i5 in Clay County, Tenn., and about 80 miles northeast of Nashville, Tenn., 28 miles north of Cookeville, Tenn., and 3 miles east Of Celina, Tenn. Reservoir extends about 51 miles up main streal 10 miles up East Fork, and 6 miles up West Fork of Obey River, and lies within Cumberland and Clinton Counties, Ky., and ClaY, Pickett, Overton, and Fentress Counties, Tenn. Existing project, A concrete gravity-type dam, hydroelectric powerplant, and reservoir for primary purposes of flood control and power production, with a permanent pool for public use and conservation purposes. See page 1096 of 1962 Annual Report for project details. Estimated cost of project is $26,233,200 (July 1966). MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-NASHVILLE, TENN., DIST. 957 Local cooperation. None required on completed project, future recreation development subject to certain conditions of nOn-Federal cost-sharing under Federal Water Project Recreation Act of 1965. t Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Addi- tional construction on recreation facilities by hired labor and communication tower under contract. Operation and main- tenlance: Dam was operated and structure and its appurtenances maintained as required. Operation of powerplant was con- tluous except for normal interruptions and necessary shutdowns r inspection and maintenance purposes. Total net energy generated (62,974,000 kw-hr) was made,available through De- Iartmnent of the Interior to Tennessee Valley Authority for distribution. Benefits attributable to reservoir effect in reduc- tion of floodflows on lower Ohio and Mississippi Rivers estimated as $70,300. Activities under reservoir management program in- Volved shoreline sanitation, malaria control, conservation, land management, and maintenance of public-use facilities. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was commenced in 1arch 1942 and completed for flood control operation in October 1943 Powerplant (initial 2-unit development) was completed ADril 1949 and third unit installed and placed in operation ecember 1953. For further details and information on other rmajor items of work, see page 1098 of Annual Report for 1962. _ _Cost and financial statement al Year .......... FiscalTotal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1066 to June 30, 1966 New Work. c nDropriated.......... .......... $52,000 -$211 $119,000 $25,000 1$26,153,183 maite e ............... 5............ 1,149 640 25,901 96,511 226,131,595 egvropriated..........$292,100 386,700 323,700 371,200 516,200 5,230,380 ....... 290,303 295,644 411,255 362,179 504,050 35,203,076 Ineludes $51,789 public works acceleration funds. $281eludes 2 $51,789 public works acceleration funds. Excludes surplus property valued at 1' transferred to project without reimbursement. Xcludes surplus property valued at $10,406 transferred to project without reimbursement. 16. J. PERCY PRIEST RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, TENN. Location. Damsite is on Stones River, 6.8 miles above its con- ue ce with Cumberland River (mile 205.9) ; in Davidson County, Tern.; about 7 miles east of Nashville, Tenn. Reservoir will ex- teid southeasterly from damsite about 32 miles along main stream, Smiles up East Fork, 6.5 miles up West Fork, and for shorter istances up other tributaries of Stones River; and will lie within avidson, Rutherford, and Wilson Counties, Tenn. Rxisting project. Plan provides for construction of a combi- '.ation earth and concrete gravity-type dam, 2,716 feet long and 0 feet above streambed, and a hydroelectric power generating D ant. Dam will consist of rolled earth embankment sections extending 680 and 1,372.5 feet, respectively, from right and left abutments, connected by a concrete structure 663.5 feet long, COmprised of spillway and adjoining nonoverflow sections. Spill- 958 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 way, to be in flood plain adjacent to right bank of river channel, will be surmounted with four tainter crest gates to provide for regulating and discharging floodflows. Powerhouse, a reinforced concrete structure of conventional indoor type, will be directly at downstream base of nonoverflow section to be constructed acroSs stream channel area, one 60-foot monolith which is designed as an intake structure to contain one 22-foot-diameter penstock. Power installation will consist of one generating unit of 28,000" kilowatt capacity. Project is a unit of a coordinated plan for flood control and development of water resources of Cumberland River Basin, this plan in turn forming an integral part of compre* hensive plan of development for Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. At maximum controlled pool level, top of spillway crest gates, reser voir will cover 22,720 acres and provide a storage capacity of 652,000 acre-feet, of which 350,000 is allocated for storage o winter floods and 34,000 as regulating storage for power, leaving a minimum pool of 268,000 acre-feet, 10,570 acres in extent, avail able for public use and conservation purposes. During sumnme season, pool will be stabilized at a level affording 14,200 acreS O water surface area for recreational use. Drainage area controlled will be 892 square miles or 95 percent of Stones River Basin.l' Project was selected for construction under general authorizatiOl for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act, and additionl authorization in 1946 River and Harbor Act. Estimated cost Of project, including the one-unit power installation, is $48,800,000 (July 1966). Local cooperation. Recreation development subject to certai, conditions of non-Federal cost-sharing under Federal Water ProJy ect Recreation Act of 1965. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations cof" tinued under contract for construction of dam and powerhouse substructure, and under supply contracts for draft tube gates; id take gate and hoist machinery; intake trashracks, bulkhead and miscellaneous parts. Contracts were initiated for reservoir rilU treatment, cemetery relocations, and supply of 42,700-hp turbine and 31,111-kva generator. Work was also prosecuted under cost reimbursable contracts for relocation, rearrangement, and altera tion Wilson County roads and pipeline facilities of TexS Eastern Transmission Corp., and initiated under a number.o cost-reimbursable contracts awarded during year for relocation of the following: Lavergne Telephone Co. lines; Rutherford County roads; Metropolitan Government, Nashville and Davidson County, roads and powerlines; Middle Tennessee Electric MeO' bership Corp. powerlines; and Columbia Gulf Transmission Co. pipeline facilities. In addition, a memorandum of understandig was issued for relocation of affected transmission lines of the Tennessee Valley Authority. Preparation and issuance of plane"S and specifications for work contracted and definite design studies on other project features were accomplished by hired labor' Lands acquired for project purposes totaled 17,829 acres. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under contract for da and powerhouse substructure, initiated in June 1963, is about 5 percent complete. Contracts for reservoir rim treatment an MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-NASHVILLE, TENN., DIST. 959 cemetery relocations are 72 and 90 percent complete, respectively. SUpply contracts were brought to following stages of completion: raft tube gates, 100 percent; intake gate, 95 percent; gate hoist lachinery, 98 percent; intake trashracks, bulkhead, and related Parts, 100 percent; and turbine, 22 percent. Status of work com- enced under various relocation contracts follows: Wilson CoUnty roads, 31 percent complete; Texas Eastern Transmission SPipelines, 2 percent; Lavergne Telephone Co. lines, 35 per- cet; Rutherford County roads, 10 percent; Middle Tennessee GuQlectric Membership Corp. powerlines, 1 percent; and Columbia 4cf Transmission Co. pipelines, 1 percent. Total reservoir lands acquired, 27,664 acres (27,481 in fee and 183 in easement) repre- 5set 83 percent of project requirements. Project as a whole is SPercent complete. Cost and financial statement liscal y1 Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work.- ropriated.......... $10,000$1,080,000 $4,340,000 $11,916,000 $12,534,000 $30,277,435 ...................... 12,818,040 128,234,458 896,540 4,023,35110,099,092 addition, surplus property valued at $1,300 transferred to project without reimbursement. 17. LAKE CUMBERLAND (WOLF CREEK DAM), OHIO RIVER BASIN, KY. 46Location. Wolf Creek Dam is on Cumberland River at mile 60.9 (above mouth) in Russell County, Ky., about 10 miles Sothwest of Jamestown and 12 miles north of Albany, Ky. Lake tmberland extends 101 miles up main stream, 48 miles up South I0k of Cumberland River, in Russell, Clinton, Wayne, Pulaski, 4reary, Laurel, and Whitley Counties, Ky. ty Xtsting project. A combination earth and concrete gravity- pe dam, hydroelectric powerplant, and reservoir for primary Durposes of flood control and power production, with a permanent Poo for public-use and conservation purposes. See page 1094 of 1962 Annual Report for project details. Estimated cost of project 1 $79,599,400 (July 1966). fuLocal cooperation. None required on completed project; Utre recreation development subject to certain conditions of t110Federal cost-sharing under Federal Water Project Recrea- 0'Act of 1965. I0 Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- ca'uction of recreational facilities by hired labor and communi- , ion tower under contract. Operation and maintenance: Dam o a Operated and structures and appurtenances maintained as a Operation of powerplant was continuous except for 1Uired. .81al interruptions and necessary shutdowns for inspection and 0"0ltenance purposes. Total net energy generated (449,585,- ter' kW-hr.) was made available through Department of the In- a~rlor to Tennessee Valley Authority for distribution. Benefits 0~l.butable to reservoir effect in reduction of floodflows on lower ,o10 ner and Mississippi reservoir Rivers program management estimatedinvolved as $541,900. Activities shoreline sanita- 960 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tion, malaria control, land management, and maintenance of pub- lic-use facilities. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project commenced August 1941 and was completed for full beneficial use August 1952. For chronology of construction and major items of work per- formed see page 1095 of 1962 Annual Report. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work:63 Appropriated.......... ..........$102,419 -$1,479 $175,000 $75,000 1$79434 37 Cost........................... 71,241 29,700 30,662 217,162 1 279:432 Maintenance: 35 77,138 Appropriated.......... $398,500 532,700 476,548 483,700 558,100 35 7 14 Cost..................397,190 463,165 538,248 477,226 552,975 45 1 Includes $96,920 public works acceleration funds.t Includes $96,920 public works acceleration funds. In addition, surplus property valued $50,838 transferred to project without reimbursement. Includes $82,048 public works acceleration funds. Includes $82,048 public works acceleration funds. In addition, surplus property valued t $36,350 transferred from project without reimbursement. 18. LAUREL RIVER RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is at mile 2.3 on Laurel River, a tributary of Cumberland River, in south-central Kentucky. The two streams meet about 9 miles below Cumberland Falls, a prominen physiographic feature at head of Lake Cumberland which is formed by Wolf Creek Dam. Reservoir will extend 19.2 miles uP" stream to site of Corbin, Ky., water-supply dam and lie withil Laurel and Whitley Counties..h Existing project. Project approved in general accordance with recommendations of House Document 413, 86th Congress, by 196 Flood Control Act, as amended by Public Law 88-253, W35 designed for purposes of flood control, power, and recreatiol as an integral unit of a coordinated plan for develoP" ment of water resources of Cumberland River Basin. With the view of a net gain in power potential on a system basis, the pl13 of improvement incorporated appropriate flood control storage 1il the proposed project and corresponding adjustment in operatio 5 of Lake Cumberland (Wolf Creek Dam) for flood control all power, which in effect constituted a transfer of reservoir capacity without entailing a change in flood control benefits. Furthe detailed study giving full consideration to power capabilities anC marketing arrangements indicated the advantage of maintaini l present storage allocation at Wolf Creek and use of all available storage capacity of Laurel River Reservoir for power. As modi" fled within discretionary authority of the Chief of Engineers, the project is now under construction in primary interestsO power production and recreation, at an estimated cost of $24,500, 000 (July 1966). Dam will be rockfill type, about 1, 0 feet long and about 282 feet above streambed. An uncontrolled spillway will be in a saddle on left bank about 400 feet from d , consisting of an uncontrolled rock cut 750 feet long, dischargi.g into an unlined lateral channel which will direct flows back ifto GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-NASHIVILLE, TENN., DISTRICT 961 Main stream some distance below project site. A powerhouse of Conventional indoor-type, with an installation of 61,000 kilowatts " a single unit, is to be directly at downstream toe of dam. At op of power pool, spillway crest at elevation 1018.5 above mean Sea level, reservoir will cover 6,060 acres. It will provide a total Storage capacity of 435,600 acre-feet below elevation 1018.5, in- lUding active storage of 185,000 acre-feet within a drawdown range of 36.5 feet allocated for power production, and leaving a Pool of at least 250,600 acre-feet at elevation 982, covering an area tof 4,200 acres, available at all times for public use and conserva- on p urposes. Local cooperation. None required. r Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of igl t bank access road to damsite was completed and work Titiated under contract for construction of diversion and power tunnels. Preparation of required plans and specifications was acconplished by hired labor, in addition to definite design studies on other project features. Real estate activities were largely Ofined to preliminary work; 127 acres acquired. Forest Serv- e program for removal of merchantable timber from reservoir area continued. bCondition at end of fiscal year. Work under contract for right bak access road, initiated in December 1964, was completed in Agust 1965. Contract for construction of diversion and power tunels is 5 percent complete. Lands acquired for project Purpoe s total 142 acres (127 in fee and 15 in easement). Proj- ect as a whole is about 7 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Peal Total to . Year 162 1 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 "evw ork:- PPropriated.......... $200,000 . " . .. $653,000 $300,000 $1,400,000 $2,553,000 150,086 .................. 60,864 $125,043 579,820 684,171 11,600,884 -cludes surplus property valued at $296 transferred to project without reimbursement. 19. OTHER AUTHORIZED MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS INCLUDING POWER For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report see Annual Name of project Report Construction Operationand I I maintenance for- eltkenYDam and Lake Barkley, Ky. and Tenn.l.................. $1373205,413 203,0l $983,718 0heat' ma, Ky.1 4 1 ..... . .' ....... ....... Cr lock and dam,Tenn. 3................................. 30,384,083 4,259,604 Ol , ull lock and dam, Tenn.]............................. 18,438,655 rl o ck and dam, Tenn. 3................ ...... .... ......... 49 203,901 landsReservoir, Ohio River Basin, Tenn. 4 ....................... 1111,855 4,998,270 ... . . . . . . 1 etailsgiven under "Cumberland River, Tenn. a Engineering and design. and Ky." r frestudy. pletedfor b erred beneficial use. 20. SURVEYS Fiscal year costs were $67,212, of which $60,504 was for flood 962 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 control studies and $6,708 for coordination with Soil ConserV11a tion Service on review of watershed studies. 21. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Fiscal year costs were $15,564 for flood plain studies. Date Federal Location Requesting agency complete cost Carthage, Tenn............................City of Carthage, Tenn....... . ."" " $14,05 Clarksville, Tenn.. .. ....................... City of Clarksville, Tenn.. ..... July1964 . 174 Murfreesboro, Tenn......... City of Murfreesboro, Tenn. .............. ....... ... ....... 1 Cost to June 80, 1966. 22. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Fiscal year costs were $3,498 for miscellaneous hydrologic stud ies involving collection and processing of streamflow and rainfall data. LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT * This district comprises a portion of southwestern Ohio, west central Kentucky, a small portion of north central Tennessee, Cndiana except northern part, and southeastern Illinois except Ohirovr-ounds-Mound City area, all included in drainage basin of blo River and its tributaries (exclusive of Tennessee and Cum- uerland Rivers) from mile 438 (below Pittsburgh) immediately Upstream from Foster, Ky., to mouth. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Flood Control-Continued 1. Construction of locks and 30. Levee unit No. 5, Wabash dams, Ohio River ...... 963 River, Ind............ 986 2. Green and Barren Rivers, 31. Lincoln Reservoir, Ill ..... 987 Ky* .................. 964 32. Mansfield Reservoir, Ind. 987 3. Kentucky River, Ky. ..... . 4. 966 33. Mississinewa Reservoir, Ohio River, open-channel Ind ................. 988 Work ................. 968 34. Monroe Reservoir, Ind .... 989 5. Other authorized naviga- 35. Mt. Carmel, Ill. . ...... 990 tion projects ......... 968 36. Nolin River Reservoir, Ky. 991 6. avigation work under spe- 37. Ohio River Basin (Louis- cial authorization ...... 969 ville Dist.) .......... 992 38. Orleans, Ind............ 997 Flood Control 39. Patoka Reservoir, Ind. ... 997 7. Barren River Reservoir, 40. Red River Reservoir, Ky. 998 y. e 41. Rochester and McCleary's 8. ]Big Pine"i eservoir,'Ind.. 9. Booneville Reservoir, Ky.. Bluff levee, Ill......... 998 970 42. Rough River Reservoir and 10. Brookville channel improvement, 11. Reservoir, Ind. 971 Buck Creek Reservoir, Ky. .................. 999 Salamonie Reservoir, Ind. 1000 12. Ohio ................. 972 43. Buckhorn Reservoir, Ky.. 13. Caesar Creek Reservoir, 972 44. Saline River and tribu- taries, Ill........... 1001 Oid . . ............. 45. Sturgis, Ky............. 1002 14. 973 CaglesjMil 1Reservoir, 46. Town Creek at Harrods- In ........... . .. . burg, Ky............ 1002 15. 974 16. Carr Fork Reservoir, Iy.". 975 47. Tri-Pond levee, Wabash River, Ill. ........... 1003 17, Cave Run Reservoir, Ky.. 976 18. Clifty Creek Reservoir, Ind. 976 48. West Fork of Mill Creek Eagle Creek Reservoir, Reservoir, Ohio ...... 1004 19. EastKy* **............ 977 49. West Terre Haute, Ind... 1005 Fort Reservoir, Ohio 978 50. Inspection of completed 20. 21. England Pond levee, Ill. . . Evansville, Ind......... 978 flood control projects .. 1005 22. Frankfort, Ky........... 979 51. Other authorized flood con- 23. Greenfield Bayou 980 trol projects ......... 1007 1e v e e, 52. Flood control work under Ind................. 24. Green . 980 special authorization .. 1008 River Reservoir, Ky. 981 25. 11untington Reservoir, Ind. 26. Indianapolis, Ind......... 982 General Investigations 27., Island levee, 983 53. Surveys .............. 1009 Ind ...... 984 54. Collection and study of 28. Lafayette Reservoir, Ind.. 984 basic data ........... 1009 29. Lebanon Junction, Ky. ... 985 55. Research and development 1009 1. CONSTRUCTION OF LOCKS AND DAMS, OHIO RIVER or report on this improvement see this heading under Ohio liver. 964 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 2. GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY. Location. Green River rises in Casey County, Ky., flows north- westerly 370 miles, and empties into Ohio River about 8 miles above Evansville, Ind. Barren River rises in Monroe CountY, Ky., flows northwesterly 130 miles, and empties into Green River one-half mile above lock 4 and 149.5 miles above mouth of Green River. Existing project. Six locks and dams on Green River and one on Barren River to give, with channel work in pools of damS, a navigable depth of 9 feet and width of 200 feet from Ohio River to mile 103 Green River, 3.2 miles upstream from Paradise, Ky.; a navigable depth of 5.5 feet from mile 103 Green River to Mar' moth Cave, Ky., mile 197.8 Green River, and from mouth of Barren River mile 149.5 Green River, to Bowling Green, KY* mile 30.1 Barren River. Principaldata concerning locks and dams Location Greatest Elevation Depth Depthr - -length of on lower on upPer Width of of Lift at normal miter miter Miles lock lock normal pool eill at sill a Lock . Nearest from chamber available pool above normal nor and town mouth of (feet) for full (feet) mean pool 01 dam river width sea level level (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) GREEN RIVER 12.1 New I Scottsville, Ky..... 9.1 84.0 600.0 111.8 349.1 11.3 1,0 New 2 0.3 miles below Calhoun, 63.1 84.0 600.0 14.3 363.4 11.7 Ky. 7.3 3 0.3 mile below Rochester, 108.5 35.8 137.5 17.0 380.4 5.6 Ky. 7.1 4 Woodbury, Ky.......... 149.0 35.8 138.0 16.4 396.8 6.5 12.0 5 0.3 mile below Glenmore, 10168.1 56.0 360.0 15.2 412.0 9.3 Ky.. 6 2.8 mile above Browns. 10181.7 36.0 145.0 9.2 421.2 8.8 8 ville, Ky. BARREN RIVER 1.O 1 0.3 mile above Green- 215.0 56.0 360.0 15.2 412.0 9.3 castle, Ky. Lock and Character of Type of Type of Year Cost of lock dam foundation dam construction completed and dai GREEN RIVER 8 New 1 Shale and coal.... Fixed........ Wood crib, concrete cap.... 31956 4 459,088 SNew 2 Shale..................do..... . Concrete masonry............ 51956 4, 7 77 3 Rock.................do....... Wood crib................. 1833-36 121 4 ..... do ........... d.....do......... do ....................... 1839 125,718 5 Piles and rock ..... . de ...... Concrete masonry............. 1934 7102088 6 Gravel...............do....... Wood crib, concrete cap........ 1905 168,415 BARREN RIVER I Gravel................do........do......................... 1841 871,565 Piles in gravel................................................ 1934 I At normal pool dam 48, Ohio River. Elev. 837.3 Green River datum (Elev. 838.0 Ohio River datum). 2 Distance from mouth of Green River is 164.5 miles. SNew lock 1, placed in operation May 25, 1956, old dam 1, completed 1835-40, still in use SIncludes $179,110 cost of old lock and dam 1. New lock and dam 2, placed in operation June 18, 1956. e Does nriot include $295,696 cost of old lock and dam 2. 7 Does not include $179,434 cost of old lock and dam 5. SWith movable A-frame crest 3 feet high. * Includes $729,269 for new large lock completed in 1934. o Operation discontinued Aug. 1, 1951. Fluctuations in stage vary considerably at different locks. At lock 3, Green River, ordinary high stages are from 12 to 15 feet RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 965 above pool level, and at lock 1, Barren River, from 7 to 10 feet above pool. Maximum stages of record are 34 feet above normal ol stage at lock 3, Green River, and 29 feet at lock 1, Barren iver, obtained during floods of 1937 and 1913, respectively. Existing project was authorized by the following : Acts Documents and reports Work authorized -I Aug. 11i,1888 Purchase of the original improvements............. H. Ex. Doe. 111, 49th Cong., 2d sess. r.3.18931 Annual Report 1887, p. 1903. Construction of lock 2, Green River...................... Annual Report, 1891, p. 2439. Uly13,1892 Construction of lock 5, Green River... ............. rly13, 1902 r. 3,19054 Construction of lock 6, Green River............ Appropriated $5,000 for continuing improvement of Green .. ... Annual Report, 1891, p. 2478. River above mouth of Big Barren River, with provision "That the Secretary of War may, in his discretion, expend such portion of saidnmount asmvaybenecessary for removal Mar. 3 90 9 of snags in Noin River.' 3, jUly 9 Construct new lock 1 and new lock and dam 2, Green River. S. Doe. 82, 83d Cong., 2d sess. onstruct new locks at dam 5, Green River, and dam 1, Bar- C9304 Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. ren River; modification of dam 5, Green River, widen bends 2, 71st Cong., 1st sess., and H. Doe. ue26, 14 in Bear Creek, Ky. 685, 69th Cong., 2d sess. ne 19342 Operation and care of locks and dams with War Department AUg3 0 , 19354 appropriations for rivers and harbors. 3 u. 30, 19354 Improvement of Nolin River ........... . ........ H. Doc. 480, 72d Cong., 2d sess. S1954 Channel enlargement lower 103 miles of Green River, Rev- S. Doe. 82, 83d Cong., 2d sess. ocation of authorities for improvement of Bear Creek and Nolin River. 2 eficieney act. Cerrnanent Appropriations Repeal Act. Creekntains latest published map of the Green, Barren, Rough, and Nolin Rivers, and Bear 4Authorizations for Nolin River and Bear Creek revoked by act of Sept. 3, 1954. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. erminal facilities. Considered adequate for existing com- erce and located as follows: River Mile Purpose Nearest town Green Green ................... ren . . .................. 81.5 Receiving coal..................... South Carrollton, Ky. Green ....................... " 83.25 Loadingcoal........................Do. 85.9 do....... .............. Do. Green ................ 97.7 .....do................... .........Rockport, Ky. arre~i:.reen ... ........... ..... ................... 99.5 105.7 ..... ..... do......................... do........ ................. .... ... Paradise, Ky. Do. 8rrea ' .......... ......... 29.7 Receivinggasoline........ ..... Bowling Green, Ky. ,, ,. ..,. . . . . . . . Do. 29.9 .....do.... ..... Operations and results during fiscal year. Consisted of opera- and maintenance of locks and dams 1 to 3, Green River, .lantenance of lock 4, Green River and lock and dam 1, Barren iver, and removal of shoals, snags, and slides as required to aintain adequate channel for existing traffic between mouth of reen River and dam 4 at mile 149, Green River. Condition at end of fiscal year. Locks and dams 1 and 2, Green River and lock and dam 1, Barren River, were in good . condition Lock and dam 3 and lock 4, Green River were in Dor condition. Dam 4, Green River, failed May 24, 1965, when 120 feet washed out. Breach has later widened, and repairs are eferred pending completion of survey report for navigation on loreen River. Pool of dam 1, Barren River, is maintained for b cal small boat use, but navigation through lock is suspended because of loss of lower pool. Operation of locks 5 and 6, Green 966 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 River, was discontinued August 1951, as they were no longer used by river traffic. Controlling project depth in lower 103 miles of Green River is 9 feet; controlling depth from mile 103 to Bowling Green, Ky. is 5.5 feet. Under permit issued by District Engineer on August 20, 1963, private interests dredged channel of Green River to extend 9-foot depth to coal loading terminal at mile 105.7. Channel of Green River from mouth of Barren River at mile 149.5 to Mammoth Cave, Ky., at mile 197.8, is no longer maintained and is blocked by deactivated locks and dams 5 and 6. Cost and financial statement Total t o Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 08222 Appropriated.................... ......... $13 8Q Cost.................: ........... .......... : ......... 113,8 08:222 Maintenance: Appropriated..........$217,500 $217,459 $251,200 $287,870 $274 500 84 04 051 16:985 Cost.................. 216,207 211,531 251,589 283,235 260,298 28,37 1 Includes $85,000 public works funds. . td 2 Includes $2,000 emergency relief funds, $19,000 "maintenance and operation of lams .ne other improvements of navigable waters" funds, and $3,842,667 expended from 1888 to Jun 30, 1936, on operating and care of works of improvement under provisions of permanent in definite appropriation for such purposes. 3. KENTUCKY RIVER, KY. Location. Formed by confluence of its North and Middle Fork5 about 4 miles east of Beattyville in east central Kentucky, (South Fork joining the main stream at that place), flows northwesterly and empties into Ohio River at Carrollton, Ky., mile 545.8 below Pittsburgh, Pa. (See Geological Survey Chart for State of Ken- tucky; scale 1: 500,000.) Existing project. Provides for 14 locks and fixed dams to give, in connection with improvement of Ohio River, slack water navlI gation of 6 feet minimum depth from Ohio River to points on the three forks a short distance above Beattyville, Ky. Length Of 6-foot-depth project on main system of Kentucky River is 258.6 miles to confluence of Middle and North Forks. Cost of completed new work is $4,176,749. River frequently rises to 35 feet *igh or more. Extreme height at lock 1 due to flood backwater front Ohio River is 60.3 feet, while extreme floods reach height of 47.6 feet at lock 4, and 35.5 feet at lock 14. At some intermediate locks extreme height of floods exceeds 40 feet. All flood heightS refer to upper pool gages. Existing project was adopted by 1879 River and Harbor Act (H. Ex. Doc. 47, 45th Cong., 3d sesS* and Annual Report, 1879, p. 1398). Operation and care o locks and dams were included in project July 1, 1935, under prO- visions of Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act of June 26, 1934. Licenses. Federal Power Commission license No. 539, to Kentucky Utilities Co., at dam 7, Kentucky River. Annual charge, $4,708; total collections through fiscal year 1966, $173,569 Terminal facilities. Facilities for bulk commodities and gaso- line are at various points and considered adequate for existing traffic. List appears on page 1110, Annual Report for 1962. Locks and dams, Kentucky River, Ky. H Lock z Dam Greatest Elevation Foundation Year Cost available of normal Depth on completed Nearest town Miles from Clear width length Lift of lock pool above lower mouth (feet) (full width (feet) mean miter sill of lock) sea level (feet) (feet) (feet) 0 11 3.8 miles above Carrolton, Ky ......... 4.0 38 145 68.2 430.0 14.8 Rock and clay.... 21839 12 Lockport, Ky........................ 31.0 38 145 13.9 443.9 6.1 Rock............ 21839 t-{ 13 Gest,Ky............................. 42.0 38 145 13.2 457.1 6.5 .... do........... 21844 381,350,385 14 1 mile below Frankfort, Ky............. 65.0 38 145 13.2 470.3 6.3 ....do........... 21844 0 15 2.8 miles below Tyrone, Ky............. 82.2 38 145 15.0 485.3 6.4 ..... do........... 21844 16 21.6 miles below High Bridge, Ky ....... 96.2 52 147 14.0 499.3 6.4 Rock and piles.... 1894 314,847 17 0.8 miles below High Bridge, Ky........ 117.0 52 147 15.3 514.6 6.8 Rock............ .1897 290,788 Uc 18 4.7 miles above Camp Nelson, Ky....... 139.9 52 146 18.7 533.6 6.0 ..... do........... 1900 275,463 49 Valley View, Ky....................... 157.5 52 148 17.3 550.6 6.6 do........... 1907 237,646 410 1 mile below Ford, Ky.................. 176.4 52 148 17.0 567.6 6.0 .do........ ... 1907 221,500 411 17.2 miles below Irvine, Ky............. 201 0 52 148 18.0 585.6 6.0 ..... do........... 1906 296,593 512 Ravenna, Ky.......................... 220.0 52 148 17.0 602.6 6.0 ..... do.......... 1910 425,633 2.2 miles below Willow, Ky............. Heidelberg, Ky....................... 239.9 249.0 18.0 17.0 620.6 637.6 6.0 6.0 . do........... ..... do...........1917 1915 461,476 r 392,902 1 Fixed dam, crib construction, concrete cap. 5 Fixed dam, concrete construction, wooden crest. SReconstruction completed by United States in 1882. e At normal pool dam 41 Ohio River elev. 421.8 Kentucky River datum (Elev, SBuilt by State of Kentucky. Cost is given for repairs by United States only. 420 Ohio River datum). M-1 SFixed dam, concrete construction. y H 968 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: Operation and maintenance of the 14 locks and dams, and removal of shoals, snags, and slides as required to maintain an adequate channel for existing traffic between mouth of river and BeattY" ville, Ky. in pool of dam No. 14. Rehabilitation: Completed minor structural rehabilitation work, details in Annual Reports for 1963, 1964, and 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was coM' pleted in 1917. Work accomplished was rehabilitation of the five old State locks and dams and construction of new locks and dams 6 to 14, inclusive. Canalization system of Kentucky River is in poor condition. Repairs were made to deteriorated locks anil dams as required to keep locks in operation and maintain pol levels above dams except in extreme dry weather, when some pools fall below normal levels. Channel work was performed aS required to relieve critical hardship conditions for existing river traffic. Controlling navigable depth in section covered by exist' ing project was 6 feet at end of fiscal year. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 749 Appropriated .......... ............ ............ ............ ........................ $4,176 749 Cost .................................................................. 4, i76:4 Maintenance: 115,405,626 Appropriated.......... $437,400 $489,894 $523,200 $465,767 $685,400 115,405,27 Cost................. 437,804 467,454 543,674 467,261 490,385 115,203,56 Rehabilitation: Appropriated......... ............ 350,000 147,206 72,958 -13,208 556,96 Coat.............. ............ 127,194 315,282 113,386 1,094 556,96 1Includes $203,127 allotted in prior years from appropriation "Maintenance and operati n of dams and other improvements of navigable waters" and $6,405,372 expended betWee July 5, 1885, and June 30, 1937, on operation and care of works of improvement, under pro visions of permanent indefinite appropriation for such purposes. 4. OHIO RIVER, OPEN-CHANNEL WORK For report on this improvement see this heading under Ohio River. 5. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 Name of project report fullAnnual see - Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Licking River, Ky......... 2 ........................... 1901 $13,045 ....... . Rough River, Ky. 3...19......... 1952 105,500 iii $1 Tradewater River, Ky.1 3....................... .... ... 1958 18,568 33:33 White River, Ind.1 3........ ................. 1909 119,312 .............. 2No commerce reported. SDisposal of Federally owned property authorized by Secretary of Army Sept. 1, 1959, Pur suant to authorization in Public Law 996, 84th Cong. (70 Stat. 1062). 8 Completed. FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 969 6. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Fiscal year costs were $1,372. Preparation of detailed project report for extension of 9-foot channel on Green River, Ky., is suspended pending completion of survey report for navigation n that river. Preparation of detailed project report for small oat harbor at Cairo, Ill., was initiated. 7. BARREN RIVER RESERVOIR,KY. Location. Dam is on Barren River, 79.5 miles above its con- tuence with Green River and 10 miles northeast of Scottsville, Y. At flood control pool, reservoir extends upstream about 40 railes in Barren and Allen Counties, Ky. xisting project. A reservoir for flood control and allied pur- Poses. Dam is rolled earth and rock fill, 146 feet high and 3,970 feet long, with gate-controlled outlet works and uncontrolled open-cut spillway. Total storage capacity is 815,200 acre-feet 768,600 for flood control and 681 for water supply storage). r further details see page 1125 of Annual Report for 1962. stiniated cost of new work (1966) is $24,857,000. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1938. Local cooperation. None required by authorizing act. Under Provision of Water Supply Act of 1958, contract with city of Glasgow for water supply storage was approved by Secretary of Arnly on October 4, 1965. Terms require city to pay $23,433, Which is project cost allocated to water storage plus capitalized PrePayment of proportionate share of operation, maintenance, andmajor replacement costs. St Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- ruction of initial public-use facilities and of one access road was completed; costs for year were $31,134 for road and $41,972 for Public at O use facilities. Dwellings, office, and shop were completed a.t ost of $160,056 for year. Land acquisition continued. Salntenance: Routine maintenance was performed. Operation 9 od control during 1966 flood season prevented damages of $311t300. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started in March 0 and project is essentially complete. Reservoir was com- leted October 1964 though placed in operation in March 1964. and acquisition is complete except for some mineral interests and tracts in condemnation. Part of reservoir boundary re- mains to be monumented. _Cost and financial statement FiscalTotal 1963 cal Year...1962 1964 1965 1966 June 30, to New ork. c tropriated .........$4,495,000 $10,405,000 $6,017,000 Cntnance*4194,862 $517,000 $42,800 $24,837,500 Maintenance: .. 10,272,702 5,990,985 720,848 305,435 24,785,453 24,785,4 A)PPtropriated.......... ....... .... ............ 14,900 110,467 138,800 264,167 ost 10,688 101,628 141,685 254,001 970 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 8. BIG PINE RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is in Warren County, Ind., 2.5 miles above mouth of Big Pine Creek, a tributary of Wabash River, and is about 2 miles northwest of Attica and 21 miles southwesterly fromn Lafayette, Ind. Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. Dam will be concrete and earthfill, 132 feet high and 4,620 feet long, with gate-controlled concrete gravity spillwY and gated sluices. Total storage capacity will be 210,500 acre-feet of which 201,500 feet will be for flood control (winter months). Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $17,834,000, of which $17 million is Federal cost and $834,000 non-Federal contribution. Propect was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests must agree to administer project land and water areas for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; pay, contribute in kind, or repay with interest (which may be through user fees) one-half of separable costs allocated to recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; bear all costs of operation, maintenance, and replacement of recreation and fish and wildlife lands and facilities. Local interests must also agree to prevent encroachments on channel between dam and mouth of Big Pine Creek. State of Indiana has indicated intent to fulfill requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. No funds for proJ* ect were appropriated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning not started. 9. BOONEVILLE RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is on South Fork of Kentucky River, 16.86 miles above confluence with and 271.6 miles above mouth of Ken- tucky River. Reservoir will be in Clay and Owsley Counties, Ky., about 130 air miles southeast of Louisville. Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and allied pur- poses. Dam will be earthfill, 165 feet high and 1,200 feet long, with gate-controlled outlet works and gated open-cut spillwaY. Total storage capacity will be 317,000 acre-feet, of which 301,030 acre-feet will be for flood control. Estimated (1966) Federal cost of new work is $25 million. Project was authorized bY Flood Control Acts of June 28, 1938, and December 22, 1944. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. PreconstructiOn engineering and design studies continued. Surveying and maP ping of reservoir area was completed. Work continued on preparation of design memorandums for reservoir and spillwaY capacities and for general design. Condition at end of fiscal year. Mapping is complete. Design memorandum for reservoir and spillway capacities is 98 percent complete. General design memorandum is 50 percent complete. FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 971 Cost and financial statement "$Rp Ya Total to year............... Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: PPropriated...................... ............ $179,000 $153,000 $332,000 F . . . . ...... . .[[ $ 7 0 I $153-000 I 32 00 ACost.. ***iae............. ..... . 115,101 159,609 274,710 10. BROOKVILLE RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is on East Fork of Whitewater River, 2.4 Miles above confluence with West Fork, and about 11/2 miles north of Brookville, Ind. Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and allied pur- Poses. Dam will be earthfill, 179 feet high and 2,850 feet long, with gate-controlled outlet works, and uncontrolled open spillway. Total storage capacity will be 359,600 acre-feet (214,700 for flood control, 89,300 for water supply, and 35,500 for conserva- tion). A minimum pool of 20,100 acre-feet will be maintained. Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $30,841,000, of which $24,200,000 is Federal cost and $6,641,000 is non-Federal con- tribution for water supply storage. Project was authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act. t Local cooperation. None required by authorizing act. Con- ract with State of Indiana for water supply storage under provi- oSions of Water Supply Act of 1958 was approved by Secretary of Army August 5, 1965. Under terms of contract State will pay initial costs allocated to water supply feature of project plus capitalized prepayment of proportionate share of operation and m1aintenance costs. Operations and results during fiscal year. Land for initial construction area was acquired and construction of outlet works Was started November 1965. Outlet works were advanced to 22 Percent complete, at cost of $490,000. Land acquisition was ad- vanced to 22 percent of completion. Costs for year were $1,201,- 941. Engineering and design studies continued. Preliminary Master land use plan was approved, as were design memorandum for relocation of State highways and two memorandums for real estate required. Design memorandums for dam and spillway, relocation of utilities, and relocation of county roads were com- Pleted. at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began Condition1965. I Ovember Outlet works are 22 percent complete. Design Miemorandums for major elements of project are approved or complete. Land acquisition is 23 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 972 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: $..00 Contributed............ . ................................... $590700 567,435 Cost .............. .. .... .................................... 567:435 11. BUCK CREEK RESERVOIR, 1OHIO Location. Damsite is just east of Springfield, Clark County, Ohio, at mile 7.3 of Buck Creek, a tributary of Mad River. . Existing project. Plan provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. It includes an earthfill dam, 6,620 feet long and 72 feet high, with gated outlet works and uncontrolled spillway. Total storage capacity of reservoir will be 63,700 acre-feet (32,900 for flood control and 20,800 for water quality control). Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $13,100,000. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests must provide assurances against detrimental channel encroachment below dam to mouth of Buck Creek. Assurances from city of Springfield, Springfield Conservancy District, and Clark County, Ohio, were accepted March 5, 1964. Operations and results during fiscal year. Land acquisitiol was started and brought to 40 percent completion at cost Of $815,895. Design memorandum for embankment, spillway, and outlet works was approved, as were supplements to general de- sign memorandum (for water quality control storage) and memorandum for relocation of New York Central Railroad. Pre' liminary master land use plan, memorandum for real estate re- quired, and plans and specifications for outlet works were completed. Engineering and design studies continued for reloca- tion work and public-use facilities. Condition at end of fiscal year. Real estate acquisition is 40 percent complete. In addition to approved and completed design memorandums noted above, memorandums are approved for site selection, general design, concrete aggregates and riprap, reser- voir and spillway capacities, real estate for construction area, and relocation of New York Central Railroad. Plans and specifica" tions are complete for outlet works, and 55 percent complete for dam and spillway. Construction has not started. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiacal year................ 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated..................... $73,000 $150,000 $680,000 $1,045,000 $1,948000 Cost........................... 44,708 99,432 153,524 915,749 1,213,413 12. BUCKHIORN RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Dam is on Middle Fork of Kentucky River, 43.4 miles above mouth, and 0.5 mile upstream from Buckhorn, Perry FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 973 County, Ky. Reservoir extends upstream about 34 miles and lies ia Leslie and Perry Counties, Ky. IExisting project. A reservoir for flood control and recreation. Dam is earth and rockfill type, with gate controlled outlet works. Total storage capacity is 168,000 acre-feet, of which 157,700 acre- feet is for flood control. For further details, see page 1120 of Alnual Report for 1962. Estimated cost of new work (1965) ..is 1,600 000. Existing project was authorized by general author- lzation for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. f Local cooperation. Department of Parks of Commonwealth o entucky has undertaken management of lands and recrea- tonal facilities in accordance with license granted by Secretary of the Army on June 29, 1962. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Water SUpply system and 23 campsites were constructed at one public access area. Campsites were transferred to Kentucky Depart- tIent of Parks for operation and maintenance. Land acquisition work continued. Maintenance: Routine maintenance was per- formed. Operation for flood control during 1966 flood season Drevented damages estimated at $134,900. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began September 1956 and reservoir was placed in operation in August 1960. Con- Struction is complete, and land acquisition is complete except for Sme mineral interests and tracts in condemnation. Cost and financial statement NiecalYear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work. ropriatod.......... ,Cost..,, . $140,000 $121,408 $71,000 -$14,000 1$11,402,408 1Matenan S......... $209,006 274,711 165,983 16,087 56,684 211,397,848 Al)rop riated.......... 46,485 48,719 119,800 82,650 124,200 470,464 Cost.. 44,327 47,913 114,629 78,258 127,442 460,765 Includes $61,451 public works acceleration, executive 1963 funds, and $58,000 Code 710 funds. lneludes $61,451 public works acceleration funds and $55,463 Code 710 funds. 13. CAESAR CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO Location. Damsite is on Caesar Creek, about 3.0 miles above a'ts confluence with Little Miami River, in Warren County, Ohio, about 3.5 miles southeast of Waynesville, Ohio, and 10.5 miles t1ortheast of Lebanon, Ohio. Reservoir will be in Warren, Clin- ton, and Greene Counties, Ohio. Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for ood control and allied purposes. It includes an earthfill dam,a dike, outlet works and an uncontrolled saddle spillway. Total Storage capacity of reservoir will be 167,700 acre-feet, of which 152,860 acre-feet would be reserved for flood control storage. tstimated cost of new work (1966) is $23,300,000. Existing roJect was authorized by general authorization for Ohio River asin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. None required. 974 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructionl engineering and design studies continued. Surveying and maP- ping were completed. Design memorandums for reservoir and spillway capacities and for general design were completed. Needs for inclusion of storage for water quality and water suP- ply were studied. Condition at end of fiscal year. Economic report is approved, and mapping is complete. Design memorandums for reservoir and spillway capacities and general design are complete. Pre- liminary master land use plan is 40 percent complete, desiP memorandum for concrete aggregates and riprap is 99 percent complete, memorandum for outlet works is 25 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: 50 Appropriated.......... $12,000 $1,000 $71,500 $150.000 $156,000 $390 '3 Cost............... .. 10,567 1,950 45,412 137,712 77,112 272,763 14. CAGLES MILL RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Dam is on Mill Creek, 2.8 miles above its confluence with Eel River, in Putnam County, Ind., and about 25 miles east of Terre Haute, Ind. Reservoir extends upstream about 11 miles and is in Putnam and Owen Counties, Ind. Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and recreation. Dam is earth and rockfill embankment. Total storage capacitY is 228,100 acre-feet, of which 201,000 acre-feet are for flood con' trol. For details see Annual Report for 1962, page 1136. Esti" mated cost of new work is $4,107,767. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. None required. State of Indiana has un- dertaken development and management of recreation facilities for use of the public in reservoir area in accordance with license granted by Secretary of the Army on January 17, 1952. Operations and results during fiscal year. Routine operations and maintenance were performed. Project was operated for flood control during 1966 flood season, and prevented damages estimated at $47,200. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was started in July 1948 iand completed in fiscal year 1953. FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 975 Cost and financial statement Fiscal Year. Total to *1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work; Appropri ated........... .......... $4,107,767 Cost,.., 4,107,767 Maintenance: cPpropri ated.......... $47,160 $48,400 $50,900 $56,386 $74,200 553,749 Co ....* 50,263 58,022 59,650 533,701 52,379 43,218 15. CARR FORK RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is 8.8 miles above mouth of Carr Fork, a tributary of North Fork of Kentucky River, 16 miles upstream rorm Hazard, Ky. LExisting project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood With control and allied purposes. Dam will be rock and earth fill impervious core, 720 feet long and 130 feet high, with un- controlled open cut spillway through left abutment. Outlet works Vill have two control gates and 8-foot diameter conduit to stilling basin. Total storage capacity will be 47,700 acre-feet (31,600 for flood control and 4,300 for water quality control). A higher evel seasonal pool for recreation will be provided. Estimated ederal cost of new work (1966) is $21 million. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. VLocal cooperation. None required for reservoir project. Di- i'on of Flood Control and Water Usage of Commonwealth of entucky gave assurance that encroachments on downstream cIannel capacity will be prevented. Operations and results during fiscal year. Storage for water Uality control was allocated in accordance with conclusions of ulibhc Health Service report. Mapping was completed; land ac- uisition was begun and advanced to 9 percent of completion, at st of $504,409. Construction of outlet works was started in January 1966 and brought to 15 percent completion at cost of $211,366. Engineering and design studies continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Land acquisition is 9 per- cent complete and outlet works construction is 15 percent com- Plete. Design memorandums for reservoir and spillway capac- les, general design, concrete aggregates and riprap, outlet Sorks, dam and spillway relocation of State and county roads 4'e approved, as are two real estate design memorandums. enorandums for preliminary master land use plan and for necessary other relocation works are in preparation. Cost and financial statement 976 REPORT OF TIHE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 16. CAVE RUN RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is on Licking River, about 3 miles up* stream from U.S. Highway 60 near Farmers, Ky., and 7 miles southwest of Morehead, Ky. Reservoir will be in Rowan, Bath, Morgan, and Menifee Counties, Ky. Existing project. Plan provides for construction of a reser- voir for flood control and allied purposes. Dam will be rolled earthfill, with gate controlled outlet works and uncontrolled open spillway. Total storage capacity will be 614,100 acre-feet (438,- 500 for flood control and 28,300 for water quality control). Esti mated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $28,900,000. Projeet was authorized by Flood Control Acts of June 22, 1936, and June 28, 1938. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Outlet works were started and advanced to 41 percent of completion at cost o $725,152. Land acquisition was brought to 13 percent comple" tion with costs for year of $435,659. Access road to damsite WaS constructed at cost of $39,185. Mapping of reservoir was corn pleted. Engineering and design and real estate studies con- tinued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Land acquisition is 13 per- cent complete, including land for initial construction area. Out- let works are 41 percent complete. Design memorandums for reservoir and spillway capacities, general design (with supple- ment), dam and spillway, outlet works, preliminary master land use plan, concrete aggregates and riprap, and for relocation O roads are approved. Two real estate memorandums are cP' proved, a third is complete. Memorandum for recreation facill" ties, being prepared in coordination with U.S. Forest Service, is 50 percent complete, memorandum for relocation of utilities is 95 percent complete. Co t7nd i l-tf_ m vn Total tO661 Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: 08 $75,000 Appropriated....................... $215,000$1,370,000 $1,444,200 $3, 981 Cost.. . ...... ............ 60,952 202,495 478,084 1,491,562 2,262, 1 Includes $29,888 for preconstruction engineering and design completed prior to fiscal ye' 1953. 17. CLIFTY CREEK RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is in Bartholomew County, Ind., 18.4 miles above mouth of Clifty Creek, tributary of East Fork of White River, and is 10 miles northeast of Columbus, Ind. Reservoir will be in Bartholomew and Decatur Counties. Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and allied putr poses. Dam will be concrete and earth fill, 88 feet high and 7,000 feet long, with gate-controlled concrete gravity spillwaY and gated sluices. Total storage capacity will be 56,208 acre, feet, of which 48,553 acre-feet will be for flood control (winter months). Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $15,410,000, FLOOD CONTROL-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 977 of which $14,500,000 is Federal cost and $910,000 is non-Federal contribution. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests must agree to administer Project land and water areas for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; pay, contribute in kind, or repay (which may be through user fees) with interest one-half the separable costs al- located to recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; bear all costs of operation, maintenance, and replacement of recreation and fish and wildlife lands and facilities. Local interests must also agree to prevent encroachments on channel below dam on Clifty Creek and East Fork of White River to mouth of Muscata- tuck River. State of Indiana has indicated intent to fulfill re- quirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. No funds Were appropriated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning has lot started. 18. EAGLE CREEK RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is 38.5 miles above mouth of Eagle Creek, tributary of Kentucky River, and about 28 miles north of Frank- fort, Ky. Reservoir will lie in Grant and Owen Counties. Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. Dam will be earth and rock- fill, 128 feet high and 1,650 feet long. Outlet works will be slide gate controlled, and spillway will be uncontrolled open cut. Stor- age capacity will be 207,700 acre-feet of which 193,200 acre-feet ill be for flood control. Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $19,600,000. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962. tLocal cooperation. None required for reservoir project. Ken- tuclky Division of Flood Control and Water Usage gave assurance that downstream channel encroachments will be prevented. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction engineering and design studies continued. Surveying and map- Ding of reservoir area was completed. Design memorandums or reservoir and spillway capacities and for general design were completed. Studies were made to determine need for storage for Water supply and water quality control. Condition at end of fiscal year. Design memorandums for res- ervoir and spillway capacities and for general design are complete. esign memorandum for concrete aggregates and riprap is 70 Percent complete, preliminary master land use plan is 20 percent complete. Construction has not started. Cost and financial statement ieal ................1111 year 5 9Total to S .............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork. Acpopriated.......... ........... ..... $90,000 $152,000 $100,000 $342,000 ost.............47,048 172,329 02,039 311,416 978 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 19. EAST FORK RESERVOIR, OHIO Location. Damsite is on East Fork of Little Miami River between Batavia and Williamsburg, Ohio, about 6.5 miles above Batavia. Entire project lies in Clermont County, Ohio. Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. It includes an earthfill dam, outlet works, an uncontrolled saddle spillway and a dike to close a saddle north of spillway. Total storage capacity of reservoir will be 211,000 acre-feet, of which 190,600 acre-feet will be re- served for flood control storage. Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $26,500,000. Existing project was authorized by gen- eral authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction engineering and design work continued, including materials and foundation investigations, hydrologic and hydraulic studies, de- sign and cost estimates, and public-use facility planning. Studies continued for inclusion of storage for water supply and water quality control as functions of reservoir. Mapping of reservoir area was completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Economic report and desig memorandum for concrete aggregates and stone protection sources are approved. Design memorandums for reservoir and spillway capacities, general design, and outlet works are coM" pleted. Preliminary master land use plan is 99 percent com- plete. Cost and financial statement Total to661 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1984 1965 1966 June 30,1066 New work: Appropriated.......... $12,000 $1,000 $82,500 $148,000 $141,000 $443 3 Cost.................. 9,691 2,815 55,247 155,568 136,501 418 1 Includes $58,571 for preconstruction engineering and design completed before fiscal year 19653. 20. ENGLAND POND LEVEE, ILL. Location. In Lawrence County, Ill., on right banks of Wabash and Embarrass Rivers, immediately north of St. Francisville, Ill. Existing project. Provides for enlargement of 5.8 miles of earth levee and 0.25 mile of railroad fill, and construction of necessary appurtenances. Levee enlargement will begin at Newv York Central Railroad fill near St. Francisville and extend along right banks of Wabash and Embarrass Rivers to Billett Hills. A second short length of levee enlargement will extend from Billett Hills to high ground. Project will protect 4,250 acres of agricultural land against a flood equal to that expected seven times per 100-year period. Estimated total cost of new work (1966) is $970,000 of which $80,000 is non-Federal cost. Project was authorized by 1946 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Assurances of cooperation were ac- FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 979 cepted from England Pond Drainage District on December 30, 1965. Rights-of-way have not been furnished. Operations and results during fiscal year. General design meorandum was completed. is Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum hacoMplete; preparation of construction plans and specifications as not started. Construction has not started. Cost and financial statement Ncal Yea Total to ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 1ew work. APropriated.......... ................... .......... $30,000 $102,348 $132,348 ost ............................ 16,892 43,236 60,128 21. EVANSVILLE, IND. Oocation. In Vanderburgh County, Ind., on right bank of io River 792.2 miles below Pittsburgh, Pa. reaXisting project. Construction of a system of levees and con- rete floodwalls, together with pumping plants for disposal of Rterior drainage, at Evansville. For further details, see Annual eiport for 1962, page 1127. Project will provide protection for y of Evansville, Ind., against Ohio River floods equal to 1937 tfood (maximum of record), with a 3-foot freeboard. Estimated toal cost of new work (1966) is $19,380,000, including non- tederal cost of $1,880,000. Existing project selected for con- 19ruction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 937 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Section 3 of Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Fully complied with for Howell unit eCtion eand ludFbra 116 for Pigeon Creek Knight Township sections. Assurances ection, unit 1, were executed February 11, 1963. I.Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of ligeon Creek section, unit 1, floodwall, begun in June 1964, was completed in October 1965. Costs for fiscal year were $301,822. Construction of Sycamore Street and Ohio Street pumping plants, With related sewer alterations, was started and advanced to 89 Dercent of completion at cost of $899,879. Construction of PDoverline to pumping plants was started and brought to 10 per- cent of completion at cost of $7,500. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction was started in lune 1939, and Knight Township and Howell unit 1 sections, in- C1udig pumping plants, were completed by June 1948 and as- igned to local interests. Installation of air vents and vacuum Driyners at existing pump plants was completed October 1957. onstruction of Pigeon Creek section, unit 1, was started in anuary 1963. Combined floodwall and highway section on Riv- erside Drive between Walnut and Court Streets, is complete; flood Wall from Court Street to 7th Avenue is complete. Pigeon Creek unit 1 pumping plants are 89 percent complete. Further plan- ning for Pigeon Creek unit 2 and IHowell unit 2 sections is post- DOned, pending completion of current flood control survey study of Pigeon Creek. 980 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $100,000 $512,000 $445,000 $660,000$1,200,000 $523 357 Cost................. 26,246 221,410 788,510 616,346 1,310,193 5,458,176 1Includes $11,812 emergency relief funds. 22. FRANKFORT, KY. Location. In Franklin County, central Kentucky, and lies on both banks of Kentucky River, 66 miles above mouth. Existing project. Plan is a portion of authorized project for Frankfort. It provides for 1,370 feet of concrete wall, 2,240 feet of earth levee, three pumping plants, and other necessary apPur- tenances to protect 430 acres of urban and suburban land in the North Frankfort section of city, against maximum flood of record (1937) with 3-foot freeboard. Project was authorized by gen- eral authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated total cost of North Frankfort project (1966) is $2,192,000 of which $172,000 is non-Federal cost for lands and damages, and alterations to utilities. Remainder of project for Frankfort is deferred. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. By resolution of December 3, 1963, Board of Corn- missioners of city of Frankfort indicated intent to fulfill require- ments. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructiol engineering and design studies continued. General design memO- randum and supplement were completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Economic report is approved. Mapping and general design memorandum with supplement are complete. Design memorandum for pumping plants is 25 per- cent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30.1966 New work: 53 Appropriated..... ...... $25,000 -$4,000 $94,053 $77,000 $192 089 Cost ................. 11,716 8,337 51,259 46,778 118, 23. GREENFIELD BAYOU LEVEE, IND. Location. In southern Vigo County, Ind., from mile 188.1 to 200.0 above mouth of Wabash River, on left bank below Terre Haute, Ind. Existing project. Provides for construction, reconstruction, enlargement or setback, of total of 13.2 miles of earth levee, three drainage structures, and necessary road ramps. Levee would protect 11,370 acres of land, including communities of HuttO" and Vigo, from flood equal to that expected on an average of seven times per 100-year period. Estimated total cost of new FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 981 Work (1966) is $2,247,000, of which $187,000 is non-Federal cost or lands and damages, and road and utility relocations. Project Was authorized by 1946 Flood Control Act. 19Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction 11gineering and design studies, including foundations and mate- al investigations, were started, and continued through year. Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum Is35 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Fiscal 'Total to ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work: PPropriated..................... $10,000 .... -$29 $50,000 $59,971 5,539 $4,249 184 36,285 46,256 24. GREEN RIVER RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is 305.7 miles above mouth of Green River iTaylor County, Ky., about 8 miles south of Campbellsville. eservoir will lie in Taylor and Adair Counties. Efxisting project. Provides for construction of reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. Dam will be earth and rock fill, 141 feet high and 2,350 feet long. Outlet works will be slide gate-controlled and spillway open and uncontrolled. Total stor- age capacity will be 723,200 acre-feet (560,600 for flood control and 64,500 for low-flow augmentation). Estimated cost of new Work (1966) is $30,400,000. Existing project was authorized Under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Outlet works were advanced to 99 percent complete at cost for year of $134,125. Construction of dam was undertaken and advanced to 42 percent Of completion, cost was $2,247,309. Land acquisition was rought to 55 percent of completion, with costs of $2,536,871 for Year. Relocation of Kentucky State Highway 551A was begun and brought to 22 percent completion at cost of $155,700. Engi- neering and design work continued for other elements of project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of outlet works, started April 1964 is 99 percent complete. Construction of dam started September 1965 and is 42 percent complete. Land ac- Uisition is 55 percent complete. Relocation works is underway. Seslgn memorandums and construction plans and specifications aire approved for work underway or scheduled for early construc- tion, and well advanced for other elements of project. 982 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 1966 New work: $11536100 Appropriated.......... $104,400 $515,000 $1,300,000 $3,915,000 $5,550,000 $113 236 Cost................. 85732 324188 1,329,026 3,605,757 5,636,886 , 25. HUNTINGTON RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is on Wabash River, about 2 miles from Huntington, Ind., and 411.4 miles above mouth. Reservoir will be in Huntington and Wells Counties, Ind. Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control and recreation. Dam will consist of a rolled earth embankment 4,700 feet long and 89 feet high, a concrete spill- way and outlet section 155 feet long, and a concrete gravitY section 310 feet long. Spillway will be controlled by three gates, and outlet works by nine sluices. Plan also provides for local protection of Markle, Ind. Total storage capacity of reservoir will be 153,100 acre-feet, of which 149,000 acre-feet will be re- served for flood control storage. Estimated project cost for neW work (1966) is $19,798,000, of which $19,600,000 is Federal cost and $198,000 non-Federal contribution. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1958. Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash an amount equal to one percent of project first cost. State of Indio ana assumed this obligation. Operations and results during fiscal year. Dam was advanced to 53 percent of completion at cost of $2,771,736 for year. Land acquisition was brought to 37 percent complete at cost for year of $1,133,145. Markle levee was completed at fiscal year cost of $56,515; construction of Markle pumping plant was started and advanced to 45 percent of completion at cost of $90,102. Re- locations of roads and utilities were brought to 39 percent Of overall completion, at cost for year of $906,361. Engineeringf and design work continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project be- gan in June 1963. Markle diversion channel, relocation of Indiana Highway 3 and Markle levee are complete. Dam is 53 percent complete. Of 205 real estate tracts required in fee, 11 have been acquired, and 43 of the required 288 easements have been acquired. Relocation work is 39 percent complete. Eng- neering and design work, and preparation of construction plans and specifications are well advanced for work scheduled for early construction. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19C6 New work: Appropriated.......... $73,660 $580,000 $2,800,000 $1,750,000 $4,697,000 $10,0490 60 Cost........86,931 277,712 1,327,009 2,227,972 5,219,888 9,272,03 FLOOD CONTROL-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 983 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ......... 192 1963 1964 1965 1966 26. INDIANAPOLIS, IND. Location. In Marion County, Ind., on White River, 232 to 250 miles above the mouth. Existing project. Project is in two parts, Warfleigh and Fall Creek. Fall Creek section I extends from Washington Street to 10thl Street and includes 6,350 feet of channel improvement of White River, 1,180 feet of concrete wall, 2,050 feet of earth levee, 1,530 feet of roadway levee, reconstruction of Michigan Street bridge, and extension of 10th Street bridge. Fall Creek section II includes 1,200 feet of channel improvement of White River above 10th Street, 6,400 feet of channel improvement of Fall Creek from mouth to 16th Street, 12,011 feet of new earth levee and levee enlargements along Fall Creek and White River, and reconstruction of Indiana Ave. bridge over Fall Creek. War- flexgh section comprises channel improvement of White River rom Northwestern Boulevard to Broad Ripple Dam and levee along left bank of White River, reconstruction of Kessler Boule- vard and Westfield Road bridges and raising of Monon Railroad bridge. Project also includes necessary sewer and drainage out- l hanges. Project will protect urban areas in Indianapolis along Fall Creek and White River against a flood equal to that of 1913, the maximum of record. Estimated Federal cost of project (1960) is $11,600,000, estimated non-Federal cost is $2,030,000. Project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of June 22, 1936 and July 24 1946. 1Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies and is fully complied with for Fall Creek section I. Federal project for Indianapolis conforms to Comprehensive flood control plan adopted by local interests after flood of 1913. Local interests accomplished portions of plan be- fore authorization of Federal project and after Federal con- Struction of Fall Creek section I expressed desire to continue with construction of Fall Creek section II, which they later built gen- erally in accordance with the authorized Federal project. Local interests indicated intent to fulfill requirements for War- fleigh section. VOperations and results during fiscal year. Economic study of arfleigh section was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Fall Creek section I is com- Plete. Fall Creek section II was constructed by local interests generally in accordance with project plan. Economic study of arfleigh section is underway. 984 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New work: 63 Appropriated. . ... .......................................... $70,000 $1,929 6 Cost....... ...................................... 740 1866767 ' Excludes $2,889contributed funds expended for new work. 27. ISLAND LEVEE, IND. Location. In Sullivan County, Ind., from 169.4 to 179 miles above mouth of Wabash River, across river from Ilutsonville and York, Ill. Existing project. Provides for construction of 9.3 miles of earth levee, four drainage structures, and related appurtenanceS. Levee will generally parallel left bank of Wabash River fro" mile 179 to 170 and then extend along north bank of Turman Creek to tie in at high ground. Project will protect 5,260 acres o flood plain from floodflow having a frequency of 7 times per 100 years. Estimated total cost of new work (1966) is $1,563,000 of which $93,000 is non-Federal cost for lands, damages, and bridge and utility alterations. Project was authorized by 1946 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Landowners authorized entry for surveying and drilling. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructiol engineering continued, including foundations and materials i- vestigations and design and economic studies. Mapping was completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memoranduan is 99 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Totalto Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work:00 Appropriated...................... ............$50,000 $38,000 $10,000 $9 029 Cost.......................................... 22,949 53,838 11,511 88 28. LAFAYETTE RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is in Tippecanoe County, Ind., 4 miles east of Lafayette, and 7.2 miles above mouth of Wildcat Creek, tributary of Wabash River. Reservoir will also extend into Clinton and Carroll Counties. Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and allied pur- poses. Dam will be earthfill, 3,350 feet long and 116 feet high, with gate controlled outlet works and uncontrolled open-cut spill way. Storage capacity will be 332,550 acre-feet, of which 313,- 320 acre-feet will be for flood control. Estimated (1966) cost of new work is $30,946,000, of which $30,200,000 is Federal cost and $746,000 is non-Federal contribution. Project was author- ized by 1965 Flood Control Act. FLOOD CONTROL-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 985 Local cooperation. Local interests must agree to administer Iroject land and water areas for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; pay, contribute in kind, or repay (which may e through user fees) with interest one-half the separable costs allocated to recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; and bear all costs of operation, maintenance, and replacement of recreation and fish and wildlife lands and facilities. Local in- terests must also agree to prevent encroachments on channel of Wildcat Creek from dam to mouth. State of Indiana indicated iltent to fulfill requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction eng1neering and design studies, including surveying and mapping, .Ydrologic and hydraulic studies, and materials and foundations investigations, were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Mapping and design memo- randum for reservoir and spillway capacities are 50 percent com- Plete, general design memorandum is 15 percent complete. Cost and financial statement . . Total to Year............... 1 1962 63 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: APpropriated.......... .................................... ............ $140,000 $140,000 ........ ......... osat ............ ............ ............ ............ 90,095 90,095 29. LEBANON JUNCTION, KY. Location. About 25 miles south of Louisville, Ky., in flood lain of Rolling Fork, tributary of Salt River, about 22 miles above mouth of Salt River. t Existing project. Provides for 4,175 feet of earth levee, with Wo drainage structures. Protection will be afforded to Lebanon JUlnction against a headwater flood or Ohio River backwater flood having a frequency of once in 100 years. Project was approved for construction July 19, 1963, under authority of sec- tion 205, Flood Control Act of 1948, as amended. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Local interests must also provide re- strictive easements against encroachments in interior ponding area due to construction or dumping. Assurances were furnished April 10, 1964. Acquisition of right-of-way is complete. Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction plans and specifications were completed, and construction started in becember 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction is 49 percent COmplete. Cost and financial statement Total to ................ year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated......... ............$13,100 $131,000 .. -.......... -$950 $153,150 Coat................. $1,600 1,679 7,539 $5981 54,144 72,227 986 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 30. LEVEE UNIT NO. 5, WABASH RIVER, IND. Location. In Gibson and Posey Counties, Ind., on left bank of Wabash River, from 58 to 94.5 miles above mouth. Existing project. Provides for construction of 41.9 miles of earth levee; drainage structures, together with alterations to three railroad bridges crossing Wabash River. Levee is di- vided for construction purposes into four sections, as follows: Black River section, 9.5 miles long, extending downstream along right bank of Johnson and Williams ditch and Black River, fronT crossing of New York Central Railroad over Maumee Creek near Johnson, Ind., to crossing of Illinois Central Railroad over Black River. Wabash-Black River section, 6 miles long, extending downstream along Black River from Illinois Central Railroad crossing to left bank of Wabash River, thence north to southwest- ern edge of Mumford Hills. Wabash River section, 18.7 miles long, extending from northwestern edge of Mumford Hills up- stream along left bank of Wabash River to Southern RailwaY oP' posite Mt. Carmel, Ill. Patoka River section, 7.7 miles long, ex- tending from Southern Railway easterly along left bank of Patoka River to high ground 2 miles east of U.S. Highway 41 and 3 miles south of town of Patoka, Ind. Project will provide pro- tection for 44,000 acres of farm land and towns of Lyle, Skelton, and Griffin, Ind., against a flood equal to that expected on all average of seven times in each 100-year period. Estimated total cost of new work (1966) is $5,471,000, of which $501,000 is non- Federal cost for lands and damages and road and utility reloca- tions. Project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936 and 1946. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Assurances were executed by Superintendent of Levee District on January 8, 1962. Authorizations of entry are received for Patoka River section and for parts I and II, Wabash River section. Operations and results during fiscal year. Patoka River sec- tion, including embankment at Southern Ry. bridge, was ad- vanced to 99 percent completion at cost of $97,464 for year. Construction of Wabash River section part I was started and ad- vanced to 48 percent of completion at cost of $569,582. Wabash River section part II was started and brought to 1 percent coMr plete, cost was $8,500. Contract with New York Central Rail- road for bridge alteration was executed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of Black River section was started July 1963 and completed November 1964. Status of Patoka River and Wabash River sections is in preceding paragraph. Contracts are executed for alteration (by owners) of Southern and New York Central railroad bridges. FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 987 Cost and financial statement Fiscal Year. *1962 Total to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work $ 0 Appropriated......00 225,6 , ropriated.... . $49,000 $215,000 $540,000 $650,000 $690,000 $2,257,368 ........ 29,730 32,003 344,793 479,076 746,147 1,729,751 31. LINCOLN RESERVOIR, ILL. Location. Damsite is in Cumberland County, Ill., on Embar- rass River (tributary of Wabash River) 103.1 miles above mouth, 11d 8.7 miles south of Charleston, Ill. Reservoir will extend into Coles and Douglas Counties. E'isting project. Reservoir for flood control and allied pur- oses. Dam will be earthfill, 2,400 feet long and 110 feet high, ith gate controlled outlet works and uncontrolled open cut spill- ay. Total storage capacity will be 538,300 acre-feet (476,985 or flood control (winter months) and 6,300 for water supply 1d water quality control). Estimated cost of new work (1966) s $33,910,000, of which $32,200,000 is Federal cost and $1,710,- 000 is non-Federal contribution. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests must agree to administer Droject land and water areas for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; pay, contribute in kind, or repay (which may be through user fees) with interest one-half the separable costs al- ocated to recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; bear all costs of operation. maintenance, and replacement of recreation 11d fish and wildlife lands and facilities. Local interests must o agree to prevent s1 encroachments on channel of Embarrass iver between dam and mouth, and pay allocated initial and an- nual maintenance and operation costs for water supply storage. State of Illinois indicated intent to fulfill requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction egineering and design, including surveying and mapping, hy- I'aulic and hydrologic studies, and materials and foundations lEvestigations, were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Surveying and mapping is 20 Iercent complete. Design memorandum for reservoir and spill- Way capacities is 50 percent complete. Cost and financial statement seal . 'Total to e Year. ......... 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. APPropriated.......... .. ........... ............ ........... $110,0 00 o t............ ... . 88,873 88,873 32. MANSFIELD RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Dam is on Raccoon Creek, 32.4 miles above its con- fluence with Wabash River, and 25 miles northeast of Terre haute, Ind. At flood control pool, reservoir extends upstream about 15 miles, in Parke and Putnam Counties, Ind. 988 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. A rolled earth dam and reservoir, for flood control and allied purposes. Total storage capacity is 132,800 acre-feet of which 116,600 acre-feet are for flood control. For details, see Annual Report for 1962, page 1132. Estimated Fed- eral cost of new work (1964) is $6,257,800. Project was se lected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Department of Conservation, State of In- diana, has undertaken management of lands and recreational facilities in accordance with license granted by Secretary of the Army on April 19, 1961. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Mark, ing Federal property boundary was completed at cost of $36,862 during year. Parking lot at damsite was paved at cost of $7,372. Routine maintenance was performed, and operation for flood control was not necessary during year. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year . ........... 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated...................... $16,500 -$6,200 $50,000 $17,500 1$6,2 S270 Cost................. $110,117 81,988 35,921 9,227 46,189 61,:865 26,2@ Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 39,050 48,320 52,650 54,739 78,300 317975 Cost.................. 37,990 43,870 52,863 56,700 65,212 301,372 ode 'Incudes$12,00 10 fnds 1 Includes $12,000 Code 710 funds. Includes $8,491 Code 710 funds. 33. MISSISSINEWA RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is 7.1 miles above mouth of MississineWa River, which flows into Wabash River about 2 miles upstream from Peru, Ind. At flood control pool level, reservoir will extend upstream about 28 miles, in Wabash, Grant, and Miami Counties, Ind. Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. It includes an earthfill dam 137 feet high and 8,100 feet long, gate controlled outlet works, and an uncontrolled open spillway through right abutment. To- tal storage capacity of reservoir will be 368,400 acre-feet, Of which 345,100 acre-feet will be reserved for flood control storage* Estimated project cost for new work (1966) is $22,416,000, of which $22,192,000 is Federal cost and $224,000 non-Federal con" tribution. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1958. Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash al amount equal to 1 percent of project first cost. State of Indiana assumed this obligation. Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of dam and spillway was advanced to 73 percent of completion; cost for year was $1,714,356. Land acquisition was advanced to 83 percent of completion, at cost during fiscal year of $1,362,927. Relocation of affected roads was brought to 65 percent of overall FLOOD CONTROL---LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 9 Corlpletion at cost of $1,415,357, during year. Relocations of cemeteries, utilities, and structures was advanced to 54 percent of OVerall completion at cost for year of $511,523. Reservoir 1aring was begun and brought to 64 percent complete at cost of 17,696. Engineering and design work continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in April 1962 and outlet works were completed in October 1964. Dam as Started in April 1964 and is 73 percent complete. Of 469 racts required in fee, 427 have been acquired, and necessary tad Casements have been acquired on 299 of 347 tracts. Design merorandums covering work completed or under construction are approved. Memorandums and plans and specifications for work scheduled for construction are complete or well advanced. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS liscal Total to 19062 1903 1904 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work. $500,000 opsrlriated.......... $1,945,000 $5,508,000 $4,750,000 $5,000,000 $18,840,300 .......... 421,250 1,879,7913,707,5545,059,0005,445,753 16,703,436 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS "al YeTotal to 1962 1963 1964 1905 1966 June 30,1966 New Work. rO)ributed........... $31,000 $4,700 $122,400 $37,100 $36,000 $231,200 **** ............ 6,175 18,988 37,449 51,101 54,907 168,620 34. MONROE RESERVOIR, IND. 5ocation. Dam is on Salt Creek, a tributary of White River, 29 miles above mouth, and 2 miles east of Harrodsburg, Monroe 4otnty, Ind. At flood control pool level, reservoir will extend Dstream 44 miles, in Monroe, Brown, and Jackson Counties. 1 "pisting project. A reservoir for flood control and allied pur- Oses. Dam is earth core and rock shell, with gate-controlled Outlet works and uncontrolled open spillway. Total storage ca- acity is 441,000 acre-feet (258,800 is for flood control and 159,- Sfor low flow augmentation). Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $14,837,000, of which $8,018,600 is non-Federal con- 'ibution. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act, odifying comprehensive plan for Ohio River Basin. Local cooperation. Section 3, 1944 Flood Control Act applies. o.cal interests must contribute 54.1 percent of project cost, this eilng the proportion allocated to low-flow regulation feature, plus capitalized amount representing that part of average annual atenance and operation cost allocated to low-flow regulation. ate of Indiana assumed this cost-sharing obligation. ,OPerations and results during fiscal year.I New work: Road oeocation work was advanced to 99 percent completion, at cost 1,$472,374. Land acquisition was advanced to 99 percent com- letion at cost of $56,236. Construction of initial access facili- 990 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ties was completed at cost of $165,178 for year. Quarters, publi comfort stations, and water treatment building were complete at cost of $128,202. Maintenance: Routine maintenance was performed. Operation for flood control during 1966 flood seaon prevented damages estimated at $69,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in NoveI" ber 1960 and reservoir was placed in operation in February 196 ' Land acquisition and relocations work are both 99 percent co" plete. Remaining work includes construction of two access roads, water supply systems at two recreation areas and minor road and utility relocations. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Tot al to66 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June3 30,1966 New work: 6,571 562 Appropriated.......... $940,000 $900,000 $2,707,000 $1,633,000 .. . $ 1,27569 Cost .................. 870,656 940,697 2,526,467 1,126,947 $44112 Maintenance: Appropriated............................... 23,921 80,100 97,85 104 021 Cost.................................................... 22,918 74,941 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Contributed........... Cost.... ..... 1,025,673 $2,035,0001 $675,000$2,825,000 $986,000 $346,000 1,108,751 2,977,811 1,312,463 569,870 57,30 35. MT. CARMEL, ILL. Location. Mt. Carmel levee is at Mt. Carmel, Wabash CountY' Ill., on right bank of Wabash River, from mile 93.6 to 95.6. Existing project. Provides for construction of 15,564 feet O earth levee, 1,734 feet of concrete wall, 5 pumping plants, an other necessary appurtenances. Levee will begin at high groun on left bank of Greathouse Creek, about 5,000 feet above moUtl extend generally along line of Greathouse Creek to right bank o Wabash, upstream along right bank to 4th Street, Mt. Car.nll then curve westerly to high ground at 7th Street. Project M1 provide protection to 380 acres of agricultural land and 160 acre of industrial and semiurban developed land against a flood equl to that expected to occur once in 100 years. Estimated costo new work (1966) is $2,020,000 Federal, and $113,000 non.Fed" eral. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962. 2 ' Local cooperation. Assurances were executed October 2 1963. Land acquisition by local interests is underway. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructio engineering and design work continued. Design memorandUfl for pumping plants was completed and approved, and preparation of construction plans and specifications begun. Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandm with supplements on floodwall and drainage, and design memo" FLOOD CONTROL---LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 991 randum for pumping plants are approved. Construction plans and specifications are approved for floodwall and levee, and 5 Percent complete for pumping plants. Construction has not Started. Cost and financial statement ?1lal y Total to cal.year*.1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work: APropriated.......... ............$75,000 $43,000 $145,000 $344,000 $607,000 t .................. 41,024 22,665 37,987 36,256 137,932 36. NOLIN RIVER RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Dam is on Nolin River, 7.8 miles above its conflu- ence with Green River, about 70 air miles southwest of Louisville, y. Reservoir extends upstream about 57 miles and is in Ed- raOnson, Grayson, Hart, and Hardin Counties, Ky. Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and allied pur- Poses. Dam is rockfill-earth core type, with gate controlled outlet Works, and uncontrolled open spillway. Total storage capacity is 09,400 acre-feet of which 570,100 acre-feet is for flood control. lor further details of project, see Annual Report for 1962, page 124. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1964) is $14,564,- 900. Project selected for construction under general authoriza- tion for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. None required for authorized project. State of Kentucky contributed $18,195 for increased width of darn for public road. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Slide repairs to one relocation highway were accomplished at cost of $8,835. Water supply system at Moutardier access site was con- structed at cost of $56,897. Maintenance: Routine mainte- nance was performed. Operation for flood control during 1966 ROod season prevented damages estimated at $513,900. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in January 1959 and reservoir was placed in operation in March 1963. All mlajor items of work are complete and land acquisition is com- Plete except for some mineral interests and tracts in condem- nation. Cost and financial statement "SealYear................ becalTotal 1962 1963 to 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 'ew work: Appropriated.......... $6,300,000 $2,933,500 $146,000 $20,000 $81,543 2$14,648,940 aiCost.................. 5,590,0134,375,210 399,771 68,931 95,309 314,631,097 apntenancet: ACoropriated...................... 36,800 97,700 140,816 181,300 456,616 Cost .............. ............ 35,321 90,519 118,750 183,753 428,343 PiXcludes $18,195 contributed funds expended for new work. Includes $21,897 public works eceleration executive 1963 funds. Scludes$82,000 Code 710 funds. Includes $78,428 Code 710 funds. 992 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 S37. OHIO RIVER BASIN (LOUISVILLE DIST.) Location. Works covered by this project are a series of leveeS, floodwalls, channel improvements, and reservoirs in Ohio River Basin within Louisville District. Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1937 authorized con- struction of levees, floodwalls, and drainage structures for protec- tion of cities and towns in Ohio River Basin, projects to be selected by Chief of Engineers with approval of Secretary of War, in accordance with House Flood Control Committee Docu- ment 1, 75th Congress, 1st session, at a cost not to exceed $24,877,' 000 for construction, which was authorized to be appropriated for this purpose. Flood Control Act of 1938 approved general comn- prehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Ohio River Basin as set forth in House Flood Control Committee Docu- ment 1, 75th Congress, 1st session, with such modifications there- of as, in discretion of Secretary of War and Chief of Engineers, may be advisable, and for initiation and partial accomplishment of plan, authorized $75 million for reservoirs and $50,300,000 for local flood protection works, individual projects to be selected an d approved by Chief of Engineers subject to provision that authorid zation shall include diversion of Cache River above Cairo, Ill., and protection of area north of Cairo drainage district by levees, at an estimated cost of $2 million. Flood Control Act of 1941 authorized $45 million for further prosecution of comprehensive plan approved in act of June 28, 1938, for Ohio River Basin. Flood Control Act of 1944, authorized $70 million for further prosecution of approved comprehensive flood control plan for Ohio River Basin. This act modified previous plan within Louis- ville District to include plan of improvement for flood control and other purposes in Kentucky River Basin in accordance with rec- ommendations of Chief of Engineers in House Document 504, 78th Congress, 2d session, flood protection works at Taylorsville, IY., and on Rough River and tributaries, Ky., in accordance with rec- ommendations of Chief of Engineers in Senate Document 105, 78th Congress, 1st session, and House Document 535, 78th Con-" gress, 2d session, respectively. Flood Control Act of 1946 authorized $125 million for further prosecution of comprehensi.ve plan approved in act of June 28, 1938, for Ohio River Basin, modified within Louisville District to include plan of improve" ment for flood control in Wabash River Basin, Ill., and Ind., sub- stantially in accordance with recommendations of Chief of Engl neers in House Document 197, 80th Congress, 1st session, and West Fork Reservoir on West Fork of Mill Creek in Ohio, su- stantially in accordance with recommendations of Chief of Eng1 neers in House Document 198, 80th Congress, 1st session, In addition to previous authorizations, Flood Control Act of 1950 authorized $100 million for further prosecution of compre- hensive plan approved in act of June 28, 1938, as amended. This act modified comprehensive plan within Louisville District to in- clude necessary bank stabilization measures at New Harmony Bridge, Ind. and Ill., at an estimated cost of $500,000. Also in" cluded in act was provision that Mining City Dam and Reservoir, Ky., and alternates therefor, shall not be constructed if such FLOOD CONTROL-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 993 a struction would have any adverse effect on Mammoth Cave a tlonal Park. Flood Control Act of 1958 modified comprehen- oie Plan within Louisville District to provide for Monroe Reser- er on Salt Creek, White River Basin, Ind., in accordance with 8econendations 8 of Chief of Engineers in House Document 192, C Congress. In addition to previous authorizations, Flood 5th .ontrol Act of 1963 and Public Law 89-42 authorized $150 and $89 million, respectively, for further prosecution of the com- ehensive plan approved by the act of June 28, 1938, as amended. 994 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local protection projects Estimated cost Type of Locationi construction Federal Non-Federal I Total (date of revision) II I1 Adams levee, Indiana (Wabash River) ..... Levee.......... $292,000 $14,000 $306,000 (1960) Alton, Ind.2.... 2 ............... ... do......... 255,000 40,000 295,000 (1954) Aurora, Ind. ...................... ..... Wall and levee..... 4,300,000 (195) 1,190,000 5,490,000.... Barnett Creek, Ky. (Rough River Basin)3 4 Channel im- . . 2 provement. Bellevue, Ky. .... Wall and levee...... 1,570,000 400,000 1,970 000 (1954) Bonpas Creek, Ill. (Wabash River Basin)... Channel im- 766,000 335,000 1,101,000 ( 2. ... . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. provement. Bromley, Ky. Wall and levee...... 1,250,000 025,000 2 175,000 (1954) Brookport, 111.25........................ ....do......... 597,493 8,500 605,993 California (Cincinnati), Ohio2........... ....do......... 1,750,000 720,000 2 470,000 (9 Cannelton, Ind.2 6...................... Carrollton, Ky.2... .............. . . . . . . . . . .....do.... ... 2,068,391 29,105 2,097,496(4 2 .. . . . . . .. do......... 2,220,000 97,000 2,317,000 Caseyville, Ky. Levee............. 396,000 35,000 431,000 (1954 Cave-in-Rock, Ill.2. .............. ... do......... 661,000 125,000 786,000 Cincinnati, Ohio2 7............... ..... Wall and barrier dam 10,150,935 11 1,309,146 11460,081 ( Unit 2......... .................... (195it Wall and levee...... 16,800,000 2,900,000 19,700,000 (94 Unit 4 remainder.......... ......... Wall....... ....... 14,900,000 621,00015,521,000 (194) Cleves, Ohio2....... ................... 2 . . . . . . . . . Levee............. ..1,240,000 67,000 1,307,000 14) Clinton, Ind. (Wabash River) .. .....do.... ..... 77,000 9,000 86,000 954) Cloverport, Ky.2.................. Wall and levee..... 728,000 193,000 921,000 (14) Concordia, Ky.2... 2 ................ Levee.......... 590,000 55,000 645,000 (195) Covington, Ky. 14............ ........ Wall and levee..... 7,866,000 765,000 8 631,000 (1954) Dayton, Ky.2.......... .. do......... 3,700,000 000 (1980) 1,110,000 4,810,000 Deer Creek2 Prairie levee, Indiana (Wabash Levee............. 213,000 10,000 4223,00 River). 2 Delphi, Ind. (Wabash River) 8........... do.....do........ 144,563 17,165 161,728954) Derby, Ind.2................. ... Wall and levee..... 553,000 67,000 620,000 l) Elizabethtown, 111.2.. 4 .. do......... 559,000 153,000 712:000 (1196) England Pond levee, 4 Ill (Wabash River) .. Levee.......... 890,000 80,000 970,000168) Evansville, Ind. ....................... Wall and levee...... 17,500,000 1,880,000 19 380 000 Fletcher and Sunshine Garden2 levee, Levee............. 548,000 26,000 574,000(1 Indiana (Wabash River Basin).2 Frankfort, Ky. (Kentucky4 River) . . . ........ . . . . . . . . Wall and levee...... ............ * .......... North Frankfort area2 ..... . . . . . . . . . .....do......... 2,040,000 172,000 2,92, 000. 94) South Frankfort area ..... .....do......... 1,950,000 180,000 2,130,000 194) Benson Creek area'............. .....do......... 660,000 140,000 800,000 Golconda, Ill.2... 2 ................ ....do......... 565,333 10,900 576,233196 Grandview, Ind. ....................... Levee.......... 580,000 133,000 713,000 1966) Greenfield4 Bayou levee, Indiana (Wabash .....do......... 2,060,000 187,000 2,247,000 16 River). Harrisburg, 111I.2 9................. Wall and levee...... 887,557 20,000 907 557 HIaweaville, Ky.2 13..... .. ..... Levee............. 969,318 42,592 1 ,011,9109 (95) Honey 2Creek levee, Indiana (Wabash .... do......... 653,000 32,000 685,000 (966 River). 4 000 (190) Island levee, Indiana (Wabash River) 2 ... ..... do......... 1,470,000 93,000 1 563 Jackson, Ky. (Kentucky River Basin) 7... Cutoff channel..... 130,952 3,000 133,952 Jeffersonville-Clarksville, Ind.............. Wall and levee..... 4,226,361 590,888 4,817,249 Lawrenceburg, Ind.2 3................. ..... do......... 2,433,414 284,725 2,718,139 154) Leavenworth, Ind.2...................... ..... do......... 1,470,000 266,000 1 736,0001954) Levee unit 1, 2 Eel River, Ind. (Wabash Levee............. 204,000 40,000 244,000(1 River Basin). Levee unit 2, 2 Eel River, Ind. (Wabash ..... do............. 2,090,000 715,000 2,805,000 (195) River Basin). Levee unit 1, Little Wabash River, Ill. ..... do............ 2,850,000 164,000 3,014,000 (1961) (Wabash River Basin). Levee unit 2, Little Wabash River, Ill. ..... do............ 2,220,000 83,000 2,303,000 (1966) (Wabash River Basin). 19 4) Levee unit 6, Wabash 2 River, Ill. (Wabash ... .do............ 1,160,000 56,000 1,216,000 ( River Basin). Levee unit 17, Indiana, (Wabash River .... do............ 795,000 71,000 (19) 866,ooo000 Basin). Levee unit 1, White River, Ind. (Wabash ..... do............ 2,180,000 116,000 2,296,000 (1961) River Basin). Levee unit 2, White River, Ind. (Wabash ..... do......... 724,000 73,000 797,000 (1951) River Basin). Levee unit 7, White River, Ind. (Wabash ..... do............ 1,490,000 88,000 1,578,000 (1901) River Basin).2. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. Lewisport, Ky. Wall and levee...... 610,000 243,000 853,000 (100) Louiaville, Ky.2 10..... ... do............ 24,710,000 2,814,938 27 521,938 )95 Ludlow, Ky. 2.........a.............. 2 .... do...... .......2,540,000 745,000 3,285000 (94) Madison, Ind. .... ... do......... 3,820,000 360,000 4,180,000 4) Mason J. Niblack levee, Indiana (Wabash Levee.......... 1,595,000 360,000 1,955,000 River).4 2 M auckport, Ind. ....................... .... do............ 506,000 105,000 611,000(14) McGinnis2 levee, Indiana (Wabash River ..... do............. 1,820,000 104,000 1,924,000 Basin). Metropolis, Ill.2.................... Wall and levee...... 3,070,000 431,000 3,501,000 (195) See footnotes at end of table. FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 995 Local protection projects-Continued Estimated cost Type of Locationl construction Federal Non-Federal Total (date of revision) W all .............. a2,480,000 $41,000 $2,521,000 (1954) )hio2 .. ................... .. ... ........ ...... Levee.......... 1,170,000 372,000 1,542,000(1954) Y, Ind.2 7 ............. Wall and levee..... 5,375,470 740,000 6,115,470 erdan, lnd.2 2 Levee....... 476,000 13,000 489,000 (1954) lony Bridge, Ill. and In(t. 2..... Bank protection .... 728,000 72,000 800,000 (1966) ony, Ind. (Wabash River) ...... Levee........... 616,00 25,000 611,000(1954) nond, Ohio2 Wall and levee..... 3,200,000 720,000 3,920,000(1954) Ky.2 .................. 7,518,261 298,506 7,816,767 ....do............ , K,.2 ....do............ 886,000 195,000 1,081,000 (1954) [y 6 . . ...................... ....do............ 4,761,552 232,000 4,993,552 d.2 . ...................... Levee.......... 753,000 372,000 1,125,000 (1954) e, K y.2 .................... 1710,000 55,000 1,765,000(1954) Wall and levee...... lvee, Indiana (Wabash River)2.. Levee ............. 426,000 37,000 463,000 (1960) Ill, iCache River) 11 ......... do......... 600,300 40,000 280,000 640,300 1,176,000 (1954) , Ind. Wall and levee..... 896,000 and McCleary'sBluff levee, Levee............. 1,320,000 129,000 1,449,000(1966) Wabash River).4 Ind.2........................ Wall and levee...... 466,000 133,000 599,000 (1954) Levee........... 359,000 67,000 426,000 (1954) er, Ky,3 4. .... Channel im- provement. I Allison levee, Illinois, (Wabash Levee............ 5,340,000 2,025,000 7,365,000(1960) Wn, Ill.2........ ........ Wall and levee..... 1,810,000 361,000 2,171,000 (1954) er levee, Indiana (Wabash River Levee.............. 2,380,000 90,000 2,470,000 (1954) SKy.2.... Wall and levee...... 864,000 414,000 1,278,000(1954) Y.(''radewater River)4 . ......... Levee...... .... 1,950,000 91,000 2,041,000(1966) k levee, Indiana (Wabash River). ..... do................ 418,000 29,000 447,000 (1960) le,Ky. (Salt River) 9 . ... ... do......... 373,050 63,310 436,360 Ind.2 12 ... Wall and levee...... 932,229 32,707 964,936 .. Levee.............. 303,000 35,000 338,000(1954 evee, Illinois (Wabash River)4... ... do............ 1,370,000 138,000 1,508,000(1966 .......... ....... Wall and levee...... 502,000 133,000 635,000(1954 Levee.............1,070,926 72,153 1,143,079 .2: ...................... ....do.............1,570,000 120,000 1,690,000(1954 tKy2 12' ' 1,170,000 146,000 1,316,000(1954 ... do............ Wall and levee...... 5,112,000 285,000 (1966 5,39)7,000 nd K... ..... do...... ... 3,283,000 400,000 3,683,000(1960 K. ....................... Wall.............. 1,610,000 41,000 1,651,000(1954 eHaute, Ind. (Wabash River)4... Levee............. 705,000 114,000 819,000(1964) '*.. .. ........ ...... .. .. .. Wall , and1 levee G ...... 2.190.000 , .,v _ 220.000 ,__. 2.410,000 . (1954) . .I l a Al Projects are on Ohio River unless otherwise noted. a Fso see "Other authorized flood control projects." art of Rough River Reservoir and channel improvement project, Ky. Coetails of this project are in individual report. o mPlete. See Annual Report for 1958 for details. ?omPlete. See Annual Report for 1959 for details. SComplete. See Annual Report for 1957 for details. Cmlete. See Annual Report for 1953 for details. iomPlete. See Annual Report for 1952 for details. Coplete. See Annual Report for 1962 for details. 1954Sbstitute project for Belknap, Karnak, and Ullin, Ill., complete. See Annual Report for faor details. is omplete. See Annual Report for for 1956 for details. 1955 for details. omPlete. See Annual Report 1' 6 omRlete. See Annual Report for 1965 for details. 996 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Reservoirs Total Tributary basin and reservoirs Stream estimated cost -- I Great Miami River: Brookville, Ind.t 4 11 ................... .... East Fork of Whitewater River.......... $30,841000 Metamora, Ind.2 . .. '.. .. West Fork of Whitewater River........... 35,300,00 Green River: Mining City, Ky.2 s........................ Green River........................... 69,100,000 Nolin River, Ky.11 8 10........... . Nolin River................ ..... 14,564,900 Barren River, Ky. 4..... .......... .. ....... Barren River................ ......... 24,857,000 Green River, Ky.l3 4 .......................... Green River......................... 30,400,000 Rough River, Ky. 9 ..... ........... Rough River.......................... 10,100,000 Kentucky River: Booneville, Ky.1 4............................. South Fork of Kentucky River............ 25,000,000 Buckhorn, Ky.1 9............................... Middle Fork of Kentucky River........... 11,600,000 Licking River: Cave Run, Ky.l 2 4.............................. Licking River.......................... 28,900,000 Falmouth, Ky. 4.............................. Licking River.......................... 40,900,000 Little Miami River: Caesar Creek, Ohio 4........................... Caesar Creek............................. 23,300 ,000 'East Fork, Ohio 4........................... East Fork of Little Miami River.......... 26,500,00, Mill Creek: West Fork of Mill Creek, Ohiotl 6............... West Fork of Mill Creek................ 3,092,942 Wabash River: Cagles Mill, Ind.l ............................. M ill Creek............................. 4,107 767 Mansfield, Ind.i 8............................. Raccoon Creek......................... 6,257,800 Monroe, Ind. 4 7.... ......................... Salt Creek............................. 14,837,000 1 Details of this project given in individual report. SAlso see listing of this project under "Other authorized flood control projects." 8 Part of Rough River Reservoir and channel improvement. Details of this project are i individual report. Estimated cost revised 1966. 5 Estimated cost revised 1954. o Non-Federal cost is $570,801 additional. 7 Includes $8,018,600 non-Federal cost. 8 Estimated cost revised 1964. SEstimated cost revised 1963. 10 Non-Federal cost is $18,195 additional. 11 Includes $641,000 non-Federal cost. Operations and results during fiscal year. Only minor costs were incurred except for those projects for which individual re- ports are given. Economic feasibility study of Bellevue-Dayton, Ky., was completed. Study of levee unit 6, Wabash River, Ill., continued. Studies of current economic feasibility of projects for Aurora and Grandview, Ind., Ludlow-Bromley, Ky., and Rus- sell and Allison levee, Illinois, were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Surveys, explorations, engl" neering studies, and preparation of detailed plans were well ad- vanced for those units in general comprehensive plan for flood control in Ohio River Basin which are under consideration for construction in the near future. Status of projects selected for construction is given in individual reports." Economic study of Bellevue-Dayton, Ky., is complete. Study of levee unit 6, Wabash River, Ill., is 87 percent complete; study of Aurora, Ind., is 36 percent complete. Studies of Grandview, Ind., Ludlow-Bromley, Ky., and Russell and Allison levee are underway. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... -$1,939 $9,436 $10,000 $25,947 $90,000 $1,475,354 Cost.................. 6 5,539 5,925 12,385 35,537 1,398:793 FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 997 38. ORLEANS, IND. Location. In Washington County, Ind., in Lost River Basin. iExisting project. Plan provides for excavation of open chan- nel, 8,900 feet long, beginning at intersection of Monroe and Third Streets in the Old Sulphur Sink in town of Orleans. Chan- nel would extend southward on Third Street to edge of town, thence westward and south westward through open country to end in Lost River Valley. Channel along Third Street will be surfaced for use as roadway during nonflood periods. Channel Will permit excess runoff, which accumulates in low sinkhole areas in Orleans during heavy rains, to flow direct to Lost River with- out causing serious overflow. Estimated cost of new work (1957) is $612,000 of which $250,000 is non-Federal cost for lands, damages, bridge and utility alterations, and road surfacing. lroject was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1950. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, as amended, applies. Operations and results during fiscal year. Study of economic feasibility of project under present conditions was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Economic study is underway. Cost and financial statement s eal Total to year...1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work.: Appropriated.............................................. ...... ..... $10,000 $10,000 Cost .......... 3,422 3,422 39. PATOKA RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is in Dubois County, Ind., 118.3 miles above mouth of Patoka River, and 50 miles west-northwest of New Albany, Ind. Reservoir will extend into Orange and Craw- ford Counties. Existing project. Reservoir for flood control and allied pur- 1Doses. Dam will be rock and earthfill, 2,500 feet long and 89 feet high, with gate-controlled outlet works and uncontrolled open 'Pillway. Total storage capacity will be 324,800 acre-feet (144,- 100 for flood control and 167,500 for water supply and water quality control). Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $22,816,- 000, of which $17 million is Federal cost and $5,816,000 is non- Federal contribution. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests must agree to administer Project land and water areas for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; pay, contribute in kind, or repay (which may be through user fees) with interest one-half the separable costs allocated to recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement; and bear all costs of operation, maintenance, and replacement of recreation and fish and wildlife lands and facilities. Local in- terests must also agree to prevent encroachments on channel of Patoka River from dam to mouth, and to pay allocated initial and annual maintenance and operation costs for water supply 998 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 storage. State of Indiana has indicated intent to fullfill re- quirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction engineering and design studies, including hydraulic and hydro- logic studies, and materials and foundation investigations were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Design memorandum for reservoir and spillway capacities is 40 percent complete. General design memorandum is 10 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 6 New work: Appropriated.......... ........ ..... .... . . . . $125,000 $125 000 Cost.................. ..................................... 14,724 14,724 40. RED RIVER RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is 47.5 miles above mouth of Red River, a tributary of Kentucky River, and about 8 miles east of Stanton, Powell County, Ky. Existing project. Provides for construction of reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. Dam will be earth and rock, 172 feet high and 900 feet long, with gate controlled outlet works and uncontrolled open spillway. Estimated cost of proj- ect (1966) is $11,100,000. Project was authorized by Flood Con- trol Act of 1962. Local cooperation. None required for reservoir project. Ken- tucky Division of Flood Control and Water Usage gave assur- ances that downstream channel encroachments will be prevented. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructionl engineering and design work, including materials and founds- tions investigations, hydraulic and hydrologic studies, design and cost studies, and public-use planning, continued. Mapping was completed. Discussions continued with local interests on in- clusion of storage for municipal and industrial water supply. Condition at end of fiscal year. Design memorandums in preparation, with percentages of completion, are: reservoir and spillway capacities, 98 percent; general design, 75 percent; pre- liminary master land use plan, 25 percent; concrete aggregates and riprap, 63 percent. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... ............ ............ $45,000 $140,000 $95,000 $280,000 Cost.............................. ............ 31,341 96,772 91,634 219,747 41. ROCHESTER AND McCLEARY'S BLUFF LEVEE, ILL. Location. Unit is in southeastern part of Wabash County, Ill., FLOOD CONTROL-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 999 o right bank of Wabash River, from 80 to 89 miles above mouth. 1Existing project. Provides for construction of 3.2 miles of evee setback, 5.4 miles of levee turnover, 0.5 mile of levee en- largement, for a total of 9.1 miles of levee, and other necessary appurtenances. Levee will provide protection for 5,400 acres of agricultural land against a floodflow equal to that expected to Occur about seven times in each 100-year period. Estimated Pederal cost of new work (1966) is $1,320,000; estimated non- Pederal cost is $129,000. Existing project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1946. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Assurances were accepted April 19, 1965, and local interests are proceeding with acquisition. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction en- ginleering work, including materials and foundation investiga- tions, continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum and construction plans and specifications are approved. Con- struction not started. Cost and financial statement Total to iecal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated........... .. $47,000 $40,500 $75,000 $226,000 $388,500 Cost..................33,443 20,680 11,757 4,477 70,357 42. ROUGH RIVER RESERVOIR AND CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, KY. Location. Dam is on Rough River, 89.3 miles above its conflu- ence with Green River at 160.3 miles above Ohio River, and about 60 miles southwest of Louisville, Ky. Reservoir extends up- Stream about 30 miles and is in Breckinridge, Hardin, and Gray- son Counties, Ky. Channel improvement work is on Rough River, Barnett Creek, and West Fork of Barnett Creek. Existing project. Reservoir is for flood control and allied pur- Poses. Dam is rolled earthfill type, with gate controlled outlet Works. Storage capacity is 334,380 acre-feet, of which 314,210 acre-feet is for flood control. Project also includes channel clear- lng of lower Rough River, and channel improvement on Barnett Creek, a tributary of Rough River. For further details see page 1126 of Annual Report for 1962. Estimated cost of new work (1965) is $9,835,000. Existing project was selected for construc- tion under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Modification of previously approved plan to include channel improvement items was authorized by 1944 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. None required for construction of reservoir unit. Provisions of section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, are applicable to channel improvements. Assurances obtained from Ohio County for channel improvement. Department of Parks, Commonwealth of Kentucky, has undertaken management of 1000 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 lands and recreation facilities in accordance with license granted by Secretary of the Army on August 18, 1961. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Water supply system using water from reservoir was constructed. Maintenance: Routine maintenance was performed. Operation for flood control during 1966 flood season prevented damages estimated at $858,300. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started in No- vember 1955 and reservoir was placed in operation in June 1959. Land acquisition, and all major items of construction and reloc a" tion are complete. Cost and financial statement Total to 661 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19E New work: . Appropriated.................. $77,000 $14,000 $25,600 $42,500 259,796 515 Cost................$132,539 236,148 102,452 10,736 58,859 39,78 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 44,915 56,361 64,650 113,345 165,500 529 6O8 Cost................. 43,465 55,207 60,769 103,311 165,920 5131434 1Includes $196,806 public works acceleration, executive 1963 funds. Includes $69,000 Code 710 funds. SIncludes $67,703 Code 710 funds. 43. SALAMONIE RESERVOIR, IND. Location. Damsite is 3.1 miles above mouth of Salamonie River which enters Wabash River about 6 miles upstream from Wabash, Ind. Reservoir will extend upstream about 27 miles at flood control pool and lie in Wabash and Huntington Counties, Ind. Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control and allied purposes. It includes an earthfill danm with a maximum height of 132 feet and a length of 6,100 feet, gate controlled outlet works with a 16-foot diameter conduit, and an uncontrolled open spillway through right abutment. Total storage capacity of reservoir will be 263,600 acre-feet, of which 250,500 acre-feet will be reserved for flood control storage. Esti- mated project cost for new work(1966) is $16,046,000, of which $160,000 is non-Federal contribution and $15,886,000 Federal cost. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1958. Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash an amount equal to one percent of project first cost. State of Indi- ana assumed this obligation. Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of dam and spillway was advanced to 99 percent of completion, at cost of $312,144. Land acquisition was brought to 99 percent of completion, costs for year were $468,402. Pool clearing was completed at cost of $118,480 for year. Relocation of roads was 'brought to 25 percent of completion at cost of $1,242,356. Re- location of cemeteries, utilities, and structures was advanced to 65 percent of completion, costs for year being $168,946. Con- tract for public-use facilities was awarded. Reservoir was corni- pleted for emergency operation purposes in January 1966. FLOOD CONTROL-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 1001 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started in De- cermber 1961. Outlet works are complete, dam is 99 percent com- Plete. Reservoir is capable of operation for flood control but lMpoundment of permanent pool is delayed to facilitate road relo- cation work. Work remaining includes acquisition of one tract of land in fee, and easements on two tracts, completion of reloca- tions work, provision of public access facilities, construction of service building and operators' quarters, and monumenting Fed- eral property line. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS iscal . .Total to calYear... ......... .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork: A proprlated......... $805,000$1,645,000 $2,495,000 $5,030,000 $3,645,000 $13,878,250 Cot ................ 676,553 1,450,2052,109,9094,179,4552,700,463 11,374,113 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Sseal eTotal to Year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work. Contributed........... $26,000 $12,000 $93,100 $28,200 $14,000 $173,300 Cost................ .. 9,435 14,650 21,311 42,131 27,191 114,718 44. SALINE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ILL. Location. Saline River, which flows into Ohio River at mile 867.4 below Pittsburgh, Pa., and 10 miles below Shawneetown, Ill., is formed by confluence of its South and Middle Forks 27 Iailes above its mouth. North Fork joins main stream at stream mile 17.2. Project area is in Gallatin, Hamilton, and Saline Counties in southeastern Illinois. (See Geological Survey map for State of Illinois, scale 1:500,000.) Existing project. Provides for 9.9 miles of channel enlarge- maent on Saline River, 1.2 miles of clearing and cleaning and 29.8 miles of channel enlargement on North Fork, 12.2 miles of chan- lel enlargement on Middle Fork, and 14.2 miles of clearing and cleaning on South Fork. Project will protect agricultural areas along 67.3 miles of improved channel from headwater floods with an expected frequency of once in 2 years, and lesser floods occur- ring more frequently. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act, and deletion of cash contributions by local interests Was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated total cost of new work (1966) is $9,739,000, of which $559,000 is non-Fed- eral cost for lands and damages, and bridge and utility reloca- tions. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Assurances of cooperation were ac- cepted March 2, 1966. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction engineering and design studies continued. Work included hy- draulic and hydrologic studies, materials and foundations in- 1002 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 vestigations, surveying and mapping, design studies, and cost estimates. Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum is 80 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated......... ...... ............ ............ $75,000 $90,000 $165 000 Cost..................... ....................... 37,392 37,993 7538 45. STURGIS, KY. Location. In Union County in western Kentucky, at conflu- ence of Cypress Creek and Tradewater River, 6 miles above mouth of latter stream. Existing project. Provides for construction of 3.31 miles of earth levee, two pumping plants, and other necessary appurte" nances. Project would provide protection for 670 acres of urban and suburban land against a flood equal to the maximum of record (1937) with 3.8 foot freeboard. Total estimated project cost (1966) is $2,041,000, of which $91,000 is non-Federal cost for lands and damages, and required utility alterations. Project was authorized by general authorization for Ohio River Basin in Flood Control Act of 1938. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Assurances of cooperation were executed by city of Sturgis February 8, 1965. Land acquisitionl by city for rights-of-way is in progress. Operations and results during fiscal year. PreconstructiOn engineering and design work continued. General design memo- randum was completed and approved. Preparation of design memorandum for pumping plants and construction plans and specifications was undertaken. Condition at end of fiscal year. Economic report and general design memorandums are approved. Design memorandum for pumping plants is 40 percent complete; plans and specifications for levee are 80 percent complete. Cost and financial statement _-- Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 966 June 30, 11 New work: Appropriated.......... $10,000.. $75,000 $170,000 $255,000 Cost.................. 2,494 $7,109 $311 37,928 89,854 137,696 46. TOWN CREEK AT HARRODSBURG, KY. Location. Harrodsburg is in Mercer County in central Ken- tucky, about 52 miles southeast of Louisville, Ky. Existing project. Provides for improvement of about 1 mile and cleanout of 0.3 mile of channel of Town Creek. Project FLOOD CONTROL---LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 1003 Would provide complete relief from frequent flooding and a good degree of relief from rare floods. Project was adopted under authority of section 205, Flood Control Act of 1948, as amended. stimated cost of new work (1964) is $130,000, of which $45,000 s non-Federal cost for lands and damages and road, utility and ridge alterations. Local cooperation. Section 3 of Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Local interests must also alter bridges and utilities and prevent future encroachments on improved wa- terway. Assurances of cooperation were executed by city and accepted March 18, 1966. Land acquisition is underway. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of con- struction plans and specifications continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Detailed project report is ap- Proved. Plans and specifications are 90 percent complete. Cost and financial statement 'a ca'lI Total to ea 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 sewWork. ApPropriated..................... $18,000 ............ $10,000 $75,000 $103,000 ot .......................... 7,201 $6,991 4,291 2,829 21,312 47. TRI-POND LEVEE, WABASH RIVER, ILL. Location. In Crawford County, Ill., on right bank of Wabash tiver between towns of Palestine and Hutsonville, and between river miles 161.5 to 171.5. Existing project. Provides for construction of 8.4 miles of arth levee, 15 drainage structures, and related appurtenances. evee will begin 1.7 miles west of Illinois Central Railroad bridge over the Wabash and extend eastward 1.2 miles, crossing Stewart Pond ditch, and utilizing two hills for protection for 0.4 mile. rom this point, 0.5 mile from Wabash River, levee will turn northward and generally parallel right bank for about 6 miles, t'ieing into high ground at river mile 168.5. From west side of this hill levee will turn westward, cross two low areas, and end at high ground about 1 mile south of Hutsonville. Project will Protect 5,300 acres of farm land against a flood expected to occur an average of seven times in each 100-year period. Estimated Pederal cost of new work (1966) is $1,370,000, estimated non- Pederal cost is $138,000. Existing project was authorized by lood Control Act of 1946. Local cooperation. Assurances were executed October 5, 1961, by East Crawford Drainage and Levee District, Crawford County, Ill. Action is underway to reorganize levee district. Operations and results during fiscal year. Limited precon- Struction planning continued, with preparation of detailed plans ad specifications deferred pending acquisition of rights-of-way by local interests. . Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum is approved. Construction not started. 1004 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work:$ Appropriated ... ... ............ $52,800 $45,000 $140,000 ...... $237 00 Cost........... ............... .37,597 15,917 2,107 $1 66, 48. WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO Location. Dam is on West Fork of Mill Creek 6.5 miles above its junction with Mill Creek and 2 miles northeast of Mount Healthy, Ohio, and 10 miles north of downtown Cincinnati. Reser- voir extends upstream about 3 miles and is in Hamilton County, Ohio. Existing project. An earth embankment dam and a reservoir for flood control, recreation, and reduction of pumping require ments at Mill Creek barrier dam in Cincinnati. Total storage capacity of reservoir is 11,300 acre-feet, of which 9,850 acre-feet is for flood control. For further details see page 1119 of Annual Report for 1962. Federal cost of completed new work iS $3,092,942, non-Federal cost is $570,801 which includes $50,000 contributed in fulfillment of project authorization. Latest pub" lished map is in House Document 198, 80th Congress, 1st session. Existing project selected for construction under additional au thorization for Ohio River Basin in 1946 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests were to release necessary land under their control, give assurance that future channel encroachment below damsite would be prevented. For enlarge- ment of reservoir to include a conservation pool, local interest would contribute one-half additional cost of such pool, includifng one-half cost of relocation of sanitary sewer, and agree to hold the United States free from damages resulting from its provision.l Board of county commissioners of Hamilton County, Ohio, adopted a resolution October 8, 1947, signifying willingness to fulfill requirements including provision of conservation poOl. Assurances were executed on same date. A contract with the United States for relocation of sanitary sewer outside reservoir area in order to include conservation pool in project was accepted by Hamilton County, in which the United States paid one-half cost of such relocation work. Hamilton County Commissioners" furnished $50,000, required as a local contribution toward addi tional cost of providing conservation pool. Hamilton CountY Park District has undertaken development and management of recreation facilities in reservoir area for use of the public in ac- cordance with license granted by Secretary of the Army on October 31, 1951. Operations and results during fiscal year. Routine main- tenance was performed and shop was remodeled to provide office space. Operation for flood control during 1966 flood season pre- vented damages estimated at $7,100. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began March 1949 and reservoir was placed in operation in December 1952. Project is complete. FLOOD CONTROL-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 1005 ..- __Cost and financial statement P .Total to cal year........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: ApPropriated.......... ............ ........... $5,243 ............ 1............ 1$3,092,942 enc... ostMain ............... 5,243.................... 1.... .13,092,942 Appropriated .......... $37,966 $45,600 41,600 $49,876 $42,400 476,307 o .................. at 39,049 41,707 44,394 41,274 48,459 470,257 x 1 E cludes $50,000 contributed funds expended for new work. 49. WEST TERRE HAUTE, IND. Location. In Vigo County on right bank of Wabash River about 215 miles above mouth. Existing project. Provides for construction of about 2.5 .miles of earth levee, traffic ramps, and facilities for disposal of Wterior drainage. It will provide protection to town of West Terre Haute against a flood expected to occur on average of once each 100-year period. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1964) is $705,000 for construction and non-Federal cost of lands and damages is $114,000, a total cost of $819,000. Existing Project was authorized under 1938 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, as amended, applies. West Vigo Levee Association, Inc., furnished assurances by letter dated May 16, 1963. Acquisition of rights- Of-Way by local interests has been delayed. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction Planning continued. Construction plans and specifications for levee were advanced to 95 percent of completion. Condition at end of fiscal year. Design memoranda on gen- eral design (with supplement) and on Cherry Grove pumping Plant are approved. Plans and specifications for levee are 95 Percent complete. Local interests are continuing efforts to se- cure rights-of-way. Cost and financial statement Total to 'eal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Appropriated work-................ $250,000 -$283,000 ............. .........$$11,000 $101,000 Cost.................. 33,888 12,103 $1,230 2,)67 $7,584 99,746 50. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS SFlood Control Act of June 22, 1936, and subsequent acts require local interests to maintain and operate completed local protection Drojects in accordance with regulations prescribed by Secretary of Army. Inspections were made to determine extent of compli- a'lce and to advise local interests as necessary of measures re- quired to correct deficiencies. 1006 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local protection projects Spring Project Fall inspection inspecton 1965 1966 I . -I . Breevort levee, Indiana............................................. September............... May. June. Brookport, Ill.. Cannelton, Ind ..................................................... Cincinnati, Ohio.... .............................. ................. October... ............. October................ November............... May. April. Covington, Ky...................................... ............. November ............... April. D elphi, Ind .. ... .................................. ............ September .............. April. Evansville, Ind...... ................................ ............ October............. June. Gill Township levee, Indiana..................... .................. September............. April. Golconda, Ill.......... ............................... September....... ........ June. Harrisburg, Ill................................. ....... September....... ........ May. Hawesville, Ky.................................................. October... ............. May. Indianapolis, Ind........................... ........... October................. April. Jeffersonville-Clarksville, Ind............................... November............... May. Lawrenceburg, Ind..................................... November............... May. Levee unit 8, Indiana................................... ............. September........... April. Louisville, Ky.......................................... December............... July Lyford levee, Indiana.................................... .......... August..... ........ April. Muncie, Ind......................................... September............... April. New Albany, Ind................................. December................ May. Newport, Ky..................................................... November............... April. Niblack levee, Indiana......................... .................... November............... May. Paducah, Ky .... ............................... October................. June. Reevesville-Cache River, Ill....*..., September............... June. Rosielare, Ill ......................................... September............... June. Shawneetown, Ill............................................ August................. June. Taylorsville, Ky ....................................... December ............... May. Tell City, Ind............................... ............. October................. May. Terre Haute (Conover levee), Ind................ ...... August .................. April. Uniontown, Ky............................................. October ................. . June. Vincennes, Ind...... ........................................ September............... May. Channel improvements Brazil (Big Walnut Creek) Ind .......................... September 1965 Eel River, Ind ......................................... February 1966 Grassy Creek, Ind ...................................... December 1965 Indian Creek at Corydon, Ind ........................... January 1966 Jackson, Ky. (North Fork Ky. River) ................... December 1965 Neon-Fleming, Ky .................................. .... November 1965 Plum Creek, Ky ....................................... January 1966 Portland, Ind. (Salamonie River) ....................... September 1965 Bank revetments New Harmony Bridge, Wabash River ..................... August 1965 Rockport, Ind .......................................... M ay 1966 Fiscal year costs were $27,303. Total costs to June 30, 1966, were $263,792. FLOOD CONTROL--LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT" 1007 51. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Alts levee, Indiana (Wabash River)I... ................. And Oi River Basin, Ind.1................................. ..... A erson, White River, Ind.1...1905,2...................... 1940........ $5,724........... bIelevue, e ora. Ohio River Basin, Ind.2.................................................. Ohio River Basin, Ky. 2 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .... 16,109 ......... 6,597 .............. Btrvoort levee, Wabash River, Ind.................................. 1954 1,230,873 ........... Calif brookl -o I, River .R1,..BasinKy.2............. ...... Basin, Ky.2. .. .............................. . .... . .. " i g . . . 1iver . . . . ... . . . . . . . C ornia (Cincinnati) Ohio River Basin, Ohiol. ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .............. 16,465 ........... Carnnelton, Ohio River arrolton, Ohio River Basin, Ky..................................... 959 ....... Basin, Ind..... 2,068,391 ............. .9713........... C a'seyille , Ohio River Basin, Ky.1..... .......................... .... .............. ........... Cii 5 n-Rock, Ohio River Basin, 111.1.......................... 3.. .. ... . ... . . . . . .. . . . . . . Cinnati, Ohio River Basin, Ohio 1957 10,O150,935 ........... C !oSnati(unit 2) Ohio River Basin, Ohio.. ............ ................................. Clcinnati (unit 4 remainder) Ohio River Basin, Ohio 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . ves, Ohio River Basin, Ohio1........ ............................ 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 6,343 ........... on, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Wabash River) 6,848 ........... Coverort, Ohio River Basin, Ky.......................................... ... ...... cordia, Ohio River Basin, Ky.1 ................................ 0 ilnlgton, Ohio River Basin, Ky.. ............................... 1965 7,862,937 ........... to. Ohio River Basin, KIy.2.. .47,027......... 2 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e Creek Prairie levee, Indiana (Wabash River) 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. i', Ohio River Basin, Ind.1 (Wabash .. . River) ......... . . . . .1953 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i44ii,63 .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . IOhio River Basin, Ind. ............... .... .... I Sethtown, Ohio River Basin,3 111.1.......................................... . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . aIhnd. (Little Blue River) 2 . . . . .. . . . . . . . .1965 . . . . . .. . . 372,353. uth Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Ky. (ic.ing River) 263,821 ........... cer and Sunshine Gardens levee, Indiana (Wabash River Basin) 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . rnfort. Ohio River Gill.. 9i6iw Basin, Ky. (Kentucky 1tiver)4............... 3. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 8 3,361 : 6 .............. ::: :::: lownship levee unit, Indiana (Wabash River) 910 1 Gonda, Ohio River Basin, 111.3...1960 565,333............. adview, ray Ohio Creek, River County, Jackson Ind.37............................. ...1953 .... Basin, Ind.2.............................. ....... 1,144 .............. 70,304.............. Ilari sg, Ohio River Basin, Ill.................................1952 3 . .. .. . ... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 870,015.. aweville, Ohio River Basin, Ky. 1955 969,318.......... ladey Creek levee, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Wabash River). .......... ...... an Creek, Corydon, Ind.3 5 ...... 3.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19643........00,143 ....... on, Ky. (Kentucky River Basin) 1957 130,952 .............. rsonville-Clarksville, Ohio River Basin, Ind.3.................... 1959 4,226,361 .............. wrenceburg, Ohio River Basin, Ind.3..............................1953 2,433,414 ........... L venworth, Ohio River Basin, Ind.1.......... .............. vee units 1 and 2, Eel River, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Wabash River... .......................... Bas~in .2 evee unit 2, White River, Ind. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . eveeunit 3, East Fork of White River, .Ind.6...................... 1938 5 ........ . 27...... Levee units 1 and 2, Wabash River, 111.2.......................... 1938 ............. . Levee units 3 and 4, Wabash River, Ill.6........................ 1938216........................... evee unit 6, Ohio River Basin, Ill,. (Wabash River) 2 . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,595 ............. 3 . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . L Vee unit 8, White River, Ind. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1952 15 700,534 ............. evee units 9 and 10, White River, Ind. .. 1939 laiport, K y)1o..... . .o.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .o... . . 0. . . . .000..0 L ville, Ohio River Basin, K.3..... ........................ 1962 24643,521 ............ dlow, Ohio River Basin, Ky.................................. 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 8,104........... aod levee unit, Wabash River, Ind. .... o 1944 267,301........... MiaOn, Ohio River Basin, Ind.1. M4soin J. Niblack levee, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Wabash River). 3 ... 1965 . 1,553,979........ a9ckport, Ohio River Basin, Ind.1... ............................. Mtinnis levee, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Wabash River Basin)i....... 195071,049 Metamora Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Great Miami River) 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mropolis, Ohio River Basin, Ill.2 ....... ............................... 10,575........... M!lton, Ohio River Basin, Ky. ................................ ............... MIning City Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Ky. (Green River) 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350,474 ......... ......... MoncowOhio River Basin,3 Ohio3... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . uncie, White River, Ind. 1956 . 887,835 ,........ .. .. on-Fleming, Kentucky River, Ky.3 5........................... 1963 85,532 ........... Nw Albany, Ohio River Basin, Ind. 3 . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1957 5,375,471 ............. New Amsterdam, Ohio River Basin, Ind.l........................................ .............. e Harmony Bridge, Indiana....................... 2 ......... . .... ' 1959 297,624 .............. 'ew Harmony, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Wabash River) ............. . ........................... Newport, Ohio River Basin, Ky.3...... ........... .1959 7,512,987 ........... New Richmond, Ohio River Basin, Ohiol..... ...................... 7,104........... Owensboro, Ohio River Basin, Ky.2.... . .................... Paducalh, Ohio River Basin, Ky.3................................. 1059 . 4,7 1,552 ::::.... Patriot, Ohio River Basin, Ind.1........................... ortland, Salamonie River, Ind.3 5 ............................... .. 962. :::: .. See footnotes at end of table. 1008 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (Cont'd) For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report ..- --- _ Name of project see Annuald Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Prestonville, Ohio River Basin, Ky.l .. ............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................. Raccoon Creek levee, Ind. (Wabash River)'' Reevesville, Ohio River Basin, Ill. Cache River)3................... 1954 $600,300 .. Rising Sun, Ohio River Basin, Ind.................... 2. ... . .. .. . . . . .......................................... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. Rockport, Ohio River Basin, Ind. 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. Rome, Ohio River Basin, Ind. 3. . . ........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. Rosiclare, Ill. (Ohio, River) 1954 622,544 ........... Russell and Allison levee, Illinois (Wabash River) 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,676 . Salyersville, Licking River, Ky.2..... ...................... 194........ 1946 12,000 .......... Shawneetown, Ohio River Basin, 111.2......... . ......................... .......... Shoals, East Fork of White River, Ind.1 ............................. I1938 Shuflebarger levee, Ohio River Basin, Ind. (Wabash River Basin)..... 1950 64,487 ......... Smithiand, Ohio River Basin, Ky.l... ..... Sugar Creek levee, Ohio River Basin. Ind. (Wabash River Basin)l...... 1961 ........ 28,061 . .... Taylorsville, Ohio River Basin, Ky. (Salt River)3........ ........... 1952 373,050......... Tell City, Ohio River Basin, Ind..... ........................ 3 . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. 1956 932,229.......... Terre Haute (Conover levee) Ind., (Wabash River). 1965 14,913......... Tolu, Ohio River Basin, Ky.1........ 1 . . . ........ . . . . . .. . . . . ......... . . . .................. ........... Troy, Ohio River Basin, Ind.......... .:: .. .. ... . ... Uniontown, Ohio River Basin, Ky.3............................... 19561 070,926.......... Utica, Ohio River Basin, Ind.1............................... 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ........................ Vevay, Ohio River Basin, Ind. Vincennes,Ind.7.............................................. . 1964 3 8....: ,940 ... West Point, Ohio River Basin, Ky.... ............................... ...... 4,490......... Westport, Ohio River Basin, Ky............................. ........................ Wilder, Ohio River Basin, Ky.2........ .... ...................... ...... ...... 5,165 ......... x Inactive. 2 To be restudied. 8 Completed. 4Deferred portion of project. For active portion, see individual report. 5 Authorized by Chief of Engineers under see. 205, 1948 Flood Control Act as amended. 0 Awaiting local cooperation. SPartially completed to form a useful unit. Remaining portion of project awaiting local cooperation. 52. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Study Fiscal year costs Carr Fork, Vicco, Ky ......................................... $1,00 Dick's Creek, Middletown, Ohio ................................. '6 Manchester, Ky ................................................ 8 Mill Creek, Jefferson County, Ky ................................. 11,628 M illtown, Ind ................................................. 1,000 North Fork of Licking River, Ky................................ 800 Rushville, Ind. (Flatrock River) ............................... 1,524 Russellville, Ky. (Town Branch) ................................ 5,475 Triplett Creek at Morehead, Ky ................................. 694 Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Costs during fiscal year were $25,901 for advance preparation, $21,290 for flood emergency operations, and $20,435 for rehabili" tation of one flood control work, the Granny Tweedle levee, Illinois. Snagging and clearing navigable streams and tributaries in interest of flood control (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Cong.) Project Fiscal year costs Manchester, Ky. (Goose Creek) ................................. $1,403 Troublesome Creek at Hindman, Ky ............................. 20,789 Whitesburg, Ky. (North Fork of Kentucky River) ................. 2,519 GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-LOUISVILLE, KY., DISTRICT 1009 53. SURVEYS Fiscal year costs were $1,660,910, of which $14,333 was for lavigation study, $190,882 for flood control studies, $3,058 for COordinated watershed studies, $274,163 for Ohio River Basin reView, $514,805 for Wabash River Basin comprehensive study, and $663,669 for Appalachian area water resources study. 54. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Fiscal year costs were $35,516. Work continued on flood plain information studies of Little Miami River, Ohio; Louisville and Jefferson County, Ky.; Campbell and Kenton Counties, Ky.; Paducah and McCracken County, Ky.; and Pigeon Creek at 1Vansville, Ind. 55. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Fiscal year costs were $13,221, of which $9,748 was for engi- 'eering studies and $3,473 for hydrologic studies and collection and analysis of hydrologic data. HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT * This district comprises central and southeastern Ohio, all but northern panhandle and northeastern portion of West Virginia, astern Kentucky, a portion of midwestern Virginia, a very Small portion of northwestern Virginia, and a very small portion f northwestern North Carolina, embraced in drainage basin of Ohio River and its tributaries from about mile 127.2 (below Pitts- urgh, Pa.) to mile 438, immediately upstream from Foster, Ky. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Flood Control-Continued 1. Constructions of locks and 24. Mill Creek Reservoir, Ohio 1027 dams on Ohio River ... 1011 25. Mt. Vernon, Ohio ....... .1028 2. Kanawha River, W. Va... 1012 26. Muskingum River Reser- 3. Open-channel work, Ohio voirs, Ohio ............ 1029 River .............. 1013 27. Newark, Ohio .......... 1030 4. Other authorized naviga- 28. North Branch of Kokosing tion projects .......... 1013 Reservoir, Ohio ....... .1031 29. North Fork of Pound Res- Flood Control ervoir, Ohio .......... .031 5. A 1 u m Creek Reservoir, 30. Ohio River Basin (Hunt- Ohio 6. Athens, ................ 1014 ington Dist.) ......... 1032 Ohio ........... 1014 31. Paint Creek Reservoir, 7. Barboursville, W. Va. ... 8. Beech Fork Reservoir, W. 1015 Ohio River Basin, Ohio . 1036 32. Paintsville Reservoir, Ky.. 1036 9. Va. .................. 1015 33. Panther Creek Reservoir, Big Darby Reservoir, Ohio 1037 W. Va................ River Basin, Ohio ..... 1016 10* Bluestone Reservoir, Ohio 34.. R. D. Bailey Reservoir, River Basin, W. Va. ... W. Va ................ 1037 11. Burnsville Reservoir, 1017 Ohio 35. Rockcastle Creek, Inez, Ky. 1038 River Basin, W. Va. ... 1018 36. Roseville, Ohio ......... 1039 12. Deer Creek Reservoir, Ohio 37. Salt Creek Reservoir, Ohio 1039 River Basin, Ohio .... 38. Summersville Reservoir, 13. Delaware Reservoir, Ohio 1018 Ohio River Basin, W. River Basin, Ky....... 1019 Va .................. 1040 14, Dewey Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Ohio ..... 1020 39. iRiver S utton tt o Reservoir, Basin, W. Va. ... Ohio 15. Dillon Reservoir, 0Ohio 40. Tom Jenkins Reservoir, River Basin, Ohio ...... 16. East Lynn Reservoir, Ohio 1021 Ohio River Basin, Ohio 1042 41. Yatesville Reservoir, Ky. .' 1042 River Basin, W. Va ..... 1022 17. Fishtrap Reservoir, Ohio 42. Inspection of completed River Basin, Ky flood control projects .. 1043 18. Grayson Reservoir, ...... Ky. ... 43. Other authorized flood con- 19. John W. Flannagan 1023 Darnm trol projects .......... 1044 and Reservoir, Ohio 44. Flood control work under River Basin, Va ...... 1024 special authorization .. 1045 20. Little Sinking Creek, General Investigations 2*. 21. Grahn, Ky............ 1025 45. Surveys ................ 1045 22. Martin, Ky............. 1026 23* Massillon, Ohio ........ Middle Fork of Mud River, 1026 46. Collection and study of basic data ............ 1045 W. Va .............. 1027 47. Research and development 1046 1. CONSTRUCTION OF LOCKS AND DAMS ON OHIO RIVER See this heading under Ohio River portion. 1012 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 2. KANAWHA RIVER, W. VA. Location. River is 97 miles long, formed by junction of New and Gauley Rivers, a short distance above Kanawha Falls, W. Va, flows generally northwesterly and empties into Ohio River at Point Pleasant, W. Va. Previous projects. For details see pages 90-98 of Annual Re- port for 1875, page 1913 of Annual Report of 1915, and page 1309 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Three dams on Kanawha River with twi" locks having usable dimensions of 56 by 360 feet, and one dam of Ohio River near Gallipolis, Ohio, with one lock 110 by 600 feet and one lock 110 by 360 feet, to furnish a 9-foot navigable depth from mouth to a point 90.57 miles above. For authorization Of existing project see page 1152 of Annual Report for 1962. Ne work for existing project as completed cost $22,872,770. Local cooperation. None required. Licenses. Under licenses issued by Federal Power Commiis sion, the Kanawha Valley Power Corp. constructed hydroelectric plants at the three locks and dams on Kanawha River. Follow ing is information relative to charges to the corporation: Cumulative collections through License No. Site Annual fee calendar year , $928000 1175....................... London locks & dam.................... . $32,000 $928 1175.................. .... Marmet locks & dam..................... 32,000 928:0 1290.................... .... Winfield locks & dam...... ............ .. 40,000 1120,000 Totals................ ......... .. 104,000 2,97600 Terminal facilities. There are 74 terminals from 30 miles east of Charleston, W. Va., to the mouth. Terminals are constructed principally of steel and wood mooring piles and steel sheet pile mooring cells. Forty of these terminals have railroad connec* tions. One terminal, paved wharf, is owned by city of Charles- ton. Remaining terminals are privately owned. Principal coMd modities handled are coal, chemicals, acids, gasoline and oil, and sand and gravel. For further information see Annual Report for 1962, page 1152. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations an maintenance, general: Locks and dams were operated as re- quired and necessary repairs and improvements were made there, to, and to appurtenant structures and grounds. Channel inspec' tions were conducted periodically. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project beg l in 1931 and was completed in 1937. Project was complete II all respects in 1954. All structures are in operation and avail able depth for navigation is 9 feet from mouth of river to head of improvement. Above improved portion of river, minimutltl depth in channel is less than 1 foot. For details of locks and dams see page 1153 of Annual Report for 1962. RIVERS AND HARBORS-HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1013 Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Operations Name of project New work and mainte- Rehabilitation Total nance, general I I I I-- lar.. egu ...... .................. . $9,369,334 1$12,648,141 $22,017,475 Ub q*i.... Eregency ............ relief... ................ .......... 1 9,004,800 . ............ 9,004,800 Works acceleration, Executive-193......... Public 4,498,636 4,498,636 .............. .............. 130,394 i -- Total....... ................... 22,872,770 -i 12,6418,141 i 130,394 235,651,305 I _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ , I , , I _ $5,159,879 expended between July 1884 and June 30, 1936, on operation and care of work h Ovement under provisions of permanent indefinite appropriations for such purposes, of S$1,276,366 expended on existing project. xcludes surplus property valued at $8,257 transferred to project without reimbursement. Cost and financial statement Fiscal Total to Year..............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Now ork: Appropriated. ........ .227,167,382 2$ Maint .................. aintenance: ..................... ... ...... 227,167,382 ADI)ropriated.......... $730,997 $612,000 $637,839 $939,900 $810,400 316,611,747 .-- , 0 .. .I .. ..767,528 41 0 39 16,531,655 lehost ltation: Aehab i........ .... ' 713,044 709,982 641,008 905,208 PPropriated.......... .. .......... 131,500 .............- 1,106...... 4130,394 'st........................... 50,915 79,479................... 130,394 s ncludes $4,294,612 for new work and $3,883,513 for maintenance for previous projects. alcludes $4,498,636 emergency relief funds and $9,004,800 public works funds. S cludes surplus property valued at $8,257 transferred to project without reimbursement. lOtted under accelerated Public Works program. 3. OPEN-CHANNEL WORK, OHIO RIVER See this heading under Ohio River portion. 4. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS, For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance . I liver, W. Va. and Ky., including Levisa and Tug Forks .. 1952 $1,586,236 151,471,299 W. Va.3.................................. 4 ..................... ......... 1903 30,259 .............. r,W. Va. .......... iver, W . Va.5........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1903 1915 . 14,761 .............. 27,500 wha River, W . Va.6.................................... 1960 470,536 1,023,854 River, Ohio7.......................................... 1955 301,912 86,171,897 Va. and W . Va.5S... ...... .......................... 1899 109,691 at Portsmouth, Ohio-............................... 1953 10,951 16,593 eludes $131,473 contributed by local interest for maintenance of lock 1 in fiscal years 2, inclusive, in addition $98,512 expended from operation and maintenance funds for of lock and dam 3 for local water supply and recreation. In addition, $140,068 expended unds transferred from Department of Commerce, under accelerated public works program, pairs of eroded bank at lock 3 on Big Sandy River, at Louisa, Ky. )eration and maintenance suspended June 30, 1952. >rk closed September 1902. Property transferred to Kanawha River improvements. >rk closed September 1902. Abandonment recommended in H. Doc. 467, 69th Cong. >rk suspended.IIIenI eration and maintenance suspended June 30, 1951. Ilections from licensed non-Federal hydroelectric utilities for use of dams on Muskingum for fiscal years 1923-1953 were $79,154. eludes $5,663 and $378, respectively, contributed funds for reconstruction of dam 10, and Ittent operation of lock 1 for benefit of Marietta Boat Club, Inc., subsequent to June 54. ivate Law 945, August 31, 1954, authorized Secretary of Treasury to pay Portsmouth and Gravel Co. $75,000 in full settlement of claims against Government for damages re- Cfrom change in Scioto River Channel. 1014 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 5. ALUM CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO Location. Damsite is in Delaware County, Ohio, on Alum Creek, a tributary of Big Walnut Creek, 26 miles above mouth of Alum Creek and 15 miles north of Columbus, Ohio. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rolled earth- fill dam 95 feet high and 9,620 feet long with a 721-foot concrete gravity channel section; a gated spillway in channel section con" trolled by five 21- by 38-foot tainter gates; and outlet works con" sisting of four 4.5-foot gated sluices through spillway section. Reservoir will provide a total storage of 124,000 acre-feet; con" trol a drainage area of 123 square miles; and necessitate reloca- tion or reconstruction of 10.3 miles of highways, 3.6 miles of powerlines, 8.3 miles of telephonelines, 1.3 miles of oil and gas lines and 4 cemeteries containing 1,615 graves. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for pro- tection of Columbus, Ohio, lower Alum Creek and Scioto and Ohio Valleys, generally. Project authorized for construction under 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost of project (1966) is $29,100,000. Local cooperation. Non-Federal interests must operate and maintain proposed fish and wildlife recreation facilities at aI estimated annual cost of $3,000; reimburse Federal Government for cost of water supply feature, computed to be 48.7 percent of total project cost, excluding cost of recreation facilities and de- sign, supervision and administration applicable thereto; and pay for operation and maintenance of water supply facilities, esti- mated to be $30,000 annually. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies were initiated. An aerial survey contract, awarded December 2, 1965, was 87 percent complete at end of fiscal year. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies, initiated in fiscal year 1966, were continued. Preconstruction planning is 45 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to 6 Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work:3 Appropriated...................... ............ ............ ............ $211,363 $211,363 Cost.............................. ................................ 192,288 192,288 6. ATHENS, 01110 Location. In Athens County, Ohio, on Hocking River, about 37 miles above confluence with Ohio River. Existing project. Channel improvement of about 22,000 feet of Hocking River by widening and straightening and snagging and clearing for an additional 13,000 feet. Project will reduce average annual damages at Athens by 88 percent. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $4,860,000; non-Federal cost, $2,870,000, for lands and damages and utility relocations. Proj- ect was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 287, 89th Con'.) .' FLOOD CONTROL-HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1015 Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way; hold the United States free fron damages; maintain project after completion; provide neces- Sary relocations; and prevent any encroachments on capacities of channel within limits of project. By letter dated January 14, 1965, the Board of Directors of Hocking Conservancy District in- dicated their intent to furnish formal assurances required for the Project. Operations and results during year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning not initiated. 7. BARBOURSVILLE, W. VA. Location. On Guyandot River in vicinity of Water Street at WVest end of city of Barboursville, W. Va. 'Existingproject. Remedial measures for correction of exist- ing bank slippage and surface erosion on right descending bank f Guyandot River adjacent to city limits of Barboursville, W. Va. roject authorized under Public Law 88-121 at a total Federal cost not to exceed $150,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Completed con- struction contract covering entire project, awarded October 27, 1964. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project com- plete. Cost and financial statement Total to iscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. Appropriated.................................. $150,000 ........... . .. ... $150,000 Cost.................................... 17,515 $124,346 $3052 144,913 8. BEECH FORK RESERVOIR, W. VA. Location. Damsite is in Wayne County, W. Va., on Beech Pork Creek, a tributary of Twelvepole Creek, 3.7 miles above mouth of Beech Fork Creek and 20.1 miles above confluence of Twelvepole Creek and the Ohio River. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rolled earth- fill dam about 91 feet high and 1,070 feet long; an uncontrolled spillway at left abutment of dam; and an outlet tunnel through left abutment of dam with control structure at upstream end. Reservoir will provide for a total storage of 43,785 acre-feet, con- trol a drainage area of 78.2 square miles and necessitate con- Struction of 17 miles of telephone and power lines, 3 miles of pipe lines, 9 miles of State roads, 1 school, and 3 cemeteries containing about 100 graves. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of co- ordinated reservoir system for protection of Lavalette, W. Va., and Twelvepole and Ohio Valleys, generally. Existing project Was authorized under 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Fed- eral cost of new work (1966) is $13,400,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. 1016 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies were initiated for inclusion in general design memorandum, and work on general design memorandum advanced to 75 percent completion. Completed phase I of an aerial survey contract, awarded in November 1964. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies, initiated in fiscal year 1965, were continued. Preconstruction planning was 85 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 0 Appropriated.......... ............ .. .......... $160,000 $200,000 $360 000 Cost................................................ 114,735 202,499 317234 9. BIG DARBY RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Damsite is in Franklin County, Ohio, on Big DarbY Creek, a tributary of Scioto River, 29 miles above mouth of Big Darby Creek and 130 miles above mouth of Scioto River. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rolled earth fill dam 101 feet above streambed and 5,920 feet long, with a con- crete gravity channel section; a gated spillway in channel section controlled by six 47- by 30-foot tainter gates; and, outlet works consisting of three 5-foot-8-inch by 10-foot sluices. Reservoir will provide for a total storage of 128,960 acre-feet; control a drainage area of 448 square miles; and necessitate relocation or reconstruction of 2.8 miles of highways, 1 mile of railroad tracks, 5.5 miles of telephone lines, 5.8 miles of powerlines; and one cemetery. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Big Darby Creek Valley and Scioto and Ohio River Valleys, generally. Existing project waS selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $32,800,000. Local cooperation. Non-Federal interests will operate and maintain fish and wildlife facilities at an estimated cost of $15,000 annually. Operations and results during fiscal year. An architect-engi- neer contract was awarded in September 1965 for developing supplementary exploration for the damsite, preparing geologY and soils design memorandum and a supplement to the general design memorandum. All work under contract is about 83 percent complete. Other engineering studies were continued. Acquired 38 tracts of land. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies continued. Acquired 38 of 370 tracts of land required for project. FLOOD CONTROL---HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1017 Cost and financial statement ea 'FClalyear* Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. Appropriated.......... ............ $250,000 $331,000 $924,200$1,200,000 $2,705,200 .............. 177,717 350,582 400,916 1,424,370 12,359,585 SEXcludes surplus property valued at $23 transferred to project without reimbursement. 10. BLUESTONE RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, W. VA. Location. Dam is on New River in Summers County, W. Va., bout 2.5 miles above IHinton, W. Va., and 1 mile above con- fuhence of New and Greenbrier Rivers. Reservoir is in Summers County, W. Va., and Giles County, Va. hExisting project. A concrete gravity dam with a maximum ight of 180 feet and an overall length of 2,048 feet, consisting ot 790 feet of spillway section, 330 feet of powerhouse intake structure, and 928 feet of nonoverflow sections and abutments. Reservoir extends about 36 miles upstream from dam and pro- Vides for gross storage of 631,000 acre-feet. Estimated Federal ost of project is $29,187,181. Existing project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of June 22, 1936, and June 28, 1938. For further details see page 1453 of Annual Report for 1939, and Pages 1173 and 1174 of Annual Report for 1962. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Plan- ing toward raising 4.33 miles of State Secondary road down- ktream from dam is complete. An agreement with the State lIoad Commission of West Virginia was approved whereby they Would perform the work and be reimbursed ($250,000) by the Covernment. Work, initiated in October 1965, is 22 percent omIplete. This section of road is flooded when the reservoir is being emptied under approved plan of operation. One tract of land was acquired for recreation expansion, under completed PrOjects program. Operations and maintenance, general: Res- ervoir was operated for benefit of flood control as required, and pecessary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances. 'acilities for accommodation and protection of visiting public Were maintained in good condition. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction work, raising of 4.33 miles of secondary road below dam, initiated in October 1965 by the State Road Commission, is 22 percent complete. Reim- bursement of $250,000 to the State is being made by the Govern- Glent. Dam is complete and reservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of New, Kanawha and Ohio Valleys, generally. Construction of dam was initiated 1" January 1942 and completed in April 1952. Total land ac- quired was 21,927 acres in fee and flowage easement over 546 acres. 1018 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work:1 81 Appropriated.......... $2,000 $10,000 $4,124 $277,700 . 1$2 197,1 Cost................. 881 9,728 188 1,859 $60,302 228,976 17 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 90,800 112,500 76,200 153,800 144,700 31,406 979 Cost................. 91,545 79,093 95,176 143,211 159,419 1,3964, SIncludes $9,698 allotted under accelerated public works program, $3,700 for recreational fa cilities under completed projects program and $543,960 emergency relief funds.r 2 Excludes surplus property valued at $26,839 transferred to project without reimbursement Excludes surplus property valued at $1,773 transferred from project without reimbursement 11. BURNSVILLE RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, W. VA. Location. Damsite is in Braxton County, W. Va., on Little Kanawha River 0.9 mile above Burnsville, W. Va., and 123.5 miles above confluence of Little Kanawha and Ohio Rivers. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rolled earth- fill dam, 107 feet high and 785 feet long; an uncontrolled spillway at right abutment of dam; and a gate controlled conduit through right abutment of dam. Reservoir will provide for a total storage of 66,000 acre-feet, control a drainage area of 165.5 square miles and necessitate relocation of 12.8 miles of State roads; 11.1 minles of power and telephone lines, 4 schools and 14 cemeteries co1' taining about 650 graves. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of town of Burns' ville and Little Kanawha and Ohio Valleys generally. Existing project selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $21,800,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies prerequisite to preparation of general design memorandum were continued. General design memorandum is 35 percent complete. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies continued. Preconstruction planning 42 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work:16 Appropriated.................... $35,000 -$284 $200,000 $22,500 Cost.............. . ............ 27,081 7,471 14,526 172,820 221,898 12. DEER CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Damsite is in Pickaway County, Ohio, on Deer Creek, a tributary of Scioto River, 21.0 miles above mouth of Deer Creek and 1.05.8 miles above mouth of Scioto River. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rolled earth- fill dam 93 feet high and 3,880 feet long, with a 741-foot con" crete gravity channel section; a gated spillway in channel sectiol controlled by three 42- by 32-foot tainter gates; outlet works con' sisting of five 5- by 5.5-foot gated sluices through concrete spill- FLOOD CONTROL--HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1019 Way section discharging into stilling basin; and an earth dike 15 by 4,600 feet in a saddle 3.8 miles southwest of damsite. Reservoir will provide a total storage of 102,540 acre-feet and control a drainage area of 278 square miles. For further proj- ect details see Annual Report for 1965, page 939. Existing Droject was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated Fed- eral cost for new work (1966) is $21,400,000. Local cooperation. Non-Federal interests must operate and maintain proposed fish and wildlife facilities at an estimated an- f1ual cost of $15,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies continued. Phase II of a photogrammetric survey contract, awarded in December 1962, was completed. Contract for con- struction of dam and dikes, awarded June 24, 1965, was ad- Vanced to 42 percent completion. Acquired 41 tracts of land. Condition at end of fiscal year. Photogrammetric survey con- tract, phase II, is complete. Contract for construction of dam and dikes is 42 percent complete. Acquired 52 of 137 tracts of land required for project. Cost and financial statement placalTotal to "SalYear....... ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: APropriated.......... ............ $240,000 $201,000 $561,000$5,575,000 $6,577,000 ost . . . 98,688 210,018 676,840 5,447,458 16,433,004 1 xcludes surplus property valued at $9,806 transferred to project without reimbursement. 13. DELAWARE RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Dam is on Olentangy River about 6 miles above and north of Delaware, Ohio, and 32 miles above confluence of Olentangy and Scioto Rivers at Columbus, Ohio. Reservoir is in Delaware, Marion, and Morrow Counties, Ohio. Existingq project. A rolled-earthfill dam having a gate con- trolled gravity ogee-type spillway in channel containing five out- let conduits. Dam is about 18,600 feet long, having a maximum height of 92 feet. Completed project provides for storage of 132,800 acre-feet from a tributary drainage area of 381 square miles. For further details see Annual Report for 1962, page 1160. Existing project was authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act. Federal cost of project as completed was $7,631,821. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to Structures and appurtenances. Condition at end of fiscal year. Dam and its appurtenances are complete and reservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Olentangy, Scioto, and Ohio Valleys, generally. Construction of dam was started in April 1946 and completed in July 1948. All construction operations 1020 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 were completed in October 1951. Total real estate requirements were completed which include acquisition of 7,703 acres in fee and flowage easements over 2,428 acres. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year.............. .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 821 Appropriated .......... .$7,631 Cost......................7:631:821 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $54,100 $62,000 $48,500 $69,200 $92,500 715, Cost.................. 53,128 52,561 52,723 75,234 89,734 2712,787 I Excludes surplus property valued at $10,176 transferred to project without reimbursement' $ Excludes surplus property valued at $1,992 transferred from project without reimbursement. 14. DEWEY RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, KY. Location. Dam is on Johns Creek, about 7 miles southeast of Paintsville, Ky., and 5.4 miles above confluence of Johns Creek and Levisa Fork of Big Sandy River. Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam having a maximum height of 118 feet and a total length of 913 feet; controlled outlet works discharging through a tunnel in left abutment; an uncon- trolled spillway discharging through a channel excavated in left or west abutment; and a rolled-earthfill dike which blocks a low divide to Brandykeg Creek and Levisa Fork. Reservoir provides storage of 93,300 acre-feet, and controls a drainage area of 207 square miles. For further project details see Annual Report for 1965, page 940. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost is $6,657,058. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations and maintenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances. Facilities for accommodation and protection of visiting public were maintained in good condition. Condition at end of fiscal year. Dam is complete and is being operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Levisa Fork, Big Sandy and Ohio Valleys, generally. Con- struction of dam was initiated in March 1946 and completed in July 1949. All construction is complete. Total acreage involved has been acquired and consists of 12,186 acres in fee and flowage easements over 1,170 acres. FLOOD CONTROL-HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1021 Cost and financial statement . . . Total to iseal Year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Nework: APpropriated ......... -$1,766 $23,200 $487 $99,956 $32,000 1$6,657,058 Coat. 10,239............ 137 26,525,195 os ................. Maite ltenance: 152,592 13,404 0* Appropriated ......... 47,400 48,000 55,500 70,800 87,000 756,417 Cost............... .. 46,579 46,256 49,697 78,944 86,948 3756,094 ti I n cludes $23,087 allotted under accelerated public works program and $132,556 for recrea- 'aal facilities under completed projects program. a Exclud(es surplus property valued at $17,200 transferred to project without reimbursement. Excludes surplus property valued at $1,993 transferred from project without reimbursement. 15. DILLON RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Dam is on Licking River, Ohio, 5.8 miles above confluence of Licking and Muskingum Rivers at Zanesville, Ohio. hExisting project. A rolled-earthfill dam with a maximum eight and length of 118 and 1,400 feet, respectively; controlled- outlet works discharging through a 20-foot conduit in right abut- bent; and ungated 280-foot spillway adjacent to left abutment of dan; and two rolled earthfill dikes. Reservoir provides for Storage of 261,110 acre-feet and controls an area of 748 square miles. For further project details see Annual Report for 1962, Dage 1162. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act Estimate of Federal cost for new work (1964) is $30,- 560,000o. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: All Work complete except remedial measures at outlet works. Opera- tions and maintenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were fmade to structures and appurtenances. . Condition at end of fiscal year. Dam is complete and reservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for pro- tection of Zanesville, Ohio, and Muskingum and Ohio Valleys, generally. Construction of project was initiated in July 1946 With relocation of Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in reservoir. Work remaining consists of remedial work to correct a slide at OUtlet works. Total acreage involved has been acquired and Consist of 8,206 acres in fee and flowage easements over 5,181 acres. _Cost and financial statement Total to year............... liseal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work: Appropriated.......... -$80,000 $160,000 $120,000 .......... $40,000 $30,155,000 .ost ................. 285,192 165,418 35,248 $105,848 41,436 130,140,091 intenance: Appropriated ......... 43,550 46,000 50,000 86,700 80,000 336,700 Cost................. 43,124 46,053 45,326 91,460 75,345 2331,759 S Excludes surplus propertyvdued at $770 transferred from project without reimbursement. Excludes surplus property valued at $325 transferred to project without reimbursement. 1022 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 16. EAST LYNN RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, W. VA. Location. Damsite is in Wayne County, W. Va., on East Fork on Twelvepole Creek, 10 miles above mouth of East Fork and 42 miles above confluence of Twelvepole Creek and Ohio River. Existing project. Provides for construction of an earthfill dam having a maximum height of 122 feet, top lengoth of 650 feet and top width of 32 feet; an uncontrolled spillway with a crest length of 150 feet near left abutment; and a 13-foot reinforced tunnel in right abutment with control structure at upstream end. Reservoir will provide for a total storage of 82,500 acre-feet, from a drainage area of 133 square miles, and will necessitate re- location or reconstruction of 12.4 miles of state roads; 15.5 miles of powerlines; 10.6 miles of telephone lines; 27.8 miles of gas lines; 34 cemeteries containing approximately 2,460 graves; and construction of one school building. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of towns of East Lynn and Wayne, W. Va., and Twelvepole Creek and Ohio River Valleys, generally. Existing project selected for construc" tion under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in Flood Control Act of 1938. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $24,900,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies continued. Phase II of aero-survey contract was completed. A contract was awarded June 30, 1965, for relocation of first section of State Route 37. Work advanced to 60 percent completionl Bids for construction of tunnel and outlet works were opened June 23, with contract to be awarded early in July 1966. Ac- quired 31 tracts of land. Condition at end of fiscal year. Phase II of acro-survey con- tract complete. Engineering studies continued. Contract for relocation of State Route 37, first section, is 60 percent complete. Acquired 50 of 553 tracts of land required for the project. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated......... ............$150,000 $253,200 $800,800 $3,056,000 $4,260,00 cost ............................. 1341,269 237,819 651,617 2,257,885 13,281,590 1 Excludes surplus property valued at $4,183 transferred to project without reimbursement' 17. FISHTRAP RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, KY. Location. Damsite is on Levisa Fork in Pike County, Ky. about 2.6 miles above confluence of Levisa and Russell Forks, and 103 miles above mouth of Levisa Fork. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rockfill danT with a maximum height of 195 feet, an overall length of 1,100 feet, and top width of 32 feet. An excavated spillway will be provided at left abutment and controlled by four 57- by 35-foot tainter gates. Reservoir will provide for a total storage of 164,360 acre-feet and control a drainage area of about 395 FLOOD CONTROL-HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1023 square miles. Its construction will require either abandonment or relocation of 17.7 miles of branch line of one railroad and raising and relocation of about 4.3 miles of track of another rail- road. Other relocations are: 37.8 miles of roads; 8.5 miles of telephone lines; 13.5 miles of powerlines; 2.1 miles of gas pipe- lines; and 48 cemeteries containing about 2,300 graves. Reser- Voir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Levisa Fork and Big Sandy River Valleys, gen- erally, and to a lesser degree, Ohio River Valley. Existing proj- ect was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $55,700,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Completed outlet Works and road relocations except State Route 366. Construc- tion of dam, spillway, and intake structure, initiated in April 1965, was continued. Following construction contracts were awarded and work continued: Johns Creek School, initiated in August 1965; Millard High School, initiated in October 1965; relocation of 27 cemeteries, initiated in December 1965; reloca- tion of 17 cemeteries, initiated in May 1966; and Kimper Ele- ilentary School, initiated in December 1965. Acquired 252 tracts of land. Condition at end of fiscal year. All road relocations except State Route 366 are complete. Contracts for dam, spillway and intake structure, 37 percent complete; Millard High School, 29 )ercent complete, Johns Creek School, 81 percent complete; relo- cation of 27 cemeteries; 91 percent complete; relocation of 17 cemeteries, 39 percent complete; and Kimper Elementary School, 35 percent complete. Acquired 1,209 tracts of land out of 1,306 required for the project. Cost and financial statement Neaaly sal Year... 1962 1963 1964 1965 Total to 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work: APropriated .......... $2,047,000 $7,980,000 $16,939,000 $4,525,000 $6,995,000 $39,079,510 Cost... 1,522,8887,261,1626,991,49216,504,6625,107,896 137,967,698 1 Excludes surplus property valued at $1,928 transferred from project without reimbursement. 18. GRAYSON RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is on Little Sandy River, Ky., 48.5 miles above its confluence with Ohio River and 11 stream miles above town of Grayson, Ky. Existing project. Provides for construction of a random earthfill dam with a maximum height of 120 feet and a total crest length of 1,460 feet; controlled outlet works discharging through a 14 -foot diameter horseshoe tunnel in left abutment; and an un- controlled 200-foot spillway beyond left abutment. Reservoir Will provide for total storage of 119,000 acre-feet; control a drainage area of 196 square miles, and necessitate relocation of reconstruction of 14.9 miles of roads, 17.6 miles of powerlines, 2.6 1024 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 miles of telephone lines, about 0.06 mile of gaslines, and 47 cemeteries having about 1,200 graves. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Gray- son, Ky., and Little Sandy and Ohio River Valleys generally. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1960 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $18,800,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Contract for con- struction of outlet works was advanced to 92 percent completion; dam, spillway and highway bridge was advanced to 26 percent completion. Other contracts initiated and continued: Reloca- tion of State Routes 7 and 1122, December 1965; relocation of State Routes 504 and 649, February 1966; and relocation of State Routes 7 (part I) and 986, March 1966; reservoir clearing, part 1, awarded June 24, 1966. Acquired 216 tracts of land. Condition at end of fiscal year. Contracts for construction of outlet works, 92 percent complete; dam, spillway and highwaY bridge, 26 percent complete; relocation of State Routes 504 and 649, 53 percent complete; relocation of State Routes 7 and 1122, 48 percent complete; relocation of State Routes 7, part I, and 986, 22 percent completion; and contract for reservoir clearing, part It not initiated. Acquired 390 of 489 tracts of land for the project. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year.. ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: $91,379 Appropriated.......... $5,800,000 $371,000 $680,000$4,200,000 379 $11,142 91,199 Cost.................. 312,975 568,465 3,959,5634,482,356 19,414:558 1 Excludes surplus property valued at $18,870 transferred to project without reiznbursenent* 19. JOHN W. FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, VA. Location. Dam is on Pound River in Dickenson County, Va., about 1.8 miles above confluence of Russell Fork and Pound River and 150 miles above mouth of Big Sandy River. Existing project. A rockfill dam having a maximum height of 252 feet, top length of 970 feet, and top and base widths of 30 and 1,030 feet, respectively. Outlet tunnel will be near left abutment with control structure at upstream end. A spillway controlled bY six tainter gates is to be provided in a saddle about 0.3 mile up" stream from damsite. Reservoir will provide for about 145,700 acre-feet of storage and control about 222 square miles of drain- age area. Project will require construction or relocation of 19 miles of secondary roads, 2 highway bridges, 1.8 miles of power- lines, 0.3 mile of telephone lines and moving 4 cemeteries of about 70 graves. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Pound, Russell Fork, Levisa Fork and Big Sandy Valleys, generally, and to a lesser degree for Ohio River Valley. Existing project was selected for construc- tion under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Project was modified, after construction be- FLOOD CONTROL--HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1025 Ran to provide water quality control features by adding control gates to previously uncontrolled spillway, thus increasing total storage capacity by about 39,000 acre-feet. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $19,800,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. tOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: con- tract for construction of spillway gates and access road con- inued. Contract consummated with Virginia Highway Depart- 'Ient for their performance of all highway relocations required or Water quality control features of the project. Construction of recreation facilities, phase II, was completed. Acquired 34 tracts of land. Operation 'and maintenance, general:. Construc- tion of dam, spillway and outlet works completed for operation becernber 15, 1963. Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to struc- ures and appurtenances. Condition at end of fiscal year. Contract for construction of 'Pillway gates is 97 percent complete. Construction of recrea- tion facilities is complete. Acquired 364 of 400 tracts of land re- uired for project. Construction of project began in February 1960 and is 93 percent complete. _ _ _ _ Cost and financial statement N yeal to '2Total Year 1962 1963 1964 1065 1066 June 30, 1066 New Work: Proipriated.......... $3,790,000 $3,463,000 $2,201,000$4,620,000$2,180,000 $19,755,000 Maintenan c .3,642,2803,933,9402,262,8522,531,370, 3,217,067 118,416,374 ice: APPro priated.......... ..................... 20,000 51,800 82,300 154,100 cost.. ....... ..... ..... 14,129 57,235 72,742 2144,106 1 , 'I " I .1_ __ _ _ EXcludes surplus property valued at $19,607 transferred to project without reimbursement. Xcludes surplus property valued at $549 transferred to project without reimbursement. 20. LITTLE SINKING CREEK, GRAHN, KY. Location. In Carter County, on Little Sinking Creek, 5.8 1liles above confluence with Little Sandy River and 51 miles above junction of Little Sandy River with Ohio River. ,Uxisting project. Channel. improvements of Little Sinking Creek channel through town of Grahn, Ky., from confluence of Grahn Fork and Cory Branch downstream for 4,520 feet; clearing of channel growth and debris from Grahn Fork above confluence With Cory Branch ifor 2,000 feet; relocation of railroad bridge and track; and remedial work to one highway bridge. Project Will reduce floods equivalent to flood of record (July 1960) by 4.8 feet, with only minor damages resulting. Construction of proj- ect authorized under section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as aended. Project was constructed at a total Federal cost of 319,595. Non-Federal cost $11,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Project complete. Condition at end of fiscal year. Contract work initiated in Novemnber 1963 is complete. Project transferred to. Carter County Court on October 7, 1964, for operation and maintenance. 1026 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1984 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated...................... $17,979 $265,000 $21,000 -$384 $319 595 Cost................. $3,646 13,589 214,052 75,151 84231 , 21. MARTIN, KY. Location. In Floyd County, Ky., on Beaver Creek at con" fluence of Right and Left Forks, 5.5 miles above its junction with Levisa Fork. Existing project. Channel improvement of 4.27 miles of Beaver Creek from 2.3 miles above the mouth to junction of Right and Left Forks. Improved channel to have a bottom width Of 100 feet with placement of riprap along outside of all curves, and channel bottoms and both sides through three bridges. Project will reduce stages of major floods at Martin about 5.7 feet. Esti, mated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $3,590,000; estimanted non-Federal costs of lands and damages and utility adjustments is $120,000. Project authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 246, 89th Cong.). Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from damages; maintain project after completioln; provide necessary relocations; and prevent any encroachments on capacities of channel within limits of project. By letter, the Fiscal Court of Floyd County, Ky., indicated their intent to ful- fill requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning not initiated. 22. MASSILLON, OHIO Location. In Stark County, on Tuscarawas River, 200 miles above mouth of Muskingum River. Existing project. Improvement of channel of TuscaraWS River, together with construction of drainage facilities, levees, and pump stations, consists of: 12,800 linear feet of channel rectification and improvements; 4,300 feet of new channel; two reinforced concrete pressure conduits with a total length of 4,300 feet; 15,900 feet of earth levee; 200 feet of concrete wall; four pump stations; and three gate openings. For further de- tails see Annual Report for 1962, page 1156. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin, in 1938 Flood Control Act. Project was con' structed at a total Federal cost of $8,139,406. Local cooperation. None required by law. See Annual Re, port for 1962, page 1156, for details of local contributions for work beyond scope of project. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance, general: Routine inspections of improved channel FLOOD CONTROL---HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1027 Were conducted and snagging and clearing work by hired labor Was performed to maintain channel in a satisfactory condition. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began in July 1940, was completed for beneficial occupancy in October 1951. Drainage structures and appurtenances including pres- sure conduits, gate openings, and pump stations were turned Over to the city for maintenance and operation. Improved chan- nels and levees maintained by the United States are in good con- dition. _Cost and financial statement iscal yeaTotal to cal year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work. Appropriated.................... ... 18,139,406 Cost .................................. .... 18,139,406 Maintenance:*............. Apropriated .......... $6,020 $3,500 $5,400 $27,600 $5,000 90,338 Cost ............... 6,570 1,654 4,391 17,243 14,164 86,289 SExcludes $477,813 contributed funds. 23. MIDDLE FORK OF MUD RIVER, W. VA. Location. In Lincoln County, on Middle Fork of Mud River, 8.5 miles above confluence with Mud River and about 30 miles southeast of Huntington, W. Va. EO'xisting project. Channel improvement of Middle Fork of Iud River through town of Griffithsville and Yawkey for 21,000 feet. Project provides for enlargement of 14,400 feet and clear- l1g and snagging of 6,600 feet and will reduce floods equivalent to flood of record (Apr. 1962) by 3.3 feet, with only minor dam- ages resulting. Construction of project authorized under section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Estimated Federal cost of project, $459,000, non-Federal cost estimated at $51,000, or rights-of-way, alterations to highway bridges, and utilities. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, as mended, applies. Assurances by Lincoln County Court adopted ovember 8, 1962. All rights-of-way have been acquired. t Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of con- ract plans and specifications were completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. All preconstruction planning is Complete. Cost and financial statement Year................ yscal Total to 1962 1963 - 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork: APPropriated ...................... $25,200 $13 $49,000 $500,000 $574,213 Cost.................. 14,685 9,493 6,648 5,253 36,079 24. MILL CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO Location. Damsite is in Union and Delaware Counties, Ohio, onI Mill Creek, a tributary of Scioto River, 1.5 miles above mouth of 1qill Creek and 155 miles above mouth of Scioto River. iExisting project. Provides for construction of a rolled earth- 1028 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF'ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 fill dam 89 feet high and 12,000 feet long, with a 720-foot con- crete gravity channel section; a gated spillway in channel section controlled by five 38- by 20-foot tainter gates; outlet works con- sisting of four 4- by 6-foot gated sluices through spillway section; one earthfill dike 17,500 feet long, average height of 7.3 feet; and one levee 4,000 feet long with pump station and necessary ap- purtenances for protection of Ostrander, Ohio. Reservoir will provide a total storage of 92,500 acre-feet; control a drainage area of 181 square miles; and necessitate relocation or recon- struction of 4.4 miles of roads; 0.6 mile railroad tracks; 3.0 miles of powerlines; 4.3 miles of telephone lines; and 4 cemeteries con- taining 1,310 graves. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of co- ordinated reservoir systems for protection of Scioto and Ohio River Valleys, generally, and contribute to reductions of flooding at industrial and population centers of Columbus and Chillicothe. Project authorized for construction under 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost of project (1966) is $21,800,000. Local cooperation. Local interests must operate and maintain fish and wildlife facilities at an estimated annual cost of $3,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies initiated and continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies con" tinued. " Preconstruction planning is 16 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fical year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 166 New work:"0 Appropriated... ................................... ....... .. .........$157,500 $157 Cost........ .......... ... 109,316 109 25. MT. VERNON, OHIO Location. Site is on Kokosing River at Mt. Vernon, Ohio, 25 miles above mouth of Kokosing River. Existing project. Plan provides for clearing Kokosing River channel and banks of all timber and brush through city of Mt. Vernon from Tilden Avenue Bridge downstream to below citY limits for 23,200 feet; and raising Pennsylvania Railway spur bridge over Dry Creek by 3 feet. Project, with construction of North Branch of Kokosing Reservoir together with existing flood control facilities constructed in the basin, will provide practically complete protection from floods equivalent to maximum of record. Project authorized for construction under 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost of project (1965) is $172,000. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1936, applies. In addition, local interests will repair locally con- structed levee, enlarge flowage opening at West High Street Bridge over Kokosing River and make changes, relocations, and alteration to existing structures and utilities made necessary bY the work. Estimated non-Federal cost, $86,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. A contract for snag ging and clearing channel was initiated and completed. FLOOD CONTROL---HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1029 0 Condition at end of fiscal year. All work complete except ad- JUstmnent to railroad bridge across Kokosing River. Work on this phase of project not initiated. Project turned over to local interests for beneficial use in December 1965. Cost and financial statement Total to ..... . alyear 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NOWWork. ............... APPropriated......... $10,000 $162,000 $172,000 Cost.................................. 1,815 6,751 $116,172 124,738 26. MUSKINGUM RIVER RESERVOIRS, OHIO Location. Muskingum River lies in southeastern Ohio and, With its tributaries, drains about 8,000 square miles. Its head- Waters rise about 25 miles south of Lake Erie and it flows into Ohio River at Marietta, Ohio, 172.2 miles below Pittsburgh, Pa. Existing project. Construction, operation, and maintenance of 14 reservoirs and appurtenant works in Muskingum River tasin. It was originally authorized by Public Works Admin- istration February 20, 1934, to include 15 reservoirs as set forth an official plan prepared by the Corps and adopted by uskingum Watershed Conservancy District of Ohio, the spon- soring agency. Project was operated and maintained by con- ervancy district from July 1938 to August 1939 when it was taken over by Corps for maintenance and operation inaccordance With provisions of 1939 Flood Control Act. For further details see page 1157, Annual Report for 1962. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1964) is $40,961,800. See table on page 1159 of the Annual Report for 1962, which gives the principal features of the 14 reservoirs. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. For details see An- nual Report for 1942, page 1257. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Plan- ]lfgD continued for construction of recreation facilities under COImpleted projects program. Contracts were awarded for con- Struction of facilities at Atwood Reservoir, initiated in February 1966 and completed in May 1966 and at Charles Mill Reservoir, liltiated in June 1966 and work advanced to 15 percent comple- tion. Additional facilities will be constructed at Piedmont, Senacaville, and Tappan Reservoirs. Operation and main- tenance, general: a contract for repairs to concrete intake struc- ture at Charles Mill Dam was completed in December 1965. Reservoirs were operated for benefit of flood control, as required, a1nd necessary repairs were made to dam, appurtenances and oPerator's quarters and' grounds. Minor flooding occurred in Mtskingum River Basin the middle of February. An average of .5 inches of rain fell on ground saturated by melting snow, 225,000 acre-feet of water was stored in the reservoirs, resulting fromn this rise. River crests and reductions affected by the reser- VOir at selected key cities along Muskingum are as follows: 1030 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cities River crest Reductions efected (Ohio) (feet) (feet) Coshocton ............. ......... .10.45........................2.15 Dresden ........................ 16.35.......................4.55 Zanesville ...................... 17.70.......................4.00 M cConnelsville .................. 11.15........................1.00 During the fiscal year, Muskingum River Reservoir system pre- vented flood damages estimated at $4,159,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning continued for con- struction of recreation facilities under completed project programs. Construction of recreation facilities at Atwood Reservoir was completed. Construction of facilities at Charles Mill Reservoir, initiated in June 1966, was continued. Con- struction of project initiated in January 1935, was completed in November 1938. All flood control dams are in operation. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $579 ....................... $80,000 Cost.................. 10,714...........................2,226 $147,454 69,109 1 2$40,94,264 140,79 Maintenance: 061 Appropriated..........465,704 $384,300 $415,100 413,000 565,900 6,49 Cost................. 475,654 372,132 387,653 440,883 566,102 3,33 36,481 Rehabilitation: Appropriated..................... 70,500 ............ -8,555 . 46 Cost... .................. 29,361 32,584 ....... 6.................. (1,94 1 Includes $27,190,000 National Recovery Act funds. 2 Includes $227,454 for recreational facilities under completed projects funds. 8 Excludes surplus property valued at $9,052 transferred to project without reimbursemelnt' SAllotted under Accelerated Public Work Program. 27. NEWARK, OHIO Location. In Licking County at junction of North and South Forks of Licking River, 29 miles above its confluence with Muskingum River at Zanesville, Ohio. Existing project. Provides for 31,500 linear feet of channel improvements of Licking River, North and South Forks of Licking River, and Raccoon Creek; 5,450 feet of levee along North and South Forks of Licking River; and pump station and surnP for disposal of interior drainage. Project provides protection for city of Newark against floods 22 percent greater than that of 1913 (one of the greatest of record) with a 3-foot freeboard. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Federal cost of completed project is $845,916. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Cost for all require- ments under terms of project authorization was $21,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance, general: Routine inspections of improved portion of channel were conducted. Snagging and clearing work, bY hired labor was performed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was initiated in July 1940 and completed for beneficial occupancy in November 1941, and pump facilities and levees turned over to city for main- tenance and operations. FLOOD CONTROL-HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1031 Cost and financial statement aTotal to cayear............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work: ApPropriated .......... $37,000 $25,000 -$1,964..................... $845,916 M atenance: 5,012 32,458 22,565 ....................... 845,916 ppropriated .......... 192,680 86,000 3,600 $5,000 $5,800 485,704 ost*38,571 239,878 3,589 4,886 5,486 484,529 28. NORTH BRANCH OF KOKOSING RESERVOIR, OHIO Location. Damsite is in Knox County, Ohio, on North Branch o Kokosing River, about 9 miles above confluence of Kokosing and North Branch Rivers, and 2.2 miles northwest of Frederick- town, Ohio. Existing project. Plan provides for a rolled earthfill dam, 1.2 feet high and 2,500 feet long with an uncontrolled ogee-type SPillway in right abutment. Reservoir will provide for a total storage of 15,000 acre-feet, control a drainage area of 44.5 square Riles, and necessitate relocation of 1.5 miles of telephone and DOWer lines and 0.65 mile of county and township roads. Reser- VOir will be operated for protection of Fredericktown and Mt. toerno n , Ohio, valleys of North Branch and Kokosing Rivers and a lesser degree, Muskingum and Ohio River Valleys. Existing Droject was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Fed- eral cost of new work (1966) is $5,050,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Work on general design memorandum completed. Engineering studies were con- tinued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies, initiated in fiscal year 1964, continued. Preconstruction planning is 72 Dercent complete. Cost and financial statement 8 Total to ieal year .............. . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. Appropriated.......... ........................ $75,000 $149,000 $25,000 $249,000 Cost .................. ............ 28,853 151,674 40,529 221,056 29. NORTH FORK OF POUND RESERVOIR, VA. Location. Damsite is in Wise County, Va., on North Fork of 1Ound River about 1.1 miles upstream from confluence of North and South Forks which join to form Pound River. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rockfill dam, with height of 130 feet, crest length of 600 feet and crest width of 32 feet; an uncontrolled spillway in a saddle about 1,000 feet tlstream from dam; and an outlet tunnel in right abutment with control structure at upstream end. Reservoir will provide for about 11,300 acre-feet of storage, and control a drainage area of 17.6 square miles. For further details see Annual Report for 1032 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 1965, page 951. Existing project was authorized under 1960 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost of project (1966) is $6,250,000.N r I Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Contract for con" struction of recreation facilities and access road paving initiated in December 1965, was advanced to 79 percent completion. Cor- pleted work on contract for construction of dam, spillway and outlet works. Two tracts of land acquired. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project, initiated March 1963, is 88 percent complete. Contract for con- struction of recreation facilities is 79 percent complete and con" tract for construction of dam, spillway, and outlet work is complete. Acquired 115 of 127 tracts of land required for project. Cost and financial statement -. _ - isa Total to year............... Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1 966 New work: Appropriated...... ... $157,048 $590,000 $1,550,000 $3,000,000 $778,000 0048 $6,10 8:410 Cost.................. 162,364 446,643 1,458,638 2,766,811 644,558 15,498 New work: Appropriated....... ............................ . ......... 19,000 1 g000 5,995 Cost................ ................. .................. 15,995 211 SExcludes surplus property valued at $810 transferred from project without reimbursement 2 Excludes surplus property valued at $127 transferred to project without reimbursement. 30. OHIO RIVER BASIN (HUNTINGTON DIST.) Location. Works covered by this project are a series of leveeS, floodwalls, channel improvements, and reservoirs in Ohio River Basin within Huntington District. Existing project. Individual projects considered in compre- hensive plan within Huntington District: Local protection projects Estimated cost Location 2 Type of protection -- Federal Non-Federal Total w Aberdeen, Ohio ........................... Wall and levee...... $1,430,0(00 $55,000 $1,485000 Ashland, Ky...... ................. ... do........... 3,710,651 313,000 44,023651 Athalia, Ohio....... .............. Levee............. 630,000 187,000 817,00 Augusta, Ky............................... Wall and levee...... 1,220,000 620,000 1,8410000 Belpre, Ohio... 3 ................. ... .. .. .. .. . . . . . ..... do...do......... 3,570,000 418,000 4,018,00 Brooklyn, W. Va. ... ....do............. 5,200,000 226,000 5,426000 Buena Vista, Ohio........................ ..... do........... 593,000 197,000 790,00 Burlington, Ohio...... ............. Levee............. 146,000 117,000 263,000 Catlettsburg, Ky ................... Wall and levee..... 3,854,361 300,000 44,154,361 Ceredo-Kenova, W. Va................... ....do............. 2,762,568 265,000 43,0217,508 Chambersburg, Ohio.....:............ ... do............ 1,600,000 53,000 1,653,00 Chesapeake, Ohio.... ................... Levee............. 330,000 139,000 469 ,00 Cheshire, Ohio......................... .....do............ 419,000 147,000 566000 Chilo, Ohio. ... ........................ Wall and levee..... 899,000 120,000 1 019 000 Clarington, Ohio .:........................ ..... do............ 2,710,000 249,000 2,959,000 Clifton, W. Va............. ................. Levee............. 230,000 113,000 313,000 Coal Grove, Ohio .......................... Wall and levee..... 888,000 55,000 943000 Dover, Ky............................... Levee............. 648,000 585,000 1,233,000 Friendly, W. Va...... ................ Wall and levee..... 655,000 61,000 716,000 Fullerton, Ky.... ...... ................ ..... do........... 1,090,000 178,000 1 268,000 Galax (New River Basin), Va................ Channel improve- 480,536 185,000 4665,36 ment and levee. callipolis, Ohio............................ Wall and levee..... 2,670,000 839,000 3,509,000 See footnotes at end of table. FLOOD CONTROL---HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1033 Local protection projects-Continued Estimated cost2 Locations Type of protection Federal Non-Federal Total - - -________________________I i __________________ i i Grenup, Ky............... . .. ....... ....do........ $2,660,000 $512,000 $3,172,000 "9l s Rock, Ohio................... Levee.......... 467,000 155,000 622,000 artford, W. Va........................... Wall and levee..... 2,880,000 222,000 3,102,000 i jerson. W. Va.............. ..... Levee............. 437,000 188,000 625,000 o olPort, Ohio ......... .............. Wall and levee...... 944,000 320,000 1,264,000 ngport, Ohio ........................ Levee.... ..... 568,000 242,000 810,000 rotn ngton, W . Va.......................... 61,509,300 48,663,402 ta,Itu , Ohio... 1........ )he ............... Wall and levee...... 7,154,102 669,000 43,250,100 .... do............ 2,581,100 SW.Va. ............ ... ..... do............ 938,000 123,000 1,061,000 L art Falsr, Ohio ...................... ... do............. 992,0(00 126,000 1,118,000 MMaritto anichester,OhiOhio .......................... Levee............. 1,330,000 377,000 1,707,000 Mal ehade Ohio.... ... do............ 1,330,100 298,000 1,628,000 M iett, Oho........................... Wall and levee...... 14,000,000 822,000 14,822,000 . ... do.. ........... 1,040,000 238,000 7477,813 1,278,000 48,617,219 Channel improve.- 8,139,406 ment, wall and asWill, K .a. .......................... levee. NearkidRep lo(Msking hio rI .. Basi), ... .. srt, Ohio3. ... Wall and levee...... 6,497,056 8563,700 490,000 47,060,500 96,750,000 ... do............ 6,260,000 Miller M Ohio... illwood, n°........ ;W ................ . .. Levee.......... 519,000 173,000 692,000 Wall and levee... . 843,000 134,000 977,000 WarMuskingum lworko'. Va......................... River Basin), Ohio8.... Channel improve- 845,916 21,000 10866,916 ment and levee. ' Martinsville, W. Va..... ..... do......... 4,670,000 643,000 5,313,000 ewewort, Matamoras, Ohio ................... Wall and levee...... 2,090,000 285,000 2,375,000 Ohio.. . ............ Levee......... 318,000 84,000 402,000 4or, Ky......................... Wall and levee.... 648,000 235,000 883,000 erburg, W. Va........................ ..... do........... 6,647,630 300,000 46,947,630 nt Pleasant, W. Va................... .... do............. 2,909,606 278,000 43,187,606 eilroy, Ohio. ... .............. .... do............. 16,500,000 346,000 16,846,000 ltand, Ohio ........................... .... do............. 1,040,000 104,000 1,144,000 rout h-New Boston,Ohio........ ....do............. 9,833,318 11525,000 410,358,318 eatan Point. Ohio........................ .... do......... 4,720,000 397,000 5,117,000 W. Va ......................... Levee.............. ,roctor 334,000 121,000 455,000 otorville, Ohio. ...................... Resettlement....... 2,700,000 2,700,000 tne, Ohio........ .................. Wall and levee...... 985,000 120,000 1,105,000 enwood, W. Va........................ .....do............. 1,470,000 106,000 1,576,000 i ey Ohio ... .. ................ Wall and levee...... 1,940,000 810,000 2,750,000 ~ vei w,W.Va.................... ..... Levee............. 881,000 115,000 996,000 oneville (Muskingum River Basn), Ohio8... Channel improve- 910,785 62,000 10972,785 ment. Russell, Ky .......................... Levee (backwater st*Marys W.Va......................... 237,193 10,000 4247,193 protection). 1,510,000 139,000 Wall and levee...... 1,649,000 8ardis, Ohio...... 285,000 60,000 345,000 g otoville, Levee..... ...... Ohio ................ .. Wall and levee...... 1,460,000 377,000 1,837,000 S'tersville, W .Va...... ... 269,000 2,039,000 ...o . . . ... do............ 1,770,000 uthPoint, Ohio ...................... .. do............. 992,000 117,000 1,109,000 uthPortsmouth, Ky ...................... Levee............. 370,000 137,000 507,000 yracuse, Ohio ...... . ................. ... do.... 100,000 1,320,000 Wanceburg, Ky..... ......... ..... 1,220,000 .. .........Wall and levee..... 2,490,000 685,000 93,175,000 ilverly, W . Va....... ............... 3,480,000 251,000 3,731,000 ....do............ Wilamatown, W. Va ....................... .....do............ 2,580,000 136,000 2,716,000 Wodlands. W. Va ......................... 206,000 28,000 234,000 Zaneaville (Muskingum River), Ohio.........Levee............. 13,000,000 21,110,000 Wall and levee...... 8,110,000 All projects are on Ohio River, unless otherwise noted. a Also see "Other authorized flood control projects," for all projects except: Massillon, New. ark, and Roseville, Ohio. L atest cost estimate revised 1954, unless otherwise noted. SConstruction completed. lFor details see individual report. Includes $2,300 construction funds contributed by local interests. Construction funds contributed by Massillon Conservatory District. 8 Includes $38,700 construction funds contributed by local interests. L atest cost estimate revised, 1960. 10 Includes construction costs expended in fiscal year 1963 and 1964. " Includes $15,150 construction funds contributed by local interests. 1034 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Reservoirs Total Tributary basin and reservoir Stream estimated costl SI -- Big Sandy: Dewey, Ky.2 2 .............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . Johns Creek................... 3$6,657058 Fishtrap, Ky. Levisa Fork................... 455,700,000 Haysi, Va................................ 2... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Russell Fork................... 10,100,000 John W. Flanagan, Va. .... .. Pound River................... 419,800,000 Guyandot: Mud River, W. Va............................. M ud River.................... 10,600,:000 Hocking: Logan, OhioS.. . ............................. Clear Creek................... 4,23000 Tom Jenkins, Ohio2.................................. Tom Jenkins, Ohio>.... East Branch of Sunday Creek..... 3 62,082,985 Kanawha: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Big Bend, W . Va. ........... ... Greenbrier River............... 13,900000 Birch, W . Va.S.............. 2 . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .................. . . ....... .. . . . . . Birch River.................... 6,450,00 Bluestone, W. Va. . New River.................... 181 329,197, M oores Ferry, Va.S................................... New River.... ............... 25,600,000 Poca, W. Va.5....... 2 . . . . . ...................... . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . Pocatalico River............... 21,600,000 Summeraville, W.2 . .Va.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gauley River.................. 746,500,000 Sutton, W. Va. Elk River..................... 836,300,000 Little Kanawha: 2 . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burnsville, W. Va. ........ 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Little Kanawha River............ 421,800 000 Leading Creek, W. Va. Leading Creek................. 419,100,000 West Fork, W. Va.S...... .................... West Fork..................... 418,500,000 Muskingum: Dillon, Ohio2........................................ Licking River.................. 830,560,000 Fraseysburg, OhioS................................. Wakatomika Creek............. 97,200, 000 . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . Millersburg, OhioS. ........ 2 Killbuck Creek................. 12,000,000 Muskingum River Reservoirs (system of 14 reservoirs) ....... On various streams............. 340,961,8s00 Seioto: Big Darby Creek, Ohio2...... . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. . . . . . . . . . . . . Big Darby Creek................ o,000 432,800 Deer Creek, Ohio2 2 . . ... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Deer Creek............... 422,400,000 Delaware, Ohio Olentangy River............... 37,631,821 Paint Creek, Ohio2....... ................... Paint Creek................... 222,400,000 Rocky Fork, Ohio 1o ................................ Rocky Fork................... 114,410:000 Twelvepole Creek: 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . East Lynn, W. Va. East Fork..................... 424,900,000 1 Latest cost estimate revision 1954. unless otherwise noted. 9 For details see individual report. 8 Construction completed. f Latest cost estimate revision 1966. 5 See also "Other Authorized Flood Control Projects." 6 Excludes $785,000 contributed by local interests. 7 Latest cost estimate revision 1965. 8 Latest cost estimate revision 1964. 9 Latest cost estimate revision 1960. 1xSee annual report for 1950 for individual report. o10 Total cost $6,349,000, additional $1,939,000 to be contributed by local interests. FLOOD CONTROL--HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1035 Existing project was authorized by the following: Act, Documents Work authorized I - Aug. 28,1937 Construct levees, floodwalls, and drainage structures for Flood Control Committee Doe. 1, 75th protection of cities and towns in Ohio River Basin. Proj- Cong., 1st seas. ects to be selected by Chief of Engineers with approval of Secretary of War at a cost not to exceed $24,877,000 for June 28, 1938 construction. Approved general comprehensive plan for flood control and Do. other purposes in Ohio River Basin as may be advisable in discretion of Secretary of War and Chief of Engineers, and for initiation and partial accomplishment of plan, author- ized $75 million for reservoirs and $50,300, for local flood Aug. 11, 1939 protection works. Provides Muskingum River Valley dams and reservoirs as set forth in official plan of Muskingum watershed con- servancy district shall be included in flood control plan of Aug. 18 1941 Ohio River Basin. Additional $45 million for prosecution of comprehensive Dec.22, 1944 plan for Ohio River Basin. Additional $70 million for further prosecution of comprehen- H. Doe. 762, 77th Cong., 2d sess. sive plan for Ohio River Basin, including Burr Oak Reser- voir on Hocking River, Ohio at an estimated cost of July 24, 1946 $400,000. Additional $125 million for further prosecution of compre- H. Doe. 506, 78th Cong., e1st sess. hesnive plan including local flood protection works at Galax, Va., on Chestnut Creek, at an estimated cost of May 17, 1950 $276,125. Additional $100 million for prosecution of comprehensive Dec. 30, 1963 plan for Ohio River Basin. Additional $150 million for further prosecution of compre- hensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Ohio June 18,1965 River Basin. Additional $89 million for further prosecution of compre- H. Doe. 6755, 89th Cong., let sess. hensive plan for Ohio River Basin Operations and results during fiscal year. Studies were com- Pleted on Birch Reservoir, W. Va., to determine its economic feasibility. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preliminary surveys and plans are complete for a number of projects included in comprehensive Plan. Feasibility study of proposed Birch Reservoir site com- Pleted. Status of projects selected for construction under this authorization is in individual reports. New work Project Total Total cost appropriated to to June 30, 1966 June 30, 1966 i i $1,334 $1,334 Co Grove, :a(7: , yOhio................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......:: ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 111,577 111,577 Coal ................ ... Columbus, Ohio..................................................... 3,389 3,389 211,237 211,237 Oreenup, Ky........ ..... . ...... ..................... ........ 4,962 4,962 anchester, Ohio ..................................................... 117,721 117,721 Ri dleport Ohio ......... ....................... 39,783 39,783 Resers e lY, Ohio ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . .: . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,523 7,523 ri . .Ohio.................................................... .Walnut 110,622 110,622 13rch, W.Va.................... Bir alnsutg, Ohio.........:. .................................... " . . . . 145,736 145,736 Clendenin. W. Va.................................................... 33,000 33,000 Frazeysburg, Ohio ...... .......... .............. 5,000 5,000 taysi, Va.... .................................. 2,656 2,656 Leading Creek, W. Va................................................ 115,284 115,284 Rocky Fork, Ohio................ .......... ............ .... 91,321 91,321 West Fork, W. Va ..................................................... 115,000 115,000 Total Ohio River Basin .................................. 4386,145 4386,145 I -- I Allocation and costs for feasibility study. a ncludes $9,137 emergency relief funds. I ncludes $1,783 emergency relief funds. Includes $10,920 emergency relief funds (Basin total). 1036 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New work: Appropriated.......... $13,780 $27,797 $8,284 $45,000 $637 $386 144 Cost.................. 8,901 18,501 14,590 45,402 8,105 386:144 x Includes $10,920 emergency relief funds. 31. PAINT CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Damsite is in Ross County, Ohio, on Paint Creek, tributary of Scioto River, 37 miles above mouth of Paint Creek and 100 miles above mouth of Scioto River. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rock and random-fill dam with maximum height above streambed of 118 feet and 700 feet long; a gate controlled spillway 191 feet wide, 1,000 feet from right abutment; an outlet tunnel in right abut* ment with control structure at upstream end; and one random rockfill dike at right abutment of spillway, 1,400 feet long and 70 feet high. Reservoir will provide storage of 145,000 acre-feet and control a drainage area of 573 square miles. For further details, see Annual Report for 1965, page 955. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protectionl of Chillicothe, Ohio, Paint Creek Basin, and Scioto and Ohio Valleys, generally. Existing project selected for constructiOnl under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost of project (1966) iS $22,400,000. .Localcooperation. Local interests must operate and maintain fish and wildlife facilities at an estimated annual cost of $27,000. ;Operations and results during fiscal year. Surveying and mapping contract phase II was advanced to 50 percent comple- tion. Preconstruction planning completed. Initial construction contract for relocation of highways awarded June 27, 1966. Ac- quired 20 tracts of land. Condition at end of fiscal year. Surveying and mapping col tinued. Preconstruction planning complete. Contract for con- struction of State Route 753 awarded June 27, 1963, work not initiated. Acquired 20 of the 200 tracts of land required for the project. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiacalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 kfvl n ew Appropriated...................... NA worx $210,000 $150,000 $1,166,000 $91,000 $1,617 000 ....... Cost............. 91,798 165,907 269,407 1,042,426 11,569:,538 1 Excludes surplus property valued at $23 transferred from project without reimbursement. 32. PAINTSVILLE RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is in Johnson County, Ky., on Paint Creek, a tributary of Levisa Fork of Big Sandy River, 7.8 miles above mouth of Paint Creek. FLOOD CONTROL-HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1037 Description. Provides for construction of an earthfill dam With maximum height of 160 feet above streambed and crest length of 850 feet; an uncontrolled spillway about 500 feet west Of right abutment; and outlet works, consisting of a 10-foot diameter horseshoe tunnel in right abutment with control struc- ture at upstream end.- Reservoir will provide a total storage of 76,400 acre-feet, control a drainage area of 92 square miles and necessitate relocation or reconstruction of 6.6 miles of highways, 3.7 miles of powerlines, 5 miles of telephone lines, 2.7 miles of gaslines, 19 cemeteries and one school. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of town of Paintsville, lower Paint Creek Valley and Levisa Fork, Big Sandy and Ohio Valleys, generally. Estimated Federal cost of ew work (1966) is $17,150,000. Estimated non-Federal con- tributions is $750,000 for construction of recreational facilities. roject was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 246, 8th Cong.). Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute 50 percent of recreation costs under current policy Public Law 89-72. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning not initiated. 33. PANTHER CREEK RESERVOIR, W. VA. Location. Damsite is in McDowell County, W. Va., on Pan- ther Creek, a tributary of Tug Fork of Big Sandy River, about 6.1 miles above mouth of Panther Creek. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rolled-rock dam with maximum height of 200 feet above streambed and crest length of 900 feet; an uncontrolled spillway in saddle to right OI dam abutment; and outlet works through a 7.5-foot diameter horseshoe tunnel in right abutment with control structure at up- Stream end. Reservoir will provide a total storage of 16,880 acre-feet, control a drainage area of 23.6 square miles and neces- itate relocation or reconstruction of 3.4 miles of highways. iReservoir will be operated as a unit of the reservoir system for Drotection of Tug Fork Valley and Big Sandy and Ohio Valleys, generally. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $11,- 360,000. Estimated non-Federal cost is $340,000 for construc- tion of recreational facilities. Project was authorized by 1965 Plood Control Act (I. Doc. 246, 89th Cong.). .Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute that por- tion of recreation costs that exceed the portion permitted to be borne by the Federal Government under Public Law 89-72. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. . Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning not initiated. 34. R. D. BAILEY RESERVOIR, W. VA. Location. Damsite is in Wyoming County, W. Va., on Guyandot River about 108 miles above its confluence with Ohio iver, and about 1 mile east of Justice, W. Va. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rolled rock- 1038 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 fill dam with maximum height of 300 feet and length of 1,330 feet; a 400-foot crest uncontrolled spillway in a saddle in right abutment; and outlet works comprised of a 20-foot diameter horseshoe tunnel in left abutment. Reservoir will provide a total storage of 203,700 acre-feet; control a drainage area of 540 square miles; and necessitate relocation or reconstruction of 23 miles of railroad track; 12.22 miles of State highways; 77 ceme- teries containing 2,200 graves; 10.84 miles of powerlines with one substation; 6.6 miles of telephone lines; 6 schools; and relocation and adjustment to oil and gas lines and facilities of 6 oil and gas companies. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordi- nated reservoir system for protection of Logan, W. Va., and Guyandot and Ohio River Valleys, generally. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $76,600,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies were continued. A revision to the general design memorandum, completed in January 1966, is 25 percent complete. Phase II of a photogrammetric contract was initiated in May 1966. Archi- tect engineer contract for surveying and subsurface investigations relative to railroad relocations was advanced to 98 percent com- pletion. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies con- tinued; photogrammetric contract, phase II, continued; architect- engineer contract relative to railroad relocations, essentially com- plete; and preconstruction planning is 91 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated...................... $35,000 $272,334 $530,000 $518,000 $1,355,334 Cost.............................. 16,333 199,288 359,094 677,933 1,252,648 1 Includes $5,534 obligated and expended from consolidated funds. Army. 35. ROCKCASTLE CREEK, INEZ, KY. Location. On Rockcastle Creek and Coldwater Fork at and near town of Inez, Martin County, Ky. Existing project. Channel improvement of Rockcastle Creek and Coldwater and Middle Forks for 13,650 feet and snagging and clearing of 1,500 feet of smaller tributaries. Project will re- duce floods equivalent to flood of record (Feb. 1962) by 3.2 feet, resulting in about 77 percent reduction in damages. Construc- tion of project authorized under section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Estimated Federal cost of project, $600,000, non-Federal cost estimated at $70,000 for rights-of-way, bridge alteration, and utility relocations. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, as amended, applies. Assurances by Martin County Court adopted on March 23, 1963. All rights-of-way have been acquired. FLOOD CONTROL--HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1039 Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction planning was completed. Colendition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning com- plete. Cost and financial statement 'ical YeaTotal to . .. Year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NeW Work. pproPriated ......... ................. $17,937 $39,000 $600,000 $656,937 ....... .... ... ................... 8,693 13,575 7,783 30,051 36. ROSEVILLE, OHIO Location. In Muskingum and Perry Counties, Ohio, on Moxahala Creek, about 6 miles above its confluence with Jonathan Creek, a tributary of Muskingum River. t 'xisting project. Protection of Roseville by channel rectifica- and levee construction. Provides 7,290 feet of channel im- tlonl PlroVement; 6,400 feet of levee and railroad embankment enlarge- aent; and necessary appurtenances for disposal of interior drain- age. Project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin, in 1938 Flood Control Act. IPederal cost of project as completed is $910,785. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total cost of all re- quirements under terms of project authorization was $62,000 (1961). Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and Raintenance, general: Routine inspections of improved portion of Project were conducted and snagging and clearing of channel by hired labor, was performed as required. . Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project, in- Itiated August 1959, is complete. A minor amount of real estate audit work remains to be completed. _Cost and financial statement Total to i ealear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ework: Appropriated .......... $2,500 $200 ............ ... ...... ............ $910,785 S.Cost...4,785 748 $189 ........................ .. 910,785 Ulntenance: Appropriated.......... 1,600 4,300 2,500 $5,000 $5,000 18,400 Cost.......... 1,428 4,012 2,829 4,482 5,403 18,154 37. SALT CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Damsite is in Ross County, Ohio, on Salt Creek, a tributary of Scioto River, 15 miles above mouth of Salt Creek, and 12 miles southeast of Chillicothe, Ohio. Existing project. Plan provides for construction of a rolled earthfill dam, 96 feet high and 1,490 feet long with an uncon- trolled spillway in a saddle near left abutment, and an intake Structure with three gated sluices 5 by 9 feet, discharging through a 12.5-foot diameter conduit into a stilling basin. Reser- 1040 REPORT OFTHE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 voir will provide for a total storage of 114,000 acre-feet; control a drainage area of 285 square miles and necessitate relocation of 6.8 miles of State roads, 7.1 miles of county roads, and three cemeteries. Reservoir will be operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Salt Creek Valley and SciotO and Ohio River Valleys, generally. Project authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $16,500,000. Local cooperation. Project authorization provides that non- Federal interests operate and maintain proposed fish and wildlife recreation facilities at an estimated annual cost of $6,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering studies continued. General design memorandum was advanced to 89 percent completion. Condition at end of fiscal year. Engineering studies con* tinued, general design memorandum is 89 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year.... ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 000 Appropriated.................. ............ $100,000 $190,000 $173,000 $463 246 Cost........ .......................... 75,341 187,094 160,810 423 38. SUMMERSVILLE RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, W. VA. Location. Damsite is on Gauley River at Ruckers Bend, Nicholas County, W. Va., about 34.5 miles above confluence of Gauley and New Rivers at Gauley Bridge, W. Va. Existing project. Provides for construction of a rockfill dal having a maximum height of 357 feet, top length of 2,280 feet and top and base widths of 40 and 1,400 feet, respectively; al outlet tunnel in right abutment with control structure at down" stream end; an uncontrolled spillway, with a crest length of 1,250 feet, 3,500 feet west of right abutment in a low point in rim of reservoir; and two rolled-earthfill dikes which will prevent diver" sion of water into Meadow Creek Valley. Reservoir will provide for about 413,800 acre-feet of storage and control a drainage of 803 square miles. For further details see Annual Report for 1965 page 957. Existing project was selected for constructiol under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) Is $47,200,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Contracts for reser- voir clearing, and construction of dam, dikes, spillway and plug* ging tunnel were completed. Remaining contracts for construc- tion of recreation and airport facilities were initiated alnd continued. Acquired 10 tracts of land. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project, il- itiated February 1960, is 95 percent complete. Contracts re- maining to be completed are: Construction of recreation facili- ties, phase I, 75 percent complete, phase II, 74 percent complete FLOOD CONTROL-HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1041 and construction of airport facilities, 23 percent complete. Ac- quired 396 of 403 tracts of land required for the project. Cost and financial statement Fl..aly Total to Year ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork- C~ropriated.......... $9,000,000 $7,695,000 $11,850,000 $8,035,000 $2,939,000 $46,499,570 Coaite ae . .8,173,619 8,515,716 8,054,457 11,474,356 1,958,902 144,953,195 Ap ropriated.......... ...... ...... ............ ............ ............ 62,500 62,500 Cost .......... ........ 57,546 57,546 1 EXcludes surplus property valued at $6,267 transferred from project without reimbursement. 39. SUTTON RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, W. VA. Location. Dam is on Elk River, W. Va., 1 mile above town of Sutton, W. Va., and about 101 miles above mouth of Elk River. S'Existing project. A concrete gravity dam having a maximum eight of 220 feet; and an overall length of 1,178 feet, consisting of 280 feet of spillway section and 898 feet of nonoverflow sec- ions and abutments. Reservoir provides for storage of 265,300 acre-feet and controls a drainage area of 537 square miles. EXisting project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Ior further details, see page 1166, Annual Report for 1962. stimated Federal cost of new work (1964) is $36,300,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Under terms of an existing agreement, Baltimore & Ohio (Railroad Co. paid $62,800 oward relocation of railroad for a modified slope and other bet- ternents. SOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- ract for construction of recreation facilities under completed hrojects program was completed. Acquired 41 tracts of land. OPerations and maintenance, general: Reservoir was operated for flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to Structures and appurtenances. . Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project, in- Itiated in October 1949, and dam operation effected February 1960. All construction complete except final real estate activi. ties. Acquired 546 of 604 tracts of land required for the project. _Cost and financial statement al Year .Total to Sear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, 1966 e work. Appropriated... $531,297 $355,632 $39,900 $833,211 $8,700 1$36,076,840 Cost ................. 268,684 321,572 201,088 120,173 717,230 235,922,137 alntenance: Appropriated ......... 89,750 85,000 93,200 185,100 158,800 695,331 Cost........ 87,317 82,801 92,509 166,041 170,886 3682,816 tl Includes $287 848 allotted under accelerated public works program and $862,600 for recrea- oal facilities under completed projects program. I, xcludes surplus property value(d at $30,363 transferred from project without reimbursement. Excludes surplus property valued at $556 transferred from project without reimbursement. 1042 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 40. TOM JENKINS RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Dam is on East Branch of Sunday Creek, a tribu- tary of Hocking River, Ohio, about 3 miles north of village of Glouster and 57.2 miles above mouth of Hocking River. Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam having a maximum height of 84 feet and a total length of 944 feet; controlled outlet works discharging through a tunnel in left abutment; and an un- controlled spillway in ridge running south from damsite. Exist- ing project was authorized under 1944 Flood Control Act. For further details see pages 1164 and 1165 in Annual Report for 1962. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1964) is $2,- 168,000. Local cooperation. For details see page 1165, Annual Report for 1962. In fiscal year 1964 $64,660 contributed funds was re- ceived from State of Ohio. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Plan- ning continued for construction of recreational facilities under completed projects program. Operation and maintenance, gen- eral: Reservoir was operated for flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was initiated in March 1948 and completed in February 1950. Reser- voir provides substantial protection to Sunday Creek Valley as well as serving as a unit of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Hocking and Ohio Valleys. Reservoir also provided an assured source of water supply to villages, industries and coal mining operations in Sunday Creek Valley. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $31,175 $33,000 -$424 -$39,513 -$20,454 22,082 9 Cost................ 31,175 31,701 875 4,546 ............ 2,082,98 Maintenance: Appropriated........... 36,196 40,000 35,000 49,700 58,600 459 51 Cost................. 35,591 37,259 32,317 53,185 56,507 3454:820 1 Excludes $639,660 contributed funds. 2Includes $30,000 for construction of recreational facilities under accelerated public Works program and $4,546 appropriated under Code 710 (recreational facilities at completed projects)* a Excludes surplus property valued at $1,881 transferred to project without reimbursement* 41. YATESVILLE RESERVOIR, KY. Location. Damsite is in Lawrence County, Ky., on Blaine Creek, a tributary of Big Sandy River, about 5 miles west of Louisa, Ky., and 18.5 miles above mouth of Blaine Creek. Existing project. Provides for construction of an earthfill dam with maximum height of 115 feet above streambed and crest length of 740 feet; an uncontrolled spillway in a saddle southeast of the dam; and outlet works consisting of a 14-foot diameter horseshoe tunnel through left abutment of dam with control structure at upstream end. Reservoir will provide a total storage of 99,800 acre-feet, control a drainage area of 208 square miles and necessitate relocation or reconstruction of 8.6 miles of high- ways, 10.4 miles of powerlines, 11.3 miles of telephone lines, 5.5 FLOOD CONTROL--HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1043 mniles of oil and gas lines, 9 cemeteries, and 2 schools. Reservoir Will be operated as a unit of the coordinated reservoir system for lrotection of town of Yatesville, lower Blaine Creek Valley and ig Sandy and Ohio Valleys, generally. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $17,512,000. Estimated non-Federal con- tributions, $988,000, for construction of recreation facilities. roject was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 246, 9th Cong.). Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute that por- tion of recreation costs that exceed that portion permitted to be borne by the Federal Government under Public Law 89-72. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. . Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning not Initiated. 42. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS lood Control Act of June 22, 1936, and subsequent acts re- quire local interests to furnish assurances that they will maintain and operate certain local protection projects after completion in ccordance with regulations prescribed by Secretary of the Army. istrict Engineers are responsible for administration of these regulations within their respective districts. Maintenance in- sp)ections were made during fiscal year of completed units of rojects transferred to local interests for maintenance and opera- tion. Local interests were advised, as necessary, of measures re- quired to maintain those projects in accordance with standards Drescribed by regulations. Fiscal year cost was $14,951. Total cost to June 30, 1966, was $112,027. S Flood control works inspected Dates of inspection shland, Ky . . . November 1965, June 1966 eaver Creek Wayland to Garrett, Ky.......... October 1965 eaver Creek, Langley, Ky ................... October 1965 ramwell, W . Va ............................ a ro, W . Va ..................... ........ atlettsburg, Ky............................. August 1965 September 1965 November 1965, June 1966 eredo-Kenova, W. Va. ....................... November 1965, June 1966 past Rainelle, W . Va ........................ November 1965 Our-Pole Creek, Huntington, W. Va.......... . July 1965 Galax, Va................................. August 1965 rahn, Ky. .... ............... ....... .. . . October 1965 untington, W. Va ........................ I)ecember 1965, June 1966 h Onton, Ohio ............................... November 1965, June 1966 acksonburg, W. Va ......................... September 1965 .aysville, Ky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . December 1965, June 1966 ' luishillen Creek, Canton, Ohio ............... July 1965 live Hill, Ky............................ October 1965 paint Creek, Chillicothe, Ohio ................. arkersburg, W. Va ........................... May 1966 October 1965, May 1966 oint Pleasant, W . Va......................... October 1965, June 1966 °ortsmouth-New Boston, Ohio ................ . November 1965, June 1966 ryestonsburg, Ky. ............................... December 1965, May 1966 rinceton, W . Va ............................ August 1965 'ichw ood, W. Va ............................ August 1965 lussell, K y. ................................. November 1965, June 1966 ithfield, W. Va. ............. Ui............ September 1965 estUnion, W . Va........................... September 1965 Williamson, W. Va ......................... November 1965, June 1966 1044 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 43. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 Name of project full report --- see Annual Report Operationand for- Construction maintenance Local protection projects; Aberdeen, Ohiol... ............................. $1,334 .. Ashland, Ky.2.......................................... 1. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . 1954. . . . . . . . 33,703,952 . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . Athalia, Ohio " Athens, Ohio................... ........................ .................... Augusta, Ky.1..................................................... 11,577 ......... Belpre, Ohio........................................................... Brooklyn, W, Va.l............................................. Buena Vista. Ohio . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . ......... . . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burlington, Ohiol . ... . ..... .............. ........... Catlettsburg, Ky.2.. ............................. 963 3 ,8154,361......... Ceredo-Kenova, W. Va.2.............................. 1955 32,743,344.. Chambersburg, Ohiol........................... ........ .... Cheshire, O hio . . . . . . . o. ................. . . ... :::: : ::: ::: .:... ....... ............. ................ . Chesapeailicothe, Ohio.... ......................... ............ .................... Chilio Chilo, Ohio................. .......................................... t e, Ohiol ............................. ....... ....... ...................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... ...... "' Clarington, Ohiot -.. ..... " " Clifton, W. Va......I.......... .............. .................. ' Coal Grove, Ohio.... ...................................... ............... .. Columbus, Ohio.l................ ...... Dover, Ky.).o............................. 2 .. .. . . . .. .. .. ............. East Rainelle, W. Va. ...... 1.9 .614,598. . Friendly, W. Va.1............................. ................................ Fullerton, 2Ky.................. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .......... ...................... . . . . . . .. .. . . ................ .... Galax, Va. 0 1953 480,536 ........... . Gallipolis, Ohio... ................... .......................... ..... Greenup, Ky.1....... ........................................ 4,962......... Hanging Rock, Ohiol ............................ ............................... Hartford, W. Va.t........................................ .... ................ ........... Henderson, W. Va......... ........................... .... Higginsport, Ohiol................ .......................... ........... Hockingport, Ohiol.......0................. 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Huntington, W. Va. 1956 . 3714,658. Ironton, Ohio2... 1952 2,569,394......... Letart, W. Va.1......... .. ..... . . .............................................. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Letart Falls, Ohiol Manchester, Ohio..... . ................... 17,721................... 17,721.. Mapriettad, Ohio....................... ................................. Martin, Ky....... ....................................... ................... M ason, W. Va............................................ 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ............ ..... ... .......... .... Maysville, Ky. 1959 36,493,563".......... Middleport, 1Ohiol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . ................... . . .... . . . ... ..... . . . . . . .... . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . 39,783...... . . . ..... 9,7.. . . . . . . . . .. Miller, Ohio l Millwood, W. Va.l......... .............. ................... New Martineville, W. Va............................. ................ ........... New Matamoras, Ohiol ................... ......................... ............ Newport, Ohiot ........ .... ............................. ......... ....... . Normal, Ky.I..... ...................................... Parkersburg, W. Va.2...1953............1...............960 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .......... Point Pleasant, W. Va. 1953 32,897,738 .......... . . . . . . . . ......................... Pomeroy, Ohio......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................. ........... Portland, Ohiol Portsmouth-New Boston, Ohio2...........1956 .............. 39,806,424 Powhatan Point, Ohiol2. . . .............. . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . .................... .. .. ... .. . . Princeton, W. Va. . A 1962 808,750 .. Proctor, W. Va.lI.................................... ......................... Proctorville, Ohio.......................................................... Racine, Ohio.................I.......... ........ Ravenswood, W. Va.l................ .................... ......... ....... '' Ripley, Ohiol....... .............................. ...... 75 . Riverview, W. Va............................ Russell, Ky.2................................... 13..... 153 237,193 .. St. Marys, W. Va............................................................. Sardis, Ohiol............ ............................................. Sciotoville, Ohiol......... ............................................ Siatersville, W. Va.. ..... ............................................ South Point, Ohiol........ ................................. South Portsmouth, Ky..................................................... Syracuse, Ohio............. ........................ ..... Vanceburg, Ky.l......... 0......................................... Waverly, W. Va.l... . . . . . .......................... ......... . . . . .............. Williamstown,W.W. Williamson, Va..... Va.t........................................................ 1984 $1,066166". Woodlands, W. Va.1 .. ................... ............ ................... Zaneaville, Ohiol... ......................................................... See footnotes at end of table. GENERAL INVESTIGATION, HUNTINGTON, W. VA., DISTRICT 1045 .OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS-Continued For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Reervoirs: Send.. W. I,'ra,,, Birch. Wu'V , a.Va.1 ........................................ a.... a ,abrg, .Ohio . . .................... ...... . : . ... ........... ::: : : :7,800 7",..... . :.................. . :... . .I......... ...... . . . :: 76................... . ea ti , W............................... ............. .. 15,2 L Va.l.... 2,6564 e Creek, W........ ..... ......... ........ ........ .... .......... Milersurg, Ohio ........... oorers .Ferry, Va.l ........................ M ooesPa rrw Va.. ..... e,::Va:: .... ...................... ... ......... ........ ................ Paits, lie.Ky....... .... ..................... ................ ............... Panther Creek, W Va........ ................................................... Pocakv Va.................................1950 rk, OhiolW. ............. Rockv Fork, .Ohiot 1950 91,321 ......... West Fork, W. Va.... ...... 15,000 ............. Yatea .ville,K y .......... ....... ......... ...................... ... ............... Inactive. 2C a om leted. ncludes cost of floodwall rehabilitation. 44. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTIHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) . t Study identification Fiscal year costs i Creek, Washington Court House, Ohio ................. $ 4,074 aCCoon Creek, Ohio ...................................... 2,498 0Cky Fork and Touby Run, Mansfield, Ohio ................. 21,556 8Outh Williamson, Ky ...................................... 653 Scarawas River, Ohio .................................... 911 Williams and Rush Creek, Ky ............................. 1,661 8nagging and clearing navigable streams and tributariesin interest of flood control (sec. 2, 1987 Flood Control Act, Public Law 406, 75th Cong.) i Project and location Fiscal year costs ,luestone River, Montcalm, W. Va ......................... '$29,493 PryFork of Tug Fork, Berwind, W. Va...................... 2635 .1Shing Creek, Pine Grove, W. Va ......................... 132,521 4ittle Fork of Little Sandy River, Ky....................... '62,540 Paint Creek, Pax, W. Va ................................. '1,253 Construction complete. 2Awaiting completion of local requirements. $Construction funds received. Flood control, hurricane, and shore protection activities (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedant legislation.) Fiscal year costs were $15,121, of which $12,548 was for ad- Vance preparation, $1,797 for flood emergency operations and $776 for rehabilitation of Paint Creek levee at Chillicothe, Ohio. 45. SURVEYS lFiscal year costs were $659,597, of which $268,371 was for flood control studies, $390,772 for comprehensive basin studies and $454 for coordination studies. 46. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA PFiscal year costs were $12,049 for flood plain studies on Alum reek, IHocking River, Nimishillen Creek, and Scioto-Olentangy Pivers, Ohio. 1046 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Completed flood plain studies Date Fe deral Location Requesting agency completed c ;ot Black Lick Creek, Ohio........... Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Divi- June 1962 $1,007 sion of Water. 47. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Fiscal year costs were $2,979 for hydrologic studies pertaining to purchase of rain gages and purchase and installation of one stream flow recorder at a temporary gaging station in Little Kanawha River. PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT * This District comprises part of eastern Ohio, western Pennsyl- Vania, southwestern New York, northern West Virginia, and northwestern Maryland embraced in drainage basin of Ohio River and tributaries above mile 127.2 (below Pittsburgh), immediately upstream from New Martinsville, W. Va. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Flood Control-Continued 1. Allegheny River, Pa..... 1047 21. Muddy Creek Reservoir, 2. Construction of locks and Pa.................... 1070 dams, Ohio River ...... 1050 22. Ohio River Basin (Pitts- 3. Monongahela River, Pa. burgh Dist.) ........ 1071 and W. Va........... 1050 23. Punxsutawney, Ohio River 4. Open-channel work, Ohio Basin, Pa ............ 1074 River ............... 5. 1054 24. Rowlesburg Reservoir, W. Tygart River Dam, W. Va. 1054 Va. .................. 1074 6. Other authorized naviga- 25. Salamanca, N.Y ....... 1075 tion projects ......... 1056 26. Shenango River Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Pa. Flood Control and Ohio ............ 1076 7. Allegheny River Reservoir, 27. Tionesta Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Pa ...... 1077 Ohio River Basin, Pa. 28. Turtle Creek, Pa....... 1078 and N.Y ............. 8. Berlin 1056 29. Union City Reservoir, Pa. 1080 Reservoir, Ohio River Basin, Ohio ..... 1057 30. West Branch Reservoir, 9. Buckhannon, W. Va .... 1058 Mahoning River, Ohio . 1081 10. Butler, Pa ............ 1059 31. Woodcock Creek Reservoir, 11. Chartiers Creek, Pa .... 1060 Pa. .................. 1082 12. Conemaugh River Reser- 32. Youghiogheny River Res- voir, Ohio River Basin, ervoir, Ohio River Basin, 1083 Pa. ................. 1061 Pa. and Md .......... 13. Crooked Creek Reservoir, 33. Youngstown, Ohio ...... 1084 Ohio River Basin, Pa... 1062 34. Inspection of completed 14 East Branch, Clarion flood control projects .. 1085 River Reservoir, Ohio 35. Other authorized flood con- S River Basin, Pa ...... 1063 trol projects ......... 1086 1. Elkins, W. Va ......... 1064 16. Johnstown, Pa.......... 36. Flood control work under 1065 special authorization ... 1087 17. Latrobe, Pa........... 1066 18. Loyalhanna Reservoi r, General Investigations Ohio River Basin, Pa. . . 1067 37. 19. Mahoning Creek Reservoir, Surveys ................ 1087 Ohio River Basin, Pa.. . 1068 Collection and study of 38. 20. Mosquito Creek Reservoir, basic data ........... 1087 Ohio River Basin, Ohio . 1069 39. Research and development 1088 1. ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA. Location. Rises in northern Pennsylvania, flows northwest- Ward into New York, thence generally southwestward to Pitts- burgh, Pa., where it joins with Monongahela River to form the Ohio. It is 325 miles long. (See Geological Survey Charts for Western Pennsylvania and southwestern New York.) Existing project. Provides for eight locks and dams to afford slack-water navigation from Pittsburgh, Pa., 72 miles to above East Brady, Pa. Controlling depth throughout canalized portion 1is 9 feet at normal pool level, and channel width varies from minimum of 200 feet to full width of river at mouth. Cost of few work for completed project is $18,157,860. 1048 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existinga rono ct was. authorized bh the fnollnig : Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Aug. 5 1886 For lock and dam 1. (Fixed dam contemplated. Sept. 29, Annual Report 1886, p. 1545, and 1891 Secretary of War authorized change to a movable Annual Report, 1891, p. 2366., dam.) June 3, 1896 For locks and dams 2 and 3............................... H. Doc. 204, 54th Cong., sletsesas.and Annual Report, 1896, p. 2212. July 25, 1912 For locks and dams 4 to 8, inclusive................ Doc. 540, 62d Cong., 2d sess. H11. July 3. 1930 For a depth of 9 feet in the lower 61 miles............. H11.Doc. 356 71st Cong., 2d sesas. Aug.30, 19351 Replace lock and dam 1 by a dredged channel, 9 feet deep Rivers and Harbors Committee, Doo and 200 feet wide up to lock 2, and construct new locks 16, 72d Cong., 1st sees. and dams 2 and 3, to replace existing locks and dams 2 and 3. Construct lock and dam 9, raising crest ol dam 8, and dredg- II. Doc. 721, 71st Cong., 3d sess.,D Do..... ing a navigable channel in head of pool 8. Rivers and Harbors Committee, 01 27, 73d Cong., 2d sees. f June 26, 19342 Operation and care o locks and dams provided for with funds from War Department appropriations fqr rivers and har- bors. ' Included in the Emergency Relief Administration Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act. program April 8, 1935. Locks and dams, Allegheny River, Pa. Depths on miter Dimensions sills at normal Character of Type of Upper pool levell foundation construction Lift at normal Kind of _- _ - Year normal pool ele- opened No. Miles Avail- pool vation dam to Estimated or above Width able level (feet navi- actual cost mouth Nearest town of length (feet) mean sea Lower Upper gation cham- to full level) (feet) (feet) Lock Dam Lock Dam bher (feet) width (feet) z 2 6.7 Aspinwall,Pa................... 56 360 11.0 721.0 19.0 10.9 Rock.... Rock.... Fixed.... Concrete.. Concrete. 21934 $1,763,485 3 14.5 Cheswick, Pa..................... 56 360 13.5 734.5 10.8 11.8 ... do..... Pile-rock. ... do..... ... do..... ... do..... 21934 1,875,665 4 24.2 Natrona, Pa...................... 56 360 10.5 745.0 10.0 8.5 ... do..... Rock.... ... do..... ... do.... ... do..... 1927 1,707,690 5 30.4 Freeport, Pa............. ....... 56 360 11.8 756.8 10.5 10.3 Piling.... Crib-pile.. ... do..... ... do..... ... do..... 1927 1,940,537 6 36.3 Clinton, Pa..................... 56 360 12.2 769.0 10.6 10.8 Rock.... ... do........do-.... ... do..... ... do..... 1928 1,523,959 7 45.7 Kittanning, Pa.................. 56 360 13.1 782.1 9.8 10.9 Piling.... ... do.... ... do..... ... do..... ... do.... 1930 1,460,008 8 52.6 Templeton, Pa.................. 56 360 17.9 800.0 10.4 13.8 Rock.... Rock-pile. ... do..... ... do..... .do.....1931 2,848,920 9 62.2 Rimerton, Pa................... 56 360 22.0 822.0 10.5 11.3 ... do.....Rock.. ... do..... .. do......do..... 1938 2,510,373 Total...... ................................................... .. . . ............................................................................................ 15,630,637 Abandoned lock and dam1.................... ............................................................................................... 591,187 Abandoned lock and dam 2............................................................................................................................................ 544,929 Abandoned lock and dam 3......................................................................................................................................... 310,103 Demolishing old dam 1................................................................. ........................................................................... 26,001 Dredging channel...................................... .................................. .. ................................................................ 1,055,003 Total..................... .................. ................ .................................................... ............... 18,157,860 2 All depths as shown are on guard sills and are controlling depth. Dates shown represent replacement structures. Cl w O 1050 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. City of Pittsburgh constructed a modern wharf for river freight. There are numerous privately main tained terminals and docks, consisting of tipples, various types o hoists, chutes, and pipelines for use in loading and unloading coal, stone, sand, gravel, petroleum products, steel products, and other commodities. Transshipment of freight between river and railroads is handled at privately owned river-to-rail terall nals. Existing private terminals are adequate for shipments and receipt in Pittsburgh District of type of commerce now in existence. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance, general: Locks were operated as required and necessary repairs made to structures to maintain them in service- able condition at cost of $423,562; maintenance repairs at lockS and dams were accomplished at cost of $289,653. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete, last lock was placed in service in 1938. All locks and dams are in good condition. Navigation channel has been widened at certail points and, in general, maintained to project depth, thus affording adequate depth for passage of commercial tows. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriated.......................................................... ........... $18,151 S60 . 118,15 7,0 Cost............... ..... ............. ........ ........... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $700,000 $730,906 $713,448 $727,000 $710,000 215,497 7068 5,934 Cost.................679,332 741,611 661,385 756,966 713,215 215,465 a Includes $2,453,737 emergency relief funds and $1,250,049 public works funds. SIncludes $64,354 Public Works Acceleration, Executive funds (1963). 2. CONSTRUCTION OF LOCKS AND DAMS, OHIIO RIVER See this heading under Ohio River portion. 3. MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA. AND W. VA. Location. Formed by junction of Tygart and West Fork Rivers about 1 mile south of Fairmont, W. Va., and flows north erly for 128.7 miles to its junction with Allegheny River, forminig Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. (See Geological Survey Charts for southwestern Pennsylvania and northern West Virginia.) Previous projects. For details see Annual Report for 1963, page 1070. Existing project. Provides for improvement of river by 11 locks and dams to afford slack-water navigation for its entire length from Pittsburgh to above Fairmont, W. Va. Original locks and dams 7, 8 and 9 were replaced by new locks and dam and 8 in 1925. Increased traffic necessitated enlargement and improvement of locks and dams 1 to 6 between Pittsburgh and Rices Landing, Pa., by building two parallel chambers and fixed concrete dams during 1905 to 1932. Locks and dam 1 were elinm" inated in 1938 by raising Emsworth Dam, Ohio River. Recon" struction of lock 2 was completed in 1953 to provide two moderl RIVERS AND HARBORS-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1051 navigation chambers. Construction of Maxwell locks and dam Which is now complete, together with progress on raising dam 4, has allowed for removal of obsolete lock and dam 6. Removal of lock and dam 5 will follow. Small and antiquated original locks and damrns 10 to 15, inclusive, are being replaced by three modern Structures. Morgantown lock and dam, initial step in replace- ment program, was completed in 1950 replacing locks and dams 10 and 11. Hildebrand lock and dam, next upstream, was com- lleted in 1959 replacing locks and dams 12 and 13. Raising crest dam 8 was also completed in 1959 as part of upper river improve- Ment and eliminates restricted depth in upper reach of pool. At 1lekiska lock and dam, which will replace locks and dams 14 and 15, construction of lock is complete and work on dam is under- Way. Completion of this final link in upper river replacement Drogram will provide for entire river length of minimum channel depth of 9 feet, varying in width from a minimum of 250 eet to practically full width at mouth. Estimated cost for new ork (1966), exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects i $121,800,000. SExistingq project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents and reports Work authorized ** 3.1899 Enlarge and improve lock and dam 6; additional works at Annual Report, 1897, p. 2423. lock 3; new repair steamer and new dredge boat with equip- 13 ,1902 ment; all at an estimated cost of $185,556. June Rebuild lock and dam 2 at estimated cost of $655,961. (Esti- Annual Report, 1909, p. 1756. 1902 mate increased in 1910 to $698,961.) Mar 3,1905 Acquisition of land and additional improvements at 5 and 6 Annual Report, 1904, p. 460. at a cost of $7,850. 1D09 Rebuild lock and dam 3 at estimated cost of $589,196........ H. Doe. 209, 58th Cong., 2d seas. 4.1913 Reconstruct lock and dam 5 at estimated cost of $756,042.. Do. Reconstruct lock and dam 6 at estimated cost of $356,400. H. Doe. 1217, 62d Cong., 3d sess. SeDt. 22,1922 (Estimate increased in 1916 to $418,860.) Additional improvements at estimated cost as follows: H. Doe. 288, 67th Cong., 2d sess. Guide walls and guard walls, 1 to 6.... . . .. $1,255,130 Lengthen land chamber of lock 3 to 720 feet. 787,722 New chamber (360 feet long), lock 4........ 699,786 Lock and dam 7............... ...... 1,161,241 Lock and dam 8.........................1,165,758 Lock and dam 7 (second chamber).......... 419,126 Lock and dam 8 (second chamber).......... 504,465 Reconstruct dam 4 ....................... 397,211 Marine ways, repair plant, office and ware- house................................ 250,000 July 3.1930 Total ............................. 6,640,439 Construct new locks and dam 2M miles below existing struc- Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. ture, at estimated cost of $2,175,000 in lieu of work 22, 70th Cong., 2d seas. Jan31,19311 authorized at old lock and dam 4. Chief of Engineers authorized to locate new locks and dam 4 above existing structure and on such site as they may deem June26,19342 most desirable. Operation and care of locks and dams provided for with funds May 17. 1950 from War Department appropriations for rivers and harbors. Modification of existing project as follows: S. Doe. 100, 81st Cong., 1st sess. Provide 2 new locks and dams similar to Morgantown lock and dam to replace existing locks and dams 12to 15. inclusive. Provide a movable crest on existing dam 8 to raise exist- ing pool-full elevation 4 feet. Provide a navigation channel of 300-foot minimum bottom width and a 9-foot project depth above lock and dam 8. Provide an extension of navigable channel of upper Mo- nongahela River, into lower Tygart River for 2.1 miles at a maximum bottom width of 200 feet and a 9-foot '- I project depth. i SPublic Res. 117, 71st Cong., 3d seas. 2 Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act. Pertinent data on locks and dams are in following table. Max- ell, Morgantown, Hildebrand, and Opekiska Dams are movable, remainder are fixed. ,___ _ _ __ _ Locks and dams, Monongahela River, Pa. and W. Va. .. Dimensions Depths on miter Upper sills at normal Character of foundation Type of construction Miles Lift at normal pool levell Per- Year No. above Nearest town Width Avail- normal pool ele- ____ - - _ cent opened mouth of able pool vation corn- to Estimated or chain- length level (feet Lo Upper Uer Lock Dam Lock Dam plete navi- actual cost bher to full (feet) mean sea (feet) (feet) gation (feet) width level) (feet) 2 11.2 Braddock, Pa..........f 56 360 8.7 718.7 16.0 15.95 Rock...... Crib pile... Concrete. Concrete... 100 21953 $17,872,212 \ 110 720 f 3 23.8 Elizabeth, Pa.............. 356 360 8.2 726.9 11.6 11.9 Rock...... ... do....... ... do....... do....... 100 21907 1,681,538 - -720 4 41.5 Charleroi,Pa............. 356 360 10.6 737.5 10.7 14.0 Piles. ... do....... ... Piles..... do....... 100 21932 617,723,767 1720, 5 56.5 Brownsville,Pa.... 356 360 12.4 749.9 11.1 11.5 Rockpile... . .......... do...... Cribpile. . 100 21909 1,074,812 Maxwell locks and dam 61.2 384 720 19.5 763.0 15.0 20.5 Rock......Rock...... do....... ... do... 93 1964 529,000,000 M axwell, Pa.2,3 7 85.0 Greensboro, Pa............ 56 360 15.0 778.0 10.0 10.5 ... do.......Rock.........do....... Concrete... 100 21925 2,639804 0 8 90.8 PointMarion, Pa... ....... 56 360 19.0 797.0 10.0 14.5 ... do....... ... do....... ... do....... ...do....... 100 21925 4 55,413.438 . 102.0 Morgantownlock and dam, 84 600 17.0 814.0 14.5 17.8 ... do....... .. do....... ... do...... ... do...... 100 1950 8,778,00 Morgantown, W. Va. ..... 108.0 Hildebrand Ick and dam, 84 600 21.0 835.0 15.0 14.0 ... do. ... do.... ... do. do. ... do......... do100 1959 12,506,829 6 miles above Morgan- town,W. Va. 115.4 Opekiska lock and dam, 84 600 22.0 857.0 14.0 17.75... do....... ... do....... ... do....... ... do....... 67 1964 525,200.000 13.4 miles above Mor- gantown, W. Vs. 15 124.6 Hoult, W. Va....... ..... 56 182 10.6 856.8 7.0 7.0 ... do....... ... do..........do....... ... do....... 100 1903 175,829 Marine ways, etc.................................................................................................................... 250,000 Abandoned lockind daml..........................1..............................1,019,907 Abandoned lock and dam 6................. ........................................................................................................................... p 770.449 Abandoned lock and dam 7................................................................. ............................................................................ 213,776 ' Abandoned lock and dam 8. ............................................................................................................................ .......... 245,900 Abandoned Abandoned and lock and dam 7...........................................................21,000. 9................................................................................................................................... 211,000 Abandoned lock and dam 10............................................................................................ ............................................ 210.445 Abandoned lock and dam 11.................................................................. ....................................................................... 227,668 Abandoned lock and dam 12................. ...................................................................................................................... 200,550 Abandoned lock and dam 13....................... ................................................................................................................ 190,691 Abandoned lock and dam l4............................................................................................................................................ 210 127 Dredging....................................................................................................................................... 587.899 Total.................................................................................................................... 127,165,457 1 All depths as shown are on guard sillsand are corntrolling depths. 4Includes 43,21,.000 for raising crest of dam. ' Dates shown for locks and dams 1Nos. 2 to 3, inclusive, ereresent reconstruction. u dstimated. o '2. shwnrz&er. I -6 ixeluaes ,00b reotutinoda. RIVERS AND HARBORS-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1053 Local cooperation. None required. T'erminal facilities. City of Pittsburgh constructed a modern Wharf for freight. Boat landings are maintained by some munic, iDalities along the river. A large number of tipples at mines and Various types of hoists at manufacturing plants and sand and gravel supply companies are maintained for private use in loading and unloading coal, coke, billets, steel products, sand, gravel, and Other commodities. These terminals and docks are not available for general commerce. A number of docks and pipelines are also Drivately maintained for petroleum and acid products. Marine Ways are maintained by some of the larger industries. There are also several terminals for rail-to-river and river-to-rail transfer. Pacilities considered adequate for existing commerce. SOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Major iterms of work performed by contract and hired labor: Dam 8 (raise crest) : Acquisition of flowage easements completed at a cost of $3,100. Maxwell locks and dam: Acquisition of land and flowage easements continued at a cost of $52,100. Contract for construction of dam was completed at a cost of $302,000; removal of lock and dam 6 cost $217,800; construction of recrea- tional facilities in pool area was completed at cost of $44,700; re- Itaining relocation work consisting of completion of Barneys Run Culvert and final settlement with Pennsylvania Railroad cost $58,700. Total cost for Maxwell locks and dam was $912,192. Reconstruction of dam 4: Acquisition of land and flowage ease- rlents continued at a cost of $78,500; relocation work was per- formed at a cost of $153,400; contract for reconstruction of dam and appurtenances and strengthening walls downstream of river chamber was advanced to 82 percent completion at a cost of $3,721,900. Total cost for reconstruction of dam 4 was $4,357,- 835. Opekiska lock and dam: Acquisition of land and flowage easements ti.l of continued otiudat at a cost of $f $287,100; contract for construc- ton of dam, including removal of lock and dam 14, was advanced to 70 percent completion at a cost of $2,034,400; relocation ac- ivity relative to negotiating settlements with railroads together With relocation of highways and utilities in pool area progressed to 29 percent completion at a cost of $958,700. Total cost for OPekiska lock and dam was $3,826,197. Operation and main- enance, general: Locks were operated as required and neces- Sary repairs were made to structures to maintain them in a serviceable condition at cost of $1,185,772; maintenance repairs at locks and dams cost $511,244. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for removal of locks and dam 5 integrated with reconstruction of dam 4 and replacement of locks and dams 14 and 15 by construction of (Pekiska lock and dam. A controlling depth of 9 feet is main- tained from Pittsburgh to Opekiska dam. From this point to head of river controlling depth is 7 feet. Upon completion of ()Dekiska lock and dam, which will permit removal of lock and dam 15, a minimum channel depth of 9 feet will exist for entire length of river, varying in width from a minimum of 250 feet to full width of river at mouth. Construction of Maxwell locks and dam was started in December 1960 and completed in October 1054 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 1965. Reconstruction of dam 4 was initiated under contract in June 1963 and is 72 percent complete. Construction of Opekisita lock and dam was initiated under contract in July 1961 and is 77 percent complete. Work remaining for completion of project consists of reconstruction of dam 4, removal of lock and dam 5, and construction of Opekiska lock and dam to replace locks and dams 14 and 15. Total costs of existing project to end of fiscal year Operation and l Funds New work maintenance, Total general 62 620 Regular................................................. $111,220,639 $32,141,981 $143,3 Maintenance and operation........ ........................................ 150,000 15000 Public works acceleration, executive (1963) ................................. 22,549 Total....................... 111,220,639 32,314,530 1143,5 35,169 .............. I-Excludes $20,446,b87 expended between July 7, 1897 and June 30, 1937, on operatior and care of works of improvement under provisions of permanent indefinite appropriatio Sfor such purposes. Cost and financial statement Total Fiscal year................ 1982 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New work: 92744 Appropriated.......... $13,198,000 $11,080,000 $12,110,000 $8,868,000 $119,1 $12,607,100 Cost................. .12,341,70212,173,222 10,216,682 11,831,4959,099,355 116,6 41:160 Maintenance: 27 300 Appropriated......... 1,395,0001,536,543 1,431,3061,597,5711,706,000 252,8 61,859 Cost..................1,367,545 1,463,4441,501,7031,580,0891,697,016 252,7 1Includes $5,420,541 for new work and $742 for maintenance for previous project. 2Includes $22,549 Public Works Acceleration, Executive funds (1963). 4. OPEN-CHANNEL WORK, OHIO RIVER See this heading under Ohio River portion. 5. TYGART RIVER DAM, W. VA. Location. On Tygart River in Taylor County, W. Va., about 22.7 miles above mouth of river at Fairmont, W. Va. It is 2.25 miles upstream from Grafton, W. Va., and about 78 miles south of Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir is in Taylor and Barbour Counties, W. Va. (See Geological Survey Charts for Fairmont, Thornton, and Belington, W. Va.) Existing project. A reservoir for low water regulation and flood control. Dam is concrete gravity type with an uncontrolled center spillway flanked by abutment sections joining valley sides. Project was authorized by Public Works Administration January 11, 1934, and adopted by 1935 River and Harbor Act. For further project description see Annual Report for 1962. Cost of new work for completed project is $18,431,844. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and maintenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control and low water regulation, as required, and project structures were maintained in a serviceable condition. HeavY rainfall on February 12-13, 1966, accompanied by snowmelt RIVERS AND HARBORS-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1055 caused a major rise along Monongahela River and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, in coordina- tion with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, achieved significant reductions. For this storm and flood, crest stage re- ductions attributed to this reservoir varied from 1.8 feet at lock 1IMonongahela , River, W. Va., to 0.65 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Reduction on Ohio River at Wheeling, W. Va., was 0.85 foot. Crest stage on Ohio River at Pittsburgh for this ood was 28.6 feet on February 14 (flood stage, 25 feet). Heavy rainfall on April 30, 1966, over Monongahela River Basin and .oderate rainfall over Allegheny River Basin caused a major ise in upper Ohio River which crested on May 2 at Pittsburgh, 4a. at 20.0 feet. Reductions made by this reservoir varied from .1feet at lock 15, Monongahela River, W. Va., to 1.7 feet on Ohio iver at Pittsburgh, Pa. During February and May rises, torage into reservoir averted suspension to navigation at lock 5, onongahela River, for 2 days and at lock 15 for 4 days. Esti- lated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year Were $3,906,800. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, the $63,748,000. Reservoir storage attained highest elevation of 'e year, 1140.9, on May 2, 1966, with a storage of 210,800 acre- Ofeet or 57 percent of usable summer flood control storage capacity i the reservoir. Some reservoir management activity was con- a1nued, comprising sanitation measures, real estate management Soperation and maintenance of public-use facilities. This Work was limited in scope as State of West Virginia has jurisdic- ton over recreation in reservoir area. I Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is com- lete. Reservoir is in operation for low water control in onongahela River and for purpose of flood protection in stongahela and Ohio Valleys. Construction of dam was tarted in 1935 and placed in operation in 1938. Cost and financial statement 8calyear Total to Year.... .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work. Appropriated................. ........... ................... $18,431,844 1..... Mainten ost ............................ ............ ........................ 118,431,844 atenance: A)propriated.......... $80,300 $120,400 $62,000 $151,500 $72,500 1,331,899 ost............. 86,022 56,395 123,013 82,805 133,970 1,320,619 ncludes $1,999,995 emergency relief funds and $10 million public works funds. 1056 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 6. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report- Name of project see Annual Report Operation a ind for- Construction maintenanc 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . Allegheny River, Pa.. open-channel work 1934 $197,000 $133 Beaver and Mahoning Rivers,3 Pa. and Ohio2 ................... Buckhannon River, W. Va.. . 4 1938 ........ .. . . 16840 . ............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1893 5,500. . Cheat River,W. Va.3 4..... 1895 12,997 ........ Pittsburgh Harbor, Pa...... ............................. 1922 110663 6 81 Youghiogheny River, Pa... ............................. 1965 547,195 6177'*168 SCompleted. SJanuary 23, 1939, Chief of Engineers recommended constructing a waterway from Ohio River through Beaver, Mahoning, and Grand River Valleys to Lake Erie (H. Doe. 178,6tb Cong., 1st sess.). 8 Abandonment recommended in II. Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess. 4 No commerce reported. 5 Previous project data. 1 Includes $1,700 expended under previous project. 7. ALLEGHENY RIVER RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. AND N.Y. Location. Damsite is on Allegheny River near Kinzua, War- s ren County, Pa., about 198 miles above mouth of river at Pitt - burgh, Pa. Reservoir is in Warren and McKean Counties, R., and Cattaraugus County, N.Y. (See Geological Survey Charts for Warren and Kinzua, Pa.-N.Y., and Randolph and Salamancal N.Y.) Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control, low water regulation, and recreation. Dam con" sists of a combination concrete gravity structure and rolled earth embankment with gate-controlled spillway and discharge conl duits controlled by slide-gates in gravity section. For further details see Annual Report for 1962, page 1202. Project W,.5 authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936, 1938, and 1941. Esti" mated cost for new work (1966) is $106,600,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Licenses. Federal Power Commission granted a license to Pennsylvania Electric Co. and Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. on December 28, 1965, for the joint construction, operation and maintenance of a 325 megawatt pumped-storage installationl' Federal Power Commission will set the annual charge which the companies will pay for use of reservoir. Project is in initial stage of construction. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work by col tract and hired labor: Acquisition of land and payment Of damages continued at a cost of $1,050,000. Relocation work waS brought to 79 percent completion at a cost of $9,295,700. Co" struction of the dam was completed at a cost of $609,800 and foundation grouting was completed at a cost of $254,700. Cofl struction of recreation facilities continued at a cost of $552,800. Operation and maintenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances at a cost of $40,387* Heavy rainfall February 12-13, 1966, accompanied by snowmelt caused a major rise along Allegheny River and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, in coordinationl with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, achieved sig- FLOOD CONTROL-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1057 Ificant reductions for this storm and flood, crest stage reductions attributed to this reservoir varied from 2.37 at Warren, Pa., to 0.25 foot at Pittsburgh, Pa., and 0.35 foot at Wheeling, W. Va. Crest stage on Ohio River at Pittsburgh for this flood was 28.6 beet on February 14 (flood stage 25 feet). Estimated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $1,717, 200. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $1,717,200. 1eservoir storage attained highest elevation of the year 1251.5 o February 17, 1966. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project, in- itiated in February 1960, is 82 percent complete. Relocation of esylvania Railroad is complete; relocation of Erie-Lacka- Wanna Railroad is 83 percent complete; relocation of highways required by project is 65 percent complete. Construction of dam as initiated in September 1960 and completed in December 1965. Construction of recreation facilities in project area are 44 per- cent complete. Of 1,964 tracts of land authorized for acquisition, ,930 have been acquired. Cost and financial statement iSealI Total to ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1960 New work PPrc - Coat, Opriated.......... $13,470,000 $23,400,000 $17,080,000 $19,125,000 $10,100,000 1$92,111,493 Maintena S . 12,986,846 23,080,946 16,508,358 17,508,120 13,739,858 189,750,124 ApPr opriated.......... ....... .................... ............. 41,400 41,400 Coat. 40,387 40,387 ' mct udes $2,791 from emergency relief funds. 8. BERLIN RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Dam is on Mahoning River about 73 miles above its confluence with Shenango River. It is about 10 miles above exist- ing Milton Reservoir Dam and 35 miles upstream from Warren, 0 o. Reservoir is in Portage, Mahoning, and Stark Counties, Ahio. (See Geological Survey Charts for Warren, Ravenna, and Allance, Ohio.) sting project. A reservoir for flood control and water sup- y. Dam consists of a partially controlled, concrete gravity, ienter spillway flanked by rolled-earthfill abutment sections join- ug valley sides. Project selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Por further project description, see Annual Report for 1962, page .23. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $7,625,500. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Devel- 1rnent of Mill Creek recreation area continued at a cost of $424,892. Operation and maintenance, general: Reservoir was oerated as required and necessary repairs were made to struc- ures and appurtenances at cost of $113,604. In addition thereto, t dating of master plan was continued at a cost of $6;112. heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 1966 accompanied by snow- lelt caused a major rise along Mahoning and Beaver Rivers and a Moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, in coordination with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, 1058 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 achieved significant reductions. For this rise, crest stage reduc- tions attributed to this reservoir along the Mahoning River varied from 2.07 feet at Warren, Ohio, to 1.25 feet at Youngstown, Ohio. Crest stage at Youngstown for this rise was 9.28 feet on February 13 (flood stage, 10 feet). Estimated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $354,600. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $77,821,000. Regulated low flows at Leavittsburg, Ohio, during July 1-October 21, 1965, and May 29-June 30, 1966, averaged 213 cubic feet per second representing 270 percent increase in natural low flows. Thus this reservoir achieved significant benefits from low-flow augmentation for populated areas using upper Mahoning River, and in conjunction with Mosquito Creek Reservoir, significant benefits along highly industrialized Mahoning River below Niles, Ohio. Water supply diversion from Berlin Reservoir bY Mahoning Valley Sanitary District for domestic consumption W1s made under contract demands of 5 and 8 million gallons per day for July-December 1965 and January-June 1966, respectivelY. Total water withdrawal for the year was 1.111 billion gallons or 3,410 acre-feet. Activities under reservoir management progracl comprising sanitation measures, conservation, land management, and operation and maintenance of public-use facilities continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is com- plete and in operation for flood control and low water regulation purposes in industrialized Mahoning Valley below. ConstructiOf of dam was started January 1942 and completed June 1943. Land acquired for project consists of 6,931 acres in fee simple and flowage easements over 1,059 acres. Remaining work coll sists of provision on project lands of additional recreational facilities required to serve public needs. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $20,000 $30,000 $140,000 $450,000 $42,000 $7,054,617 Cost................. 10,291 12,271 23,213 196,866 424,892 7,037,91 Maintenance:28 Appropriated.......... 65,300 87,000 85,000 126,100 117,600 1,223289 cost................. 79,804 82,964 84,367 117,421 ,716 119 1,211, 9. BUCKHANNON, W. VA. Location. On Buckhannon River, Upshur County, north-cen- tral West Virginia and about 100 miles south of Pittsburgh, Pa. (See Geological Survey Charts for Sago and Crawford, W. Va.) Existing project. Consists of major channel improvements bY deepening, widening, and uniformly aligning channel of Buck- hannon River, combined with a channel cutoff. Project will re- duce stages of floods up to 8,500 second-feet to no damage stage at Elias Street Bridge and reduce stages of all floods. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $1,380,000 estimated non-Federal costs of lands and damages and utility adjustments is $75,000. Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide FLOOD CONTROL-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1059 lands and rights-of-way, including spoil disposal areas, for con- Struction; hold United States free from damages; perform neces- Sary relocations or alterations of utility facilities; establish channel lines and prevent encroachment within channel limits so de- fined; maintain all works after completion; and at least annually inform interests affected that project will not provide protection against maximum floods; and that under extraordinary stream runoff conditions the water level may exceed elevation 1416 at lias Street Bridge. Assurances of local cooperation and the evidence of legal and financial ability of city to fulfill them were accepted by District Engineer on October 15, 1965. Acquisition of rights-of-way by local interests has been delayed. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Mlited preconstruction planning continued. Colndition at end of fiscal year. Plans and specifications are complete. Construction not started. Local interests are con- tinuing efforts to secure rights-of-way. Cost and financial statement C eal ea Total to *. ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work A01)ropriated $513,000 Cor riated...................... $30,000 $73,000 $175,000 $235,000 119,996 ........ 27,690 52,943 34,235 5,128 10. BUTLER, PA. doLocation. City of Butler and adjoining community of Lyn- ra a~re on Connoquenessing Creek, Butler County, western ennsylvania about 30 miles north of Pittsburgh, Pa. (See ceOlogical Survey Chart for Butler, Pa.) tsi Existing and areaproject. Provides flood protection for two communi- immediately below by widening, deepening, and treamlining existing channel of Connoquenessing Creek and colnstruction of a cutoff channel to bypass west end loop area of t)Utler. Appurtenant work consists of a diversion control struc- t1ure; alteration of utilities and bridges; and relocation of a sec- tion of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad along cutoff channel. Improve- ment is designed to contain a discharge 33 percent greater than flood of record. Project was authorized by 1960 Flood Control ct (II. Doc. 110, 86th Cong., 1st sess.). Estimated Federal cost for new work (1965) is $1,640,000; estimated non-Federal costs or lands and rights-of-way and railroad and utility alterations is $534,0oo00. 1 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. On January 4, 1965, local interests assumed operation and maintenance of unit 1. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- Struction work of unit 2, remaining unit, was continued under contract at cost of $404,600 and advanced to 98 percent com- Dletion. Estimated flood control benefits achieved by this project for the year were $15,000. Total flood control benefits to June 0, 1966, are $15,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project be- 11an in March 1963 and is about 98 percent complete. 1060 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Tot3I to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30 1966 Now work: 000 Appropriated.......... $183,000 $200,000 $315,000 $762,000 $75,000 $1,5606'( Cost................. 65,464 130,377 237,234 625,551 449,727 1 11. CIIARTIERS CREEK, PA. Location. Within Washington and Allegheny Counties, sou 0 tth western Pennsylvania, a tributary of Ohio River. (See GeO- logical Survey Chart for Carnegie, Pa.). Existing project. Provides for channel widening, deepening and realignment, construction of a major channel cutoff, and re- locations in two separate and independent reaches. Carnegie- Bridgeville reach of improvement in Allegheny County would be about 11.3 miles long and Canonsburg-Houston reach in Wash- ington County about 4.7 miles long. Proposed improvement would contain within banks all floods up to the 1912 maximum o record, but with some residual damage, and would greatly redutce flood stages and damages resulting from higher floods. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1965. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $23,900,000, of which $14,400,000 is Federal cost and $9,500,000 non-Federal cost. Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide lands, easements, rights-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas for coI" struction; bear cost of all relocations and alterations of sewVer, water, gas, oil, electric powerlines, and other utility alterationSl railroad track shifts; highway and street modifications; and con" struction of new or reconstruction of existing highway bridges made necessary by construction work; hold United States free from damages; establish channel limit lines within each county along entire waterway downstream from existing improvements at Washington, and prevent any encroachment which would re, duce flood-carrying capacity of the channel so defined; inform affected interests at least annually that project will not provide complete protection from floods greater in magnitude than that which occurred in September 1912; and maintain and operate project works after completion. Chartiers Valley District Flood Control Authority, local cooperating agency for Carnegie' Bridgeville reach in Allegheny County and Board of County Cofl' missioners, Washington County, local cooperating agency for Canonsburg-Houston reach of improvement adopted resolutions5 on December 27, 1962, and February 15, 1963, respectively, e%* pressing willingness to comply with requirement of local cooperS* tion. Requests have been made of both agencies for formal as* surances of local cooperation and evidence of their legal and financial ability to fulfill the assurances. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Work is underway on preparation of feature design memoranda and plans and specifications for the first construction units of the tWVo reaches of project. Preparation of general design memorandum was initiated. FLOOD CONTROL-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1061 Condition at end of fiscal year. Feature design memoranda COvering first construction units of two reaches of project is 20 rercent complete. Preparation of general design memorandum is about 20 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Necal Total to ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work: APpropriated................ .......................................... $107,303 $107,303 "'t.................. ............ 88,70788,70788,707 88,707 12. CONEMAUGH RIVER RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. Location. Dam is on Conemaugh River in Indiana and West- moreland Counties, Pa., 7.5 miles above junction of Conemaugh River and Loyalhanna Creek, which form head of Kiskiminetas 4iver. It is about 2 miles northeast of Tunnelton, Pa., and about 42 miles east of Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir is in Westmoreland and Indiana Counties, Pa. (See Geological Survey Charts for Latrobe, New Florence, and Elders Ridge, Pa.) .Existing project. A flood control reservoir dam of concrete gravity type with a gate-controlled center spillway flanked by abutaent sections joining valley sides and an earth embankment ending in right abutment. Project authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936 and 1938. For further project description e Annual Report for 1962, page 1217. Completed project cost 5,684,411, Local cooperation. None required by law. t Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main- teance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances. Heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 1966, ac- aoPanied by snowmelt caused a major rise along Allegheny River d 'a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, " coordination with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, achieved significant reductions. For this storm and flood, crest ftage reductions attributed to this reservoir varied from 11.30 e along Kiskiminetas River at Vandergrift, Pa., to 1.95 feet on 'Oo River at Pittsburgh, Pa., with a reduction of 2.20 feet at fo eeling, W. Va. The crest stage on Ohio River at Pittsburgh r this flood was 28.6 feet on February 14 (flood stage, 25 feet). aleavy rainfall on April 30, 1966, over Monongahela River Basin an d moderate rainfall over Allegheny River Basin caused a major rise in upper Ohio River which crested on May 2 at Pittsburgh, a., at 20.0 feet. Reduction made by this reservoir foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Estimated floodwas 0.40 control elonefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $10,622,900. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $137,986,300. peservoir storage attained highest elevation of the year, 954.8, on 'ebruary 16 1966, with a storage of 159,000 acre-feet or 57 per- ent full. Activities under reservoir management program com- 1062 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 prising sanitation measures, conservation, land management, and operation and maintenance of public-use facilities were continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is corn- plete. Reservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir system designed for protection of Pittsburgh and reduction Of flood heights in upper Ohio Valley, generally. Construction of dam and appurtenances was started in April 1949 and completed in December 1952. Furnishing and erection of 2 gantry cranes and 14 crest gates by contract were started in November and December 1951, and completed in August and September 1953, respectively. Relocation of main line of Conemaugh division, Pennsylvania Railroad, was started by contract in April 1946 and completed in September 1950. Land acquired for dam and reser-s voir consists of 6,928 acres in fee simple and flowage easement over 578 acres. Railroad relocation required acquisition of 1,331 acres in fee and easements over 3 acres. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year ... ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: 1 411 Appropriated................................................................5 684 Cost ...... .................... ........................ 145:684:411 Maintenance: ,J Appropriated........... $44,500 $50,000 $56,000 $73,000 82.000 6439706 Cost............... 44,012 47,131 57,249 73,870 80,063 639, 1 Includes $5,351 from emergency relief funds. 13. CROOKED CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. Location. Dam is on Crooked Creek 6.7 miles above junctiol of creek with Allegheny River near Ford City, Pa., and about 32 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, Pa. (See Geological Survey Charts for Freeport and Elders Ridge, Pa.) Existing project. A flood control reservoir dam of earthfll type with separate uncontrolled saddle spillway and tunnel outlet works. Project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936 and 1938. For further project description see Annual Report for 1962, page 1213. Completed project cost $4,204,888. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operationsand results during fiscal year. Operation and main- tenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances. Heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 1966, ac- companied by snowmelt caused a major rise along AlleghenY River and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, in coordination with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, achieved significant reductions. For this storm and flood, crest stage reductions attributed to this reservoir were 0.50 foot at lock 4, Allegheny River, 0.45 foot on Ohio River at Pitts burgh, Pa., and 0.50 foot at Wheeling, W. Va. Crest stage on Ohio River at Pittsburgh for this flood was 28.6 feet on February 14 (flood stage, 25 feet). Heavy rainfall on April 30, 1966, over Monongahela River Basin and moderate rainfall over Allegheny River Basin caused a major rise in upper Ohio River which crested FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1063 onIMay 2 at Pittsburgh, Pa., at 20.0 feet. Reduction made by this reservoir was 0.10 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Esti- Mated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $2,393,000. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $44,526,300. Reservoir storage attained highest elevation of the year, 891.3, on February 16, 1966, with a storage of 47,000 acre- feet or 48 percent full. Activities under reservoir management )rograrn comprising sanitation measures, conservation, land man- agement, and operation and maintenance of certain public-use fpIc1hltiescontinued. This work was limited as Commonwealth of nsylvaniahas jurisdiction over recreation in reservoir area. Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is complete. teservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir sys- tem designed for protection of Pittsburgh and reduction of flood heights in upper Ohio Valley, generally. Construction of dam Was started in March 1938 and completed October 1940. Land acquired for project consists of 3,563.55 acres in fee simple and owage easements over 99.98 acres. ,_ _Cost and financial statement Fiscaly Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NeWork Pproopriated ........ - Cost. .. .......... ............ .......... 1$4,204,888 Maintenane .4,204,888 1..... APPr opriated..........$62,000 $69,000 $53,700 $70,000 $114,000 990,952 cost. 62,497 56,645 71,031 62,046 935,570 61,575 1 nclu ides $63,788 from emergency relief funds. 14. EAST BRANCH, CLARION RIVER RESERVOIR, 01110 RIVER BASIN, PA. Location. Dam is in Elk County, Pa., on East Branch of Clarion River above Middle Fork, 7.3 miles above junction of East and est Branches of Clarion River at Johnsonburg, Pa., and about 05 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir is in Elk County, Pa. (See Geological Survey Chart for Mount Jewett, 11a.) Existing project. A reservoir for flood control and low water regulation. Dam is rolled-earthfill type with gate-controlled con- crete tunnel under right abutment and a paved uncontrolled spill- Way on left abutment slope. Project was selected for construe- iOn. under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in Flood Control Acts of 1938 and 1944. For further project description See Annual Report for 1962, page 1206. Estimated cost for new Work (1966) is $9,519,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- struction of launching area was completed and construction of l)arking area, comfort station, and appurtenant work was in- itiated under contract. Operation and maintenance, general: Reservoir was operated as required, and necessary repairs were ttade to structures and appurtenances. Heavy rainfall on Feb- ruary 12-13, 1966, accompanied by snowmelt caused a major rise 1064 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 along Clarion and Allegheny Rivers and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir achieved flood control bene- fits along Clarion River and in coordination with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, achieved flood control benefits alofl, Allegheny and upper Ohio River valleys. For this storm a.nd flood, crest stage reductions attributed to this reservoir varie from 1.05 feet at Johnsonburg, Pa., to 0.05 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa., and also at Wheeling, W. Va. Crest stage o Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa., for this flood was 28.6 feet ol February 14, 1966 (flood stage, 25 feet). Estimated flood co1* trol benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $300,500. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $3,171,700. Reservoir storage attained highest elevation of the year, 1671.0, on May 5, 1966, with a storage of 66,500 acre-feet or 6 percent Of usable summer flood control storage capacity of reservoir. Regu' lated low flows at Johnsonburg, Pa., during July 1-November 5, 1965, and June 1-June 30, 1966, averaged 270 cubic feet per see. ond, representing a 230 percent increase in natural low water flows. Thus, this reservoir achieved significant benefits from loNw flow augmentation for populated areas using Clarion River and also to Piney Reservoir (private power dam). Some reservoir management activity was performed throughout the year coni i prising sanitation measures, conservation, land management a d operation of public-use facilities. Work was limited in scope a bulk of reservoir lands are owned by Commonwealth of PennSYl' vania. Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is cole" plete. Reservoir is in operation for low water regulation purposes in Clarion River valley below and for flood control as a unit Of coordinated reservoir system for protection of Pittsburgh and upper Ohio Valley, generally. Construction of dam was starte. in June 1947 and completed in July 1952. Land acquired for proJY ect consists of 1,252 acres in fee simple and flowage easements over 820 acres. Construction of additional recreational facilities, required to serve public needs, is underway. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1066 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $5,000 $25,000 -$1,450 $87,678 $25,000 $9,524,. Coat.................. 1,161 610 5,824 28,348 61,002 9,479, Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 45,000 53,400 54,000 58,000 73,000 593,6 '40 44,985 Cost.................. 48,679 567,504 53,626 74,957 589, 15. ELKINS, W. VA. Location. On Tygart River in north-central Randolph CountY' W. Va., about 155 miles south of Pittsburgh, Pa. It is at dowfl stream end of a long, broad reach of upper Tygart Valley, about 75 miles above mouth of river. (See Geological Survey Chart for Elkins, W. Va.) FLOOD CONTROL---PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1065 dExisting project. Provides flood protection by diverting flood ischarges from upstream arm of loop of natural river channel uto an artificial cutoff channel, thereby bypassing city of Elkins. tmprovement is designed to accommodate discharges equivalent o maximum flood of reasonable expectancy. Project was author- ized by 1938 Flood Control Act. For further project description see Annual Report for 1962, page 1222. Federal cost of com- Pleted project is $1,772,627; estimated non-Federal costs for lands, asements, and rights-of-way is $40,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main- tenance, general: Routine inspections were made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project construction was com- menced May 1946 and completed May 1949. Completed works, except that portion of channel maintained by Federal Govern- ment, has been operated and maintained by city of Elkins since IVarch 31 1949. Land required for project consists of 43.19 acres Infee simple and flowage easements over 526.04 acres. Cost and financial statement cal year Total to .. 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work. p.ropriated....................... . ..................................... $1,772,627 Maintenan.. . . . .. . . .... .. .. .. . . .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. ... .... ..... . . . ..... 1,772627 APropriated........... $3,000 $13,300 $1,500 $2,000. 42,100 1 8..0 2..1P08 13,429 2,027 1,284 1,249 41,603 16. JOHNSTOWN, PA. Location. In southwestern Cambria County, Pa., about 58 miles east of Pittsburgh, Pa. It is in a deep and comparatively narrow Valley at junction of Stony Creek and Little Conemaugh River, Which unite to form Conemaugh River. (See Geological Survey Chart for Johnstown, Pa.) Existing project. Increased channel capacity by enlarging and ealining channels and protecting banks with concrete pavement. thprovement designed to accommodate discharges equivalent to those of March 1936 flood, maximum natural flow of record, mini- Mnrum of overbank flow and to practically eliminate damages there- from. Project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936 and 1937. For further project description see Annual Report for 1962, page 1215. Cost of completed project is $8,865,388. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938, applies. SOperations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main- tenance, general: Routine inspections were made. Flood dam- ages prevented by project during 1965-66 flood season were estimated to be $144,000; cumulative total flood damages prevented to end of fiscal year is $35,633,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project construction began AiAugust 1938 and was completed November 1943. Footer pro- tection for unit 4 was completed in November 1949. For further 1066 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 details see page 1216 of Annual Report for 1962. Land acquired for project consists of 0.60 acre in fee simple and flowage ease- ments over 397.16 acres. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1 966 New Awork: p prop ri at e d .. . ...... Cost e.................. ....................... . .. .. $8 86F16388 18,86J Maintenance: 15128 Appropriated.......... $22,600 $10,000 -$4,000 $5,000 -$1,000 32 1, 850 Cost................... 3,517 24,001 2,836 1,859 2,102 32C0, 'Includes $33,423 from emergency relief funds. 17. LATROBE, PA. Location. Borough of Latrobe is on Loyalhanna Creek, 23 miles above its mouth at Saltsburg, Pa., and about 35 miles east of Pittsburgh, Pa. (See Geological Survey Chart for Latrobe, Pa.) Existing project. Consists of widening, deepening, and streamlining existing creek channel; excavating two cutoff chan" nels; and providing a pilot channel for low flows. Appurtenant work consists of special treatment at bridge piers and abutments where necessary; adjustment of numerous utilities; improved channel side slope and disposal area protection. Improvement Will contain a discharge of 28,000 second-feet, equal to that of October 1954 flood, maximum of recent record. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1960 (H. Doc. 383, 86th Cong., 2d sess.)* Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $3,248,000, of which $2,650,000 is Federal cost, $484,000 non-Federal cost of land and rights-of-way and utility alterations, and $114,000 non-Federal contribution. Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide lands, rights-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas for construction ex, cept for Government-owned land in Loyalhanna Reservoir; bear cost of all alterations or relocations of roadways and utilities; establish channel limit lines and prevent encroachments on chan- nel so delineated; hold United States free from damages; and maintain and operate works after completion. In addition, aUt- thorizing act requires local interests to enter into an agreement in advance of construction to assume at least 20 percent of cost (exclusive of costs of planning, design, and acquisition of water rights) of completed project allocated to production of local flood control benefits, payable either as construction proceeds or plur- suant to a contract providing for repayment with interest over 50 years. Latrobe Borough Council, the responsible local coopera- tion agency, executed formal assurances which were accepted bY the District Engineer on May 25, 1965. Agreement for payment of local share (20 percent) of the cost of project was also approved by Borough Council. Right-of-entry for construction purposes was granted Government on June 25, 1965. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- struction was initiated under contract. FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1067 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project was initiated in July 1965 and is 42 percent complete. Cost and financial statement yeaa .. "Sea' Total to .Year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork. Ppropriated...................... $75,000 $117,000 $265,000$1,050,000 $1,507,000 .. .................... .. 4,213 75,732 96,578 899,199 1,115,722 RIVER BASIN, PA. 18. LOYALIIANNA RESERVOIR, 0111OHIO Location. Dam is on Loyalhanna Creek, 4.5 miles above junc- tion of creek with Conemaugh River at Saltsburg, Pa., and about 29 Mriles east of Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir is in Westmoreland ounty, Pa. (See Geological Survey Chart for Latrobe.) IXsting project. A flood control reservoir dam of concrete gravity type with a gate controlled center spillway flanked by abutnent sections joining valley sides, and an earth embankment section ending in left abutment. Project was authorized by P'lood Control Acts of 1936 and 1938. For further project de- Scription see Annual Report for 1962, page 1219. Completed Iroject cost $5,452,862. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operationsand results during fiscal year. Operation and main- tenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood con- trol, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures land appurtenances. Heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 1966, ac- onI)anied by snowmelt caused a major rise along Allegheny tiver and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this rservoir, in coordination with other reservoirs in upper Ohio Ver Basin, achieved significant reductions. For this storm and flood, crest stage reductions attributed to this reservoir varied fror 2.55 feet along Kiskiminetas River at Vandergrift, Pa., to 0.40 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa., with a reduction of 0.50 foot at Wheeling, W. Va. Crest stage on Ohio River at Pitts- furgh for this flood was 28.6 feet on February 14 (flood stage, 25 eet). Heavy rainfall on April 30, 1966, over Manongahela River asin and moderate rainfall over Allegheny River Basin caused a major rise in upper Ohio River which crested on May 2 at Pitts- burgh, Pa., at 20.0 feet. Reduction made by this reservoir was t0.10 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Estimated flood con- trol benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $2,273,- 000. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $48,471,200. peservoir storage attained highest elevation of the year, 954.2, on ,'ebruary 16, 1966, with a storage of 42,700 acre-feet or 44 percent ll. Activities under reservoir management program comprising sanitation measures, conservation, land management and operation an' maintenance of public-use facilities continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is complete. t eservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir sys- ei designed for protection of Pittsburgh and reduction of flood eights in upper Ohio Valley, generally. Construction of dam 1068 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 was started October 1939 and completed June 1942. Land ac- quired for project consists of 3,415.12 acres in fee simple and flow' age easements over 79.84 acres. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1984 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work:86 Appropriated.......... ............... ..... ......................... .... 1$5,452 86 ............ Cost.................. ... ....................................... ..... 15,452862 Cot..................:, Maintenance: Appropriated.......... Cost.....69,285 $70,600 $50,000 $51,500oo7Pooo $62,000 $99,000 936 4 49,906 51,793 61,573 61,847 6574 1 Includes $7,339 from emergency relief funds. 19. MAHONING CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. Location. Dam is on Mahoning Creek in Armstrong CountY, Pa., 21.6 miles above junction of creek with Allegheny River. It is about 61/ miles southeast of New Bethlehem, Pa., and about 51 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir is in Armstrong', Indiana, and Jefferson Counties, Pa. (See Geological Survey Charts for Rural Valley and Smicksburg, Pa.) Existing project. A flood control reservoir dam of concrete gravity type with a gate-controlled center spillway flanked bY abutment sections joining valley sides. Project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936 and 1938. For further project description see Annual Report for 1962, page 1210. Estimated cost for new work (1965) is $6,471,300. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main" tenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood con" trol, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances. Heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 1966, ac- companied by snowmelt caused a major rise along Allegheny River and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reser- voir, in coordination with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, achieved significant reductions. For this storm and flood, crest stage reductions attributed to this reservoir varied from 0.40 foot at lock 7, Allegheny River, to 0.70 foot at lock 4, AlleghenY River. Reduction was 0.60 and 0.65 foot on Ohio River at Pitts- burgh,' Pa., and Wheeling, W. Va., respectively. Crest stage of" Ohio River at Pittsburgh for this flood was 28.6 feet on February 14 (flood stage, 25 feet). Heavy rainfall on April 30, 1966, over Monongahela River Basin and moderate rainfall over AlleghenY River Basin caused a major rise in upper Ohio River which crested on May 2 at Pittsburgh, Pa., at 20.0 feet. Reduction made by this reservoir was 0.20 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Esti- mated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $3,417,000. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $48,275,600. Reservoir storage attained highest elevation of the year, 1148.6, on February 16, 1966, with a storage of 48,400 acre-feet or 63 percent full. Activities under reservoir manage- ment program comprising sanitation measures, conservation, land FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1069 management, and operation and maintenance of public-use facili- ties Were continued. m o Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is complete. teservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir sys- ter designed for protection of Pittsburgh and reduction of flood he ghts in upper Ohio Valley, generally. Construction of dam was arted in February 1939 and completed in June 1941. Land ac- quired for project consists of 2,533.49 acres in fee simple and flow- age easements over 76.89 acres. Cost and financial statement scl Totalto Y .1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: ppropriat at ,ed................ ............ *.... ed.......... .... . ... .. . ......... ............ .......... 1$6,421,345 186,421,345 Maintenance: . 16,421,345 Appropriat ed.......... $42,000 $48,000 $73,300 $89,000 $71,900 889,333 Rehabilitation 41,065 46,620 71,304 90,314 71,992 886,233 DPropriat(ed.................... -2,967 ..................................... 47,033 46,824 209 .................................. 47,033 Includes ... SIncludes; $25,671 emergency relief funds. 20. MOSQUITO CREEK RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, OHIO Location. Dam is on Mosquito Creek, 9 miles above junction of creek with Mahoning River at Niles, Ohio, and about 18 miles Iorthwest of Youngstown, Ohio. (See Geological Survey Charts for ristolville and Kinsman, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.) laExisting project. A reservoir for flood control, low water regu- ation and water supply storage. Dam is rolled-earthfill type With outlet facilities through dam, and an uncontrolled natural Wasteway to discharge overflow from reservoir. Project was se- lected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River 3asin in 1938 Flood Control Act. For further project description See Annual Report for 1962, page 1228. Completed project cost $4,035,400. Local cooperation. None required by law. t Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main- enance, general: Reservoir was operated as required, and neces- Sary repairs were made to structures and appurtenances. Heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 1966, accompanied by snowmelt caused a major rise along Mahoning and Beaver Rivers and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, in coordination lith other reservoirs on upper Ohio River Basin, achieved sig- nificant reductions. Crest stage reduction attributed to this reser- Voir on Mahoning River at Youngstown, Ohio, was 0.57 foot. Crest stage at Youngstown for this rise was 9.28 feet on February 3 , (flood stage, 10 feet). Estimated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $152,400. Total flood COntrol benefits to June 30, 1966, are $13,597,700. Regulated low flOW at Youngstown during July 1-October 21, 1965, and May 29- 2 ne 30 1966, averaged 362 cubic feet per second, representing 50 percent increase in natural low water flows. Thus, this reser- 1070 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 voir in conjunction with Berlin Reservoir achieved significant benefits from low-flow augmentation along highly industrialized Mahoning River below Niles, Ohio. This is the 12th complete year that city of Warren, Ohio, diverted their water supply fropr Mosquito Creek Reservoir. Water withdrawal was 4.270 billion gallons or 13,100 acre-feet. Activities under reservoir manage- ment program comprising sanitation measures, conservation, land management, and operation and maintenance of certain public- use facilities continued. This work was limited as State of Ohio has jurisdiction over recreation in reservoir area. Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is complete and in operation for flood control and low water regulation pur- poses in industrialized Mahoning and Beaver Valleys below. Con struction of dam started in July 1943 and was ready for beneficial use January 1944. Land acquired for project consists of 11,213.98 acres in fee simple and flowage easements over 275.21 acres. State of Ohio has a license from Secretary of the Army for de- velopment and operation of recreation facilities in reservoir area. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... ................ ... ............................ 400 $4,035 Cost............... ..... 4,035,400 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $39,000 $50,000 $54,700 $60,000 $92,000 731 Cost............... .. 38,309 46,318 58,217 59,450 73,013 716:11 21. MUDDY CREEK RESERVOIR, PA. Location. In Crawford County, northwestern Pennsylvania, on Muddy Creek, a tributary of French Creek. Damsite is aboutt 4 miles above mouth of Muddy Creek and about 17 miles northeast of Meadville, Pa. (See Geological Survey Chart for Union CitY, Pa.-N.Y.). Existing project. Provides for construction of flood control reservoir dam of rolled earth embankment nongated type with uncontrolled side-channel spillway. Outlet works will be uncon- trolled and consist of a reinforced concrete conduit, 10 feet it diameter, in valley floor. Dam will be 6,970 feet long at toP rising 67 feet above streambed and provide for gross capacitY 19,600 acre-feet from a drainage area of 61 square miles. Reser- voir will be operated as one of three-reservoir system for reduction of flood stages in French Creek Basin between damsite and mouth, Allegheny River from Franklin, Pa., to Pittsburgh, Pa. inclusive, and upper Ohio River Valley. Existing project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new worc (1966) is $8,800,000. Local cooperation. Local interests must inform affected inter- ests in French Creek Basin at least annually, in a manner satis- factory to District Engineer, that system of reservoirs of which Muddy Creek Reservoir is a part, will not provide protection against maximum floods. Pennsylvania Department of Forests FLOOD CONTROL-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1071 and Waters has assumed responsibility of local cooperation for Project. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Prepa- ration of general design memorandum was continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preparation of general design Memorandum is approximately 60 percent complete. Cost and financial statement hscal Year ea*1962 Total to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19066 Nwork- tPPropriated...... ........... ........................ $25,000 $90,000 $115,000 ................................. ............. 22,970 84,805 107,775 22. OHIO RIVER BASIN (PITTSBURGH DIST.) Location. Levees, floodwalls, channel improvements, and res- ervoirs in Ohio River Basin within Pittsburgh District. IExisting project. Flood Control Act of 1937 authorized con- struction of levees, floodwalls, and drainage structures for protec- lonl of cities and towns in Ohio River Basin, projects to be Selected by Chief of Engineers with approval of Secretary of War, I accordance with House Flood Control Committee Document 1, 75th Congress, 1st session, at a cost not to exceed $24,877,000 for C11struction, which !-"nount was authorized to be appropriated for thi s purpose. Flood Control Act of June 28, 1938, approved gen- eral comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Ohio River Basin as set forth in House Flood Control Committee Document 1, 75th Congress, 1st session, with such modification thereof as, in discretion of Secretary of War, and Chief of Engi- neers, may be advisable, and for initiation and partial accomplish- nent of plan, authorized $75 million for reservoirs and $50,300,000 for local flood protection works, individual p)rojects to be selected and approved by Chief of Engineers subject to provision that 'Ithorization shall include diversion of Cache River above Cairo, Il, and protection of area north of Cario drainage district by evees, at an estimated cost of $2 million. Flood Control Act of 1941 authorized $45 million for further prosecution of compre- hensive plan approved in act of June 28, 1938, for Ohio River asin, modified to include Allegheny Reservoir project in accord- ance with recommendation of Chief of Engineers in House Docu- pent 300, 76th Congress, 1st session. Flood Control Act of 1944 authorized $70 million for prosecution of comprehensive plan ap- Proved in act of June 28, 1938, as modified by act of August 18, b194 1, for Ohio River, including additional projects in tributary basins Flood Control Act of 1946 authorized $125 million for further prosecution of comprehensive plan for Ohio River Basin a)Proved in act of June 28, 1938, as amended and supplemented by Sbsequent acts, including additional projects in tributary basins. llood Control Act of 1950 authorized $100 million for prosecution of comprehensive plan for Ohio 'River Basin approved in act of Une 28, 1938, as amended and supplemented by subsequent acts, including additional projects in tributary basin. Flood Control 1072 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Act of 1963 authorized $150 million for prosecution of compre- hensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Ohio River Basin, authorized by Flood Control Act of 1938, as amended and supplemented. Public Law 89-42 authorized $89 million for proS- ecution of comprehensive plan for flood control and other pur- poses in Ohio River Basin, authorized by Flood Control Act of 1938, as amended and supplemented. Individual projects con- sidered in comprehensive plan within Pittsburgh District: Local protection projects Estimated cost Location Type of protection Federal Non.- Total Federal - - - I1 f Adena, Ohio (Short Creek)2................. 2 Channel.... ......... $283,000 $67,000 9$350 Allegany, N.Y. 2 (Allegheny River) ........... ........... .......... Levee... ......... 1,100,000 67,000 91,167,000 9530 000 Bellaire, Ohio ...... Wall and levee............ 7,660,000 1,870,000 Brackenridge, Tarentum and Natrona, Pa. 0 2 Wall..... .......... 11,800,000 3,080,000 14,880, (Allegheny River) . Brilliant, Ohio2.. .......................... .....do.... .. ...... 3,240,000 276,000 3,516,0 Brockway, Pa. (Allegheny 2 River Basin)2 ........ Wall and levee............ ................ 477,000 167,000 000 Clarington, Ohio ...... .....do.... ......... 2,710,000) 249,000 2,959,00 Corsopolis, Pa.2... ............... Wall..... .......... 3,080,000) 466,000 3 546,00 Dillonvale, Ohio (Short Creek)2............. Channel................. 388,000 58,000 446,000 Elkins, W.Va. (Monongahela River Basin)4 5. Channel diversion......... 1812,21 31,772,627 40,000 Empire, Ohio2............................. Wall..... .......... 3,030,000 234,000 3.264,000 20902,0 Follansbee, W. Va.2... ............. 2.. ....... ....do.................. 2,670,000 232,000 1.001, 00 Freeport, Pa. (Allegheny River) ... .. do... .......... 1,480,000 21,000 1606,000 Industry, Pa.2............................ Wall, levee, and channel... 1 560, 000 136,000 18040064 Johnsonburg, Pa. (Allegheny River Basin)5.. 4 Wall..... .......... Johnstown, Pa. (All egheny River Basin) 5.. Channel................. 4674,664 130,000 38 ,865, 38 865,388 Kittanning, Pa., part, (Allegheny River) 2 5. 2 W all........ ............. 1130,317 132,31 Kittanning, Pa., part II (Allegheny River) .. ..... 6,292, 2,000 do.... .......... 5,940,000 352,000 Lake Chautauqua and Chadakoin 2 River, N.Y. Channel.... ......... 6,640,000 1,310,000 107,950,00 (Allegheny River Basin) 2 Latrobe, Pa. (Allegheny 2 River Basin) 8...... .................... .....do.... .......... 3207,659 44,400 252050 Leetsdale, Pa. ....... Levee..... ......... 1,270,000 141,000 1,411'000 Martins Ferry, Ohio2 ........ 6..................... ...... ..... . Wall and levee............ 8,630,000 836,000 9,460,000 McKees Rocks, Pa. ... Wall..... .......... 5,470,000 197,000 5,67000 Mingo Junction, Ohio2.................... 2.. ...... . . . . . . .. ..... do................ 1,920,000 2230000 310,000 3:6,75000 Moundaville, W. Va. .... Wall and levee............ 3,070,000 605,000 Neville Island, Pa.2.................... 5,040000 2 . . . . . . . . .... do ..................3,210,000 1,830,000 New Cumberland, W. Va. ...... ... .do.... ......... 2,760,000 421,000 3,181000 New Kensington 2 and Parnassus, Pa. (Alle- Wall..... .......... 7,900,000 148,000 8:048,000 gheny River) . 2 14 53 Olean, N.Y. (Allegheny River) 5.......... 2 Levee..... ......... 33,217,531 597,000 819 000 Pittsburgh, Pa. (Golden Triangle) .......... 2 ... . . . . . . . . Wall..... .......... 9,390,000 429,000 Pittsburgh, Pa. (North Side) 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....do................... 22,400,000 1,760,000 24,160,00 Pittsburgh, lPa. (The Strip) 2 .. .. .do ................... 10,700,0002,560,000 13,20000 2423,480 Portville, N.Y. (Allegheny River) 5......... Levee................... 32,070,484 353,000 5 :I17 0 Powhatan Point,2 Ohio2................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... do.... .......... 4,720,000 397,000 455,000 Proctor, W. Va. ....... ...do.. . ........... 334,000 121,000 Punxsutawney, Pa. (Allegheny River 2Basin)4. Channel and levee......... 33 586 107 3180,485 33,766592 Ridgway, Pa. 2(Allegheny River Basin) .... Channel.... ......... 5628,888 72,000 700,88 Ro chester, Pa. ...... 2 .....Wall..... .......... 3,350,000 622,000 574,00 St. Marys, Pa. (Allegheny 2 .. River . . . . . . . .... . . . . Basin) . . . . . Channel.... ......... 557,000 17,000 000 Smiths Ferry, Pa. ....... Wall............... 2,120,000 229,000 2,3 Stratton, Ohio2........................... ..... do................... 2,780,000 336,000 3,1160 00 Warwood, W. Va.2...... 2 . . . . . . ............ ......... ... ... do.... ......... 1,740,000 376,000 2,11 00 Wellsburg, W. Va. .... Wall and levee........... 3 270 000 1,160,000 4,430: 511,08 Wellsville, Ohio, see. 12 5.................. ..... do.... ......... 5398,978 113,000 Wellsville, Ohio, sec. 112 3157,633 .... . .. . 3157,033 2. .5................. . . . . .. . . . . . . ..... do.................. West Bridgewater, Pa. Wall..... .......... 2,340,000 517,000 2,85,00 Wheeling-Benwood, W. Va.27.............. 2 Wall and levee............ 28,200,000 6,640,000 93,8400 Wheeling, W. Va. (North Wheeling) 2........ Wall..... .......... 11,700,000 2,700,000 14,400 00 Wheeling, W. Va. (Wheeling . . . . . . ........ 2 . . . . . . . .Island) . .. Wall and levee......... 13,300,0001 2,470,000 15,77000 Woodlands, W. Va. .... Levee..... ......... 206,000 28,000 23400 xAll projects are on Ohio River unless otherwise noted. 2 Also see "Other authorized flood control projects." 8 Actual cost. SReported in detail in an individual report. 5 Completed. 6 Reported in detail in Annual Report for 1941. SReported in detail in Annual Report for 1954. 8 Latest cost estimate revision 1954 unless otherwise noted. 9 Latest cost estimate revision 1960. ,o Latest cost estimate revision 1965. FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1073 Reservoirs Total Tributary basin and reservoir Stream estimated cost i i ver,Pa. and N.Y.1.................... All egheny River.................... 5$106,600,000 tiver, Pa.1............................... Co nemaugh River.................. 245,684,411 k, Pa.l............................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cr ooked Creek..... ........... 24,204,888 Clarion River, Pa.l ...... Cla rion River....................... 59,519,000 Pa.1 ..... .................. Lo yalhanna Creek.... .......... 25,452,862 eek, Pa.1...... ................... Ma honing Creek..... .......... 66,471,300 3 ..... .... ItRedbank Creek..... .......... 39,800,000 ........... Tic nesta Creek..... ........... 55,997,900 erlin,Ohiol.......................Mahoning River...... ......... 57,625,500 o Creek, Ohio3......................... ......... 1aM Ea gle Creek..................... 12,700,000 osquito Creek,Ohio .............................. iMsquito Creek..... .......... 24,035,400 Monoaenango River, Pa., and Ohiol..........:.......... Sheenango River.................... 533,500,000 flahela. WestFork River, W. Va.3.... ................ We st Fork River...... ........ 18,800,000 oughiogheny Pa., and Md.1............. River, ... Yo ughiogheny River................. 510,917,900 S eported in detail in an individual report. a ompleted actual cost. SAlso see "Other authorized flood control projects." a atestcost estimate revision 1954. SLatest cost estimate revision 1966. atestcost estimate revision 1965. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Re- Study report on Allegany, N.Y., flood control project returned for urther revisions was reevaluated as two independent units, costs updated to April 1966 level, future development benefits computed nd resubmitted. A review of restudy report on Empire, Ohio, flood protection project indicated that due to proximity of Stratton and Empire, flood protection for either village separately, without full consideration of a project combined to protect both villages, Would be impractical. The report, extended to present the most Practical plan of flood protection for both Empire and Stratton, Was completed and submitted at a cost of $12,779. No other work Was conducted except as stated in individual reports. Completed tloeal protection projects operated and maintained by local in- terests, other than those projects for which individual reports have been included, prevented flood damages of an estimated $655,000 during fiscal year. Condition at end of fiscal year. Restudy reports on Allegany, SN.Y.and Empire, Ohio, flood control projects, are under review by higher authority. Preliminary surveys and plans are com- Plete for a number of projects included in comprehensive plan. Status of projects selected for construction under this authoriza- tion is given in individual reports. Cost and financial statement S ear Total to 1............ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 , I , - - I .. . . I New work. Appropriated..................... $42,000 $100,000 $101,000 -$20,281 $900,710 Cost................ ............ 20,466 $91,194 94,978 16,081 900,710 1 Includes $8,914 emergency relief funds. 1074 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 23. PUNXSUTAWNEY, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. Location. Borough of Punxsutawney is on Mahoning Creek in Jefferson County, Pa., about 85 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, Pa. It is on a comparatively wide, alluvial flood plain about 52 miles above mouth of stream and 30 miles above Mahon- ing Creek flood control dam. (See Geological Survey Charts for Punxsutawney and Smicksburg, Pa.) Existing project. Provides flood protection by channel en- largement, dikes, and walls. Improvement is designed to acco" modate discharges 20 percent greater than that of maximum flood of record. Project was authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act. For further project description see Annual Report for 1962, page 1209. Federal cost of completed project is $3,586,107'. Non-Federal cost was $180,485. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main- tenance, general: Operation activities and routine inspections and reports were made. In addition, periodic removal of san.d and gravel deposits was accomplished under contract at a cost of $20,380. Flood damages prevented by project during 1965-66 flood season was estimated to be $67,000; cumulative total flood damages prevented to end of fiscal year is $3,362,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was accomplished by four construction units. Construction was started May 1946 and completed June 1950. Land required for project consists Of perpetual easements over 97.5 acres. Completed works, except that portion of channel maintained by the Federal Government, has been operated and maintained by borough of Punxsutawney since July 31, 1950. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 107 Appropriated......... .......... ................... 153586 107 Cost .................. ............. 13,586, jOf Maintenance: 300 Appropriated...........$17,000 $6,400 -$2,000 $19,700 $33,700 133,881 Cost.................. 5,019 23,823 5,619 3,581 26,124 108, 1Excludes $180,485 for new work was expended from contributed funds. 24. ROWLESBURG RESERVOIR, W. VA. Location. In Preston and Tucker Counties, northcentral West Virginia on Cheat River, a tributary of Monongahela River. Damsite is at upstream limits of town of Rowlesburg, W. V3. (See Geological Survey Chart for Kingwood, W. Va.). Existing project. Provides for construction of flood control reservoir dam of concrete gravity type with controlled outlet works and spillway, about 1,620 feet long and 267 feet above streambed. Reservoir surface at full level would be 9,140 acres. Gross con- trolled reservoir storage would be 831,700 acre-feet from a tributary drainage area of 936 square miles. Proposed project purposes are flood control, water quality control, recreation, and hydroelectric power production. About 300,000 acre-feet of FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1075 Storage would be available for flood control during winter months and about 250,000 acre-feet during the summer. Storage for con- trol of water quality, production of hydroelectric power, and other Uses of about 572,000 acre-feet would, for the most part, serve several purposes simultaneously. Existing project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act. Estimated ultimate Federal cost for new Work (1966) is $92,750,000, exclusive of power facilities. Local cooperation. Local interests must reimburse the Federal overnment for costs allocated to water quality control (cooling) Over a period not to exceed 50 years after use of this storage is llitiated. This reimbursement is presently estimated at $2,096,- 0, exclusive of interest. Local interests must also bear one-half O separable costs allocated to recreation and fish and wildlife en- ancement over a period not to exceed 50 years. This reimburse- ent is presently estimated at $1,254,000 for initial development. tI addition, local interests would be required to provide assurances that they would hold the United States free from any claims for damages from storage of water, and provide adequate direct waste reatment at source within a reasonable period of time and Preserve existing and augmented low flows for the intended water Uality purposes. Action has been initiated to obtain required Ocal cooperation. Licenses. On August 1, 1965, Federal Power Commission granted Monongahela Power Co. a permit to study development of ower at project. rOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Prepa- ion of hydrology and general design memoranda were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preparation of hydrology and general design memoranda are 17 and 21 percent complete, re- SDectively. sCost and financial statement Fical Y **. ........... 1962 1903 1964 1965 1966 Total to June 30, 1966 NwVork:- -- - oPorpriated.......... .............. ............ ............ $120,000 $120,0001 $119,024 110,537 .... ............................................... 120,000 110,537 25. SALAMANCA, N. Y. Location. City of Salamanca is in Cattaraugus County, south- Western New York, on both banks of Allegheny River about 10 miles upstream from New York-Pennsylvania State line and about 222 miles above mouth of river at Pittsburgh, Pa. (See Geo- logical Survey Charts for Randolph and Salamanca, N.Y.) diyxisting project. Provides for flood protection by means of kes and floodwalls. Earth dikes will be used along riverbanks here space permit. Where buildings and other structures limit available space, floodwalls of a suitable type will be used. Struc- tures for relief of internal drainage will be provided as required. t'lProvement will protect community from flood 8 percent greater 4an maximum of record, with 3 feet of freeboard. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $1,700,000; estimated non-Federal cost of lands, damages, and relocations is $439,000. 1076 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold United States free from damages; accomplish changes, relocations, and alterations of buildings, utilities, and structures made necessary by the work; prevent encroachment on levees, floodwalls, and flood-carry- ing capacity of improved waterway; and maintain and operate all works after completion in accordance with regulations. New York State Department of Public Works is the local coopera- tion agency for flood control improvements. Assurances of local cooperation were accepted by District Engineer September 20, 1965. The State has been requested to make available right-of: entry for construction and to make firm arrangements for utilitY adjustments. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Prepa- ration of feature design memorandum for pumping stations was completed. Plans and specifications for first construction unit of project are being prepared. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preparation of construction plans and specifications for first construction unit is about 70 per- cent complete. Cost and financial statement Totalto Fiscal year.......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1966 June 30, New work: Appropriated...................... .......... $20,000 $75,000 $200,000 000 $295, Cost..................................... 8,046 74,158 39,181 121,385 26. SHENANGO RIVER RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. AND OHIO Location. Dam is on Shenango River about 0.8 mile above Sharpsville, Pa., and about 33 miles above junction of river with Mahoning River, which unite near New Castle, Pa., to fornm Beaver River. Reservoir is in Mercer County, Pa., and Trumbull County, Ohio. (See Geological Survey Chart for Kinsman, Ohio, and Shenango, Pa.) Existing project. A reservoir for flood control, low-flow aug- mentation, and recreation. Dam consists of a concrete gravitY structure with gate-controlled outlet works and an uncontrolled center spillway section. For further project description, see Annual Report for 1962, page 1230. Project was authorized bY 1938 Flood Control Act. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $33,500,000. Local cooperation. None required by law. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Major items of work performed by contract and hired labor: Acquisi- tion of lands and payment of damages continued at a cost of $1,283,600; relocation work continued and was brought to 73 per- cent completion at a cost of $1,949,000; construction of recreatiol facilities continued at a cost of $108,300. Clearing reservoir area was initiated at a cost of $449,400. Operation and maintenance, general:: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures and ap FLOOD CONTROL---PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1077 Purtenances at cost of $28,329. Except for short periods when the sluice gates were installed and tested, the reservoir conduits Were maintained fully open the entire fiscal year, and reservoir f"unctioned as a detention basin. Heavy rainfall February 12-13, 966, accompanied by snowmelt caused a major rise along Beaver River and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, in coordination with other reservoirs on upper Ohio iver Basin, achieved significant reductions. Crest stage reduc- tion attributed to this reservoir on Shenango River at Sharon, Pa., wvas 1.31 feet. Crest stage at Sharon for this rise was 8.59 feet on February 13 (flood stage 10 feet). Estimated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $234,600. Tal flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $234,600. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began in July 1960 with construction of Erie-Lackawanna Railroad structures Nos. 4 and 5 and appurtenant work, this work was com- leted in January 1962. Relocation of Pennsylvania Railroad and L rie-Lackawanna Railroad, First District, was completed in No- )emnber 1962 and Erie-Lackawanna Railroad, Second District, in ecember 1963. Construction of dam started in March 1963 and completed in May 1965. Relocation activity is about 73 percent Complete. Construction of recreation facilities is 22 percent com- lete. Of 981 tracts of land authorized to date for acquisition, 887 have been acquired. _Cost and financial statement Piscal Year 1965 Total to ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 166 June 30, 1966 New work. APtropriated..........$4,380,000 $5,400,000 $5,813,000 $6,400,000 $4,600,000 $29,699,681 Saintena; .............. 3,863,298 4,776,477 5,459,700 6,131,655 4,407,240 26,940,764 0 ropriated .......... ............ ........................ $30,000 30,000 S .... ............ ............ ............ 28,329 28,320 27. TIONESTA RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. Location. Dam is on Tionesta Creek, 1.25 miles above junc- tion of creek with Allegheny River at Tionesta, Pa., and about 78 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir is entirely in Porest County, Pa. (See Geological Survey Charts for Tionesta, idioute and Sheflield, Pa.) t.'xisting project. A flood control reservoir dam of earthfill Ype with separate uncontrolled saddle spillway and tunnel outlet Works. Project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936 a1d 1938. For further project description see Annual Report for 1962, page 1203. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $5,997,900. Local cooperation. None required by law. t Operations and results during fiscal year. Operation and main- tenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control, as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures cad appurtenances at cost of $104,032. In addition thereto, up- dating of master plan was continued at cost of $15,800. Heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 1966, accompanied by snowmelt caused 1078 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 a major rise along Allegheny River and a moderate flood along Ohio River during which this reservoir, in coordination with other reservoirs in upper Ohio River Basin, achieved significant re- ductions. For this storm and flood, crest stage reductions at- tributed to this reservoir varied from 1.15 feet at Franklin to 0.40 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa., and also at Wheeling, W. Va. Crest stage on Ohio River at Pittsburgh for this flood was 28.6 feet on February 14 (flood stage, 25 feet). Heavy rain- fall on April 30, 1966, over Monongahela River Basin and moderate rainfall over Allegheny River Basin caused a major rise in upper Ohio River which crested on May 2 at Pittsburgh, Pa., at 20.0 feet. Reduction made by this reservoir was 0.20 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Estimated flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year were $2,296,300. Total flood control bene- fits to June 30, 1966, are $61,021,900. Reservoir storage attained highest elevation of the year, 1126.5, on February 16, 1966, with a storage of 45,200 acre-feet or 30 percent full. Activities under reservoir management program comprising sanitation measures, conservation, land management, and operation and maintenance of public-use facilities continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is complete. Reservoir is in operation as a unit of coordinated reservoir systen designed for protection of Pittsburgh and reduction of flood heights in upper Ohio Valley, generally. Construction of dam Was started in May 1938 and completed in January 1941. Land re- quired for project consists of 3,040 acres in fee simple and flowage easements over 349 acres. Future work consists of provision o project lands of additional recreational facilities as required to serve public needs. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19 66 New work: Appropriated.......... $16,000 ... .. $1,482 -$1,678. ......... 155299 205 Cost................ 10,217 $3,607 3,602 6,208.......5in,299 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 78,300 81,000 87,000 97,000 $121,000 1,211 950 Cost................. 77,559 70,053 83,580 107,972 119,832 1,206, 176 1 Includes $24,201 emergency relief funds. 28. TURTLE CREEK, PA. Location. In Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, adjacent to Pittsburgh, Pa., along lower reaches of Turtle Creek and Thompson Run, a tributary of Turtle Creek. (See Geological Survey Chart for Pittsburgh, Pa.) Existing project. Provides for flood protection by widening, deepening, and streamlining channel of lower Turtle Creek for about 6.3 miles and channel of Thompson Run for about 1 mile above its mouth. Appurtenant work consists of channel streamf bed and side slope protection where required, retaining walls, drop structures, debris basins, lowering sill of existing backwater floodgates, alteration, removal or reconstruction of restrictive FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGIH, PA., DISTRICT 1079 Structures and adjustments of affected utilities. Improvement is designled to accommodate a design flood corresponding to an esti- Mated 100 year frequency. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1958. Estimated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $15,200,000; estimated non-Federal cost is $1,840,000. .L°cal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and r'ghts-of-way for construction; bear expense of all changes, alter- btions, additions to, or relocations of any roadways, highway ridges, and utilities; hold the United States free from damages; establish and enforce project channel limits; and maintain and Operate completed works in accordance with prescribed regula- tions. Turtle Creek District Flood Control Authority, author- ized representatives for local interests, furnished formal asurances which were accepted June 27, 1961. Rights-of-entry for left bank protection at Union Railroad Bridge (unit 1A) was urnished June 29, 1962. Right-of-entry for unit lB was fur- fished June 28, 1963. Right-of-entry for unit 2 (Pennsylvania ,ailroad Bridge) was furnished April 10, 1964. Right-of-entry for unit 4 was furnished March 5, 1965. Rights-of-entry for unit , the final unit to be constructed, was furnished March 21, 1966. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- struction of unit 1B was completed under contract at a cost of 899,600; construction of unit 2 ((Pennsylvania Railroad Bridge) as also completed under contract at a cost of $12,400; construc- tion of remainder of unit 2 was continued under contract and ad- Vanced to 53 percent completion at a cost of $2,972,800; Construction of unit 4 was initiated under contract and advanced to 65 percent completion at a cost of $360,200. A contract for Costruction of unit 3, the remaining unit, was awarded June 24, 1966. Flood control benefits achieved by partially completed proj- for the year were $200,000. Total flood control benefits to Jule 30, 1966, are $200,000. inCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began S eptember 1962 and is about 74 percent complete. Unit 1A s5isting of left bank protection at Union Railroad Bridge, East tpittsburgh, Pa., was constructed September-October 1962. Addi- 4O-ial work in area consisted of raising obstructive Union Railroad rl ge and raising Pennsylvania Railroad tracks to elevated level ch ridge. Construction of unit 1B, consisting of 8,900 feet of ilannel deepening, widening, and appurtenant work, was initiated SOctober 1963 and completed in March 1966. Replacement of tensylvania Railroad Bridge, which formed a part of unit 2, was started in June 1964 and completed in July 1965. Remainder of tlit 2, consisting of 11,385 feet of channel improvement, began in 4 eember 1964 and is 53 percent complete. Construction of unit binvolving 4,868 feet of channel improvement on Thompson Run, egan in June 1965 and is 65 percent complete. Construction of "it 3, the final unit, is about to be started under contract. 1080 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: $1574 $3,850,000 $11537471 $4,540,000 $400,000 $250,000$2,300,000 Appropriated.......... Coat........... . 181,770 347,165 1,948,8344,012,3414,615,544 11:294:061 29. UNION CITY RESERVOIR, PA. Location. In Erie County, northwestern Pennsylvania, on French Creek, a tributary of Allegheny River. Damsite is 24 miles upstream from Cambridge Springs, Pa., and 41 miles up" stream from Meadville, Pa. (See Geological Survey Chart for Union City, Pa.-N.Y.) Existing project. Provides for construction of flood control reservoir dam of earth embankment nongated type with uncol" trolled side-channel spillway. Outlet works will be uncontrolled and located in valley floor and spillway weir and will be cOf* structed of reinforced concrete. Size of lower opening 6 bY 6 feet, upper opening in weir 10 by 16 feet. Dam will be 1,430 feet long at top rising 88 feet above streambed and provide gross capacity of 47,640 acre-feet from a drainage area of 222 square miles. Reservoir will be operated as one of three-reservoir sy$s tem for reduction of flood stages in French Creek Basin between damsite and mouth, Allegheny River from Franklin, Pa., to Pittsburgh, Pa., inclusive, and upper Ohio River Valley. Exist- ing project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Esti" mated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $11,000,000. Local cooperation. Local interests must inform affected iV terests in French Creek Basin at least annually, in a manner satisfactory to District Engineer, that the system of reservoirs of which Union City Reservoir is a part, will not provide protec- tion against maximum floods. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania acting by and through the Water and Power Resources Board of Department of Forests and Waters executed assurances No- vember 10, 1964, that it is willing to commit itself formally to performance of required notification, and has legal ability to make such commitment. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- construction engineering and design studies continued. CoIt"' pleted design memoranda covering real estate for initial highway relocations and for damsite. Design memoranda for sources of concrete aggoregate and relocation of power transmission lines were also completed. Preparation of design memoranda for other ele- ments of project continued. Plans and specifications were pre- pared for initial highway relocations. Seven tracts of land were acquired. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction engineerifg. and design studies continuing. Plans and specifications for initial highway relocations are complete. Land acquisition is about 10 percent complete. FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1081 Cost and financial statement iscalYeTotal to ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Now Work. APropriated............ .. $50,000 $150,000 $200,000 $400,000 $800,000 ................... .35,702 138,462 99,442 248,347 521,953 30. WEST BRANCH RESERVOIR, MAHONING RIVER, OHIO Location. Damsite is on West Branch of Mahoning River Which joins Mahoning River at Newton Falls, Ohio. It is 11 Viles above mouth of branch and about 15 miles upstream from Warren, Ohio. Reservoir is in Portage County, Ohio. (See Geo- ogrical Survey Charts for Ravenna, Garrettsville, Chagrin Falls, and Kent, Ohio.) Existing project. Provides for construction of a reservoir for flood control, low-water regulation, and recreation. Dam con- sists of a rolled-earth embankment structure with gate-controlled Outlet works and an uncontrolled side-hill spillway through left abutment. For further description see Annual Report for 1962, Dage 1231. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (1. Doc. 191, 85th Cong., 1st sess.), with local contribution re- irements modified by Flood Control Act of 1960. Estimated "Ut1rate Federal cost for new work (1966) is $14,670,000. SLocal cooperation. Local interests must contribute $5,200,000 tor Water for pollution abatement and for municipal and indus- trial Water supply purposes, of which $3,230,000 will be paid in eash during construction. Unpaid balance at time project is Placed in operation, $1,970,000, will be paid in cash at that time or on an annual basis. A contract covering local cooperation requirements between the Government and counties of Mahoning a l d Trumbull, Ohio, local cooperating interests, was approved by Secretary of the Army on November 27, 1961. Local interests cntributed $3,230,000 towards total of $5,200,000 non-Federal cost. Operations and results during uisition of lands and payment of fiscal year. New work: Ac- damages continued at a cost of $588,500. Relocation work was advanced to 92 percent comple- on at a cost of $348,500. Contract for construction of dam and a~cess road was brought to 93 percent completion at a cost of $3074,500. Clearing(r reservoir area was initiated in April 1966 an1d advanced to 31 percent completion at a cost of $37,800. Deration and maintenance, general: Maintenance Were performed at partially completed dam commencing activities January 1966. iCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began i July 1962 and is 85 percent complete. Construction of dam access road was started in May 1963 and is 93 percent com- Dlete. Relocation of Portage County highway was initiated in OCtober 1963 and is 95 percent complete. Of 257 tracts of land authorized to date for acquisition, 250 have been acquired. 1082 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUINDS Total too Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 966 New work: 5,000 Appropriated......... $1,240,000 $1,269,000 $2,700,000 $4,700,000 $5,012,000 $15,56 440 Cost................. 306,440 1,262,546 3,157,422 4,931,605 4,064556 14,12 4,42 Maintenance: 9000 Appropriated........... .. .............. $9,000 Cost................ .................... 7,249 7,249 Cost and financial statement CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1662 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1066 New work: $3,230,000 . .... .....$1,021,222 $572,125$1,029,113 Contributed $204,477 $403,063 3 8953 Cost................. 245,131 247,589 789,355 1,232,902 683,976 3,19 31. WOODCOCK CREEK RESERVOIR, PA. Location. In Crawford County, northwestern Pennsylvanil on Woodcock Creek, a tributary of French Creek. Damsite is about 2.5 miles above mouth of Woodcock Creek and about 6 miles north of Meadville, Pa. (See Geological Survey Chart for Meadville, Pa.). Existing project. Provides for construction of flood control reservoir dam of rolled earth embankment type with controlled outlet works and uncontrolled spillway. Dam will be 4,400 feet long at top rising 81 feet above streambed and provide for gross capacity of 15,100 acre-feet from a drainage area of 46 square miles. Reservoir will be operated as one of three-reservoil' system for reduction of flood stages in French Creek Basil between damsite and mouth, Allegheny River from Franklin, Pa., to Pittsburgh, Pa., inclusive, and upper Ohio River Valley. ER* isting project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. Esti- mated Federal cost for new work (1966) is $10,200,000. Local cooperation. Local interests must inform affected inter- ests in French Creek Basin at least annually, in a manner satisfactory to District Engineer, that the system of reservoirs of which Woodcock Creek Reservoir is a part, will not provide protection against maximum floods. Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters assumed responsibility of local cooperatiol for project. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Prepa- ration of general design memorandum was continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preparation of general design memorandum is approximately 99 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... ........................ ............ $84,000 $107,700 $191 700 Cost............................................. 69,881 105,076 174: FLOOD CONTROL---PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1083 32. YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER RESERVOIR, OHIO RIVER BASIN, PA. AND MD. Location. Dam is on Youghiogheny River about 74.2 miles aove its junction with Monongahela River at McKeesport, Pa. Sis 1.2 miles upstream from Confluence, Pa., and about 57 miles sotheast of Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir is in Fayette and Somer- set Counties, Pa., and Garrett County, Md. (See Geological aurvey Charts for Confluence, Pa., Accident, Md., West Virginia anl Pennsylvania.) EXisjting project. Reservoir for flood control, navigation aid, ad pollution abatement purposes. Dam is rolled-earthfill type W th separate uncontrolled side channel spillway and tunnel out- et Works. Project was selected for construction under general authorization for Ohio River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. 1~or further project description see Annual Report for 1962, page 1223. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $10,917,900. Local cooperation. None required by law. OPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- Struction of comfort station and appurtenant work at Somerfield recreation area was underway by contract. Operation and main- tenance, general: Reservoir was operated for benefit of flood control as required, and necessary repairs were made to structures d appurtenances 11tinued at cost ofat$15,814. cost of $126,183. Updating of master plan Heavy rainfall on February 12-13, 0, accompanied by snowmelt caused a major rise along onugahela River and a moderate flood along Ohio River during hich this reservoir, in coordination with other reservoirs in up- r Ohio River Basin, achieved significant reductions. Crest stage reductions attributed to this reservoir for this storm and flood arled from 1.6 feet on Youghiogheny River at Connellsville, Pa., to 0.55 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Reduction on Ohio iver at Wheeling, W. Va., was 0.65 foot. Crest stage on Ohio iVer at Pittsburgh for this flood was 28.6 feet onil February 14 flood stage, 25 feet). Heavy rainfall on April 30 over Mononga- he River Basin and moderate rainfall over Allegheny River oasin caused a major rise in upper Ohio River which crested 1 May 2 at Pittsburgh at 20.0 feet. Reduction made by this reservoir was 0.30 foot on Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pa. Esti- lted flood control benefits achieved by this reservoir for the year Were $3,110,300. Total flood control benefits to June 30, 1966, are $43,273,400. Regulated low flows at Connellsville, Pa., July 1, to ecember 11, 1965, and May 31 to June 30, 1966, averaged 735 cubic feet per second representing a 240 percent increase over n tural moderate and low flow. Thus, this reservoir achieved significant benefits from low-water augmentation. Reservoir 5torage attained highest elevation of the year, 1149.8, on May 2, 1,966, with a storage of 186,600 acre-feet or 32 percent of usable surnier flood control storage capacity of reservoir. Activities tirlder reservoir management program comprising sanitation meas- tres, conservation, land management, and operation and main- 11ance of public-use facilities were continued. Uondition at end of fiscal year. Authorized project is complete. eservoir is in operation for flood control, navigation, and pollu- 1084 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tion abatement purposes. For flood control, reservoir is operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system designed for protection of Pittsburgh and reduction of flood heights in upper Ohio ValleY, generally. Construction of dam was started June 1940 and corl- pleted May 1944. Land acquired for project consists of 4,033.19 acres in fee simple and flowage easement over 0.48 acre. A license was issued Commonwealth of Pennsylvania covering ish conservation and management in Pennsylvania portion of reser- voir. Construction of comfort station and appurtenant work a Somerfield recreation area is 96 percent complete. Future wor consists of provision on project lands of additional recreational facilities as required to serve public needs. Cost and financial statement Totalt to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: 95179 Appropriated...........$13,000 ............ -$32 $45,000 $22,300 $9,7 Cost................. 9,217 $4,494 ............ 1,713 53,653 9, 83,243 Maintenance: 96280 Appropriated.......... 79,000 68,000 8,800 112,000 147,000 1,3 5, Cost................. 65,240 79,734 84,731 109,927 141,997 1,2 33. YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO Location. In Mahoning County within city limits of Young5S town, along lower reaches of Crab Creek, a tributary of MIIaho" ing River. (See Geological Survey Chart for Youngstown, Ohio.- Existing project. Provides for widening, deepening, ad paving, with some realignment, channel of lower Crab Creek for about 2.2 miles above its mouth. Project would eliminate da" ages in Crab Creek area from all floods up to that of JanuarY 1959 flood of record and would greatly reduce damages that Migh be associated with greater floods. Project was authorized V Flood Control Act of 1962. Estimated Federal cost for new vor (1966) is $2,420,000; estimated non-Federal cost of lands, dal" ages, and construction adjustments is $396,000.. Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide lands, rights-of-way, and borrow and spoil-disposal areas for co* struction; bear cost of sewer, drain, pipeline, railroad and other utility alterations, and of changes in existing structures as necessary, except the three railroad bridges; bear all additionsal cost resulting from construction of cutoff channel near AndreWS Avenue if such is desired and requested by city of Youngstown as an alternative to improvement proposed by District Engineer, hold United States free from damages; establish appropriate channel lines up to northern city limit to prevent any encroach' ment on flood-carrying capacities of improved and natural creek channel; prevent dumping of solid industrial and other wastes in creek; inform affected interests at least annually of limited degree of protection provided by project; enlarge waterway openings of clearances of restrictive bridges downstream of Valley Street at such future times as might be feasible, in accordance with standards prescribed by Secretary of Army; and maintain sfl FLOOD CONTROL--PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1085 Operate project works after completion. Youngstown City Coun- cil, after being informed of details of project design and related requirements, adopted a resolution dated May 12, 1965 providing required formal assurances and expressing their preference for the cutoff plan of improvement near Andrews Avenue and their Willingness to bear additional cost of cutoff. Assurances of local cooperation were accepted by District Engineer on September 9, 1965 Local interests are securing right-of-entry for construction Purposes. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Prepa- ration of contract plans and specifications completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memorandum as approved. Contract plans and specifications were prepared. Construction not started. Cost and financial statement Year 'ieal Total to .......... 1962 1963 196.1 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. ........... $300000 $7,0 APpropriated..........t2,00 ............$50,000 ............ $25,00$375,000 .. ................... . 9,542 62,557 68,887 140,986 34. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS F'lood Control Act of June 22, 1936, and subsequent acts require ocal interests furnish assurances that they will maintain and 4erate certain local protection projects after completion in ac- cordance with regulations prescribed by Secretary of the Army. rstrict Engineers are responsible for administration of these eulations within boundaries of their respective districts. Main- tllance inspections were made during fiscal year of 30 projects 1tIansferred to local interests for maintenance and operation as lted below. Local interests were advised, as necessary, of meas- res required to maintain these projects in accordance with Otandards prescribed by regulations. Fiscal year costs were $11,- 58. Total cost to June 30, 1966 was $84,435. Inspection of com- Peted flood control works and dates of inspections are as follows: rdam, Ohio .................. December 1965 l, Pa ....................... June 1966 rd, Pa. ..................... October 1965, May 1966 Pa. .................... ille, June 1966 tstown-Slovan, Pa ........... November 1965 Pa....................... June 1966 S,Pa................... November 1965, May 1966 W.Va. .................... November 1965 ,Pa ....................... October 1965, May 1966 M d .................. sville, October 1965, April 1966 lle,Pa ..................... November 1965 nburg, Pa ................... October 1965, May 1966 wn., Pa. .................... September 1965, June 1966 nina, Pa..................... 3,P a..... . . . .... ....... October 1965, April 1966 aPP a.... e, . ................ ' : ....................... October 1965 November 1965 October 1965, May 1966 N. ...................... October 1965, May 1966 , Pa. . . .......... ..... November 1965, June 1966 le, N.Y................... October 1965, May 1966 1086 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Punxsutawney, Pa ................ July 1965, October 1965, March 1966 Reynoldsville, Ga................... June 1966 Ridgway, Pa ....................... June 1966 Stonewood-Nutter Fort, W. Va ..... Sylcesville, Pa ..................... Tarentum, Pa ..................... November 1965 June 1966 August 1965 W ashington, Pa ................... November 19656 Wellsville, Ohio .................. July 1965, November 1965, May 1966 W eston, W .Va .................... November 1965 W ilmore, Pa....................... June 1966 35. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction OperStiod for- mail scel 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -1- i Adena, Ohio $13,452 ......... Allegany, N.Y.2...4 .................................. Amsterdam, Ohio :6........... . ... . .. ~ 6,966 183,072 Bellaire, Ohiol. ........................ Big Run, Pa. 6..................... ...... 1962 " . 364,208 . Brackenridge,4 larentum,. and . . . . . . .Pa.1..... . . . .Natrona, . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . ........... Bradford, Pa. Brilliant, Ohiol..................................... Brockway, Pa.l1............. 4. . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 . Brookville, Pa. 3 . ... .. .. .. .. .. .. 964,976 Buckhannon, W. Va. 37,488 . Burgettstown, Pa.4 6... ..... 83.129 . . . ClarIgton, Ohiol......... ............ .............. Coraopolis, Pa.1...2. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dillonvale, Ohio . 16,884 . ... DuBois, Pa........................................ . Eagle Creek Reservoir, 2. . . . . Ohiol........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Empre, Ohio 25,031 .. Follansbee, W.1 . Va.l........................ Freeport, Pa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ** .......... .. Friendsville, Md.4 6................................. 41,529 Granville, Pa. 6 ....................... . ... 175,908 .................................... ' Industry, Pa.1.. 4 . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 7.. . ... ... . Johnsonburg, Pa. ....... 1958 674,664 Kittanning, Pa., part 14........... 1949 ............ 130,317 Kittanning. Pa., part II... 4 . . . . and Lake Chautauqua . . . . Chadakoin . . . . River, N.. .Y.1 . . . 7............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 1065 ............ 190,722. Latrobe, Pa. 4 .............. 1951 207,659. Leetonia, Ohio1. 6............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89,299 . ..... Leetsdale, Pa. M artins Ferry, Ohiol 1 .... . . . . .. ................................. .. .25,164 McKees Rocks, Pa. 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ .............. 1.1.2. .... . ° . Mingo Junction, Ohio 6 0 6 ... ..... .............. Moundsville, W. Va.1.... ............................. ............ ............. . ...... Neville Island, Pal............................... ... New Cumberland, W. Va.1................................ .. ..... New Kensington and Parnassus, Pa.2.......................... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 14,127. Oakdale, Pa.6.............. ............ Oil City, Pa. 6.................................................. . 43,595 Olean, N.Y.4... .................................... 1 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1954 3,217,531. Pittsburgh, Pa. (Golden Triangle) l ... . ... .. .. .. .... .. .... Pittsburgh, Pa. (North Side)'............................ ............... Pittsburgh, Pa. 4 (the Strip) I........................................ 150,386 ............... Portage, Pa. 6......................................... . 1965 Portville, N .Y.4................................................. 1964 2,070,484 . ....... Powhatan Point,1 Ohiol... ............................. .............. . . Proctor, W . Va. ................... ............................. 1941 Redbank Creek Reservoir, 4. . . . Pa.1.................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156,337. ........ Reynoldaville,4 Pa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . * 1959 385,494 Ridgway, Pa. Rochester, Pa. 6 ......................... . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ .... ..... . 628,888 Rouseville, 4Pa. ............. 1,642. Slovan, Pa. 6........................................ . . ....... ................. 57,811 . Smith Ferry, Pa.1 . ......... ................................... ..... ........ Stratton, Ohio1..................................... St. M arys, Pa.1......... ................. .................. 13,529....... Sykesville, Pa.4 6........................ . .... 184,246. Tarentum, Pa.42 6................... . . . . . . . . ........ . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1964 136,51 ......... Uniontown, Pa. ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1956 ............ .... W allace, W . Va.6............ ........... 11,035.. W arwood, W . Va..................................... .. 8 : . •..... .......... W ashington, Pa.4.................................... 789,093. Wellsburg. W. Va.1................................... 6,387. See footnotes at end of table. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-PITTSBURGH, PA., DISTRICT 1087 OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS-Continued For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Wellsill o_ __ WellS l Ohio, Se. 14......................................... . 1956 398,978 .............. W ..W ,Ohio, sec. 114.......................................... erl~ewae114')................ ............ 1956 157,633 .............. W" k rewater , :a....................................................... ........................ Whe te8ervoir, W.Va........................................... ....... .... . ............... W' Wheeling ( a............. ........................... . ....... 1,70...... ~lg.9B~enwow a~ .................. 0... 1954 270,095.. 'oredT. . .8................................................... ....... W Co, P 516,761 Inactive. Obe restudied. Peb. al interests failed to meet requirements of cooperation, authority for project expired a {ornoleted.~ ]. ,1951. . Ocal interests failed to meet requirements of cooperation, authority for project expired Luthorized by Chief of Engineers. for project will expiocal 2, 1970.failed to meet requirements of local cooperation, authority interests r ar. 86. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) ch Study identification Fiscal year costs erry Valley Run at Washingtonville, Ohio Clareconnaissance report) ................................ $2,363 Crion River Ridgway, Pa. co detailed project report) ................................ 12,381 Clewango Creek, Pa. e reconnaissance study) .................................... 5,580 elMile Creek at Marianna, Pa. (detailed project report) ................................ 2,464 'Emergencyflood control activities-repair,floodfighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) SFiscal year costs were $21,192, of which $8,601 was for advance 1)rearation, and $12,591 for emergency operations. 37. SURVEYS Fiscal year costs were $191,455, of which $150,606 was for flood ontrol studies, $35,647 for special studies and $5,202 for compre- eQlsive basin studies. 38. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Fiscal year costs were $16,110. Work continued on flood plain tUdies of Jacks Run and Sewickley Creek, HIempfield Township, a., and Mosquito Creek, Ohio. Study of Pigeon Creek at Wash- "gton, Pa., was initiated. Completed flood plain studies . ... . I Location Requesting agency Date completed FFederalcost .haneock Creek, Lawrence County, Lawrence County Regional Planning April 1964. treao en" rt 1. and Mahoning Rivers, Law- Commission, New Castle, Pa. ..... do ............................... February 1965. $27,798 e County, Pa. Part 2. I I I 1088 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 39. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Hydrologic studies consisting of collection and analysis of hY drologic and hydraulic data were performed during year at cost of $6,249. ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT * SThis district comprises western Wisconsin, westerly portion of Upper Peninsula of Michigan, major portion of Minnesota, north- ern and eastern North Dakota, and small portions of northeastern outh Dakota and northern and northeastern Iowa embracing drainage basins of Mississippi River and tributaries from its source to mile 614 above mouth of Ohio River; Red River of the North and tributaries; those streams north of Missouri River .asin in North Dakota; U.S. waters of Lake of the Woods and its tributaries; and U.S. waters at Lake Superior and its tributary basin west of Au Train Bay, including Isle Royale in Lake uperior. That section of Mississippi River above mile 614 is included in report on Mississippi River between Missouri River and Minneapolis, Minn. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Flood Control-Continued 1. Ashland Harbor, Wis... 1090 26. Homme Dam and Reser- 2. Big Bay Harbor, Mich... 1091 voir, N. Dak......... 1113 4 Black River Harbor, Wis.. 1092 27. Lac qui Parle Reservoir, 4. Cornucopia Harbor, Wis.. 1092 Minnesota River, Minn. 1113 . Duluth-Superior Harbor, 28. La Farge Reservoir and 6 Minn. and Wis ....... 1093 channel improvement, 6 Grand Marais Harbor, Kickapoo River, Wis... 1114 M inn. ................ 1095 29. Lake Ashtabula and Bald- . Grand Traverse Bay Har- hill Dam, Sheyenne S bor, Mich. ............ 1096 River, N. Dak ........ 1115 . eweenaw Waterway, 30. Lake Traverse and Bois de 9 M ich ................ 1097 Sioux River, S. Dak. and 19. Marquette Harbor, Mich. 1098 M inn. ................ 1116 11. M innesota River, Minn.. 1099 31. Lost River, Minn ....... 1116 SMississippi River between 32. Mankato and North Man- Missouri River and Min- kato, Minn. .......... 1117 neapolis, Minn ......... 1100 33. Red Lake River, Minn., in- 18 Ontonagon Harbor, Mich. 13 Presque Isle Harbor, Mich. cluding Clearwater River, Minn. .......... 1119 4. Reservoirs at headwaters 34. Red River of the North 15. of Mississippi River .. 1102 drainage basin, Minn., St. Croix River, Minn. & S. Dak., & N. Dak .... 1120 1104 35. Roseau River, Minn ..... 1121 1 axon Harbor, Wis. .... 16. SWis. ................. 17 Two Harbors, Minn..... 1105 36. Rushford, Minn......... 1122 18. Reconnaissance and condi- 1107 37. St. Paul and South St. Paul, Minn .......... 1123 19 tion surveys ......... 1108 38. Warroad River & Bull Dog SOther authorized naviga- Creek, Minn .......... 1125 20. tion projects ......... 1108 39. Winona, Minn.......... 1125 Navigation work under 40. Zumbro River, Minn .... 1127 special authorization . 1108 41. Inspection of completed Alteration of Bridges flood control projects .. 1127 21. Authorized bridge altera- 42. Other authorized flood con- tions ................. trol projects ......... 1128 1109 43. Flood control work under Flood Control special authorization.. 1128 22. Big Stone Lake-Whetstone General Investigations 23, River, Minn. and S. Dak. 1109 44. Surveys ............... 1129 24Dry Run, Iowa ......... 1110 45. Collection and study of 25' Eau Galle River, Wis... 1110 basic data ........... 1129 SGuttenberg, Iowa ....... 1112 46. Research and development 1129 1090 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 1. ASHLAND HARBOR, WIS. Location. At head of Chequamegon Bay, on south shore of Lake Superior. (See Lake Survey Chart 964.) Existing project. A west channel 20 and 21 feet deep and an east basin 25 and 27 feet deep, both extending lakeward from 75 feet outside harborline, all protected by an 8,000-foot breakwater. For additional details, see page 1008 of Annual Report for 1965. S Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports i I. Aug. 5, 1886 Breakwater 7,900 feet long and dredging to remove a shoal.. H1.Ex. Doe. 89, 48th Cong., 2d 01 Annual Reports, 1886., p. 1674 ; and 1887, p. 1966. Aug.11, 1888 Appropriation of $60,000 for "Continuing improvement on enlarged project." (on completion of Poe lock in 1896, with available depth of 20 feet, dredging at Ashland Harbor was carried to a similar depth). Mar. 3, 1899 (Dl)etached breakwater extending 4,700 feet out from shore June 6, 1900 at a point 2,600 feet east of main breakwater (prolonged) and parallel thereto. Aug. 8, 1917 Project modified by omitting detached breakwater and de- H. Doc. 1698, 64th Cong., 2d sees fining depth and extent of channel to be dredged. July 3, 1930 Widening part of present channel for entrance channel and S. Doc. 133, 71st Cong., 2d sess. for basin in eastern part of harbor. Aug. 30, 19351 Deepening east basin to 25 feet and west channel, as far Rivers and Harbors Committee De, as 8th Ave. West, extended, to 21 feet. 46, 72d Cong., 1st sess. Mar. 2, 1945 Widening west channel to 750 feet at its wcster!y end........ H. Doc. 337, 77th Cong., 1st sess. July 14, 1960 Deepening portions of East Basin and West Channel to 27 and 21 feet, respectively. IH.Doc. 165, 86th Cong., 1st ses, (con tains latest published map). 1 Included in Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for 1960 act. Terminal facilities. City of Ashland owns 4,150 feet of water- front for future public needs. Wharves for handling coal, ore, limestone, logs, and pulpwood are served by railroads. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Repairs to break water were made in November 1965 by hired labor for main' tenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized prior to 1960 act was completed in 1950. Work authorized by 1960 act wras completed in November 1962. Breakwater is in good condition, except for some settlement. At end of fiscal year, controlling depths were 16 feet in 1,800-foot west portion of West Channel, and authorized depths in remainder of project. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 198661 New work: 46 Appropriated.......... $180,000 $719,000 ............- $1,433 .. $........ $1,695 Cost................. 10,661 889,944 $110 . ... ,695 ,646 . 1........... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 20,000 ............ 25,200 35,000 $40,000 839 491 Cost................. 20,000 ............ 24,755 32,542 15,124 811,412 , ' Includes $221,895 public works funds for new work. RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1091 2. BIG BAY HARBOR, MICH. Location. On south shore of Lake Superior 33 miles north- Westerly from Marquette, Mich., and 38 miles easterly from ortage entry to Keweenaw Waterway. (See Survey Chart 94.) XZisting project. Provides for two converging piers extending from shore, an entrance channel between piers and a rectangular hlarbor basin. Project depths are 12 feet in entrance channel and 10 feet in harbor basin. For details see page 1009 of Annual Re- Port for 1965 and page 1261 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing Project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (11. Doc. 446, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. STerminal facilities. A State-owned launching ramp and dock Ior small craft. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Con- dition surveys were performed. About 6,000 cubic yards of mate- ial were removed by Government crane barge and hired labor at a cost of $15,014 to restore project depth. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in June 61 except for protection at inner end of east breakwater, com- in November 1961. Structures are in good condition. Deted COntrolling depths at end of fiscal year were about 12 feet in lake aDroach and entrance channel and 10 feet in basin. Cost and financial statement ical Total to iscaler................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWork: Alropriated.......... $42,000 -$12,557 ................................... $340,433 Maitenane"1. ........ .... 46,483 91 .................................... 340,433 Proriated......... ............ 70,700 -$3,700 $20,000 $13,000 100,000 ot .............. 15,034 51,360 17,006 16,431 99,831 EXcludea $56,500 contributed by local interests. 3. BLACK RIVER HARBOR, MICH. Location. At mouth of Black River on south shore of Lake SUperior 39 miles westerly from Ontonagon, Mich., and 47 miles easterly from Ashland, Wis. (See Lake Survey Chart 95.) aPlisting project. Two converging breakwaters 180 feet apart at their outer ends, westerly one extending 555 feet from shore at left bank of Black River and easterly one extending 825 feet into lake from about 700 feet easterly of right bank of Black River at los Mouth; an entrance channel with 12-foot depth, about 700 feet 11, and 100 feet wide between breakwaters with a flared ap- Droach at lakeward end and a widened curve within the break- }'aters; an inner channel of 8-foot depth, irregular in shape taper- 8 to a 50-foot width, about 550 feet long; and an irregular shaped harbor basin of 8-foot depth with maximum length of 240 tet and maximum width of 130 feet. Project depths are referred p lOW-water datum 600 feet above mean water level at Father oant, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Ordi- nary seasonal variation of water level extends from 0 to plus 1 1092 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 foot above low-water datum. Harbor is subject to extreme fluctuations of water level of a temporary nature, due to wind and barometric conditions, of about 1 foot above or below mean lak level prevailing at the time. Project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 446, 78th Cong., 2d sess., containS latest published map).1 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total cost for al local cooperation was $30,000 for a non-Federal contribution. Local interests furnished easements on .85 acre of land. Terminal facilities. Wharves constructed on both sides of river. Wharf on east bank has frontage of 400 feet and on west bank, a frontage of 750 feet. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. Condition surveys were made. About 6,125 cubic yards of mate- rial was dredged by Government derrick boat No. 20 to partially restore project depths, at a cost of $27,432. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in June 1958. A triangular-shaped rock shoal 50 feet wide at easterly end extends along southerly side of channel through stilling basin Controlling depths at end of fiscal year were 10 feet in approach channel and 7 feet in river channel and basin. Cost and financial statement Total 1to966 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: 38 Appropriated...............................8 3,0 3,30 ........ Cost ................................................... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $26 $78 $1,311 $648 $45,000 0458 4,36 Cost................. 26 78 1,311 648 28,988 _ _ _ _ .-- 1 Excludes $30,000 contributed by local interests. 4. CORNUCOPIA HARBOR, WIS. Location. At mouth of Siskiwit River on south shore of Lake Superior, 49 miles east from Duluth, Minn. (See Lake SurveY Chart 96). Existing project. Provides for an entrance channel betweefl piers; an irregular-shaped turning basin; two inner channels; and reconstruction and Federal maintenance of entrance piers constructed by local interests. Project depths are 10 feet be- tween piers and 8 feet in turning basin and inner channels. For additional details see page 1010 of Annual Report for 1965. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Aug.26,1937 Entrance channel 50 feet wideand 10 feet deepbetweenS. Committee print, 1st 75thCong., existing piers from bay toa turning basin 200feet long, 8 sess. feet deep, with maximum width of 180 feet, with 150- and 300-foot inner channels each 50 feet wide and 8 feet deep.. Sept. 3, 1954 Reconstruction and Federal maintenance of east and west H. Doc. 434, 83d Cong., 2d seS. (co entrance piers, a 25-foot extension of west pier and a 300- tains latest published map). foot extension of existing westerly inner channel at a depth of 8 feet and a width of 50 feet. RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1093 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. d 2 'erminal facilities. About 1,000 linear feet of privately owned d(king space is available. COperations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: ondition surveys were made at a cost of $834. Beach protective riprap Was placed by hired labor at a cost of $14,553. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized by earlier act as completed in 1939, that for later modification in July 1958 except for extension of east pier, completed in September 1963. 1ntrolling depths at end of fiscal year were 10.5 feet in lake ap- lroach, 11 feet in channel between piers, 8.5 feet in west slip, anld 7 feet in east slip. S Cost and financial statement eal Y Totalto . 1962 1983 1984 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Work: Ap ropriated.......... ............$106,000 -$1,377 ......... $462,653 aintenance:.7,378 97,245........ 462,653 Appropriated.......... $10,268 8,800............ $4,210 $20,032 138,733 ............ 10,453 8,800............ 3,562 15,387 133,440 5. DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MINN. AND WIS. Location. At extreme western end of Lake Superior. Cities Of Duluth, Minn., and Superior, Wis., are on north and south s, respectively. (See Lake Survey Chart 966.) revious projects. See page 1246 of Annual Report for 1962. lt E'xisting project. Provides for rebuilding canal piers at Du- a entry, replacement or construction of piers and breakwater 11 Superior entry and dredging approaches and channels within 4arbor, St. Louis Bay, and St. Louis River. Channels vary in ~iepth from 32 to 28 feet in entrances, are 27 feet deep in outer or ron-ore channels, and are from 20 to 23 feet in inner channels. Ants Existing project was authorized by the following: Work authorized Documents and reports e 3,1896 Dredging...... .............................. H. Ex. Doc. 59, 53dCong., 3d seas. and useIar* l3 2 1902 Rebuilding piers at Superior entry. Annual Report, 1895, p. 2538. 21907 Enlarge plan for Superior entry and additional dredging H. Doc. 82, 59th Cong., 2d sees. near draw span of Northern Pacific Railway bridge. ay28, 19081 Dredgin additional area for basin inside Duluth entrance H. D)oe.221, 60th Cong., 1st seas. July27 1 to 22- cot depth. Mar 2' 191 Enlarging Superior Harbor Basin......................... H. Doc. 651, 64th Cong., 1st sess. Ja21 ,1919 Removal of shoal point at southerly end of East Gate Basin..1. Doe. 1018, 64th Cong., e1st sees. July1927 Howards Bay Channel, 20 feet deep........... .. ........ I.Doc. 245, 69th Cong., ist sess. and 3:1930 Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. g 32, 71st Cong., 2d ses. AGI'3019352 Deepening and widening channels and basins...............11. Dl)oc. 482, 72d Cong., 2d sess. J 16,19523 Deepen Superior Front Channel and a portion of East Gate H. Doe. 374, 82d Cong., 2d sess. July14, 9Basin to 25 feet, 4 4,19605 Present project dimensions of channels and basin........... H. Doc. 150, 86th Cong., 1st sess.4 Oct. 4,1961 Abandons northerly portion of 21st Avenue West Channel.... 11. Doe. 196, 86th Cong., 1st ses. a-drinistrative act, section 4. * clUded in Public Works Administration program, September 6, 1933. 4csblic Law 568, 82d Cong. a ntalns latest published map. licLaw 888, 87th Congress. 1094 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 For details of authorized channel dimensions and dimensions of structures, see pages 1246 and 1247 of Annual Report for 1962 and page 1011 of Annual Report for 1965. Estimated cost (1966) for new work is $15,150,000. Local cooperation. Improvement authorized by House DocU" ment 150 under the 1960 act, provides local interests must furnish lands, rights-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas for construction and future maintenance, hold the United States free from damages, and provide depths in berthing areas commensurate with project depths. Local cooperation for this portion fully complied with. In addition to provisions noted above, improvement authorized bY House Document 196 provides that local interests must construct a new grain terminal on 21st Avenue West Channel, provide pro- tection at pivot pier of Northern Pacific ,Railway bridge acroSs North Channel, remove pier of dismantled Lamborn Avenue Bridge in Howards Bay; and make alterations to sewer, water supply, power, communications lines, and other utilities. As- surances to cover all work except 21st Avenue West and North Channel were accepted from Superior on October 15, 1962, an from Duluth on January 23, 1963. Assurances for North Chan- nel have been requested. Lands for the portions covered by 8s surances, except North Channel, have been furnished. Terminal facilities. There are 113 docks or terminals if- cluding some 54 major ones all but one privately owned. Facili ties for handling iron ore, coal, limestone, petroleum, steel ad scrap iron, cement, general cargo, and grain are believed adequate for most existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Prep- ration of plans and specifications for deepening North Channe were carried on by hired labor at a cost of $10,466. Final pay- ment for alteration of highway bridge over Howards Bay and minor construction work resulted in a credit of $13,560. MVair- tenance: Condition surveys, miscellaneous inspections and re- ports, harbor line surveys, and maintenance of parks and grounds cost $53,423. Removal of about 20,000 cubic yards of material in shoals by dredging was accomplished at a cost of $30,535 using Government crane barge DK 20. Minor repairs were made to breakwaters and piers by hired labor at a cost of $7,024. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized prior to 1960 act was completed in June 1956. Under the 1960 act, work on the outer harbor, included in House Document 150, was completed in June 1965. Work on the inner harbor, included in House Document 196, started in May 1963 is complete excePt for North and 21st Ave. West channels. About 1,747,000 cubic yards of material have been removed in this portion. Control ling depths available in harbor except for scattered shoals in various locations: Lake approach to Duluth entry ................... 322 Duluth canal ................................... 32 decreasing to 2 Duluth Harbor Basin .............................. 28 Lake approach to Superior entry .................. 320 Superior entry Superior Harbor......................... Basin, Superior front channel, .......... 32 decreasing to 2 East and West Gate Basin, eastern half of South RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1095 Channel, Cross Channel, and a section of North AllChannel adjacent to Cross Channel .............. 27 ouez Bay...................................27 owards ay.................................. 27 North Channel . . . . . . . ........... 21 rW eenty-First Y - r.,t..Avenue West Channel...............20 .... WStern half of South Channel and Upper Channel.... 23 tllnesota Channel ...................... Inner end-21, outer end-20 St. Louis River .................................. 20 fEntrance piers and breakwaters are in fair condition except fo Piers at Duluth entry which are being undermined and re- quire stabilizing repairs. The United States owns 29.54 acres of land in fee in Minnesota and Wisconsin, of which 2.15 acres are used for a vessel yard. Total cost of existing project to une 30, 1966, was $20,292,965, of which $13,577,427 was for 1ew work and $6,715,538 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement 8 Total to isclea 1962 lYear................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New work. Ae ropriated.......... $479,000$2,067,464 $2,213,134 $540,000 $5,897 $15,148,510 M ai t ................ 133,021 3,325,6892,197,371 556,661 -3,060 15,124,623 Manenance: APPropriated.......... 203,232 110,208 141,100 139,300 100,000 6,726,385 ost.................. 236,395 108,825 132,509 148,143 90,982 26,715,538 T n cludes $1,547,195 nCludes $29,200 forforrock new work for previous projects. in stockpile. 6. GRAND MARAIS HARBOR, MINN. Location. On north shore of Lake Superior, 106 miles north- eaiterly from Duluth, Minn. (See Lake Survey Chart 9.) Ex'isting project. Provides breakwater piers to narrow the entrance; concrete seawalls across ledge at southeast corner of arbor; an anchorage area and a small-boat basin protected by a rubblemound breakwater. Project depths are 16 feet in anchor- age area increasing to 20 feet near entrance and 8 feet in small- boat basin. For additional details see page 1014 of Annual Re- D(ort for 1965. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 3,1879 Breakwaters and dredging of anchorage area of 26 acres to I1.1Ex. Doc. 75, 43d1Cong., 2d sess A 16 feet. (Annual Report, 1875, p. 184). ug.30,1935 Seawalls across ledge in southeast corner of harbor, enlarging Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. anchorage basinand deepening of entrance. 22, 72d( Cong., lestsess. V 17,1950 Smallboatbasinwithbieakwater ......................... .Doe. 187,81stCong.,1stsess. (Con- tains latest published map.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Two pulpwood wharves and several fish Wharves, all privately owned. Facilities are considered ade- quate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. Con- lition surveys were made at a cost of $1,132 and repair of break- Water was accomplished at a cost of $3,023, both by hired labor. 1096 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. Project depths of 16 feet in anchorage basin, 18 to 20 feet if entrance channel, and 8 feet in small boat basin are available. Concrete seawall and both breakwaters are in good conditionl Gravel spit along eastern side of harbor is too low to prevent waves from rolling into harbor during severe storm periods. Cost and financial statement,. Totalto Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: Appropriated........................................... .......... $ 450972 Cost............................. ............................... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $492 $45,000 -$13,400 $25,000 .. 276433 Cost.................. 492 8,984 22,616 885 $4,155 256,473 7. GRAND TRAVERSE BAY HARBOR, MICH. Location. At mouth of Traverse River on eastern shore of Keweenaw Peninsula about 20 miles northeasterly from Portage entry to Keweenaw Waterway. (See Lake Survey Chart 94.) Existing project. Provides two parallel piers, an entrance channel between piers and a harbor basin. Project depths a 12 feet between piers and 10 feet in basin. For additional de tails see page 1015 of Annual Report for 1965. Existing project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 446, gth Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Local interests furnished easements on 5.1 acres of land. Terminal facilities. Several privately owned fishing wharves' Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Condition surveys cost $1,360. About 12,750 cubic yards of material were removed by Government crane barge and hired labor at a cost of $23,204. Reimbursement of $4,500 was made for work done in a prior year for U.S. Coast Guard. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co"I pleted in 1950 except for extension of north pier completed in 1964. Entrance piers are in good condition. Controlling depths at end of fiscal year were 12 feet in lake approach and entrance channel and 9 feet in harbor basin. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriated.,......... ....................... ... . 197,' 771 $............ Cost ................................. ........ .197, Maintenance: g60 Appropriated.......... $15,000 $94,500 $25,000 325,500 $17,000 269, Cost.................. 15,000 20,244 53,258 68,435 20,064 286, RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1097 8. KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MICI. Location. In Lake Superior across Keweenaw Peninsula in upper Michigan. The west entrance is 169 miles east of Duluth, inn. (See Lake Survey Chart 944.) Existing project. A navigable channel, minimum width 300 feet, 25 miles long, partially natural and partially artificial across Keweenaw Peninsula via Portage Lake. For details see page 1121 of Annual Report for 1963. Completed cost for new work Is $5,967,700. Portion of project providing for extension of lOwer entrance breakwater and necessary alteration or replace- 'ent of structures due to deepening channels is inactive and ex- cluded from foregoing cost. Estimated cost (1957) of this por- tion was $3,315,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: At$ Work authorized Documents and reports Sept. 19,1890 Acquisition of waterway; for a 16-foot channel of 70-foot H11. Ex. Doc. 105, 49th Cong., 2d ses bottom width, renew canal revetments, reconstruct and and Annual Report, 1887, p. 1977. extend piers at upper entrance to 30-foot depth of water, and at proper time for increase of channel depth to 20 feet with bottom width of not less than 120 feet 5,1898). in width and depth of channel approved Mar. (increase June 25 , 1910 Anlhorage basin just within lower entrance about Y mile H. Doc. 325, 60th Cong., 1st sess. long, 800 feet wide; a mooring pier on its westerly side Mar 21919 2,000 feet in length, and for purchase of necessary land. Aug.30' 1919 Princess channel ........................... Point Cutoffwidening, 11. Doc. 835, 63d Cong., 2d ses; 19351 General deepening, and straightening of channels I. Doc. 55, 73d Cong., 1st sess. (con- and basins to provide 25-foot depth with additional over- tains latest published map). depth at entrances, extend lower entrance breakwater, and necessary alteration or replacement of structures due to deepening channels. Included in Emergency Relief Administration program, May 28, 1935. Local cooperation. None required. T'erminal facilities. Six coal docks, a petroleum dock, and several general merchandise and miscellaneous wharves, all pri- Vately owned. Facilities are considered adequate for existing coMnmerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Public-use facilities Were completed at Portage River Harbor area for a cost of $712 for nlew work by hired labor. Condition surveys and miscellane- ous inspections and reports were made for $20,264 for mainte- lance. Minor repairs and shoal removal by hired labor cost $3,148. Condition at end of fiscal year. Active portion of project is omlplete. Breakwaters are in good condition except for a weak- 1fess occurring in about 300 feet of substructure of breakwater at oWer entrance, and stone-covered portions of breakwaters at up- Per entrance need minor repairs. Mooring pier at Lily Pond re- lired repairs to halt movement and permit dredging to project 9eth adjacent thereto; mooring pier at Portage River Harbor of b fuge good condition. is in indefinitely. Annual redredging of channels will e required Controlling depth is about 25 feet. 1098 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: 141 Appropriated.......... ............ ............$12,000 ............ $200 $ g 7141 Cost..... ........... . 7,781 $3,707 7..................... 712 5:97 Maintenance:620 Appropriated.......... $125,500 $93,400 118,700 71,000 84,000 4,697 20 Cost............... .. 134,968 91,032 117,551 67,742 23,412 14,6 25 1Includes stock on hand June 30, 1964, $3,675 and $402,242 expended between 1893 and 1917 from permanent indefinite appropriations for operation and care. 9. MARQUETTE HIARBOR, MICH. Location. In Marquette Bay on south shore of Lake Superior, 160 miles west of Sault Ste. Marie, Mich., and 256 miles east from Duluth, Minn. (See Lake Survey Chart 935.) Existing project. Provides for a breakwater, and a harbor basin 25 feet deep, giving a protected area of 350 acres. Projec was modified in 1960 to provide a 27-foot depth in harbor area. Estimated cost (1966) of new work is $1,292,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 2, 1867 Breakwater, 2,000 feet long............................... H. Ex. Doe. 56, 39th Cong., 2deS , pts. 1 and 2, and Annual ileport 1866, pp. 8 and 77. Aug. 11, 1888 Extending the breakwater 1,000 feet .......................Annual Report. 1889, pp. 272 and 201. June 25, 1910 Additional 1,500-foot extension to breakwater and removing H. Doc. 573. 61st Cong., 2d sess. a shoal in northerly part of harbor.oc Aug.30, 19351 Deepening harbor basin to 25 feet........................ Rivers and Harbors Committee 20, 72d154, Cong., 1st seas. t July 14, 1960 Deepening harbor basinto 27 feet......................... .Doc. 86th Cong., Is ses.(coo- tains latest published map). 1 Included in the Public Works Administration program, September 6, 1933. Local cooperation. None required for earlier authorizationS' For the 1960 act, local interests must furnish lands and rights-Of' way for construction and future maintenance, hold the United States free from damages, and provide depths in berthing area commensurate with project depths. Assurances were accepted January 26, 1966, and depths to berthing areas have been prO vided. Terminal facilities. One ore dock, one coal dock, two petrolet1im docks, and three unused docks. There are also several small fis wharves without railroad connections. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Condition surveys were accomplished by hired labor. Rehabilita* tion: Rubblemound portion of breakwater was completed bY Government plant and hired labor. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project authorized by earlier acts was completed in 1935. Planning for deepening authorized in 1960 is in progress. Rehabilitation of rubblemound portionO breakwater was completed in November 1965. Controlling depth in harbor is 25 feet. RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1099 Cost and financial statement FiscalYear. Total to .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work: Appriiatted.......... $9,021...$7,000 $1,133,333 Cost 1,128,908 Maintenance:* .......... 8,935 $86 ............ 2,575 Appropria ted......... ...................... $1,869 $2,117 1,277 582,418 Cost 582,418 Reabilitation: S............ 1,869 2,117 1,277 Appropriat ted..................... 12,747 ............ 161,000 300,000 473,747 ost..... 12,747.. 32,743 418,428 463,918 10. MINNESOTA RIVER, MINN. Location. Rises in Big Stone Lake, Minn. and S. Dak., and ovs southeasterly about 224 miles to Mankato, Minn., thence northeasterly about 106 miles to join the Mississippi River oppo- site St. Paul, Minn. (For general location see Geological Survey "lap of Minnesota.) f Previous projects. For details see page 1890 of Annual Report or 1915, and page 1105 of Annual Report for 1938. ofXxisting project. Provides 9-foot depth below flat pool level M ississippi River lock and dam 2 from mouth to mile 14.7, 01e-half mile above the railway bridge at Savage, Minn., and tailot depth from mile 14.7 to 25.6 at Shakopee, Minn. For de- ails see page 1018 of Annual Report for 1965. Estimated Fed- eral cost for new work (1966) is $1,640,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Act Work authorized Documents and reports July13,1892 Open-channel improvement from mouth to Shakopee to Annual Report 1891, p. 2209. obtain a channel of 4-foot depth to accommodate vessels July 3 with 3-foot draft. 1958 Dredging to provide channel of 9-foot depth from mouth to S. Doe. 144, 84th Cong., 2d sess. (con- mile 14.7. tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Under the 1958 act local interests must five assurances they will provide lands and rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance, hold the United States free froln damages, make changes in roads and maintain fender pro- eCtion at railroad bridge at mile 1.6. Assurances were accepted eptember 13, 1962. In June 1964 Dakota County Court granted ti erranent injunction against county on basis of unconstitu- Sonality of the State Watershed Act and other findings. By a i ecision filed May 18, 1965, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled aI favor of the watershed district. Appeal to the U. S. Supreme court was denied. Rights-of-entry were furnished January 6, 1i966. Railroad bridge at mile 1.6 was removed. Under pro- slon of section 4, River and Harbor Act of 1915, section of chan- "el between mouth and mile 13.2, at Port Cargill, Minn., was Colpleted July 1943 at a cost to local interests of $139,671. I Terminal facilities. There are privately owned terminals at iles 9, 13.1, 14.5 and two at mile 14.7. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- 1100 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 neering for channel improvement was carried on by hired labor at a cost of $13,482. Reimbursement by State of Minnesota of $17,000 for work done for them resulted in a net cost for engi- neering of minus $3,518. A contract was awarded and clearing and grubbing accomplished to bring the contract to about 2 per- cent completion, at a cost of $117,001. Maintenance: Removed 64 snags from channel from mouth to Savage, Minn., by Govern- ment plant. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on project for 4-foot depth was completed in 1931. The United States owns 10 acres of land in fee 2 miles east of Savage, Minn. Navigation from mouth to Shakopee was practicable for drafts not in excess of 3 feet. Depths of 9 feet in reach from mouth to Port Cargill, dredged by local interests are not dependable although some maintenance was done by local interests. A contract for work under 1958 authorization for a 9-foot channel was started in May 1966 and is 2 percent complete. Total costs for existing project to June 30, 1966, were $495,905, of which $304,141 was for neW work and $191,764 for maintenance. In addition, cost from con- tributed funds was $139,671 for dredging to 9 feet deep under provisions of section 4, River and Harbor Act of 1915, and $17,000 for engineering for realignment of channel. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19681 New work: Appropriated..................-$227,950 ."i. .. $169,200 $785,000 " $1,216, Cost..................$24,204 38,285 45,482 460 $113,483 883 421, Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 10,000 10,122 25,400 10,000 10,000 091 193, Cost................. 5,359 15,067 25,400 9,814 8,859 191, 1 Includes $117,542 for new work for previous project. Excludes $139,671 contributed fundS for new work. 11. MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. For report on this improvement see page 1155. 12. ONTONAGON HARBOR, MICH. Location. On south shore of Lake Superior. It consists of ijf provement of mouth of Ontonagon River. (See Lake Survey Chart 95.) Previous project. For details see page 1931 of Annual Report of 1915, and page 1406 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Provides for flared approach channel 17 feet deep with widths from 400 to 150 feet; a channel 150 feet wide between piers with 17-foot depth in outer 250 feet and 1 5 -foOt depth in inner 2,200 feet; an inner basin 15 feet deep, 900 feet long and maximum width of 285 feet from existing wharves on each side of river, and maintenance of channels, basin, and 4,878i feet of entrance piers. Completed project cost $19,619. A mrod - fication authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act provides for increasing depths of channels and construction of an inner basin RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1101 11d a sedimentation basin. This portion of project is inactive. stirlated cost (1965) of this work is $6,040,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Workauthorized Documents ue251910 Channel 17 feet deep and 150 feet wide through bar and 15 H. Doe. 602, 61st Cong., 2d sess. feet deep and 100 feet wide between piers, and pier main- Aug2 tenance. Oct. 2 1937 Modified project widths and provided inner basin ........... S. Committee print, 74th Cong., 2d seas. 1962 Deepening approaches and extending harbor basin........... 11. Doe. 287, 87th Cong., 2d seas. (con- tains latest published map.) g Local cooperation. None required for earlier authorization. e Page 1020 of Annual Report for 1965 for requirements of 1962 A ct., , - 1. .. I T erminal facilities. There are no publicly owned wharves. here are three coal wharves, an oil receiving facility, and few 11all fish wharves. Terminal facilities are considered adequate or0 existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Public COntacts for the 1962 modification were accomplished by hired labor. Maintenance: Condition surveys were made for $3,718 id Government pipeline dredge De Poe Bay removed about 44,000 cubic yards of material at a cost of $38,791. About 116,- 577 cubic yards of material were removed by contract pipeline dredge at a cost of $112,685. Dredging was necessary to main- an project depths. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project under earlier act was rOrpleted in 1938. Piers are in fair condition except for minor epairs needed on stone-covered portions. Controlling depths are 17 feet in lake approach channel and inside piers for 1,000 feet, 14 feet in channel between piers, and 8 feet in harbor asin. Work under the 1962 act has not been done. Total costs 4toJune 30, 1966, for existing project were $1,494,270, of which 4,101 was for new work and $1,447,169 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement a 21 Total to 1962 1963 1064 19065 1June 30, 19661 Newwork* CPtropriated.................... $48,000 -$20,518 $ 331,903 ......... Maintenance: ..................... ........ 26,549 0933 331,903 Apropriated.......... $75,000 $92,000 $60,000 140,000 55,000 1, 584,553 ot ............... 74,150 87,076 57,622 23,900 155,104 1,5560,495 Includes $284,802 for new work and $113,326 for maintenance for previous projects. 13. PRESQUE ISLE HARBOR, MICH. oLocation. On south shore of Lake Superior within city limits Of Iarquette and about 3 miles from Marquette Harbor. It is in an indentation about 11/2 miles long and one-half mile wide in shore behind Presque Isle Point. (See Lake Survey Chart 935.) .xisting project. A breakwater off Presque Isle Point and dredging harbor to depth of 28 feet in inner portion with 30 feet 1102 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 at entrance. For details see page 1021 of 1965 Annual Report. Estimated cost (1966) for new work is $1,247,000. Existing project was authorized by the following : Acts Work authorized Documents and reports i June 3,1896 Breakwater, 1,000 feet long.............................. H. Doc. 318, 54th Cong., 1st s-s.An- June 13,1902 Shore extension, 216 feet long................ .... nual Report for 1903, pp. 474, 182 Aug.30, 1935 For dredging and rubblemound extension to breakwater H. Doc. 473, 72d Cong., 2d sess. 1,600 feet long. Changed designation of project. 1st sess. (con- July 14,1960 Deepening harbor from 26 and 28 feet to 28 and 30 feet, H. Doc. 145, 86th Cong., respectively. tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. One merchandise and petroleum receiving wharf and one ore dock. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Minor dredging work was accomplished by hired labor. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project authorized by earlier acts was completed in 1939. A contract for harbor deepening authorized by 1960 act was completed April 1962 except for section where rocks were encountered in southeast portion Of harbor. Rock removal is being accomplished intermittently bY hired labor. It is expected that work will be completed in 1967 Breakwater is in good condition. Controlling depth was 28 feet. Cost and financial statement_ _ Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated.......... $25,700 $6,500 $23,983 $70,000 ..... $1,246 492 Cost................. 229,0,17 5,700 12,918 26,633 $,396 1,190:419 Maintenance: Appropriated .......... 43 ........................ 109 ............ 1 71 Cost.................. 43 ............ ............ 109 ............ 171:771 Rehabilitation: Appropriated...................... 140,000 -63,500 ........................ . 76 ,0 Cost... ............ ............ 31,682 44,818 ............ . i............ 14. RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER Location. Reservoirs are on the Mississippi River and several of its tributaries in Itasca, Beltrami, Hubbard, Aitkin, Cass, and Crow Wing Counties, Minn., as follows: I I i Outlet Area (square miles) Watershed Name of reservoir Above (square River St. Paul miles) Original Reservoir (miles) lake r i i i i Winnibigoshish................. Missiasippi............ 408 1,442 117 179. Leech Lake............... Leech................. 410 1,163 173 250.0 Pokegama..................... Mississippi............. 344 1660 24 35.0 Sandy Lake................... Sandy.... ......... 267 421 8 16.6 Pine River.................... Pine.... .......... 199 562 18 23.7 Gull Lake...................... Gull.................. 168 287 20 20.5 1 Exclusive of area controlled by Winnibigoshish and Leech Lake Dams. RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1103 SPrevious project. For details see page 1888 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1098 of Annual Report for 1938. t0 Existing project. Provides for reconstruction from timber o Concrete at Winnibigoshish, Leech Lake, Pokegama, Sandy Lake, and Pine River dams, and construction of a concrete dam at Gull Lake. Pokegama was built on bedrock and the others oIl pile foundations. A portion of Leech Lake Dam from piers 26 to 39 was replaced with an earthfill. Constructed three dikes at innibigoshish, 4 at Pokegama, 2 at Sandy Lake and 16 at Pine Iver. Sandy Lake Dam includes a lock 160 feet long, 30 feet Wide, with a maximum lift of 9.5 feet and a depth of 2.5 feet on lOwver sill at low water which was converted to use as a spillway. Estimated cost (1966) of new work for existing project is $1,905,000. . Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar. 3,1899 Reconstruct 4 of the 5 original dams and surveys to Ma Mar.2, 1907 determine extent of lands overflowed by reservoirs. Reconstruct Sandy Lake Dam and construct Gull Lake ,1 "le 2525,1910 Reservoir. Construct an equalizing canal between Winnibigoshish and H. Doe. 363, 61st Cong., 2d sess. Leech Lake Reservoirs (no work was done and this July 7 part of project abandoned in act of Mar. 4, 1915). 1916 Abandonment of ditches connecting Long Lake, Round H. Doc. 413, 64th Cong., 1st sess. e Lake and Gull Lake. Jue26, 19341Operation and maintenance provided for with funds from War Department appropriations for rivers and harbors. 1errnanent Appropriations Repeal Act. 2or Miap, see p. 1978, Annual Report for 1911. Lower operating limits by regulations approved Feb. 4, 1936, and modified 29, 1944 ec .Dec. Minimum Minimum Reservoir stage Reservoir stage (feet) (feet) innibigoshish......................... 6 Sandy Lake.......................... 7 ch Lake... ......................... 0 Pine River........................... 9 Okegama.. '........ "........... .. 6 GullLake............................ 5 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. None. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- l1eering for recreational facilities was carried on by hired labor at a cost of $25,523. Various recreational facilities were con- structed by contract at Pine, Sandy, and Pokegama at a cost of $43,187. Maintenance: 'Reservoirs were operated as required nd miscellaneous inspections, repairs and reports were made by hired labor. It is estimated that stages at Aitkin, Minn., were reduced by 0.7 foot during the 1966 flood by operation of these reservoirs, and it is estimated that about $344,000 in flood dam- ages were prevented downstream of reservoirs by their operation. Rehabilitation: Reconstruction of apron at Winnibigoshish was completed at a cost of $484 for engineering by hired labor and $71,459 for construction by contract. Costs for the year by hired labor were $193,943; by contract, $114,646. 1104 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co1l- pleted in 1937. Flowage rights were acquired on all lands af- fected by construction, maintenance, and operation of reservoirs. A total of 2,076 acres in fee and easements on 296,397 acres are owned by the United States. Structures are in fair condition.. Work on a contract for rehabilitation of the apron at Winnli- bigoshish started June 1964, was completed in August 1965. Various recreation facilities were constructed at Sandy, pine, and Pokegama. Capacities and costs by reservoir Capacity Previous projects Existing projects Total at Tcost Reservoir maximum cot stage (acre- Corn- Cost Corn- Cost feet) pleted pleted Winnibigoshish.... 967,030 1884 $214,000 1900 $173 470 $387,470 Leech Lake......... ......... 743,320 1884 171,805 1902 84,380 256,185 Pokegama...... .......... 120,750 1884 85,000 1901 126,030 211'030 Sandy Lake........................ 72,500 1895 114,000 1909 117,020 23182 Pine River.... ................... 177,520 1886 97,000 1907 133,320 230'326 Gull Lake ........................... 70,820.......... ........... 1913 86,826 866326 Surveys and flowage rights.................................. ...................... 160,939 10'3 01 Recreational facilities................. ............................................ 132,701 .^ - 132 Total new work........... ... . . ..........681,805 ...1,014,6861,69616,491 Total operating and care....... ............ 1'970 a:19? 100,857 ..........2,381,113 2,481 Permanent indefinite appropriation for . .. ........ ................. 967,197 96 operating and care, Feb. 1, 1895, to end of fiscal year 1936. Rehabilitation......... .............. ........ 422,776 2,771 ........... Total......................... 2,152,840 .......... 782,662 .......... 4,785,772 5,568,4 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New work: 7 Appropriated.......... $5,000 $15,000 $11,000 $39,400 $107,688 $1,746,2 Cost.................. 3,332 8,886 18,436 28,113 68,710 1,696, Maintenance: 3476632 Appropriated.......... 85,000 109,000 138,000 148,000 189,000 347 1 Cost.................. 82,596 101,954 137,868 152,089 167,936 3,446, Rehabilitation:0 Appropriated.......... ............ 30,000 200,000 224,000 -25,000 42 6 Cost.............................. 14,033 27,256 309,544 71943 422:71 SIncludes $681,805 for new work and $100,857 for maintenance from previous project. 15. ST. CROIX RIVER, MINN. & WIS. Location. From source in northwestern Wisconsin floWs southwesterly and then southerly about 164 miles to MississiPP' River at Prescott, Wis., about 41.7 miles below lower Northerl Pacific Railway bridge, Minneapolis, Minn. For its greater parts forms boundary between Minnesota and Wisconsin (See Geo- logical Survey map of Minnesota.) Existing project. Provides for maintenance of a channel, 9 feet in depth and of suitable width from mouth to Stillwater, Minn., 24.5 miles, created by improvement of upper Mississippi River; channel 3 feet deep at mean low water between Stillwater and Taylors Falls (27.3 miles) ; improvement of harbor and water- front at Stillwater; and a small-boat harbor at Hudson, Wis. RIVERS AND HARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1105 Estimated Federal cost of new work is $334,400. Latest author- iZation (1954) for maintenance work on reach between Still- Water and Taylors Falls is limited to an expenditure not exceeding $5,000 per year. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reportsl June18,1878 Dredging, etc., for a 3-foot channel between mouth and H. Ex. Doc. 75, pt. 6, 43d Cong., 2d 31896Taylors Falls. sess; Annual Report 1875, p. 372. Jan. 23,1896 Harbor and waterfront at Stilwater 378, 69th Cong., 1st sess. .... H. Doc. Au 10 A 6-foot 1927 The S, 1935 channel 9-foot to from channel Stillwater... mouth .................... to Stillwater........ H. Doc. 184, 72d Cong., .................... 11. Doc. 184, 81st Cong., Ist ma7, 1950 Small-boat harbor at Hudson......... sess. 1st sess. 1Latest P ublished map is in H. Doc. 462, 71st Cong., 2d sess. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed portion. or htudson Harbor, local interests must provide lands and its-of-way for construction of the project, hold the United States free from damages, provide and maintain parking and Storage areas, mooring facilities, utilities, public landing, and ulpply facilities open to all on equal terms, and establish a public ody to regulate a-nd develop the harbor. Terminal facilities. At Stillwater there is a concrete paved levee and a piling-and-timber trestle wharf on right bank. At Other points along river, landing may be made on banks. Facili- es are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Removed 87 snags in reach above Stillwater, Minn., by Government plant and hired labor at cost of $5,305. U.S. pipeline dredge Win. A. Thompson re- moved 56,530 cubic yards of material at mile 6.0 at a cost of $29,700. Condition at end of fiscal year. All new work was completed 1930, except subsequently authorized harbor at Hudson. The nited States owns 2.75 acres of land in fee at Taylors Falls and thas easements over 7.57 acres of land at Bayport, Minn. Ex- ension to provide a 9-foot channel from mouth to Stillwater was 0opPleted August 12, 1938 when full pool at dam 3 of Mississippi giver canalization project was reached. Minimum draft from Stillwater to Taylors Falls is about 1 foot at extreme low water, and from mouth to Stillwater, 9 feet. _ _ _Cost and financial statement Yea iscal Total to ear . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ewwork: APropriated.......... ............ ................................................ $150,410 Maintena.......... ............................................ ................ 150,410 n.ence: APpropriated.......... $8,800 $5,378 $100 ............ $44,000 280,402 ost...... ....... 14,160 4,911 5 $476 35,005 271,321 16. SAXON HARBOR, WIS. Location. On south shore of Lake Superior in Wisconsin at touth of Oronto Creek, 27 miles southeast of harbor at Bayfield, is., and 21 miles westerly of harbor at Black River, Mich. It is also 99 miles east of Duluth-Superior Harbor and 60 miles west of 1106 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Ontonagon Harbor, Mich. (For general location see Lake Sur- vey Chart 96.) Previous project. For details see page 1254 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project. Provides for construction of new east and west breakwaters, removal of portions of existing piers, an outer channel 10 feet deep, an inner basin and side channel 8 feet deep, and diversion of Oronto Creek to Parkers Creek by three short reaches of channel excavation and a levee. For detailed dimen" sions of features see page 1025 of Annual Report for 1965. Esti mated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $451,000 and $45,000 to be contributed by local interests. Existing project wvas authorized by 1958 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 169, 85th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance; hold the United States free from damages; maintain public wharf on east side of existing harbor basin and its access road, open to all oil equal terms; maintain Oronto Creek diversion channel; establish a public body to regulate use of harbor facilities which shall be open to all on equal terms; and make a cash contribution equivalent to 9 percent of the first cost of breakwaters, piers, an dredging. No dredging shall be done by the United States with" in 25 feet of any established wharf, dock, or bulkhead. Assur- ances were accepted October 30, 1964. Iron County Board fur- nished lands and required cash contribution. Terminal facilities. One wharf 300 feet long on east side of present harbor basin constructed by local interests. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- struction engineering by hired labor cost $2,963. A contract for construction of improvements was completed at a cost of $219' 544. Maintenance: Condition surveys were accomplished bY hired labor. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on a contract for im" provements started in May 1965 was completed in November 1965 except for minor work. Additional bank revetment is needed. Controlling depths are 6.5 feet in lake approach, 10 feet in channel between piers, and 8 feet in inner basin and side channel. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: Appropriated.......... $2,000........................$215,000 $204,103 03 $451, t98 Cost................ 5,808....................... 170,989 222,507 425, Maintenance: , Appropriated.............................. ................. 1,930 1, 30 Cost...................... .... ......... 1,930 1.030 RIVERS AND IIARBORS-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1107 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS NTotal to year 11962 1cal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Contributed..... ... ...................................... $5,00 $56,000 Cost.... ................... $43,000 43,000 17. TWO HARBORS, MINN. Location. Harbor is on north shore of Lake Superior, 27 miles nIlortheasterly from Duluth, Minn. (See Lake Survey Chart 96.) fExisting project. Narrowing natural entrance by construction etwo breakwaters, 1,628 and 900 feet long, from eastern and vestern points of bay, respectively; and dredging a maneuvering area on north side of harbor to 28 and 30 feet deep. A walkway 011 east breakwater is provided for public recreational use. For details see page 1026 of Annual Report for 1965. Areas along easterly and northerly edges of channel have not been fully teepened. al cost. This portion of project is inactive and excluded from Estimated cost (1963) of this portion is $45,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Aug. ,188 Breakwater and dredging..... ....................... 11. Ex. Doe. 94, 48th Cong., 2(dseas. Aug. 1935 Construction of two breakwater piers................... Annual Report for 1887, p. 1952. Shore connection to east breakwater and dredging maneuver- Rivers and Harbors Committee Dooe. No 7,1945 ing area. 17, 72d Cong., slotsess. Construct new east breakwater and enlargement of ma- H. Doc. 805, 78th Cong., 2d sess. July 14,1960 neuvering basin. Deepen harbor project depths from 26 and 28 feet to 28 and H. I)oc. 146, 86th Cong.,1st sess. (con- 30 feet, respectively. tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. doerminal facilities. No publicly owned wharves. Three ore docks, coal dock, merchandise wharf, and tug wharf are privately Oned. Facilities considered adequate for existing commerce. rarbor was used only by commercial fishing and recreational craft in 1965. Shipment of iron ore was resumed in spring of 1966" Operations and results during fiscal year. Condition surveys stere made and repairs were made to decking of wooden super- structures of east breakwater by hired labor for maintenance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized prior to 1960 act Was completed in 1950. Breakwaters are in good condition except for wooden superstructure of east breakwater which needs repair. - T he public-use walkway was completed in June 1965. Work on harbor deepening project authorized in 1960 is complete except for inactive portion. Full project depths are available to ithin about 100 feet of east project line. 1108 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 ,1966 New work: Appropriated..........$117,300 $29,200 $717 $1,900.$3, 709272 Cost................. 115,099 17,635 1,728 15,172. 3, 709,272 Maintenance: d, 3, 52 . Appropriated.......... .8,500 43,000 882 $12,100 354 582 Coat... . . .. . . 12,136 43,085 882 8,555 351,037 18. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Name of project Date survey canducted Bayfield Harbor, Wis................................ July 1965 Eagle Harbor, Mich................................. Aug. 1965 Port Wing Harbor, Wis ............................... May 1966 Warroad Harbor and River, Minn ...................... Feb., Mar. 1966 19. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report ---- Name of project see Annuald Report Construction Operation an for- maintenance Baudette Harbor, Minn.1.. ................................. 1961 $36,415 $21711 Bayfield Harbor, Wis.,.: ... ...0............. 1961 183,855 2:319 Beaver Bay Harbor, 2 Minn.2.................................1945........ Black River ,Wis. 3 ...................................... 1950 67,585"... Chippewa Harbor, Isle Royale, Mich.1........................... 1959 125,629.... 3 ma1e Harbor, Mich.1 .......................................... 1959 4205, 164 115.i KMNfe River Harbor, Minn.1.... ............................. 1963 271,745 55,286 Lac La Belle Harbor, Mich....9............................. 1964 269,270 11,686 Lake Traverse, Minn.2and S. Dak.5 .. ... 6.............................. . ... .. . ... .. .. .. .. ............. . 1921 92 .......... Lutsen Harbor, Minn. 1945 ..................... i i Mississippi and Leech Rivers. Minn.1 5 ....................... 7 1929 1925 277,615 47,794 3:891 3, Mississippi River between Brainerd and Grand Rapids, Minn. .... Pine Creek, Angle Inlet, Minn.1................................... 1964 38,700...... Port Wing Harbor, Wis.... ................................ 1964 63,393 639, Red Lake and Red Lake River, Minn. 1 5........................... 1923 9,070........ Red River of the North, Minn. and N. Dak.5 9......................1921 293,344 29 Warroad Harbor and River, Minn.............................1965 83,805 520,622 Wisconsin River, Wis. 10................................ 1888 .................... Zippel Bay Harbor, Minn.2 7...................................... 1928 27,941 . 1Completed. sInactive. 8 Channels adequate for commerce. SExclusive of $27,800 contributed by local interests. 1 No commerce reported. SAbandonment recommended in 1915 (H. Doc. 439, 64th Cong., 1st sess.) and June 24, 1926 (H. Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess.). SAbandonment recommended June 24, 1926 (H. Doe. 467, 69th Cong., 1st sess.). 1 In addition, $145,792 has been expended for rehabilitation of breakwater. 0 Abandonment recommended in 1915 (H. Doc. 1666. 63d Cong., 3d sess.). 1oOriginally included in project "Fox and Wisconsin Rivers, Wis." Abandonment of im" provement of Wisconsin River by channel contraction works recommended in 1886 and 1887 (H. Ex. Doc. 65, 49th Cong., 2d sess.). Expenditures included under "Fox and Wisconsin River, Wis.". No breakdown available. 20. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Study identification Fiscal year costs East Two Rivers, Tower, Minn ............................. $500 La Pointe Harbor, Wis ..................................... 5,565 Marquette Harbor, Iowa .................................... 500 Total ............................................... 6,565 FLOOD CONTROL-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1109 21. AUTHORIZED BRIDGE ALTERATIONS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report [ . . .. _ .. _........ Name of project of project see Annual seRName Construction portnual Operation and for- maintenance Chag Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Bridge, Hastings, 1962 . Bridge, Mich.2 ................................ oughton-Hancock 1963 .............. $4,230,000 S Waiting funding. o mleted. Cost to local interests, $6,896,200. 22. 13BIG STONE LAKE-WHETSTONE RIVER, MINN. AND S. DAK. Location. On Minnesota River near Ortonville and Odessa, Minln., and Big Stone City, S. Dak., at the outlet of Big Stone ake and in Big Stone and Lac qui Parle Counties, Minn., and Qrant County, S. Dak. (For general location, see Geological urvey map of Minnesota.) 1xisting project. Provides for a dam and reservoir on Minne- ota tRiver above U.S. Highway 75, modifications of Big Stone Lake outlet dam and silt barrier, bank stabilization along lower 6 iles of Whetstone River, channel improvement on Minnesota iver for 3 miles below outlet control dam at Big Stone Lake along with necessary relocations and acquisition of lands. These iMprovements would be made for wildlife conservation and de- velopment flood control and recreation. Authorization provides that before starting construction of dam and reservoir, the Chief of Engineers and Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, shall pre- are a mutually satisfactory general plan for administering use bof waters land or interest therein for wildlife so as to provide estuse for all project purposes, and also provides that upstream ork not be undertaken until construction has been started on the am and reservoir above Highway 75. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $4,790,000 and $126,000 to be contributed by local interests. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Aet (H.Doc. 579, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest map, and *D oc. 193, 88th Cong., 2d sess.) wLocal cooperation. Local interests must, for project as a tWhole, contribute in cash 20 percent of cost allocated to flood con- rol to be paid in a lump sum before start of construction or in Sstallments prior to start of work items and hold the United States free from damages and, for the project exclusive of dam ad reservoir: provide lands and rights-of-way for project con- astruction; maintain and operate works after completion; make all changes to highways including bridges and approaches, utili- iesand other relocations; and prevent encroachments which Vould reduce flood-carrying capacity of channel. Local interests have not been requested to furnish assurances. to Perations and results ailed plans was initiated during fiscal year. Engineering for de- by hired labor for new work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Detailed plans are about 30 Dercent comnlto- 1110 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 19641 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 000 Appropriated.......... .................................... ............ $90,000 $9 06900 Cost.................. ............... '......... . ... '*.... 33 069 3 23. DRY RUN, IOWA Location. In northeastern Iowa, on Dry Run, a tributary of the Upper Iowa River at Decorah, Iowa. (See Geological Survey map Decorah quadrangle, Iowa.) Existing project. Diversion of Dry Run into Upper low River, a levee system along Upper Iowa River in Decorah raising a section of railroad tracks and State Highway No. 9, and neceS- sary alterations to bridges and protection to existing structures in the vicinity for flood control. For details see page 1029 of Annual Report for 1965. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $1,805,700. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents June 22, 1936 Flood retention reservoir and channel enlargement down- None. stream for protection of Decorah, Iowa Aug. 18, 1941 Modified project to provide for diversion of Dry Run into None. Upper Iowa River, a levee system along Upper Iowa River and appurtenant work. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total costs for all requirements of local cooperation under terms of project author- ization are about $161,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. Miscellaneous engl* neering cost $10,429. A contract for remedial work was cofll pleted at a cost for the year of $41,300. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in 1951. Remedial work was completed in May 1962 and work on drainage culverts was completed in May 1966. Structures and channels are in good condition. Cost and financial statement .... 1 Total to691 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 19 New work: -$10,200 Appropriated.......... ...................... .$58,000 $16,000 $1,805 700 Cost.................. 22,639 ........................ 7,227 51,729 1,790,656 1 Excludes $42,766 contributed funds. 24. EAU GALLE RIVER, WIS. Location. At and in vicinity of Spring Valley, Wis., on EaU Galle River 30 miles above its mouth at Chippewa River, and its tributary, Mines Creek, which flows through the village. Spring Valley is about 45 miles east of St. Paul, Minn., and 36 miles west of Eau Claire, Wis. (See Geological Survey map for Wisconsinl for general location.) FLOOD CONTROL--ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1111 E Xisting project. Authorized plan of improvement as modi- fed by further studies includes a retarding dam and reservoir on l au Galle River immediately upstream from Spring Valley, and lernedial works on Mines Creek including channel enlargement, a low levee and a drop structure. Project provides for earth and rockfill dam, aniuncontrolled outlet and an uncontrolled spillway eMerging fr 1- above-"Mines Creek. See Ppage 0 1030 of Annual Report or 1965 for further details. Proposed improvements on Burg- ardt Creek were eliminated. Improvements would provide com- lete protection near Spring Valley for standard project flood, and belfow that point in decreasing value in proportion to distance floua reservoir. Permanent conservation pool will serve a local heed for a recreational area. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for Cew Work is $7,010,000. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood COnitrol Act (S. Doc. 52, 84th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest pub- lished map). rd.Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and ghts-of-way for construction; hold the United States free from tao-ages; make all highway, bridge, and utility alterations; main- cain all channel improvement works; establish and enforce flood- Channel limits for protection against further encroachments of Crod channels of Eau Galle River and Mines and Burghardt creeks within extent of proposed projects, prevent dumping of Waste material or creation of fills within said flood-channel lim- ts; and regulate construction of bridges or other structures cross- 1 iaproved waterways. Assurances for Mines Creek portion of roject were accepted September 13, 1963, and for remainder of the project November 5, 1964. Lands for entire project have been urnished. Village of Eau Galle made necessary relocation agree- 1'ents. Mines Creek improvements were accepted by local interests O0 December 12, 1964. SOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- struction engineering for the dam, spillway, and Eau Galle River channel by hired labor cost $56,126. A contract for construction of dam, spillway, and channel improvement was brought to 38 Percent completion at a cost of $2,066,952. Excavation of core trench, construction and dewatering of cofferdam, foundation grouting and work on stilling basin and conduit were in progress under this contract. Due to abandonment of Chicago & North- Western Railway trackage in the area of Mines Creek, a minor contract for closure of levee at that point was awarded. Condition at end of fiscal year. Mines Creek improvements ere completed in 1964 except for minor work which is being ac- EMPlished A contract for dam, spillway, outlet conduit and channel excavation is 38 percent complete. Cofferdam for first section of dam is completed and dewatered and some impervious fill placed and foundation grouted. Work on stilling basin, dis- Charge conduit and discharge channel are in progress. Project s a whole is 43 percent complete. Completion of contracts in force and construction of recreation facilities remain to complete the project. 1112 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total0 to Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3 ,1966 New work: $3383200 Appropriated.......... $209,000 $320,000 $135,000 $400,000$2,000,000 $3,3324 Cost............. .... .206,837 126,949 288,254 392,099 2,123,078 3, 25. GUTTENBERG, IOWA Location. In northeastern Iowa on right bank of MississiPP' River about 615 miles above mouth of Ohio River (See Geological Survey map of Iowa for general location.) Existing project. As modified because of 1965 record flood, project provides for levees at both north and south extremeties of Guttenberg, raising railroad at intersections with levees, con" struction of pumping systems at each levee, reservation of pond- ing areas for temporary storage of seepage and interior drainage North portion of levee will extend from the bluff about 1,600 feet upstream from Jackson Street, thence to and along river banl downstream to upper end of lock and dam 10 at Main Street, at a general elevation of 629 feet above sea level. This levee will be about 7,500 feet long. A pumping station will be at upstream end of this levee. South levee about 2,800 feet long will extend froml intersection of Water and Herman Streets downstream and land- ward of Miner's Creek to the bluff at a general elevation of 628.3 feet. A pumping station will be located at De Kalb Street. Levees together with intervening reach of high ground along riverbank will protect essentially all of city of Guttenberg from floods with an expected frequency of recurrence of once in 154 years. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $2,060, 000. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (I8 Doc. 286, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction of project; hold the United States free from damages; maintain and operate works after completion; make any alterations to utilities, culverts for interior drainage, roads, and highways including necessary widening of levees to provide for roadways, and provision of freeboard on streets and alley portions if needed; and obtain control over pondage areas and prevent encroachment in such areas until substitute areas or equivalent pump or outlet capacity have been provided. Local interests have not been requested to furnish assurances. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructiol planning was started by hired labor for new work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Detailed plans are about 25 percent complete. Completion of preconstruction planning and construction of improvements remain to complete the project. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fisoal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work: Appropriated.......... ........................................ ... $70,000 $70 00 Cost....... ............. ......... ............................ 25,227 25, FLOOD CONTROL---ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1113 26. HIOMME DAM AND RESERVOIR, N. DAK. Location. Dam is on South Branch of Park River, about 4 miles upstream from Park River, N. Dak., and 62.1 miles above mouth of Park River. South, Middle, and North Branches, head- Water streams of Park River, rise in Cavalier County in north- eastern North Dakota and flow easterly to an almost common Confluence near Grafton, N. Dak., forming main stream which loW's easterly 35 miles to join Red River of the North about 35 miles south of international boundary. (For general location, See Geological Survey map of North Dakota.) See page 1285 of Annual Report for 1962. roject wasproject. "pIreisting authorized as Park River Reservoir by 1944 Flood otrol Act (S. Doc. 194, 78th Cong., 2d sess.), and redesignated fomne Reservoir and Dam by Public Law 435, 80th Congress, 2d session. Latest published map is in project document. Estimated Qederal cost (1966) for new work is $1,379,300. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Estimated total costs for all requirements of local cooperation under terms of Project authorization, including required non-Federal contribu- ins, are $62,800. In addition, local interests contributed $16,- .20 for construction of a water-supply outlet through dam and icurred other costs of $19,600. OPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Rec- reational planning by hired labor cost $4,409. Construction of a Parking area and toilets by contract cost $8,114. Maintenance: tructure was operated and minor repairs made by hired labor. t is estimated that $33,300 in damages were prevented during the Year by operation of the project. 1Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed in June 1956 except for additional recreational facilities which have been done intermittently since that time. Construction began 11 April 1948 and major structures completed in May 1951. 8ructures are in good condition. Government has acquired 395.2 acres of land in fee and easements over 7.8 acres of land for Droject. An additional 5.2 acres of land have been donated for recreational development. _Cost and financial statement Pincal Year Total to e * . . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 A~priopriated...........$7,500............ $2,500 $7,000 $5,300 $1,349,097 Cost 1,484 $5,141 148 1,978 12,523 1,348,014 nee: Caintn opriated.......... 8,900 11,200 13,500 22,500 56,000 251,878 8,029 9,978 13,090 18,731 55,600 243,885 udes $56,220 contributed funds for new work. 27. LAC QUI PARLE RESERVOIR, MINNESOTA RIVER, MINN. Location. Works covered by this project lie along Marsh and ac qui Parle Lakes and Minnesota River between head of Marsh Lake and Granite Falls, Minn. (For general location, see Geologi- cal Survey map of Minnesota.) project. See page 1291 of Annual Report for 1962. 'Existing 1114 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Estimated cost (1965) to United States for completion of project is $938,600, including about $379,950 for lands and dal ages. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Project was oper- ated and minor repairs made to structures by hired labor for maintenance. An estimated $102,000 in damages were prevented during the year by operation of the project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project has been operated bY the Government since transfer from State of Minnesota to United States in September 1950. The United States owns fee title to 516.3 acres of land and easements on 19,826.7 acres of land. In 1957, 60.1 acres were withdrawn from public lands for use of Department of the Army. Land acquisition is complete. Construction under present plan of improvement was started il September 1941 and completed in December 1951 except for recreational facilities. All structures are in good condition. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1982 1963 1964 1985 1968 966 June 30, 19 New work: 73 Appropriated.......... $1,000 $557 $168 ........... ......... $93 Cost.................. 5,118 844 166 .. 9.......... 1',073 Maintenance: S 42 Appropriated.......... 20,000 110,700 30,700 $31,500 $35 000 53 Coat................. 2, 29,12134,4913360 109,030 53 11,550 28. LA FARGE RESERVOIR AND CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, KICKAPOO RIVER, WIS. Location. Rises in Monroe County in southwestern Wisconsil and flows south and southwest through Vernon, Richland, and Crawford Counties emptying into Wisconsin River about 16 miles above junction of latter stream with Mississippi River. (For general location see Geological Survey map of Wisconsin.) Existing project. Provides for a dam and reservoir on Kicka- poo River about 1 mile upstream from village of La Farge for flood control, fish and wildlife conservation, general recreation and a reduction of aggradation downstream from reservoir, and for supplemental flood protection at Soldiers Grove and at Gays Mills by construction of levees, and interior drainage facilities and channel enlargement. For details see page 1157 of the An nual Report for 1963. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for nev work is $18,500,000. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Con- trol Act (HI. Doc. 557, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest pub lished map). Reservoir may be undertaken separately frof' downstream protection works. Local cooperation. None required for construction of La Farge Reservoir. For local protection works, local interests must fur- nish lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States free from damages; maintain and operate each usable ele- ment of work after completion; relocate buildings, utilities, high- way bridges, sewers, roads, and other structures required in con- nection with work; and prevent encroachments on improved FLOOD CONTROL-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1115 hiannels, floodways, and ponding areas unless substitute storage or pumping capacity is provided. Local interests have not been requested to furnish assurances. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- lebring for detailed plans has been in progress. Cost by hired Sor was $139,706 and cost by contract for aerial mapping and lotr design of relocations was $104,660. Preliminary work for and acquisition cost $50,864. Condition at end of fiscal year. Detailed plans are about 80 Percent complete. Only preliminary work for land acquisition has been accomplished. Cos.t and financial statement Total to S ... 1962 163 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. A ropriated.......... ............ ............ $65,000 $168,000 $330,518 $563,518 Co . . ,o ......... ..................... 63,161 123,725 295,230 482,117 29. LAKE ASITABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, SHEYENNE RIVER, N. DAK. Location. Baldhill Dam is on Sheyenne River, 16 miles up- stream from Valley City, N. Dak., and about 271 miles above 0outh. Sheyenne River rises in central North Dakota and flows 0 miles generally southeast to enter Red River of the North Sout 10 miles north of Fargo, N. Dak. (For general location ee Geological Survey map of North Dakota.) P'Xisting project. See page 1287 of Annual Report for 1962. ptinated 1'.oject wasFederal cost (1966) of new work is $2,987,100. authorized by Flood Control Act of 1944 (S. Doc. o.9, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map.) Reser- Vor above Baldhill Dam was designated as Lake Ashtabula by public Law 772, 81st Congress, 2d session. CLocal cooperation. See page 1288 of Annual Report for 1962. alplied with except for construction of Fargo diversion dam ald ditch for which assurances furnished by city of Fargo were alIroved by Secretary of War on June 26, 1947. Plans for this eature have been prepared. r1eOPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- lering for recreational facilities was accomplished by hired S tor.Maintenance: Project was operated and minor repairs ade to structures by hired labor. Since early spring discharge tVas reduced for control of an ice jam, later discharges were equal e or slightly greater than inflows eliminating effectiveness of reservoir for flood control. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed in March 1956 except construction of recreational facilities, which is being acomplished intermittently. United States owns 7,816.5 acres 9f land in fee and easements on 666.2 acres. Construction Stated in July 1947 and major features completed in November 1950. Dam was placed in permanent operation in spring of 1951. tructures are in good condition. 1116 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement ;1to. Tota Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jue30, 19661 New work: 732838 Appropriated.......... $4,000 $15,000 $20,000 $7,600 -$3 040 $2,:732'8 34 Cost.................. 6,982 7,499 12,245 17,527 4,029 2, Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 39,000 33,700 43,500 61,500 87,000 566 868 553:379 Cost................. 30,386 41,716 43,154 60,485 79,225 1 Excludes $208,000 contributed funds for new work. 30. LAKE TRAVERSE AND BOIS DE SIOUX RIVER, S. DAK. AND MINN. Location. Works covered by this project lie along Lake Tra- verse and Bois de Sioux River between upper end of Lake Tra- verse at Browns Valley, Minn., and mouth of Bois de Sioux River at Breckenridge, Minn. Lake drains through river to Red River of the North, and the two waters form a portion of boundarY between State of Minnesota and States of North and South Dakota. (For general location, see Geological Survey map,pOf Minnesota.) Existing project. See page 1289 of Annual Report for 1962 Estimated (1966) cost of project is $1,339,800. Existing projec was authorized by Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. Project was operated and minor repairs made to structures v hired labor. It is estimated that damages of $27,800 were pre- vented during the year by operation of project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co" pleted in June 1948, except for minor recreation facilities. Fee title to 1,144.13 acres and easements on 6,155.35 acres of lan1d have been acquired. White Rock Dam and Reservation control structures are in operation, and structures and appurtenances are in good condition. Roadways across structures are open to public travel. Cost and financial statement FTotal Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 to June 30, 19 New work: g21 Appropriated......... ....................... $127 ........................ $1,333 127................ ....................... . 3921 Cost....127 Maintenance: 370 Appropriated..........$25,000 Cost......... ....... 23,619 $20,731 19,534 26,000 24,352 $34,500 32,878 $50,000 38,043 ,,6l 31. LOST RIVER, MINN. Location. Tributary of Clearwater River in Polk, Red Lake, and Clearwater Counties in northwestern Minnesota. (For gef eral location see Geological Survey map of Minnesota.) Existing project. Project authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act provided for improvements on Lost River and Ruffy Brook' Authorization of the Ruffy Brook portion expired in April 1966, Improvements on Lost River provide for channel clearing and FLOOD CONTROL-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1117 snagging, deepening, widening or straightening and appurtenant Work. For details see page 1041 of Annual Report for 1965. -stinated Federal cost (1966)of new work at Lost Jiver is $520,000 and $248,000 to be contributed by local interests. Proij- ect Was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 141, 84th 1ong., 2d sess., contains latest published map) Local cooperation. Improvement is subject to condition that local interests for Lost River provide lands and rights-of-way or construction; hold the United States, free from damages; aintain and operate all works after completion; make all changes to Utilities, highways, and highway bridges, including approaches; cotribute in cash or equivalent construction work 32.3 percent Ofgross Federal first cost; and construct and, maintain local ralnage works required to utilize improved major outlets. As- Urances for Lost River were accepted April 15, 1963. Red ake Drainage and Conservancy District furnished lands and cash contribution. Local cooperation was not furnished for,Ruffy trook Operations and results during fiscal year. New work:: , Con- struction engineering by hired labor cost $5,728. A contract for hannel excavation and appurtenant work on Lost River was sub- stantially completed at a cost for the year of $230,430, including $14,326 Federal funds and $216,104 contributed funds. t Condition at end of fiscal year. Lost River improvements started in September 1963 were completed in December 1965 ex- celt for minor work. Completion of minor work will complete 1)roject. Channels are in good condition. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS ical Year Total to year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 ewWork:. P ropriated.........-$42,000 -$5,000 $15,800 $234,200. $566,000 ot................ 16,377 27,389 159,209 206,927 $20,054 542,681 SIncludes $46,034 for Ruffy Brook unit for which authorization has expired.' CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ia Total to ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NeWork: ontributed................... $382,000 1-$125,000 .. .. .... $257,000 ost ....... ....... .. ............ 23,000 $4,6819 $216,105i 243,924 xiefunded to local interests. 32. MANKATO AND NORTH MANKATO, MINN. Location. Along Minnesota River between miles 103.5 and 109.5 near Mankato, North Mankato, and Le Hillier, in south central Minnesota. (For general location see Geological Survey of Minnesota.) DaP ,xisting project. As modified as a result of severe 1965 flood, D1ovides for protection for North Mankato and for Mankato above arren Creek as well as the community of Le Hillier adjacent to 1118 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Mankato. Protection will be accomplished by channel improve- ment on Minnesota River below Belgrade Avenue bridge and a portion of Blue Earth River and by levees and drainage struc- tures. In North Mankato, levees would follow along U.S. HJigh- way 169 from southwesterly city limit to Belgrade Avenue. Be- yond Belgrade Avenue, would be a 500-foot floodwall and levee would then continue downstream along river to Lake Street and then to high ground. This barrier including existing levees downstream of McKinley Avenue will be about 4.4 miles long. In Mankato, levee will extend from U.S. Highway 169 along Blue Earth River to right bank of Minnesota River and thence along Minnesota River to Warren Creek, tying back to high ground along left bank of Warren Creek near Front Street. Existing levees will be utilized and improved wherever possible. This barrier including high ground at Sibley Park will be about 2.9 miles long. Community of Le Hillier will be protected fro", high flows by a levee along left bank of Blue Earth River to the east and along the Chicago and Northwestern Railway track to the north. This levee will total about 1.7 miles. Three pumping' stations in Mankato and one at Le Hillier will be built and two lift stations in North Mankato will be modified. Appropriate 1i terior drainage facilities will also be constructed. Estimate Federal cost (1966) for new work is $5,200,000. Project wTs authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 437, 84th Coj1M 2d sess., contains latest published map). Project was modified by 1965 Flood Control Act. Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction of project, hold the United States free from damages, maintain and operate works after completiO, make necessary changes to utilities, highways, and bridges "d cluding approaches, prevent encroachment on ponding areas ad improved river channels, use the three pumps in existing Indian Creek pumping station, remove remaining portion of Blue Earth River dam and contribute in cash or equivalent construction wor 1.9 percent of gross Federal first cost, presently estimated to be $99,000. Section 207, 1965 Flood Control Act modified require- ments of local cooperation to credit local interests against the re- quired contribution for work done by them during 1965 high water period. Local interests have expended about $315,000 i such work. Assurances of local cooperation have not been re- quested. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of de- tailed plans was resumed by hired labor for new work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on detailed planfs virtually completed, was suspended in 1962 due to lack of loca cooperation. Following the record flood in 1965 work was re- sumed. Revision of detailed plans is 60 percent complete. FLOOD CONTROL--ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1119 Cost and financial statement a Year Total to Sear............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work-. APpropriated.......... .......... ... ................................... $100,000 $271,800 0t ........... ............ ............ ............ ............ 68,012 239,812 33. RED LAKE RIVER, MINN., INCLUDING CLEARWATER RIVER, MINN. Location. Works covered by this project lie along upper reach of Red Lake River and also along Clearwater River, a tributary of Red Lake River, between a point near Plummer, Minn., and a point just above mouth of Ruffy Brook. Red Lake River, Drincipal tributary of Red River of the North, has its source at outlet of Lower Red Lake in northwestern portion of Min- resota and flows westerly about 196 miles to its junction with Red River of the North at East Grand Forks, Minn. Clearwater River has a general westerly course from its source near Ebro, Minn., about 205 miles to its junction with Red Lake River at Red Lake Falls, Minn. (For general location, see Geological Survey Mlap of Minnesota.) LExisting project. See page 1282 of Annual Report for 1962. ,stinated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $3,116,000 com- Dosed of $3,105,000 for construction by the Corps and $11,000 for bridge approaches by Bureau of Indian Affairs. Project was authorized by 1944 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 345, 78th Cong., st sess., contains latest published map.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- neering to restore water levels in Red Lake River marshes was acconmplished by hired labor at a cost of $13,391. A contract for construction of a new bridge on Clearwater Road over the Clear- Water River was completed under the direction of the Indian Service at a cost to the Corps of $539 for the year. A contract for Work to restore water levels in marshes of the Red Lake River was started in April 1966. Cost of this work for the year Was $74,501. Total cost of new work by contract was $75,040. aintenance: Structures were operated and maintained and rniscellaneous inspections and reports were made by hired labor. it is estimated that operation of the Red Lake dam resulted in savings in damages from floods of about $95,000 during the year. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of major im- Drovements on Red Lake lRiver initiated in February and the Jlearwater River initiated in October 1948 were completed in une 1956. Replacement of rock-and-brush dam on Red Lake River at Indian boundary with a concrete structure and ap- Purtenant work was completed in June 1959 to restore marshes "I area to better wildlife conditions. Construction of bridge on Clearwater Road was completed by the Indian Service in July 61965. A contract for improvements on Red Lake River is about percent complete. Operation of Red Lake Dam was assumed Y the Corps on April 1, 1951. Channels are in good condition and indicate effectiveness of project as a flood control measure. 1120 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Totalt Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1 New work: $1,000 Appropriated...................... $5,000 $47,000 $206,000 $3,075049 Cost.................. 767 3,984 41,790 88,431 2,97 Maintenance: .$8,000 Appropriated.......... 6,569 31,200 11,500 14,000 42379 Cost............. ..... 6,954 8,115 13,142 28,459 8,6681 35,422 1 Excludes $30,020 contributed funds for new work. 34. RED RIVER OF THE NORTH DRAINAGE BASIN, MINN., .S. DAK., & N. DAK. Location. Red River of the North Basin, within the United States, includes northeastern corner of South Dakota and much of eastern North Dakota and northwestern Minnesota. Red River of the North, formed by confluence of Otter Tail and Bois de Sioux Rivers, flows northward through this region, formning boundary between North Dakota and Minnesota. (For general location of basin, see Geological Survey maps of Minnesota and North Dakota.) Previous projects. See page 1278 of Annual Report for 1962 for navigation and flood control projects in the basin, not part of this project. Existing project, Project includes improvements for local protection in interests of flood control and major drainage ac- complished by channel improvement, levees, etc., in addition to construction of a multiple-purpose reservoir on Otter Tail River to control floods and, in conjunction with previously authorized Federal reservoir project at Baldhill site of Sheyenne River and at Red Lake, to increase low flows for water supply and pollutionl abatement. Active units in comprehensive basin plan are: mted Total est- Name of unit State Type (19m Fed eral 0870 cost -:~~~~~~ ................... Orwell Reservoir (Otter Tail River)......... Minnesota.......... Reservoir..................... 151,908,1 Wild Rice and Marsh Rivers....................do............. Channel improvement.......405,10 Rush River......... .... North Dakota. .... ... .......... do ................. ... ...... 290,700 Sand Hill River.......................... ... Minnesota ......... ..... do .................... 548 Mustinka River..... .................. ... do..... do........................... 440,80 Otter 'rail River......... .... .. ... ... do.. ... ..... do................... ... 174800 Red River at Grand Forks..... ........ North Dakota...... Levees and floodwall............ 948900 Red River at Fargo............... .... ..... ... do............. Channel improvement, levees ... 21,639900 Total estimated cost..... ................................................. 36,357,0 1Includes $178,000 for lands and $17,000 for retreation facilities. s Includes $67,900 for lands. 8 See p. 1279 of Annual Report for 1962 for units deferred for restudy, inactive units an units on which authorization has expired, not included. Project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1948 ad 1950. ;Public Works Appropriation Act, 1957, authorized Chief of Engineers to acquire such lands as were beyond legal authoritY of city of Grand Forks to acquire. Latest published map is i1 House Document 185, 81st Congress, 1st session. Local cooperation. See page 1039 of Annual Report for 1965. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Rec FLOOD CONTROL-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1121 reational planning and planning for Rush River remedial work Were carried on by hired labor. Maintenance: Orwell Dam was operated as required and necessary repairs made by hired labor. A a result of operation of the dam it is estimated that damages rom flooding in the amount of $34,000 were prevented during the Year. Condition at end of fiscal year. Major construction for all active units is complete. A total of 1,985 acres of land for twell Reservoir is owned in fee by the United States. See 'ge1281 of Annual Report for 1962 for periods of completion active units of project other than Fargo. Work at Fargo, SDak., started in May 1959, was completed in July 1963. Proj- Oct as a whole is complete except for recreational facilities at r ell Reservoir. STotal costs to June 30, 1966, for new work are as follows: Unit Costs Orwell R eservoir.........................$1,893,897 Wld Ric Rash Riv -Marsh Rivers.................................405,056 and lii] er ................ ...................................... 242,378 Mustinka River............................................................548,778 Otter TA Grand Fo Fargo. , River...... ....................................... 948,898................. 1,639,924 O To Rled tal oftheNorth.............................................. River 16,294,484 1 Cost .Crocken s of following deferred or inactive units not included: Sheyenne, $37,956; Wahpeton- has exD ridge, $11,239. Authorization of East Grand Forks, Moorhead, and Maple River units )ired. Costs of these units total $86,141. * Coq Well] sts to June 30, 1966, for operation and maintenance of Or- Dam are $264,008. Total costs for active portion of project are $6,558,492. In J,1R Uted i addition,$350,034 expended from contrib- funds for work done for local interests. _ Cost and financial statement Fliscal yer Total to 181 Yei 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Apropriated.......... $122,000 $10,000 -$459 $2,500 $22,400 $6,452,041 Coat Maintena S14,606 109,619 9,853 950 1,729 6,429,821 Appr opriated.......... 16,000 18,700 24,600 33,500 27,600 Cost 275,611 ............. 15,377 17,806 25,562 31,917 20,024 264,008 ha,'Lrcludes costs of the following deferred or inactive units and units on which authorization $37 9Xiredl; East Grand Forks, $57,200: Maple River, $1,241; Moorhead, $27,700; Sheyenne. $14'056; Wahpeton-Breckenridge, $11,239. In addition, $203,874 special deposit funds and by160 other contributed funds expended for work done under Government contract paid for local interests. 35. ROSEAU RIVER, MINN. SLocation. In Roseau County and northeastern Kittson County, orthwestern Minnesota, and in south-central Manitoba, Can- aa, (For general location of the works in United States see Geological Survey map of Minnesota.) fExisting project. Provides for improvement of Roseau River or flood control by channel enlargement, clearing, and realign- stent of the river from the dam at Roseau, mile 137.5, down- Stream to mile 93.8, being a point 2.6 miles upstream from the 1122 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 International Boundary. Three short reaches of levee will be built in the United States and remedial works will be constructed in Canada at the expense of the United States, made necessary bY improvements on Roseau River in the United States. Estimated cost (1966) to the United States for new work is $2,880,000, including $430,000 for cost of work in Canada to be accomplished with United States funds. Project was authorized by Flood Control Act of 1965 (II. Doc. 282, 89th Cong., 1st sess.) Latest published map is in project document. Local cooperation. Local interests must provide all lands for project construction; provide all relocations and betterments, hold the United States free from damages, maintain and operate all works, prevent encroachment on Roseau River channel it United States, construct and maintain associated drainage works, and organize a proper legal entity to provide local cooperation including the associated drainage works. Local interests have not been requested to furnish local cooperation. Operationsand results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. None. 36. RUSHFORD, MINN. Location. At confluence of Root River and Rush Creek ad, jacent to city of Rushford in Fillmore County in southeaster" Minnesota. Confluence of streams is 32.5 miles above mouth of Root River, a tributary of Mississippi River. (For general loca- tion, see Geological Survey map of Minnesota.) Existing project. Provides for improvements on Root River and Rush Creek to protect city of Rushford from floods expected to occur once in 200 years. Plan of improvement as modified bY detailed design studies provides for channel improvement of 6,860 feet, including two cutoffs, along Root River and 5,600 fleet along Rush Creek; construction of 5,101 feet of levee along left bank of Root River; 4,661 feet of levee along right bank of Rush Creek and 6,108 feet of levee and 510 feet of concrete floodWNvall along left bank of Rush Creek; and construction of one sandbag closure and interior drainage facilities. Five pumping stations will be improved or constructed. U.S. Highway 16 bridge over Root River and State HIighway 43 bridge over Rush Creek will be raised by local interests, and railroad grade will be raised. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $2,550,000. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 431, 84th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States free fro,, damages; maintain and operate works after completion; manke necessary changes to utilities, highways, and highway bridges il' cluding approaches; furnish existing 1,200-gallon-per-minute pump in Rushford sewage plant and existing 75- and 100-gallofl per-minute pumps in Rushford Avenue sewage lift station; and prevent encroachment on pondage areas, collecting ditches, ad improved channels including any alternative facilities. Local interests requested to furnish assurances on January 31, 1966. FLOOD CONTROL-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1123 The city obtained approval for project from the court in April 1966. bOperations and results during fiscal year. Detailed plans have een completed and contract plans and specifications were sub- stantially completed, both by hired labor for new work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is P5ercent complete. Construction of improvements is scheduled o be started in the next fiscal year. -Cost and financial statement S Year.............. y.. 1962 acalTotal 1963 1964 1965 1966 to June 30, 1966 Newwork: 0i)ropriated........... ..... $50,000 $40,000 $80,0000 $110,000 $281,979 Cost*................. ............ 26,825 58,865 80,296 111,929 279,894 37. ST. PAUL AND SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINN. Location. At St. Paul and South St. Paul, Minn., on right bank of Mississippi River between miles 843 and 832 above mouth of Ohio River. (For general location see Geological Survey map of Milnnesota.) S.xisting project. Provides for protection of west side area of St.Paul, exclusive of airport area, by means of levees, floodwalls, and interior-drainage facilities and for protection of South St. Paul by raising and extending existing flood barrier and providing ditional facilities for interior drainage. Improvements at St. Paul are designed with a freeboard of 3 feet to protect against a Peak floodflow of 168,000 cubic feet per second. At request of city of St. Paul, an additional area to be used as an industrial Dark was protected with payment by the ciecty. Flood barrier at St. Paul exctnds about 3 miles, including about 11,100 feet of earth levee, 3,100 feet of floodwall and appurtenant works, in- cluding 13 closure structures and three pumping stations. At Outh St. Paul the flood barrier is designed to protect against a eak flow of 190,000 cubic feet per second with a 3-foot freeboard. lood barrier will be continuous for 2.8 miles, providing a com- Plete inclosure for meat packing plants and stockyards, consisting of 11,640 feet of earth levee, 2,380 feet of floodwalls, four closure structures totaling about 529 feet, interior-drainage facilities in- cluding two new pumping stations and conversion of lower reach Sexisting Wentworth Avenue sewer into a pressure conduit. Estimated cost (1966) for new work at St. Paul is $2,850,000 and $475,000 to be contributed by local interests under authorized roject. Estimated U.S. cost (1966) for new work at South St. aul is $5,730,000 and $110,000 to be contributed by local in- terests. An additional $203,000 was contributed by city of St. Paul to cover work they requested. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 223, 85th Cong., 1st sess., con- tailns latest published map). rLocal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States free from damages; maintain and operate works after completion; make all necessary changes to utilities, highways, and highway bridges 1124 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 including approaches; and furnish in cash or equivalent construe- tion work a contribution equal to 14.3 percent of gross Federal first cost of improvements at St. Paul and 1.89 percent of that at South St. Paul. Assurances for South St. Paul were accepted October 29, 1964. City has furnished lands and required con" tributed funds including work on sewers in lieu of a portion of the cash contribution. Local cooperation for St. Paul has been fully complied with. Completed portion of that project waS turned over to city on July 15, 1963. Operations and results during fiscal year. St. Paul: lis- cellaneous engineering by hired labor cost $10,013. A contract for remedial work at Wabasha Street bridge was substantially completed and payments on claims were made at a cost by con- tract of $81,575. South St. Paul: Plans and specifications were completed and construction engineering accomplished at a cost of $73,480. A contract for improvements at South St. Paul was awarded and brought to 17 percent completion. Four minor re- location contracts were awarded and work was accomplished as required in conjunction with the main contract. Costs for the year for these jobs were $1,033,726. Removal of wing dams if preparation for construction of levees was done by hired labor at a cost of $42,828. City of South St. Paul completed work on Wentworth Avenue sewer, being done in lieu of part of the cash contribution, for which final costs have not been determined. Federal costs for the year were $126,321 by hired labor and $1,115,301 by contract, all for new work. Condition at end of fiscal year. St. Paul: This portion of the project is physically completed. Installation of relief valves in outfall lines and payment of claims on stage I construction re- main to complete this unit of the project. Total cost to date of this unit is $2,722,617 Federal funds and $464,000 contributed funds, a total of $3,186,617. South St. Paul: A contract for in" provements is 17 percent complete. Four minor relocation proJ ects are in progress. Completion of these contracts will con*" plete the project. Total cost to date for this unit is $1,807,226 Federal funds. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1960 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 i!963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1066 New work: Contributed........... $20,000 . ... -$200,000............$111,000 23807,0O Cost .................. 159,829 $230,000 2,637 -$27,400 3,000 3668,060 Refunded to local interests. Includes $231,000 for work being done at request of local interests. 8 Includes $204,066 expended for work being done at request of local interests. FLOOD CONTROL-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1125 38. WARROAD RIVER & BULL DOG CREEK, MINN. Location. Vicinity of Warroad, Minn., near mouth of Warroad iver in north-central Minnesota, near International Boundary. arroad River flows into Lake of the Woods, a part of Hudson ay drainage system. (For general location see Geological.Sur- Vey map of Minnesota.) Eisting project. Provides for enlarging, straightening, and clearing about 8.6 miles of Warroad River extending upstream Iom East Branch, the lower 7.5 miles and 4.5 miles on East Sranch and Bull Dog Creek, respectively, entire 4-mile reachof county ditch 10 including 1 mile of diverson ditch, and entire 9.2 Wiles of county ditch 6. Also included are a control structure on varroad River at outlet of Reserve ditch system, a levee along arroad River to prevent overflow into adjacent Roseau River 3asin, seven drop structures, paved grade crossings and other work. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $1,170,000 and $112,000 to be contributed by local interests. Project was au- thorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. (H. Doc. 499, 87th Cong., 2d sess. contains latest published map.) Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash or quivalent construction work 9.9 percent of gross Federal con- struction cost (exclusive of county ditch 6), to be paid either in a lump sum prior to construction start, or in installments prior to Start of pertinent work items in accordance with construction chedules as required by Chief of Engineers, final contribution to r e determined after actual costs are known; provide lands and rghts-of-way for construction including changes to highway channel crossings and miscellaneous utilities; hold the United tates free from damages; maintain and operate works after com- Pletion; prevent encroachment on proposed rights-of-way and Improved channels; provide an organization capable of furnishing equired local cooperation; and construct and maintain associated rainage works needed to effectively use improved outlet system. ocal interests have not been requested to furnish assurances. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction plan- ing was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Detailed plans are 10 percent coraplete. Cost and financial statement ViscalYear Totalto yea r*.. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Applropriated . . .. Work. . ... ... C.Pop riated .......... ............................................... $98,000 $98,000 17,564 17,564 39. WINONA, MINN. SLocation. At Winona, Minn., in southeastern Minnesota on right bank of Mississippi River about 725 miles above mouth of tio River. (For general location see Geological Survey map of iesota.) St Existing project. Plan of improvement provides for raising, rengthening, and extension of existing protection dikes and 1126 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 levees and installation and operation of facilities considered nec- essary for interior drainage. Detailed plans as modified because of severe flood of 1965, for raising existing lock and dam 5A dike about 4 feet about 2.9 miles providing a public roadway and three parking areas thereon for recreational purposes; raising existing Prairie Island dike about 6.5 feet for about 1.8 miles; and raising Crooked Slough levee an average of about 5 feet for about 1.4 miles. Project will also include raising and extending existing city-built levee downstream from outlet of Lake Winona. Extent of this portion is under further study. Plans for handling surface runoff and seepage from protected areas landward of flood barriers include construction of two pumping stations, 1in terceptor ditches and sewers, and alteration of several drainage structures. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for new work 1is $2,248,000 and $18,000 to be contributed by local interest. Stage II and closure for stage I portion of the project is deferred for restudy and excluded from foregoing estimate. Estimated cost (1965) of this portion is $1,020,000 Federal and $17,000 contribution by local interests. Project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 324, 84th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States free fro' damages; maintain and operate improvements (except lock and dam 5A dike) ; make changes to utilities, highways, and highwaY bridges, including approaches and including proposed 2 4-inch drain near station 214+80 and alterations to existing sanitarY sewer at Olmstead and Second Street; obtain legal control over pondage areas and prevent encroachment in such areas until substitute areas of necessary additional pump or outlet capacitY have been provided; and contribute in cash or equivalent work I amount equal to 0.8 percent of Federal cost of project. AssUr ances of local cooperation were accepted February 14, 1964. Lo- cal interests furnished lands and cash contribution for stage I. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering for redesign of stage I, construction engineering and public contactS for stage II prior to reclassification of that portion of the project were accomplished by hired labor at a cost of $61,742. Partial payment was made on terminated contract for stage I at a cost Of $106,605. A new contract for stage I, termed stage Ib, Was awarded and brought to 46 percent completion at a cost for year of $660,600. Prairie Island levee was brought to about 75 per* cent complete, Crooked Slough levee to 40 percent completion, and Olmstead Street pumping station was brought to about 50 per- cent completion under this contract. Other work is in progress, Cost for the year was $61,742 by hired labor and $767,205 bY construction, all for new work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Termination proceedings were in progress for the initial contract on stage I (Ia). Work oi stage Ib was started in October 1965 and is 46 percent complete. A contract with the Chicago & Northwestern Railway CompanY is in force but no work has been done. Project as a whole is 53 percent complete exclusive of portion deferred for restudy. FLOOD CONTROL-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1127 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Neal YearTotal to 1............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New work:. propriated.......... $82,000 $40,000 $80,000 $579,700 $400,000 $1,261,700 t .................. 68,354 64,505 84,053 86,533 828,947 1,181,790 0lu de O 1 -1 1,500 for inactive portion. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 'Leal Year . .. Total to .year 1962 1960 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Cotributed............... ............... ............ $13,000 $7,000 $20,000 Cost.. ... ............................................... 18,000 18,000 40. ZUMBRO RIVER, MINN. Location. Lower end of Zumbro River, in Wabasha County in Southeastern Minnesota, between Kellogg, Minn., and its mouth at the Mlississippi River. (For general location, see Geological Sur- Vey map of Minnesota.) "Existingproject. Provides for a system of continuous setback levees on both banks, totaling about 23,260 feet, excavation of tW0 channel cutoffs totaling 7,000 feet, and protection of about a,300 feet of riverbank in areas susceptible to bank erosion, all to alleviate damages from flooding. Estimated cost (1966) to the United States for new work is $1,220,000, and $18,000 to be eo.tributed by local interests. Project was authorized by 1965 1a ood Control Act (I. Doc. 246, 88th Cong., 2d sess., contains test published map). Local cooperation. Local interests must provide all lands for 'construction;hold the United States free from damages; con- tribute in cash an amount equal to 1.5 percent of cost of con- Struction, to be paid in a lump sum prior to start of construction; 'un tain completed works; alter utilities, highways, highway WUdges, and approaches; and prevent encroachments which Ould reduce flood-carrying capacity of Zumbro River channel d areas between levees. Local interests have not been re- quested to furnish assurances of local cooperation. 0 Perations and results daring fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. None. 41. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS chFollowing projects were inspected to determine that project alnels are kept clean and unobstructed, dikes and revetments are in good condition and structures are in good repair and op)erable. Deficiencies, if any, were minor unless noted. Aitl hall Project Minn. ........................... October 1965 Date inspected 1lt Park Creek, Bayfield, Wis. ............ Do. -chrane Drainage )itch, Wis ............. July 1965 run, Decorah, Iowa..................October 1965' go, N. Dak .......................... November 1965' ee footnotes next page. 1128 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Project Date inspected Forest River, N. Dak...................... Do. Grand Forks, N. Dak ..................... September 1965 Maple River, N. Dak...................... January 1965 Marshall, Minn. .......................... November 1965'1 Mines Creek, Spring Valley, Wis ........... August 1965 Minneota, Minn ........................... November 1965 Mustinka River, Minn. ..................... Do. Otter Tail River, Minn. .................... Do. Park River, N. Dak....................... Do. 1 Red Lake-Clearwater Rivers, Minn. ......... Do. Redwood River, Minn. ..................... Do. Rush River, N. Dak. ....................... Do.' St. Paul, Minn..,........................ July 1965' Sand Hill River, Minn.....................November 1965' Sheyenne River, N. Dak .................. .. Do. Trempealeau River, Arcadia, Wis.......... July 1965 Upper Iowa River, Iowa ................. .. . October 1965 Wild Rice-Marsh Rivers, Minn. ............. Do. 1Major deficiency. Costs for the year were $6,547. Total cost to June 30, 1966 was $45,097. 42. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30,1966 full report -- Name of project see Annual t Report Construction Opera ion an for- maintensae Marshall, Minn.1.. ................. ............... ...... 1964 1,802,866.. Mellen, Wis.2.. .1960 7,202 .. . Minneota, Minn.1 3.. 1963 161,545 .. Mississippi River near'Aitlin,'Min n.1 . .... o : ...... 1957 1,675,835 ... Odanah, Wis.4 n r I..... 1962 31,941.. Pembina River Reservoir, N. Dak.5............................ 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1950 50,000 .. Tongue River Reservoir, 1N. Dak. 1950 23,695. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Upper Iowa River, Iowa 1964 888,445 .. Upper Mississippi River Basin (St. Paul Diet.), Black River Reservoir, 1950 ....... .............. Wia6. 1Completed. SInactive, lack of economic feasibility. SProject authorized by Chief of Engineers under small project authority, section 205, 194 Flood Control Act. Inactive, lack of local cooperation. 5 Further work deferred pending review of project document (inactive). e Has not been selected for construction (inactive). 43. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) e y Fiscal VO Study identification costs Bonnes Coulee, Velva, N. Dak............................... $261,098 Browns Valley, Unnamed Coulee, Minn......................... 6,1400 Carver, Minn, Minnesota River' .............................. 00 Chaska, Minn., Minnesota River ............................... 9, 100 Cochrane, Wis., Mississippi River .............................. 4,448 . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 50 0 Delano, Minn., S. Fk., Crow River 9 Eau Claire, Wis., Chippewa River ....................... . 1, Elk River, Minn., Mississippi River .......................... 24,21 Fargo, N. Dak .............................................. .s420 Grand Forks, N. Dak. '99....................................... Hastings, Minn., Vermillion River ............................ 6,930 Henderson, Minn., Minnesota River ' -.......................... 3148 Hutchinson, Minn., S. Fk., Crow River ........................ 8,4 Le Hillier, Minn., Minnesota River 1. ......... See footnotes next page. GENERAL INVESTIGATION-ST. PAUL, MINN., DISTRICT 1129 Fork River, Cook, Minn. ................................. Little 289 Madebiae, Minn Watonwan River . ............................. 500 S Sanitary Dist., Minn.. .................... 1,600 0nt1 eplis-St. Paul.......................................... eo, Mnn. 2,498 OoOnagoOn, Mich . ............................................ iv o 2,500 Obslo, Minn., Red River of North .............................. '3,409 ub'in Minn Red River of North' ............................ 2 800 Stush River, Lower Branch, N. Dak. ........................... 30,530 To Vincent, Minn. (Red River of North). ....................... 2 23 ,gue River, N. Dak ....................................... 2,358 Tnfavorable. a nder special continuing authorities. Aeloudies$392 under special continuing authorities. W'OStudies. 'mergencyflood control activities---repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) A Project Federal cost lvance preparation .......................................... $9,624 Plood emergency operations: UPper Mississippi River basin .................... $155,464 Red River of the North basin ..................... 235,071 Flood damage surveys (reimbursement) (net) ...... .52,519 R aTotal flood emergency operations ........ . *........... 443,054 eDair and restoration: Zumbro River, Minn............................. 25,780 Black River, Wis................................ 1,451 Chaska, Minn... . . . ............................ ..... 10,833 Fargo, N Dak. .............................. ... 53 Yellow Medicine River, Minn.................... .. 1,419 Marshall Minn. ............................... 12,018 Sand Hill River, Minn..... o.................... 11,994 St. Paul, Minn. ................................... 5,500 Damage survey ............. .................... 2,355 Total repair and restoration ............................ 71,403 Total emergency flood control activities ................... 524,081 44. SURVEYS Navigation studies continued at fiscal year cost of $12,386. XglOod control studies continued at a fiscal year cost of $368,010. lecial studies in coordination with Soil Conservation Service on Watershed studies and Upper Mississippi River Basin study were Conducted at a cost for fiscal year of $51,060. 45. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Fiscal year costs were $9,506 for International Joint Commis- ion activities for regulation of Lake of the Woods, and $1,199 for flood plain information studies, a total of $10,705. 46. RESEARCHI AND DEVELOPMENT C iscal year cost was $38,581 for streamflow data obtained by orps gaging beyond cooperative stream-gaging program, for ledraulic laboratory work in measurement and analysis of sedi- ent load in streams, and for preparation of a report on in- vestigations for high-lift locks. ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT * This district comprises portions of western Illinois, southwest- ern Wisconsin, southern and southwestern Minnesota, eastern and central Iowa, and northeastern Missouri, embraced in drain- age basin of Mississippi River and its eastern and western tributaries between mile 300 (above mouth of Ohio River) and at , and of its eastern tributaries only, between Hamburg Bay, a. mile 261 and 300. This district also includes Illinois and t Ississippi Canal and n ofMississippi drainage basin of Bureau Creek, Ill. Sec- River between mile 300 and 614 is included in report on Mississippi River between Missouri River and Minne- apolis, Minn. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Flood Control-Continued 1. Illinois and Mississippi 20. Iowa River-Flint C ree k 2 Canal, Ill............. 1132 Levee District No. 16, 2. Mill Creek and South Iowa ................. 1142 3. Slough at Milan, Ill... 1132 21. Marion County Drainage Mississippi River between District, Mo .......... 1142 Missouri River and Min- 22. Marshalltown, Iowa River, 4 neapolis, Minn........ 1133 Iowa ................ 1143 SSquaw Chute at Quincy, 23. Muscatine Island Levee Ill ................... 1133 District and Muscatine- Louisa County Drainage Alteration of Bridges District No. 13, Iowa .. 1143 5. Authorized alteration of 24. New Hartford, Iowa .... 1144 Bridges ............... 1133 25. Red Rock Dam and Lake Red Rock, Iowa ...... 1145 Flood Control 26. Rock Island, Ill......... 1146 6. Ames Reservoir, S k u n k 27. Saylorville Reservoir, Des SCRiver, Iowa .......... Moines River, Iowa .... 1146 1133 28. Sny Basin, Ill. .......... 1147 Central City Reservoir, Upper Mississippi River 29. Sny Island Levee Drainage District, Ill .......... 1148 * Coasin, Iowa......... 1134 30. South Quincy Drainage and Coralville Reservoir, Upper Levee District, Ill ..... 1149 Mississippi River Basin, 31. South River Drainage Dis- D ow a .................. 1135 9. Des Moines and Mississippi trict, Mo ............. 1149 10. D evee District No. 1, Mo. 32. Subdistrict No. 1 of Drain- 1136 age Union No. 1 and Bay D Moines River at Des 11. Moines, Iowa ......... Island Drainage and 1136 Levee District No. 1, Ill. 1150 12. Dubuque, Iowa .......... 1137 33. Upper Mississippi River 13 Freeport, Ill ........... 1137 Basin (Rock Island Green Bay Levee and 1150 Drainage District No. 2, Dist.) ................ 34. Waterloo, Cedar River, 14 Iowa .............. . 1138 Iowa ................ 1151 1.Gregory Drainage District, 35. Inspection of completed 16. , 15. I i bMo. M. **.. **.**..**..* . .. 16. He, o .......... , County Henderson 1139 36. flood control projects . Other authorized flood con- Drain- trol projects .......... 1152 17 age District No. 1, Ill.. 1140 37. Flood control work under 17' enerson County Drain- 18. District No. 2, Ill... special authorization .. 1153 ,age 1140 Hunt Drainage District General investigations and Lima Lake Drainage 38. Surveys ............... 1154 9. District, Ill............ 19. Indian Grave Drainage 1141 39. Collection and study of basic data ........... 1154 District, Ill........... . 1141 40. Research and development 1154 1132 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 1. ILLINOIS AND MISSISSIPPI CANAL, ILL. Location. Extends for 75 miles from Illinois River near La- Salle to Mississippi River at Rock Island. Existing project. This obsolete canal is being repaired and modified prior to transfer to State of Illinois as part of the State park system. See pages 1306-1308 of Annual Report for 1962 for details. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. None. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance to pre- vent further deterioration of canal structures cost $241,561. Work under repair and modification program continued at cost of $586,539. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project completed in 1918. Canal has not been operated for navigation since June 1951. Repair and modification program to be accomplishled prior to disposal of canal initiated in fiscal year 1961, and a nUfll ber of canal features have been repaired or modified. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1063 1064 1965 1966 June 30, 1968 New work: 143 Appropriated............ ................................................ 1$7,60 i143 Cost.............................. .................................. ............ 7,605 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $402,020 $233,000 $572,000 $1,208,900 $449,430 210,771120 Cost.................304,822 287,434 456,793 773,278 828,100 10,533 3:723 1Includes $25,000 emergency relief funds., 2Includes $4,143,282 for operating and care under "Permanent Indefinite Appropriation" 2. MILL CREEK AND SOUTH SLOUGH AT MILAN, ILL. Location. Mill Creek and South Slough at Milan, Rock Island County, Ill. Previous project. See page 1132, Annual Report for 1932, and page 1081, Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. For flood protection at Milan, 1930 River and Harbor Act provided for diversion of Mill Creek into South Slough, flood gates in walls of Illinois and Mississippi Canal to carry Mill Creek flood waters across canal right-of-way into RocK River, levees, and other works. Project was modified to restore original Mill Creek outlet into Rock River. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Minor channel maintenance was performed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was coln" pleted in 1932 Cost for existing project to June 30, 1966, Ws $200,024, of which $63,634 was for new work and $136,390 for maintenance. In addition, $73,366 was expended in 1962-63 from Illinois and Mississippi maintenance funds for restoration of Mill Creek outlet into Rock River. FLOOD CONTROL---ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1133 Cost and financial statement Nsal YTotal to a .. *1962 1963 1964 1905 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. A opropriated. 163,710 Cos.t. ......................... ..... I........................... . 1$63,719 Maintenance: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 163,719 1 . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . . c opriated.......... $950 $4,900 $4,900 $4,900 $5,000 144,630 S... ...... 1,667 5,735 4,344 2,294 15 136,390 SIncludes $85 for previous project. 3. MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. For report on this improvement see page 1155. 4. SQUAW CIIUTE AT QUINCY, ILL. SLocation. Squaw Chute, an embayment of Quincy Bay, which Sturn is an embayment of the Mississippi River, at Quincy, Ill., 327.2 miles above mouth of Ohio River. Existing project. Consists of a small-boat harbor in.Squaw Chute, with project depth of 5 feet. An entrance channel, 600 by 100 feet, will be dredged to Quincy Bay. Size of harbor will be 1,000 by 200 feet, with capacity of 200 small craft. Dredged Sand will be placed as breakwater on north and east sides of arbor. Total estimated cost is $94,800, including $27,000 non- pederal cost, mostly as a cash contribution toward construction. troject approved by Chief of Engineers under provisions of sec- tlon 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction in 1rogress. bCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Novem- ber 1965 and project is 88 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to iscal Year............ 1966 June 30, 1966 1962 1963 1964 1965 i ------ - i i ---------- i .._._ i-----r-- ewwork: Propriated. $2,500 $2,500 . $62,031 $67,031 1 . Cost ......... .... ............ 1,643 1,350...$1,467 7,287 .... $48,140 59,887 -- ,-i_ 5. AUTHORIZED ALTERATION OF BRIDGES For last Cost to June 30, 1966 fullreport- Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Chicago ... . at --... Burlington & Quincy, Railroad uincy, Ill., and channel realinement.l Bridge, Mississippi River 1963 $3,298,138............ Completed. 1 6. AMES RESERVOIR, SKUNK RIVER, IOWA Location. Site is in Story County, Iowa. Dam will be at mile 220.6 on Skunk River, and about 5 river miles upstream from city Of Ames, Iowa. 1134 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Dam will consist of an earth embankment about 75 feet high and about 1,260 feet long at the crest. Outlet works will consist of a single gated conduit, 7 feet in inside diameter. Conduit will be 570 feet long and discharge into a stilling basin 87 feet long and 15 feet wide. Control of dis- charge from reservoir will be by operation of three gates, each 3 feet wide by 5 feet high, operated by electric motors. Saddle- type spillway will be in left bluff, 232 feet wide, with crest eleva- tion at 969.0. It will be controlled by five tainter gates. Reser- voir will cover about 4,350 acres at full pool elevation 968.0, and extend about 8 miles above dam. Project will be operated for flood control, water quality control, recreation, and fish and wild life enhancement. Total estimated Federal cost is $10,130,000 (Nov. 1964). Project authorized by Flood Control Act of 1965 (H. Doc. 166, 89th Cong.). Interstate Highway 35 is now under construction through State of Iowa. As originally planned, high' way would have traversed part of Skunk River Valley to be oc- cupied by the reservoir. Realignment of highway location to accommodate future reservoir is to be undertaken at this time at an additional estimated cost of $1,100,000 under a tripartite agreement among Bureau of Public Roads, Iowa State HighWaY Commission, and the Corps. Under this agreement, the HI.gh" way Commission will plan and construct the new perimeter high- way, the Bureau will approve plans, construction, and billings incident thereto, and the Corps will disburse funds on the basis of State billings approved by the Bureau. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. None, except for disbursement of funds in connection with realignment of Inter- state Highway 35. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work not started on reservoir project. Cost and financial statement Total to196 6 Fiscal year.................. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: Appropriated............ Coat .................... ............ ............ ............ ...... ............ .......... ...................... $270,000 110,5 $270 O 190:965 C ost... .. .. . .. ....... 7. CENTRAL CITY RESERVOIR, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN, IOWA Location. On Wapsipinicon River about 3 miles upstrea'm from Central City and 110 miles above mouth of river, in Linn and Buchanan Counties, Iowa. Existing project. Plan of improvement contemplates con- struction of earth dam, 1,200 feet long, with concrete gravitY spillway. Reservoir capacity is 230,000 acre-feet, covering a1 area of about 11,000 acres. Project would provide a measure of flood protection for about 20,000 acres of agricultural land il lower reaches of Wapsipinicon River and reduce flood crests on Mississippi River downstream from mouth of Wapsipinicon. Estimated cost is $9,490,000 (1954). Project was made FLOOD CONTROL-ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1135 eligible for selection as a unit of general comprehensive plan for ood control and other purposes in Upper Mississippi River Basin Under 1938 Flood Control Act. Project is in "deferred for re- Study, Localcategory. cooperation. None required. sib0 perations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of fea- t ,lty report to determine whether project should be reclassified to active" category initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Feasibility study in progress. Cost and financial statement Yea Facal Total to 1............ 962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Ne Work: Propriat ed. ... .......... 8...$60,000 $60,000 25,271 $19,216 44,487 . CORALVILLE RESERVOIR, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN, IOWA CLocation. On Iowa River, several miles upstream from Iowa t, in Johnson County, Iowa, about 83 miles above mouth of oa River. EXisting project. st Strearnbed, a 500-foot An earthfill dam rising about 100 feet above uncontrolled spillway, outlet works to con- rol flow of river to bankfull stage below dam, and a reservoir DrOViding flood control pool of 475,000 acre-feet. In addition, a Conservation pool is provided which varies from 17,000 acre-feet fron February through June to 53,750 acre-feet from July to P1ebruary of each year. Coralville Reservoir is used to store "'a River flows temporarily during flood periods. Project illimizes flood damages on Iowa River from dam to mouth of Cedar River, and provides a high degree of protection to lands along Iowa River below mouth of Cedar River. Project also eflects significant reduction of Mississippi River flows at Keokuk, (OWa, and reduction of flows at Cairo, Ill. Incidental benefits to Conservation and recreation accrue from project. Power is not developed Estimated cost of Mehaffey Bridge is $1,390,000 (July 1965), including $100,000 non-Federal cash contribution. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Existing project adopted................................ Flood Control Committee Doc. 1, 75th 1e28,1038 , 1960 Jly l 14. Cong., let sess. Highway bridge across Coralville Reservoir at or near Me- None. haffey site. L ocal cooperation. None required, except in connection with ehaffey Bridge, which has been fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- struction of Mehaffey Bridge continued. Construction of recrea- t0onal facilities continued. Maintenance: Routine maintenance activities continued. 1136 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in July 1949 and project has been in operation since February 1958. About 24,112 acres of land were acquired in fee, and flowage easements obtained for 9,567 acres. Only major uncompleted fea- ture is Mehaffey Bridge, construction of which was initiated ill June 1964, and is about 82 percent completed. Cost and financial statement Total too year................ 1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 1966 g New work: Appropriated..........$83,000 $41,500 $200,000 $732,000 $608,000 1$17,15 4548 Cost................. 69,819 67,975 105,266 479,021 614,027 116,80 4:804 Maintenance: 3 170 Appropriated.......... .222,700 217,400 153,300 198,000 198,000 1,4 1475 Cost.................181,224 212,033 197,076 170,929 168,739 1, 1Excludes $100,000 contributed funds. 9. DES MOINES AND MISSISSIPPI LEVEE DISTRICT NO. 1, MO. Location. Right bank of Mississippi River, immediately downstream from mouth of Des Moines River, 357.1 to 359.8 miles above mouth of Ohio River, in Clark County, Mo. Area is shown on topographic maps of Geological Survey. Existing project. Consists of modification of about 16 nmiles of agricultural levees to provide increased protection from floods on Mississippi and Des Moines Rivers. Total estimated project cost is $1,643,000 (July 1965), including $143,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocations. Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan" ning was continued and construction was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started in June 1966. Cost and financial statement Total to . 1962 Fiscal year............... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: 4600 Appropriated......... . -$41,000 -$290,000 $300,000 $20,000............ $46300 .. Cost............ 4,475 6,711 4,785 $10,802 54,066 211 10. DES MOINES RIVER AT DES MOINES, IOWA Location. Along Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers, in city. Des Moines, Iowa. Area is shown on State base maps of Geologl* cal Survey. Existing project. Provides for local flood protection at DeS Moines by construction of levees and floodwalls, with appurtenant closure structures and sewer alterations. Estimated project cost is $2,670,000 (July 1965), including $740,000 non-Federal cost for land, relocations, and drainage facilities. Project al' thorized by 1944 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 651, 78th Cong., 2d sess.). FLOOD CONTROL---ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1137 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- ing continued. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. reliminary planning in progress. Cost and financial state? ---------- Total to Year**ew....... I iaea1 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ._..... AP oropriated.......... ** .. .. $68,000 $92,500 78,082 $40,000 $100,000 $320,000 36,818 122,650 107,752 $622,020 409,772 62,950 I # 11. DUBUQUE, IOWA Location. On right bank of Mississippi River, 579.3 miles aove mouth of Ohio River, in Dubuque County, Iowa. Existing project. Local protection from Mississippi River oods to be provided by construction of levees, walls, closure tructures, a navigation opening for the commercial harbor, and (terior drainage facilities. Estimated project cost is $5,812,000 (July 1965), including $162,000 non-Federal cost for land and re ocations. Project authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962 (. DOc. 450, 87th Cong.).. 1 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 3 6 , applies. Local interests must also modify or relocate build- ligs, utilities, and other facilities and obtain legal control over Io ding areas. Local interests will be requested to furnish as- surances after a firm project plan is established. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- ing continued. P Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. .relimiliary planning in progress. Cost and financial statement 8 al Yea .............. 1962 Total to 1r0 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 AppWri .................. .. $35,000 $70,000 $145,000 $250,000 cost. opr•ated.......... 15,963 60,203 153,512 229,678 12. FREEPORT, ILL. Location. On Pecatonica River, about 59 miles above mouth Of that stream, in Stephenson County, Ill. tc isting project. Project would have provided local flood pro- ection by means of levees, walls, channel improvements, and tterior drainage facilities. Project authorized by 1936 Flood Coutrol Act. In fiscal year 1952 the project was classified "de- ferred for restudy" after problems of local cooperation and eco- P.ic justification became apparent. Consideration is being .iven to coordination of a revised flood control plan with a major idghWay relocation to be constructed by State of Illinois. Peca- 1138 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tonica River would be diverted around city along its northern edge, following alinement of a proposed highway bypass. Based on information in a special report by district engineer, the Chief of Engineers transferred the project to "active" category in 1962. Estimated cost for revised project is $3,875,000 (July 1964), i - cluding $660,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocations. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Local interests must also bear cost of relocatiol of roads, utilities, and buildings. Local interests will be requested to furnish assurances after a firm project plan has been estab, lished. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan" ning for revised plan continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. Preliminary planning for modified plan in progress. Cost and financial statement Total top Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: $264 529 Appropriated.......... -$5,546 $22,000 $95,000 $95,000 . ... 2 Cost.................. 1,271 13,873 49,964 73,988 $6112 2 13. GREEN BAY LEVEE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT NO. 2, IOWA Location. Right bank of Mississippi River, several miles dowD" stream from Burlington, 386.6 to 396 miles above mouth of Ohio River, in Lee County, Iowa. Area is shown on topographic nmap of Geological Survey. Previous project. For details see page 1435, Annual Report 1949. Existing project. Modification of 19.5 miles of agricultur levees to provide increased protection from floods on MississiPP' River, Skunk River, and Lost Creek. Plan also includes road ramps and modification of pumping plant discharge facilitieS' Estimated project cost is $1,918,000 (July 1966), includifl $108,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocations. Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.) Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction corD* pleted on Skunk River flank levee and continued on MississiPP' River levee and Lost Creek flank levee. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in June 1964 and project is 95 percent complete. Work remaining coll sists of completing Mississippi River levee and Lost Creek flanlk levee. Cost and financial statement FLOOD CONTROL---ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1139 14. GREGORY DRAINAGE DISTRICT, MO. Location. Right bank of Mississippi River, upstream from anton, 347.8 to 354.4 miles above mouth of Ohio River, in Clark and Lewis Counties, Mo. Area is shown on topographic maps of eological Survey. " • For details see page 1185, Annual Report 19evious project. 1940. lex~isting project. Modification of 11.4 miles of agricultural lvees to provide increased protection from Mississippi River loods. Estimated project cost is $1,849,000 (July 1966), includ- 99,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocations. Project aUthorized by Flood Control Act of 1962 (H. Doc. 564, 87th CofLg., 2d sess.). 1Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, i936, applies. Local interests must also modify or relocate build- "s and utilities. Local interests will be requested to furnish assurances after a firm project plan is established. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- ng continued. pCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. reliminary planning in progress. Cost and financial statement ear Total to Y ............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork:. APPropriated.......... ............$35,000 $27,300 $30,000 $20,000 $112,300 t.... ....................... 31,858 23,776 15,038 23,339 94,011 15. HANNIBAL, MO. Location. On right bank of Mississippi River in Marion ounty, Mo., 309 miles above mouth of Ohio River. . xisting project. Provides for local protection from Missis- 99Pi River floods by construction of levees and floodwalls along ierfront, provision of two tainter gates for passing Bear Creek oW through line of protection, street and railroad closures, a unrflping plant, and modification of interior drainage facilities. Total estimated project cost is $4,692,000 (July 1966), including $122,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocations. Project au- thorized by Flood Control Act of 1962 (II. Doc. 564, 87th Cong.). 1Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, .936, applies. Local interests must also modify or relocate build- s,utilities, and other facilities and to obtain legal control over Dondage areas. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- nin Was discontinued because of lack of local support of project. t Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning has been discon- tiued. 1140 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total t0 year................ Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juno30;96 New work: 03 ilo Appropriated..................... $25,000 $70,000 $806,000-$64,067 0933 Cost.................... .5,888 71,507 30,562 2,976 16. HENDERSON COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT NO. 1, ILL. Location. Left bank of Mississippi River, opposite and U' stream from Burlington, Iowa, 403.2 to 412.3 miles above mout-0 of Ohio River, in Henderson County, Ill. Area is shown on toP graphic maps of Geological Survey. tural Existing project. Modification of 11.3 miles of agricuiver levees to provide increased protection from Mississippi 9, floods. Estimated project cost is $1,668,000 (July 1966), 1 cluding $88,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocati TS' Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 281, Cong.). .Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal, year. Preliminary ning continued, and construction initiated.rl Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in APril 1966. Cost and financial statement Totalto Fiscal year................ 193 1964 1965 19660 June New work: $79 Appropriated.......... $50,000 $32,000 -$2,300 $100,000 $400,000 Cost................. 29,874 34,771 12,041 15,034 57,937 17, HENDERSON COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT NO.2, ILL. Location. Left bank of Mississippi River, opposite and UP' stream from Burlington, Iowa, 400.8 to 410.2 miles above mtho of Ohio River, in Henderson County, Ill. Area is shown on top graphic maps of Geological Survey. fl Existing project. Consists of modification of 10 miles of rl cultural levees to provide increased protection from floods et Mississippi River and Ellison Creek. Total estimated proJl cost is $1,185,000 (July 1966), including $105,000 non-Fed6l cost for land and relocations. Project authorized by 1954 Flool Control Act (H. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. l Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary Plq ning continued, and construction initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began APinl 1966. FLOOD CONTROL-ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1141 Cost and financial statement Year to Total 1962 1963 1064 1965 1966 June 30, 1962, dewWork. ropriate d..$40,000 $25,500 $5,000 $100,000 $305,000 $475,500 17,227 34,930 15,097 28,182 95,962 191,398 18, RUNT DRAINAGE DISTRICT AND LIMA LAKE DRAINAGE ILL. ation. Left bank of Mississippi River, upstream from Y, from mile 341.7 to 358.6 above mouth of Ohio River, oncock and Adams Counties, Ill. The two districts are con- us and have interrelated drainage and flood protection sys- Area is shown on topographic maps of Geological Survey. "sting project. Modification of 32.7 miles of agricultural to provide increased protection from floods on Mississippi and several small tributaries. Plan includes detention Voirs on Rocky Run and Jenifer Creek, modification of ties at existing pumping plants, and road ramps. Esti- d Project cost is'$3,585,000 (July 1965), including $285,000 ederal cost for land and relocations. Project authorized by Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.). al, cooperation. Fully complied with, except for rights-of- acquisition for the two detention reservoirs. erations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary 'plan- 'for remaining project features continued.I. nition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in July and project is 75 percent complete. Remaining work con- of. construction of detention reservoirs on Rocky Run and er Creek. Cost and financial statement year Ceal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 work ; C )ropriatooi "..........$550,000 $168,000 $66,790 $26,000 $100,000 $2,545,600 1,060,070 378,026 99,189 24,097 41,321 2,479,266 19. INDIAN GRAVE DRAINAGE DISTRICT, ILL. stLocation. Left bank of Mississippi River, several miles up- ieea1t1 from Quincy, 330 to 341.7 miles above mouth of Ohio of gr, inAdams County, Ill. Area is shown on topographic maps s.,:tils Geological uey Survey. . . .17 miles' of agricultura levestng project. Modification of ler o provide increased protection 11.7 miles of agricultural from floods on Mississippi and several, small tributaries. Estimated project cost is l aa' 20,000 (July 1965), including $260,000 non-Federal cost for pt ad relocations. Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control (. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.).3 96cal cooperation. Section 3, Floo Control Act of June 22, ,applies. Requirements have been partially fulfilled. 1142 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- ning continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. Preliminary planning in progress. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal yeac ................ 1962 1963 1964 1 0165 1966 June 30,1960 New work: $33000 Appropriated.......... ............ $50,000 $90,000$91,000 $100,000 3133 Cost...16,377 95,231 60,783 58,992 20. IOWA RIVER-FLINT CREEK LEVEE DISTRICT No. 16,10IOWA Location. Right bank of Mississippi River, 405.7 to 434.5 miles above mouth of Ohio River, in Louisa and Des Mole'd Counties, Iowa. Levees of district protect village of Oakvilleis- agricultural lands in Louisa-Des Moines County Drainage 7 trict No. 4 and Des Moines County Drainage Districts NOSvey. and 8. Area is shown on topographic maps of Geolo gical levee Existing project. Modification of 48 miles of existing e, to provide increased protection from floods on MississipP difica- Iowa River, and three hill streams. Plan also includes od r tion of facilities at three existing pumping stations and ro- ramps. Estimated project cost is $6,194,000 (July 1966)o cludingo $544,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocatiO8 3 d Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 281, Cong.). Local cooperation. Complied with except for acquisitiofl land for downstream portion of Mississippi River levee. Co Operations and results during fiscal year. Constructionp tinued on Mississippi River levee and initiated on YelloWrprin" Creek levee. ilJuly Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction begani 1962 and project is 86 percent complete. Work remaini 0 f sists of Yellow Spring Creek levee and downstream portiOl Mississippi River levee. Cost and financial statement Total t~o6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 work: New Appropriated........ .. $300,000 $705,000$2,318,000 $1,250,000 $200,000 5, 4, 931 Cost............... 62,387 778,287 2,511,177 989,776 322,428 21. MARION COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT, MO.A , Location. Right bank of Mississippi River, opposite and eral miles downstream from Quincy, Ill., 320.7 to 323.Areais above mouth of Ohio River, in Marion County, Mo. shown on topographic maps of Geological Survey. i agrl Existing project. Consists of modification of 9.2 miles s of cultural levee to. provide increased protection from flood odi- Fabius, Mississippi, and North Rivers. Plan also includes iii FLOOD CONTROL-ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1143 ication of a gravity outlet and ramping of railroads and high- i ays. Estimated project cost is $960,000 (July 1965), includ- a $80,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocations. Project alorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.). ,ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. t POeratio n s and results during fiscal year. Construction con- ltrued on Mississippi River levee and North River levee. Con- trucetion of cutoff walls by Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Rail- 'Da across their tracks at three locations continued. 19 onition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in June is95 and project is 85 percent complete. Remaining work con- railof completing Mississippi River levee, North River levee, and oad cutoff walls. Cost and financial statement Total salYer 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, to . roPriated......... $250,000 -$5,000 -$35,000 $614,000 -$14,900 $880,027 6,706 13,374 39,273 35,881 600,521 752,451 22. MARSHALLTOWN, IOWA RIVER, IOWA Location. 10V¢R. Right bank of Iowa River in Marshall County, beoxisting project. Local protection from Iowa River floods to dr~aprovided by construction of levees, floodwalls, and interior 196 )age facilities. Estimated project cost is $3,320,000 (June reloc6 ')including $460,000 non-Federal cost for rights-of-way and ocations. Project authorized by 1964 Flood Control Act (H. c. 166, 89th Cong.). 19 36cal cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, obta applies. Local interests will also provide relocations and tai nlegal control over pondage areas. Local interests will be lifedsted to furnish assurances after a firm project plan is estab- tiOperations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- " initiated in November 1965. P~ eodition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. relilinary planning in progress. Cost and financial statement a' Yeal Total to ............ 1963 1904 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 o ated................... .. ........................ $55,000 $55,000 ......................... 47,902 47,902 23. MIUSCATINE ISLAND LEVEE DISTRICT AND MUSCATINE- LOUISA COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT NO. 13, IOWA dojocation. Right bank of Mississippi River, immediately WOastream from Muscatine, miles 434.8 to 454.8 above mouth f Ohio River, in Muscatine and Louisa Counties, Iowa. The two 1144 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 districts, together with upper one-half mile of Louisa CountY Levee District No. 15, form a joint drainage and flood protection system. In addition to agricultural land, levee of Muscatine i land Levee District protects downstream portion of Muscatine from Mississippi River floods. Area is shown on topographi maps of Geological Survey. . t Existing project. Modification of existing levees in the two ' districts to provide increased protection to area from floods f Mississippi River and Michael Creek. Project also includes a r railroad closure structure, ramping of roads, and a new pumPr in plant. Estimated project cost is $3,502,000 (July 1965), os cluding $422,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocation Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (IL Doc. ' 83d Cong.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. la Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary Pl ning for south flank levee and pumping plant continued. * Att SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction began inry gust 1959. Mississippi River levee is complete. PrelininareS planning for south flank levee and pumping plant is in progres. Project is about 74 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Totalo Fiscal year ............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 june3 New work: 03353 Appropriated.......... $100,000 $110,000 $9,000 $153 $85,00072,0 cost..........s..... 382,079 298,022 8,181 3,839 78,213 24. NEW HARTFORD, IOWA Location. Along Beaver Creek, a tributary of Cedar River, New Hartford in Butler County, Iowa. Bver Existing project. Consists of levee, on right bank of I eoect Creek and interior drainage improvements. Estimated pro d cost is $293,600, including $35,600 non-Federal costs for lande and damages. Project authorized by Chief of Engineers und section 205, Flood Control Act of 1948, as amended. 2, Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of Juneoh 1936, applies. Local interests would also provide relocations,e tain legal control over pondage areas, and assume any costs o $1 million. - Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary pl 5 ning was discontinued as the result of local cooperation problem s Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning has been disco tinued. Cost and financial statement FLOOD CONTROL--ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1145 25. RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, IOWA lo.ocation. On Des Moines River, Iowa, chiefly in Marion Dauty, but extending into Jasper, Warren, and Polk Counties. :i' (Howell site) is 142.9 miles above mouth of Des Moines o'Ver, Which empties into Mississippi River at mile 361.4 above iot1 of Ohio River. City of Des Moines lies northwesterly site about 60 miles upstream. Area is shown on aero- l'tqalical "ical maps of Coast and Geodetic Survey. tiing project. Provides for a dam consisting of a rolled re fill embankment and gravity-type concrete spillway with iegates, located near center of valley, each end of which will be io into embankment by a gravity-type nonoverflow concrete sec- eve The dam, at crest elevation of 798 feet above mean sea f Will be about 5,676 feet long and maximum height ock0 eet. Gated spillway will be of concrete founded on bed- ith crest at elevation 744. Full flood control level (top of kt gates) will be at elevation 780. Spillway crest gates will be e high and 45 feet wide. Outlet works consisting of 14 5- y 9oot gated conduits will extend through spillway section and to. arge into spillway stilling basin. Nonoverflow concrete sec- :e.s of dam at each end of spillway will be gravity type, 2~ d into foundation rock. Drainage area above damsite is 12,- o Square miles. With pool at full flood control elevation, reser- b~r area will be about 65,500 acres; reservoir will contain or t1,890,000 acre-feet of water at that height (1,840,000 ill rood control and 50,000 for a conservation pool which e furnish a minimum downstream flow of 300 cubic feet per aatad. Impoundment of floodwaters by reservoir will result in ~ erially reduced flood heights on Des Moines River below the Ge., and also provide substantial supplementary benefits by re- 'tI1 MIississippi River floods. Estimated Federal cost is $82,- 0 000 (July 1966). Project was made eligible for selection as uit of general comprehensive plan for flood control and other o'Doses in Upper Mississippi River Basin under 1938 Flood 'Otrol Act. L0cal cooperation. None required. 2Pe'rations and results during fiscal year. Construction of ce II consisting of concrete spillway and concrete nonoverflow ions of dam continued. Construction of stage III, the re- hin1 1g earthwork, was initiated. Norfolk and Western and cago Burlington & Quincy Railroad and Iowa State Highway ~edrission were engaged in construction of railroad and State e deral highway relocations. Relocations of county roads, leltric lines, and telephone lines were in progress. Land ac- is0tion program continued. ) ndition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in May 0 and project is 66 percent complete. Part of earth embank- Set placed and work in progress on concrete spillway and con- ,te Inonoverflow sections of dam. Construction of railroad, 'AWay, and utilities relocations underway. Land acquisition gram in progress, 45,707 acres acquired in fee, and flowage etents obtained for 22,746 acres. 1146 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total tO Fiscal year ................ 1963 1964 1965 1966u New work: 0163,0300 Appropriated.......... $7,200,000 $5,382,000 $15,300,000 $10,193,000 $14,000,000 54,092,933 Cost.................. 4,724,950 6,450,251 11,823,582 13,261,511 12,317,187 26. ROCK ISLAND, ILL. Location. On left bank of Mississippi River, 482.4 miles above mouth of Ohio River, in Rock Island County, Ill. River Existing project. Local protection from Mississipp livd floods by construction of levees, walls, closure structures, is modification of drainage facilities. Estimated project costfor $4,406,000 (June 1966), including $406,000 non-Federal cosl At land and relocations. Project authorized by Flood ControlAct of 1962 (II. Doc. 564, 87th Cong.). 22, Local 1936' cooperation. Section ,ifvy 3, Flood Control Act ofor Julecte .. l3e b r(1 1936, applies. Local interests must also modify or re be buildings, utilities, and other facilities. Local interests Wltab requested to furnish assurances after a firm project plan is e lished. 1 Operations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary pl - ning initiated in November 1965.rted. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started Preliminary planning in progress. Totsto Appropriated.......... ............ ... ........................ $75,000 4919 Cost........................ ....... . ....................... 40916 27. SAYLORVILLE RESERVOIR, DES MOINES RIVER, IOWA Location. Site is chiefly in Polk County, Iowa, but por otl will extend into Dallas and Boone Counties. Dam will be "bot 213.7 miles above mouth of Des Moines River, and Area 5 miles upstream from north limits of city of Des Moines. rveY is shown on aeronautical maps of Coast and Geodetic Sur Des Moines and Dubuque sections. 850 Existing project. Dam will be an earth embankment, 6eet. feet long at crest with a maximum height of 120 eint Outlet works will be a single circular concrete conduit, 22 fee. be diameter, located at toe of west bluff. Control structure wlli at upstream end of conduit and house three gates. A stilt basin will be provided to dissipate energy of discharge fronm 406 let conduit. Spillway will be in west bluff, weir to be to feet long. Water flowing over spillway weir will discharge inflill paved chute and thence into a concrete stilling basin. Water Wo9 then travel through an excavated pilot channel to the river. et of spillway will be about 31 feet below top of earth embankm section, and flow over weir will be uncontrolled when water FLOOD CONTROL--ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1147 re1erVoir reaches its crest. Watershed area above damsite is voi Square miles. With pool at spillway crest elevation, reser- fee area will be 16,250 acres and contain about 609,000 acre- fee of Water at that height (534,000 for flood control and 75,000 str a conservation pool to maintain minimum flows at down- Stream points). Reservoir will supplement capacity of down- Will ar Lake Red Rock at river mile 142.9. The two reservoirs PqIoirovide a large degree of flood protection to lower Des St oes River Valley. Reaches along Mississippi River down- seant from mouth of Des Moines River will also be benefited. autt 1ated Federal cost is $40 million (July 1965). Project orized by Flood Control Act of 1958 (S. Doc. 9, 85th Cong.). LOcal cooperation. None required. e 1irsation s and results during fiscal year. Construction of ad t stage of earth dam continued. Construction of overlook I)o-access road at damsite, powerline and dwellings at Camp quiste, water supply at Woodward State Hospital, and land ac- tiue 1on program also in progress. Preliminary planning con- 19C ition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in June secti and project is 10 percent complete. Earth embankment res oi of dam partially completed. Land acquisition in prog- 4,270 acres were acquired in fee. Cost and financial statement Yeear 16Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. -.. .. ... C o riated........ $155,000 $100,000 $300,000$1,100,000 $2,500,000 $4,515,000 ......... 174,149 135,1409 155,003 747,624 2,610,557 4,094,858 r 28. SNY BASIN, ILL. Si Cation. In basin of the Sny, a former by-channel of Missis- 260 River, in Pike, Adams, and Calhoun Counties, Ill., about tari' to315.4 miles above mouth of Ohio River. Major tribu- tay C of the Sny are McCraney, Hadley, Kiser, Six Mile, and urvCreeks. Area is shown on topographic maps of Geological vey. wi lo With.'-i istin . ela.. Plan for "project. .... reduction . of interior flooding desilt the Sny bottom lands, including two retarding- three g reservoirs for Pigeon Creek and Horton-Dutch Creeks; Creek diversion channels for McCraney-Hadley Creeks, Kiser Ii" and Six Mile-Bay Creeks to conduct runoff directly to loutitSsippi River; three pumping stations; a closing levee at ohther ?f the Sny; aqueducts or culverts for drainage which would Sa1 Ise be blocked; and improvement of certain reaches of the costhannel to collect bottom land runoff. Estimated project ost $15,945,000 (July 1965), including $2,430,000 non-Federal Co tfor land and relocations. Project authorized by 1946 Flood rol Act (H. Doc. 713, 79th Cong., 2d sess.). cal cooperation. Fully complied with. 1148 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of var- ious project features continued.St Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Augut 1959 and project is about 95 percent complete. Following mail project features are complete: Date Feature completed Pigeon Creek reservoir .................................. Sept. 1961 Pumping station No. 1 ....... ....... ........... .... ... .... Apr. 1963 Kiser Creek diversion .... ............................. .....May 1964 Pumping station No. 3A ............................... Sept. 1964 Wabash Railroad relocation at Hadley-McCraney diversion .. . Sept. 1964 Horton-Dutch reservoir ................ Sept. 1964 Hadley-McCraney diversion ................................. June 1965 Pumping station No. 4 .................................... June 1965 Sny cleanout ........ . .................. Nov. 1965 Remaining project features, including Six Mile-Bay diversiOfl relocation of Gulf, Mobile & Ohio Railroad at Six-Mile-Bay diver- sion, and Sny Closing levee are under construction. Cost and financial statement Tota! to Fiscal year................ 192 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 34 Appropriated .......... $1000,000 $3,842,000 $2,980,000 $1,700,000 $902,384 $13,60 363 Cost ...... .... ...... 1,565,651 4,408,518 2,816,902 1,936,600 677,489 12,907 29. SNY ISLAND LEVEE DRAINAGE DISTRICT, ILL. Location. Left bank of Mississippi River downstream from' Quincy, miles 264.3 to 315.4 above mouth of Ohio River, in Adam.s, Pike, and Calhoun Counties, Ill. Area is shown on topographiC maps of Geological Survey. Previous projects. For details see page 1047, Annual Report 1942. Existing project. Improvement of main-stem MississiPPi River levee to provide increased flood protection. Est"- mated project cost is $5,495,000 (July 1965), including $425,000 non-Federal cost for land and modification of utilities. Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 247, 83d Cong.)' Local cooperation. Complied with, except for continuing ac- quisition of right-of-way. Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of the first stage of project, at upstream end of district continued. Work also continued by owning agent on drainage facilities o right-of-way of Norfolk & Western Railroad at a location where tracks parallel improved levee. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in June 1965 and project is 18 percent complete. FLOOD CONTROL--ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1149 Fiscal Year.... New work. ............ CPropriated ....... $50,000 $75,000 $06,000 $400000 $1,090,000 $1,711,000 27,767 82,729 102,477 73,820 632,274 919,067 30. SOUTH QUINCY DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, ILL. Location. Left bank of Mississippi River, immediately down- stream from Quincy, 317.8 to 325.4 miles above mouth of Ohio ofr,in Adams County, Ill. Area is shown on topographic maps eological Survey. 1940revious projects. For details see page 1188, Annual Report i Existing project. Modification of agricultural levees to pro- de increased protection from Mississippi River floods. Esti- mlated project cost is $1,307,000 (July 1966), including $57,000 1on-Federal cost for land and relocations. Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (11. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Pperations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- ing was continued and construction was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started in April 1966. Cost and financial statement Piscale............ 1962 1963 1964 Total to 1965 1966 June 30,1966 'OWWork. Aipropriated.......... $40,000 $40,000 $15,000 $10,000 $110,000 $215,000 S33,784 37,687 23,529 5,429 61,456 161,884 31. SOUTH RIVER DRAINAGE DISTRICT, MO. Location. Right bank of Mississippi River, several miles up- streamn from Hannibal, 312.1 to 320.5 miles above mouth of Ohio iver, in Marion County, Mo. Area is shown on topographic aPs of Geological Survey. 1941. 19Previous project. For details see page 1160, Annual Report le 0xisting project. Modification of 12.7 miles of agricultural Meee to provide increased protection from floods on South and lSsissippi Rivers. Plan also includes modification of a gravity OUtlet and discharge lines from three pumping units and ramping Of railroads and highways. Estimated project cost is $1,250,000 1(July 19 6 5 ), including $110,000 non-Federal cost for land and re- cations. Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. oc. 281, 83d Cong.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. aOperations and results during fiscal year. Levee construction ong South River was completed. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in July 1963. Project completed May 21, 1966. 1150 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work:000 Appropriated.......... $36,000 $75,000 $574,00 $390,000 -$16,000 $1,119 00237 Cost................. 30,044 35,324 612,672 336,589 56,776 32. SUBDISTRICT NO. 1 OF DRAINAGE UNION NO. 1 AND BAY ISLAND DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT NO. 1, ILL. Location. Left bank of Mississippi River, opposite and down- stream from Muscatine, Iowa, 434.2 to 450.9 miles above mouth of Ohio River, in Rock Island and Mercer Counties, Ill. The two districts are contiguous and have interrelated drainage and flood protection systems. Area is shown on topographic mapS of Geological Survey. Existing project. Modification of about 25 miles of agricul- tural levees to provide increased protection from floods on Missis- sippi River, Copperas Creek, and Eliza Creek. In addition, proJY ect includes modification of pumping facilities and several road ramps. Estimated project cost is $3,532,000 (July 1965), including $232,000 non-Federal cost for land and relocations' Project authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 281, 83d Cong.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Levee construction along Mississippi River and Eliza Creek was continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in Feb- ruary 1963 and project is 92 percent complete. Work in progresS on Mississippi River and Eliza Creek levees. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1914 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work:o Appropriated.......... $10,000 $380,000 $1,139,000 $970,000 $637,000 $3,300 026 Cost.................. 45,478 370,577 1,165,087 700,051 603,596 3,02 33. UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN (ROCK ISLAND DIST.) Location. Mississippi River Basin above Ohio River, exclusive of Missouri River Basin, in Rock Island District. Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1938 approved conO prehensive plan for flood control and other purposes in Upper Mississippi River Basin described in Flood Control Committee Document 1, 75th Congress, 1st session, with such modifica tions thereof as in discretion of Secretary of War and Chief of Engineers may be advisable, the reservoirs and local protection projects to be selected and approved by Chief of Engineers. Individual projects in Rock Island District considered in conl prehensive plan: FLOOD CONTROL-ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1151 Reservoirs Name Tributary basin State Total estimated Federal cost Ceritral City2 ...... . . . . . . . W 00ra J yity2........... ........ Wapsipinicon ........... Iowa ................... 159,490,000 (1954) . ....... 3 16,812,144 do......... . . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa ........................ eO tock ............. ........ Cedar................ ....... do................ 113,300,000 (1954) c ................. Des Moines........ ..... do................ ... 82,200,000 (1966) Levees Township 0olJsi Drainage District .... ........................ Missouri............... $109,621 'Project deferred for restudy. a8ee inidividual report for details of project. cludes $1,380,000 (July 1964) for Mehaffey Bridge. CorQpleted. For last full report, see Annual Report for 1947, p. 1420. Operations and results during fiscal year. See individual re- I)orts for Central City, Coralville, and Red Rock Reservoirs. Condition at end of fiscal year. See individual reports. 34. WATERLOO, CEDAR RIVER, IOWA Location. Both banks of Cedar River in Blackhawk County, IOWa. IExisting project. Local protection from Cedar River and lackhawk Creek floods to be provided by construction of levees, floodwalls, pumping plants, and closure structures on both sides of Cedar River and Blackhawk Creek. Estimated project cost 1is$19 million (July 1966), including $3,900,000 non-Federal costs for rights-of-way and relocations. Project authorized by P'lood Control Act of 1965 (I. Doc. 166, 89th Cong.). Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Local interests will also provide relocations and Obtain legal control over pondage areas. Local interests will be requested to furnish assurances after a firm project plan is estab- lished. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preliminary planning not Started. 35. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS pFederal flood control regulations (part 208 of title 33, Code of ederal Regulations) provide that structures and facilities con- structed by the United States for local flood protection shall be cotinuously maintained in such a manner and operated at such ne s and for such periods as may be necessary to obtain maxi- n1urbenefits. Fiscal year costs were $4,608. Following proj- ects were inspected during the fiscal year: Project Date inspected bula Iowa ........ .. ......................... January 1966 ry Drainage District, Illinois ....................... January 1966 'a Creek-Muscatine, Iowa .......................... January 1966 kUscatine Island Levee District, Iowa ................. February 1966 ,Ub-District No. 1 of Drainage Union No. 1 ' ............ January 1966 qy I)rainage and Levee District Island No. 1, Ill2 ....................................... January 1966 1152 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Project Date inspected Iowa River-Flint Creek Levee District No. 16, Iowa ...................................... February 1966 Henderson County Drainage District No. 3, Illinois ...................................... January 1966 Henderson County Drainage District No. 1, Illinois ...................................... January 1966 Henderson County Drainage District No. 2, Illinois ..................................... January 1966 Green Bay Levee District No. 2, Iowa ................... January 1966 Gregory Drainage District, Missouri ' ................... January 1966 Canton, Mo........................................ January 1966 Hunt Drainage District, Illinois ........................ January 1966 Lima Lake Drainage District, Illinois ................. January 1966 Indian Grave Drainage District, Illinois ................. January 1966 Union Township Drainage District, Missouri ............ January 1966 Fabius River Drainage District, Missouri ............... January 1966 South Quincy Drainage and Levee District, Ill.' ........... January 1966 South River Drainage District, Missouri ................. January 1966 Sny Island Levee Drainage District, Illinois .............. January 1966 Bear Breek, Hannibal, Mo. ............................ January 1966 Sny Basin, Ill. .... . ................................ January 1966 Elkport, Iowa ........................................ January 1966 Galena, Ill . ... ....... .............................. January 1966 Penny Slough Drainage and Levee District, Illinois ....... .June 1966 66 DeKalb, Ill ........................................ February 1966 Van Meter, Iowa ..................................... January 1966 1Project partially completed. Completed portions have been turned over to local interests for maintenance and operation. 36. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation mainte oace Sod for- I-I- t Bear Creek at Hannibal, Mo. .. ........................... 1962 .. $1,670,632 Campbells Island, Mississippi River, Ill..... ................ 1961 59,473 ..... Canton, Mo.1.................................................... 1964 1,496,555..... Carroll County Levee and Drainage . . .District. No.. . . 1, . .Illinois3........... . . . ..... . . . . 1938 i i i: " : : .. . Drury Drainage District, Illinoisal . ... . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . 1964 1,144,875. Elkport, Turkey River, Iowal . 1951 34,200 ..... Fabius River Drainage District, Missouritl.......................... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1941 60,500 ..... Fabius River Drainage District, Missouril....... 1963 1,621,841.. Galena, Galena River, 111.1................ . . .............. .......... 1952 844,100 .. Green Bay Levee and Drainage District No. 2, Iowal 3 . . . . . . . . . ..... 1949 299,000 ..... Green Island Levee and Drainage District No.. . 1, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . Iowa . .. 1938 Gregory Drainage District, Missouril....... 2 1940 77,100...."" ' Gregory Drainage District, Missouri 6 ......... .................... ... . . . . . . . . . . 1964 68,213 . ".. Henderson County Drainage District No. 3, Illinoisl 1949 42,700 .. Henderson River, 111.7... .............................. 1964 102,310 .. Jansville and Indian Ford Dams, Wis.5...... 3 ............... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1938 ..... . . . . Keithsburg Drainage District, Illinois ........ 1938 . .....o . Kent Creek at Rockford, Ill.... ................ 0........ 1957 123,300 .. Kishwaukee River at DeKalb, 111.12............................. Muscatine, Iowa (Mad Creek)....... 1 ..................... 1962 1,169,042.. . Okabena Creek at Worthington, Minn. 2....................... 1957 72,432 .. Pecatonica River at Darlington, Wis........ ............... 1940 .... Penny Slough, Rock River, 111.1.................................... Rochester Reservoir, Upper Mississippi River Basin, Iowa 4........ .... ................... 85,800 .. """ Rock River agricultural levees, Illinois ........ ........... ......... ............. ...... . . . Beloit, Rock River, Ill. and Wis., at South . Ill.4...................... ...................... 1952. Sabula, Mississippi River, Iowal ........ 1958 411,915 .. Sny Island Levee Drainage District, Illinoisl ..... ............. . . .. . . . . . . . . . 1942 61,400 .. ' South Quincy Drainage and Levee District,. . .Illinoisl.... . . . .. . . 1940 61,200 ... South River Drainage District, Missouril ................. 1941 55,300 .... Union Township Drainage District levee, Upper Mississippi River 1947 109,621 . . Basin, Mo.t ..... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . Van Meter, Iowal . 1905 113,842 .. i i 1Completed. Authorized by Chief of Engineers (sec. 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended). Inactive; lowlands of district acquired by United States in 1937. See footnotes next page. FLOOD CONTROL--ROCK ISLAND, ILL., DISTRICT 1153 To be restudied. . e; project not economically justified. 7 annng discontinued because of lack of local support. done enderson River diversion unit and Henderson River levee unit are inactive; no work On remaining unit, the Cedar Creek levee. 37. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) A Study identification Fiscal year costs queduct Special Drainage District, Illinois ...................... $948 ust1, Minn ..... ............. ........................ 1,707 urlington, , W is Chassville Iowa ................. " ....................... ................................................. 3,047 easte GlastonubIowa que,.................................................. II. .............................................. 61,22 la ts Ie, Ill. ...... ...................................... 51,327 Iaderson County Drainage District No. 3, Illinois................ 990 .eredosia Levee and Drainage District, Illinois ................... 11,280 i an, Ill................................a...............14,283 alston Creek at Iowa City, Iowa......... ..................... 13,287 ycamore, Ill ................................................ 806 Whitewater Creek, W is. ....................................... 163 Emergency flood control activities---repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Ad Project Federal cost vlance preparation ....................................- $110,635 ood emergency operations ................................. 205,070 RePair and restoration: Eddyville levee, Des Moines River, Iowa .................. 3,317 Eldon W. Yager levee, Rock River, Ill....................... 227 Fox River-Honey Creek levee, Missouri ................... 23,594 Renderson County Drainage District No. 1, Illinois ......... . 58,191 Henderson County I)rainage District No. 2, Illinois ......... 33,644 Henderson County Drainage District No. 3, Illinois ......... .. 37,353 Iloopes and Ziegenhorn levee, Cedar River, Iowa ........... .. 6,475 Indian Grave Drainage District, Illinois .................. 605,044 Iowa River-Flint Creek Levee District No. 16, Iowa ......... 49,371 John E. Rex levee, Cedar River, Iowa .................... 621 Louisa County Levee District No. 8, Cedar River, Iowa ..... 72,000 Louisa County Levee District No. 14, Cedar River, Iowa .... 7,554 Mad Creek, Muscatine, Iowa ............................. 3,673 Muscatine County Levee District No. 17, Cedar River, Iowa.. 5,698 Nick Rieff levee, Marion County, Missouri ................ 24,762 Ottumwa levee, Des Moines River, Iowa .................. 19,949 Sherer levee, Skunk River, Iowa ........................... 4,194 South Quincy Drainage and Levee District, Illinois ......... . 228,526 Stumbo Bottom levee, Des Moines River, Iowa .............. . 12,808 Waterloo levee, Cedar River, Iowa ....................... 8,622 g.W. G. Harvey levee, Des Moines River, Iowa .............. 1,471 lcellaneous investigations ................................. 4,595 8nagging and clearing navigable streams and tributariesin interest of flood control (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Cong.) t Snagging and clearing of Blackhawk Creek at Davenport, Wa, were initiated in June. Fiscal year costs were $10,107. Emergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Public Law 526, 79th Cong.) Correction of a bank erosion problem on Raccoon River at Adel, owa, which threatened local water supply, was initiated in April ald completed in May. Fiscal year costs were $12,476. 1154 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 38. SURVEYS Navigation and flood control studies cost $107,799 for fiscal year 1966. In addition, special reports were made as required in coordination with Soil Conservation Service of Department of Agriculture under provisions of Watershed Protection Act of 1954 (Public Law 566, 83d Cong.). Costs during the fiscal year were $414. Fiscal year costs for Upper Mississippi River Basi' study were $33,476. 39. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Collection and study of basic data for flood plain informatiol studies were made during the fiscal year at a cost of $23,285. Flood plain studies completed Requesting Date Federal Location agency completed cost Duck Creek, Scott County, Iowa......... .................. State of Iowa....... Sept. 1965 ...... 34 Indian and Dry Creeks, Linn County, Iowa ................. ..... do .......... Dec. 1964...... 8078 Prairie Creek, Linn County, Iowa..............................do............ Mar' 1966...... 40. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Collection and study of hydrologic data, including storm ad sedimentation studies, continued. Hydrologic studies during fiscal year cost $3,501. Engineering studies on paint tests a 4 corrosion mitigation studies continued at a cost of $59,328 durin the fiscal year. MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. * Section of river covered in this report is divided into three reaches, under supervision and direction of district engineers at St. Louis, Rock Island, and St. Paul. Section in St. Louis District extends 105 miles from mouth of Missouri River to mile 300 above Ohio River; Rock Island District extends about 314 miles from mile 300 to 614; and St. Paul District extends about 244 miles from mile 614 to Soo Line Railroad bridge, Minneapolis. Location. Mississippi River rises in northern part of Minne- ta, flows about 2,360 miles southerly and empties into Gulf of exico. Portion included in this report extends about 663 miles rom mouth of Missouri River to Soo Line Railroad bridge, Min- lealolis. Latest map and profile showing this section of river is '1 House Document 669, 76th Congress, 3d session. A map show- l1g Lake Pepin is in House Document 511, 79th Congress, 2d Session. A map of section Minneapolis to Dubuque is in IHouse tocument 515, 79th Congress, 2d session. A map showing loca- ton of drainage districts (Bellevue, Iowa, to Missouri River) is Rivers and Harbors Committee Document 34, 75th Congress, 1st session. Previous projects. See page 1199 of Annual Report for 1963. Existing project. Provides for a channel of 9-foot depth and adequate width between mouth of Missouri River (1,179 miles from the gulf) and Soo Line Railroad at Minneapolis, by con- Struction of a system of locks and dams, supplemented by dredg- "I. Project also provides for further improvements at St. Paul provide a basin extending downstream from Robert Street tridge for 2.7 miles, and at Minneapolis to provide adequate terminal facilities, and for other harbor improvements and mis- cellaneous work. Pertinent data for existing and proposed locks and dams, harbors, etc., are given in tables below. All dams are concrete Three dams (Upper St. Anthony Falls, 1 and 19) are fixed, remainder are movable. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $232,536,700 exclusive of amounts expended on previous DrOjects. See House Document 669, 76th Congress, 3d session, for a report of Chief of Engineers dated February 27, 1940, con- taining a general plan for improvement of Mississippi River be- tween Coon Rapids Dam and mouth of Ohio River for purposes of navigation, power development, flood control, and irrigation needs. Pertinentdata for existing and proposed locks and dams c1 Lock dimensions Depth on Character of foundation miter sill - -_ ___ ___ - ___- __________ _________ .Per- cent Estimated Great- Upper corn- Year cost of Miles Width est normal plete opened each lock O above of length pool locks, to and dam Ohio Miles from cham- avail- Lift eleva- Upper Lower dams, navi- including t' River nearest town ber able (feet) tiont (feet) (feet) Lock Dam and gation work in 0 (feet) for full work pool width in pool H3 (feet) St. Anthony Falls, 853.9 In city of Minneap- 56 400 49.2 799.2 15.7 I 13.7 Some limestone, main- Limestone.......... 299 ........ 3$18,520,000 upper lock. olis, Minn. ly sandstone. No piles. St. Anthony Falls, 853.3....do.............. 56 400 526.9 750.0 13.7 510.3 Sandstone. No piles.. Sandstone......... 100 1959 412,380,000 lower lock and dam. 100 1917 62,350,000 Lock and dam 1...... Lock and dam 2...... 847.6 815.2 Minneapolis-St. Paul... 1.3 above Hast- 535.9 35.9..... 12.2. 725.1 513.5 712.5 16.0 7.6 J 10.1 lRock and piles in gravel. 15.1 Piles in sand, silt and Piles in gravel....... Piles in sand, silt, 100 1930 ,96,499,000 O ings, Minn. 8110 8600 12.2 687.2 22.2 13.0 } clay. and clay. 100 1948J 110 600 8.0 675.0 17.0 14.0 .... do............Piles in sand....... 86 1938 6,537,000 Lock and dam 3...... 796.9 6.1 above Red Wing, Minn. Lock and dam 4...... 752.8 Alma, Wis.... 110 600 7.0 667.0 17.0 13.0 Piles in sand and Piles in sand and 89 1935 6,524,000 gravel gravel Lock and dam 5...... 738.1 Minneiska, Minn..... 110 600 9.0 660.0 18.0 12.0 ..... do............ Piles in sand....... 88 1935 5,791,000 ti Lock and dam SA..... 728.5 3 above Winona, 110 600 5.5 651.0 18.0 12.5 Pilesin sand............do............. 68 1936 6,755,000 Minn. Lock and dam 6...... 714.3 Tremepaleau, Wis.... 110 600 6.5 645.5 17.0 12.5 Piles in sand, gravel, Piles in sand and 100 1936 4,892,000 . and silt. clay. Lock and dam 7...... 702.5 Dresbach, Minn...... 110 600 8.0 639.0 18.0 12.0 Piles in sand and Piles minsand........ 89 1937 6,329,000 S graveL Lock and dam 8...... 679.2 Genoa, Wis.......... 110 600 11.0 631.0 22.0 14.0 Piles in sand, gravel, Piles in sand and 86 1937 7,019,000 and broken rock. gravel. Lock and dam 9...... 647.9 3.3 below Lynx- 110 600 9.0 620.0 16.0 13.0 Piles in sand......... Piles in sand....... 84 1938 7,630,000 ville, Wis. Lock and dam 10...... 615.1 Guttenberg, Iowa..... 110 600 8.0 611.0 15.0 12.0 . (..... ......... .... do........... 83 1936 5,746,000 Lock and dam 11..... 583.0 3.7 above Du- 110 600 11.0 603.0 18.5 12.5 Piles in sand, gravel .... do............ 99 1937 7,370,000 buque, Iowa. and silt. Lock and dam 12..... 556.7 Bellevue, Iowa....... 110 600 9.0 592.0 17.0 13.0 Piles in sand and Piles in sand and 99 1938 5,522,000 gravel, gravel Lock and dam 13...... 522.5 4.3 above Clin- 110 600 11.0 583.0 19.0 13.0 Piles in sand, clay and .... do......... 100 1938 7,502,000 ton. Iowa. gravel Lock and dam 14...... 493.3 3.7 below Le 110 600 11.0 572.0 20.5 13.5 Rock..... ......... Rock............. 98 1939 5,925,000 Claire, Iowa. 0) Le Claire lock (Canal) 493.1 3.9 below Lte 80 320 11.0....... 17.6 10.9 .... do.............. .................. 100 1922 (1 Claire, Iowa. Lock and dam 15...... 482.9 Foot of Arsenal Island, 110 600 16.0 561.0 1124.0 11.0 .... do.............. Rock.............. .... 95 1934 9,637,00)0 Rock Island, Ill. 110 360 16.0. ....... 1117.0o 11.0 0 Lock and dam 16...... 457.21 1.8 above Mus- 110 600 9.0 545.0 17.0 12.0 Piles in sand and Piles in sand and.... 95 1937 8,163,000 catine, Iowa. graveL gravel. Lock and dam 17...... 437.1 4.2 above New 110 600 8.0 536.0 16.0 13.0 .... do............... Piles in sand........ 99 1939 5,785,000f Boston, Ill. 0 Lock and dam 18.... 410.5 6.5 above Bur- 110 600 9.8 528.0 16.5 13.7 Pilesin sand......... Pilesin sand 90 1937 8,995,000 0 lington, Iowa. Lock and dam 19..... 364.2 Keokuk, Iowa........ 110 1358 38.2 518.2 14.0 139.2 }Rock............... Rock.............. 100 1913 0 110 1,200 15.0 13.0 { 99 1957 1214,466,000 Lock and dam 20...... 343.2 0.9 above Can- 110 600 10.0 480.0 15.0 12.0 .... do............... Rock and piles in 97 1936 6,105,000 ton, Mo. sand and gravel. Lock and dam 21...... 324.9 2.1 below Quincy, 110 600 10.5 470.0 16.5 12.0 Piles in sand and Piles in sand and 95 1938 7,645,000 Ill. gravel. gravel. Lock and dam 22...... 301.2 1.5 below Saver- 110 600 10.2 459.5 18.0 13.8 Rock............. Rock............. 99 1938 5,217,000 Lock and dam 24..... Lock and dam 25..... 273.4 241.4 ton, Mo. Clarksville, Mo........ Cap Au Gris, Mo...... oo ..... ... oo .449.0 oo ... .... 15.0 15.0 ... 434.0 19.0.. 19.0 o. 12.0 12.0 Rock: piles in sand ... Piles in sand and Piles in sand....... Piles in sand and 7,422,000 9,623,000 gravel. gravel. Lock and dam 26 202.9 Alton, Ill........... 110 600 1324.0 419.0 1119.01410.00 4 Piles insand.........Piles in sand....... 100 1938 12,824,000 0 (Henry T. Rainey 100 360 1324.0......... 16.0 1 410.0 Dam). w ..... ..... ..... Total locks and . .. 219,173,000 dams. 1 Elevations of pools 1 to 22 and at St. Anthony Falls are mean sea level 44 9 In addition, $1,965,300 expended from previous projects. 1912 adjustment; pools 24, 26 are mean sea level 1929 adjustment. 1o Existing Le Claire Canal lock is used as auxiliary to lock 14; previous 2 Existing dam, owned by Northern States Power Co., is complete. project cost, $540,000. SIncludes dredging above upper lock. (Federal cost only.) u Depth over upper poiree sill. Depth over upper miter sills is 27 feet, at 4 Includes lower approach dredging and dredging between upper and lower lock 15. locks. (Federal cost only.) 6 Based on pool elevation 723.1 in pool 1 which is crest of dam. Pool is 1 $640,868 for first lock was reported by Mississippi River Power Co., trans- ferred to Government free in lieu of improvements destroyed. (Annual Report, normally maintained at elevation 725.1 by flashboards. 1928, pp. 1118-1119.) Present estimate includes $13,132,600 for main lock and 6 In addition, $1,948,800 expended from previous projects and $1,349,600 from ,,j appurtenant work. O & C appropriation for first of twin locks. Excludes lock and dam replace- 1 Lift above pool to be created by future dam 27. Lift at extreme low water ment program. about 28.2 feet. ? Old upper guard sill. 14Based on possible future pool to be created by future dam 27. 8 Landward lock. 0 z t-4 Miscellaneous harbor improvements Project Approximate size (feet) Actual or Name Miles above Location Type depth Percent estimated 1 00 H Ohio River (feet) complete cost Width Length Harriet Island Harbor, St. Paul, 840.2 In city of St. Paul........................ Small-boat.................. 70 925 0 2$59,000 Minn. O St. Paul Harbor, Minn............ 836 5-839.2 In city of St. Paul, Minn. Channel improve- Commercial.................. 400-1,0002.7 (mile) 100 217,100 839.7 ment. Small-boat harbor and channel en- Small-boat................... 0-300 400 100 230,200 largement. Hastings Harbor, Minn........... 813.2 Lower end of city of Hastings, Minn......... ... do...................... 200 500 100 74,300 Red Wing Harbor, Minn.......... 791.4 In city of Red Wing, Minn......... ..... Commercial.................. 300 1,200 100 3146,800 791.1 .... do... Small-boat..... ......... 450 800 100 8,700 0 439,400 o Do......... ............ ................................... Bay City Harbor, Wis........... 785.9 Upper end of Bay City, Wis.... ....... ... do.................... 50-100 5,990 100 Lake City Harbor, Minn........ 773.0 In city of Lake City, Minn.......... ..... Small-boat................. 400 600 100 93,500 and Commercial............ 500 1,000 100 Pepin Harbor, Wis.... ....... 767.1 In city of Pepin, Wis... 760.0 Upper end of city of Wabasha, Minn........ ................... Small-boat..... ......... 50 175-400 5100,100 41,700 z Wabasha Harbor, Minn........... ... do..... ........... Alma Harbor, Wis.... ....... 751.3 Upper end of Alma, Wis......... ... ....do...................... 300 500 100 56,300 Winona Harbors, Minn........ 726.0 In city of Winona, Minn., Latsch Island.... .....do...................... 200 1,100 100 89,800 726.2 Crooked Slough..... .. ................ Commercial.... ......... 200 6,000 100 84,700 Lansing Harbor, Iowa............. 663.3 Upper end of town of Lansing, Iowa....... Small-boat.... .......... 170 500 100 95,300 Prairie du Chien Harbor, Wis...... 635.5 Upper end of city of Prairie du Chien, Wis... ... do................ 400 800 100 85,500 635.0 In Marais de St. Friol East channel below Commercial.................. Hwy bridges. 1,000 ft frontage 93,100 z Cassville Harbor, Wis............. Dubuque Harbor, Iowa........... 606.6 At Cassville, Wis.... 579.4 At Dubuque, Iowa.... ............... .............. Small-boat................... Commercial.................. 1,500 178,000 55,200 ~tj Bellevue Harbor, Iowa............ 555.6 At Bellevue, Iowa ..... ............. Small-boat.................... 100 850 0 87,000 0 Savanna Harbor, Ill.............. 537.0 At Savanna.............................. ...... do..... ........... 120 1,685 0 108,000 Clinton Harbor, Iowa............. 518.8 Joyce Slough............................. ....do..... ........... 170 1,800 0 42,000 Moline Harbor, Ill............. 488.0 At Moline............................... ..... do... ........... 190 520 0 128,000 .L Davenport Harbor, Iowa (Lindsay 484.2 At Davenport............................ .....do...................... 200 1,150 100 262,100 .0 Park). Rock Island Harbor, .Ill........... 479.8 At Rock Island.......................... Entrance channel to small-boat 100 1,100 100 31,000 harbor. Davenport Harbor, Iowa (Credit 478.7 Credit Island Slough ....................... Small-boat................. .i 100 1,510 0 87,000 Island). Andalusia Harbor, Ill.............. 473.0 Andalusia Slough.............................do..(2 channels)......... 40 200 to 435 0 20,600 Muscatine Harbor, Iowa.......... 455.5 At Muscatine.................................do........... ... 150 950 100 455.6 ........................................ Freight terminal approach chan- 200 1,890 100 353,000 nel. New Boston Harbor, IlL........... 433.1 Boston Bay............................... Small-boat..... ......... 90-135 600 0 23,000 Fort Madison Harbor, Iowa........ 383.7 At Fort Madison.........................do...................... 250 900 100 184,200 Keokuk Harbor, Iowa............ 383.5 At Keokuk...............do........................... 100-160 1,015 0 202,000 Warsaw Harbor, Ill............... 359.1 At Warsaw... ..................... do...................... 100 600 0 81,000 Quincy Harbor,I11................. 327.3 Quincy Bay..... ...................... do.......... 200-300 9,000 0 k6) HannibalHarbor, Mo.........../ Grafton Harbor,11............... Total...................... 308.8 218.5 .. At Hannibal...............................do..................... At Grafton............................./.....do .............. ...................................... Toa / ... . .. . ...... . 3,,600 ............................ .... 1 Freight termination approach channel at mile 383, Fort Madison, Iowa, is in ..... /... .................. . ... ... 5/ ...I ..... 180-260 .. 1,200 i .. /.... 129,000 223,000 /.. 3709,600 ... estimated at $121,000 (1959), including $11,900 for preauthorization study and / active and excluded from cost estimate. Cost estimated at $43,200 (July 1957). $3,000 Coast Guard costs. "Harbor opposite Hamburg, Ill." portion is deferred and excluded from cost 2In addition, local interests will contribute $59,000. estimate, cost estimated at $116,000 (1960), including $5,200 for preauthoriza- 3In addition, local interests contributed $3,455. tion study and $2,000 Coast Guard costs. "Commercial Harbor at Alton, Ill." 4 In addition, local interests contributed $9,500. portion is deferred and excluded from cost estimate, cost estimated at $306,000 5 In addition, local interests contributed $15,900. (1960), including $27,000 for preauthorization study. "Small Boat Harbor at 6 Maintenance only, estimated at $5,000 annually. - Alton, Ill." portion is considered inactive and excluded from cost estimate, cost z CI z . p. 1160 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Additional features entering into cost of project: Facilities for public use, convenience, and safety . . . $1,640,000 Rectification of damages caused by seepage and backwater ... 1 5,759,700 Regulating works between lock and dam 26 (Henry T. Rainey 0 Dam) and Missouri River ................................ 1,331,00 Improvement of Beaver Slough at Clinton, Iowa, for navigation 193,600 Rectification of damages caused by silt deposit, Clarksville, Mo. 104,300 Miscellaneous ............................................. 625,500 Total additional features .............................. 9,654,100 Total existing project .............................. . . 232,536,700 1 Excludes $205,000 (1955) for remedial works in Sny Island Levee Drainage District, Illinois, to be restudied after completion of Sny Basin flood control project. 2 Excludes $227,000 (1965) for inactive remedial measures at Sandy Slough, Mo. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Sept.22,1922 Dredging channels to landing places ....................... None. July 3, 1930 Project adopted from Illinois River to Minneapolis; Chief H1.Doe. 290. 71st Cong., 2d sess. I as amend- of Engineers granted discretionary authority to make ed by P.R. such modification in plan as may be deemed advisable. No. 10, Feb. 24, 1932. June 26, 1934 Operation of snag boats and operation and care of locks and None. dams to be provided for with funds from Department of the Army appropriations for rivers and harbors. Aug. 30, 1935 Missouri River established as lower limit of project ......... 1.1. Doe. 137, 72d Cong., 1st ses. Aug.26, 1937 Extend 9-foot channel above St. Anthony Falls, Minn., in- Do. eluding adequate terminal facilities for Minneapolis, Minn. Aug. 30, 1935 St. Paul Harbor......................................... Rivers and Harbors Committee e Doi. 44, 74th Cong., let sess. Aug.26, 1937 Determine damages to drainage and levee districts caused Rivers and Harbors Committet ;e Doe. by seepage and backwater, and cost of making rectifica- 34, 75th Cong., 1st sess. tion thereof. Dec. 22, 1944 Public park and recreational facilities.... ............... Doc. 103, 76th Cong., 1st sesg s. Do...... Remedial works to correct damages caused by seepage and If. Doe. 137, 76th Cong., 1st ses 8. backwater at Cochrane, Wis. Do...... Such changes or additions to payments, remedial works, or None. land acquisitions authorized by River and Harbor Act of 1937 (River and Harbor Committee Doc. 34, 75th Cong., 1st seas.), as Chief of Engineers deems advisable. Do...... St. Paul, Minn., channel enlargements, small boat harbor, H. Doe. 547, 76th Cong., 3d sess 3. and roadway. None........ Vertical bridge clearance at Minneapolis to 26 feet above S. Doc. 54, 77th Cong., 1st sees. estimated stage for discharge of 40,000 c.f.s. - Mar. 2, 1945 Winona, Minn, basin ................................... H. Doe. 263, 77th Cong., 1st ses3. Do...... Future modification of lock and dam 2 for power devel- H11.Doe. 432, 77th Cong., 1st seos 3. opment. Do...... Provides for cash contribution by local interests in lieu of H. Doc. 449, 78th Cong., 2d ses 9. alteration of privately owned bridges and utilities for St. Anthony Falls project. July 24, 19460 Lake City, Minn., harbor................................ I. Doe. 511, 79th Cong., 2d sess9. Do...... Wabasha, Minn., harbor................................ H. Doc. 514, 79th Cong., 2d sess9. Do...... Payment of damages caused by backwater and seepage, IH. Doe. 515, 79th Cong., 2d sess 9. pools 3 to 11. Do...... Hastings, Minn., harbor................................. 11. Doc. 509, 79th Cong., 2d sessB. Do...... Lansing, Iowa, harbor................................... S. )oc. 192, 79th Cong., 2d sess. June30, 1948 Fort Madison, Iowa, harbors ............................. . Doe. 661, 80th Cong., 2d sees E. May 17, 1950 Payment of damages caused by pool No. 14 at Clinton, Iowa. S. Doe. 197, 80th Cong., 2d sess. Do...... Davenport, Iowa, harbor................................11. .Doc. 642, 80th Cong., 2d seas9. Do...... Muscatine, Iowa, harbors..... .................... 11. Doc. 733, 80th Cong., 2d sees9. Do...... Alma, Wis., harbor..................................... I. Doc. 66, 81st Cong., 1st seas. Do...... Hannibal, Mo., harbor...... ..................... 11. Doe. 67, 81st Cong., lnt seas. Do...... Prairie du Chein, Wis., harbors............................11. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . IDoc. 71, 81st Cong., l1t sesq. Do...... Opposite HIamburg, Ill., harborl...... I1. Doe. 254, 81st Cong., 1st sees 8. Do...... Rock Island, Ill., harbor......... ........................ 11. Doe. 258, 81st Cong., let sees 8" Do...... Permits such change in location of Winona, Minn., small None. boat basin authorized by River and Harbor Act of 1915 (I. Doc. 263, 77th Cong.)., as Chief of Engineers deems ad- visable. Sept. 3, 1954 Construct Crooked Slough Harbor at Winona, Minn., in lieu 11. Doe. 347, 83d Cong., 2d sees. of previously authorized commercial harbor. Do...... Payment of damages caused by pool No. 24 at Louisiana, Mo.. Ii. Doe. 251, 82d Cong., 1st sess July 3, 1958 Permits modification of vertical bridge clearances and au- If. Doe. 33, 85th Cong., 1st sess. thorizes completion of St. Anthony Falls project. Do...... Small boat and commercial harbors at Alton, 111.2.......... H. Doc. 136, 84th Cong., 1st ses I. Do...... Payment of lump sum amounts for damages to drainage and h. Doe. 135, 84th Cong., 1st ses s. levee districts caused by operation of navigable pools. Do...... Improve and maintain Beaver Slough at Clinton, Iowa..... HI. Doe. 345, 84th Cong., 2d sess!. July 14, 1960 Construct Industrial Harbor at Red Wing, Minn........... I. Doe. 32, 86th Cong., let sees. Footnotes at end of table. MISSISSIPPI AND MISSOURI RIVER-MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 1161 Acts Work authorized Documents Oct. 23,1962 Construct small-boat harbors at Savanna, Moline, Andalusia, II. Doc. 513, 87th Cong., 2d sess. New Boston, Warsaw, Quincy, and Grafton, Ill.; Bellevue, Clinton, Davenport, and Keokuk, Iowa; St. Paul (Harriet S Island), Minn.; and Bay City, Pepin, and Casaville, Wis. Do .. Payment of damages caused by pool 24 at Clarksville, Mo.... H. Doce.552, 87th Cong., 2d sess. Remedial works at Sandy blough, Mo..................... II1. Doc. 419, 87th Cong., 2d sess. SDef erred. nactive. Local cooperation. (a) Small-boat harbors authorized in Siver and Harbor Act of 1962 are subject to conditions that local interests make a cash contribution toward cost of construe- 11 (except in case of Quincy Harbor which involves mainte- 0lo lance only of an existing harbor); furnish lands and rights-of- Way for construction and future maintenance; hold the United states free from damages; provide and maintain mooring facilities and utilities; reserve accommodations for transient 5hlall boats; make necessary relocations or alterations; and es- tablish public bodies empowered to regulate use, growth, and development of harbors. Assurances were requested for small- boat harbor at upper end of Harriet Island. (b) fully complied With for all completed items and for small-boat harbors at Clin- ton,,Iowa, Andalusia and Warsaw, Illinois. L censes. Federal Power Commission collects from non-Fed- eral licensees annually to recompense the United States for use f Government dams for generation of hydroelectric power. Atiounts collected are returned to U.S. Treasury. Following is a list of amounts collected through fiscal year 1966. Annual Collectiosq to Dam Licensee charge June 30, 1966 t Anthony Falls, ....... Nortern States ............. $3,300.... $23,597 OWer lock and dam Power Co. (No. 2056) Lock anid dam No. 1 ..... Ford Motor Co. (No. 362) ... .95,440... .3,913,040 Total project.............................................3,936,637 Tierminal facilities. Considered conmerce. adequate for existing Operations and results during fiscal year. St. Paul District, ]ew work: Extension of channel above St. Anthony Falls- ontract for esplanade and access road was completed. Addi- tional payment on claim for construction of upper lock was made all d other minor work was accomplished by contract. Mis- tellaneous engineering was performed by hired labor. Cost of the St. Anthony Falls project for the year was $147,638. I'iarbors: Contracts for construction of Bay City and Pepin Rarbors were completed. Miscellaneous engineering was ac- COmplished for these and Harriet Island Harbor by hired labor. ublic-use facilities: Work on master plans for pools 3, 7, and , and on land-use maps for 3, 4, 5a, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 was accom- Dished feering,byetc., hired labor. Cost of work by classes: Design, engi- for St. Anthony Falls, $8,107; for harbors, $3,763; or public-use facilities, $10,835. Lock and dam construction, 189,531; harbor construction, exclusive of funds returned to local 1162 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 interests, $121,402. Cost by hired labor, $27,891; by contract, $255,747. Federal funds, $258,346; contributed funds for harbors (exclusive of funds returned), $25,292. Maintenance. Channel dredging to remove shoal areas was performed. Govern- ment pipeline dredge William A. Thompson removed 1,409,445 cubic yards of material at 26 locations at a cost of $498,840. Government derrickboat No. 767 removed 210,959 cubic yards of material at 16 locations for $265,852. Seven locations were dredged by pipeline dredges under two contracts under which 132,138 cubic yards of material were removed at a cost of $146,- 136. Radio installation was continued and miscellaneous surveys, reports, and other work was carried on by hired labor for $306, 042. Total cost of maintenance was $1,216,870. Operating and care: Locks and dams were operated as required and necessary repairs were made to those and appurtenant structures. Study for replacement of lock No. 1 was continued and a report sub- mitted. Roller gates were painted at No. 6, bluff repair was con- pleted at No. 1, repairs were made to dwellings and buildings and other work was accomplished at a cost of $2,611,228. Rehabilita- tion of operating machinery made necessary by 1965 floods waS continued at a cost of $137,805. Total cost of operating and care was $2,749,833. Rock Island District, new work: Planning and construction of small-boat harbors at Cassville, Wis.; Andalusia, Ill.; Daven- port (Credit Island), Iowa; Savanna, Ill.; and Warsaw, Ill., cost $34,854. Planning for rock excavation in pool No. 16 near Horse Island and Crescent Bridge cost $111,104. Planning aid construction of recreational facilities, consisting of boat-launch* ing ramps, parking areas, picnic tables, access roads, and fire- places were in progress at a cost of $43,139. Maintenance: Hired labor forces performed maintenance activities as follows: Reconnaissance and condition surveys cost $150,808. Channel dredging at 24 locations by U.S. pipeline dredge Thompsot' 1,366,963 cubic yards of material removed at a cost of $318,987. Regulating work consisting of repair and restoration of wing n closing dams cost $17,954. Snagging and channel sweeping cost $11,625. Service bridges and dam gates were sandblasted anjd painted at cost of $19,467. Maintenance of recreational facil" ties cost $41,263. Radio communication with locks and danms was continued at cost of $47,833. Winter repairs to lock and dam 20 cost $156,412. Non-submersible dikes at locks 12, 13, and 18 were repaired at cost of $78,612. Lake Odessa levee was repaired at cost of $70,115. Other maintenance activities cost $154,876. Operating and care: Locks and dams were operated as required and necessary repairs were made thereto and to appurtenant structures at a cost of $1,792,991. Income and credits to operation were -$71,778. St. Louis District, new work: Costs for planning of recreas tion facilities in pool No. 24 were $4,623 for engineering and de- sign, and $385 for supervision and administration. Costs for planning of recreational facilities in pool No. 25 were $5,844 for engineering and design and $425 for supervision and administra- tion, and $81 for surveys and layouts. Costs for planning of MISSISSIPPI AND MISSOURI RIVER-MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 1163 recreation facilities in pool No. 26 were $7,301 for engineering and design and $740 for supervision and administration. Main- tenance: $310,168 for dredging 1,716,789 cubic yards; $16,309 for repairs to Government structures; $19,004 for replacement of electrical and mechanical equipment; $10,618 for restoration of str4ctural components, locks 24, 25, and 26; $1,195 for roads; $84 for engineering and design; and $24,275 for supervision and administration. Operating and care: Locks and dams were OPerated as required, and necessary repairs were made thereto and to appurtenant structures at a cost of $584,090. Condition at end of fiscal year. The 9-foot channel as a whole s about 89 percent complete. For information pertaining to locks, dams and harbors, see tables "Existing project." St. Paul District, status of land and flowage acquisition: About 50,479.72 acres of land in fee, including 47,630 acres used by De- lartment of thile Interior in accordance with a cooperative agree- lIent and general plans, and easements on 15,417.8 acres of land are owned or controlled in pools 1 to 10, inclusive. In addition, fee title to 12.46 acres and perpetual easements on 2.78 acres of land for St. Anthony Falls and perpetual easements over 219.87 acres of land for harbors have been obtained and Department of the Army holds special rights over 62,874.13 acres owned by De- Partment of the Interior in pools Nos. 3 to 10, inclusive. Land acquisition is complete. Work remaining to complete portion of Project in St. Paul District: Completion of guide wall extensions at Nos. 3 to 10, inclusive, except No. 6; realinement of channel at Wilds Bend; construction of small-boat harbor at St. Paul (Har- et Island)', Minn.; and construction of additional recreational facilities. Condition of channel on June 30, 1966, was such that ntrolling depths of 9 feet at low water and minimum widths for ag-haul common-carrier service were available in all pools. Xcept for lock No. 1 which is in poor condition due to age and obsolescence, structures are in good condition. Total costs of existing project (St. Paul Dist.) to June 30, 1966: Cost Regular funds Public works Emergency Total funds relief funds w Workl ...... 256,100,295 $24,210,071 $9,071,214 $89,381,580 altenance.......... ..... 25,181,020........................... .. 52,181,020 Total.............. ........... 108,281,315 24,210,071 9,071,214 141,562,600 2 xcludes $1,222,808 contributed funds. Includes $7,673 expended in pool No. 11. dericludes $159,359 transferred from Rock Island District covering pro rata share of costof er~ek boat ll ercules. A $762,196 expended between xc(ludes 1930 on operating and care of works of improvement erProvisions of permanent indefinite appropriations for such purposes. IRock Island District: Major construction items, including all locks and dams, are completed and in operation. Work remain- ing to complete portion of project in Rock Island District consists Of: Construction of guide wall extensions at Nos. 16, 18, and 21; thooring facilities at Nos. 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 22; upper approach improvement at No. 19; upper approach dike at No. 20; removal of remainder of lateral dam in pool No. 14; rock and/or 1164 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 conglomerate excavation in pools Nos. 14, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 21; construction of small-boat harbors at ten locations; and construe- tion of additional recreational facilities. Status of land and flowage acquisition: Acquisition of land in pools Nos. 11 to 22f inclusive, consisting of 93,601 acres in fee and 10,562 acres il flowage easement, has been completed. Condition of channel on June 30, 1966, was such that controlling depths of 9 feet 3t low water and widths suitable for long-haul common carrier serV" ice were being maintained in all pools. Total costs of existing project (Rock Island Dist.) to June 30, 1966. Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitation Total Regular..............1$............. 59,349,048 2 3$48,813,730 $41,035 $108,2 8 Public works......... ................ 17,403,322 ........................... 1740356 Emergency relief..... ................. 11,338,865 ................................ 1 Total......................... 89,091,235 48,813,730 41,035 136,946, 1 $687,709 was transferred to St. Louis District in fiscal year 1958. Exclude $201,167 trans ferred to St. Paul and St. Louis Districts covering their pro rata shares of cost of derrick boat Hercules. 2 Costs subsequent to fiscal year 1953 included with operating and care. of sIncludes $395,442 expended between 1930 and 1936 on operating and care of worksS improvement under the provisions of the permanent indefinite appropriation for such purpose St. Louis District, status of land and flowage acquisitionS: Acquisition of land in Pools Nos. 24, 25, and 26, involving 41,451 acres of land in fee and flowage easements over 6,600 acres, is complete. Work remaining to complete: Construction of guide" wall extensions at locks 24 and 25; construction of recreatiol facilities for public use; construction of 3,800 linear feet of dikes and 3,100 linear feet of revetment upstream of mouth of Missour' River, and a small-boat harbor at Grafton, Ill. Conditiono channel on June 30, 1966, was such that controlling depth of 9 feet at low water and generally suitable widths for long-haul common carrier services were maintained in all pools and between lock and dam 26 and Missouri River. Total cost of existing project (St. Louis Dist.) to June 30, 1966: Regular Public work Emergency Total funds funds relief funds New work.... ..................... 1$16,002,920 $10,282,566 $2,440,266 $28,72506 Maintenance........................... ....................... 21,070,174 .070 2.. . Total.......................... 37,073,094 10,282,566 2,440,266 49,7992 1 Includes $47,800 transferred from Rock Island District covering pro rata cost of derricy boat HIercules and $687,709 transferred from Rock Island District. Total Federal cost of existing project to end of fiscal year for the three districts was $328,304,526, of which $206,198,567 was for new work ($131,452,263 regular funds, $51,895,959 public works funds, and $22,850,345 emergency relief funds), $122,064, 924 regular funds for maintenance, and $41,035 regular funds for rehabilitation. MISSISSIPPI AND MISSOURI RIVER-MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 1165 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Yal Year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWork: $4,023,446 $950,413 PPropriated.......... $5,898,935 $387,880 $438,072 $255,613,520 Maintenance ........... 6,664,5894,277,919 911,518 511,248 466,842 255,211,211 ApPropriated.......... 5,754,1006,020,3006,135,7007,806,4008,160,100 132,477,802 Rehabiliaon. . . . . . ..... 5,578,107 6 ,112 ,905 6,215,693 6 ,5 66 ,165 7 ,720 ,8 11 130 ,537 ,521 APProPriated.......... -18,965 ............................... .............. 41,035 ot................. l0,11...... ................................. 41,035 1ncludea $49,012,646 for new work and $8,472,597 for maintenance of previous projects. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT* . This district comprises eastern Wisconsin, south central por- tIo of Upper Peninsula of Michigan, northeastern and central 9.lnois5 , and portions of northwestern Indiana and southwestern chigan. Area in Illinois, southeastern Wisconsin and north- estern Indiana is included in drainage basin of Illinois River above south boundary of Federal property at New La Grange lock and dam, exclusive of basin of Bureau Creek, Ill. It also includes Western shore and southern end of Lake Michigan and its tribu- tary drainage basins from Peninsula Point, Mich., to drainage asin of St. Joseph River, Mich., and waterways connecting Illi- nois River with Chicago and Calumet Rivers. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Navigation--Continued 1. Big Susamico River, Wis. 1167 26. Reconnaissance and condi- 2. Burns Waterway Harbor, tion surveys ......... 1215 Ind .................. 1168 27. Other authorized naviga- 3. Calumet Harbor and River, tion projects .......... 1216 Ill. and Ind......... 1170 28. Navigation work under 4. Cedar River Harbor, Mich. 1173 special authorization .. 1216 . Chicago Harbor, Ill .... 1174 Alteration of Bridges 6. Chicago River, Ill ...... 1176 29. Calumet River Bridges., Ill. 1216 g* Fox River, Wis. ........ 1177 Beach Erosion Control 8. Green Bay'Harbor, W... . Illinois Waterway, 1180 30. Evanston, Ill. .......... 1217 Ill. and 31. Authorized beach erosion Ind. ............. ..... 1182 control projects ...... 1219 10. Indiana Harbor, Ind. .... 1190 11. Kenosha Harbor, Wis. ... 1192 Flood Control 12. Kewaunee Harbor, Wis.. 1194 32. Farm Creek, Ill........ 1219 13. Little Bay De Noc, Glad- 33. Mouth of Sangamon River, stone Harbor, and Kip- Ill ................... 1220 1 ling, Mich. . ......... 1196 34. Oakley Reservoir and chan- 14 Manitowoc Harbor, Wis.. . 1197 nel improvements, Ill. . . 1220 5. Menominee Harbor and 35. Sid Simpson flood control SRiver, Mich. and Wis.. . 1198 p r o j e c t (Beardstown, 16, Michigan City Harbor, Ind. 1200 Ill.) ................. 1221 17. Milwaukee Harbor, Wis... 1202 36. Inspection of completed 18" New Buffalo, Harbor, Mich. 1204 flood control projects .. 1222 19, Pensaukee Harbor, Wis.. . 1205 37. Other authorized flood con- 20. Port Washington Harbor, 1224 2 W is. .. . . ........... trol projects .......... 2. Racine 1206 38. Flood control work under Harbor, Wis .... 1208 special authorization ... 1224 22. Eheboygan Harbor, Wis. 1209 23 Sturgeon Bay and Lake General Investigations Michigan ship canal, 39. Surveys ............... 1225 2 Wis. ................ 1211 40. Collection and study of 24. Two Rivers Harbor, Wis. 1212 basic data ............ 1225 25. Waukegan Harbor, Ill... 1214 41. Research and development 1225 1. BIG SUAMICO RIVER, WIS. Location. A small stream which flows easterly into Green tay, an arm of Lake Michigan. Mouth of the river is about 8 Iiles north of Green Bay Harbor, and about 44 miles south- Westerly from Menominee Harbor, Mich. and Wis. (See Lake Survey Chart 725.) 1168 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. An entrance channel 8 feet deep at loWV water datum from that depth in Green Bay to 1,800 feet above the river mouth, with widths of 100 feet in bay and 60 feet il river, total length of channel is about 3,700 feet. Project depth is referred to low water datum for Lake Michigan, which 1s 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (In" ternational Great Lakes Datum, 1955). Fluctuations of water annual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a temporary nature, level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or belOW due to wind and barometric pressure, of about 3 feet above or be- low mean lake level prevailing at the time. New work for com- pleted project cost $20,243. Existing project was authorized bY 1937 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 498, 74th Cong., 2d sess.)* Latest published map is in project document. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Small private wharves along lower 11/2 miles of river, used by local fishing interests. Ample space 3s available for additional fishing wharves when required. Facili- ties considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Condition surveYs were made by hired labor at a cost of $4,861. U.S. bucket dredge Winneconne operations in July and August 1965 removed 12,772 cubic yards of material at a cost of $18,139. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com-* pleted in 1938. Dredging channel was started in September 1938 and completed in November 1938. Controlling depths at low water datum are 6.2 feet in entrance channel in Green BaY to mouth of river, thence 6 feet in lower 0.4 mile of river. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1 966 New work: Appropriated................................. $20 243 Cost............................................................ .2 0,243 Maintenance: 0 94 Appropriated.......... $9,073 $1,197 $690 $3,148 $23,000 Cost.................. 9,673 1,197 690 3,148 23,000 770,794 S 2. BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IND. Location. On Indiana shore of Lake Michigan in Porter County, 18 miles east of Illinois-Indiana State line, 14 miles east of Indiana Harbor, 9 miles east of Gary Harbor, 14 miles west of Michigan City Harbor, Ind., and 19 miles southeast of Calumet Harbor, Ill. (See Lake Survey Chart 75.) Existing project. Provides for (a) a north breakwater 4,050 feet long; (b) a west breakwater 1,330 feet long; (c) an east breakwater 1,340 feet long; (d) an approach channel 30 feet deep and 400 feet wide, extending from deep water in Lake Michigan to north end of east breakwater; (e) an entrance chan' nel 28 feet deep and 800 feet wide, from end of approach channel to west breakwater; and (f) a 225 acre outer harbor 27 feet deep. Project was authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. RIVERS AND IHARBORS-CIHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1169 160, 88th Cong., 1st sess.) Authorizing act also provides the Secretary of the Army may reimburse State of Indiana for ex- Penditure of funds used to construct such portions of project as approved by Chief of Engineers and constructed under super- Vsion of the Chief of Engineers. Unless construction of project toegins within 3 years from enactment of this act, the authority oreimburse State of Indiana shall expire. State of Indiana Shall furnish assurance satisfactory to Secretary of the Army that Water and air pollution sources will be controlled to maxi- mlum extent feasible in order to minimize any adverse effects on Dublic recreational areas in the general vicinity of the harbor. to appropriation is authorized to be made for construction of iVsproject until Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore has been Oted upon by both Houses of Congress during the same Congress. roject depths are referred to low-water datum for Lake Mich- ian, which is 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Surface Uctuations of Lake Michigan in the locality have ranged from a high monthly mean of 5.18 feet above to 1.15 feet below low-water datum. Monthly means within any year have varied from 0.36 to 2.23 feet. Temporary changes in water level may range from a few inches to several feet for periods varying from a few rainutes to several hours. Estimated costs (1966) are $14,500,000 Iederal and $76,400,000 non-Federal, a total cost of $90,900,000. Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, ease- lents, and rights-of-way for construction and future mainte- Cance of project and for aids to navigation upon request of the Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil-disposal areas de- termined and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embank- ments therefor or costs of such retaining works; hold the United states free from damage due to construction and maintenance of Droject, including damages resulting from any shore erosion that lay occur; reimburse the United States for all excess costs for dredging if not done by hydraulic methods; provide and maintain adequate public terminal and transfer facilities open to all equally; provide and maintain depths in berthing areas and local access channels serving the terminals commensurate with depths Provided in related project areas; construct a fully integrated steel plant; construct adequate east and west shore connections 820 and 2,500 feet long, respectively. Construction of these ore connections is to b)e done either before or with construction of breakwaters by the United States; and furnish assurances that ater and air pollution sources will be controlled to maximum extent feasible in order to minimize any adverse effects on public recreational areas in the general vicinity of the harbor. Partial assurances have been requested. State of Indiana is proceeding ader provision of authorizing act with construction of the arbor. Harbor being constructed by the commission provides for: A north breakwater 4,630 feet long; a west outer bulkhead 1,200 feet long; an approach channel 30 feet deep and 400 feet ide, extending from deep water in Lake Michigan to north end Of east bulkhead being constructed by others; an outer harbor 28 feet deep having an area of about 94 acres; an east harbor arm 1170 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 27 feet deep having an area of about 18 acres; and a west harbor arm 27 feet deep having an area of about 71 acres. Bethlehem Steel Co. placed a cold rolled sheet and tin mill il operation in November 1964. Midwest Steel Co., a division of National Steel Corp., constructed initial phase of an integrated steel producing plant on a 750 acre tract adjacent to and west of proposed public terminal. This rolling and finishing mill begal operation late in 1960. Terminal facilities. Under construction by Port Commissiol of State of Indiana. Operations and results during fiscal year. Indiana Port Cor" mission completed plans and awarded a contract in June 1966 for construction of north breakwater and west outer bulkhead of the Federal portion of harbor. State will request reimbursement from Federal Government as provided in the authorizing act. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. 3. CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, ILL. AND IND. Location. Northeastern Illinois (Cook County), near souther end of Lake Michigan, 121/2 miles south of Chicago Harbor, and known on Great Lakes as South Chicago Harbor, is in southerlY part of and within corporate limits of city of Chicago, except for a part of breakwaters and of anchorage behind same, which are in Indiana. Calumet River is within Chicago city limits. (See Lake Survey Chart 755.) For description, see page 1471 of Annual Report for 1932. Previous projects. For details see page 1400 of Annual Ie- port for 1962. Existing project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions................. ................ Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth (feet) Northerly breakwater......... ......................... 6,714 ................... . . Southerly breakwater......... ......................... 5,007 ................... . North pier............ ...................... ....... 2,450 ...................... Approach channel............... .................. .. 8,000 3,200........... 2...29. Outer harbor.......................................... 10.000 3,000.............. 28. River entrance ........................................... 4,000 290............... 27. Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Bridge to turning basin No. 3. 21,100 200 and variable... 27.earth. 28-rock. Turning basin No. 3 to turning basin No. 5.................. 8.000 Variable........... 27. Approach into Lake Calumet.............................. 4,000 400................ 27. Extension into Lake Calumet............................. 3,000 1,000.............. 27. Deepening turning basins 1, 3 and 5........... .......... .... . ................... 27. For a more detailed description see page 1246 of Annual Re- port for 1963. Project depths are referred to low water datum for Lake Michigan, 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec. (International Great Lakes Datum-1955.) FluctUa* tions in stage of river are practically those resulting from change of water level in Lake Michigan. On Lake Michigan, seasonal fluctuations in mean stage from low water in winter to high water in summer average about 1.2 feet. Local and temporary fluctuations of 0.1 to 0.5 foot, due to wind and difference in barometric pressures, occur daily. Seiches of 3 to 4 feet occur at infrequent intervals. Estimated cost for new work (1966) 1 RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1171 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents and reports Work authorized Mar 31899 Outer harbor protected by breakwater............... Annual Report, 1896, pp. 2584, et seq., 2, 1905 J and H.oc. 277, 54th Cong., 1st se s Five turning basins..... ...................... H. D)oc. 172, 58th Cong., 2d sess. ept. 22,1922 Provided for shape and dimencions of turning basins ... ..... H. Doc. 349, 70th Cong., 1st sess. Consolidated the 2 projects for Calumet Harbor and Calu- Aug.30 met River. Detached breakwater; dredging outer harbor to existing H1.Doc. 494, 72d Cong., 2d sess. project depth and dimensions; deepen river-entrance chan- nel and river to existing project depths: widen and straighten river channel; 5 turning basins to same depth as adjacent channel, Do **.. Dredging areas A and B in south end of Lake Calumet and 11. Doe. 180, 73d Cong., 2d seas. Mar.2,19453 an entrance channel 300 feet wide to 21 feet deep. An approach channel to harbor 3,200 feet wide and 28 feet H. Doe. 233, 76th Cong., 1st sess. (con- deep through shoals outside breakwater and closing exist- tains latest published map of river.) July 14,1960 iag gap between breakwaters. Depth of 29 feet in lake al)proach; 28 feet in outer harbor; If. Doc. 149, 86th Cong., 1st sess. (con- Oct. 23, 1962 arid 27 feet in river entrance tip to E.J. & E. Ry. Bridge. tains latest published map of harbor). Deepen, widen and straighten channel in Calumet River HI.Doe. 581, 87th Cong., 2d sess. from E.J &E. Rty Bridge to and including turning basin 5, to a depth of 27 feet in earth and 28 feet in rock; deepen turning basins 1, 3 and 5, to 27 feet; enlarge turning basins 3 and 5; a channel into Lake Calumet to 27 feet deep for 3,000 feet and a width of 1,000 feet; and eliminate turning b-g in 2 d 4..f..... j. t aumsz ana i rom project . ucd in public works administration program Sept. 6, 19,13, and Dec. 16, 1933. 2l eoM leted portion is inactive (Dredging in front of U.S. Steel Corp.). 'coInpleted portion is inactive (breakwater closure). $25,185,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects. aLocal cooperation. Fully complied with for completed modifi- cations and acts of 1960 and 1962. For act of August 30, 1935, requirements for dredging in front of U.S. Steel Corp. remains. d erminal facilities. Calumet River and outer harbor: 41 ocks handling foreign oversea, lake vessels, and river barge argoes. Most important cargoes handled are iron ore, grain, elcl, limestone, sand, gravel, iron and steel products, and mis- e laneous package freight. There are two boatyards, one for a'epalrs to large lake vessels (this yard has two large drydocks), b 1d the other boatyard has one floating drydock for repairing and building commercial river craft. Government owns one dock Which is used by the Corps only. There are no other publicly OWned docks on Calumet River, except the one reserved for ex- clusive use of city of Chicago fireboat. Lake Calumet: One riVately owned dock which handles domestic and small foreign can vessels and barge cargoes of package freight and iron from steel products. Chicago Regional Port District owns and leases others three transit sheds and two grain elevators. perations and results during fiscal year. New work: 1935 d~ification: Total Government costs were $28. 1960 modifica- t E:Engineering and design and supervision and administra- i.cost $18,701. 1962 modification: Dredging under contract t river channel between E. J. & E. RR bridge to north end of rock section was completed in November 1965 with 257,673 cubic yards of material removed at a cost of $404,718. Dredging under contract in river channel between north end of rock section and end of project including a channel into Lake Calumet was com- pleted in June 1966 with 2,091,564 cubic yards of overburden and 82,917 cubic yards of rock removed at a cost of $3,310,924. 1172 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Dredging and pier protection under contract at E.J. & E. 87 Bridge was started May 4, 1966. Work is about 51 percent com- plete with costs of $102,492. Dredging and pier protection under contract at Norfolk and Western Ry. Bridge was started May 6' 1966. Work is about 82 percent complete with costs of $88,43. Channel deepening at Old Calumet Western Railway Bridge Wb started and completed at a cost of $33,947. Government cos' during the fiscal year were $242,559. Total costs were $4,183," 071. Maintenance: Condition surveys and flue dust investitga tions were made by hired labor at a cost of $25,243. paymieni of $67,497 was made to contractor for dredging in outer harbo'r For a resum6 of litigation to fix the responsibility for illegal deposition in navigable waters of a portion of Calumet River (United States of America, Plaintiff v. Republic Steel Corpora tion, International Harvester Company and Interlake Iron Corp ° , ration, defendants) and settlement agreement see Annual Reports for 1962 and 1964. Each defendant was issued a permit setting forth conditions pertaining to future discharges and deposits' Pursuant thereto the three companies paid $25,000 for each of the calendar years 1964 and 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about. 8 percent complete. Work remaining to complete project consist of removing hard materials in outer harbor; deepening and cor" pleting the widening and straightening of Calumet River; d closing the gap between breakwaters. Timber crib breakwater (6,712 feet, completed in 1904; concrete superstructure completed in 1924) is in fair condition. Cellular type steel-sheet pile brea water (5,007 feet, completed in 1935) is in fair condition. Unde permit from the Secretary of War, the Youngstown Sheet Tube Co. and its predecessors removed all of south pier (cora pleted in 1897) and replaced it with a concrete dock wall 2,961 feet long and 50 feet southerly of pier's original location. Under permits from the department, the Defense Plant Corp. built tWVo sections of bulkheads on east side of river between a point oP posite the Semet-Solvay slip and south side of former turnid basin 3 at about 117th Street. United States widened and deeP* ened the channel adjoining the new bulkhead except through the rock section, where widening was done by the corporation. Depths at low water datum in outer harbor varied from 26 to 29 feet. Controlling depth in entrance channel is 27 feet. Con trolling depth in river is about 27 feet to and including turning basin 5 and in Lake Calumet channel. Head of navigation for deep-draft vessels in the river is at turning basin 5 on north side of 130th Street. Total costs of existing project to end of fiscal year were $28,164,245, of which $20,788,475 was for new wor ($17,751,872 regular funds and $3,036,603 public works funds), $6,686,769 regular funds for maintenance, and $689,001 regular funds for rehabilitation. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1173 _Cost and financial statement . .seal. 2 Total to Year . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966L Nework: Appropriated.......... $864,000 $1,241,700 $3,770,000 $4,526,810 $5,072,393 $23,004,300 aintenance . ............305,058 1,755,3403,465,6784,487,3664,201,800 21,644,448 PPropriated.......... 248,610 221,400 234,400 495,251 118,500 26,807,472 Rehablitation ............. 78,125 342,588 284,400 445,538 92,740 26,731,999 CPPropriated.......... 230,000 428,001 . ....................... 689,001 S143,310 520,648 ............................... 689,001 eludes $855.973 for new work and $45,230 for maintenance for previous projects. 9 arcicludes $620,000 in contributed funds in settlement pursuant to decree (No. 54-0-1608) re- Ein removal of flue-dust, 4. CEDAR RIVER HARBOR, MICH. Location. At mouth of Cedar River on west shore of Green e Y, an arm of Northern Lake Michigan about 68 miles north of City of Green Bay. Nearest harbors are Menominee, Mich., 27 1iles southwest and at Escanaba, Mich., 20 miles northeast. (See Lake Survey Chart 70 and 702). 30 tsting project. Two parallel entrance piers, a west pier 1 feet long and a rubblemound east pier 2,100 feet long with a llular sheet pile pierhead and sport fishing walkway; an en- tiance channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep from that depth in reen Bay to mouth of Cedar River about 2,100 feet long; an lier channel in Cedar ,River 1,400 feet long, 80 feet wide, and 8 e. deep upstream to about 150 feet below State Route 35 StIdge; and a turning basin 150 feet wide near upstream end of 11fer bridge channel. Project depths are referred to low-water d atunr for Lake Michigan, which is 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum 1955). Fluctuations of water level are seasonal changes of about Ole-half foot above or below annual mean stage and extreme Ructuations of a temporary nature, due to wind and barometric Dressures, of several feet above or below mean lake level pre- vailing at the time. New work for completed project cost $28,464. Estimated costs (1966) of new work for 1965 modifica- tlOll are $739,000 Federal and $155,000 non-Federal which in- d es00cash contribution of $134,000. Total project cost is Existing project was authorized by the I following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports - Au, 2, 1882 Dredge an entrance channel (datum at 580.69 feet above S. Ex. Doe. 12, 47th Cong., 1st sess. mean tidle at New York) and construct two parallel piers Oct. 28, 165 extending lakeward from mouth of Cedar River. Modification of project to provide for two parallel entrance If. Doc. 248, 89th Cong., 1st sess. (con- piers including a new rubblemound east pier with a sport tains latest published map). fishing walkway; an entrance channel from Green Bay to mouth of Cedar River; and a turning basin. Local cooperation. The 1965 modification provides that local Iterests will contribute in cash 15 percent of first cost of new avigation facilities and 50 percent of first cost of structural modifications necessary to provide for sport fishing walkway on op of new east pier, the total of such contributions being $134,- 1174 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 000 (July 1966 estimate) to be paid in a lump sum before starting construction and subject to final adjustment after actual costs are determined; provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for coI" struction and future maintenance of project and for aids to navigation upon request of Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil-disposal areas; and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads and embankments therefor or cost of such retaining works; hold the United States free from damages due to construction works and maintenance of project; provide and maintain necessary mooring facilities and utilities, including an adequate public land ing with provision for sale of motor fuel, lubricants, and potable water and a parking lot with adequate sanitary facilities avail able to all on equal terms and including dredging of berthing areas to depths commensurate with the related project depthS; and reserve anchorage spaces and mooring facilities adequate for accommodation of transient craft. Terminal facilities. No permanent docking, mooring, or handling facilities. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized by the 188 act was completed in 1886 and has been inactive since 1896. 5. CHICAGO HARBOR, ILL. Location. Northeastern Illinois, near southern end of Lale Michigan; 85 miles southerly from Milwaukee, Wis. (See Lalce Survey Chart 752.) Previous projects. See page 1396 of Annual Report for 1962' Existing project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions............................................ Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth (feet) Shore arm north breakwater..................................... 2,250 .............. .......... North exterior breakwater...................................... 5,413 .............. Southerly extension ........................................ 5000................ 5,000 .. Main inner breakwater......................................... 4,036 ... ............. South inner breakwater........................................ 2,550 .............. ........ 29 Approach channel............................................. 6,600 800 28 Inner channel................................................. 2,200 470 28 M aneuver area... ........................................ 1,660 750 Outer Basin contains about 970 acres. Inner basin contains about 224 acres. For more detailed description see page 1242 of Annual Report for 1963. Depths in north part of inner basin and entrance channel to Chicago River west of lock and controlling works o Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago are referred to normal pool elevation 576.2 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955) east or lakeward of lock, depth in entrance channel is referred to loW- water datum for Lake Michigan elevation 576.8 feet above Inter" national Great Lakes Datum. Seasonal fluctuations is mean stage from low water in winter to high water in summer average about 1.2 feet. Local and temporary fluctuations of 0.1 to 0.5 foot, due to wind and difference in barometric pressure, occur dailY. Seiches of 3 to 4 feet occur at infrequent intervals. Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $4,184,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1175 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reportal July 11,1870 Inner breakwaters and inner basin.......... ............... A. Ex. Doe, 114, 41st Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report 1879, pp. 1562- 14. 1880g 1557. Exterior breakwater ..................................... Annual Report, 1879, pp. 1562-1567. Jun Present project depth in basin, and entrance to Chicago Annual Report, 1897, pp. 2790-2791. Mar. 3, 1899 River. Shore-arm and southerly extension of exterior breakwater.. H. Dec. 710, 62d Cong, 2d sess. Modification of area to be dredged in inner basin............11. Doc. 1303, 64th Cong., 1st sess. ., 1931 Shore-arm extension of exterior breakwater transferred to Public 797, 71st Cong. Mar. 2, 1945 Lincoln Park Commissioners. Resumption of iurisdiction over shore-arm extension break- Public 14, 79th Cong. water and over certain navigable waters in Lake Michigan Oct. 23, 1962 which lie in northwestern part of outer harbor. Deepen a lake approach channel to 29 by 800 feet wide for 11. Doe. 485, 87th Cong., 2d sess. 6,600 feet; and deepen a channel and maneuver area inside harbor entrance to 28 hv 1.30(0 feet wide. ILatest Published map is in Annual Report for 1914, opposite p. 2924. ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Twenty docks for handling various tYpes of cargo. Most important cargoes handled are coal, oversea aeckage freight, and newsprint. Passenger excursion steamers are Served by 6 of these 20 docks. There is one privately owned larine service mooring and two yacht club docks. City of Chi- eago Owns five docks, one of which is used for commercial pur- Poses. The U.S. Government has six docks; two used by Coast QGard, two by Navy, and two )bythe Corps. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Ad- vance planning by hired labor for work under 1962 modification Was continued. Construction contract was awarded. Mainte- nance: Condition surveys and engineering and design were per- formed by hired labor. Rehabilitation: Stone placement on exterior and inner breakwaters was continued by hired labor, and Work in the amount of $463,899 was accomplished. Contract for teel sheet piling and stonefill at north pier and concrete parapet for North Shore connection breakwater was completed in July 965. Cost of work placed was $16,001. Engineering and de- Ir and supervision and administration cost $63,709. ,Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 82 reent complete. The 1962 modification remains to be com- leted. Entrance to Chicago River was improved by construc- tlon of parallel entrance piers, and dredging a channel 190 to 470 feet Wide, and 21 feet deep. Northerly arm of inner breakwater (timber 4,034 feet, with 304 feet of shore return on north end, CO3°leted in 1875; concrete superstructure completed in 1934) is 1 good condition. Southerly arm of inner breakwater (timber .,544 feet completed in 1880; concrete superstructure completed c 1930) 'is in good condition after current rehabilitation by Co1version to rubblemound which is virtually complete. Ex- cerior breakwater (timber cribs 5,418 feet, completed in 1889; 0ocrete superstructure completed in 1930) is deteriorated under Water and was rehabilitated in 1966 by conversion of lake side Of structure to rubblemound. Southerly extension (rubblemound 2,227 feet, completed in 1917), and south arm (rubblemound ,532 feet, completed in 1920; and concrete caisson 1,185 feet completed in 1922) are in good condition. Shore-arm extension 1176 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 (timber cribs 2,250 feet, completed in 1917; inner 1,050 feet capped with concrete superstructure 1951; next adjoining 1,000 feet capped with stone blocks 1956; outer 200 feet capped W1i concrete superstructure 1952) is in good condition. Channel side of north pier (concrete superstructure, 975 feet, completed in 1908, repaired in 1949, and rebuilt with steel sheet piling i 1965) is in good condition. Controlling depth from west end lock to Michigan Avenue Bridge near mouth of Chicago River 1 21 feet below normal pool; and east of lock for about 1,400 fee over a width of 470 feet is 21 feet below low-water datum an thence 27 feet to breakwater entrance gap. Water level land- ward of lock is controlled, level maintained at an elevation lower than that of Lake Michigan except during excessive storm rtlin off. Total costs of existing project were $8,479,548, of whic $3,441,758 was for new work, $3,766,233 for maintenance, an $1,271,557 for rehabilitation. Cost and financial statement Total t Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1 966' New work: 29,849 Appropriated......... ........................ $27,000 ............ $747,000 $46287,763 Cost................. ... . ........... 13,501 $11,124 7,289 3, Maintenance: 93895 Appropriated.......... $49,400 $12,276 3,488 6,026 30,000 3,71,6,233 Cost................. 47,652 14,024 3,488 6,026 2,338 3,7 Rehabilitation: Appropriated...................... 30,000 300,000 647,000 355,000 1,3232 000 Cost................. ........... 9,815 67,366 650,767 543,609 1,2 11:551 1Includes $446,005 for new work for previous projects. 6. CHICAGO RIVER, ILL. Location. Cook and Lake Counties, Ill., navigable porti0OSl being wholly in Cook County and city of Chicago. (See La e Survey Chart 752). For description, see page 1467 of Annual Report for 1932. Previous projects. See page 1394 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project. For details see page 1241 of Annual Ie- port for 1963. All depths are referred to normal pool, elevatiol 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (11" ternational Great Lakes Datum-1955). Portion of project authorized by River and Harbor Act of 1946, is in deferred-for- restudy category. Estimate (1960) for this portion is $65,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 3, 1899 For project depth of 21 feet in lieu of that fixed by act of Specified in act. June 3, 1896. June 13, 1902 Turning hasins....................................... Do. A ' Mar. 2, 1907 Interpreted by Chief of Engineers, Apr. 11, 1908, as adopting II. Doc. 95, 56th Cong., 1st sess. (d new work of the then existing project .Annual for 21-foot depth nual Report, 1900, p. 3863, Report, 190i), p. 709.) Mar. 2, 1919 Eliminated all work, except maintenance o'main river, North I. Doc. 1294, 61th Cong., 1st sess. Branch, North Blranch C(anal, and turning basin. .2 July 24, 1916 Dredging channel 9 feet deep to within 0 feet of existing II. Doc. 767, 78th Cong., 2d sess bulkheads and river banks from North Ave. to Belmont Ave., thence 9 feet deep and 50 feet wido to Addison St. Latest published mrnap is in Annual Report for 1914, opposite p. 2928. 2 Contains latest published map of North Branch above North Ave. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1177 Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed modi- ications. Act of July 24, 1946, provided improvement of channel Is subject to condition that local interests furnish assurances they will hold the United States free from damages which may "esult from construction and maintenance of improvement. Re- quiremnent has not been complied with. STerminal facilities. There are 28 docks handling lake vessel aad river barge cargoes. Most important cargoes handled are 9ad, gravel, coal, salt, cement, and petroleum products. There are three boatyards, two of which are used for servicing rec- reational craft and one engaged in constructing and servicing S4all craft as well as small Navy vessels. U.S. Government has two docks used by the Corps exclusively. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Condition surveys and engineering and design were performed by hired labor. A contract to remove about 160,000 cubic yards material was awarded in June 1966. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except for Work authorized by 1946 River and Harbor Act. Controlling d'epths below normal pool for practicable widths: In main river, 21bsi,21fettn.ot feet; in North Branch to turning basin, 21 feet; in North 1Venue turning basin 21 feet; North Avenue to Addison Street, C0.feet; and in North Branch Canal, 15 feet. Water level in Clcago River is controlled, the level is maintained at an eleva- "o lower than that of Lake Michigan, except during excessive torm runoff into the river. Heads of navigation for deep-draft veSsels are North Avenue on North Branch, and Archer Avenue /West fork of South Branch, 5.97 and 5.52 miles, respectively, tro Michigan Avenue Bridge. Head of navigation for barge rafic is near Touhy Avenue on North Shore Channel, about rilles from Michigan Avenue Bridge. Total costs of existing Project to June 30, 1966, were $3,162,103, of which $544,679 was new work and $2,617,424 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Total to cal Year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Work. oPPro riated....................... .................................... $1,500,565 MasItenance: ............... ................................... ............ 1 00,565 ropriated.......... $3,291 $250,312 $4,800 3,966 $315,000 3,036,293 . ............. 3,830 195,478 59,384 4,216 5,594 2,726,887 Includes $955,886 for new work and $109,463 for maintenance for previous projects. 7. FOX RIVER, WIS. 1Location. Rises in Columbia County, Wis., and flows about 1 miles northerly into Green Bay. Wolf River, physically main river but by designation a tributary of Fox River, rises in central Dart of Forest County, Wis., and flows southerly. (See Lake Urvey Chart 720 for Lake Winnebago and lower Fox River). Previous projects. See page 1368 of Annual Report for 1962. 1.'Xsting project. Deepening and widening channel of Fox IVer from DePere 7 miles above mouth to confluence of Wolf 1178 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 River, a total length of 59 miles, to be 6 feet, with 9.6 feet in rock cut below DePere lock and 7 feet in other rock cuts on lower river below Menasha lock; construction and reconstruction of 19 locks and 9 dams; a concrete retaining wall at Kaukauna; con* struction and maintenance of harbors having depths of 6 feet oI Lake Winnebago; widening Neenah Channel to 100 feet, with 6-foot depth for about 1 mile; and dredging, snagging, and other- wise improving Wolf River 47 miles from its mouth to Nei London, depth to be 4 feet. All depths are referred to standard low water. Ordinary and extreme fluctuations of water level above and below mean stages on various parts of improvement' due to floods and other causes, are about as follows: Ordinary fluctuations Extreme fluctuatio ns Place Above mean Below mean Above mean Below stage (feet) stage (feet) stage (feet) stage (feet) 4,5 Lower Fox River at DePere Dam................ 1.0 1.4 2.5 3.9 Lake Winnebago....... ................. 1.2 1.3 2.2 30 Wolf River at New London..................... 5.0 2.6 8.8 River and Harbor Act of 1925 portion of project is considered inactive and excluded from cost estimate. Estimated cost (1954) of this portion is $2,886,000. Existing project was authorized by the following : Acts Work authorized Documents and reports . Aug. 5,18861 Improvement of Fox River.............................. Annual Report, 1885,pp. 2041-20 (plan of a board approved Dejgi. 1884,as modified by Corps of neers, May 14, 1886). se. Sept. 19,1890 Dredging Fond du Lac Harbor on Lake Winnebago......... H. Ex. Doc. 24, 51st Cong.. let Annual Report, 1890,p. 2390. June 3, 1896 Improvement of Wolf River............... No prior survey or estimate. Do...... Improvement of Stockbridge, of Calumet and Miller Bay, Do. June 13, 1902 and of Brothertown Harbors, on Lake Winnebago. Mar. 2, 1907 Mar. 3, 19252 Increased depth in rock cuts on lower river, widen Neenah H. Doe. 294, 68th Cong., let se"s Channel, and a concrete retaining wall at Kaukauna. June 26, 19343 Operation and care of locks and dams provided for with funds from War Department appropriations for rivers and har- bors. July 3,19585 Sec. 108. That Federal project structures, appurtenances, S. Doc. 3910, 85th Cong., 2d sess. and real property of Upper Fox River, Wis., be disposed of to State of Wisconsin. 1 $2,600,000 inactive. s $286,000 inactive. 8 Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act. 'Latest published maps are in II. Doc. 146, 67th Cong., 2d sess., and H. Doc. 294, 68t. Cong., 1st sess. 6 Transfer completed June 1962. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Wharf and landing facilities are in gen- eral, adequate for accommodation of existing commerce. Locks and dams, Fox River, Wis. I /Depth at normal Miles Dis- Clear Avail- pooCharacter Year Name of lock and dam from Nearest town tance width able Lift of Kind of dam Type of construction com- Actual Green (miles) (feet) length (feet) Breast Lower foundation plete cost Bay (feet) wallI miter (feet) sill (feet) 09l 2 . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . DePere lock 2 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1 DePere............. 36.0 146.0 8.9 10 3 12.0 Rock....................Concrete............1936 $229308 DePeredam Little Kaukauna lock 2 . . . . . . . . . 2 .. ....... 7.2.....do....................... . 13.0 ..... 13.0 ..... do do......... 6 36.0 146.0 ... 7.2 ... ........ ..... do. 8 0 ... 9.5 "..n.grve..... Clay... Fixed4. .. do............... Piers and3...417 ... do.............. 209,53 362,427 z Little Kaukauna dam 2.. .. ...... 13.1 ..... do........ . 6 ............................... Clayandgravel. Fixed 4.....Piers and concrete..... 1926 179,398 Rapide Croche lock . . . . . . . . . . 19.2 Wrightstown.... 2 36.0 146.0 .8.3 88 9.3 Rock....................... Concrete............. 1934 228,738 Rapide Croche Dam2 2 .. . . . . . . . . 19.3 . .... do ... 2 2...................... ..... do......... Fixed 34... ... do.... ........ 1930 118,975 Kaukauna fifth lock . 2 ......... 22.8 Kaukauna............. 356 144.0 9 1 6.7 7.4.. do.................. Composite.......... 1898 513,310 Kaukauna fourth lock 2 .......... 23.1 ..... do................ 36 6 144.1 10 2 6 9 6.0.....do....................... Stone masonry... . . 1879 37,536 Kaukauna third lock2. ........ 23 3 ..... do................ 30.6 144.0 10 2 6 9 6.3 ..... do....................... do............. 1879 39,948 0 Kaukauna second lock2. . . . . . 23.4 . ..... do................. 35.0 144.0 9.6 60 6.0 ..... do.....................do............. 103 24,313 Kaukauna first lock 2 ... .. ........ ..... 23 6 ..... do................ 35.1 144.4 11.0 6.9 6 0 ..... do................ ..... do.............. 1883 38,704 Kaukauna Dam . do.......................................... . ............. do......... 24.0 ..... Fixed3 4.... 1931 Concrete............. 123,763 Kaukauna guard lock.......... 24.0 ..... do................. 40.0................ 9.4.............do.......................Stone masonry........ 1891 12,630 Little Chute combined lock: Lower.................... 25.4 Little Chute.... 1 35.4 146.5 10.9 6.0 8.6 ..... do........................ . do.... . 1879 102,304 Upper.................25.42 ..... do........ .1 36.3 144.1 10.6 7.6 6.0 Hardpan..................... ........... . 1879 Little Chute secondlock .. .. 2 26.4 26.5 ..... do................ do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.0 35 . 4 144.2 13.8 . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. 8.0 6 .6 6.1 . . . . . . Rock.......... .............. . . . . . d o . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ..... do.. . . . do . . . . ... . . 11881 9 04 548,555 7 , 8 17 . . . . . . lock Little Chute first 2(guard) . . . . . . ..... .. 3 . Little Chute2 Dam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 26.6 do..... ............... .... ........... ........... .......... .. Fixed 4.....Concrete.............12 82,554 0 Cedars lock 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.3 ..... do......... 1 35.0 144.0 9.8 6.8 7.3 . do............do .... .. Stone masonry....... 1888 34,972 Cedars Dam . 2 . . . .. . . . . . 27.4 ..... do......... 1 ................... ................. do........ Fixed3 4 .... Concrete............ 1933 84,973 Appleton fourth lock2 . . . . . . . . . . 30.7 Appleton ....... 1 35.0 144.0 7.6 8 1 7.9 . do.... ..... ......... Stone masonry... 1907 40,893 Appleton lower dam2 . . . . . . . . . . . 30.9 .... do......... 1 ..................... ................ do........ Fixed3 4. .. Concrete.........1...1934 73,903 Appleton third lock 2 . . . . . . . . . . 31.3 ..... do................ 35 0 144.0 8.7 6.0 8 6 do..........do....... .. Stonemasonry... 1909 32,238 wo Appleton second lock 2 . . . . . . . . . . 31.6 ... do..............35 1 144.6 9.6 6.9 6 0 Clay.. ........................... do........... .. 1901 22,940 Appleton first lock . 31.9 .. do.... ....... 35 .0 144.7 10.0 6.6 6.0 Rock................... .... do.............. .1884 36,004 Appleton upper 2 dam........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.2 ..... do..... ........... .. ........................ .. do......... Fixed3....... Concrete....1940 151,558 no Menashalock 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.0 Menasha............... 35.4 144.0 8.5 7.2 8.0 Clay........... .............. Composite........... 1890 519,326 Menasha Dam . 37.8 ..... do................. ...... ...................... Hardpan....... Fixed3...... Concrete............1937 84,686 2 Depth shown is on breast wall, which is controlling depth for upper pool. 3 Provided with sluices. 2 Original structure built prior to assumption of control by United States on 4Flash boards used. Sept. 18. 1872. Partially rebuilt. 1180 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Conditions survey , discharge observations, and inspections and reports were co" ducted by hired labor at a cost of $33,403. Locks and dams were operated as required and necessary repairs made to strue" tures at a cost of $292,934. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete except for inactive portion. Nineteen original locks and nine original dams have been rebuilt. (See existing project for year of completion of each.) Structures and dredging in pools have increased original depths generally about 2 feet. Controlling depths at standardlow water Fox River: 6.0 DePere to mouth of Wolf River .............................. Wolf River: 4.0 Mouth to 1 mile below Partridge Crop Lake .................... 0 Thence to New London ........... ..................... Harbors on Lake Winnebago: 5.0 Stockbridge Harbor ................ .................. 50 Brothertown Harbor ...................................... 5.0 Calumet Harbor ........................................... 06,0 Fond du Lac Harbor ......................................... Practicable drafts of vessels are about one-half foot less thaf controlling depths which prevail all year except when rivers are frozen, usually from December 1 to April 1. Work remaining t complete project consists of dredging in upper portion of Wolf River, and rock removal and deepening Neenah Channel on lowVer Fox River, which are no longer considered necessary. Except for Menasha lock, which should be rebuilt, existing locks and dams .re in generally fair to good condition. Costs for existing project. to June 30, 1966, were $513,424 for new work and $9,581, for operation and maintenance, a total of $10,094,566. In acdd- tion, $3,706,187 expended between July 5, 1884, and June30 1935, on operating and care of works of improvement under prO vision of permanent indefinite appropriation for such purposes Cost and financial statement Total year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: Appropriated.......... ............ $3, Cost...3....................................................... 76333 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $321,040 $385,595 $405,100 $361,400 $400,000 13, Cost.................298,978 316,951 492,217 323,022 326,337 13,3 1Includes $3,239,910 for new work and $89,309 for maintenance for previous projectS. 8. GREEN BAY HARBOR, WIS. Location. At mouth of Fox River, at head of Green Bay, about 180 miles from Milwaukee, Wis., via Sturgeon Bay Canal, and about 49 miles southwesterly from Menominee Harbor, Mich., and Wis. (See Lake Survey Chart 725.) Previous projects. See page 1366 of Annual Report for 1962 Existing project. For completed modifications see page 1366 RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1181 f Annual Report for 1962. The 1945 modification provides for a urning basin at mouth of East River. The 1962 modification lrovides for: rjt diensions........ ...................... Length (miles) Width (feet) Depth (feet) rance channel ........ 500 26 e annel o .... .......................... 300 24 Po 'T ... XRrae 1hne ................ rance channel..1.8 I 1.8 300 26 -ver .. .............. ........................... 3V... 3ri 24 i o River)'at mout of East River .............. .............. ' oFox ,' i.ng............................. 4sin ,Vr ................ 3.2 Varies 1,000 1,000 lOr a more detailed description of project see page 1216 of dilual1 Report for 1963. Project depths are referred to low-water unat for Lake Michigan, 576.8 feet above mean water level at 19 her Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum- oleh). Fluctuations of water level are seasonal changes of about te-haalf foot above or below annual mean stage and extreme fluc- ations of a temporary nature, due to wind and barometric pres- thre of about 21/2 feet above or below mean lake level prevailing at the time. Federal estimate is $6,564,000 (July 1966). Non- treralestimateis btited f unds. $490,000 (July 1966) includin $100,000 con- Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports e1 186 uy13,189 6 Outer channel and revetment at Grassy Islandl.... ....... Annual Report, 1867, p. 70. 2 Inner channell Unpublished report approved Aug. 3, 1892. 8,191 0 Turning basin at DePere........ ................. H. )oc. 222, 61st Cong., 2d sess. 3, 1915 7 57 of turning basin at DePere ................... Maintenance IL.Doc. 1017, 64th Cong., lst seas. ,30',923 Increasing depth of inner channel and turning basin to 18 feet. H. Doe. 294, 68th Cong., 1st ses.2 193i Deepen outer channel to 22 feet with widening and straight- Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. ueninginside of Tail Point Bend, widen channel in Fox 40, 72d Cong., 2d sess. a4' 26, 193[ Rtiver through city of Green Bay to 22 feet. Turning basin above Chicago & North Western Ry. Bridge.. Rivers and rIHarbors Committee 2 Doe. Mar.2 73, 74th Cong., 2d sess. oct.. 194 . Doc. 95, 76th Cong., 1st seas. 3,196 5 Turning basin at mouth of East River .......... 2 Deepen and widen 9 miles of entrance channel to 26 by 500 H. Doe. 470, 87th Cong., 2d ses.2 feet, respectively; 3.6 miles of entrance channel to 24 by 300 feet; and 3.2 miles of existing Fox lRiver to 24 feet deep. 2CaDleted under previous projects. 1o 4n latest published maps. elued in Public Works Administration program, Jan. 3, 1934. ,Ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. There are 28 wharves for handling coal, cetroleumMproducts, grain, pulpwood, and wood pulp, sulphur, o tient, building materials, and miscellaneous commodities located to ths waterway. Green Bay provided a municipal wharf open crthe public. Facilities are considered adequate for existing O,tlherce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 1962 modification; advance planning by hired labor was continued. Maintenance: Condition surveys were made by hired labor at a cost of $12,225. U.S. bucket dredge Winneconne operations in May and June 1965 removed 34,330 cubic yards of material at a cost of $21,580. U.S. dipper dredge Kewaunee operations in July and August 1965 removed 116,681 cubic yards of material at a cost of $90,046. 1182 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about percent complete.The 1962 modification is not complete. Dredg ing turning basin at mouth of East River was commenced il July and completed in October 1963. Dredging turning bas,,l above Chicago & North Western Railway Bridge was commenced in August and completed in September 1938. Dredging. River inner channel and turning basin below DePere to existii project depth was commenced in June and completed in October 1926. East revetment at Grassy Island, built in 1869, is in f35 condition. West revetment was entirely removed in July 19te Controlling depths at low-water datum are 22 feet in outer channel and channel through city of Green Bay, 20 feet turning basin above railway bridge; 18 feet for about 900 feet i. Fox River channel to DePere, thence for about 1.3 mile co trolling depth is about 15 feet; thence to turning basin at Depee depths are 18 feet or more. Depths of 18 feet or more available in about the northeasterly half of turning basin, and depths remainder of turning basin are generally 11.0 feet or more. Total costs to June 30, 1966 for existing project Funds New workl Maintenance Total $924,192 $2,214,056 0,8 Regular....................................................... Publio works.... ....................................... 940,800 .............. 4 Total.. ... ................................. 1,864,992 2,214,056 409, 1 Excludes $100,000 contributed funds. Cost and financial statement Tots'alto6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: Appropriated...................... $260,000 -$75,000 $46,604 $350,000 2$2 Cost.............................. 8,900 164,700 49,168 33,507 22 Maintenance: 28,81 Appropriated.......... $79,200 75,200 255,300 157,774 384,000 2 ~ o~ e Inlds$8,7 okad$,1 Cost................. 1~~~~~~~~ 84,76475,256 aneac278,067o rvospoetl o135,007 123,851 2 1Includes $396,974 for new work and $8,918 for maintenance for previous projectS. Excludes $100,000 contributed funds. 9. ILLINOIS WATERWAY, ILL. AND IND. Location. Illinois River (entirely within State of Illinois$) formed by confluence of Kankakee and Des Plaines Rivers, flow southwesterly and enters Mississippi at Grafton, Ill., abo1t e miles above St. Louis. Illinois Waterway comprises Illinois e from its mouth to confluence of Kankakee and Des Plaines River$ (273 miles); Des Plaines River to Lockport (18.1 miles) and 0l cago Sanitary and ship canal and to South Branch of Chicat River to Lake Street, Chicago (34.5 miles). Also from a Pol ' 12.4 miles above Lockport, Ill., waterway comprises CalumetS'a Channel and Little Calumet and Calumet Rivers to turning baS 5, near entrance to Lake Calumet (23.8 miles) ; and Grand Cal, met River from junction to 141st Street, deep (lake) draft us? gation (9 miles) and to Clark Street, Gary, Ind. (4.2 miles). RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1183 porevious projects. For details, see page 1945 of Annual Re- pt for 1915 and page 1172 of Annual Report for 1932. Xsting project. Provides for the following: Prolectdime nons, i I ................................. Length (miles) W idth (feet) Depth (feet) I __________________ I -- xdams, with duplicate locks at seven locations...... ort1 l.............................. .....291.1 ...... 3 300 9 roling works... ................. 2.0 200-300 9 to junction with Calumet-Sag Channel........... 10.5 225 9 unel to lock in Blue Island........ ...... . 16.0 225 9 tie Calumet Channel, from Blue Island to turning 7.7 300 9 River Channel from junction with Little Calumet 9.0 225 9 Indiana Harbor Canal to 141st, East Chicago, hid. met River Channel, from junction of Indiana iarbor 4.2 160 9 nd Calumet River to Clark St. in Gary, Ind., with at Clark St. icago Sanitary and ship canal and South Branch 22.1 175-300 9 from Sag-Junction to Lake St. in Chicago, Ill. o more details see page 1255 of Annual Report for 1963. stanated cost of new work (1966) is $338,647,000. 7. n..i h." 11IXistyng project was authortzea cy v ree JosvccwereU *. Work authorized Documents an. 21.1927 Channel 9 feet deep and 200 feet wide from mouth of Illinois Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. River to Utica, 231 miles, modification of 2 U.S. locks and 4, 69th Cong., 1st sess., and S. D)oc. July tdams, removal of 2 State dams. (Act authorized appropria- 130, 69th Cong., sletsess. 3, 193 tion of not to exceed $3,500,000 for carrying on work.) 0 Channel 9 feet deep from Utica, Ill., to heads of present S. Doc. 126, 71st Cong., 2d seas. Federal projects on Chicago and Calumet Rivers, 94.6 miles to Lake St. and 96.3 miles to turning basin 5, respec- tively, to be secured by means of completed dams, locks, lateral canals, and dredging begun by State of Illinois in general accordance with present plans of state for that work. Act adopting project authorized appropriation of Jane 26, 19341 not to exceed $7,500,000 for carrying on work. )41 Operation and care of locks and danms provided for with funds from War Department appropriations for rivers u 130 C1and harbors. 2 935Construct modern locks and dams at La Grange and Peoria II. Doc. 184, 73d Cong., 2d ses. (con- and a channel 9 feet deep and 300 feet wide below Lockport, tains latest published map of Illinois exact location anriddetails of design of all structures to be & Des Plaines Rivers). left to discretion of Chief of Engineers, and, for time being, that no change be made in water authorized for naviga- 0.2 tion of Illinois River by act of July 3, 1930. Also provides for 3 passing places along Sag Channel and H. Doc. 180, 73d Cong., 2d sess. authorized channel in Calumet-Sag route to turning basin "4e14,19375, and dredging at entrance of Lake Calumet. Rivers and Harbors Committee Do c. J 937 Realine portion of Calumet River and abandonment of ne 2 0n1938 bypassed section of Calumet River. 19, 75th Cong., 1st sess. et.23 1938 43IModifies local cooperation requirements in 1935 act. S 943 Pay damages to levee and drainage districts due to seepage II. Doc. 711, 77th Cong., 2d sess. S2, 1945 and other factors, not to exceed $503,500. Enlarge Calumet-Sag Channel to 1(60feet wide and a usable II. Doc. 145, 76th Cong., let ses. depth of 9 feet. Dredge a barge channel 160 feet wide with a usable depth of 9 feet in Grand Calumet and Little Ca!u- met River Branch of Indiana Harbor Canal to deep (lake) draft through 141st St., East Chicago, Ind. Construct in Little Calumet River a lock of suitable dimensions for large navigation. Rebuild or otherwise alter at Federal expense all obstructive railroad bridges across Calumet- Sag Channel, Little Calumet River, Calumet River, Grand Calumet River, and Indiana Harbor Canal, so as to pro- vide suitable clearance, except that no Federal funds shall be expended for removal or alteration of Illinois Central e IR.R.bridge at mile 11.20 of Little Calumet River. footnlotes at end of table. 1184 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Acts Work authorized Documents - *1i July 24, 1946 Substitute following work for that authorized by act of Mar. H. Doc. 677, 79th Cong., 2d seas. 2, 1945: Replace emergency dam in Chicago sanitary and ship canal; enlarge that canal thence to Sag Junction and of Calumet-Sag Channel to afford channels 225 feet wide with usable depth of 9 feet; construct along general route depth of 9 feet to 225 feet wide between Little Calumet River and junction with Indiana Harbor Canal and 160 feet wide thence to Clark St., Gary, Ind., with a turn- ing basin at Clark St.; enlarge Indiana Harbor Canal to 225 feet wide and usable depth of 9 feet between Grand Calumet River and vicinity of 141st St., inclusive; remove Blue Island lock and construct a lock and control works in Calumet River near its head, and similar structures in proposed Grand Calumet Channel west of Indiana Harbor Canal; alter or eliminate railroad bridges across these channels lakeward of Chicago Sanitary and ship canal, or construct new railroad bridges, to provide suitable clear- ance. Do. A small-boat harbor in vicinity of Peoria, Ill., by construe- H. Doc. 698, 79th Cong., 2d seas. tion of a basin 510 by 250 feet, dredged to 7 feet deep. July 17,1953 $48,933 to reimburse Nutwood Drainage and Levee District H. Doc. 144, 82d Cong., 1st ses for additional pumping operations; supplementing $58,750 authorized in Oct. 1943 Act. July 3,1958 Federal participation in alteration of highway bridges, Calu- H. Doc. 45, 85th Cong., 1st sess. met-Sag modification part 1 which constitute unreasonable (contains latest published maps obstructions to navigation, in accordance with Public Law of Calemet Sag portion) 647, 76th Cong., as amended. Oct. 23, 1962 Construct auxiliary locks at Lockport, Brandon Road, Dres- H. Doc. 31, 86th Cong., 1st seas den Island, Marseilles, Starved Rock, Peoria, and La Grange. iJ 1 Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act. Included, in part, in Public Works Administration program, Oct. 81, 1934. and Feb. 28, 193' Existing and proposed locks and dams Dimensions Depth on miter si at low water Miles Lock above Miles to Available Lift at mouth nearest town Width of length for low Lower pper chamber full width waterl (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) La Grangelock....... 80.2 7.8 below Beards- 110 600 10.0 13.0 1i. town, Ill. 15. Auxiliary lock....... 80.2 ..... do........... .110 1,200 10.0 13.0 15.6 Peoria lock............157.7 4.1 below Peoria, 100 600 11.0 12.0 Ill. 14.0 Auxiliary lock....... 157.7 ..... do........... 110 1,200 11.0 14.0 16,8 Starved Rock lock..... 231.0 Utica, Ill.......... 110 600 18.5 14.0 13.0 Auxiliary lock....... 231.0 ..... do ....... 110 1,200 18.5 14.0 186 Marseilles lock........ 244.6 Marseilles, I11.... 110 600 24.45 14.0 12 Auxiliary lock....... 244.6..... do........... .110 1,200 24.25 14.0 16.8 Dresden Island lock.... 271.5 8 above Morris, 110 600 21.75 12.25 Auxiliarylock....... 271.5 ..... do.......... 110 1,200 21.75 14.0 16 Brandon Road lock.... 286.0 Joliet, Ill........ 110 600 34.0 13.8 14,0 Auxiliary lock....... 286.0 ..... do ..... ... 110 1,200 34.0 14.0 522.0 Lockport lock......... 291.1 Lockport, Ill.... 110 600 230.5-39.5 15.0 1 14. Auxiliary lock....... 291.1 .... do ... 110 1,200 230.5-39.5 14.0 14. T. J. O'Brien lock....3 3326.4 H a m m o n Ill....... Chicago, 2 9 .6 d 110 110 1,000............ 1 ,0 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . 14.0 14.0 Grand Calumet lock .. , Ind.... . .0 See footnotes on page 1186. Lock Dam Estimated "'_ Fede,al cost 2 Name Year under Type of con- Character of Kind Type of construction Character of complete existing struction foundation foundation project Illinois River, mouth to Utica; channel improve- .................................. ment by dredging in Illinois River below Starved Rock, modification of two U.S. locks and dams, .............................................. 4$2,773,499 z and removal of two State dams. 0 La Grange................................... Concrete....... Piles in sand.... Movable (wicket type and weir Concrete and timber......... Piles in sand.... 1939 42,744,592 Auxiliary lock............do......... d ...... do.........with A-framecrest) ... do..... ... ......... d...........do 19,030,000 0 Peoria........ .......................... do......... ..... do.........Movable (wicket type)........ Concrete and timber......... ..... do......... 1939 43,381,030 Auxiliary lock....................................do..............do............do.... ................. do..........................do ......... 18,970,000 Starved Rock....... ...................... do......... Rock.......... Movable (tainter gates)........ Concrete and structural steel. Rock.......... 1933 4885,315 Auxiliarylock.....................................do............do............do................... ...do.....................do ......... 21,400,000 Marseilles........................... ...... ..... do..............do..............do ....................... ..... do..........................do......... 1933 41,853,72 Auxiliary lock....................................do..............do........ .... do................ ..... do..................... ..... do ......... 26,930,00 C) Dresden Island ............................... ..... do...........do.........do do......do................ ............... ..... do.........1933 425033............7.... Auxiliary lock... ................ ..... do..........do..........do........ve a p.............do.................... ..... do......... 22,660,000 Brandon Road.....................................odo...........do..........do........ do .......................... do .........1933 42,031,683 04 Auxiliary lock... ................................. do ...... do.........do......do.......................... do.........do 25,810,000 rt- Lockport lock ....................... ..... do..do........do . Movable (Rear trap)............do ..................... ..... do .........1933 4133,608 Auxiliary lock.............................do............do ....................................... d.....do .................... do ......... 32,200,000 T. J. O'Brien lock and dam.................... Concrete and Piles in clay.... Fixed6...................... Concrete and sheet piling..... Piles in clay.... 1960 46,954,700 sheet piling. Proposed lock in Grand Calumet River....... .... do..............do6............do.... ................. do............... ... do................. 9,160,000 Proposed replacement of emergency dam....................................... Movable (vertical type)........ Structural steel...... .. Rock...................... 1,500,000 0 Lock and dam equipment........................................,5 0........................................ 41,250,304 Total locks and dams................. . ....................................................................................... .......... ........... 202,171,832 }3 See footnotes on page 1186 1186 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Additional features entering into cost of project: Dredging: Little Calumet and Calumet Rivers ................... ' $2,135,358 Calumet-Sag, 3 passing places ......................... 4813,418 Starved Rock to Lockport ............................ 4,757,970 Starved Rock to Grafton ............................ 3,498,92 Chicago Sanitary and ship canal ...................... 17,160,00 Calumet-Sag Channel ................................ 18,840,00 Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor Canal ....... 5,160,000 Peoria small boat harbor ............................. '24,937 Protection piers at all locks .............................. 477,613 Calumet-Sag modification engineering and design ............ 6,405,000 Calumet-Sag modification, supervision and administration .... 7,632,00 Rebuild T) ^1 .' highway .. 'YI bridges ................................ ..... It IN 2/A t... 1 . l 11,510,000 jRebuilting rasway Driuges: Calumet-Sag Channel ................................ 24,613,000 Little Calumet and Calumet Rivers .................... 13,727t000 Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor Canal ........ . 18,700000 Removal of Blue Island lock .............................. 255,000 Grand Calumet River controlling works .................... 83,o St. Louis District ....................................... 41,081, Total additional features ............................ 136,475 Total existing project ............................. 338647,00 1 Lifts and depths on miter sills are those obtained with flat pools. 2Variation in lift and depth on upper miter sill at Lockport is due to fluctuation of wate surface in the sanitary district canal. 8 Proposed. Actual cost.o 6 dams completed by the Corps; 48-foot bear trap at Lockport completed by State Illinois. SControl works. Local cooperation. Complied with for completed modifications and part 1 of Calumet-Sag modification, except for widening be- low Starved Rock under August 30, 1935, act. Required cooperal tion under October 23, 1962, act is that prior to construction local interests agree to assume title to and maintain and operate neW bridge across lower approach to Brandon Road lock when bridge is placed in service. For details see pages 1412 to 1414, Annta Report for 1962. Terminal facilities. Of the 13 principal cities and towns alon Illinois River, about five own dock frontage, more or less i proved for boat landings; four own dock frontage with no 4 provements; and four own no frontage except at street ends At Peoria, there is a $400,000 modern river-rail municipal public terminal with available frontage of 31,100 feet; 205 feet occupied by a dockhouse and 190 feet by an open dock. DoCk" house is served by a wharf boat 45 by 230 feet, and an escalator capable of handling 1,000 tons a day. This terminal is served bY equivalent of a beltline railroad. Grain barge loading facilities are available at 26 docks between Grafton and Joliet, 21 of which have grain elevators. Private coal-loading terminals are at Frederick, Havana, Liverpool, Copperas Creek, Kingston Lake, and Peoria. Coal-unloading terminals are at Havana al Hennepin powerplants; at mouth of Vermillion River near Salle and at Joliet. Bulk-petroleum terminals are in Havafn1 Kingston Mines, Peoria, Peru, Seneca, and Joliet. Sand and gravel plants are at Kingston Lake, Chillicothe, Henry, OttawVa, Morris, Joliet, and Lockport. From Chicago Sanitary and shiP RIVERS AND IIARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1187 canal, sand gravel, oil, grain, and gasoline are shipped from ockport, and petroleum products and stone from Lemont. Two grain elevators are at Lockport. Bulk-petroleum terminals are at Argo and Forest View, Ill., and at California Avenue, Cicero Avenue, and Kedzie Avenue, Chicago; three liquid industrial- cheirncals terminals are at Joliet and one at Willow Springs and One at Cicero Avenue in Stickney, Ill. Private coal-unloading terminals are at Ridgeland Avenue, Crawford Avenue, Loomis Street, Fisk Street, and Addison Street, Chicago. At Western Avenue, Chicago, bulk and package sugar are handled through Aerican Sugar Refining Co. Bulk fertilizer terminals are at Iarseilles (two), Dresden, and Joliet. A liquid asphalt terminal Isat Summit. Cement terminals are at Summit and at Cicero Avenue in Chicago. A scrap iron bulk terminal is at Californis Avenue, Chicago. State of Illinois barge terminal, including a 0 elevator, is at Damen Avenue, Chicago, 0-bushel grain hi"'1Z1 0 ,00,0 UhBrnho oi South Branch of Chicago River. Two sand-and-gravel dis- loition yards are on Calumet-Sag Channel. A petroleum-un- ocading terminal is on Little Calumet River at Riverdale, just up- stream from junction with Sag Channel; and two petroleum erminals are at IHoman Avenue in Blue Island. Plans for further terminals and docks between Grafton and Chicago are Underway. OPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Calu- met Sag modification, part I-channel widening at Harlem c Avenue Highway bridge was completed by contract; 51,826 Cubiuet ubc yards of material were removed at a cost of $77,835. Fiscal djustent in contract for channel widening at Cicero Avenue lighway bridge was $100. Railroad bridge relocations: Re- bConitruction of Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad 1i7dge and trackwork was completed in September 1965 with cal year costs of $95,576. Reconstruction of Grand Truck testern Railroaid bridge and trackwork was completed in Sep- te mber 1965 with fiscal year costs of $63,510. Indiana Harbor eaelt Railroad bridge was completed in September 1965 with fiscal Year costs of $3,643. Reconstruction of Chicago & Western ,idiana Railroad bridge and trackwork was continued by con- tract. Work is about 87 percent complete with fiscal year costs of $1,071,052. Reconstruction of Kensington and Eastern Rail- oad bridge and trackwork was continued by contract. Work is with fiscal year costs of $1,140,648. out 86 percent eConstruction of complete Pennsylvania Railroad bridge and approaches Was initiated by contract in August 1965. Work was about 41 erentcomplete with fiscal year costs of $621,767. Removal of ierMont and Broadway Street detours was initiated by contract 1 December 1965. Work is 80 percent complete with fiscal year COSts of $34,000. Acquisition of rights-of-way continued for t]Ue Island bridges, Pennsylvania 'Railroad bridge, Illinois Cen- ral Railroad bridge, Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad bridge nd the K & E Railroad bridge with fiscal year costs of $42,901. 4equisition of additional rights-of-way for Wabash; Gulf, Mobile Ohio; and Michigan Central Railroads cost $1,879. Fiscal adjustment in completed bridge relocation for Chicago, Rock 1188 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Island & Pacific Railroad was $10. Highway bridge relocations and modifications: Construction of Western Avenue HighwaY bridge and approaches (by contract) was completed in June 1966. Fiscal year costs were $234,216. Acquisition of rights1 of-way for Western Avenue Highway bridge continued with fisca year costs of $1,189. Fiscal adjustments: $100 in Cicero Avenue bridge; $4,100 in Southwest Highway bridge; $18,075 i Division Street bridge; and $19,194 in Chatham Street bridge. Construction of 104th Avenue bridge was completed in October 1965 with fiscal year costs of $252,512. Construction of Harlent Avenue bridge was completed in June 1966 with fiscal year costs of $430,550. Construction of Kedzie Avenue Highway bridge was completed in November 1965 with fiscal year costs of $142, 076. Provision for lift, Ashland Avenue bridge continued by co" tract and is 89 percent complete with fiscal year costs of $34,777' Construction of 96th Avenue bridge began by contract in January 1966 and work is about 8 percent complete with fiscal year costs of $78,456. Rights-of-way acquisitions for Division Street, Chatham Street, 104th Avenue, Harlem Avenue, Kedzie Avenue, 96th Avenue, Ridgeland Avenue and 127th Street bridges cost $6,211. Removal of Blue Island lock began by contract in June 1966 and is 15 percent complete with fiscal year costs of $22,000. Miscellaneous hired labor work, including supervision and ad- ministration by project office cost $403,870. Maintenance. Alton Pool costs by hired labor for condition and operatiol studies were $49,410; inspection and reports, $1,139; supervisiol and administration, $3,764. All pools above Alton Pool. Con" dition and operation studies were conducted by hired labor at a cost of $274,897. Contract dredging in LaGrange and Marseilles pools was completed at a cost of $208,737. U.S. derrickboats No. 1 and No. 3 performed remedial bank protection work, re- moved silt, obstructions, snags, and other debris from forebaYs of locks and sluice gates at dams to maintain operation O navigable structures as well as assisted in rehabilitation of lockd and dams at a cost of $194,773. Operation and care of lock a dams: locks and dams were operated as required and the neces sairy repairs made thereto and to appurtenant structures at a cost of $2,195,191. Total maintenance costs were $2,873,598 for a 1 pools above Alton Pool. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, exclusive of Calumet-Sag and Duplicate locks modifications is 95 percent corl" plete. Calumet-Sag modification, part I, is 72 percent complete. No work has been done on Duplicate locks. Eight locks and6 dams are complete, and there is a channel 300 feet wide and9 feet deep between Grafton and Lockport, Ill., with exception o Marseilles Canal which is 200 feet wide. Controlling depth of river as it prevails is 9 feet (luring extreme low water. Limiting horizontal bridge clearance in reach from Grafton to Utica, Ill., is 114 feet. Limiting horizontal clearance: 110 feet at bridges between Utica and Lockport, Ill.; between Lockport and Lake Michigan via Chicago Sanitary and ship canal and Chicago River is 80 feet at emergency (Butterfly) dam, mile 293.1; and 49.3 feet at bridges between Lockport and turning basin 5 in Calumet RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1189 river, via Chicago Sanitary and ship canal, the Calumet-Sag annel, Little Calumet and the Calumet River. Work remain- 1g on 1935 modification is dredging section 2 above Starved ]ock and widening Pekin Bend. Remaining uncompleted items o' Calumet-Sag modification part I are: relocation of 5 high- bWaY bridges; provision for lift on 4 highway bridges; 4 RR bridges; removal of Blue Island lock; widening and deepening section 5; dredging part 2 of Acme Bend; and channel widening at 7 bridge sites. Remaining work in parts II and III of Calumet- SaC Modification is replacement of emergency (Butterfly) dam in Chicago Sanitary and ship canal; construction along general route of Grand Calumet River of a channel with usable depth of 9 feet, 225 feet wide between Little Calumet River and the junc- tilol With Indiana Harbor Canal; enlargement of Indiana Harbor Canal to 225 feet wide and usable depth of 9 feet between Grand alumet River and vicinity of 141st Street, inclusive; construction Of a lock and control works in Calumet River near its head and of Similar structures in proposed Grand Calumet Channel west of he Indiana Harbor Canal; alteration or elimination of restrictive ihway bridges and railroad bridges across these channels lake- bard of Chicago Sanitary and ship canal, or construction of new bridges to provide suitable clearances, with apportionment of the csts between the bridge owners and the United States in accord- ance with the principles set forth in agreement February 23, 1945. Also, 1962 modification, duplicate locks at seven locations, Lockport, Brandon Road, Dresden Island, Marseilles, Starved Peoria, and La Grange has not been started. ,ck .Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitation Total ork ..........................$83,648,557 $48,669,865 $414,625 $132,733,047 k1ergenorks" ...... 3,960,735 .............................. 3960,735 eYrelief.........................1,853,936..1,858,936 otal.................... ..... 89,468,228 48,669,865 414,625 1138,552,718 1'Inc] llDp udes $1,735,890 expended between 1927 and 1936 on operation and care of works of 'ement under provisions of permanent indefinite appropriation for such purposes. Cost and financial statement Fiscal Total to year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 liwe ork ~Ptropriated......... $6,880,000 $5,443,000 $4,430,000 $3,613,000 $5,363,370 $94,768,616 Maitenance:ost ............ 5,983,268 5,588,142 3,294,546 4,418,906 4,755,697 92,037,330 APlropriated.......... 2,326,939 2,729,500 2,630,000 2,985,700 3,079,400 50,348,553 ehaCost............... 2,257,231 2,718,018 2,616,471 2,806,848 2,927,911 49,698,333 biiation : .. ApPropriated.......... -47,056 275,000 -- 62,600 -719. 414,625 ot............... 164,770 15,268 196,413.......................... . 414,625 Includes $2,569,102 for new work and $1,028,468 for maintenance for previous projects. 1190 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 10. INDIANA HARBOR, IND. Location. Northwestern Indiana (Lake County), on south' west shore of Lake Michigan, 18 miles southeast of Chicago Harbor. (See Lake Survey Chart 755.) Previous project. For details see page 1943 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1520 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Provides for a northerly rubblemound breakwater, 2,520 feet long, an easterly reinforced concrete- caisson breakwater 1,507 feet long, an extension of this latter breakwater about 2,300 feet to north, and construction and placing of a light-house crib; an outer harbor entrance channel generally 800 feet wide with a depth of 29 feet; dredging an outer harbor basin to 28 feet deep, and a canal entrance channel to 27 feet deep; deepening main stem of Indiana Harbor canal for a width of 190 feet with a depth of 25 feet from outer harbor to 100 feet lakeward of Dickey Place; widening canal to a bottom width of 260 feet with a depth of 22 feet from 100 feet lakeward o Dickey Place to The Forks and dredging Calumet River Branch from The Forks to 141st Street to same width and depth; a channel 22 feet deep and 160 feet wide in Lake George Branch from The Forks to White Oak Avenue; maintenance of a channel 20 feet deep and 80 feet wide in remainder of Calumet River Branch south of north line of 141st Street, except removal Of sewage deposits and other city refuse, after completion and ac- ceptance from private parties; and construction of a turning basiB at The Forks 22 feet deep. That part of Calumet River BranCh Channel from north line of 141st Street to Grand Calumet River has not been completed by local interests or accepted for mrnain- Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents i _____________________1______ June25, 1910 Outer harbor and maintenance of inner harbor channel...... if. Doe. 1113, 60th Cong.. 2d sess. Mar. 4,1913 Breakw aters............................................ H. Doe. 690, 62d Cong., 2d sess. Mar. 2, 1919 Lighthouse crib, present length and aline easterly and north- Rivers and Harbors Committee DeC, erly breakwaters. 6, 65th Cong., 2d sess. Mar. 20, 1922 Modified length of channel to be maintained in extension to Public Law 176, 67th Cong. Lake George. Mar. 3,1925 Authorized Secretary of War to modify project so far as re- lates to length and alinement of breakwaters and to sell Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. about 1,180 linear feet of shoreward end of existing north breakwater. July 3,19302 Existing project channel width and depth in Lake George Rivers and Harbors Committee Do' Branch, turning basin at the Forks. 21, 71st Cong., 2d sess. June 30, 1932 Authorized Secretary of War to sell Inland Steel Co. about Public Law 219, 72d Cong. 1,903 linear feet of southerly end of existing east break- water. Aug. 30, Extend easterly breakwater, dredge entrance channel and Rivers and Harbors Committee Do° 19351 2 outer harbor, deepen channel between bulkhead fills, widen 29, 72d Cong., 1st sess. main stem of canal and portion of Calumet River Branch to 141st St. Aug.26, 1937 Modified conditions of local operation required before en- Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc, largement of Indiana Harbor Canal is undertaken by 13, 75th Cong., 1st seas. United States. July 14, 1960 Increases authorized depths to 29 feet in outer harbor en- H. Doe. 195, 86th Cong., 1st sess. trance channel; 28 feet in outer harbor; and 27 feet in canal entrance channel to first E. J. & E. RY.Bridge. 5 Oct. 27, 1965 Deepen main canal from landward end of canal entrance H. Doe. 227, 89th Cong., 1st sess. (co channel to a point lakeward of Dickey Place Bridge over tains latest published map). a modified channel width of 190 feet, except through bridge openings. 1 Includedin public works administration program, Sept. 6, 1933, and July 25, 1934. 'Uncompleted portion is inactive (widen and deepen Lake George Branch). 8Uncompleted portion is inactive (widen and deepen main channel of canal and Caluiet River Branch). RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1191 'tenance by the United States. Project depths are referred to low Water datum for Lake Michigan, 576.8 feet above mean water evel at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum -1955). Seasonal fluctuations in mean stage from low water in Winter high water in summer average about 1.2 feet. Local and ferporary fluctuations of 0.1 to 0.5 feet, due to wind and dif- ference in barometric pressures, occur daily. Seiches of 3 to 4 feet Occur at infrequent intervals. Estimated cost for new work (1966) is $4,938,000 Federal and $1,007,000 non-Federal, ex- elusive of amounts expended on previous project. Uncompleted Portion of 1930 River and Harbor Act is considered inactive, cost of $234,000 (1965) Federal is excluded from present cost estimate. Uncompleted portion of 1935 River and Harbor Act is considered inactive, costs of $1,228,000 (July 1965) Federal and $595,000 (July 1965) non-Federal are excluded from the Present cost estimate. 7Local cooperation. Act of 1937 provides enlargement of hdiana Harbor Canal shall not be undertaken until local interests furnish a right-of-way 300 feet wide and construct substantial bulkheads along channel on established lines shown on map ac- companying Rivers and Harbors Committee Document 13, 75th ongress, 1st session, provided that improvement on one side may Proceed in any section on fulfillment of conditions for that side of section, and provided further, that south of turning basin at The Iorks (beginning 450 feet south of intersection of present Calu- "lt Branch and mainstem bulkhead lines), widening and deep- elning by the United States shall be done only as rights-of-way and bulkheads on at least one side of channel are continuously pro- Vided southward from above limit of turning basin at The Forks. o provide for 300-foot channel, a parcel of land (of about 4.6 ares), generally 100 feet wide, lying on east side of Calumet iver Branch, commencing at north side of 141st Street and ex- tendinig northward toward The Forks for about 2,170 feet, has been conveyed to and accepted by the United States. Local in- erests constructed about 1,350 feet of bulkhead along east side of Calumet River Branch, and reconstructed bulkhead on west side from The Forks to 141st Street. Defense Plant Corp. built a bulkhead along east side of canal between Pennsylvania Rail- road Co.'s bridge and Dickey Place Bridge; the United States Widened and deepened east side of this portion of widening. OUngstown Sheet and Tube Co. constructed a bulkhead along est side of canal between Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Co. bridge and the Pennsylvania Railroad Co. bridge, and the United tates widened and deepened west side of this portion of widen- ig. All prior requirements fully complied with. Act of 1965 Drovides that local interests agree to hold the United States free frorn damages due to construction works and maintenance of im- Drovement; provide and maintain depths in berthing areas serving errninals commensurate with depth provided in related project rea; and make required relocations of submarine utility cross- gS. Assurances have not been requested for work authorized by the act of 1965. Terminal facilities. Three docks for handling iron ore, lime- 1192 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 stone and taconite; two docks for handling steel mill products bY barge; ten docks for petroleum products; three docks for 1is- cellaneous commodities and two docks used exclusively for winter mooring of vessels in layup.65 Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 1965 modification: Planning was accomplished. Maintenance: Con condition surveys and flue dust investigations and engineering and design were made by hired labor. A contract for dredging in project was awarded May 31, 1966. Private dredging attributed to flue dust investigations was completed by Inland Steel Co., about 105,950 cubic yards being removed from outer harbor basin. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about.9 9 percent complete (excludes inactive portion). Work remainin to complete existing project is main stem of Indiana Harbor Canal to 25 feet deep and 190 feet wide from outer harbor to 100 feet lakeward of Dickey Place Bridge. North breakwater (rubble mound, 2,520 feet, completed in 1922) is in good condition. East breakwater (concrete caisson, 162 feet, completed in 1926) and northerly extension (rubblemound, 2,324 feet, completed in 1935) are in good condition. Controlling depths for practicable widths: 28 to 29 feet in entrance channel parallel to rubblemound break water; 28 feet in outer harbor, 27 feet between bulkheads of steel companies to the 5 bridges; 22 feet from the 5 bridges to the turn ing basin at The Forks; from 17 to 22 feet in turning basin east of Canal Street; 22 feet in turning basin at The Forks; 20 feet in Calumet River Branch from turning basin at The Forks to about 100 feet north of 141st Street bridge; and 22 feet from turning basin to 1,000 feet above Indianapolis Boulevard bridge on Lake George Branch. Depths are referred to low-water datum. iea of navigation for commercial vessels is at the Baltimore & Ohio Terminal Railroad bridge on the Lake George Branch about 3 miles from outer harbor, and at 141st Street highway bridge about 2,200 feet south of The Forks on the Calumet River Branch about 2.5 miles from outer harbor. Total costs of existing prOJ' ect to June 30, 1966, were $8,447,934, of which $6,817,390 were regular funds, $1,618,044 public works funds, and $12,500 con* tributed funds; $4,844,304 for new work and $3,603,630 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement x $1966 Total ig68 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: 301948 Appropriated..........$273,000 $1,010,000 $50,000 -$201,096 $13,000 2$4,992,412 Cost................. 30,938 1,255,707 -135,645...............4,124 24,8 Maintenance: 33 519 Appropriated.......... 302,200 116,500 113,600 163,500 245,000 3,8 Inlues$6,68fo Cost................. nwwok 151,208 1nd$,09 fo 437,399 113,705 manenneo 17,627 197,014 reiuspojcs 3,606,139 A Includes 2 Excludes $60,668 for new work and $2,509 for maintenance for previous projects. $12,500 contributed funds. 11. KENOSHA HARBOR, WIS. Location. On west shore of Lake Michigan about 35 miles southerly from Milwaukee and about 54 miles northerly from Chi- cago. (See Lake Survey Chart 74.) RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1193 Previou s projects. See page 1390 of Annual Report for 1962. isting project. Provides for the following: oect d ensions................ ... ................ Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth (feet) Br~eakwae orth Water...............................................796.................... Ptier.............. .......................... 1,077..... Lake 1,8772.......................... otaP rachchane....... ... ....... .......... ... . 2,800 800. 27 annel10 .... . ... .. 1cha 2,150 400 200 26 n er .... enel...... .... 11erbasin North ChUn. . '- . .... . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . ..... . . . . . .. . . . . . ...... . ... I0200 . . . . . . . . . . . . .800 . 25 200-700 25 annelto50thStreet ridge.......... .................. 475 75 21 ror.detailed description see page 1237, Annual Report for 1963. roject depths are referred to low-water datum for Lake Michi- gan, 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec 1haternational Great Lakes Datum-1955). Fluctuations of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or below ainual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of temporary na- btre, due to wind and barometric pressure of several feet above or beow mean lake level prevailing at the time. Estimated (1966) ederal cost is $452,000, exclusive of amounts expended on pre- cVious projects. Non-Federal estimate is $43,000 (July 1966) in- uding $3,000 contributed by local interests. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports ................. Mar. 3, 18g9g ... ....... . .... Parallel piers and 600 feet of breakwaterl .. H. Doc. 328, 54th Cong., 2d sess., An- nual Report, 1897, p. 2772; H. Doe. 164, 55th Cong., 3d sess., Annual Mar. 2, 1907 Report, 1899, p. 1817. Extending breakwater 200 feet............................ H. Doc. 62, 59th Cong., Ist sess., and Rivers and Hailbors (Comnmittee Doe. Aug. 3 0 ,19352. 3, 59th Cong., 2d sess. Present project dimensions of entrance channel and basin.. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. May 171950 19, 74th Cong., l9t sess t. 23,1962 Channel northwesterly from basin ......................... H. Doc. 750. 80th Cong., 2d sesgs. 3 Deepen lake approach channel to 27 and 800 feet wide; 11. Dec. 496, 87th Cong., 2d sess. deepen approach channel to 26 feet entrance channel and inner basmuto 25 feet. 21 leed under previous projects. co 0luded in emergency relief program May 28, 1935. Otains latest published map. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. bU,erminal ldilg materials, and Four facilities. wharves used for handling coal, miscellaneous foreign oversea commodi- tes, and also several fishing wharves. While these facilities are eonSldered generally adequate for existing commerce, more ef ent use of existing terminals and utilization of available Outage for development of additional terminals should be made. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 1962 Modification; cleanup by hired labor was continued at a cost of $15,210 Engineering and supervision cost $3,227. Mainte- nance: Condition surveys by hired labor cost $231. Engi- oeering and design in connection with planning for rehabilitation North pier cost $14,249. Repair of portions of breakwater by placing 966 tons of stone was made in August 1965 at a cost 1194 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of $31,032. U.S. hopper dredge Hains operations in May 1966 removed 10,762 cubic yards of material at a cost of $17,454.. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project existing before mrodil- cation of October 23, 1962, was completed in 1959. North and south piers were completed in 1900, and breakwater in 1909' The north pier is in poor condition and in need of repair. Thr south pier and breakwater are in generally fair condition. Worn under 1962 modification is complete except for sweeping area dredged August 1964 to May 1965 and dredging strips 25 ee wide adjacent to north and south piers. This dredging willb done after rehabilitation of piers. Controlling depths at ow water datum are 27 feet or more in lake approach channel, 26 feet in approach channel, 25 feet in entrance channel and inner basin to 51st Place, and depths of 17 feet or more in channel ex% tending northwesterly to 50th Street Bridge. Total cost of existing project to end of fiscal year Funds New work Maintenance i $338,236 Regular....................................................... $877,9082 1 ,6 Emergency relief... ...................................... 27,658 .............. .......... 1365,894 Total....................................... 877,908 11,243801 1Excludes $3,000 contributed funds. Cost and financial statement Total I $10661 year............... 1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: Appropriated..................... $15,000 $150,000 $195,000 -$25,000 258 19733 Cost.......................... 13,784 11,612 228,931 18,437 28 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $27,350 24,700 36,800 74,700 40,000 99>729 Cost.................. 26,655 25,173 37,022 19,465 62966 l,55 f . kldU d 1 1I 06 .in f i i) jts incu es $-453i,o39 or new worK an $2zi,8sz8 or maintenance ior previous pro ectm. Excludes $3,000 contributed funds. 12. KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WIS. Location. On west shore of Lake Michigan, about 105 Miles northerly from Milwaukee and about 78 miles from Green 130, via Sturgeon Bay Canal. Harbor is at mouth of Kewaunee River. (See Lake Survey Chart 73.) Previous projects. See page 1375 of Annual Report for 196 Existing project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions........................... .................. Length (feet) Width (feet) De feet North breakwater............................................. 3,000 .................... North pier.... ........................................... 650 ............. .... South pier... ........................................... 1,850 ............. ..... * 1 Approach channel............................................ 800 600 20 Outer basin................................................... 700 505 20 Channel to turning basin...1................................. 1,400 150-156 20 Turnin basin............................................. 700 400 20 Channel to North Basin......................................... 620 100 20 North Basin.................................................. 300 500 For detailed description see page 1224, Annual Report for 1963. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1195 Project depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michi- gan 5 7 6 .8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec b tnternational Great Lakes Datum-1955). Fluctuations of wa- evel are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or beow annual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a tempo- rary nature, due to wind and barometric pressure, of several feet aboveor below mean lake level prevailing at the time. Estimated costsof completed project are $602,976, Federal, and $9,000 non- eoeral, exclusive of amount expended on previous projects. Un- a'mpleted portion (estimated $200,000-July 1965) of 1935 River dHarbor Act except dredging of area immediately north of 7Uter 200 feet of north pier is considered inactive, and excluded Am present cost estimate. A portion of 1960 River and Harbor bt is also considered inactive and cost of this portion, (turning basn at Fisherman's Point) was $29,000 (Mar. 1961) and ex- cied from present cost estimate. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar , 1881 . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.25 1910 Entrance piersl Aug.30 19352 Turning basin........................................ Annual Report, 1881, p. 2082. I. IDoc.324, 60th Cong., 1st sess. North breakwater, remove old north pier, widen and deep- Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. en entrance channel and turning basin to 20 feet, and 43, 72d Cong., let sess. July 14, 1960 remove outer south shoal. Enlarge existing turning basin, extend existing project into S. Doe. 19, 86th Cong., 1st sess. (con- north basin, and increase depth of north basin to 20 feet tains latest published map.) at a maximum width of 500 feet and eliminate removal of Il outer shoal. iDf leted under previous projects. o fet in emergency relief program, May 28, 1935. Inactive portion; removal of 200 linear orth pier, widening inner 200 feet of channel through outer basin, and closing gap in northo • ore connection of breakwater. Loca l cooperation. Fully complied with. leuTerminal facilities. Two car-ferry slips, a coal wharf, a petro- eru tank farm, an engineer base, a shipbuilding yard, and sev- existl fishing wharves. Facilities are considered adequate for n1g commnerce. O Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 1935 modification: Dredging by government plant was completed at a cost of $63,928. Engineering and supervision cost $9,924. Maintenance: Condition surveys were made by hired labor at a st of $2,007. U.S. dipper dredge Kewaunee operations in March-April 1966 removed 20,950 cubic yards of material at a cost of $21,550. Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation of 970 feet of south pier by government plant was continued with costs of 7%',765. Engineering and supervision cost $38,564. Condition at end of fiscal year. Active portion of existing 700 feet of channel thru the outer baoject bail was widened andInner is complete. deepened in 1965. The piers were com- eted in 1897 and are in generally good condition except that the outh pier requires repairs and rehabilitation now in progress is P ercent complete. Construction of north breakwater and ,ore connection, except for a gap of 150 feet about 830 feet from ioreward end, and removal of outer 706.5 linear feet of north Pier Were commenced in September 1935 and completed in June 1196 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 1937. Removed 500 linear feet of north pier in April-May 1963 Dredging entrance channel and interior basin to existing project depth was commenced in April and completed in October 193 ' Controlling depth at low water datum is 20 feet or more in en trance channel, 19 feet for a mid-channel width of 100 feet be- tween piers, and over an area 400 by 500 feet in the interior tturn ing basin, 19 feet or more in northerly channel extension and 18 feet in north basin. Kewaunee River is navigable for about 6/1 miles above mouth for craft drawing not more than 4 feet. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966, was $2,068,088, o which $602,976 was for new work ($182,976 regular and $420,00 emergency relief funds) $1,024,434 regular funds for maintenance and $440,678 regular funds for rehabilitation. Cost and financial statement Tot 30, 19661 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: $769 733 Appropriated...................... $55,000 -$26,600 $10,964 $85,000 752,288 Cost.................. $33 2,144 26,248 4,703 73,852 Maintenance: 12258 Appropriated.......... 39,940 67,700 46,800 43,500 50,000 11 798 Cost................. 39,828 59,643 50,328 35,123 23,557 Rehabilitation: 650 000 Appropriated.................. ............ 30,000 150,000 470,000 Cost.................................... 15,428 18,921 406,329 440678 1 Includes $149,312 for new work and $88,3641 for maintenance for previous projects. 13. LITTLE BAY DE NOC, GLADSTONE HARBOR, AND KIPLING, MICH. Location. Little Bay De Noc is at north end of Green Bay, arm of Lake Michigan in northwest part of lake. It is about 5 miles long and 31/ miles wide at entrance. Gladstone occupies Saunders Point, a triangular land area which extends over a ile into bay from west shore about 10 miles north of entrance, WVIth harbor being a natural anchorage formed by an indentation i shore. Kipling (unincorporated) is on bay shore, about 14 miles north of Gladstone. Existing project. A channel 24 feet deep, 200 feet wide, tn about 2,400 feet long, from deep water in bay to Kipling water" front, with enlarging at landward end to form a turning basiB 550 feet wide and 24 feet deep. Project was authorized by River and Harbor Act of 1962 (I. Doc. 480, 87th Cong., 2d sesS.)' Project depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michigafl 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (1"' ternational Great Lakes Datum-1955). New work for com' pleted project cost $332,832 Federal and $16,686 non-Federall' Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish assurances satisfactory to Secretary of the Army that they will hold the United States free from damages due to construction and mainte" nance of improvement; deepen and maintain berthing areas toa depth commensurate with that provided in Federal project; an make terminal facilities for unloading petroleum products at i P ling available to all on equal terms. Assurances fully complied with. Terminal facilities. One petroleum dock. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1197 DOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Dredging by hired labor completed in July 1965. Removed 2,650 cubic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was started lOW-water1964 a October and iscompleted datum in July 1965. Controlling depth 24 feet in channel and turning basin. Cal Year New Work: lTotal Cost and financial statement 1062 1963 1064 1965 1966 to June 30,1966 PPropriated......... ...........$352,000-$156,00 $155,912 -$18,180 $332,832 t.. ......... 12,580 8,171 156,231 155,844 332,832 14. MANITOWOC HARBOR, WIS. Location On west shore of Lake Michigan about 79 miles 'ortherly from Milwaukee and about 106 miles from Green Bay laSturgeon Bay Canal. (See Lake Survey Chart 735.) Previous projects. See page 1379 of Annual Report for 1962. EXisting project. River and Harbor Act of 1962 provides: roject diension . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. ... .. .... Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth (feet) AI~~ uteroach channel . .. 2,600 800 25 harbor har ... .......... ...... 1,700 800 23 er River Channel ver ........ 1,500 800 23 Canel 7,000 Variable 22 p or detailed description see page 1228, Annual Report for 1963. rOject depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michigan, 56. 8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (Inter- ational Great Lakes Datum-1955). Fluctuations of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or below alinual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a temporary na- lre, due to wind and barometric pressure of several feet above or below mean lake level prevailing at the time. Estimated costs 1966) are $1,297,000 Federal and $229,000 non-Federal, exclusive amounts expended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts I Acts Work authorized Documents Mar, 2,1907 Breakwaters........................................... 11 Dec. 62, 59th Cong., 1st sess., as H. modified by Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 3, 59th Cong., 2d sess. Aog*30,19351Present project dimensions of channel through outer basin Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. repmoval of old north stub pier, and approach channel to a 39, 73d Cong., 2d seas. Sproposed city terminal south of shore end of south break- 26,1937 Channel in river...... ......................... Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 80, 74th Cong., 2d sess. Oct. 23, 1962 Deepen lake approach to 25 feet by800 feet wide, deepen outer H. Doe 479. 87th Cong., 2d sess. harbor to 25 feet, River Channel to 23 feet to 8th St., and (contains latest published map). Upper River Channel to 22 feet to Soo Line RR. SU Derseded by act of October 23, 1962. 1198 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed miodi fications. For River and Harbor Act of 1962 local interests mus hold the United States free from damages; provide lands anO rights-of-way including spoil disposal areas, for construction a future maintenance, provide and maintain depths in berthing areas and local access channels serving terminals commensurate with depths provided in related project areas; and acco- plish required alterations in sewer, water supply, drainage, an other utility facilities, including maintenance. Formal assurances have not been requested. City of Manitowoc has ability to cooper-l ate with the Federal Government on proposed project and is wi l- ing to do so, formal assurance will be furnished when necessary. Terminal facilities. Three car-ferry slips, 2 grain elevatorS, 2 shipbuilding yards, and several wharves used for handlin coal, building materials, cement, and miscellaneous commodities, plus one dock for marine contractor floating plant. While these facilities are considered fairly adequate for existing commerce, it is believed the city should provide a suitable wharf with ware" house and railway connection open to the general public. n Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance Condition surveys and engineering and design were made by hired labor at a cost of $7,886. Repair of portions of breakwater bY placing 1,000 tons of stone was made in June 1965 at a cost of $4,615. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 34 percent complete. The 1962 modification remains to be co" pleted. Inactive portion of project consists of dredging approachl channel in outer harbor, which is not desired by local interestS' The breakwaters, completed in 1910, are in generally fair con-" dition, except at outer ends which require repairs. Dredging channel through outer basin to existing project depth, and re- moval of a portion of old north stub pier at the river entrance, were completed in December 1937. Dredging river channel Wts completed in July 1942. Controlling depths for practicable widths at low water datum are 23 feet or more in lake approach channel and 21 feet or more in channel through outer basin and in the river to upstream limit of project. Costs of existing proJ" ect were $436,752 for new work and $1,303,453 for maintenance, a total of $1,740,205. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19 New work: Sg Appropriated ................................. $836. 876 Cost................ .......... .".......... ............. 36 8.. Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $62,370 $51,400 $10,500 $59,400 $60,000 1,42, 725 Cost.................. 62,358 49,663 12,249 35,915 12,501 1,357 1 Includes $400,126 for new work and $54,288 for maintenance for previous projects. 15. MENOMINEE HARBOR AND RIVER, MICH. AND WIS. Location. On west shore of Green Bay, about 49 miles north' RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1199 easterly from Green Bay Harbor, and about 155 miles from Mil- Waukee via Sturgeon Bay Canal. (See Lake Survey Chart 723.) Previous projects. See page 1361-2 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions Length (feet) Width feet) Depth (feet) South Pier...................................... orth .ier............................................. cflannei........................................2,000 . ....... ..... PDroach, ier (00026 erhannel.3,500 e channel ............................ ............... 4,500 300 200 24 basiu .............................................. Cnleg 450204 .................................... ..... .. 800-200 500 21 PFor detailed description see page 1214, Annual Report for 1963. roject depths are referred to low-water datum for Lake Michi- gan, which is 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Fluctua- tions of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or below annual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a ten1porary nature, due to wind and barometric pressures, of sev- eral feet above or below the mean lake level prevailing at the time. cornpleted portion of project cost $169,339, exclusive of the mounts exp)ended on previous projects. Portion authorized by 1960 River and Harbor Act is inactive and estimated (1964) at $442,000, Federal, and $105,000 non-Federal. Existing project was authorized by the following: ActsWork authorized 1)ocuments and reports Mar3 .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JA 1 3 1871 Entrance pierst ...... Annual Report, 1867, p. 132. 1, 1902 Consolidation of project for harbor and river, and a channel 11. Doe. 419, 56th Cong., let sess. Mar. deep. 18 feetrestoration 4, 1913 Partial ar. 4, of work above bridge which had been ly eliminated by act of Mar. 3, 1905. July3,193020-foot depth in channel and 18-foot depth in turning Doc. 171, 70th H11. Cong., 1st sess. Aug.'30, 19 basin. Rvr n irosCm iteDe 1935 21-foot depth in channel and turning basin and enlarge Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. Mar. 2,1452,1945turning basin. 28, 73d Cong., 2dsess. Extend channel 12 feet deep, to vicinity of Marinette Yacht I. Doe. 228, 76th Cong., 1st ses,. Jul 1 Club. July 1960 Deepen existing approach channel to 26 feet, entrance and Doe. 113, 80th Cong., 1st sess. H1. river channels to 24 feet and enlarge turning basin. (contains latest published). SCompleOted under previous projects. 1 Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed work. or July 14, 1960 Act, local interests must provide lands and t'ights-of-way for construction and future maintenance, hold the nited States free from damages; and provide and maintain depths in berthing areas adjacent to stone and coal docks com- 4ensurate with depths in Federal project area. Tentative assur- ances were received October 1962. 1 Terminal facilities. In addition to a car-ferry slip, there are 13Wharves for handling coal, building materials, and miscella- teous commodities. City of Marinette provided a public wharf. acilities are considered fairly adequate for existing commerce, ecept that there is need for a public wharf owned by city of Menominee, with warehouse and railway connection. 1200 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Condition surveys were made by hired labor at a cost of $4,629. U.S. dipper dredge Kewaunee operations in July 1965 removed 12,230 cubic yards of material at a cost of $12,978. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project in effect before modi fication of March 2, 1945, was completed zin 1938." No addition3l ", t0 work was necessary under modification of March 2, 1945, provide a depth of 12 feet in extension of channel to vicinity of Marinette Yacht Club as project depth or more was available. End trance piers were completed in 1884, and were rehabilitated (1954-64) and are in excellent condition. Dredging channel be low Marinette municipal wharf, together with enlarging turnine basin to existing project depth, was commenced in May and completed in November 1938. North pier is maintained for about 1,224 feet long. Portion of project authorized by 1960 modification is in an inactive category. Controlling depths at low water datum are 23 feet in entrance channel to 21 feet or more between the piers; thence generally 21 feet or more throUgh th channel to Marinette municipal wharf; and 21 feet in turnitg basin thence 12 feet to a point 300 feet east of upper limit o1 project; thence 7.8 feet to project limit. Costs under existing project to June 30, 1966, were $169,339 for new work, $1,041,145 for maintenance, and $1,351,852 for rehabilitation, a total of $2,562,336. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: I 769 Appropriated.......... $20,000 ............... ............... -$16 $ 81762 Cost................. 16,137 $3,653 $44. 4........... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 38,740 4,425 240 $46,500 . 1,0 Cost................. 38,740 4,425 240 25,625 17,608 1,0 77,339 Rehabilitation: Appropriated.......... 265,000 625,000 450,000 -20,580 -2,168 1,3 51852 Cost..................201,105 442,215 576,351 101,635 ............ 1, 51,852 1Includes $312,423 for new work and $36,194 for maintenance for previous projects. 16. MICHIGAN CITY HARBOR, IND. Location. Northwestern Indiana (in La Porte County), 0o southeasterly shore of Lake Michigan, 38 miles southeasterly from Chicago Harbor. (See Lake Survey Chart 75.) For de- scriptions, see page 1482 of Annual Report for 1932. SPrevious projects. See page 1407 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project. Provides for a detached breakwater, east and west entrance piers, and a dredged channel, 120 to 150 feet wide and 18 feet deep, from Lake Michigan to upper of two turning basins, which are also to have a depth of 18 feet; repair and restoration of westerly 1,000 feet of old east breakwater; dredging an anchorage shoreward of restored section to a depth of 12 feet in northerly portion and 8 feet in southerly portionl; and enlarging entrance to this basin through east pier to a width of 66 feet. Project depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michigan, 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1201 Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Seasonal fluctuations in mean stage from low water in winter to hgh1 water in summer average about 1.2 feet. Local and tempo- rary fluctuations of 0.1 and 0.5 foot, due to wind and difference In barometric pressures, occur daily. Seiches of 3 to 4 feet occur at infrequent intervals. New work for completed project cost $1,212,385 exclusive of amount expended on previous project. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports East breakwater and old east pier inclosing the outer basin. Recommendation of a Board of Engi- neers, Annual Report, 1870, p. 123. Extension of east pier ............................ Reports of Boards of Engineers, Annual Report, 1881, pp. 2187-2189; Annual Mar. g Mar', 3,1905 Extend a pier and construct detached breakwater........ Report, 1882, pp. 2264-2266. Annual Report, 1897, pp. 2903-2904. Lower turning basin. Rebuild west pier as at present located. Present project di- Joint resolution of Congress approved Jan. 21,1927 oMensions of entrance channel. May 13, 1908, Public Law 23. Existing project depth in channel, and in lower and middle H. Doe. 279, 69th Cong., 1st seas. turning basins, eliminated implrovement of Trail Creek above middle turning basin and uncompleted portion of detached breakwater, abandonment of east breakwater Aug,30, 1935 and old east Oier inclosing outer basin. Restore and repair westerly 1,000 feet of east breakwater, Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. dredging outer basin, and enlargiug entrance to basin 34, 74th Cong., 1st sess. (Contains through east pier. latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. 7.erminal facilities. Four fish docks, one city dock, and one iata elevator in this harbor. Commodities handled at this brbor are grain, salt, and fresh fish. There are two small boatyards which repair and construct recreational craft only. one Public dock is owned by city and has not been used for C nercial purposes. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Condition surveys were performed by hired labor at a cost of i,90 4 . Engineering and design studies were made in connection $2 Planning for rehabilitation of breakwaters at a cost of Se 6 e45. U.S. dipper dredge Kewaunee operations in August and September 1965 removed 30,098 cubic yards of material at a cost of $37,540. Repairs were made to portions of detached break- water by placing 2,000 tons of stone in June 1965 and June 1966 at a cost of $18,476. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- Pleted in December 1936. Concrete superstructure, 1,304 feet, on detached breakwater, completed in 1925, and entrance piers 7~31Pleted in 1931 are in poor condition and in need of repairs. id-er permit from Secretary of War, the Northern Indiana Pub- b Service Co. removed 615 feet of inner end of west pier and about a"'Seel719 feet of bulkhead south of pier, and replaced them with Ateel sheet pile bulkhead located landward of former dock line. ea channelward of new bulkhead was dredged by permittee to 18 feet. Controlling depth at low-water datum for practicable ,dths is 18 feet in entrance channel and between piers to pr'anklin Street Bridge. Between Franklin Street Bridge and abrning basin at head of project, depths vary from 17 feet to out 6 feet in a channel about 60 feet wide, except in the draws 1202 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of Michigan Central Railroad Co.'s bridge where width is about 40 feet. Turning basin at head of project has shoaled above datum. Available anchorage depths in the basin are 12 feetir northerly portion and 8 feet in southerly portion. DepthS are referred to low-water datum. Head of navigation for deep-draft commercial vessels and barges is at Franklin Street Bridge, ad for shallow draft commercial fishing launches is turning ba sin at head of project, 1.04 miles above outer end of west pier. Above this point, depths are sufficient only for small shallow draft launches. Total costs of existing project were $3,310,144, .o which $1,212,385 was for new work and $2,097,759 for ma1 tenance. Cost and financial statement Total to 30 1,1966 Fiscal year ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June , New work: Appropriated.. Appropriated.............................. .......... .......... 1 $..1, 714 Cost................. .................. ..... .......... .......... .......... 499' Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $86,680 $53,300 $101,200 $49,500 $105,000 2, ,126'242 Cost................. 124,590 42,732 100,685 55,605 82,565 2, ' 97,169 1 Includes $287,389 for new work for previous project. 17. MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WIS. Location. On west shore of Lake Michigan about 85 miles northerly from Chicago and about 83 miles west of Grand Haven, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 743.) Previous projects. See page 1385 of Annual Report for 1962 Existing project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions............................................. Length (feet) Width (feet) D 9,9...... North breakwater.........................................9,95.......... South breakwater.................................................... ,.... North pier.................................................... 1,656 .. .......... . South pier.............. ............................... 1,608 ............ ... ."10 Approach channel............................................ 1,500 300-800 28 Entrance channel............................................. 4,300 250-600 121 North outer harbor........................................... 4,600 1,500 29 South outer harbor........................................... . 4,600 2,200 21 M ilwaukee River .............................................. 1,100 250 21 Milwaukee River to Buffalo Street Bridge........................ 1 2,750 Variable 21 Milwaukee River Buffalo St. to Humboldt Ave..................... 10,500 Variable 21 Menomonee River............................................. 9,000 Variable 21 Kinnickinnie River entrance channel to C & N W Ry................ 4,400 350-150 21 Kinnickinnic River C & N W Ry to So. Kinnickinnic Ave. Bridge... 2,200 150-100 21 South Menomonee Canal....................................... 4,350 100 Burnham Canal............................................... 1,320 100 1 Dredging by city of Milwaukee and reimbursed at 100 per cu. yd. For detailed description see page 1232 of Annual Report for 1963. Project depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michigan, 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Poit, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). FluctUa tions of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or below annual mean stage and extreme fluctuations O temporary nature, due to wind and barometric pressure, of about 11/ feet above or below mean lake level prevailing at the time* RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1203 o ated costs (1966) are $7,042,000, Federal and $1,648,000, Un1 ederal, exclusive of amount expended on previous projects. i co°mnpleted portion of 1945 River and Harbor Act is considered active and excluded from foregoing estimate. Estimated cost (1960) of this portion is $225,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports R3 1852 ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. pierl feet of North 7,600 Mar 2'1883 Inner S. Doc. 175, 25th Cong., 2d sess. ar 2, north breakwaterl . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . Annual Report, 1881, p. 2122. South pier. Extending north breakwater 1,000 feet... .. Annual Report, 1906, p. 1752. (No prior survey or estimate affecting SePt.22,1922 breakwater extension). iu1,39 Extend north breakwater; a south breakwater, present H. Doe. 804, 66th Cong., 2d seas. Project dimensions of inner entrance channel. Mar 2' 1935 Dredging a portion of outer harbor to 21-foot depth ....... 11. Doe. 289, 72d Cong., 1st sess.2 .14, 1945 Dredging river channels to 21-foot depth................... S. Doe. 29, 76th Cong., 1st sess. et 23 ,11960 1962 Deepen South Menomonee and Burnham Canals to 21 feet.. If. )oc. 285, 86th Cong., 2d sess. Deepen an approach channel to 30 feet by 800 feet wide 11. Doc. 134, 87th Cong., 1st sess. and 300 feet wide through breakwater; deepen entrance (contains latest published map). channel 28 feet through piers, outer harbor to 28 feet south of entrance channel, and a channel to 27 feet in Mil- waukee River to Buffalo St. and in Kinnickinnic River o U hincago & North Western Ry. bridge. a °tPletedl under previous projects. I o-11DIetedPortion inactive (dredging Milwaukee River from Buffalo St. Bridge to North Ave. Bridge). Local cooperation. Complied with for acts of March 2, 1945, 1ober 23, 1962, and July 14, 1960, except inactive portion of i1 5 act. Act of August 30, 1935, provided that original dredg- b of outer harbor area be done by city of Milwaukee and city of pjlWaukee be reimbursed at actual cost but not to exceed 10 cents a cubic yard, place measurement, for original dredging done ~ovsequent to authorization of work by Congress. Agreement 2 3vering dredging was executed by Secretary of War, February 2o1934, after this work was originally authorized as part of drlec Works program. City was reimbursed for 10 percent of -'edglng. ,h erminal facilities. Four car-ferry slips, and 57 other S.arves, private and municipal, used for handling coal, grain, l ding materials, cement, petroleum products, and miscellane- is commodities. As facilities in inner harbor are considered ladequate for existing commerce, Milwaukee Harbor Commis- S0o is building an outer harbor. Perations and results during fiscal dfication: A contract for dredgingyear. .. New work: 1962 Kinnickinnic River and $2waukee River channels was started and completed at a cost of $8,092. Dredging south outer harbor, approach and entrance o qnels was started by government plant with fiscal year cost lab $1,245,341. Engineering and design by government hired l.or Was continued at a cost of $136,582. Maintenance: Con- bylon surveys and engineering and design studies were performed ired labor at a cost of $3,168. Repair of portions of break- ater by )lacing 1,941 tons of stone in June 1966 at a cost of $10,877. Rehabilitation: Work on contract for reconstruction Of additional 450 feet of north breakwater was started and com- ,eted at a cost of $276,732. Material for installation of new Wales was purchased at a cost of $18,202. 1204 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 9 percent complete. The 1962 modification is about 78 percet complete. North breakwater, 9,954 feet long, was completed i August 1925. North pier was completed in 1905 and constrtc tion of south pier was completed in November 1910. Construe tion of south breakwater and shore connection was commenced in May 1925 and completed in October 1929. Dredging entranvce channel to existing project depth and width was commenced i May 1929 and completed in September 1930. Before modific" tion of August 30, 1935, city of Milwaukee dredged most of the area in the outer harbor south of inner entrance piers and lake ward of pierhead line to more than 21 feet below datum without cost to the United States. City of Milwaukee also dredged a por tion of the area in the outer harbor north of inner entrance pi to provide an approach channel to the passenger and auto pier opposite East Clybourn Street. Work on the 1945 modificatiol was started in June and completed in August 1957, except fo inactive portion. North breakwater is in generally good col dition except the northerly 2,000 feet which requires minor remedial repairs. South breakwater and shore connections are in generally good condition. Controlling depths at low wate datum are 27 feet in Milwaukee River to C. & N. W. Ry. bridge 21 feet to Buffalo Street bridge and about 18 feet thence to head of project; 27 feet in Kinnickinnic River to C. & N. W. 1Y bridge and 21 feet to head of project east of the Kinnickinic Avenue bridge; and 21 feet in Menomonee River to 700 feet easlt of head of project; 19 feet to 150 feet east of the head of the project, and thence reducing to 5 feet at the head, and 21 feet i the South Menomonee Canal and Burnham Canal to the head of the project in these channels. Costs of existing project were $6,444,082 for new work, $4,082,471 for maintenance, and $1,79 465 for rehabilitation, at total of $12,324,018. Cost ,L and financial statement Total to6 1 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: 4 Appropriated.......... $75,500 -$43,200 $40,000 $406,000$1,770,000 $8 1 300 Cost.................. 5,558 26,742 25,994 42,369 1,669,015 7737,30 Maintenance: ,4504 Appropriated.......... 50,050 143,500 129,000 49,500 110,000 465716 Cost.................. 50,437 139,752 132,811 41,727 14,045 4541, Rehabilitation: 931,900 Appropriated.......... 250,000 300,000 670,000 444,000 200,000 1 Cost.................. 27,053 518,875 455,409 436,538 310,229 1 I Includes $1,293,220 for new work and $459,305 for maintenance for previous projects. 18. NEW BUFFALO HARBOR, MICH.o Location. At mouth of Galien River on southeast shoreo Lake Michigan in Berrien County, about 45 miles easterly frofl Chicago, Ill. (See Lake Survey Chart 75.) Existing project. Provides for an entrance channel 10 fee deep by 80 to 180 feet wide and 850 feet long, to mouth of Galien River; new north and south breakwaters 1,400 and 860 feet lo1go respectively, and deepening inner channel in Galien River to 8 feet and 80 feet wide and 1,250 feet long. Project was author" RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1205 ized by River and Harbor Act of 1962. Project depth is re- fabrred to low-water datum for Lake Michigan, which is 576.8 feet (GrVe mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International p'eat Lakes Datum-1955). Estimated costs (1966) are $837,000 bu eral and $1,267,000 non-Federal, which includes a cash contri- Lon of $763,000. Total project cost is $2,104,000. DLocal cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash 48 ( rcent of the first cost of construction of the general navigation leV lties, such contribution, presently estimated (July 1966 price ,,tels) at $763,000 to be paid in a lump sum before start of detsruction, subject to final adjustment after actual costs are tiermined; provide lands and rights-of-way for construc- S landfuture maintenance of project and aids to navigation 130 request of the Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil- sPOsal areas; hold the United States free from damages; provide ad1aintain necessary mooring facilities open to all equally, commensurate iftl1ncluding dredging berthing areas to depths "at ed projects depths; and reserve mooring facilities ade- for accommodation of transient craft. Formal assurances Cere requested in December 1965. Michigan State Waterways co0 r.nission stated it would provide the cash contribution and ordinate local efforts to meet other cooperation requirements. Termina facilities. One village owned boat ramp and three ')Tately operated marinas and a private boat club facility. e Pertions and results dutring fiscal year. New work: Engi- ering and design was continued by hired labor. Conition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. Cost and financial statement SnalYe to Total 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork.. APrropriated ......... . ....... ......... . $90,000 $200,000 $260000 ................................................ .61,760 80,326 142,086 19. PENSAUKEE HARBOR, WIS. eLocation. On west shore of Green Bay, about 22 miles north- asterly from Green Bay Harbor, and about 33 miles south- g eterly from Menominee Harbor, Mich. and Wis. (See Lake "vey Chart 703.) vious projects. For details, see Annual Report for 1899, 'age2734, and Annual Report for 1938, page 1429. feVXisting project. An entrance channel 100 feet wide and 8 water datum from the depth in Green Bay about 44et300deepfeetattolowmouth of Pensaukee River. Project depth is re- ferred to low water datum for Lake Michigan, which is 576.8 eet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (Interna- aet0onlal seasonal changesDatum-1955). Great Lakes Fluctuations of water level of about one-half foot above or below the annual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a temporary ab overe, ordue to wind and. barometric pressure, of about 2 feet below mean lake level prevailing at the time. New 1206 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 work for completed project cost $24,851, exclusive of amrounts expended under previous projects. Existing project was authO ized by 1937 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 478, 74th Cong., sess.). Latest published map is in project document. Local cooperation. None required.hf Terminal facilities. Small private wharves along lower his mile of river, used by the local fishing interests. Ample spac available for additional fishing wharves when required. Fac' ties considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Condition surveys by hired labor cost $4,079. U.S. bucket dredge Winneco''p 1I operations in August 1965 removed 8,395 cubic yards of material at a cost of $15,921. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was coI pleted in 1938. Dredging channel was commenced in Augue and completed in October 1938. Controlling depths at low wate datum are 6 feet in entrance channel in Green Bay to mouth the river and thence about 4 feet in river. Costs and expeand tures under the existing project were $24,851 for new wolrk -lc $58,940 for maintenance, a total of $83,791. Cost and financial statement lo- Total ................ Fiscalyear 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June $403$ New work: Appropriated.............................. 34:035 Cost................ ............................. Maintenance: 65,11 Appropriated.......... $13,835 $1,947 $400 $1,300 $20,000 66g11 Cost.................. 13,835 1,947 400 1,300 20,000 1 Includes $9,184 for new work and $6,777 for maintenance for previous projects. 20. PORT WASHINGTON HARBOR, WIS. Location. On the west shore of Lake Michigan, about miles south from Manitowoc and about 29 miles north from M waukee. (See Lake Survey Chart 74.) Previous projects. For details, see page 1938 of Annual te port for 1915, and page 1459 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A north breakwater 2,537 feet long; extend ing a privately owned south breakwater about 456 feet to fore an entrance about 350 feet wide; an outer turning basin 750 fet wide and 21 feet deep; an entrance channel 2,400 feet long and 21 feet deep through the south side of the basin; a west inne basin 140 feet wide and 490 feet long and a north inner basin 190 feet wide and 750 feet long, both basins, 18 feet deep. Projec depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michigan, whic is 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). The fluctuation' of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or below the annual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a ter" porary nature, due to wind and barometric pressure, of several feet above or below the mean lake level prevailing at the tiMe. New work for completed project cost $810,709, exclusive o amounts expended on previous projects. The 1958 River and "arbor RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT Act portion is considered inactive and excluded from fore- go1g costs. Estimated cost of this portion (1960) is $2,750,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports July 11,1870 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . North pier and south basin ...... II.Ex. Doc. 28, 41st Cong., 2d seas., and Au. 14,1876 . Annual Report, 1879, p. 119. Annual Report, 1876, pt. 2, p. 379. 30,19352 North basini. Aug. 6 North breakwater, removal of 50ifeet of north pier, outer 11. Doe. 168, 72d Cong., 1st seas., and turning basin, present project dimensions of channel and Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. July 3,19583 basin and extension of south breakwater. 41, 74th Cong., 1st sess. Extending and raising of north breakwater and placing 11. Doc. 446, 83d Coneg.,2d sess. rubble along sides; removing 456 feet of south breakwater (contains latest published map). t~o b in re d ging in outer asin. andQudIptff n CO Detr d under previous is W projects. 8 0 kecormended 1tior in 11. Doc. 168, 72d Cong., 1st sess.,included in Public Works Admin- 'n'%Ctive. ' f Sept. 6, 1933. e-Dprograrm, Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Wh erminal facilities. There is one coal wharf and several fishing arvYs. City provided a wharf which is open to public use. ailities considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Condition surveys were performed by hired labor at a cost of $1,554. U.S. dipper dredge Kewaunee operations in September 1965 removed 9,295 cubic yards of material at a cost of $7,502. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- Seted in 1936, except for inactive portion of 1958 modification. Construction of north breakwater and removal of outer portion of 1rth pier were commenced in April and completed in December ter 4. Dredging entrance channel, outer turning basin, and in- 1r.basins to existing project depth, was commenced in July in December 1934. Construction of south break- watercompleted 4" was commenced in July and completed in October 1936. 1reakwaters and north stub pier are in good condition. Original Pier, completed in 1893, was entirely removed in 1932 by Pth Drivate interests under permit granted October 25, 1930, by Secre- bry of War and replaced with coal wharf. A south rubblemound irakwater about 500 feet long was constructed in 1934 by private 0terests as an extension of their coal wharf in accordance with local COoperation requirements of House Document 168, 72d Con- s,1st session. Controlling depths at low-water datum are 21 feet in entrance channel and 21 feet in turning basin. iterior basins had controlling depths of 14 feet in west basin id 18.9 feet in north basin. Area between south line of Vernment entrance channel and the harbor face of private coal deha, which is maintained by private interests, had a controlling 19epth of about 22 feet. Total cost of existing project to June 30, ,6, was $1,153,303, of which $810,709 was for new work $207,714 regular funds and $602,995 public works funds), and $342,594 regular funds for maintenance. 1208 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement T otal10t966 year..........;..... Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: 204 $999 Appropriated. . ..................................................... 999,204 Cost... ............................................... ......... Maintenance: 368,641 Appropriated.......... $20,250 $1,594 $1,089 $24,700 -$3,000 357,711 Cost................. 20,162 1,682 1,089 1,714 9,056 1Includes $188,495 for new work and $15,123 for maintenance. 21. RACINE HARBOR, WIS. Location. On west shore of Lake Michigan about 26 miles southerly from Milwaukee and about 64 miles northerly from, Chicago. (See Lake Survey Chart 745.) Previous projects. See page 1389 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions........................ ................. Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth (feet) North breakwater............ ......... ............. 2,640 ............ .... North Stub pier............................................180............... South breakwater............................... . .2,652....................2. Apprroach channel....... ...................................... 680 350 21 Outer basin...... ....................................... 1,000 1,000 91 Root River Channel............................................ 2,900 95-190 For detailed description see page 1235, Annual Report for 1963. Project depth is referred to low-water datum on bLale Michigan, 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Poin Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Flucta tions of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or below annual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations o a temporary nature, due to wind and barometric pressure, of several feet above or below mean lake level prevailing at the time. New work for project as completed cost $777,775, a clusive of amounts expended on previous projects and exclusive of inner 300 linear feet of pile pier and 450 linear feet of rubble mound, orginally part of south breakwater but no longer co1 sidered necessary. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 2,1907 lBreakwaters.................... . .................. 11. Doc. 62, 59th Cong., 1st sess, s June25, 1910 1fAnnual IReport 1909, p. 1973. , Aug.26, 1937 Remove shoals lakeward of harbor entrance, enlarge 19-foot Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc.4 channel through outer basin and 19-foot channel min river. 75th Cong., 1st sess. o.0d Mar. 2, 1945 Present project dimensions of channel through outer basin H. Doe. 816, 77th Cong., 2d ses., and in river. HI.Doc. 255, 78th Cong., 1st (contains latest published maps)* Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Five wharves used for handling coal, lime stone, and fish. City provided a public wharf with warehouse. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance Condition surveys by hired labor cost $3,928. Repairs to break- RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1209 waters were made in June 1966 by hired labor by placement of 1,941 tons of stone at a cost of $3,449. U.S. dipper dredge Kewaunee operations in September 1965 removed 12,290 cubic yards of material at a cost of $18,674. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project substantially corpleted in 1946. Construction of north breakwater and shore connection was completed in November 1918. Removal of old north pier was completed in 1913. Construction of south break- water and shore connection and removal of old south pier were colmenced in June 1916 and completed in December 1924. Re- 111oval of outer shoals, widening and deepening channel through uter basin to existing project depth and width, and dredging river channel began in July and completed in November 1946. Concrete superstructure on portions of north breakwater and hore connections and timber substructures of portions of south reakwater and south stub pier are disintegrating and require repairs. Controlling depths at low-water datum are 23 feet or 'Ore in entrance channel, generally 21 feet through outer basin alld for about 400 feet in river except for lesser depths in scattered thoals and along northerly and southerly sides of outer basin; thence 19 feet to State Street Bridge, and thence decreasing to about 10 feet at upper limits of project. Costs of existing proj- ect Were $777,775 for new work and $957,985 for maintenance, a tal of $1,735,760. Cost and financial statement 1calYear Total to .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NWWork: A 1ropriated................................... $1,205,015 oR ra ted019$1,205,015 oat..................... I...... .... 1,205,015 ntenan..c .................................. Coprated.......... $39,600 $9,300 $38,900 $39,600 $45,000 1,056,471 S40,276 9,225 38,983 39,600 26,051 1,037,522 nludes $427,240 for new work and $79,537 for maintenance for previous projects. • a22. SHEBOYQAN HARBOR, WIS. Location On west shore of Lake Michigan about 26 miles south from Manitowoc and about 55 miles north of Milwaukee. (See Lake Survey Chart 735.) Previous projects. See page 1381 of Annual Report for 1962. b 1'xisting project. An outer harbor or stilling basin formed by eakwaters as follows: lrolect dimensions............ ........ ................ Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth (feet) water...........................................20...................... Su b pier .............................................. 120 ............. .............. 1 breakwater .............................................. 2,750 .. ............ ntrn e an nel............................ ................... ,000 450 .......... 2 basin .... .... er hannel.. ..................................... 2,500 200-500 21 1,500 400 20 rannel....3,000 165-370 21 rchannel.... 2,000 100-165 15 1210 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 For detailed description see page 1230, Annual Report for 1963. Project depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michigans which is 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Fluctua- tions of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half fOOt above or below annual mean stage and extreme fluctuations of a temporary nature due to wind and barometric pressure of about 112 feet above or below mean lake level prevailing at the tnlle New work for project as completed cost $648,271, exclusive o amounts expended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mara 2,1907 North breakwater............................ .. 11. Doc. 62, 59th Cong., 1st sess. Jan. 21, 1927 Preserving south pier as part of project, providing turning H. Doc. 475, 68th Cong., 2d sess. basin, and elimination of proposed south breakwaters. Aug. 30 1935 Present project dimensions of channel..................... Rivers and Harbors Committee . 47, 74th Cong., 1st sess. Sept. 3, 1954 Widen and deepen outer harbor entrance channel to 450 H. Doc. 554, 82d Cong., 2d sess. (cos feet, widen and deepen river channel from present project tains latest published map). limit to north side of Jefferson Ave. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Four wharves for handling coal, building material, petroleum products, fish, and miscellaneous commodi ities. City provided a public wharf. Facilities considered ade- quate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. Condition surveys were made by hired labor at a cost of $2,448. Repairs to breakwaters were made in June 1966 by hired labOr by placement of 934 tons at a cost of $5,981. Rehabilitation: Funds in amount of $972 were revoked. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed in December 1956. South pier was completed in 1904. Cot* struction of north breakwater was commenced in October 1913 and completed in October 1915. Dredging turning basin WaS commenced in October 1928 and completed in September 1931. Dredging entrance channel to existing project depth was com' menced in June and completed in July 1938. Work on 1954 modification was completed in December 1956. Piers and break* waters are in generally good condition. Inner 260 feet of south pier replaced with a revetment by private interests under permit granted July 16, 1931, by Secretary of War. Pier is therefore maintained only for a length of about 2,490 feet. Controlling depths at low-water datum are about 24 feet in entrance channel, 20 feet in basin and channel between piers; thence about 21 feet to 8th St.; thence about 15.4 feet to Maryland Avenue, and thence depths gradually decrease to 7 feet to Jefferson Avenue, the upper limits of the project. Sheboygan River is navigable about 2.4 miles above its mouth for craft drawing not more than 2 feet. Costs of existing project were $648,271 for new work, $1,095,764 for maintenance and $609,028 for rehabilitation, a total of $2, 353,063. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1211 Cost and financial statement iScal Yea ................ Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 New work: ApDroopriated............... ............................................... $1,136,088 coai. Maintenance:. * .................................................. 1,136,088 ppropriated.......... $39,600 $33,700 $34,600 $31,700 $55,000 1,229,466 lehabilitaion.......... 40,456 33,559 33,198 33,340 8,429 1,182,895 .......... 200,000 PPropriated 320,000 68,000 -10,000 -972 609,028 Ot .................. 11,925 95,767 329,105 143,410 .. 609,028 ncludes $487,817 for new work and $87,131 for maintenance for previous projects. 23. STURGEON BAY AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WIS. Location. On west shore of Lake Michigan about 52 miles nrtheasterly from Green Bay and about 128 miles northerly roM Milwaukee. (See Lake Survey Chart 728.) PreVious projects. See page 1373 of Annual Report for 1962. .xisting project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions .. .. .. . .... .. .. . . .. .... .. .. .. ...... Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth (feet) Wop7) Channel........................................... COnverging breakwaters (each)............................. 1,500 I1,314......60 7,20 ApP::oh.......... ................................ ch canal hev-- .h through breakwaters ................................... 7,200 2,000 160-2 0 200.......... 22 elt h Cn rough Sturgeon Bay.......................... .20,930 250 22 Maiel nSturgeon Bay.................................. 14,020 500 22 u bain, southwesterly side of channel............. ......... ........................... 20 or detailed description see page 1223, Annual Report for 1963. ]oject depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michigan, 76.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (In- lernational Great Lakes Datum-1955). Fluctuations of water evel are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or below a nlIlual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a temporary na- Ure, due to wind and barometric pressure, of several feet above or below mean lake level prevailing at the time. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Maar 3,1873 Breakwatersl ........................................ H. Ex. Doc. 34. 42d Cong., 2d seas., July 13 Annual Report, 1872, p. 171. Jul31892Acquisition of the canal...... .................... H. Ex. Doc. 106, 49th Cong., 2d seas. J131902 Canal AR30195works.revetments and consolidation of canal and harbor- H. Doc. 117, 56th Cong., 2d seas. Aug. 30, 1935 Present project dimensions of channels and elimination of Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. May turning basin immediately west of revetted canal. S2,1945Turning basin between city and Bushman wharves......... 9, 74th Cong., 1st sess. H. Doe. 421, 78th Cong., 2d seas.2 a oPleted under previous projects. Otains latest published map. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. As the canal and connecting channel is a through waterway, only terminal facilities are in city of Stur- geon Bay, 4 miles from west end of revetted portion of canal. hese facilities consist of two coal wharves, four shipbuilding Yards, and one package-freight wharf. City of Sturgeon Bay 1)rovided a public wharf. There is also a large inactive stone 1212 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 wharf about 5 miles northwesterly from city of Sturgeon 1aY. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. . Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance Condition surveys and engineering and design studies were Imade by hired labor. Rehabilitation: Construction was continued bY contract at a cost of $13,601. Government costs were $4,982. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co pleted in 1946. Breakwaters were completed in 1880, and can0l revetments in 1903. Dredging and rock removal at easterly eln trance to canal and dredging in westerly section of canal,l t existing project depth, were commenced in May and completed in September 1940. Deepening and widening middle section O canal to existing project depth and width was commenced in May and completed in August 1942. Dredging turning basin was commenced in June and completed in July 1946. Breakw aters are in good condition. North revetment and sections of south revetment have been rehabilitated and are in good condition. Remainder of south revetment is in fair condition and requires repair. Controlling depths for practicable widths at low water datum are 23 feet in entrance channel and revetted canal, 22 feet in channel in Sturgeon Bay, and 18.3 feet in turning basin. Costs to June 30, 1966, for existing project were $736,303 for ne work, $3,129,082 for maintenance, and $882,408 for rehabilitai tion, a total of $4,747,793. In addition, $235,940 was expended between April 25, 1893, and June 30, 1917, on operating and care of works of improvement under provision of permanent indefinite appropriations for such purposes. Cost and financial statement o Total to year.............. Fiscal : 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19f66' New work: 9 722 Appropriated........................................................... $105g9:722 Cost.................. ........ .. .......... .................... 1,06 Maintenance: 9 548 Appropriated.......... $64,300 $51,600 $47,400 $60,400 $65,000 3,39 Cost................ 64,234 51,619 43,158 64,689 14,264 3,34 Rehabilitation: g999 Appropriated.......... 33,000 359,899 400,000 96,000 .. 88 Cost................. 21,784 53,929 577,435 210,677 18,583 8882,405 1 ,...,].. ,00,0A , ,! ..... . ... Ara 1 '7000 . . . :--L ..... Includes $323,41u for new work and $29,743 0A .. .... .' . ...... or maintenance for previous projecs. n" +F2_ t.. 24. TWO RIVERS HARBOR, WIS. Location. On west shore of Lake Michigan about 82 miles northerly from Milwaukee and about 101 miles from Green 3Bay via Sturgeon Bay Canal. (See Lake Survey Chart 73.) Previous projects. See page 1377, Annual Report for 1962. Existing project. Provides for the following: feet) Project dimensions................................... Length (feet) Width (feet) Depth Approach channel........... ................................... 1,000 500 North pier.... .......................................... 1,642 ....................... *1,720. South pier ........................................... ....... Channel ............................................... 1,600 ..... 200 18 Inner Basin.................................................. 2 800 200 10 Channel East Twin River...................................... 2,200 100 RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1213 or detailed description see page 1226 of Annual Report for M. Project depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake xchian, 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, t~uebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Fluctua- abons of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot t ve or below annual mean stage and extreme fluctuations of a porary nature, due to wind and barometric pressure, of sev- al feet above or below mean lake level prevailing at the time. o 1pleted project cost $147,463 exclusive of the amount expended of 1revious projects. The 1935 River and Harbor Act portion (1jroject is considered inactive. Estimated cost of this portion o4) is $14,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar 3, 1871 South pier, 750 feet of north pier, and about 44 feet of northAnnual Report, 1871, p. 123 (as modi- revetinent.1 ied by Chief of Engineers Feb. 27, Mar. 2, 107 1897) Relemainder of north pier and stilling basin........... ... H. Ifoc. 730, 59th Cong., 1st sBess. Aug.30, Modification of plan A. Deepening entrance channel and inner basin to 18 feet....... Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. July 3,1958 25, 73d Cong., 2d sess. Extend of existing project in West Twin Riiver to 18 feet 11. Doe. 362, 84th Cong., 2d sess. deep and in East Twin River to 10 feet deep to 22d Street ( contains latest published map ). B ige urdage. oapleted under previous projects. 1ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Cit erm'inal facilities. A coal wharf and several fishing wharves. Dub provided a wharf for receipt of petroleum products and Co.c use. Facilities existing considered adequate for CoPerations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: dtion surveys ewaunee by hired labor cost $3,267. U.S. dipper dredge operations in April 1966 removed 11,550 yards of derial at a cost of $15,953. eXCo'ndition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete aet for inactive portion of project which consists of dredging 01 -foot width along reannel between each side of lakeward portion of entrance the piers. This dredging was omitted to avoid oreoval of necessary riprap along entrance piers. Present width "fchannel is considered adequate for present and reasonably i. ospective commerce. South pier was completed in 1883 and is N0 generally good condition. North pier was completed in 1908. 1.96rth revetment, completed in 1917, was rebuilt May to August 1ro Dredging entrance channel and inner basin to existing D1 Ject depth was commenced in March and substantially com- 18lted in May 1937. Controlling depth at low water datum is p4iet or more in entrance channel, 17.5 feet in channel between T}i)' and 18 feet in inner basin, and 8.2 feet or more in East River to 22d Street. East and West Twin Rivers are .nV1 .. ie ble for about 3 and 7 miles, respectively, from the harbor 1 96er for craft drawing not more than 4 feet. Costs to June 30, 896, for existing project were $147,463 for new work and $1,- 8,369 for maintenance, a total of $1,539,832. In addition, '057 were costed for minor rehabilitation. 1214 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 uost and inanciat staremenc Total to66 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19 New work: $0 320 360,320 Appropriated.............................................................. Cost... ......................................................... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $49,700 $43,900 0 196 $94,600 $49,500 $80,000 1548 Cost................. 49,713 43,961 83,936 46,319 19,220 Rehabilitation: g,051 Appropriated......... . 102,057 -44,000 .......... ..................... 586 Cost.................. 22,593 35,460 4 ........................ 'Includes $212,857 for new work and $33,113 for maintenance for previous projects. 25. WAUKEGAN HARBOR, ILL. Location. On west shore of Lake Michigan about 51 m south of Milwaukee and about 38 miles north of Chicago. (See Lake Survey Chart 74.) Previous project. See page 1392, Annual Report for 1 Existing project. Provides for the following: Project dimensions............................... .............. Length (feet) Width (feet) Dep feet) North breakwater... ...................................... 1,900........... North pier........... .......................................... 1,610 .............. South pier.......... ........................................... 3,211 .......... ...... Entrance channel... ...................................... 1,200 390 18 Channel to inner basin. .. 1................................... 1.700 200 8 Inner basin................................................... 1,375 375-500 For detailed description see page 1239, Annual Report for 196 Project depth is referred to low-water datum for Lake Michi"ga 576.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (Inter. national Great Lakes Datum-1955.) Fluctuations of water level are seasonal changes of about one-half foot above or belo" the annual mean stage, and extreme fluctuations of a temporYe nature, due to wind and barometric pressure, several feet abo or below mean lake level prevailing at the time. - Estimated c t for new work (1965) is $624,000 Federal and $88,000 non Fed eral, exclusive of amount expended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports - I -I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . June 14, 1880 Parallel iers and basinl......... 1 .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... Annual Report, 1880, p. 1942. 2163. Aug. 3. 1882 Modifiedlocation of harbor entrance . Annual Report, 1882, pp. 277,26 June 13, 1902 Detached breakwater, extend piers, increase width of harbor H. Doc. 343, 56th Cong., 1stse at inner end of north pier, and dredge channel and basin to existing project depth. July 3,1930 Extension of breakwater to shore, dredging near outer end Rivers and Harbors Committeeo of north pier, and enlarging inner basin. 27, 71st Cong., 2d sess. e ss' 3 Mar. 2, 1945 Dredge an entrance channel to existing project dimensions H. Doc. 116, 77th Cong., 1st s from outer end of north pier to project depth in lake, and dredge an anchorage area in southwest corner of inner basin to existing project depth. Abandonment of dredging triangular area in southwest corner of inner basin to 18 feet deep. 1Completed under previous projects.to 2Contains latest published map. Anchorage area in southwest corner of inner basin is t restudied. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. RIVERS AND HARBORS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1215 gy Terminal facilities. Two commercial docks receive coal, o1un, and limestone. In addition, there are three publicly othel edt docks, one owned by city and used for fishing, and the Other bo rtwo owned by the Waukegan Port District. There is one Yat Yard for recreational craft. City dock is considered ade- 1 ate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 1945 modification; contract dredging of anchorage area was completed at a cost of $50,020. Final costs are pending. Government costs were $6,910. Maintenance: Condition surveys by hired labor cost $4,183. Adjustment of $37,561 was made for dredging operations in April and May 1965. Dredging with the Hains was also performed in May 1966 removing 40,224 cubic yards at a cost of $38,517. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. ACeahorage area in southwest corner of inner basin (1945 modi- QatioU)) is"i i was completed in 1966. North pier, completed in 1904, CoI good condition. South pier, completed in 1903, is in good a ltion. The outer 600 feet of breakwater, completed in 1904, Codithe shore-arm extension, completed in 1931, are in good at 't on . Controlling depths for practicable widths at low souWtter datum are 22.0 feet in entrance channel to outer end of bas t Pier, 18 feet in channel between piers and 18 feet in inner were costs $604.,042Total of existing project were $2,388,735 of which for new work and $1,784,693 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement iear . .16Total to ,. ....... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Nwork.: -- ~ A)rOriated .. oriated........''........................ $4,000 $7,735 $111,000 $877,726 nee.23,735 6,619 56,930 822,275 o .riated....... $67,650 $60,700 53,500 42,000 45,000 1,803,079 .......... 74,434 60,666 53,544 4,064 80,261 1,800,404 aSjdo $218,233 oreatior for new work and $15,711 for maintenance on previous projects. lities. 26. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Ceo1of roject Date survey conducted Ra arbor, Wis............................... Sept. 1965 O0ors at Washington Island, Wis. .................. Aug.-Oct. 1965 Sharbor, W is................................ . Aug.-Sept. 1965 1216 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS U. S. ARMY, 1966 27. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS Cost to June 30, 1966 For last Name of project full report eratio see Annual o tperato Report Construction an ane for- Algoma Harbor, Wis............ 1 .. ...................... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1964 $292,010 6840 Harbors at Washington Island, Wis. 1950 62,838 Oconto Harbor, Wis....1................................ 2 1964 130,754 South Milwaukee Harbor, Wis. 3................................ 1906 5,000 .. 1 Channels adequate for commerce. 2 No commerce reported. Abandonment recommended in 1926 (H. Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1stsess.). 28. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Studies conducted during fiscal year cost $1,013 forIllif River at Peoria, Ill., $4,168 for Michigan City, Ind., $4,917 for Menominee Harbor and River, Wis. and Mich., and $5,207' Manitowoc Harbor, Wis. 29. CALUMET RIVER BRIDGES, ILL. Location. Bridges are Calumet Western Railway bridge mile 5.17; Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad bridge at"'I 5.31; and Norfolk and Western Railway (formerly New.. e, Chicago, & St. Louis Railroad) bridge at mile 5.66 from Calu, Harbor over Calumet River. . et Existing project. Provides for removal of present Cal0d Western Railway bridge, and replacement of present Norfolk 'e Western Railway bridge with new bridges, as existing bridgese obstructive to free and easy navigation. New bridges will hee minimum horizontal clearance of 200 feet and vertical clears of 125 feet in open position. Notice to alter Norfolk and Weste Railway (then the New York, Chicago, & St. Louis Railrosd) bridge was served owner July 24, 1961, as authorized by Trulnfl Hobbs Act of 1940, as amended. A voluntary three way agre ment was approved March 5, 1963, whereby under phase Calumet Western Railway will remove existing damaged bri%1 (at mile 5.17) and construct necessary approaches and tie-4d trackage to use existing Chicago & Western Indiana Railro bridge (at mile 5.31). Then under phase II, relocationll alteration of Chicago & Western Indiana bridge and tracksti be accomplished to provide permanent use of new bridge by bOt railroads (Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad and Calo Western Railway). Estimated (1966) Federal share of cost new work is $18,700,000. Estimated cost to bridge owners $480,000. Local cooperation. In accordance with Truman-Hobbs..'; bridge owner must prepare and submit plans and specificatio take and submit bids with a recommendation as to most cof petent bid or bids; submit a written guaranty that total costo project, including cost of such work as is to be performed W bridge owner and not included in work to be performed bY co BEACH EROSION CONTROL--CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1217 tract, shall not exceed sum stated in said guaranty; and bear proportionate share of total cost of project as determined by Secretary of the Army. Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Gen- eral Plans and specifications for new Norfolk & Western Railway CO. bridge were approved by Office, Chief of Engineers, on Decem- ber 30, 1965. The railway company initiated purchase of neces- ary rights-of-way preliminary to advertising for bids. Calumet brestern Railway Co. awarded contract for removal of its existing pidge in December 1964. Removal was completed in May 1965. tiProcurement of rights of way for Calumet Western track reloca- 01n Was completed in June 1966. Relocation of utilities in olnection with the track relocation continued. Preparation of anas and specifications for track alteration was started. Chicago 41d Western Indiana Railroad continued with preparation of Puans and specifications for its new bridge. Costs to the Govern- coet of work by the railroads was $1,176,910. Administrative sts by the Government during the year were $45,316. C0,ondition at end of fiscal year. An order of apportionment for hase I construction was issued by the Secretary of the Army on abovernber 17, 1964. Phase I work under voluntary agreement is ibout 60 percent complete. Preparation of plans and specifica- S for Chicago and Western Indiana new bridge is about 48 Percent complete. Plans and specifications for new Norfolk odf W estern Railway bridge have been completed and purchase rights-of-way is in progress. Construction has not started. -Cost and financial statement ical Ye1Total ........ to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Work: roriated..........:.......... $980,000-$300,000 $800,000 $1,566,000 $3,046,000 S ...................... 23,741 38,107 234,706 1,222,226 1,618,780 30. EVANSTON, ILL. Location Along western shore of Lake Michigan, within Lok County and adjacent to city of Chicago to the south. (See lae Survey Charts 75 and 751 and Geological Survey quad- rangle sheet entitled "Evanston, Illinois.") of1 isting project. Provides for Federal participation to extent cubne-third of first cost of construction for placement of 45,000 ic yards aIrk StreetofBeach, sandfill and construction of a jetty 600 feet long at placement of 30,000 cubic yards of sandfill 8l construction of a jetty 200 feet long at Dempster Street tieach, placement of 50,000 cubic yards of sandfill and construc- Ofo44 of3 a jetty 425 feet long at Lee Street Beach and construction ce ,1 0 feet of riprap protection along publicly owned shore ex- t at Lee Street Beach and south of South Blvd. Federal par- a~tl~ation to extent of 70 percent of first cost for construction at .rosse Point Park Beach of an impermeable steel sheet-pile fen 600 feet long and placement of sandfill extending about 525 t north of groin, varying in width from 300 feet at groin to 1218 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 75 feet at north end and Federal participation to extent of 50 percent of first cost for modification of protection at South Boule- vard Beach by construction of an impermeable steel sheet-Ple groin 600 feet long and placement of sandfill extending about 80 feet north of groin, varying in width from 200 feet at groin to 50 feet at north end. Completed work at Clark Street, Dempster Street, and Lee Street Beaches and 4,131 feet of riprap protec tion cost $267,267 Federal and $534,535 non-Federal, a total of $801,802. Estimated cost (July 1966) for new work at Grosse Point and South Boulevard Beaches is $393,000 Federal and $267,000 non-Federal, a total of $660,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Sept. 3, 1954 Federal participation for control of beach erosion control at H. Doc. 28, 83d Cong., 1st sess. Clark St., Dempster St., and Lee St. Beachs and 4,130 feet of riprap protection along publicly owned shore, Evanston, Ill.(o* Oct. 28, 1965 Modification of project to provide for Federal participation I. Doc. 159, 89th Cong., Ist sess. for beach erosion control at Grosse Point Park Beach and tains latest published map). South Boulevard Beach, Evanston, Ill. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work authorized by act of September 3, 1954. Total costs for local cooperatiol for work authorized by act of September 3, 1954 were $534,535- Act of October 28, 1965 requires that local interests bear all coss of work in excess of Federal contributions recommended; pro- vide necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from damages due to the construction works5 ; maintain all works after completion in accordance with regula- tions prescribed by the Secretary of the Army; maintain during economic life of project continued public ownership and admiB' istration for public use of publicly owned shores upon which the recommended Federal participation is based; maintain at the Grosse Point Park beach conditions that will exclude permanent human habitation including summer residences, preserve th natural protective features of the beach and inshore lands, ad provide essentially full park facilities for appropriate public Use including a suitable recreational beach all of which shall mee with the approval of the Chief of Engineers; provide appurtenant facilities required for realization of recreational benefits; control water pollution to extent necessary to safeguard health o bathers; and obtain approval of Chief of Engineers, before cor" mencement of work, of detailed plans and specifications, and atr rangements for prosecuting the work. Operations and results during fiscal year. City of EvanstOh completed plans and specifications for Grosse Point Park Beac. portion of project. Plans were approved by the Chief of Eng1 " neers on April 14, 1965. City of Evanston advertised for bids and awarded a contract for this portion of the project April V, 1966. Construction is underway. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized by act of September 3, 1954 is completed. Local interests started con struction on Grosse Point Park Beach portion of the work authorized by act of October 28, 1965. FLOOD CONTROL---CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1219 Cost and financial statement ?i5 Yea Total to " 1062 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work.. APPrOriated.......... . ....... $3,733 .................................. $267,267 S .............. $2 ,534 3,200 $533 ... ... ........... 267,267 31. AUTHIORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30,1966 full report Name of project seeAnnual Operation and Report ._for- Construction maintenance iao Cook Couty 11. Xil DU .. oo..County................................................................ orth, Cook County, 111.1......... ............................ ... 3$5,200 ............ foLake County, Ill..................... ............................... 8kore f st, Lake County, Ill..4603............. Wirt, Manito aet&a.Cook woc County, WIl. County, Wi................................ . 460,503... a.Cok County, 111.1 urtnorized by River and Harbor Act of 1954. a eithorized by River and Harbor Act of 1958. c1,. iUirsement to Kenilworth in fiscal year 1961. roe 6ludes reimbursemrnent of $56,037 to ostsof $4,466, in fiscalyear 1964. Wisconsin State Highway Commnission and Govern- 32. FARM CREEK, ILL. 60Location. Farm Creek watershed in Tazewell County, Ill., is at square miles in extent. Stream empties into Illinois Waterway 1M1ile 162 above mouth. p(Iisting project. Two compacted-earth flood-detention dams, 1 ldulac Dam on Fondulac Creek, Tazewell County, Ill., about 01.,niles easterly of East Peoria, Ill., and Farmdale Dam miles easterly of a st arIm Og Peoria, Ill.,Tazewell Creek, Farm2.5Creek, Cole Creek, County, Ill.,to about and improvements g d IRerfoot Creek Channels in East Peoria, Ill. Fondulac Dam s a maximum height of 67 feet a above riverbed and a reservoir Mlacity of 3,780 acre-feet. Farmdale Dam has a maximum height of 80 feet above riverbed and a reservoir capacity of 15,500 acre-feet. Linear feet of channel improvements are: Farm Creek, 12,000 feet; Cole Creek, 1,875 feet; Kerfoot Creek, 900 eet. Project provides complete protection to residential, busi- less, and highly developed industrial areas to East Peoria, Ill., : ainst design flows in Farm, Cole, Kerfoot, and Dempsey Creeks Oc expected frequency once in about 100 years. Federal costs of 6T~ leted project were $9,856,294, and contributed funds were au,813, a total cost of $10,018,107. Existing project was 2d4thorized by 1944 Flood Control Act (HI. Doc. 802, 78th Cong., sess.). 0 Ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. aPerations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: a'Intenance of remedial works at Fondulac and Farmdale Dams a continued by hired labor. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated in ugust 1947 and completed in September 1955. S1220 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscalyear................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,196 work: New,Appropriated.........-$13,516....................... $2,726..........85 020 Coat .... ............. 5 ,9 Maintenance:..23630 Appropriated.......... 22,770 $22,800 $24,700 25,700 29,700 378 Cost................. 22,428 22,130 23,826 27,687 22,257 SExcludes $161,813 contributed funds. 33. MOUTH OF SANGAMON RIVER, ILL. Location. On east bank of Illinois River, 98 miles above mouth and 9.4 miles above Beardstown Highway Bridge. Project e- tends for several miles upstream from mouth of river. This por" tion of Sangamon River forms boundary line between Masol County on the northwest and Cass County on the southwest. I Existing project. Project authorized by 1936 Flood Contro Act (H. Doc. 186, 72d Cong., 1st sess.) provided for excavati° of a new outlet channel for Sangamon River about 6.7 mileslo1 and 200 feet wide extending from Hager Slough on Illinois River to mile 6.7 above mouth of Sangamon River, and a diversion cha" hel and remedial works necessary for maintenance of a highwater table in adjacent wild game reserves. Further remedial wvork authorized by Flood Control Act of 1962 (II. Doc. 472, 87th Co11, 2d sess.) provides for a small concrete diversion weir, channe excavation and clearing. Estimated costs (1966) are $854 090 Federal; $15,122 contributed funds; lands and damages, 1o0 Federal costs $21,000; total $890,212. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: pla ning for remedial work authorized by 1962 act was continued Maintenance: Hired labor operations to clear channels of debris were completed.30 Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized by 1936 Flo Control Act is complete. Remedial work authorized by 191 Flood Control Act remains to be completed. Cost and financial statement Total 3 0 i66 year................ 1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June , New work: Appropriated.......... ............ $3,400 $2,000 $125 $7,875 1$ Coat......... ......... 3,400 5............. 9,523 Maintenance: Appropriated....... .. $10,809 24,800 15,800 19,800 22,800 Cost................. 10,419 22,188 17,256 22,340 17,138 1 Excludes $15,122 contributed funds. 34. OAKLEY RESERVOIR AND CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS, ILL. Location. On Sangamon River, a tributary of Illinois River' Damsite is about 114 miles upstream from Decatur, Ill. Existing project. Provides for a multiple purpose dam and reservoir at Oakley site, about 11,4 miles above Decatur, Ill., and extending about 38 miles upstream to a point about 8 miles abov FLOOD CONTROL---CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1221 11onticello, Ill. Earthfill dam will be 60 feet high and 4,750 feet long* Concrete ogee-gated spillway will be 198 feet long. Reser- Vir capacity will be 242,500 acre-feet, including tentative alloca- reation 168,7 00 for flood control, 11,000 for water supply and rec- i n and 12,000 for sedimentation. Project also provides for IProvement of 98 miles of Sangamon River Channel extending coom Decatur downstream to mouth of Salt Creek. Estimated i (1966) is $62,400,000 and includes a future non-Federal re- "ursement of $4,880,000. Project was authorized by Flood oltrol Act of 1962 (II. Doc. 472, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Latest lllished map is in project document. to Local cooperation Local interests must assume costs allocated 7 Water supply functions, presently estimated at $4,880,000 or a Percent of construction cost, with such modification minthese chaounts as may be necessary to reflect adjustments in storage " Pacity for water supply and other purposes, is to be paid in a UPg sum prior to construction with appropriate adjustments coen actual costs are determined, or in installments prior to ti~lmencement of pertinent items, in accordance with construc- on' schedules as required by Chief of Engineers, or by annual olments, including interests during construction and interest 8 unpaid balance over life of project as determined by Chief of the ineers, or 50 years, whichever is the lesser; pay annually as sey occur costs of operation and maintenance allocated to water ac l1y, such costs presently estimated at $22,000 or 5.8 percent of thnual maintenance and operation cost, with such modification in aese amounts as may be necessary to reflect adjustments in stor- roe capacity for water supply and other purposes; maintain all d~ads and bridges in reservoir area and over improved channel ownstream from dam; hold the United States free from all water- ecghts claims resulting from construction and operation of proj- ;and operate existing non-Federal dam and reservoir at Lake ecatur for flood control. Formal assurances have not been re- ested. City of Decatur indicated its willingness to participate In"akley Dam and Reservoir and associated channel improvement d contribute toward its costs. 1 0 perations and results during fiscal year. Preliminary plan- g including field surveys and foundation investigations by hr labor continued. Conditi o n at the end of fiscal year. Preliminary planning is lPrOgress. Cost and financial statement year Total to "".. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 Ak: .C.oriated.................... $125,000 $255,000 $334,710 $200,000 $914,710 S ..................... 101,077 255,815 301,225 213,631 871,748 5. SID SIMPSON FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT (BEARDSTOWN, ILL.) Cass County, Ill., on south bank of 111ocation. "'ois River 89,inabout 70 miles below Peoria, Ill. at river mile is Beardstown 1222 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Construction of a section of floodwall to re place that lost or damaged, and raising, strengthening, and eX tending remaining portion of floodwall and adjacent levees, 8Io modification of existing levees in adjacent Lost Creek, south Of Beardstown, and Valley Drainage and Levee Districts. Project will afford flood protection to city of Beardstown and adjacen land against maximum flood of record, having an expectancy once in 80 years. Project was authorized by 1950 Flood Control. Act (see H1. Doc. 332, 81st Cong.). Estimated cost (1965) $5,750,000, Federal; lands and damages, $175,000 non-Federal, total $5,925,000. Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish assurance they will furnish lands and right-of-way for construction; hole the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate all works after completion. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Wor 0 on contract for reconstruction of stations 138+00 to 744+40 c Downstream Beardstown, South Beardstown, and Valley District levees was completed. Contract costs were $116,468. Adjilst ment of $179 was made on contract for reconstruction of . stream Beardstown and Lost Creek Drainage and Levee Distric levees, below County Highway 7 Bridge. Work on contract fo agricultural pumping plants and observation platform was co. pleted. Contract costs were $5,310. Adjustment of costs o $971 was made on contract for additional drainage facilities Work on contract for levees above County Highway 7 Bridge .W started. Contract costs were $128,507. Miscellaneous hi.re labor work, including supervision and administration by proje office and engineering and design cost $46,356. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project as a whole is coniplet except for second seeding at several sites and some remedial wvor ' Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 16, New work: 000 Appropriated..........$485,000 $900,000 $695,000 $265,000 . $5'7 8 Cost................ 881,855 975,684 813,300 277,002 $295,849 6 36. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Annual inspections are made with local interests of all proJ" ects improved or extensively repaired at Federal expense in order to determine compliance of local interests with assurances givef to the United States regarding maintenance of the projectS, determine physical condition of the levees and appurtenances £1, to receive necessary information for use in flood emergencieS Inspection of 28 levees was made in the Chicago District i volving about 177 miles of embankment. Fiscal year cost w $16,774. Total cost to June 30, 1966, was $172,774. FLOOD CONTROL-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1223 Project location IlDate of inspection Illinois River, Ill. Banner Special Drainage and Levee District .............. Nov. 1965 Big Lake Drainage and Levee District ................... Nov. 1965 Coal Creek Drainage and Levee District................. Nov. 1965 Crane Creek Drainage and Levee District ................. Nov. 1965 East Liverpool Drainage and Levee District ............. Nov. 1965 Past Peoria Drainage and Levee District ................. Nov. 1965 East Peoria Sanitary District .................. *******. .Nov. 1965 Iennepin Drainage and Levee District ................... Nov. 1965 Xelly Lake Drainage and Levee District ................. Dec. 1965 Lerton Valley Drainage and Levee District ............... Nov. 1965 Lacey Drainage and Levee District ..................... Nov. 1965 Langellier Drainage and Levee District ................... Nov. 1965 Liverpool Drainage and Levee District .................. Nov. 1965 Lost Creek Drainage and Levee District .................. Nov. 1965 elkiln and La Marsh Drainage and Levee District ..... . . . Nov. 1965 locky Ford Drainage and Levee District .............. Nov. 1965 Sanitary District of Beardstown ........................ Nov. 1965 Sea Horn Drainage and Levee District ................... Nov. 1965 South Beardstown Drainage and Levee District ........... .Nov. 1965 Spring Lake Drainage and Levee District ................ Nov. 1965 Thompson Lake Drainage and Levee District .............. Nov. 1965 Valley Drainage and Levee District ....... o.............. Dec. 1965 est Matanzas Drainage and Levee District .............. Nov. 1965 Samgamon River, Ill. Clear Lake Special Drainage District .................... Nov. 1965 Parmers Levee and Drainage District ... e................ Dec. 1965 Parmers Levee and Drainage District (Herget) ............ Nov. 1965 Iason and Menard Drainage District .................... Nov. 1965 akford Special Drainage District ...................... Nov. 1965 1224 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 S 37. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 166 full report Name of project see Annual Operatio a Report Operation_ for- Construction maintenance ILLINOIS RIVER, ILL. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . Banner Special Drainage and Levee Districtl . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . 1943 $274,822 .......... Big Lake Drainage and Levee Districtl 1943 144,910 .. Big Prairie Drainage and Levee District...................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2).......... Coal Creek Drainage and Levee Districtl 1954 . 923,145........ Crane Creek Drainage and Levee Districtl ...................... 1941 68,898 .. East Liverpool Drainage and Levee Districtl................... 1941 207,826 .. East Peoria Drainage and Levee Districtl..................... 1946 279,963.. Hennepin Drainage and Levee Districtil... ................... 1940 109,593 ......... Kelly Lake Drainage and Levee District... .................. 1947 13,153.. Lacey Langellier, West 1 Matanzas and Kerton Valley Drainage and 1954 3 61,290,000 ....... Levee Districts. 1 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Liverpool Drainage and Levee District. 1943 117,731 ......... Lost Creek Drainage and Levee Districtt 4...................... .... .. ............ 1938 Pekin LaMarsh Drainage and Levee Districtl 1955 168,383 . Peoria, Ill ................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5) ............... Rocky Ford Drainage and Levee Districtl 1941 108,797 ...... Seahorn Drainage and Levee Districtl ......................... . . . . . . . 1945 32,281.. South Beardstown and Valley Drainage and Levee . . Districtl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1942 220,729. South Beardstown Drainage and Levee Districtl ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1942 171,839.. Spring Lake Drainage and Levee Districtt 1941 185,980.. Thompson Lake Drainage and Levee District.................. 1952 9,465 .... KANKAKEE RIVER, ILL. AND IND. Levee between Shelby Bridge and Baum's Bridge in Ind........... 1938 ............. LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, ILL. AND IND. Little Calumet River and tributaries, Illinois and Indiana........ 1964 49,901 .......... SANGAMON RIVER, ILL. Bell Drainage District........................................ 1946 1,112 .. ...... Clear Lake Special Drainage District..................... ... 1965 103,027. EastofChandlerville........................................ 1959 30,588 .. Farmers Levee and Drainage Districtl....................... 1942 155,562.. Farmers Levee and Drainage District.......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5) Mason and Menard Drainage Districtl 1940 93,808 .. .. Near Springfield on Sangamon River,. . .111.1.....................1941 . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 97,743.. Oakford Special Drainage Districtl 1940 38,417 .. Panther Creek levee...................................1938..................... 1938. Tar Creek levee............................................. 1946 1,425...... SALT CREEK, ILL. Donovan levee... ................................... 1945 1,821 ....... ... East of Hubly Bridge.... .............................. 1945 572.. . Lake Fork of Salt Creek...................................... (5) ................ Lussenhop levee............................................ 1945 116 Salt Creek in vicinity of Middletown, Ill........................ 1940 48 .. Swiger Whitney, Young, Hoblit levee.......................... 1945 399 .... W atts levee................................................. 1945 1,031 .. 1 Completed. 2 Never activated. 8 Settlement of claim in Nov. 1958 ($4,250) increased cost to $1,290,000.l Reported previously by St. Louis District as completed under provisions of section 6, Flo Control Act of 1928. 5Authorized in Flood Control Act of 1962. * Includes $55,976 claims. 38. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Fiscal year cost of $749 for study on Des Plaines River, North Libertyville Estates, Ill. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-CHICAGO, ILL., DISTRICT 1225 Irmergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong. and antecedent legislation) Federal Adl Project and location cost ~valee preparation ........................................... $24,823 encY operations ......................................... 1seha 791 eabilitation: lair Allspatch levee, Sangamon River, Ill, ................... 3,210 P* Bell levee, Sangamon River, Ill........................... 277 arrners levee, Sangamon River, Ill......................... 19,603 XcCray levee, Sangamon River, Ill. .......................... 713 * T. T omlin levee, Sangamon River, Ill. ..................... 3,561 olillin-Swope levee, Sangamon River, Ill. ................... 429 atson levee, Sangamon River, Ill. .......................... 5,350 ernpel-Evans levee, Spoon River, Ill, ........................ 1,411 int and clearing navigable streams and tributariesin interest of flood trol (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Congress) Fiscal Year Project and location cost U94o r River, Creek, 111.1 ll .......................................... .. $43,212 Creek' 111. ......... .... 0.. 143 39. SURVEYS b lscal year costs were $45,459 for navigation studies ($400 $3-North Central Division) $19,684 for flood control studies, ($~532 for special studies and comprehensive basin studies 7291 byNorthCentralDivision),and$613forcoordination tes with Soil Conservation Service. 40. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA North Central Division fiscal year cost was $21,016 for inter- 1tilal water studies. Chicago District fiscal year cost was ,$14020 for flood plain information studies. 41. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Cost for hydrologic studies during the fiscal year was $6,392. DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT * This district comprises eastern half of upper and lower penin- soua of Michigan except a small area in southwestern corner; brathwestern Les Ohio; and a small part of northern Indiana. It em- Michigan waters of Lake Michigan; U.S. waters of eastern ar e Superior, Lake Huron, Lake St. Clair, and western Lake soi; and their tributary watersheds from Au Train Bay, exclu- Lae, in Lake Superior, Peninsular Point, and St. Joseph River in oh ichigan, to Sandusky Bay on Lake Erie, exclusive. Unless to erwise indicated, all depths stated in this report are referred Ill ow-Water datum as follows: Lake Superior, 600 feet; Lake St. hlgan--Iuron, 576.8 feet; Lake Erie, 568.6 feet; and Lake le Clair, 571.7 feet. Elevations in feet are above mean water evel at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datu-l1955). IIMPROVEMENNTS Page Page Navigation Navigation-Continued 1 Al 1277 2 Alpena Harbor, Mich. ... 1228 36. Sebewaing River, Mich... Su Sable Harbor at Au 37. South Haven Harbor, Mich. 1277 Sable River (Oscoda), 38. Toledo Harbor, Ohio .... 1279 S Mich. . ....... . . 1229 39. Traverse City Harbor, M ich ................ 1281 4. Bay Port Harbor, Mich. .. 1230 1282 5. olles Harbor, Mich .... 1231 40. West Harbor, Ohio ...... g. Caseville Harbor, Mich... 1232 41. White Lake Harbor, Mich. 1283 7. Charlevoix Harbor, Mich. 1233 42. Reconnaissance and condi- Sheboygan Harbor, Mich. 1234 tion surveys .......... 1284 9 1linton River, Mich .... 1236 43. Other authorized naviga- tion projects .......... 1284 10. etroit River, Mich .... 1237 11. Frankfort Harbor, Mich.. 1241 44. Navigation work under rand Haven Harbor and special authorization .. 1285 12. Grand River, Mich ... 1243 Grand Marais Harbor, Alteration of Bridges 13. IMich. ................ 1244 45. Authorized alteration of 1arnnond Bay Harbor, bridges ............... 1285 Mich 14. 1 Iarbor 1245 Beach Erosion Control of Refuge at Ha r- bor Beach, Lake Huron, 46. Authorized beach erosion 15 Mich. 1246 control projects ...... 1285 16. IOll1and Harbor, Mich. Mich. ... 1247 Flood Control 17, Tl Inland Route, 1249 ake St. Clair, Mich., 47. Battle Creek, Kalamazoo 18 Channels ............ 1250 River, Mich .......... 1285 19. eland Harbor, Mich. ... . 1251 48. Grand River, Grandville, 1287 20, exington Harbor, Mich. . 1252 Mich............... 21. Little Lake Harbor, Mich.. 1254 49. Kalamazoo River, Kalama- 22. Ludington Harbor, Mich. . 1254 zoo, Mich ............ 1288 2 Mackinaw City Harbor, 50. Kawkawlin River, Mich..... 1289 23. M ich ........... 1255 51. River Rouge, Mich. ..... 1289 24M anistee Harbor, Mich... 1256 52. Saginaw River, Mich. ... 1291 25 Manistique Harbor, Mich. 1258 53. Sebewaing, Se be w a i n g 26 Onroe Iarbor, Mich... 1259 River, Mich .......... 1293 kIarbor, Mich. 1260 completed 2, Lookout Hiarbor, 1262 54. Inspection of projects .entwter harbor,Mich. 2,USkegon 28. i ... flood control 1294 29, Mich. ............... 1263 55. Other authorized trol projects .......... flood con- 32. g ort Austin harbor, Mich. 1263 8 OUge Saginaw 3 River, Mich ..... River, Mich .... 1267 1264 56. Flood control work under special authorization .. 1294 33 t . Clair River, Mich ... 1269 34 . Joseph Harbor, Mich. 1271 General Investigations 35. *tMarys River, Mich... 1272 57. Surveys ................ 1295 augatuck Harbor and 58. Collection and study of Ialamazoo River, Mich. 1276 basic data ........... 1295 1228 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 1. ALPENA HARBOR, MICH. Location. At mouth of Thunder Bay River which empties into Thunder Bay, Lake Huron. Harbor is 100 miles southeast O Cheboygan Harbor, Mich. River has its source in Montmorency and Alpena Counties, Michigan. (See Lake Survey Chart 53.) Previous projects. For details see page 1957 of Annual ]Re" port for 1915 and page 1548 of Annual Report for 1938. d Existing project. Provides for a bay channel 200 feet wid and 24 feet deep from deep water in Thunder Bay to a point 300 feet lakeward of the Alpena Light; thence an entrance channel 2 feet deep, narrowing to a width of 100 feet at a point 700 feet upstream from the light; thence a river channel 100 feet wide and 22 feet deep to Second Avenue Bridge; thence 18.5 feet deep and 75 feet wide for 1,600 feet to upper limit of Federal project; turning basin at upstream end of project, 15 feet deep and acres in area; a new turning basin at river mouth 18 feet deep, trapezoidal in shape, with a maximum width of 700 feet includil e the channel width and a maximum length of 900 feet along th channel line, including removal of existing rubble breakwate and a. breakwater about 550 feet long paralleling lakeward side of -new turning basin. Estimated (1966) Federal cost for le work is $1,280,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previoUS projects. Estimated (1966) non-Federal cost is $42,000. . Existingq project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Sept. 19, 1890 Channel depth of 163 feet.............................. Annual Report 1889 p.2288. sod Mar. 2, 1919 Rubblemound breakwater for protecting channel on south IH.)oc. 830, 65th Cong., 2dsess. th Sept. 22,1922 side, and widening entrance channel. Rivers Committee Doe. 1, Cong., 1st sess. 4, Aug.30, 1935 21 and 18% foot channel depths and turning basin........... Rivers and Harbors Comm. Do. 72d Cong., let sess. &(coo' Oct. 27, 1965 Present project dimensions, new turning basin, removal of H. Doc.151, 88th sCong.,1stse old breakwater, and construction of new breakwater. tainslatest published map). 1 Contains latest published map. Local cooperation. Act of October 27, 1965 is subject to con dition that responsible local interests give assurances that they will provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for constructi and future maintenance of project and aids to navigation uPiO request of the Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil-di" posal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads and el,'* bankments therefor or the costs of such retaining works; hold the United States free from damages; provide necessary termifi facilities at Abitibi Corp.; dredge and maintain areas betwee" Federal improvement and terminal facilities to depths cord mensurate with improved Federal channel. Local cooperation from previous River and Harbor Acts is fully complied with.. Terminal facilities. Several commercial docks along Thundr Bay River used primarily for receipt of coal and petrolelhi products. Also a municipal marina basin about 14/ mile souto' west of river mouth. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: RIVERS AND IIARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1229 Condition surveys, miscellaneous inspection services and prepara- tion of various reports by Government forces cost $460. U.S. hoppper dredge Hains performed maintenance dredging removing 35,563 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material at a cost of $24,440. Engineering and design, surveys, construction layouts, Dpervision and administration cost $3,889. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project with ex- ception of latest modification was completed in 1936. Project features are in good condition. Controlling depths (Sept. 1965) 17e 21 feet in lake channel, 18.5 feet in river channel, and 15 feet iturning basin. Total costs to end of fiscal year for existing o ject were $548,717, of which $309,562 was for new work and 9,155 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement YSeal Total to 192....... 1963 1964 1065 1966 June 30, 1966 Werork:- Propriated ............................... ....... 1$328,451 ........ aitean: ............................................. .......... .. 1328,451 ~o priated.......... .......... $21,077 $21,633 $17,000 $27,640 239,155 20,424 22,286 15,851 28,789 239,155 Iludes $18,889 for previous project. 2. AU SABLE HARBOR AT AU SABLE RIVER (OSCODA), MICH. Location. Au Sable River and village of Oscoda, Mich., are on est shore of Lake Huron, 8 miles north of Au Sable Point, ortheast limit of Saginaw Bay. (See Lake Survey Chart 52.) uPrevious project. For details see pages 336 and 2453 of An- iual Report for 1892. CExisting project. Riprapping outer 200 feet of north pier at ~outh of Au Sable River, dredging an entrance channel 12 feet ep and dredging between piers and upstream to State Highway Ptldge to 10 feet deep. Existing project was authorized by 1945 I v e r and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 446, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains atest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. 'erminal facilities. Several small timber-pile wharves used rinarily by commercial fishermen and pleasure-craft operators; soa private marina basin east of U.S. Highway 23 bridge. c'lities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Condition surveys, miscellaneous inspection services by Govern- ment forces cost $589. U.S. bucket dredge Tompkins performed maintenance dredging in project removing 35,223 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoal material at a cost of $34,067. Engineer- ad and design, construction surveys and layouts, supervision and zaylinistration cost $5,559. 1Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- eted in 1962. Controlling depths (Sept. 1965) over usable idth of authorized channel are 8 feet in entrance channel and 7 eet in river channel between jetties. Costs for existing project 1230 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 to June 30, 1966, were $936,616, of which $94,990 was for neW work (including $16,400 contributed funds) and. $841,626 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement iito Tota year................ 1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 0, 1966 New work: $209 776 Appropriated.............................. Cost... $10,000 $18,000 -$16,731 1209,716 . ............... ......... 1,119 10,150 ............ Maintenance: 841 626 Appropriated.......... $94,000 $12,000 39,973 17,398 40,215 Cost...........24,159 83,400 841 626 1,229 56,169 40,215 x Includes $114,786 for previous projects and $16,400 contributed funds. 3. BAY PORT HARBOR, MICH. Location. On Wild Fowl Bay on east shore of Saginaw B3y about 10 miles south of Caseville, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 52). Existing project. Provides for a channel 6 feet deep and 50 feet wide extending 5,750 feet from 6-foot contour in Saginaw Bay to intersection of private service channels to be dredged by local interests. Estimated (1965) cost for new work is $70,000. Est mated (1965) cost to local interests is $1,500. Existing projec was authorized by the Chief of Engineers on May 20, 1965, putr suant to section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. Local cooperation. Michigan State Waterways CommissiO furnished assurances, dated 24 June 1965, that they would pro- vide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construction ad future maintenance and for aids to navigation upon the request of the Chief of Engineers, including suitable areas determined by the Chief of Engineers to be required in the public interest for initial and subsequent disposal of spoil, and necessary retainil dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor or the cost of such retaining works; hold the United States free from damages; provide depths in dock approach areas commensurate with the depth of Federal channel improvement; maintain a public lafl ing, with suitable supply facilities open to all equally; assume ful responsibility for all project costs in excess of the Federal cost limitation of $200,000. Assurances were accepted August 6, 1965. Terminal facilities. Several small wharves used primarily by commercial fishermen. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Eng" neering and design for project was completed at a cost of $4,560. A contract was awarded in the amount of $51,290. Contract work was initiated and costs were $4,513. Surveys, construction layouts, real estate studies, supervision and administration bY Government forces cost $4,285. Condition at end of fiscal year. Contract dredging was i1 1' tiated during the fiscal year. Controlling depth (Sept. 1965) before construction was 3 feet. RIVERS AND HARBORS DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1231 Cost and financial statement Year Nlseal Total to Year .. .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 14wWork.- o ...... roPriated . .. . .. . ... ........................ . . . ............ ............ $3,000 2,6 6 $11,826 5,907 $78,000 13,358 $92,826 21,031 4. BOLLES HARBOR, MICH. Location. On west shore of Lake Erie at mouth of La Plaisance Creek, 7 miles southwest of Monroe, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 37.) 74'Xisting project. Provides for an entrance channel in Lake lrie, 8 feet deep and 80 feet wide from deep water to a point op- losite the outer end of existing jetty, thence widening to 100 feet at creek mouth; an access channel in La Plaisance Creek, 6 feet deep and 100 feet wide at the mouth widening to 120 feet and extending to the first bend, thence narrowing to 50 feet wide and C0utijuing at that width to the La Plaisance Road Bridge; a steel sheet pile revetment about 200 feet long, located along Michigan State Conservation Department property on west side of channel at creek mouth. Project also provides for inclusion of existing 400-foot long steel sheet pile jetty constructed by Michigan State Vaterways Commission at the mouth of La Plaisance Creek. 0sti mated (1966) cost for new work is $255,000, excluding $255,- 0 to be contributed by local interests. Existing project was authorized by the Chief of Engineers July 6, 1965, pursuant to section 107, 1960 River and IHarbor Act. aLocal cooperation. Responsible local interests must furnish Surances that they will contribute in cash 50 percent of first ost of construction of recommended improvements if total cost I less than $1 million, or if first cost exceeds $1 million the amount in excess of $500,000 of this first cost, such contribution Presently estimated at $255,000. Required amount shall be paid ' a lump sum before start of construction, subject to final ad- Justment after actual costs are determined; provide necessary lalnlds, easements, and rights-of-way for construction and future aintenance and aids to navigation upon the request of the Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil-disposal areas and oecessary retaining dikes, bulkheads and embankments therefor Or the cost of such retaining works; hold the United States free fromn damages; establish a competent and properly constituted ulic body empowered to regulate the use, growth and free de- Velopment of the harbor facilities with the understanding that saidfacilities will be open to all equally; provide and maintain ieCessary mooring facilities and utilities including a public land- g .Withsuitable supply facilities open to all on equal terms; Povide depths commensurate with the depth of the Federal . cannel improvements in service channels to principal docks and Int berhing areas; make necessary road relocations and utility alterations. rTerminal facilities. Monroe Boat Club and three marinas Provide facilities adequate for existing recreational boat traffic. 1232 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 There is also a public launching ramp and parking area at Conservation Department fishing site at creek mouth. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- construction planning and preparation of plans and specificationl was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. Cost and financial statement Total to66 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 196 work: New Appropriated..................... ............ $14,000 $15,000 $173,000 43o056 $20200' QCost ......... ........................... 12,018 4,965 26,072 5. CASEVILLE HARBOR, MICH. Location. At mouth of Pigeon River on south shore of Sagi" naw Bay about 17 miles southwest of Port Austin, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 5.) Existing project. A small craft harbor of refuge consisti of a breakwater protected channel extending from the 1 0 foot contour in Saginaw Bay into Pigeon River. Project depths are 10 and 8 feet. For additional details see page 1320 of Annual Report for 1963. Existing project was authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 64, 87th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published maps). Widening river channel from 50 to 60 feet for about 1,000 feet, with widening to 80 feet in upper 300-foot reach, is considered inactive. Estimated (1963) cost of this portion of project is $30,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Complete public boating facilities co'" structed by State and local agencies are available in addition to privately owned and operated marinas. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Ad- justments were made in prior years contract costs for settlement of claims. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed i June 1964, except for inactive portion of project. Controllin depths (Oct. 1965) are 9.4 feet in outer entrance to harbor and 7 feet adjacent to breakwater and upstream to public anchorage area. Cost and financial statement PUBLIC WORKS ACCELERATION FUNDS Total to Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work:57 Appropriated...................... ............ ..... $336,000 . -3$42,343 $29 Cost........................... 34,000 $296,550 -57,441 20,548 2903f61 RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT. MICH., DISTRICT 1233 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscaly Total to .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work. ntribute ..... ...... ............$356,000 ........................ -$62,343 $293,657 ......................... 613 $294,420 -$13,980 12,604 293,657 6. CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MICIH. Location. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 276 miles north- eaterly from Chicago, Ill., and 75 miles northerly from Frank- , ich. (See Lake Survey Chart 789.) i xtstg project. A channel 18 feet deep from that depth WLake Michigan to that depth in Lake Charlevoix, protected Where needed by piers and revetments. For additional details See Page 1476 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project was authorized by the following: Work authorized Documents and reports Aug.14, 1876 Channel from Lake Michigan to Round Lake protected S. Ex. Doc. 16, 44th Cong., 1at sess. Avir.2 1882 wlhere needed by piers and revetments. and Annual Report. 1876, p. 523. S nel3 Channel from Round Lake to Lake Charlevoix......... .. ..... o prior survey or estimate. Jua 2 019 1 froemt depth increased to 15 feet ........ ........... N piDo.s . depth increaed to 18 feet....................S. Doe. 163, 75th Cong., 3d sess. 1 Contains latest published map. Local cooperation. None required. La erminal facilities. Several small landing places in Round tiake at Charlevoix for handling fish and miscellaneous commodi- , a wharf for petroleum products at west end of Lake Charle- oix, and coal wharves at Advance and Boyne City at inner end ialke. Charlevoix and Boyne City provided public docks for I~~eall craft. Facilities considered adequate for existing com- Operations and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitation: ti eparation of plans and specifications were continued for sec- aons C, G, and J and were completed for sections A (north pier) out P at a cost of $27,105. A contract for emergency removal of ter 26 feet of concrete superstructure of section A, north pier, awarded May 5, 1966, in amount of $4,630, and was com- 8as ed June 21, 1966, at a cost of $4,630. Contract in amount of S3,300 for rehabilitation of section A of north pier and section Of south revetment was awarded in June 1966. Supervision "d administration cost $170. Maintenance: Condition sur- veys and miscellaneous inspection services by Government forces cost $2,303. U.S. hopper dredge Hains performed maintenance dreging in project removing 12,964 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material at a cost of $16,625. Engineering, design, tiol Veys, layouts, real estate studies, supervision and administra- cost $4,546. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project wascom- leted in 1939. For details on completion of existing project see age 1170 of Annual Report for 1964. Underwater condition 1234 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 surveys of existing structures were conducted in May 1962 Structures recommended for rehabilitation as a result of that survey were reexamined in August 1964. Results of investiga tions indicate that portions of navigation structures requirin repairs are: north pier (section A), outer 50 feet of pier head (concrete superstructure of outer 26 feet has been removed) 600 feet of north revetment (section C); 404 feet of south revetmet (section F); 670 feet of south revetment (section G); 414 feet south revetment, upper channel (section J). Remaining gnavi tion structures are in generally good condition. Controllifl depths (May 1966) are 18 feet in channel between Lake Mlichi gan and Round Lake and in channel between Round Lake a'd Lake Charlevoix. Cost and financial statement I Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 A 10 New work: $82223 Appropriated..................................................... .. 822 Cost............. ..................................................... Maintenance: 5 103 Appropriated.......... $10,000 $5,000 $26,500 $2,000 $23,500 578,9 Cost................. 10,516 5,734 23,974 2,476 23,474 Rehabilitation: gO0,0 Appropriated............ .......... ....... 30,000 150,000 600,000 100, Cost.................. ....................... 29,332 38,787 31,905 7. CHEBOYGAN HARBOR, MICH. Location. At mouth of Cheboygan River which empties tO western Lake Huron about 16 miles southeast of the Straits Mackinac Bridge. (See Lake Survey Chart 60 and 660, sheet 1) Previous projects. For details see page 1956 of Annual Repor for 1915, and page 1546 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A channel 21 feet deep and 200 feet Wide from 21-foot contour in Lake Huron to outer end of west pier; thence, between lines parallel to and 25 feet from the docks, 1 feet deep from this point to East First Street and thence 18.5 feet deep to State Street Bridge and thence 8.5 feet deep and 60 feet wide from this bridge to the lock in Cheboygan River; a turnlii basin 21 feet deep, 400 feet wide, and 420 to 770 feet long o east side of existing project channel just below East First Street; and a rubblemound breakwater about 775 feet long on the site 0 existing west pier at mouth of river. Improvement is 12,000 feet long, of which about 6,000 feet are in Straits of Mackin1c Estimated (1966) cost for new work is $398,000, exclusive°t amounts expended on previous projects. Estimated (1966) co for recreational facilities is $2,500, excluding $2,500 to be con tributed by local interests. RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1235 Existing project was authorized by the following: Act$ Work authorized Documents and reports hose 3'1 1 . . Mar "26 AUr 1907 8Y2fo 2,' 8 -foot nn l................................... tChchannel ..................... ......... Annual Report, 1895, p. 2823. a 26, 1937 8'urning i -foot channel ....................................... H. Doc. 134, basin ................................. H. Doc. 537, 59th Cong., e1st sess. 75th Cong., 1st sess. 17'19 ast let St., enlarge basin turning an 11. Doe. 269, 81st Con., 1st seas. (con- t, 1950 2. -d1 techannel chaueepento to 21feet. totains latest published maps) .1964 ..... Breakwater ............................. Section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act jLocal cooperation. Modification authorized by the Chief of tetgineers October 21, 1964, is subject to condition that local in- tirests provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construc- ion and future maintenance and for construction and mainte- Snee of aids to navigation upon the request of the Chief of re Rineers, and for public access to breakwater for purposes of creational fishing; hold United States free from damages; oeration and maintenance thereof for recreational purposes; Cortribute in cash 50 percent of first cost for surfacing break- rater as necessary to provide a safe walkway on breakwater for r2creational fishermen, such contribution presently estimated at $2500 to be paid in a lump sum before start of construction, sub- Ject to final adjustment after actual costs are determined. As- iaances were furnished by Michigan State Waterways Com- ission, the local cooperating agency, and accepted July 6, 1965. reT"erminal facilities. Several privately owned wharves used for reeiving coal, stone, and petroleum products. A municipal tiar for recreational craft is open to the public. These facili- s satisfy existing commerce and vessel traffic. Operationsand results during fiscal year. New work: Prep- ation of plans and specifications for latest project modification completed. Maintenance: Condition surveys, miscellaneous inspection services, and layouts by Government forces cost $1,795. U.S. hopper dredge Hains performed dredging in the project re- moving 55,601 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material at a cost of $28,947. Engineering and design, supervision and ad- listration, and construction layouts cost $5,478. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, with ex- 9t lon of latest project modification, was completed in 1950. olItrolling depths are 21 feet from Lake Huron to East First eet including the turning basin, thence 181,/ feet to State Street re1dge , thence 5 feet to upper limit of project. Total costs from $8 afunds ~to end of fiscal year were $603,075, of which 3,230 was for new work and $299,845 for maintenance. 1236 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement T(otal to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June °30,966 New work: 1$52805 Appropriated................... .................... .$7,500 $98,000 933058 Cost... ........................ 348 10,158 Maintenance: 299846 Appropriated..........$28,500 -$859 $17,658 665 36,220 29, 846 Cost................. 27,641 -- 92 17,658 665 36,220 1 Includes $129,828 for previous project. 8. CLINTON RIVER, MICH. Location. Has its source in Oakland County, Mich., flows east erly about 60 miles and empties into Anchor Bay in northwestern part of Lake St. Clair. (See Lake Survey Chart 42).t Previous projects. For details see page 1958 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1556 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. An entrance channel in Anchor Bay 8 feet deep, 300 feet wide at 8-foot depth contour in the bay, gradually decreasing to 50 feet wide at about 1,000 feet upstream frol mouth of Clinton River, about 4,600 feet; a channel 8 feet deep and 50 feet wide in the river about 38,700 feet long from entran-ce channel upstream to Mt. Clemens at Cass Avenue; closing Ol channel and making a cutoff at Shoemakers Bend; closing Catfish Channel; construction of revetments as needed in the river; and a harbor basin, 5 feet deep and 11 acres in area at entrance alo1 bay channel, protected by breakwaters on north and south sides' Estimated (1966) Federal cost for new work is $234,546, e% clusive of amounts expended on previous projects. Estimated (1966) non-Federal cost is $296,000 to be contributed by local interests. Existing project was adopted by 1886 River and 1ir" bor Act (S. Doc. 199, 46th Cong., 2d sess., Annual Report for 1880, page 2062; and H. Doc. 210, 48th Cong., 2d sess., and Annual Report for 1886, page 2190). Project was modified under pr0 visions of section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of Engineers on July 19, 1963, to provide for widening entrance channel and constructing protected harbor basin. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. River is used exclusively by recreational craft. There are numerous public and private piers and wharves along river below the city. They are considered adequate. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con" tract work, continued and was completed, cost $179,699. Super- vision and administration on above contract cost $26,044. Ad justment in engineering and design costs was minus $15,078* Maintenance: Condition surveys and miscellaneous inspection services by Government forces cost $4,358. Maintenance dredi' ing was performed in the upstream portion of project using a rented hydraulic dredge at a cost of $20,984. Maintenance contract dredging was performed as a part of the new work ac- tivities removing 10,350 cubic yards of shoal material at a cost RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1237 of $2,083 . Engineering and design, construction layouts, super- -Wonand administration cost $4,384. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project in effect prior a~ete latest project modification was completed in 1893. Work ahorized under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, was opleted during fiscal year. Controlling channel depth is 8 feet to da Point 1,500 feet from upper project limit after which controlling depth is 5 feet. Total costs from regular funds to end of fiscal year foWre $639,709, of which $234,546 was for new work and $405,163 Work.aintenance. In addition, $284,000 contributed funds for new Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal . Year ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Total to June 30, 1966 1ew Work. pro riated Al c t e ........ ros $2,500 $19,000 $178,500 .. .. 1260,046 maintenanee:..2,080 11,332 . 10,194 5114,336 62058 1260,046 c ropriated.................... ...........15,000 236,000 7,039 405,163 ... ................... 14,435 211,795 31,809 405,163 l"udes $25,500 for previous projects. CONTRIBUTED FUNDS year ,seal Total to ......... 162 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NwWork. ................. tribut $284,000 ...... ......... ... $284,000 ....... ............................... $155,393 $128607 284,000 9. DETROIT RIVER, MICH. .ocation. One of the Great Lakes connecting channels, 31 ak4es long and flows south from Lake St. Clair to Lake Erie. (See Lake Survey Chart 41.) of Annual Report for revious projects. For details see page 1958 1938. r1915, and page 1541 of Annual Report for Pr 'isting project. Improving Detroit River main channels to aOVide 25.5-foot draft navigation; improving certain auxiliary rd Side channels; and construction of various water level and taas-current control structures. Details are in accompanying 1 es. Project depths are referred to local low-water datum aes which correspond to low-water datums for Lakes St. Clair p I Erie, 571.7 and 568.6 feet above mean water level at Father oint, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). 1238 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized nnn met i and 1stsess.', June 13,1902 Amherstburg Channel and removal of Grosse Ile Shoal...... HI.Does. 712, 56th Cong., Mar. 3,1905 40, 58th Cong., 3d sess. June 25, 1910 Mar. 4, 1913 Fighting Island Channel................. ............ H. Doc. 17, 62d Cong., 1st s5ess.676 Mar. 2, 1907 H. I)Does.266, 59th Cong., 2d ses..65th, June 25, 1910 Livingstone Channel................ ............ 61st Cong., 2d sess.; and 322, Mar, 2, 1919 Cong., 1st sess. July 3, 1930 Channel depths of 26 and 25 feet... . I1.Doe. 253, 70th Cong., 1stsesoc Aug. SO, 19352 Channel to Wyandotte 21 feet deep and 300 feet wide through Rivers and Harbors Commnittee v Middle Ground opposite head of Fighting Island. 1, 72d Cong., 1st sess.1 Aug. 26. 1937 Trenton Channel and turning basin (west of Grosse Ile)...... IT.Doc.205, 75th Cong., 1st sess. Mar. 2, 1945 American Channel north of Belle Isle between windmill t. Dec. 731, 79th Cong., 2d sess. Point and Fairway slip, Detroit. July 24, 1946 Deepen westerly 300 feet of Amherstburg Channel and H. Doe. 335, 80th Cong., 1st seas. Ballards Reef Channel below Livingstone Channel to 27 feet to provide depths adequate for 24-foot draft navigation when governing lakes are at datum, with necessary widen- ing at approaches and bends and construction of necessary compensating works, Detroit River. s '1 May 17,1950 Extend turning basin in Trenton Channel 600 feet, dredge S. Den. 30, 81st Cong., 1st ses through east draw of lower Grosse l1e Bridge, and extend 300-foot width of channel north of lower Grosse Ile Bridge. l Mar.21,1956 Channel depth of 28.5 feet throughout downbound and two- S. Dec. 71, 84th Cong., 1st sess. way channels, except in upper (27.7-foot depth) and lower, (29-foot depth) Livingstone Channel; and in up- bound channel, 27 5-foot depth in Ballards Reef Channel below junction with Livingstone Channel, 27.5 foot depth in westerly 300-foot width of Limekiln Crossing and Am- herstburg Reaches, and 28.5-foot depth in westerly 300- foot width of Hackett Reach; with necessary compensation works. Also 28.5-foot depth in Lake Erie from Detroit River to Pelee Passage Shoal, inclusive. s1 July 14,1960 Trenton Channel: deepen to 27 feet, where necessary, Wyan- II. Doc. 319. 86th Cong., 2d se . dotte Reach from Detroit River to upper Grosse Ile Bridge, about 5.5 miles: deepen to 28 feet and widen to 300 feet below upper Grosse Ile Bridge to and including a turning basin 28 feet deep and 15 acres in area outside project limits. 1 Contain latest published maps. Included in Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. Estimated (1966) cost for new work, exclusive of amounts eX pended on previous projects, is $79,400,000. RIVERS AND HARBORS--DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1239 Characteristicfeatures of existing project Project Length Miles Used by datum planes of from upbound Project Project above mean Name ofchannel channel mouth of or down- width depth water level (feet) river bound (feet) (feet) at Father vessels Point, Que- vbec (feet) Cha Ct0 0e o571.3Il1 . .... . . . . ..... ... _orh___ . thofBelle Islel.......(2) nnel 30 Both... 200 21.0 571.3 d of etroit River... tn Mscella 38,800 do....... 32 ..... 800 28.5 571.5-570.9 s, Bel shoals and obstrue- 44,500 25 do..... .............. 28.5 570.9-570.3 1h',t andaChanne sle to Fighting Is- banne1. Bil t' Isand Channel.......... 24,800 do....... 17 ..... 800 28.5 569.8 unction . north of atChannel 12,200 12 ..... do....... 600 28.5 569.8 Chan- C in*oto Ct aLivingstone Unel. n stone Channel Li -~on annel, upper. lower ... .. 26,000 10 Down ........ 450 27.7 569.8-568.6 C83 8 87 '00to 368-1o87..... 10,887 5 ..... do....... 450,800 29.0 568.6 to 492+00... 12,313 .......... Both......... 800-1,200 29.0 568.6 Wia 0s uter channel.......... . 42,000 ........ do.... . . 1,200 28.5 568.6 troilv and obstructions, De- .................. . do................... 28.5 568.6 tivrtoNVoie Passage. gdo ah ge Sghoal...................a ................... 28.5 568.0 UstbureChanl-o rsection, -Chnnel. Ballards Reef 6,500 10 Up .. 600 27.5 569.8-569.5 Lidde section... 1 000 ................ . 600 321-27.5 569.5-568.9 Wt sectionHackettRange.. 24,000........ ....do... 600 421-28.5 568.9-568.6 eanChalel . ......... 21,000.......... Down....... 800 22.0 568.6 IWYandotte Reach0 27.0 569.9-569.7 Treton eac.h. .. .. . 31,500 17 Local ..... 300 27.0 59.9-569.7 each (upper)......... Trenton 5,1 ............. 300 28.0 569.7-569.6 Grosteach (lower)........ 14,300 ....... ..... do ....... 250 21.0 569.6-569.2 1Shal.............. 600 14 do ..... ......... do..... 20.0 569.8 sa ds side channel. ,0 e frorndeep water near Windmill Point to a point opposite Fairview Slip, about ar et. P r J ct depth 21 feetin easterly 300-foot toA f o-'ideth chti, 0 otwdho canlad2 and 27.5 feet in westerly 300- width of channel i depth. 21 feet in easterly 300-foot width of channel and 28.5 feet in westerly 300- o L ocal cooperation. Fully complied with for completed portions ,Poject. For Trenton Channel modification approved May 17, 19"00, and ' esponsible local agencies must furnish lands, rights-of-way, atd Poil-disposal qq. hold areas the United for construction and future maintenance; States free from damages. Assurances re- 1'edl by act of May 17, 1950, have not been provided. No of al cooperation is required for modifications authorized by acts ,uly 1946 and March 1956. fo Terinal facilities. Numerous commercial installations used or handling coal, iron ore, limestone, steel products, petroleum tail cts, and other items such as overseas general cargo. De- ( ~ actual port and harbor facilities is in Port Series No. 45 ,V1sed 1961) prepared and published as part 2 by Board of tineers for Rivers and Harbors. Information on port ad- chlstration and Federal services, port and terminal services and 3artges, and steamship services is prepared and published as Ice by Port Development Staff, U.S. Department of Commerce. O lties are considered adequate for existing commerce. jt)sterations and results during fiscal year. New work: Ad- $16 ~ents in engineering and design costs for fiscal year cost h '47 8. Hired labor sweeping and dredging of Pelee Passage 0i1al continued using U.S. derrick boat Huron and derrick boat Chigan at a cost of $305,848. U.S. derrick boat Michigan and 1240 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 derrickboat Coleman completed dredging in East Outer Channel at a cost of $23,436. Investigation and clearing new work di$ posal areas continued at a cost of $31,146. Adjustments were made in prior years cost for settlement of claim on contract fOr dredging Lower Livingstone Channel in the amount of $258,4 Adjustments in prior year contract costs for dredging sectilofs B and C, Trenton Channel, were made in the amount of $42,801. Surveys, construction layouts, supervision and administratiol cost $38,341. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection service, t preparation and publication of connecting channels depth bu letins, and condition surveys by Government plant and hired lab cost $104,695. U.S. hopper dredge Hoffman performed rnaint nance dredging in East Outer Channel removing 450,072 cube yards of shoal material at a cost of $139,218. Location and re moval of obstructions in rock channels continued by U.S. derric boats Coleman and Michigan at a cost of $144,658. Engineerig'1 design, supervision and administration cost $61,318. Condition at end of fiscal year. Latest modification of connect ing channels project in Detroit River is substantially complete.ex" cept for minor shoal removal operations which are continum'l All contract work is complete. About 20 percent of hired labor dredging for Pelee Passage Shoal remains. Pertinent data co1 cerning channels covered by project at end of fiscal year. Co$t$ Name of channel Length of chan- Minimum width Project depth Control- ling depth oplete co nel (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) Channel north of Belle Islel....................(2) 200 21 21.0 1964 Channel at head of Detroit River.............. 38,800 800 28.5 28.5 1904 Miscellaneous shoals and obstructions, Belle Isle 44,500 ............. 28.5 28.5 1984 to Fighting Island Channel. 1962 Fighting Island Channel..................... 24,800 800 28.5 28.5 Ballards Reef Channel north of junction with Liv- 12,200 600 28.5 28.5 ingstone Channel. Livingstone Channel, upper..................... 26,000 450 27.7 27.7 Livingstone Channel, lower: CS 260+00 to 368+87..................... 10,887 450-800 29.0 326.0 CS 368+87 to 492+00..................... 12,313 800-1,200 29.0 326.0 East outer channel............. ......... 42,000 1,200 28.5 28.5 Miscellaneous shoals and obstructions, Detroit ...................... 428.5-29.5 428.5-29.5 River to Pelee Passage. Pelee Passage Shoal............................................. 29.5 Amherstburg Channel: 1960 Upper section, Ballards Reef Channel.......... 6,500 600 27.5 27.5 100 Middle section.......................... 12,000 600 521-27.5 521-27.5 1960 Lower section, Hackett Range................ 24,000 600 621-28.5 621-28.5 West outer channel............................. 21,000 800 22 20.1 1929 Trenton Channel: Wyandotte Reach... ................... 31,500 300 27.0 27.0 1964 Trenton Reach (upper).............. ...... 5,100 300 28.0 28.0 1941 Trenton Reach (lower)...................... 14,300 250 21.0 21.0 Grosse Isle Shoal........................6 600 . 0............ .20.0 19.5 1904 I This is an auxiliary channel.3,0 2Extends from deep water near Windmill Point to point opposite Fairview slip, about ,000 feet. SDeepening to project depth under construction. Project depth 29.5 feet over rock shoals and 28.5 feet over other than rock shoals. 800 Project depth 21 feet in easterly 300-foot width of channel and 27.5 feet in westerly foot width.30 Project depth 21 feet in easterly 300-foot width of channel and 28.5 feet in westerly foot width. SProject complete except for work authorized by River and Harbor Act of 1960. for existing project were $78,722,729, of which $74,293,676 for new work ($72,762,988 regular funds and $1,530,688 ptlb lic works funds) and $4,429,053 for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1241 Cost and financial statement Yea Total to sea r. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work. ApPropriated.......... $4,092,000 $1,990,799 $5,094,000 $389,690 $820,975 1$76,557,015 Maintena .***........ 6,141,7856,387,2802,158,555 593,821 716,455 176,390,930 Propriated*.......... 57,500 147,500 444,000 354,500 547,222 4,536,346 ...... 51,934 147,792 323,541 470,273 449,889 4,429,053 1Includes $2,097,254 for previous projects. 10. FRANKFORT HARBOR, MICIT. Location. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 204 miles north- easterly from Chicago and 28 miles northerly, from Manistee, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 77.) 6iscting project. Provides for constructing an exterior basin L ake Michigan formed by two breakwaters, 450 feet apart at ae Outer ends, diverging at an angle of about 900, the main arm Sdshore connection on north breakwater are 972 and 1,000 feet l0lg, respectively, and the main arm and shore connection of outh breakwater 1,188 and 1,400 feet long, respectively; for re- boving 801 feet of north and 1,172 feet of south pier; dredging asin 20new tooWlard deep feetpier andto800 feet wide at entrance, decreasing heads 600 feet wide, dredging approach and ntrance channel through outer basin to a depth of 24 feet from deoep Water in Lake Michigan to a point 500 feet landward of bPening between breakwaters, over the entire width outside the b eakwaters and to a maximum width of 500 feet inside the 'eawaters; thence to 23 feet deep through inner portion of fOuter basin to outer end of north pier, over widths decreasing from 500 to 160 feet; and thence to 22 feet deep between the iers to the inner basin in Lake Betsie; dredging an 18-foot deep sructuresbasin isterior on thein Lake Betsie from within 50 feet of existing west and extending eastward about 1,550 feet to ecasterly boundary and from within 50 feet of existing structures b11 the north and extending southward 800 feet to the southerly boundary; dredging a recreational craft anchorage area 10 feet eep and 300 feet wide, extending 600 feet eastward of the east ruit of the interior basin, with its north side in line with the north limit of the basin. Breakwaters and shore connections are built of concrete caissons and piling capped with concrete. Inner piers and revetments are built of stonefilled timber cribs and piling, all capped with concrete, except for 476 feet of south revetment which consists of steel-sheet piling. Estimated (1966) ederal cost for new work is $2,012,000, excluding $36,000 to be 9 tributed by local interests. Estimated total non-Federal cost i $530,000. 1242 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents June23,18661 A new outlet 12 feet deep protected by piers and revetments. 11. Doe. 482, 55th Cong., 2d sess. Mar. 3, 1925 Exterior breakwaters, removal of portions of piers, project 1. Doc. 208, 68th Cong., Ist sess. dimensions of outer basin. Aug. 26, 1937 Dredge the area in Lake Betsie........................... 11.Doc. 511, 74th Cong., 2d ses Oct 27, 1965 Deepen apprdach and entrance channels, extend inner basin, S. Doc. 16, 89th Cong., 1st sees. and dredge recreatidnal anchorage area. Amended 1868, 1879, and 1892. Contains latest published map. Local cooperation. Act of October 27, 1965, is subject to cox" dition that responsible local interests give assurances that they will contribute in cash 50 percent of first cost of construction Of recreational craft anchorage area, such contribution presently estimated at $36,000, to be paid in a lump sum before start o construction, subject to final adjustment after actual costs are determined; provide necessary lands, easements, and rights-Of" way for construction and future maintenance, including suitable spoil-disposal areas, and also necessary retaining dikes, bull heads, and embankments therefor or the costs of such retaining works; hold the United States free from damages; maintain neces- sary mooring facilities and a public landing for local and translent craft, open to all equally, with depths commensurate with depth of the Federal anchorage area; reserve mooring facilities and space within the anchorage area adequate for accommodation of transient craft; and construct necessary terminal facilities to accommodate prospective fuel oil commerce. Any of the iM- provements may be undertaken independently of the others wvhen- ever funds for that purpose are available and the pertinent local cooperation has been furnished. Local cooperation from previoUS River and Harbor Acts is fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Two car ferry slips on south shore and several docks along north shore of Lake Betsie. The city and State provided a recreational docking facility on north side of Lake Betsie which is open to all on equal terms. There is also a marine railway capable of handling small craft. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- construction planning in connection with the latest project modi- fication was initiated. Rehabilitation: Contract for rehabilita- tion of about 1,331 linear feet of south breakwater shore connection (sections F, G, I, and I) was initiated and completed at a cost of $235,224. Supervision and administration cost $15,- 826. Maintenance: Condition surveys and miscellaneous in- spection services by Government forces cost $2,278. U.S. hopper dredge Hlains removed 46,782 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material at a cost of $36,227. Engineering and design, con- struction layouts, supervision and administration cost $7,367. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project with excep- tion of latest project modification was completed in 1939. Break- waters, shore connections, and revetments are in generally good condition. Sections F, G, H, and I of the south breakwater have RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1243 been rehabilitated as a rubblemound structure. For additional details on completion of existing project and subsequent recon- dtruction see page 1474 of Annual Report for 1962. Controlling d epths (Sept. 1965) are 22 feet over the outer basin and 21 feet a channel between the piers and revetments into Lake Betsie. Cost and financial statement iscal YearTotal to e '** *........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork: AIppropriated, $16,000 $1,757,827 cos. aitence. 4,798 1,746,625 Cl)ropriate d, $42,000 $6,500 $17,018 $1,978 48,000 1,259,697 36,738 15,050 18,346 1,978 45,872 1,257,569 Appropriated, 383,500 283,500 0...........-00,000 Cos ... ... 2,258 21,111 251,050 274,419 11. GRAND HAVEN HARBOR AND GRAND RIVER, MICH. Location. Harbor is on east shore of Lake Michigan, 108 miles ortheasterly from Chicago, Ill., and 23 miles northerly from 2Olland, Mich. River rises in Jackson County, Mich., and flows " miles westerly into Lake Michigan. (See Lake Survey Chart 5,and Geological Survey Grand Rapids quadrangle.) Drevious projects. For details see page 1949 of Annual Re- Dort for 1915, and page 1481 of Annual Report for 1938. .'xistin project. An entrance channel protected by parallel ers and revetments at mouth of Grand River, a deep draft Clannel in river extending to Spring Lake, a turning basin, and a Shallow ,assRiver. in riverareextending channel depths draft Project miles upstream to 141/entrance 23 feet in channel, 21 feet inriver to turning basin, 18 feet in turning basin and channel to Pring Lake, and 8 feet in upper Grand River channel. For dditional details b red 1."c t.) 1461 of Annual Report for 1962. I see p)age t redgng on northerly side of inner channel is considered minac- ive. Estimated cost of this portion (1954) is $38,600. Existing project was authorized by the following: Work authorized Documents Ju05514,1880 J 23,186)..Piers and revetments .. ....................... .. S. Ex. Doc. 42, 35th Cong., 1st sess., 19 .t. .do. ...................................... pp. 89, 91. 8) . do..................... .............. 1892 do 930 Present project dimensions of Iarborchannel to Grand S. Doc. 88, 71st Cong., 2d seas.l Trunk car ferry slip and river channel; eliminating all of that portion ofGrand River above Bass 2 River; con- Au26 solidation of projects for harbor and river. .2,1937 Channel to Spring Lake........... ....................... Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 1, 75th Cong., 1st sess.1 2, 1945 Present project dimensions of harbor channel from ear H.Doe. 661, 76th Cong., 3d seas.l ferry shlipto Grand Trunk Railway bridge and turning basin. a Cntain latestpublished maps. edging on northerly side of inner channel is considered inactive. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. terminal facilities. Several wharves for handling coal, lime- Stone, sand and gravel, petroleum products, fish and miscellaneous 1244 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 commodities. There is also a car ferry slip which is inactive. Facilities considered adequate for existing commerce.. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys iy Government plant and hired labor cost $8,506. Cooperative stream gaging costs were $1,449. An adjustment was made il prior year costs for stone work in south pier by Chicago District plant and hired labor in the amount of $940. Minor repairs t sections of the north and south piers by Government plant alsd hired labor were completed at a cost of $12,146. About 520 tons of fill stone was placed behind sections C-1 and D, north revet- ment, and sections M and P, south revetment, by Government plant and hired labor at a cost of $5,162. U.S. hopper dredge Hains removed 97,895 cubic yards shoal material at a cost of $62,039. Hydraulic dredge Depoe Bay performed dredging Grand River removing 13,072 cubic yards shoal material at a cost of $11,320. Bucket dredge Tompkins performed maintenance dredging in Government Basin removing 3,300 cubic yards shoal material at a cost of $12,755. A contract rental hydraulic dredg- ing unit removed 17,357 cubic yards place measure of shoal mat- rial in Grand River at a cost of $12,092. Costs incurred in o taining easements for spoil disposal areas and other pertin real estate charges amounted to $366. Engineering, desigl supervision, and administration cost $24,928. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was 8b stantially completed in 1949. For additional details on comple, tion of existing project see page 1462 of Annual Report for 1901 Controlling depths (May 1966) are 22 feet in entrance chanle id ge, 21 feet between piers and in river to Grand Trunk Railway br 18 feet in turning basin, 8 feet in Grand River to Bass River, and 17 feet in outlet from Spring Lake. Total costs from rego-lr funds to end of fiscal year were $7,632,484, of which $972,140 was for new work, $5,846,731 for maintenance, and $813,613 for rehabilitation. Cost and financial statement Total Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juneo New work: 469 Appropriated................................. $7,500 ............ -$211 $1, 283469 Cost............................... ........... 835 $6,454 ............ 1, Maintenance: 418 Appropriated.......... $126,000 $108,669 174,250 186,000 165,000 5, r168 Cost.................. 111,626 89,462 177,814 191,783 151,703 5, Rehabilitation: 28161 Appropriated..........300,000 535,000 --20,000 -21,838 ............ 813,613 Cost................. 198,352 479,876 121,971 -15,195 646 81 1 Includes $311,329 for new work and $13,427 for maintenance for previous projects. 12. GRAND MARAIS HARBOR, MICH. Location. On south shore of Lake Superior, 93 miles west Of Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 92.) Existing project. Provides for a channel protected by paralle parallel piers and for closing natural entrance channel with a pile dike. Project depths are 18 feet between piers and 20 feet in lake RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1245 1962. 2. forProach For additional details see page 1449 of Annual Report Eyxisting project was authorized by the following: tWork authorized Documents and reports 14,1880 uJne xisting project, except for pile dike......... .. ......... Specified in Act, Annual Report 1881 DO op p. 2050. ay17, * 8 00 dike orpile ... ........ Annual Report 1895, p. 351 -foot extension of west pier........ . ........... ... H. Doc. 751, 80th Cong., 2d sess. Local Cooperation. None required. STerm'°inal facilities. Several small piers, a Coast Guard Station 4d a small boat pier and launching ramp built by the State o ik3fgan provide facilities adequate for present traffic. C0Perations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: GQl1tion surveys and miscellaneous inspection services by 1avernment forces cost $1,705. A design memorandum for tiaJor rehabilitation of east pier (section B) and west pier (see- os3 A and B) was completed and preparation of plans and elifications initiated at a cost of $27,897. U.S. derrickboat e leman placed 1,802 tons of riprap stone around outer cell of of st breakwater at a cost of $26,496. Storm damaged sections 1ftimber crib east breakwater were weighed down with stone P"Iaced.by the U.S. derrick boat Harvey at a cost of $6,929. En- streerilng and design, supervision and administration, and con- ction layouts cost $3,735. e-ondition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete feeept for widening inner portion of channel from 250 to 300 ,feet The 1954 estimated cost of this inactive part of project is $10000. Underwater condition surveys of June 1963 indicate tat 7o f Portions of navigation structures requiring repairs are: ad eet0 of east pier (section B) ; 1,112 feet west pier (section A) co41d 70 feet west pier (section B). For additional details on A tion and completion of existing project see page 1292 of feeual Report for 1963. Controlling depth (May 1966) is 15 Cost and financial statement . .ear Total to **............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work. cociatted.......... Mai -$10,000 -$13,500.. 363,544 4,164 -$4,119 .. -$4,157 .. $990,268 990,268 A'IceanceV' Ceropria1 ed...................... 11,001 -1,313 40,000 $40,000 915,964 ..... 8,540 1,148 12,421 66,762 915,147 13. HAMMOND BAY HARBOR, MICH. eaLcation. On northwest shore of Lake Huron, 35 miles south- SofIStraits of Mackinac. (See Lake Survey Chart 60.) b xi2ting project. Provides for a harbor of refuge, protected ihe breakwater the structures, lake; for dredging extending to 12-foot depth contour in a harbor basin 10 feet deep; and for dredg- a entrance channel 12 feet deep. Existing project was 1246 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (I. Doc. 446, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published maps). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Public facilities being planned by State and local agencies. Plans and specifications are complete, bUt construction has not started. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: PaY- ments covering contract work completed last fiscal year amounte to $15,330. Adjustments on fiscal year's cost amounted to minu $19,263. Maintenance: Reconnaissance and condition surveys were accomplished. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was con pleted in June 1965. Controlling depths are 12 feet in entrance channel and 10 feet in harbor basin. A private mooring basill with a controlling depth of 7 feet was provided by local interests. Cost and financial statement Total ,0 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 19668 New work: 98 102 Appropriated..........-$10,000 $629,100 $46,000 $8,000 -$4,231 )98,12 .. Cost............... 38,172 455,604 244,001 135,318 -3,933 Maintenance: 218 Appropriated................................................... 69 218 Cost.......................................................... 69 1 Includes $89,400 contributed funds. 14. HARBOR OF REFUGE AT HARBOR BEACH, LAKE HURON, M Location. On west shore of Lake Huron about 60 miles north of Port Huron, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 51.) Existing project. Harbor of refuge protected by three break waters; a main entrance 23 feet deep; and an anchorage area2 feet deep. For additional details see page 1485 of Annual RePo~ for 1962. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 3,1871 Adopted site and made provision for harbor................ Annual Report, 1873, p.292. 00 Aug. 8, 1917 Closing north entrance and dredging main entrance and II. Doc. 1700, 64th Cong. .2d anchorage area. (contains latest published maP) Jan. 21, 1927 Removal of portion of breakwater in interest of sanitation. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Coal and limestone are received at a pri" vate wharf. In addition there is a public recreational craft pier a Coast Guard pier, and several small installations engaged i docking and servicing light-draft commercial and recreationsal vessels. These facilities satisfy current commerce and traffice requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation of 500 linear feet of south end of south breakwater, 320 linear feet of north breakwater, and 300 linear feet of north leg of main breakwater has been deleted from rehabilitation program, and will be repaired under operation and maintenance RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1247 Iograrm. A 200-foot portion of section E has been added to the rhabilitation program. Plans and specifications for section E ere Completed at a cost of $10,983. A contract for rehabilita- 19t If section E was awarded in amount of $172,055 during June 966.. Maintenance: Condition surveys and miscellaneous in- GSection services by Government forces cost $5,137. U.S. dredge Gaillard performed maintenance dredging in the project remov- ing 81,400 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoal material at a cost to $47,040. Engineering, design, supervision, and administra- ti' n cost $3,792. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- dted in 1928. For additional details on completion and con- sion of existing project, see Annual Report for 1962. Condition tr'eys revealed that a 200-foot portion of section E is in urgent ethed of repair. Controlling depths (July 1965) are 17 feet in t e entrance and 16 feet in anchorage area. Cost and financial statement Total to 'seal Year 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 .............1962 1963 1964 Ne work: Propriated ......... ,200,598 ............................... ...... ,200,598 1,200,598 aose.................................. h aitenaie :.. C opriated..................... . Rehabiliation:1.4 $3,000 $4,164 ............ $306 $180,000 1.,745,134 1,10 ........... :**itat 2,820 4,344 ............ 306 55,969 1,621,102 I tDroporiated ............ ........................... 186,000 100,000 286,000 . .................................... 7,348 10,983 18,331 15. HOLLAND HARBOR, MICH. erocation. On east shore of Lake Michigan 95 miles northeast- 4 from Chicago, Ill., and 23 miles southerly from Grand Haven, - (See Lake Survey Chart 763.) o evious project. For details see page 1948 of Annual Report r'1915, and page 1478 of Annual Report for 1938. elXsting project. An outer breakwater protected approach yanfnel in Lake Michigan, an entrance channel to Lake Macatawa aacatawa by 1otected piers and revetments, a channel through Lake into Black River, and a turning basin. Project depths are 23 feet in outer portion of approach channel decreasing Existing project was authorized by the following: Ac, Work authorized Documents and reports r.30, 185 1852 Artificial channel between Lakes S. Ex. Doe. 42, 35th Cong., 1st seas. Ma . . . .Michigan.I . . . . . . . . . . .and . . . Macatawa . .. . . . . . . Annual Report, 1866, p. 106. c. , 167 899 Piers and revetmental....... Extending inner piers.................................... H. Doe. 272, 54th Cong., 2d sess. and Annual Report, 1987, p. 2950. dy3, 1905 Conver ing breakwaters................. ........... Annual Report. 1905, p. 2176. Channe to Holland and turning basin at Holland........ H. Doc. 588, 69th Cong., 2d seas. eg 3t,1935 Doe. Present project dimensions of ch annels and turning basin.... Rivers and Harbors Committee, 48, 74th Cong., Ist seas. 3,1954 .et, 2 Widen bend in revetted entrance channel into Lake Maca- H. Doc. 282, 83d Cong., 2d seas. tawa; dredge channel in Black River; and widen and ex- tend turning basin. i n- '--__ ... s ,ee__ prviupojc 'orfloleted under previous project tains latest published maps 1248 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 to 21 feet at outer end of inner piers, 21 feet to upper end Of project, and 18 feet in turning basin. For additional details see page 1458 of Annual Report for 1962. Widening bend of eI- trance channel into Lake Macatawa is considered inactive. Est mated cost of this portion (1956) is $449,500.1 Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed portiOl of project. Work authorized by act of 1954 is subject to codiee tion that work on either or both proposed modifications may$b undertaken by the United States provided local interests furnish all lands except 1.5 acres of Federal lands, easements, rights way, and suitable spoil-disposal areas for initial work and future maintenance; remove buildings and other structures, except e isting revetments, from lands to be furnished; and hold the United States free from damages. Terminal facilities. Wharves are at inner end of Lake Maca tawa, and used for handling coal, building materials, petroleu' products, and miscellaneous commodities. Two shipbuildil yards are on south shore of lake. Holland provided a public f wharf for small craft. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitationl Adjustments were made in cost for hired labor work perforrned last fiscal year by Chicago. Maintenance: Condition surveYs miscellaneous inspection, and real estate services by Governme forces cost $4,385. U.S. hopper dredge Hains removed 97,131 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material at a cost of $64,081. U.S. dredge Depoe Bay removed 36,397 cubic yards, place meas- ure, of shoal material at a cost of $22,221. Stone replacement work by Chicago District cost $9,084. Engineering, design, co struction layouts, supervision and administration cost $16,8,. Cost of razing unserviceable buildings and real estate expenses t connection with property (land and buildings) transferred With out reimbursement from U.S. Coast Guard amounted to $5,815. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, with.e ception of widening bend in revetted entrance channel authorile by act of September 3, 1954, was completed in 1957. All strtl, tures are generally in good condition. For additional detailS or completion of existing project see page 1460 of Annual Report for 1962. Controlling depths (June 1966) are 23 feet in outer bar, 21 feet in channel through Lake Macatawa to docks.h Holland, 18 feet in turning basin, and 21 feet upstream to the settling basin. Cost of existing project to end of fiscal year $595,221 for new work ($559,516 regular funds and $35,705 co tributed funds), $1,837,886 regular funds for maintenance, gr $502,452 regular funds for rehabilitation, a total of $2,935,55 RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1249 Cost and financial statement 1kal Year, Total to S ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWork . . ...................... DPPropriated .. ..................... 2$771,841 8............... Maitenane............................................... ................ 2771,841 C0 ~ oriated.......... $99,000 $92,500 $130,000 $40,000 $120,000 1,969,533 Aerbabhlitation:........... 53,929 137,988 86,195 81,588 122,481 1,965,484 68,000 277,927 140,000 25,000 1.. 510,927 0r opriated........... S ......... 19,080 145,754 257,057 81,614 -1,053 502,452 OIldes $176,620 for new work and $127,598 for maintenance for previous projects. des$35,705 contributed funds for existing projects. 16. THE INLAND ROUTE, MICH. LoCation A series of interconnected lakes and streams retching across northern tip of Lower Peninsula of Michigan, d extends from Conway near Lake Michigan to Cheboygan on Lake 1Huron; an overall distance of 35 miles. Crooked and Indian gVers are connecting channels in the waterway. (See Lake urvey 'Chart 660.) feXisting project. Provides for a channel 30 feet wide and 5 let deep, with necessary widening at bends, through Crooked and Cdian Rivers, and Crooked, Burt, and Mullett Lakes, and from ConWay (west end of Crooked Lake) to navigation lock at heboygan; in Pickerel Channel from Pickerel Lake to Crooked atke. It also provides for suitable jetties at head of Indian ClVer. The addition of a lock and dam was approved by the hief of Engineers on September 2, 1964, to correct a design eficiency. Estimated (1966) cost for new work is $610,800, ex- hding $148,000 to be contributed by local interests. Existing Project was authorized by 1954 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 142, 82d Cong., 1st sess, contains latest published map). jocal cooperation. Fully complied with. l Terminal facilities. None for commercial-cargo handling exist aong the Crooked and Indian Rivers. Numerous small privately Owned timber piers and wharves, some equipped with covered- oat wells for serving and storing recreational craft, have been constructed. Landings maintained by hotel and resort operators are open to the public for transfer of passengers. Public docks re at Conway and Oden on Crooked Lake; the village of Indian Ver Topinabeeand Mullett Lake Village on Mullett Lake; and ed Cheboygan. About 30 highways dead end at the water's edge, permitting public access for various marine activities. ock facilities are considered adequate for existing traffic. Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Plans a" Specifications for the lock and dam were completed. Main- telance: Reconnaissance and condition surveys were accom 1l1"i~hed" :Rcnasac Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, except the lock and dam, was completed in 1958. Construction has not Started on the lock and dam. Controlling depth is 5 feet. For d itional details see page 1382 of Annual Report for 1960. 1250 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Tot alto Fiscalyear.............. 3 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 0, 1966 New work: $700 162 Appropriated.............. ........................ $161,000 $104,231 1 Cost ............. .................. .................... 17,592 28,331 1480,854 Maintenance: .......... Appropriated......... ... ............ ......... 337 ,09 Cost....................................... 337 102,609 1 Includes $85,000 contributed funds. 17. LAKE ST. CLAIR, MICH., CHANNELS Location. Lake St. Clair, a section of Great Lakes connecting channels, is an expansive shallow basin having a steamer tracy length of about 15 miles from mouth of St. Clair River to head of Detroit River. (See Lake Survey Chart 42.) Previous projects. For details see page 2882, Annual Report for 1896; pages 1957-58, Annual Report for 1915; and page 1539, Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. An improved channel through Lake St. Clair 800 feet wide, 27.5 feet deep, and about 14.5 miles long; extending from mouth of Southeast Bend cutoff channel at lower end of St. Clair River to head of Detroit River Channel. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Aug. 5, 1886 Two dikes ............. . Annual Report, 1885, p. 2159. July 13, 1892 Deepening canal and dredging channel at Grosse Poi nte. . o. 207, 51st Cong., 2d ses,. Doc. June 13, 1902 Second canal for downbound vessels................. ...... H. Doc. 234, 56th Cong., 2d seas. Mar. 2, 1919 21-foot depth in Grosse Pointe Channel for about 5% miles.. H1.Doc. 188, 65th Cong., 1st sess. July 3,193025-foot depth through canals and channel through Lake St H. Doec.253, 70th Cong., 1st seas. Clair. Aug.30, 19351 Removal of center dike and widening channel to 700 feet..... Rivers and Harbors Committee Dec, 3, 72d Cong., lst sess. Mar.21,1956 Deepening channel to 27.5 feet and abandonment of channel S. Doc. 71, 84th Cong., 1st sess. (cOl above mouth of Southeast Bend cutoff channel. tains latest published map). 1 Included in the Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. Estimated cost (1966) for new work is $7,013,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. None. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Mis- cellaneous inspection services and preparation of various reports in connection with contract disposal areas. Maintenance: Con* dition surveys, miscellaneous inspection services, preparation and publication of water level bulletins on channel depths by Govern- ment forces cost $32,168. U.S. hopper dredge Hoffman per- formed maintenance dredging in the project removing 178,623 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material at a cost of $57,374. Engineering and design, construction layouts, supervision and administration cost $18,299. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in fiscal year 1962. Controlling depth (Sept. 1965) is 27.5 feet. Total costs for existing project to end of fiscal year were $8,442,487, RIVERS AND HARBORS----DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1251 of Which $7,008,819 was for new work ($6,000,224 regular funds nd $1,008,5 9 5 public works funds) and $1,433,668 for mainte- fiance, Cost and financial statement Year.-Total Fiscal to .. .seal . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 New Work. copriated ..... $2,242.880 . ..... -$16,960 ...... $700 $7,669,127 Mantenane......... .... 3,075,492 $195,416. $9,212 20,388 44 7, APpropriated................... 37,02600 1669,014 S .................. 225 107,841 1:669,014 Ieludes $656,060 for new work and $235,346 for maintenance for previous projects. 18. LELAND HARBOR, MICH. Location. A light-draft-vessel harbor on eastern shore of Lake Michigan at mouth of Carp River, about 40 miles north of ranlkfort, Mich., and 40 miles southwest of Charlevoix, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 705.) fEsting project. Provides for a harbor of refuge consisting Of a breakwater about 1,200 feet long, a protected anchorage and flaneuver area about 3 acres in extent and 10 feet deep, a 12-foot deOe flared approach channel decreasing in width to 90 feet, an exlSting south pier 440 feet long, a 35-foot long cellular extension to sOuth pier, an entrance channel 6 feet deep and 40 feet wide of Carp River, and for elimination of existing o"rth Pierto mouth xtending Estimated (1966) Federal cost for new work is j9,,000, excluding $275,000 to be contributed by local interests. Istirnated total cost to local interests (1966) is $400,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents Work authorized Aug.30, 1935 Entrance channel protected by 2 piers.......... ... River and Harborsess. Committee Doe. 23, Oct.23 . . . - . 74th Cong., 1st 23.t, o breakwater, anchorage area, approach channel, and (con- H. Doc. 413, 87th Cong., 2d sess. removal of north pier. tame latest published map). Local cooperation. Act of October 23, 1962, is subject to 37 per- coldition that responsible local interests contribute in cashfacilities cent of first cost for construction of general navigation co~prising breakwater, approach channel and anchorage area, uch contribution presently estimated at $275,000, to be paid in alUm1p sum before start of construction, subject to final ad- ustment after actual costs are determined; provide lands and "its-of-way for construction and maintenance; hold the United ates free from damages; provide and maintain necessary moor- 1 acilities and utilities, including a public landing with suit- toe supply facilities, open to all equally; dredging berthing areas be commensurate with depth of Federal channel improve- bodts; establish a properly constituted and competent public to provide and oper- reserve and financially cooperateand essential localtofacilities; at e Yempowered spaces within anchorage 1252 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and mooring facilities adequate for accommodation of transient craft. Assurances were furnished by Michigan State WaterwaY Commission and accepted by the District Engineer on October 25 1965. A cash contribution of $365,000 was provided February 2, 1966. Return of the amount over the $275,000 presently needed is under consideration. Terminal facilities. Privately owned wharves on each side of river below dam which is about 400 feet above river mout. They are used by local fishing interests and recreational craft. All available dockage space is utilized. Public facilities are being planned by State and local agencies. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: PreP aration of plans and specifications for latest project modifications were completed at a cost of $19,306. A contract was awarded in June 1966 for the new work and rehabilitation of the existing south pier in the amount of $703,363. Maintenance: Preparia tion of plans and specifications for rehabilitation of south pier (section C) were completed at a cost of $10,259. Conditio' surveys, miscellaneous inspection services, and preparationO reports by Government forces cost $53. U.S. bucket dredge Tompkins removed 4,188 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoal material at a cost of $7,280. Engineering and design, super- vision and administration cost $1,267. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project, with exceP tion of work authorized in October 1962, was completed in 1931. For additional details on completion and condition of existing project see Annual Report for 1962. Underwater condition sur" veys conducted in August 1964 indicate that sections C of the north and south piers are in poor condition. Controlling depth (Aug. 1965) is 6 feet. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to year................1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1 66 New work: 4 81 Appropriated........................................... $30,000 $8200,000 $29 1818 Cost..................................... .......... . 22,181 19,306 10 t Maintenance: 12 843 Appropriated.......... $4,000 $4,718 ............ 10,000 15,000 125,940 Cost.................. 1,776 6,943.............. 3,938 18,859 12 (~NTRTITTTDT F TTNTT Total to 6 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,196 New work: $ 6 ,0 .......... $3 $365,000 65 ' 00 Contributed Cost...... ............. ............ ............ Coat................ ..... .... ... .. . . 19. LEXINGTON HARBOR, MICH. Location. On southwest shore of Lake Huron, 20 miles north of Port Huron, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 51.) Existing project. Provides for two offshore breakwaters opening to the southeast and totaling about 2,000 feet long with RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1253 Provisions for recreational fishing on the main breakwater; an anchorage and maneuver area af about 6 acres, 8 feet deep; and a fred approach channel 10 feet deep, decreasing to 160 feet in bydth through the breakwaters. Existing project was authorized cy 1965 River and Harbor Act (I. Doc. 301, 88th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Estimated (1966) Federal cost or new work is$670,000, excluding $425,000 to be contributed by local interests. Estimated total cost for local interests is $515,000. aLocal cooperation. Responsible local interests must furnish asurances that they will contribute in cash 39 percent of the first cost of construction of the general navigation facilities, such con- tribution presently, estimated at $425,000, to be paid in a lump SuM before start of construction, subject to final adjustment after actUal costs are determined; provide lands, easements, and rights- nf-Way for construction and future maintenance and for aids to 1avigation upon request of the Chief of Engineers, including suit- abe spoil-disposal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, th1d embankments therefor or cost of such retaining works; hold the United States free from damages; provide and maintain neces- lary Mooring facilities and utilities including an adequate public lding with provision for the sale of motor fuel, lubricants, and 0Pe table and a parking lot with adequate sanitary facilities, "Pell to water, a•ll Wi th all equally; dredging berthing areas to be commensurate co the depth of the Federal improvement; establish a properly olstituted and competent public body empowered to cooperate eancially and to provide and operate essential local facilities; forerve spaces within anchorage and mooring facilities adequate reopay (which may of r accommodation transient craft; pay, contribute in kind, or be through user fees) with interest, one-half f separable cost of structural modifications necessary to provide or recreational fishing facilities on the main breakwater, less loe-half of the cost of associated parking facilities to be provided bocally, the amount involved currently estimated at $11,000; and tbear all costs of maintenance and replacement of these modifica- t1o s the amount involved currently estimated at $2,000 on an oerage annual basis; provided that the sizing and responsibility for development, maintenance, and replacement of these facilities a be modified in accordance with the alternatives provided in the tederalWater Project Recreation Act, depending on the inten- ols of non-Federal interests regarding participation in the costs Of these features at the time of construction and subsequent 'hereto. Improvement for navigation may be undertaken inde- bendently of the public recreational fishing facilities on the main reakwater whenever funds for that purpose are available and eqUired local cooperation has been furnished. i'Terminal facilities. An existing public fishing pier of open Pile construction is not adequate for existing and prospective Jollerce. Complete boating facilities are planned by State and ao agencies in connection with the harbor construction. allPverations Cocated to this resultstoduring andproject fiscal year. No funds have been commence work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. 1254 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 20. LITTLE LAKE HARBOR, MICH. Location. On south shore of Lake Superior 21 miles west of Whitefish Point and 30 miles east of Grand Marais, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 92.) Existing project. A small-craft harbor of refuge by dredgig an entrance channel 12 feet deep from Lake Superior into Little Lake, suitably protected by breakwaters and revetments. timated (1966) cost for new work was $598,700 excluding $57 700 to be contributed by local interests. Estimated (1966) cost to local interests is $95,000. Existing project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 446, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. A public dock built by State of Michigs for light-draft craft. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Eng- neering and design work on shoaling problem was initiated. Maintenance: Project condition survey by Government forces cost $116. U.S. derrick boat DK 20 dredged 51,495 cubic yards of material from the harbor entrance at a cost of $35,392. E neering, design, supervision, and administration cost $11,10 9 . Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is considered co" plete; however, because of shifting sand the harbor entrance h as shoaled so that controlling depths (May 1966) vary from 1.3 to 9.5 feet. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 1966 New work:1600 47 Appropriated.......... $200,000 $255,000 $31,800 $32,000 .98,6 0 Cost .................25,851 354,446 73,895 64,074 .......... Maintenance: 105 500 Appropriated.................... .............. ............ 66,000 $39,500 Cost........... ....... ........... ............ 58,340 ............ 46,617 10 1 Includes $57,670 contributed funds. 21. LUDINGTON HARBOR, MICH. Location. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 156 miles north" easterly from Chicago, Ill., and 67 miles northerly from Grand Haven, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 774.) Previous projects. For details see page 1951 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1491 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A breakwater protected outer basin in Lake Michigan and an entrance channel from Lake Michigan to Pete Marquette Lake protected by piers and revetments. Project depth in outer basin and channel between inner piers is 18 feet. For additional details see page 1307 of Annual Report for 1963. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. In addition to main terminal of ChesS- peake & Ohio Railway Co., consisting of three car ferry slips, a RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1255 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents and reportsl Work authorized i Mar 2,1867 Mar. 31899 Entrance piers............................... Annual Report 1867, p. 114. Pier extension reconstruction and repairs to existing struc- H. Doe. 273, 54th Cong., 2d sess., and Mar. 2,1907 tures, and present project dimensions of channel. Annual Report, 1897, p. 2951. Breakwaters, shore connections, and removal of outer ends H. Doc. 62, 59th Cong., 1st sees., and of the two inner piers. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 3, 59th Cong., 2d sess. Latest published map is in Annual Report for 1914, p. 2974. Wharf, and warehouses there are several wharves which handle Coal, limestone, and miscellaneous commodities. Facilities ade- quate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitation: A contract for rehabilitation of about 150 linear feet of section A and B-1, awarded in May 1965, was completed at a cost of $146,781. Supervision and administration cost $9,823. Main- tenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition sur- Veys by Government plant and hired labor cost $4,676. Placement of about 1,930 tons of riprap stone on lakeside portion of north breakwater by Government plant and hired labor cost $17,036. U.S. hopper dredge Hains removed 44,482 cubic yards shoal mate- rial at a cost of $32,878. Costs incurred in obtaining easements aosPoil-disposal areas and other pertinent real estate charges "niunted to cost rainstration $183. Engineering, design, supervision, and ad- $8,162.tp Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- ti ed in 1918. For additional details on completion and condi- o of existing project see page 1469 of Annual Report for 1962. tontrolling depths (June 1966) are 23.1 feet at the harbor en- peance and 20 feet in channel between piers and revetments to eere Marquette Lake. Total costs for existing project from ru"lar funds to end of fiscal year were $4,802,666, of which ,036,086 was for new work, $3,408,666 for maintenance, and $357,914 for rehabilitation. Cost and financial statement Yaear..1 Total to ar .1962 . 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Ne Work:. Al~orop~riated o .. . .......... *,priated..........5........... ......................... ............ $1,527,502 1,527,502 a ........................... ,.................................... "inte enance: C opriated.......... $23,300 -$6,500 $60,500 $44,000 $37,476 3,540,400 lehabiltatio, ......... 9,732 7,677 57,591 16,167 62,935 3,535,117 ............ 24,073 150,000 222,000 . 396,073 0 coropriated.......... ........... ............20,200 113,026 68,084i 156,604 357,914 cludes $491,416 for new work and $126,451 for maintenance for previous projects. 22. MACKINAW CITY HARBOR, MICH. p. cation. On east shore of extreme northern tip of Lower ,ninsula of Michigan, on southerly shore of Straits of Mackinac. See Lake Survey Chart 60.) 1256 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Provides for a breakwater, about 430 feet long, perpendicular to existing railroad pier; wave absorbing slope protection for about 300 feet along harbor side of railroad pier; an entrance channel 10 feet deep with a minimum widt of 100 feet, and a protected anchorage and maneuver area about 3.3 acres in extent with depths varying from 6 to 8 feet; and maintenance of outer 200-foot portion of existing north break" water. Estimated (1966) cost for new work is $198,000, exclUd ing $198,000 to be contributed by local interests. Existing proY ect was authorized by the Chief of Engineers January 15, 1965, pursuant to section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Additional public facilities are being planned by State and local agencies in addition to existing facil' ities owned by the village of Mackinaw City but leased to a private marina operator. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: PreP aration of plans and specifications for the project were completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started' Cost and financial statement I Fcal yar................ 192 193 16 1 1Total June 30 ,1ot Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Junie, New work :65000 Appropriated.................................. $4,000 $21,000 140,000112 Cost.................................... 2,167 6,043 9,912 23. MANISTEE HARBOR, MICH. Location. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 179 miles north" easterly from Chicago, Ill., and 26 miles northerly from Ludilng ton, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 776.) Previous projects. For details see page 1952 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1493 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. An entrance channel in Lake Michigan prO- tected by a breakwater, piers, and revetments; a channel 1 Manistee River to Manistee Lake; and Federal participation , cost of replacing Maple Street Bridge. Project depths are feet in entrance channel and 23 feet in river channel. For addi- tional details see page 1470 of Annual Report for 1962. Est" Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 2,1867 Entrance piers.. ................. Annual Report, 1867, p. 115. Sept.19,1890 Extending channel 8,000 feet to connect with Manistee Lake, Annual Report, 1891, p. 2678. and further pier extension. July 25,1912 Depth of 20 feet in outer harbor, 570 feet wide to outer end H. Doc. 599, 82d Cong., 2d sess. ot south pier and 18 feet deep in river; south breakwater with shore connection, and extend north pier if required. July 3, 1930 23-foot depths in entrance channel and 21-foot depths in S. Doc. 131, 71st Cong., 2d sess. river channel. Mar. 2,1945 Remove old south revetment; construct new south pier and H. Doc. 380, 77th Cong., let sess. revetment; and widen river entrance channel.o July 14, 1960 Present project dimensions of channel through outer basin H. Doc. 358, 86th Cong., 2d sess. (c and river, and Federal participation in cost of replacing tains latest published map). Maple Street Bridge. RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1257 tated (1966) Federal cost for new work is $2,271,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects. Estimated (1966) an-Flederal cost is $13,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with Terminal facilities. Installations are on both sides of river alld on Manistee Lake. Commerce handled includes coal, sand, Wh and general cargo. In addition, there is a Government to arf and a city owned recreational craft pier which is open entublic. These facilities satisfy current commerce require- Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Re- placement of existing bascule type bridge at Maple Street by overnmient cost participation contract which was completed last ,Cal year had supervision and administration costs of $345. Hired labor dredging was completed at a cost of $26,672, using dipper dredge Gaillard and removing 11,100 cubic yards, scow measure, of material. Supervision and administration min con- ection with hired labor dredging was $5,142. Rehabilitation: ngineeiing and design costs for rehabilitation were $5,763. otracts for rehabilitation of north pier (section A, B, C, D, and ) and north revetment (sections F and G) were completed at ts of $187,147 and $92,546, respectively. Contract for re- obilitation of about 985 linear feet of south breakwater shore $onection (sections M, N, O, and P) was completed at a cost of 1 10,144. A contract for emergency reconstruction of outer 700 'near feet of south breakwater (section B) was awarded in aount of $183,000. Costs for the fiscal year were $94,107. Surveys, construction layouts, supervision and administration in fofnection with rehabilitation activities cost $38,634. Main- tenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition sur- veys by Government plant and hired labor cost $4,803. U.S. hopper dredge Hains removed 55,255 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material at a cost of $30,895. An adjustment of minus $147 was made in prior year costs for emergency repairs to south breakWater by Chicago District plant and hired labor. About 996 tons of riprap stone was placed in section B, south break- water, by Chicago District plant and hired labor at a cost of $19,468. About 200 tons of riprap stone and 150 tons of fill stone were placed in section II, north revetment, under contract at a cost of $3,850. Costs incurred in obtaining easements for spoil- t0isposal areas and other pertinent real estate charges amounted cos$79. Engineering, design, supervision and administration st $7,083. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project in effect before 1960 tiodification was completed in 1950. Work on latest modifica- on,which provides for dredging river to project dimensions 00 8 00 feet below Maple Street Highway Bridge to Manistee Lake, is substantially complete except for dredging adjacent to sc t h channel line opposite north pier and revetment which is oLeduled for completion in October 1966. For additional details 01 conmpletion of existing project see Annual Report for 1962. ehabilitation of 1,142 linear feet of north pier (sections A through E); 820 linear feet of north revetment (sections F and 1258 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 G); and 972 feet of south breakwater (sections M, N, O, and P) complete. Remaining navigation structures are in generally good condition except for outer 700 feet of south breakWate s which is being repaired. Controlling depths (Sept. 1965) are 2 feet in outer basin and 23 feet in river to Manistee Lake excep in vicinity of Maple Street Bridge. Total costs for existing proJ ect from regular funds to end of fiscal year were $5 , 0 69,531, o which $2,223,753 was for new work, $1,504,473 for maintenance' and $1,341,305 for rehabilitation. Cost and financial statement Total 1 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1y061 New work: Appropriated.......... $300,000 $1,050,000............ $104,158 .$2,6 Cost.................. 69,569 363,507 $745,949 251,907 $32,159 2.5 Maintenance: 733 Appropriated.......... 26,000 -2,020 26,500 40,279 65 000 1,6 365,3 Cost................. 31,290 451 26,500 33,894 66,035 1,6 Rehabilitation: Appropriated...................... 45,000 300,000 500,000 530,000 1,3 Cost.... ....................... 34,360 31,514 747,060 528,341 ,3 SIncludes $354,999 for new work and $150,910 for maintenance for previous projects. 24. MANISTIQUE HARBOR, MICH. Location. On north shore of Lake Michigan 135 miles north* easterly from Green Bay Harbor, Wis., and 220 miles northerly from Milwaukee, Wis. (See Lake Survey Chart 701.)t Previous projects. For details see page 1933 of Annual Report for 1915 and page 1422 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A breakwater protected entrance channel in Lake Michigan, a channel in Manistique River, and a Pie at river mouth. Project depths are 19 feet in outer portionf entrance channel, 18 feet in inner portion of entrance channel, and 18 feet in river channel. For additional details see page 1451 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project was authorized by the follawing: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Mar. 3, 1905 Breakwaters and outer harbor.......... ................... 11. Doc. 429, 58th Cong., 2d ses.. Mar. 2, 1907 Present location of west breakwater and pier at river mouth.. Annual Report, 10(8, p. 648, ndg published report of Mar. 13, 1 r' approved by Secretary of War, AP 3, 1908. 1 May 17, 1950 Present project dimensions of channel.......... ........ H. Doc. 721, 80th Cong., 2d sess. 1Contains latest published map. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. A car ferry slip, two coal and building material wharves, two fishing wharves, and numerous lumber- yard slips. Facilities are considered adequate for existing con" merce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $706. U.S. bucket dredge Tompkins performed maintenance dredging over entire project removing 21,755 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoal material at a cost of $108,776. Drilling, blaSt- RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT ig, and dredging operations by U.S. derrick boat Harvey cost $21,573. Engineering, design, supervision, and administration Cost $23,142. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was corn- Pleted in 1961. For additional details on completion of existing project see Annual Report for 1962. All structures are generally 1l good condition. Controlling depths (Aug. 1965) are 19 feet in elitrance channel and 18 feet from harbor entrance to upstream ,"lit of project. Total costs to end of fiscal year were $2,762,612, Of Which $1,295,400 was for new work, $1,150,879 for mainte- nance, and $316,333 for rehabilitation. _Cost and financial statement ical Total to lalyear ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. Appropri ated..........-$5,712. ........................ ............ 1$1,299,355 . 395........................ ............ 11,299,355 Maintenance: -CAppropri ost .. ated.......... 5,000 $71,000 $40,285 $53,000 $167,000 1,165,727 ehabiitud 4,931 67,423 43,939 50,955 154,197 1,150,879 ated.......... Co)ropril 45,000 290,000 --15,000 -3,667 .............. 316,333 10,897 106,240 199,196 ........................ 316,333 Include, s$3,955 for previous project. 25. MONROE HARBOR, MICH. ,LJocation. On lower reach of Raisin River, which empties "Ito Lake Erie and is 36 miles south of Detroit, Mich. (See e Survey Chart 376.) Existing project. Provides for a channel in Lake Erie and Raisin River to city of Monroe, for a turning basin, and for r i )ra3ppingctdets r fePing 21 1feet protecting dikes at river mouth. Project depths are to turning basin, 18 feet in turning basin, and 9 feet to UPstream end of project. For additional details see page 1490 of 11tnual Report for 1962. Project feature for riprapping pro- tecting dikes is considered inactive. Estimated cost of this eature (1954) is $90,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and Reports Peb 24 . . .. . . .. . . . . . .... Annual Re ort, 24l, 18351 9-foot channel, protected revetments and2. piers........ 1872,p.237. S 1930 21-foot channel, dikes and turning basin RItiversand Harbors Committee Doe. ' 1ly 22, 71st Cong., 2d seas. u. , 19323 ~Modified conditions of local cooperation imposed by act of Rivers and Harbors Committee Does. g2. 2,1937 f July 3, 1930. 12, 72(dCong., 1st seas., 45, 75th Cong., 1st sess. 2 odified by act of June 10, 1872. , rawping of protecting dikes portion of project is inactive. So ar Department appropriations act. ontains latest published map. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Several privately owned docks and a nunicipal terminal. Port of Monroe authority built a steel and Concrete wharf on southeast side of turning basin for commercial Use. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. 1260 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $2,719. U.S. hopper dredges Hains and Hoffman performed maintenance dredging over the entire project removing 268,836 and 5,324 cubic yards, respectively, of shoal material at costs of $94,608 and $4,120. Costs incurred in obtaining easements for spoil-disposal areas and other pertinent real estate charges amounted to $271. Engli neering, design, supervision, and administration cost $19,556. d Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was complete in 1936, except for riprapping protecting dikes on each side o channel. Due to combined effect of severe storms and continued high water, dikes have largely disappeared. Controlling depths (Sept. 1965) are 18.3 feet in channel from Lake Erie to turnin basin and 16 feet in turning basin. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 JuneA96 New work:34 Appropriated............................................................. 87,340 Cost............ ..................... ... ............................ Maintenance: 20 Appropriated......... $60,000 $65,298 $132,000 $113,000 $120,000 2,220 Cost.................. 62,039 64,165 133,109 108,602 121 274 2,2172 1Includes contributed funds of $300,000 for new work and $166,667 for maintenance. tributed by: Port Commission of Monroe, $300,000; Consolidated Paper Co. $125,000; and Raisin Paper Co., $41,667, 26. MUSKEGON HARBOR, MICH. Location. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 114 miles north' easterly from Chicago, Ill., and 80 miles easterly from Milwaukee, Wis. (See Lake Survey Chart 767.) Previous projects. For details see page 1950 of Annual Repot for 1915; page 1399, Annual Report for 1924; and page 1484; Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A breakwater protected outer basin in Lale Michigan and an entrance channel from Lake Michigan to Muske- gon Lake protected by piers and revetments. Project depths vary from 29 feet in the lakeward portion of the outer basin to 27 feet in the channel between the inner piers to Muskegol Lake. For additional details see page 1303 of Annual Report for 1963. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents I. __________________________________________________ June 13,1902 Piers and revetments................................... H. Doc. 104, 56th Cong., 2d seas. Mar. 3, 1925 Breakwaters.......... .... ........................... H. D)oc. 494, 67th Cong., 4thsess. , Aug. 30, 1935 Repairing revetments around car ferry slip................ Rivers and Harbors Committee 64, 75th Cong., 1st sess. c Oct. 23, 1962 Channel deepening and present project dimensions of chan- H. Doc. 474, 87th Cong., 2d sess. c nel. tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Several privately owned wharves pri marily for commercial use. Details on actual port and harbor RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1261 facilities are in Port Series No. 48 (revised 1961) prepared and Published as part 2 by Board of Engineers for River and Harbors. anformation on port administration and Federal services, port and terminal services and charges, and steamship services is repared and published as part I by the Port Development Staff, .* Department of Commerce. Facilities are considered ade- quate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Fiscal year cost adjustments, for prior years deepening of inner chan- el, Were made. Rehabilitation: Engineering and design for rehabilitation cost $9,026. Contract for rehabilitation of south and revetment (sections N, 0 & P) continued. About 76 PDercent of contract work was completed at a cost of $366,020. A contract in the amount of $209,877 was awarded for rehabilita- tIon of about 1,250 linear feet of south breakwater shore connec- on (sections F and G). Surveys, construction layouts, pervision, and administration cost $19,049. Maintenance: lscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Gov- erment plant and hired labor cost $4,581. U.S. hopper dredge Hains and bucket dredge Tompkins removed 63,791 and 20,350 cubic yards of shoal material at costs of $33,601 and $38,358, re- pectively. Costs incurred in obtaining easements for spoil dis- Posal areas and other pertinent real estate activities amounted to , Engineering, design, supervision, and administration cost Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project including ltest Project modification was completed in 1965. For addi- tonal details on completion and condition of existing project see Dage 1465 of Annual Report for 1962. Underwater condition ~urveys of existing structures were conducted during May 1962. being repaired are: 299 linear feet of south pier (sec- 0ections ilons N and 0); 393 linear feet of south revetment (secton P); ald 1,274 linear feet of south breakwater (sections F and G). condition. eaining navigation structures are in generally good ontrolling depths (June 1966) are 28 feet in the channel through cuter harbor and 27 feet in channel to Muskegon Lake. Total costs to end of fiscal year were $3,836,277, of which $2,298,702 and $445,855 for efor new Ire4abilita tion.work, $1,091,720 for maintenance, Cost and financial statement 1Total to ea ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Iiew Work. ................... ..........$125,000 $300,000 -$27,220 ADDropriated $2,912,110 Mainteos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. .. .. .......... 122,671 275,053 56 2 ,912 ,110 ADropiated .......... $49,000 $2,500 53,000 50,000 92,000 1,546,115 ehblitation*............... 44,650 8,1160 54,071 46,099 87,689 1,537,903 (D"ropriated a tion 30,000 150,000 600,000 780,000 Cost 0 ..... . ....... ....................... 28,947 22,813 394,095 445,855 $613,408 for new work and $446,183 for maintenance for previous projects. .ludes 1262 REPORT OF THIECHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 27. PENTWATER HARBOR, MICH. Location. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 146 miles north easterly from Chicago, Ill., and 14 miles southerly from Ludind ton, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 77.) Existing project. Provides for widening old entrance chanel to 150 feet between parallel piers and revetments, channel to e tend from Lake Michigan to Pentwater Lake, with a depth of,1 feet. Piers and revetments are built of stone-filled timber crib' and piling and capped with concrete. The 200-foot extensiol to south pier portion of project is considered inactive. Estiniated cost (1954) of this portion is $65,100. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documrnentsl Mar. 2, 1867S H. Ex. Doc. 70, 39th Cong., 2d a Mar. 3, 1873 Piers and revetments; dredging........................... July 5, 1884 July 13, 1892 Mar.25,1907 Present project depth of channel.......................... H. Doc. 181, 59th Cong., 2d S 2 Latest published mnap is in H. Doc. 303, 66th Cong., 1st sess. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Several small privately owned wharves on west end of Pentwater Lake. The city and Michigan Water. s ways Commission jointly constructed a dock on northwest d of Pentwater Lake for public use. Facilities are considered ade quate for existing commerce.. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. Condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $3e 709. U.S. bucket dredge Tompkins performed maintenace dredging over entire project removing 67,800 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoal material at a cost of $78,680. Grading an leveling sand dunes along channel was accomplished by purchase order at a cost of $761. Engineering, design, supervision, ar administration cost $10,168. A study to determine methods 0 controlling shoaling at outer ends of piers was initiated at a cos of $284. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co1' pleted in 1959 except for 200-foot extension to south pier which is not considered necessary under present conditions. For a1di tional details see page 1468 of Annual Report for 1962. piers and revetments are in fair condition. Controlling depths (June 1966) are 14 feet in entrance channel and 12 feet in channel be- tween the piers. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,190 New work: 7999 Appropriated.......... 9.....................9 Cost.................. ......................................... Maintenance: , 07 Appropriated.......... $59,000 $59,500 $120,000 $30,000 75,000A 1,18 g Cost.................. 68,909 58,167 61,596 61,763 93,612 1,lO'~ RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1263 28. POINT LOOKOUT HARBOR, MICH. aLocation On westerly shore of Lake Huron at entrance to Ri'naw Bay, about 30 miles northeast of mouth of Saginaw v ter*(See Lake Survey Chart 5.) refxsing project Provides for construction of a harbor of du g e,protected by breakwater structures, extending to 12-foot fepth contour in the lake andcost for dredging a harbor basin 10 feet deep. Estimated (1966) for new work is $2 million ex- euding $104,500 to be contributed by local interests. Total non- i ederal cost (1966) is $134,000. Existing project was author- ,zed by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H11.Doc. 446, 78th Cong., 2d se., contains latest published map).t ] Local cooperation. Improvement authorized by the act of aearch 2, 1945, is subject to the condition that responsible local t)genaces give assurances they will contribute $104,500 in cash tWard first cost of protective structures and dredging; provide nd maintain a suitable and adequate public wharf for the ac- c °nalmdation of transient vessels; establish a competent and groperly constituted public body, empowered to regulate the use, rowth, and free development of harbor faciilties, with the under- randing that harbor facilities shall be open to all on equal and toasonable terms; hold the United States free from damages due e construction and maintenance of the works; provide lands, clsements and rights-of-way for construction of the project; in- clading suitable spoil-disposal areas when and as required. As- sIrances 'were furnished by Michigan State Waterways Commis- 22 S1 d approved by Assistant Secretary '0 of the Army on March Terminal facilities. None at Point Lookout. OtPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: atudies to determine the advisability of relocating the project to A1n alternate site were initiated at the request of local interests. fie lublic hearing was held in Au Gres, Mich., and preliminary d nvestigations completed in the Au Gres River area. Cndition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not' started. Cost and financial statement Fiscal Year Total to -- _* *........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New Work: ... CPropriated...................$55,000 $57,520 12,029 14,549 29. PORT AUSTIN HARBOR,MICH. aocation On west shore of Lake Huron at extreme south- 'Stern limit of Saginaw Bay, and 29 miles south of Au Sable Iver (Oscoda). (See Lake Survey Chart 52.) cojE'sting project. A harbor of refuge at mouth of Bird Creek, t1csiSting of a harbor basin dredged to a depth of 10 feet pro- cheedi by a breakwater structure, and for dredging an entrance V annel to harbor basin to a depth of 12 feet. Existing project by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 446, 78th Coas authorized contains .,2d sess., latest published map). 1264 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. A number of docks near mouth of Bird Creek and a State-owned dock inside breakwater. Facilities ac- commodate recreational craft and are considered adequate for existing traffic. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by GoV ernment plant and hired labor cost $2,353. U.S. bucket dredge Tompkins performed maintenance dredging over entire project removing 9,710 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoal material at a cost of $17,395. Maintenance dredging by contract was per- formed at a cost of $2,273. Costs incurred in obtaining ease ments for spoil-disposal areas and other pertinent real estate charges amounted to $751. Engineering, design, supervisionl and administration cost $3,113. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was coi" pleted in 1959. Controlling depths (Oct. 1965) are 12 feet i1 entrance channel and 10 feet in harbor basin. Total costs for existing project to end of fiscal year were $1,162,395, of whicd $1,128,334 was for new work (includes $172,100 contributed funds) and $34,061 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Tota Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 3 ,128'334 New work: Appropriated.......... ..................... ............ 1$i ,128,331 ................. Cost ........... .......... .... .......... ... . Maintenance: Appropriated......... ............ $4,822 ............ ........... $25,885 34 , v Cost............................ 4,822 ........... ............ 25,885 34,061 1 Includes $172,100 contributed funds. 30. ROUGE RIVER, MICI. Location. Rises in Oakland and Washtenaw Counties, Mich' 30 miles long, flows southeasterly through Wayne County, anl joins Detroit River at westerly limit of city of Detroit. (See Lal e Survey Chart 415.) Previous projects. For details see page 1530 of Annual RepOrt for 1932, and page 1558 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Provides for: (a) Main channel fro# Detroit River through Shortcut Canal extending to upstrea limit of the project, a distance of 31/2 miles. Project depths ar 25 and 21 feet in navigation channel, 21 feet in turning basin, a 13 feet in upper reach of project. (b) Old channel from Detroit River extending to junction of Old Channel with Short-Cut Canal Project depths are 25, 18, 17, and 21 feet. For additional detail' see page 1324 of Annual Report for 1963. Estimated Federal cost (1966) for new work is $1,006,000, exclusive of amounts e%" pended on previous projects. Estimated non-Federal cost (1966) is $73,000. Except for dredging 25-foot channel 1,150 feet UP stream from mouth of Old Channel, work authorized in act of August 30, 1935, is considered inactive and excluded from fore- RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1265 going cost estimate. Estimated cost (1958) of inactive portion Sact$255 ,000.It has been recommended that work authorized by a ofuly 3, 1958, be placed in deferred for restudy category. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents Work authorized Documents Aug 91 AU 38 1917 21-foot channel via the shortcut canal.... ... . H. Doc. 2063, 64th Cong., 2dseas. 1935.i 3 25-foot channel at mouth of old channel, 18-foot e hannel, 1,425 feet long and adjacent to latter, and 21-foot channel extending from junction of old channel and shortcut canal JUly 3, 19.. ..into old channel to Detroit, Toledo & Ironton RR. bridge. , Oldchaannel; 100 feet wide firom Peerless Cement Corp. to H. Doe. 135, 85th Cong., Ist sess. 2 5, on,2d sess1 8 Cong..ss. 23,1962 Oct. 25unection with shortcut S-foot channel canal, widened over modified to 150 limits from feet atIriver Detroit to. H. Doc. 2 bends. 509, 87th Jefferson Ave. (via shortcut canal). 2d Cotains latest published maps. See also map with Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. 19, 2 O R, a ""'W 1ste sess. merency relief administration work authorized May 28, 1935, at tfor dredging 25-foot channel to 1,150 feet uptream of mouth in old channel, work this act is considered inactive. nzedi FLocal cooperation. Act of August 30, 1935, provided that no untderal expenditures be made on improvements in old channel f1t' local interests provided all necessary rights-of-way and afrnished guarantees protecting the United States against dam- drages o adjacent lands and property which may result from dedging operations. Except for guarantees protecting the alited States against damages to adjacent lands and property w 25-foot channel, this requirement has not been complied Wth. Act of July 3, 1958, is subject to condition that local inter- sts furnish lands, rights-of-way, and spoil disposal areas for con- fyuctlon and future maintenance; hold the United States free fiou damages; make a cash contribution equal to 50 percent of 0 st cost of dredging; dredge and maintain area between Federal • annel and wharves along channel to depth necessary for moor- o vessels; and provide and maintain a steel-sheet pike bulkhead to Protect facilities of Allied Chemical & Dye Corp. Except for guarantees protecting the United States against damages to ad- hacent lands and property along 25-foot channel, this requirement asnot been complied with. Act of October 23, 1962, requires local interests provide lands, and rights-of-way for construction 'Don request of Chief of Engineers; hold the United States free fomt damages; provide terminal facilities to accommodate pro- de ctive commerce considered in report of District Engineer; cerminaland teredge maintain facilities areas between to depths the Federal commensurate improvement and with improved Federal tannel; make alterations in docks, bulkheads, and other struc- tures, and take such other measures as may be necessary to assure tability of banks adjacent to channel; and provide bridge rIotection. Local interests were requested to furnish additional A surances that they will pay all costs in excess of $400,000. 'osurances for the 1962 act, with the exception of that pertaining to all costs in excess of $400,000, were furnished by Michigan State Waterways Commission and accepted by the District Engi- er January 7, 1965. 11Terminal facilities. Numerous large commercial docks for andling various type cargo. Details on actual port and harbor 1266 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 facilities are in Port Series No. 45 (revised 1961) prepared and published as Part 2 by Board of Engineers for Rivers and lar" bors. Information on port administration and Federal services port and terminal services and charges, and steamship services prepared and published as Part 1 by Port Development Staff, Department of Commerce. Facilities are considered adequate o existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Fpla' 5 and specifications for latest project modification were initiatedt a cost of $1,325. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection servr ices and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labod cost $27,616. U.S. hopper dredges Hains and Hoffmnan removed 280,980 and 21,977 cubic yards of shoal material at costs of $214,- 115 and $19,894, respectively. Cost is exclusive of finacl participation in cost of dredging by industries (obtainedfo~ a result of studies on illegal deposit of industrial waste) 1inof lowing amounts: Ford Motor Co. $47,355; Solvay Process.o Allied Chemical Corp. $9,523; Scott Paper Co. $1,798; Peerles Cement Co. $20,641. Total financial participation by industrier during fiscal year was $79,317. Maintenance of Rouge River disposal area cost $77,940. Engineering, design, supervision, an administration cost $39,525.62 Condition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized before 1962 modification is complete except for deepening old channel to 2 feet from Detroit, Toledo & Ironton Railroad bridge to a junctiol with Shortcut Canal. This work is being held in abeyance until local interests comply with terms of local cooperatiOfl Engineering and design is in progress on modifications author ized by 1962 River and Harbor Act. For additional details on completion of existing project see Annual Report for 1962. Based on soundings of January 1966, controlling depths are 21 feet over major portion of main channel through the Short' cut Canal to upper limits including the turning basin; 20 feet from junction with Shortcut Canal via old channel to D. T. d' Railroad bridge, thence 17 feet to Delray Connecting Railroad bridge, thence 25 feet to Detroit River. Total costs for existi project to end of fiscal year were $4,271,655, of which $594,84 was for new work and $3,647,238 for maintenance. In addition' $29,563 expended for new work from Emergency Relief Act funds. Cost and financial statement i°Oit Total t Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: 75400 Appropriated.......... ........................ $22,000 $110 ... $674,00 Cost................. ... . .. ......... . 5,838 14,045 $1,325 Maintenance: 96 Appropriated.......... $160,000 $207,000 258,000 269,000 380,000 3,7 Cost................. 168,862 206,288 257,391 268,481 379,090 3,7' 03,846 1Includes $50,083 for new work and $56,608 for maintenance of previous projects. RIVERS AND HARBORS---DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1267 31. SAGINAW RIVER, MICH. Location. Formed by union of Tittabawassee and Shiawassee ivers, 22 miles long, and flows northerly into extreme iner end a Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron. Cities of Saginaw and Bay City reon the river. (See Lake Survey Chart 524.) fo reviOus projects. For details, see page 1957 of Annual Report r 1915, and page 1550 of Annual Report for 1938. SIxi'sting project. Provides for an entrance channel 27 feet eep and 3)50 feet wide from 27-foot contour in200 Saginaw Bay to avermouth; thence a channel 26 feet deep and feet wide for about 0.4 mile; thence 25 feet deep and 200 feet wide to New York Cyentra l Railroad bridge at Bay City; thence 22 feet deep and 200 feet Wide to a point 2,800 feet upstream from Sixth Street Bridge liSaginaw; thence 161/2 feet deep and 200 feet wide to upstream bnaslt treen Point Project also provides for five turning asms; one 25 feet deep at Essexville, 600 feetwide with a maxi- abum length of 1,850 feet; one 22 feet deep on east side of channel iut mile upstream from Cass Avenue in Bay City, 650 feet 30de and 1,000 feet long; one 20 feet deep at Carrollton, 100 to 0 feet wide and 900 feet long; one 20 feet deep on east side of 0ch feaentnel just upstream from Sixth Street Bridge in Saginaw, 650 .tWide long; and one 15 feet deep bridge 1,000 feet New and Bridge between istol Street and York Central Railroad in 11 inaw. Estimated (1966) Federal cost for new work is $14,- s,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects. inlated (196(6) non-Federal cost is $678,000. Existing p'roJect was authorized by the following: Aets Work authorized Documents Jue25,1910 Channel 200 feet wide, with depths of 182 feet in bay and 11. Doe. 740, 61st Cong., 2d ses4. '19Y 11 feet in river. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. S3,1930 Project depth of 18 feet extended up river to Saginaw..... 30, 71st Cong., 2dsess. A 6'2,1937 Turning basin ................... .............. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. uue 121, 20i 75th Cong., 1stsess. e 20, 1938 Present project channel dimensions from bay to Sixth Street H. )oc. 576, 75th Cong., 3dsess. t* 954 Bridge 33.1954 in Saginaw. hannel in bay, 350 feet wide and 24 feet deep from I. Doe. 500, 83dCong., 2dsess. 4-foot contour to river mouth; project depth of 24 feet inriver channel up to Detroit & Mackinac Railway bridge project depth of 22 feet in river channel up to Sixth Street 03ridge; turning basins at Essexville and Carroliton, and Oc.23, D nlnation Deepen t.23162 bay channel, in Blay. channel river of present deepen channel to Detroit & H.1 Doe.544, 87th Cong., 2d sess. Mackinac bridge, extend 22-foot project above 6th St. Bridge, deepen hIsexvillo turning basin, and construct 2 Dnew turning5 t2727,1965 965 D basins. to-'25 feet from Detroit & Mackinac H. Doc. 240, 89thCong., lst river channel sess. (con- bridge to New York Central Railroad Bridge. tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Act of October 23, 1962, is subject to con- to local interests hold the United States free from damages due i nstruction and maintenance; provide and maintain depths de dockside areas and approaches thereto commensurate with qPths provided in related project areas; make alterations as re- ed in submarine utility crossings; and provide lands, rights- te ay, and spoil disposal areas for construction and future main- aDance of project. Act of 1965 is subject to condition that re- SPOnsible local interests give assurances that they will provide 1268 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 lands, easements, and rights-of-way for construction and main* tenance, including suitable spoil-disposal areas, and also necessarY retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor orthe costs of such retaining works; hold the United States free from damages; provide and maintain depths in dockside areas and aP proaches thereto commensurate with the depths provided in re lated project areas; and make such alterations to utility crossings and additional bridge pier protection as required because of the improvement. Assurances for the act of 1962 have not been pro- vided. Assurances for the act of 1965 were furnished by lMich' gan State Waterways Commission and were accepted by the District Engineer on February 23, 1966. Local cooperation from previous River and Harbor Acts has been fully complied With. Terminal facilities. Numerous large commercial docks for handling a great variety of cargo. Details on actual port and harbor facilities are in Port Series No. 45 (revised 1961) prepared and published as part 2 by Board of Engineers for Rivers anWI Harbors. Information on port administration and Federal serV ices, port and terminal services and charges, and steamshlP services is prepared and published as part I by Port Developme Staff, U.S. Department of Commerce. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce.ae Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: pre construction planning for modification of Saginaw River s authorized by 1962 act continued at a cost of $79,872 Preco struction planning for dredging Bay City Section authorized by act of 1965 was initiated at a cost of $17,217. Engineering ad design cost adjustments for prior years work as authorized bY 1954 act were $4,312. Adjustments in prior year hired labor dredging were $634. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspectiO services and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $24,114. U.S. hopper dredge Hoffman completed maintenance dredging removing 22,231 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material in channel from Detroit and Mackinac Railway bridge and Essexville turning basin in the river out into the baY section at a cost of $8,519. U.S. hopper dredge Markham per- formed maintenance dredging in Saginaw Bay Channel to D & Bridge in the river, removing 592,603 cubic yards of shoal mater- rial at a cost of $181,854. Engineering, design, supervision, !' administration cost $45,435. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com pleted in 1965, except for work authorized by acts of October . 1962, and October 27, 1965. Preconstruction planning is contin ing on latest modifications. Controlling depths (Apr. 1966) aret feet over 200-foot center width of channel from Saginaw BaY el Detroit and Mackinac Railway Bridge, 22 feet for full chan 1 width to Sixth Street Bridge, 16.5 feet from Sixth Street to 1400 land Street, 15 feet in turning basin, and 8 feet for a width of 100 feet to Green Point. Total costs for existing project from regular funds to end of fiscal year were $11,521,588, of which $7,917,923 was for new work and $3,603,665 for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1269 Cost and financial statement Fiscal Year Total to S.......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New' ork:. Aropriated.......... $3,261,000$1,089,000 $218,000 $120,000 $827,825 1$9,675,961 Maitenc *............... 3,133,228 629,868 464,286 395,347 102,035 18,880,479 ~opriated.......... 71,000 60,000 428,028 110,375 265,000 3,624,230 ..... 74,315 60,443 316,362 206,556 259,922 3,603,665 ncludes $962,556 for previous projects. 32. ST. CLAIR RIVER, MICH. Location. A section of Great Lakes connecting channels, about 40 miles long and flows southerly from Lake Huron into Lake t*Clair. (See Lake Survey Chart 43.) oi "isting project. Provides for channels through St. Clair 2Ver, which, at low-water datum, are suitable for vessels drawing si feet Project also provides for compensating works, con- 3ting of a number (estimated at 31) of submerged rock sills, With crests 31 feet below datum, and improvement of North Chan- Pl OUtlet, 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep, for recreational craft. oJect depths are referred to low-water datums for Lakes Huron ;d St. Clair, 576.8 and 571.7 feet above mean water level at 'Fther Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955.) " Existing project was authorized by the following: eta Work authorized Documents Jily ,, 1892 20-foot channel in the river............................... H. Doc. 207, 51st Cong., 2d sees. MarO 1930 Deepen channel to 25 and 26 feet, and compensating works.. H. Doc. 253, 70th Cong., 1st sess. Jl21945 Widening channel at Southeast Bend to 700 feet... ..... H. Doe. 309, 77th Cong., sletsess. 21946 Widen and deepen Southeast Bend and improve outlet of H. Doe. 335, 80th Cong., 1st sess. . North Channel, St. Clair River. 19561 Deepen and further improve channels in St. Clair River be- S. Doe. 71, 84th Cong., sletsess. (con- tween limits of 27.1 to 30 feet to provide safe navigation tains latest published map). by vessels with drafts of 25.5 feet. A cutoff channel in Canada at Southeast Bend and abandon old Southeast Bend channel. Characteristicfeatures of existing project: Project datum Length Miles Used by Projec t planes above Name of channel of chan- from unbound or Project depth mean water nel (feet) mouth of downbound width (feet) (feet) level at river vessels Father Point, Que. h_ ___bec (feet) 1 at foot of Lake Huron.. -'-el 26,500 44 Both.... 800 30.0 576.8-576.5 lrid P~tue. north of Blue Water 4,100 39 ..... do..... 800 30.0 576.4-576.1 l~,ron to Stag Island. 38,000 38 ..... do....... 1,000-1,400 27.4 576.1-574.9 and toSt. Clair(including37,600 31 ..... do....... 900-1,000 27.3 574.9-573.8 eanaing at upper and lower S.ottag Island). lar to Russell Island....... 77,000 24 ..... do ....... 1,000 27.3 573.8-572.4 Island to Southeast Bend. 20,600 11 ..... do....... 700-1,000 27.2 572.4-572.1 2 0at Bend CS 324+00 to 7,400 5 ..... do ....... 700 27.1 572.1-572.0 ioartChannel .............. 30,300 ............. .do..... . 700 27.1 572.0-571.7 Channel outlet........... 8,000 ......... Smallcraft... 100 10.0 571.7 1270 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Act of March 21, 1956, provides for a project safe draft of 25.5 feet over full width of channels when levels of Lakes HIuron and St. Clair are at their respective low-water datums. Estimated cost (1966) for new work is $25,389,000. Project features for construction of compensating works, consisting of submerged roc, sills, was previously considered inactive. During fiscal year 1960, portion of rock sills (presently estimated at four) necessary to compensate for deepening connecting channels was reclassified i active category. Estimated cost (1966) for these four sills 'i $5,680,000. This cost is included in foregoing estimated cost od new work. No expense of maintenance will probably be required for submerged sills. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. This improvement serves through CON merce between upper and lower Great Lakes, and has not miater ally influenced terminal facilities along its route. A number.O privately owned piers and wharves are at Port Huron, Marysville, St. Clair, and Marine City, Mich., which handle coal, limestonee petroleum products, woodpulp, salt, and general cargo. These installations satisfy present commerce requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 14Y" draulic model studies for compensating works continued at a cost of $15,933. Adjustments in prior year costs, and damages aS" sessed contractor on completed items, amounted to minus $3,459 Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services, preparation and publication of connecting channels depth bulletins, and con dition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $23,224. U.S. hopper dredge Lyman removed 101,596 cubic yards, bin measure, at a cost of $54,354. U.S. hopper dredge Markhatrm, re- moved 103,460 cubic yards, bin measure, at a cost of $43,814. U.S. bucket dredge Tompkins removed 48,150 yards, scow meas- ure, at a cost of $86,193. Sweeping and location of obstructiOl in St. Clair ,River by Government plant and hired labor cost $51, 367. Engineering, design, supervision, and administration cos $28,591._ Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete except for construction of submerged rock sills. Pertinent data concerning channels covered by project at end of fiscal year: Length of Minimum Project Controlling Name of channel channel width depth depth etred (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) o p Channel at foot of Lake Huron..................... 26,500 800 30.0 30.0 1961 Channel north of Blue Water Bridge................ 4,100 800 30.0 30.0 1962 Port Huron to Stag Island ........................ 38,000 1,000-1,400 27.4 27.4 1961 Stag Island to St. Clair (including widening at upper 37,600 900-1,000 27.3 27.3 1962 and lower ends of Stag Island).96 St. Clair to Russell Island... ................... 77,000 1,000 27.3 27.3 1962 Russell Island to Southeast Bend.................. 20,600 700-1,000 27.2 27.2 1962 Southeast Bend C.S. 342+00 to C.S. 250+00 ....... . 7,400 700 27.1 27.1 1962 Cutoff channel .................................. 30,300 700 27.1 27.1 196 North Channel outlet............................. 8,000 100 10.0 Varies 1946 RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1271 Cost and financial statement eiscal to Total .... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 lew Work: Apopriated......... $3,005,060 $450,000 $150,000 $23,583 $77,100 1$19,297,246 Maitenance. . . ... . .... 4,661,347 371,359 223,356 87,277 12,474 119,192,127 0 ropriated.......... 27,000 54,500 335,189 58,350 290,000 2,567,783 ........... 26,813 55,006 236,290 152,711 287,555 2,560,536 $1,671,660 public works funds and $49,419 emergency relief Includes funds. 33. ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MICH. .Location. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 60 miles easterly lqi Chicago, Ill., and 24 miles southerly from South Haven, Mch. (See Lake Survey Chart 758.) f Previous projects. For details see page 1945 of Annual Report r 1915, and page 1470 of Annual Report for 1938. k4xisting project. Provides for protecting mouth of St. Joseph iVer by two piers, 250 to 325 feet apart at their inner and outer 2is, respectively, having lengths of 2,854 feet on north side and 6 eet on south side; for a channel 21 feet deep from Lake 6chigan to mouth of Benton Harbor Canal, a length of about ,'00feet with widths of 265 feet at outer end of piers, 190 feet at e end of piers and revetments, thence generally 215 feet to i1wer end of turning basin, increasing to 250 feet above the turn- t basin to mouth of Paw Paw River, thence generally 110 feet in aW'NPaw River to mouth of Benton Harbor Canal; for diedging channel in Benton Harbor Canal, up to west line of WiVerview Drive extended northerly, to 18 feet deep and 80 feet abde; and a turning basin 18 feet deep on north side of channel deove mouth of Morrison Channel and a turning basin 18 feet ep near mouth of Paw Paw River. Public Law 88-88th Con- gres declared -reaw. a portion of Benton Harbor Canal a nonnavigable Existing project was authorized by the following: Act. Work authorized Documents and reports i Mar. 3, 1875 Interior revetment ..................... ............... H. Ex. Doc. 160, 43d Cong., 2d seas., and Annual Report, 1875, pt. I, p. June 14 1880 263. ... ... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Benton Harbor Canal. Annual Report, 1880, pp. 2030, 2031 Mar. 3, 1899 and 2049 2055. Present project dimensions of piers and a turning basin... H. Doe. 307, 55th Cong., 2d sess., and 30,1935 Annual Report, 1898, p. 2496. Present project dimensions of channel and turning basin, Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. Jne 2. 1937 near mouth of Paw Paw River. 52, 74th Cong., 1st sess. Abandon easterly 1,000 feet of canal above west line of 9th Mar* 2,1945 St. Turning basin above mouth of Morrison Channel and elim- H. Doc. 129, 76th Cong., 1st sess. July 3, 1958 inate turning basin near mouth of Paw Paw River. Maintenance of turning basin near mouth of Paw Paw River. S. Doc. 95, 84th Cong., 2d sess. (con. tains latest published map.) CorDplted under previous projects. Public Law 130, 75th Cong., 1st sess. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Several commercial wharves for handling Coal, building materials, petroleum products, and miscellaneous 1272 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 commodities. A package-freight terminal is also available' Facilities considered adequate for existing commerce. 1 Operations and results during fiscal year. RehabilitatioN Adjustments were made in engineering and design cost for re- construction of north pier, section A, and south pier sectiOn .f Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condiitO surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $3,823. U.S. hopper dredge Hains removed 75,917 cubic yards of shoal nate rial, bin measure, at a cost of $51,546. U.S. bucket dredge Tomp- kins performed maintenance dredging in turning basin, removing 13,800 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoal material at a cost of $19,441. An adjustment of minus $1,720 was made in priorye cost for stone placement, north pier, by Chicago District's Pln and hired labor. Costs incurred in obtaining easements for Sed disposal areas and other pertinent real estate charges amotlult to $73. Engineering, design, supervision and administration c $11,345. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was complete in 1956. Piers and revetments are in generally good condit For additional details on completion of existing project see Page 1454 of Annual Report for 1962. Controlling depths (ne 1966) are 24 feet in entrance channel, thence 21 feet in challd between piers and revetments to mouth of Paw Paw River, d 18 feet in turning basins. Total costs of existing project to e of fiscal year were $3,442,293, of which $473,371 was for e work, $2,603,605 for maintenance, and $365,317 for rehabilitatio Cost and financial statement z Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jun New work: 1$976,4$4 Appropriated................................. ........ ............ Cost... ......................................................... Maintenance" Appropriated......... $80,000 $136,500 $127,000 $60,000 $80,000 Cost.................439,604 152,432 62,608 126,143 84,508 Rehabilitation: Appropriated.......... 300,000 26,000 -4,000 -162 Cost.................. 167,537 138,590 18,024 -5,367 646 Includes $503,113 for previous projects. 34. ST. MARYS RIVER, MICH. Location. A Great Lakes connecting channel about 63 mile5 long, flows southeasterly between State of Michigan and ProVce of Ontario, Canada, from eastern end of Lake Superior 1T northern end of Lake Huron. (See Lake Survey Charts 61, and 63.) At Sault Ste. Marie, Mich., about 14 miles doW- stream from Lake Superior, there are four parallel locks and hydroelectric powerplant. rt Previous projects. For details see page 1955, Annual Report for 1915; and page 1529, Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Channels permitting 25.5-foot draft navig" tion in St. Marys River and Lake Superior and Lake Huron aP proaches thereto; constructing and operating four locks and tWO RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1273 canals; constructing a hydroelectric plant of 14,000-kilowatt capacity ( 4 5,000-kilowatt ultimate capacity); constructing an- Chorage areas in river above and below locks; and constructing loaious other works in conjunction with project. Original State ks Were operated and maintained under permanent indefinite a iropriation from June 9, 1881, to November 2, 1886, after which they Were destroyed by excavation for the Poe lock in 1896. Sitzel lock, destroyed in 1942 by excavation for MacArthur lock, as operated and maintained under same appropriation from ePtember 1, 1881, to June 30, 1935. Poe lock was operated and maintained under same appropriation from August 3, 1896, Davis l0ck from October 21, 1914, and Sabin lock from September 18, 1919, to end of fiscal year 1935. Poe lock was destroyed by ex- cavation for new Poe lock in 1962. Details of existing project are: Lock. Davis ................... Sabin MacArthur New Poe l above mouth............ 47.............. 47............... 47.............. 47. Le dth of chamber.....feet. 80. ...... .......... 80..............110. lff tween gate quoins.,. do. 1.350...........1.350... ...... 800.........1,200. et Over...... ...do. 21.7.......... .. 21.7..... ...... 21.7............. 21.7. Oet U erbreast wall do. 24.3............. 24.3 ..... . 31......31 ............ 32. Gu breast walli do.. 23.1............. ea owerO 23.1........... 31............... 32. Yeofcon** .. ............. Rock............ Rock............ Rock............ Rock. t " construction ........ Concrete......... Concrete... .. Concrete.........Concrete. ualst .................. $6200,0002...... $3,275,0003...... $12,909,440...... $39 000000 **s . . . . . $2,200,0005...... $12,718,8064 7... Under const. $1,750,0006...... d (open to commerce).... Oct. 21, 1914..... Sept. 18, 191. July 11,1943..... dam for...... tAergeny South Canal North Canal h ve mouth....... t abo 47.................................... 47. COSt.. . e.a4.ted (9) . .......................... $300,000. t i.t. d . ... Steelstoplogs recessedintolock masonry... Steel stoplogs recessed into lock masonry. t orplete.... .. o (9).................................... 8$269,224. completed... 1943........43 1922 (modified 1963). ........................... 11 loW-water datum 599.5 above and 577.8 below. ludescost of North Canal. lud cost of canal excavations to provide necessary approaches to lock, canal walls, cudes Wers and emergency dam. xcudes cost of deepening and enlarging South Canal, $1,653,378. cost of North Canal, $2,572,611. dXeslude ajndLxclUdes cost of canal excavations to provide necessary approaches to lock, canal walls, rs, and emergency dam, $662,919. acuding cost of lower guard gates which were never installed. luding engineering office, and inspection. Not Separable from cost of locks. Note. Limiting draft to locksisdetermined by depth over breast walls. Project depths are referred to low-water datum corresponding to Sloping surface of river as follows: Above locks: When water Urface of Lake Superior is at elevation 600 feet and at upstream Side of locks is 599.5 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Below locks: When water surface at downstream side of locks is at elevation 577.8 feet and Lake Huron is 576.8 feet above mean rater level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes 5 tum-1955). Estimated (1965) cost for new work is $150,- P5),600, exclusive of amounts expended on previous projects, and ncludes $3,410,600 for construction of new lift bridge which is Uder separate project.t 1274 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports -- - of July 11, 1870 Weitzel lock (replaced in 1943 by MacArthur lock), widen Report by Maj. O. M. Poe, Corps and deepen existing State Canal.1 Engineers, not published. Aug. 5, 1886 Poe lock'..................... H. Ex. Doc. 72, 49th Cong., 2d se' July 13, 1892 Dredging through shoals above falls and shoals below falls H. Ex. Doe. 207, 51st Cong., 2810.. between lower end of canal and upper entrance channel and Annual Report 1891, p. into Lake Nicolet (formerly HflayLake). June 13, 1902 Enlarging the old channel ................................ H. Docs. 128, 56th Cong., 2d sesa.,sad Mar. 2, 1905 215, 58th Cong., 3d sess. June 13, 1904 Lake Nicolet and Neebish Channels work in that section of H. Doc. 128, 56th Cong., 2d sess. river below locks. Mar. 3, 1907 Davis lock second canal, and emergency dam............... H. Doe. 333, 59th Cong., 2d se (plan 3). Mar. 3, 1909 Lease of waterpower at falls. Lease entered into with Michigan Northern Power Co. Provided for construction of remedial and compensating works. July 25, 1912 Fourth lock (renamed "Sabin" lock in 1943)............... H. Doe. 65, 62d Cong., 1st sess. Deepen tailrace Mar. 4,1915 Widen of powerplant. Sept.22,1922 upper approach to canals through Vidal Shoals, District Engineer report, Oct. 29, 1920. extend anchorage and maneuver area below locks. Jan. 21, 1927 Remove Round Island, middle ground, extension of North- H. Doc. 270, 69th Cong., 1st sess. west Canal pier, and widen channels Middle Neebish route. July 3, 1930 Deepen channels throughout downbound route.............. H. Doe. 253, 70th Cong., 1st seas. June 26, 19342 Operation and care of canal and locks provided for from War Department appropriations for rivers and haribors. Aug. 30, 1935 Widen Brush Point turn and channel from Brush Point to River and Harbor Committee Doe. 53 Point Louise. 74th Cong., 1st sess. Mar. 7, 1942 Construct new (MacArthur) lock on site of former Weitzel H. Doc. 218, 77th Cong., 1st sess. lock, deepen approach channels to 27 feet, and reconstruct approach piers. June 15, 1943 Named "MacArthur" look and changed name of "Fourth" lock to "Sabin" lock. a d Mar. 2, 1945 Remove Bridge Island and construct new hydroelectric H. Doe. 679, 78th Cong., 2d sess n powerplant. H. Doe. 339, 77th Cong., 1st ses' July 24, 1946 Replace Poe lock at St. Marys Falls Canal with a new struc- H. Doc. 335, 80th Cong., let ses. ture 800 feet long, 100 feet wide, and 22 feet deep, with necessary construction of nose and center piers; and widen and deepen channel across Point Iroquois shoals and in Lake Nicolet to provide wider anchorage and maneuver areas in St. Marys River. Mar.21 1956 Deepen to provide a project safe draft of 25.5 feet over full S. Dec. 71, 84th Cong., 1st sess. (coo* width to downbound and 2-way channels (including tains latest published map). anchorage areas) and over westerly 300-foot width of upbound Middle Neebish Channel, when levels of Lakes Superior and Huron are at their respective low-water datums. July 9, 1956 Repeal authorization of bridge as a part of project; an- None thorize alteration with cost to be apportioned by sec. 6, Truman Hobbs Act, June 21, 1940. SCompleted under previous projects. 2 Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. This improvement serves through cof"l merce between Lake Superior and lower lakes and has ot materially influenced terminal facilities at localities along its route. Three piers at Sault Ste. Marie receive coal and petroleuo products. Limestone is shipped from a pier at DrurnrnOnd la Island. Vessel refueling stations are at Lime Island and vil ge of Detour; they receive coal and petroleum products. Present terminals satisfy current traffic requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Ad justment of $805 made in prior year engineering and design cost' New Poe lock: Engineering and design cost $147,209. Fina settlement of contract for East Center pier cost $67,798. Con- struction of New Poe lock continued at a cost of $7,775,082. Con- tract for information center was awarded at a cost of $157,700, construction was initiated at a cost of $146,395. Contract for construction of addition to and modification of an overlook plat- form was awarded and completed at a cost of $37,859. A con" RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1275 tract Was awarded for furnishing and installing power, control ald lighlting equipment-New Poe lock at a cost of $710,000; construction was initiated at a cost of $41,591. Miscellaneous 77struction items of New Poe lock continued at a cost of $12,- et Instrumentation and observation for measuring rock move- continued at a cost of $8,599. Supervision and administra- CoA cost $550,418. Maintenance: Operation and care. Locks. reals and three locks were operated as required, and necessary rtuairs and improvements were made thereto and to appurtenant da uctures and equipment. Canal was open to navigation 262 pl (July 1-December 18, 1965, and April 1-June 30, 1966). touring that period, 14,462 vessels, aggregating 99,555,275 short As of freight and 151,664 passengers, passed through Mac- NiealI Afthlur, Davis, and Sabin locks in 12,164 lockages. Cost for e cl.year was $1,764,663, all hired labor. Powerhouse and nuipnent: New powerhouse and unit 10 were operated and lautained. Costs during fiscal year were $156,275 for hired Solr, less a deduction of $15,185 for interdepartmental electricity n-e* Installation of a cooling system as an addition and better- C" r Was completed at a cost of $24,118. Other operation and Sitems: Buildings and grounds were maintained; security tiasures enforced; and condition and operation studies, inspec- Cons, and reports made or compiled as required, all by hired labor. cl Was $438,696. Channels and canals: St. Marys River mannels and canal approaches were examined by sweeping. Re- 1aval of shoals in St. Marys River channels and canal approaches as accomplished by hired labor and U.S. derrick boats Merganser wae Harvey. Cost was $302,313. Recreational facilities: Costs nre $16,258, which included $14,398 for purchase and installing lb, fountainhead in park. All work accomplished by hired 19ondition at end of fiscal year. Project in effect before March tmodification is complete with exception of installation of peel uard gates at upper end of MacArthur lock, replacement of Ceh lock and widening channel across Point Iroquois Shoals. Teanlel across Point Iroquois Shoals is 97 percent complete. _ork authorized by 1956 modification to provide a safe draft of 2~ e'pfeet for both upbound and downbound traffic is complete ex- po: for construction of anchorage area near Point Iroquois. SIroquois anchorage area is 33 percent complete. Costs of existing project to June 30, 1966 Funds New work Maintenance Total 4e-u irk ......... . ............. . $134,520,350 $46,5412,334$181,062,684 ieo s............................................. 158,01 158,401 ork8 acceleration ......................................... ..... 118,000 118,000 otal ............... ...................... 134,678,751 46,660,334 1181,339,085 of X0des $7,028,127 expended between 1881 and June 30, 1936, on operation and care of works iDrovernent under provisions of permanent indefinite appropriations for such purposes. 1276 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement otal to Tc year................ 1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1985 1966 e30,i8 June New works Appropriated.......... $9,783,440 $2,020,000 $712,800 $7,723,300 $9,013,400 15$139, 177,5 Cost.................. 10,322,992 2,222,026 1,352,844 7,353,220 8,788,531 11 37,583,98 Maintenance: 53 700,249 Appropriated.......... 2,127,100 2,346,000 2,425,500 2,673,000 2,722,500 461 53,688 Cost.................... 2,120,123 2,372142 2,422,216 2,630,767 2,687,138 63, 1 Includes $2,904,807 for previous projects. 35. SAUGATUCK HARBOR AND KALAMAZOO RIVER, MICH. Location. Harbor is on east shore of Lake Michigan, 90 Miles northeasterly from Chicago, Ill., and 22 miles northerly fron South Haven, Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 76.) Report Previous projects. For details see page 1947 of Annual Repor for 1915, and page 1475 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Entrance channel protected by parallel pier at mouth of Kalamazoo River and a river channel to city et Saugatuck. Project depths: 16 feet in entrance channel, 14 feet in river channel. Additional details on page 1456, 1962 AnnUal Report. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and repor June 3, 1896 Entrance channel, piers, and revetments................... H. Doc. 912, 54th Cong., 1st se '5p. nual Report, 1896, vol. 2, Pt 2739. Mar. 2, 1907 Deepening entrance to 16 feet.......... Annual Report 1907, p. 648. June 25, 1910 Deepening channel in river to 14 feet1.......... Doc. 635, 61st Cong., 2d ses. 1 Latest map published is in H. Doc. 608, 64th Cong., 1st sess. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. At village of Saugatuck there are several landing places for recreational craft and one for small commercial vessels. At village of Douglas there is a landing pier. Facilities are considered adequate for present traffic. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Gov" ernment plant and hired labor cost $6,118. Adjustments were made in prior year costs for U.S. hydraulic dredge Depoe Bayil1 amount of $4,655. U.S. hopper dredge Hains and U.S. bucket dredge Tompkins removed 44,873 and 58,650 cubic yards of shoal material at costs of $20,884 and $53,620, respectively. Engi- neering, design, supervision, and administration cost $9,120. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was coM' pleted in 1911. Piers and revetments are in generally good co il dition. Controlling depth (June 1966) is 15 feet in outer channel and 14 feet between the piers and in Kalamazoo River. Totl costs for existing project to end of fiscal year were $1,532,61O1,f which $274,295 was for new work and $1,258,316 for mainlte' nance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1277 Cost and financial statement isal r Total to . ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New Work. A)Propriated... $364527 . . . .364,527 364,527 e.................. MIaintenance rated........... tro $26,000 $29,500 $44,000 $49,000 $105,000 1,400,181 ' .. ....... 39,099 12,918 66,650 39,947 89,742 1,375,870 $90,232 for new work and $117,554 for maintenance for previous projects. eIcludes 36. SEBEWAING RIVER, MICH. SL.cation. At mouth of Sebewaing River on south shore of .aga W-Bay about 10 miles south of Bay Port, Mich. (See Lake urvey Chart 52.) fofr19 Ous projects. For details see page 1077 of Annual Report 0 12. S XZisting project. Provides for an entrance channel 8 feet deep, 10 feet wide, and about 15,000 feet long in Saginaw Bay. 'XSting project was authorized by 1896 River and Harbor Act ( Doc. 71, 54th Cong., 1st sess.). ocal cooperation. None required. er inalfacilities. A number of small wharves used by e'lvessels and other light-draft craft are along the river. Mit iltes are considered adequate for existing commerce. OYperations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: e1,sellaneous and hired services laent plant inspection and condition surveys by Gov- labor cost $960. Contract dredging in . Section from station 185+00B to 45+00B removed 98,885 Siglc yards of material at a cost of $140,346. Engineering, de- ),Upervision, and administration cost $14,930. iCtodition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed to 1903. Controlling depth (Dec. 1965) is 6 feet. Total costs oend of fiscal rkand year were $217,678, of which $35,573 was for new $182,105 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement lcal Totalto .. 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 19661 June 30, SWork AllProriated.......... 1............ antenance: on at .. .' 150,573 oroPriated............... .................. ............ $135,000 $34,893 182,105 cat ..... 0....... '*... '. ............ ....... 6..... 13,657 156,236 182,105 '1eludes $15,000 for new work for previous projects. 37. SOUTH HAVEN HARBOR, MICH. 4aocation. On east shore of Lake Michigan, 77 miles north- eSterly from Chicago, Ill., and 24 miles northerly from St. 4oSeph Mich. (See Lake Survey Chart 76.) oPrevious projects. For details see page 1947 of Annual Report r' 1915, and page 1473 of Annual Report for 1938. 1278 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. An entrance channel protected by parallel piers and revetments at mouth of Black River, a river channel, Oe a turning basin. Project depths are 21 feet in entrance ChianeI and 19 feet in river channel and turning basin. For additioin details see page 1455 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports t. . . ..... .No prior survey or estimate. Aug. 11,1888 Channel from inner end of piers to highway bridge Mar. 3, 1905 Present dimensions of piers and for a turning basin........It. Doc. 119, 58th Cong., 2d ess. C Aug. 30, 1935 Present project dimensions of channel and turning basin.....Rivers and Harbors Comm 0 a eE 9,73d Cocng., Ist sess.2f el 10 lished review report of Chie gineers, dated Dec. 21, 1934. 1 Completed under previous projects. Contains latest published map. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Several wharves for handling coal, build, ing materials, woodpulp, fish, and miscellaneous commodities; "two e have warehouses. Facilities satisfy current commerce require ments.-o' Operations and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitatiol Adjustments were made in prior year costs for reconstruct of south pier, section J, by hired labor due to final billing b Chicago District. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection serV ices and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $1,903. U.S. hopper dredge Hains removed 38,760 cubic yards of shoal material at a cost of $23,346. U.S. bucket dredge Tomkins performed maintenance dredging in turning basin re- moving 8,100 cubic yards shoal material at a cost of $8,963. Placed 942 tons of stone fill in south pier and revetment by Chicago District plant and hired labor at a cost of $7,798. Costs incurred in obtaining easements for spoil disposal areas and other pertinen real estate charges amounted to $351. Engineering, desie' supervision, and administration cost $7,714. A study to d termine methods for controlling shoaling at outer ends of pier5 was initiated at a cost of $898. d Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was compleCt in 1960. For additional details on completion of existing pro] see page 1456 of Annual Report for 1962. Controlling dept (June 1966) are 21 feet in entrance channel and 19 feet in chane between the piers and in the turning basin. Total costs to end of fiscal year were $2,677,549, of which $265,193 was for new work, $1,532,586 for maintenance, and $879,770 for rehabilitA tion. RIVERS AND HARBORS---DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1279 Cost and financial statement Ascal To tal to ar.1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Newwork: ptropriated.......... os-ite ......... -$9,854.......... $452,426 4aiatenane: 452,426 Cost propriated.......... . . . . .. . . . 42,142 $128,500 $120,000 $38,000 $58,000 1,674,875 Rshabilitation:.......... 43,066 119,705 57,036 106,345 50,973 1,663,825 PPropriated........... 300,000 445,000 90,000 50,668 ......... . 928,468 ............. 298,906 355,284 58,845 150,927 -15,520 879,770 Includes $187,233 for new work and $131,239 for maintenance for previous project. 38. TOLEDO HARBOR, OHIO chLocation. Comprises lower 7 miles of Maumee River and itannel through Maumee Bay to Lake Erie. Maumee River has bSsource in northern Indiana and empties into Lake Erie. Har- Sis at westerly end of Lake Erie, 99 miles westerly from Cveland, Ohio. (See Lake Survey Chart 374.) f revious projects. For detail see page 1959 of Annual Report 1915, and page 1565 of Annual Report for 1938. f ' isting project. A channel 28 feet deep and 500 feet wide r01 deep water in Lake Erie about 18 miles to mouth of Maumee Ohier; including a widening of 38.6 acres opposite Chesapeake & thio Railway and Lakefront Terminal Co. docks; a channel in e river 27 feet deep and 400 feet wide from mile 0 (river 110Uth) to 3; thence a channel 400 feet wide from mile 3 to 6.5 With depths of 27 feet over a least width of 200 feet and 25 feet OVer remaining 400-foot channel width; thence a channel 25 and 200 feet wide to upper limit of project, mile 7; for a turning basin i)osite American Shipbuilding Co. docks (mile 2.7) 750 feet at de, 800 feet long, and 20 feet deep; a turning basin just up- ream of old Fassett Street Bridge (mile 6.5) generally semi- Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents and reports Work authorized Mar. 3.1899 I A channel 400 feet wide and 21 feet deep from 21-foot contour H. Doc. 198, 55th Cong., 2d seas. and in Maumee Bay to Fassett Street Bridge, 200 feet wide and Annual Report 1898, p. 2693. 19 feet deep above that point and a 500-foot turning basin at upper end. A stone revetted earth dike in Maumee Bay une 25, 1910 Channel. Act 1899 modified to insure a navigable channel of 21 feet H. Doe. 865, 60th Cong., 1st seas. AUg.30,1935 from Fassett Street Bridge to lake. Channel 25 feet deep and 500 feet wide from 25-foot contour Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. to mouth of Maumee River (300 feet wide on each side of 21, 72d Cong., let sess. center d(likein bay channel), thence 400 feet wide to Fas- sett Street Bridge, 200 feet wide above that point and a May17, 1950 turning basin at upper end 18feet deep. Widening at bend at mouth of river opposite Chesapeake and H. Doe. 189, 81st Cong., 1st sess. j. 3,1954 Ohio Railway dock. Removal of center dike in Maumee Bay cha nnel............ H. Doe. 620, 81st Cong., 2d seas. 3. 1958 Enlarge widening at bend opposite Ches.apeake and Ohio H. Doc. 436, 84th Cong., 2d seas. dock and turning basin opposite American Shipbuilding Jly 14,1960 Co. dock. Deepen bay channel including widenings to 28 feet, deepen I. Doe. 153, 86th Cong., 1st sess. (con- river channel to New York Central Railroad bridge to tains latest published map). 27 feet and construct now turning basin below Anthony Wayne Bridge.l i of ~-foot project is extended 2,800 feet and turning basin relocated under authority of Chief engineers. 1280 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 circular in shape with a radius of 730 feet, and 27 feet deep;and a turning basin 18 feet deep and 8.25 acres in area at upPer project limit. Project also provides for clearing sailing cours between Maumee Bay Channel and East Outer Channel, Detrot River, to 28 feet deep over a width of 1,200 feet. Estimated (1966) Federal cost for new work is $15,734,000, exclusive Of amounts expended on previous projects. Estimated (1966) non Federal cost is $2,620,000 for dredging dock approaches. Local cooperation. Fully complied with.d Terminal facilities. Maumee River through city of Toledo has been developed extensively for deep-draft navigation. ort tailed information on actual port and harbor facilities are inPort Series No. 45 (revised 1961) prepared and published as part o by Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. Information1 port administration and Federal services, port and terminal serv ices and charges, and steamship services is prepared and pub lished as Part I by the Port Development Staff, U.S. DepartneO of Commerce. Facilities are considered adequate for existilo commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: hopper dredge Hoffman continued dredging in new sailing course in Lake Erie between Maumee Bay Channel and East Outer Channel removing 479,360 cubic yards, bin measure, of material at a cost of $136,819. Sweeping and removal of miscellaneos shoals by hired labor and Government plant continued at a cost of $111,826. Investigation and clearing of contract disposal are"' was continued by hired labor and Government plant at a cost of $20,206. Adjustments of prior year costs for surveys, construe tion layouts, supervision and administration of contract work were $27,300. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $22,013. Cooperative stream gaging cost $1,828. IlopP dredge pipeline equipment and disposal area were maintaind at a cost of $12,349. U.S. hopper dredges Hoffman and Ma.rkh removed 3,130 and 1,002,079 cubic yards at costs of $2,9471 and $161,096, respectively. Contract work on replacing pile cluster at hopper disposal area was completed at a cost of $12,956. Two contracts were awarded in the amounts of $87,600 and $31,y7 for construction of a dike in hopper dredge disposal area, bay section, and hopper dredge disposal area, river section, respec tively. Engineering, design, supervision, and administratiol cost $68,206. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is complete except lr f clearing sailing course in Lake Erie from Toledo entrance channl to Detroit River East Outer Channel. Controlling depths (May 1966) are 28 feet over 200-foot center width of Bay Channel, 26 feet in river channel upstream to Cherry Street Bridge with 19 feet in turning basin opposite American Shipbuilding Co., thence 25 feet from Cherry Street Bridge upstream and including turn ing basin opposite Midstates Terminal wharf, thence 21 feet to turning basin at upper project limit with 15 feet in turning basin. Total costs of existing project were $25,756,343; of which $22, 066,343 was regular funds (new work and maintenance prior to RIVERS AND HARBORS-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1281 03, not separable, $11,752,081; and maintenance since 1903, ,314,262) and $3,690,000 public works funds for new work. Cost and financial statement iscal'y Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NeoW Work: 0o0priated......... $330,000$4,800,000 $4,250,200 $260,000 $177,220 1'17,155,842 Mainteance:.... ....... 163,018 4 ,877,140 3,626,963 768 ,216 296 ,151 117,036,77 6 ApPropriated........... 320,000 423,500 130,155 500,000 453,410 10,568,138 S................. 301,093 437,309 43,028 510,482 281,395 10,314,262 Ieludes $1,624,695 for previous projects. 39. TRAVERSE CITY HARBOR, MICH. Location. On Lake Michigan at south end of West Arm of r'.and Traverse Bay, about 45 miles southwesterly from Charle- loxand 92 miles northeasterly from Frankfort. (See Lake urvey Chart 706.) faQsting project. Provides for dredging a basin 600 feet wide 35d about 850 feet long with a depth of 14 feet in outer by0 feet of the area and a 10-foot depth in remainder, protected b a steel sheet pile breakwater about 1,300 feet long with a 00-foot long 6tudegrees rubblemound extension along a line bearing south west from outer end of steel structure and a detached "bblemound breakwater 420 feet long along south side of the 'i8. Estimated (1966) cost for new work is $360,000, exclud- ecg $121,000 to be contributed by local interests. Existing proj- 8o0has 8t authorized by 1948 River and Harbor Act (H Doc. 546, Cong., 2d sess.). Project was modified under provisions a Section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, by the Chief of brgineers on June 26, 1964, to provide for detached rubblemound reakwater and breakwater extension. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. erminal facilities. An existing public wharf (built in con- lection with the 1948 authorization), a boat launching ramp, da small privately operated yacht harbor located beyond the "lits of existing project. Existing public wharf deteriorated or lack of maintenance and must be rebuilt. OPerationsand results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- Aeerhng and design cost $861. Contract work continued on modi- fcation authorized by Chief of Engineers on June 26, 1964, at a st of $207,305. Surveys, construction layouts, supervision and ahdinistration by Government forces cost $10,212. Mainte- l 11 e: Reconnaissance and condition surveys were accom- lished. pCondition at end of fiscal year. Existing project except modi- ation authorized by Chief of Engineers on June 26, 1964, was C19Pleted in August 1951. The 1964 modification is about 99 percent complete. Controlling depths (Sept. 1965) are 14 feet outer half of basin and 10 feet in inner half. 1282 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS to Tot,tat Fiscalyear................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 196' June3 30, New work: $364557 Appropriated................................. $6,000 $119,000 .... ... 3461796 Cost ... .................... ........................ 9,861 $97,378 Maintenance: 19833 Appropriated............................................. 395 4,176 19,833 Cost............................................ .... 395 4,176 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 40. WEST HARBOR, OHIO Location. On the southwest shore of Lake Erie, 13 miles north east of Port Clinton, Ohio. (See Lake Survey Chart 364.) .r' Existing project. Provides for two arrowhead breakwhte with an aggregate length of about 2,450 feet, extending nort easterly into Lake Erie on either side of natural entrance;0 entrance channel between the breakwaters 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide to mouth of natural entrance where the width is reduced to 80 feet and the depth to 8 feet; and an access channel 80 feet wide and 8 feet deep from inner entrance to a "Y" near centero the harbor, a distance of about 4,300 feet, where the chanl divides with one arm extending northerly about 3,100 feet ald one southerly for about 2,300 feet. Existing project was author ized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (H.Doc. 245, 88th Cong. Y2 sess., contains latest published map). Estimated (1966) Federf cost for new work is $630,000, excluding $630,000 to be con- tributed by local interests. Estimated total cost for local in terests is $700,000. Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must furnish assurances that they will contribute in cash 50 percent of .filr cost of construction of general navigation facilities comprisi the breakwaters, entrance channel, and access channels, a co" tribution presently estimated at $630,000, to be paid in a lUMP sum before construction starts subject to final adjustment after actual costs are determined; provide lands, easements, and rights of-way for construction and future maintenance and for aids to navigation, including suitable spoil-disposal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor or cost 0 such retaining works; hold the United States free from damageS establish a competent and properly constituted public body em' powered to cooperate financially and to regulate the use, growth and free development of the harbor facilities with the under" standing that said facilities will be open to all equally; pro'Vide and maintain an adequate public landing or wharf with provisions for sale of motor fuel, lubricants, and potable water, available to RIVERS AND HARBORS--DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1283 all equally; and provide and maintain depths commensurate with the depths of Federal channel improvements in service channels torincipal docks and in berthing areas. Te rminal facilities. Sixteen recreational craft marinas with ock Space for more than 1,500 boats provide facilities adequate r existing traffic. allOPerationsand results during fiscal year. No funds have been lOcated to this project to commence work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. 41. WHITE LAKE HARBOR, MICH. eLocation. On east shore of Lake Michigan 120 miles north- easterly from Chicago, Ill., and 45 miles southerly from Luding- *. ich. (See Lake Survey Chart 768.) C~XIhsting project. Parallel piers, revetments, and a channel. annel is 16 feet deep, 200 feet wide, 1,950 feet long, and ex- ttends from Lake Michigan to White Lake. For additional details see Page 1465 of Annual Report for 1962. Existing project was authorized by the following: Aets ActsWork authorized Documentsl 2, 1867 '73 New channel, with piers and revetments................... Unpublished survey report of 1868. I 1884 '111Y mar 3,1892 2,1907 Present project depth of channel......................... No prior survey or estimate. Latest Published map is in H. Doc. 2053, 64th Cong., 2d sess. Local cooperation. None required. oerminal facilities. A privately owned chemical shipping dock 0 lorth side of lake about 3 miles from inner end of revetted en- trance channel. Across lake, at village of Whitehall, there are S.everal installations serving light draft vessels. These terminals satisfy present recreational and commercial traffic requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Gov- erment plant and hired labor cost $1,120. U.S. hopper dredge Hains removed 40,545 cubic yards at a cost of $23,521. Place- ment of about 455 tons of fill stone in back of sections E, F, and H, south revetment, by Government plant and hired labor cost $4,547. Engineering, design, supervision, and administration cost $5,004. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- 1908. Piers and revetments are in generally good con- iln inControlling lieted ch depths (June 1966) are 18 feet in entrance annel and 16 feet in channel between piers into White Lake. 1284 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Tots I to 6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1g 8 New work: 207 862 Appropriated....................................................... 207,802 Cost ................. ............ ........... .......... .......... .......... Maintenance: 976396 Appropriated.......... $58,000 ............. $42,000 $45,000 $35,000 971,964 Cost.................. 45,146 $11,484 39,423 45,323 34,192 42. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Date survey cond"etd Name of project Michigan: Belle River, M arine City........................................................ August 1965 Black River, Port H uron........................................................ February 1966 Channels in Straits of M ackinac.................................................. July 1965 Grays Reef Passage.............................................. July 1965 Harrisville Harbor. .............................................. July 1965 M ackinac H arbor............................................................... July 1965 Petoskey Harbor.................................... July 1965 Pine River, St. Clair City............................... ......................... September 1965 Portage Lake Harbor............................................................ October 1965 Port Sanilac Harbor..... ......... ............................................. September 1965 St. James Harbor, Beaver Island................................................. October 1965 St. Joseph River................................................................ May 1966 W hitefish Point Harbor.......................................................... July 1965 Ohio: Port Clinton Harbor............................................................ Septmber 1965 Put-in-Bay .................................................................... May 1966 43. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report see Annual Name of project Report Operations for- Construction maintens Michigan: Arcadial 2................................................... 1920 .............. 63794 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Belle River, Marine City 1907 $24,301 416695 Black River, Port Huron... ............................. 2 ....... .. .. .. .... ....... 1956 140,323 20009 Channels in the Straits of Mackinac ... 1964 2,832,629 1036 Grays Reef2 Passagel ...................... 2........................................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1937 109,521 26 Ifarrisville ........ .......................... .. . ..... .. ..... 1965 41,444,259 5802 M ackinac........ 1962 77,982 12166 Petoskey2..... .............................................. 1962 118,239 20544 Pine River, St. . . . . .2.................................. . . Cityl 2 Clair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1907 13,647 590160 Portage Lake2 . ...................... .. .. ....... ...... . 1963 256,129 8981 Port Sanilac ....... 1965 4539,045 8 226 Rogers Cityl... 2 ..................................... ................ .. .. ...... ..... 1926 5,666 210 6, St. James, Beaver Island ..... 1957 441,671 18,28 St. Joseph Riverl 2... ...................................... 1923 4,555 5,06 Whitefish Point2... .................................. 1964 648,405 Ohio: Maumee River above2 Toledol........ 3................................ . ........ .. .. ............. 1873 7,000 ...... 2'i Port Clinton1 Harbor ...... 1964 71,950 1 3 Put-in-Bay 2............................................... 1951 51,747 I Channels adequate for commerce. Completed. No commerce reported. * Excludes contributed funds respectively: Harrisville Harbor,. Mich., $129,500; St.Jaes Beaver Island, Mich., $7,500; Port Sanilac Harbor, Mich., $130,100. FLOOD CONTROL-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1285 44. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) S4tudies conducted during fiscal year cost $1,596 for Detour Chiarbor, Mich.; $23,938 for Huron River, Mich.; $2,642 for Les heneaux Islands Channels, Mich.; and $493 for South Haven arbor, Mich. Snauging and clearing for navigation (sec. 3, 1945 River and HarborAct, Public Law 14, 79th Cong.) el iscal year cost was $972 for removal of snags, debris, and earing and deepening small channel near foot of Lake Kalama- oo and U.S. Highway Bridge 31 (Saugatuck Harbor, Mich.) by overnment plant and hired labor. 45. AUTHORIZED ALTERATION OF BRIDGES For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance enoval of Bridge Island, South Canal, St. Marys River, Mich..... 1963 $4,008,051 ............. ConMleted. 46. AUTHORIZED BEACH EROS1ON CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Constraction Operation and for- maintenance e1nCCounty Shore (St. Joseph), Mich............................ -olreek Creek State Park,k,Ohio. State Par Ohio.................................. . . . . . . .. . . . .. . ......................... 47. BATTLE CREEK, KALAMAZOO RIVER, MICH. dLocation. River drains an area of 1,980 square miles in Hills- Adle, Jackson, Calhoun, Eaton, Barry, Kalamazoo, Van Buren, llegan, Kent, and Ottawa Counties in southwestern Michigan, a4ld discharges into Lake Michigan 2 miles downstream from tllage of Saugatuck. City of Battle Creek is 108 miles up- tream from mouth of Kalamazoo River. (See Geological Survey attle Creek quadrangle and Lake Survey Chart 76.) aXisting project. Flood protection along Kalamazoo River at, in vicinity of, Battle Creek, Mich., to consist generally of "nd excavation and clearing of Battle Creek Channel to provide for al enlarged channel within city of Battle Creek extending from "OVe Union Street Bridge downstream to its Channel near Siberty Street and Washington Avenue to bypass constricted existing channel through heart of city; excavation and straight- ofing Kalamazoo River Channel downstream from confluence b Battle Creek and new rerouted Kalamazoo River Channel to low Fort Custer Waterworks Bridge; riprapping or paing channels at critical locations in new enlarged channels where 1286 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 velocity of floodflows might be high enough to cause damaged constructing new and reinforcing existing highway and railroad bridges as required, and constructing levees. Project is designe to provide protection for city of Battle Creek from such pea_ flood discharges in channels which would produce, when co1 bined, a discharge of about 11,000 cubic feet per secon below confluence of Battle Creek and Kalamazoo River. Esti* mated (1966) cost for new work is $6,700,000, excluding $168, 000 to be contributed by local interests. Estimated cost (1966) to local interests is $3,340,000. Existing project was authorize~ by 1954 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 98, 83d Cong., 2d sess'., contains latest published maps). Local cooperation. Act of September 3, 1954, provides theat no money shall be expended on construction by the United Stat 11 until responsible local interests give assurances they provide lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold the5 United States free from damages; maintain and operate all Wor after completion, including supervision of maintenance and oP eration of existing Monroe Street Dam and headrace on K al mazoo River; prescribe and enforce regulations designed to pre, vent encroachments on rights-of-way and improved channs; construct new highway bridges across new Kalamazoo River cut off; make all changes and additions to streets, necessitated bY improvements; and contribute toward project in accordance ithr recommendation of Secretary of the Army; and provided further that construction of initial stage of project as defined in District Engineer's report may be undertaken whenever funds are avald able and prescribed local cooperation has been provided and whenever local interests agree to remove at their o0 W~ expense concurrently with construction of first-stage improve ment, such buildings from Battle Creek Channel as in opin.o of District Engineer may jeopardize effectiveness of that .l' provement. The first stage of project is defined as entire proJits exclusive of Battle Creek channel portion upstream from i junction with Kalamazoo River. At time of authorization oe improvement the Secretary of the Army recommended in the project document that a cash contribution of $93,000, at report price levels, should be made by non-Federal interests. Assurance were furnished by city of Battle Creek and formally accepted bi the United States December 10, 1956. Local interests made l cash contribution of $125,000 and allowed credit for channet construction and bridge removal work accomplished by them at old confluence of Kalamazoo River and Battle Creek chaennel Cash contribution received, credits allowed for work accomplished by local interests and anticipated savings in Federal constructio costs due to reduced capacity of a portion of Battle Creek channel from abandonment of headrace, partially offset by increased cost of cutoff channel due to increased capacity, were collectiVelY considered sufficient for expenditure of funds for completion first stage of project. An additional cash contribution wvill be required before starting final stage of project.All local co- operation required for first-stage of project has been complied with. FLOOD CONTROL--DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1287 ceOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Mis- aneous activities relating to project were continued. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Kalamazoo River Channel dvlstream 2 from cutoff channel was completed in 1961. New th Street Bridge was completed in 1963. Replacement of Stringh. prjectam Road Bridge is required to complete first stage of Crect.k All contract work on cutoff channel and Battle Clekl Channel up to old confluence is complete. Completed fa- tories were transferred to local interests for operation and main- enance. Cost and financial statement is Year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work.- NeW A roPriated................................................................$4,373,000 0 toritd.$4,373,000 31 $29,929 -$9,683 $531 14,326,881 * .. $437,390 $20,8 Xcludea $108,242 contributed funds. 48. GRAND RIVER, GRANDVILLE, MICH. Location River rises in south-central Michigan and flows lortherly to Lansing, thence northwesterly and westerly to Lake SIchigan. Grand Haven, a federally improved deep-draft harbor cat the mouth of Grand River. Grandville is on south bank of rand River about 35 miles upstream from Lake Michigan and about 6 miles downstream from Grand Rapids. River drains Qout 5,570 square miles, of which 5,000 are upstream from ndville. (See Geological Survey Grandville quadrangle). c2izsting project. Provides for flood control improvements Colsislting of levees, railroad adjustments, storm-drain interceptor ~Ysteoi, pump station, and appurtenant works. Project plan roides for construction of a levee on right bank of Buck Creek, Slow levee and impermeable blanket on river side of Highway '"96 embankment, and a third section of levee extending along orth side of 28th Street from Highway 1-96 to vicinity of San- rd Avenue. Emergency closure structures would be provided 0 .the Buck Creek levee at Chicago Drive and Chesapeake and Oh~ 0 Railway crossings. Improvements would provide protec- t'01 against a design flow of 68,800 cubic feet per second, or cbout 25 percent greater than maximum of record. Estimated (1,966) Federal cost for new work is $1,770,000. Estimated (1966) cost to local interests is $65,000. Existing project was authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (11. Doc. 157, 88th Co~u., 1st sess., contains latest published map). diLocal cooperation. Act of October 27, 1965 is subject to con- -lon that responsible local interests give assurances that they oill provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way, including bor- areas, for construction; hold the United States free from arages due to the construction works; accomplish all relocations ald alterations of streets, buildings, pipelines, utilities, bridges, b other structures (except railroad facilities) made necessary Dye construction work; maintain and operate project after com- in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secre- aetion 1288 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tary of the Army; and prescribe and enforce regulations to prevent encroachment on rights-of-way needed for proper futlnc" tioning of the project. Operations and results during fiscal year. No funds have been allocated to this project to commence work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. 49. KALAMAZOO RIVER, KALAMAZOO, MICH. Location. Rises in southern part of lower peninsula of Mich" gan, flows northwesterly 185 miles, and empties into Lake Michi gan 2 miles downstream from village of Saugatuck. It drains an area of 1,980 square miles. City of Kalamazoo lies 75 miles upstream from mouth of river. (See Geological Survey Kala" mazoo quadrangle.) Existing project. Provides for flood protection at and nea3r Kalamazoo to consist generally of: Widening, deepening, and straightening the river channel from immediately above Con" stock about 10 miles to near Cooper. Plan would include riP1 rapping channel where necessary to prevent erosion at critical locations; reconstruction and reinforcement of railroad and high way bridges as required; and necessary alterations to exist. buildings and utilities. Cost estimate for new work (1966) s $8,400,000 excluding $445,000 to be contributed by local interestS. Estimate of cost to local interests (1966), is $1,180,000. Existing project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 53, 84th Cong., 1st sess. contains latest published maps). Local cooperation. Act of July 3, 1958, provides that n1 money shall be expended by the United States until responsibl local interests give assurances they will provide necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from damages; maintain and operate all works after completion in ac- cordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army; prescribe and enforce regulations designed to prevenlt encroachments on rights-of-way and improved channels; raise aI buildings and roadways in disposal areas as necessary to nie proposed grades; and make all utility changes necessitated by im provements; and provided further that Federal construction shal not be started until abatement of pollution of Kalamazoo River at and near Kalamazoo has been initiated by local interests to a extent satisfactory to the State of Michigan; and contribute in cash 5 percent of estimated first cost of work for which the United States would be responsible; a contribution presently esti mated at $445,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- construction planning for project was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. Cost and financial statement 30 to Total Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June ,196 New work: 50 00 Appropriated............. .................................... $50,000 2660 Cost.................... ................................... 26,660 FLOOD CONTROL-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1289 r.50. KAWKAWLIN RIVER, MICH. 22Location. River drains an irregularly shaped area of about 20 square miles in Bay, Gladwin, Midland, and Saginaw Counties ,east-central Michigan and discharges into Saginaw Bay 2 Ciles northwest of Saginaw River. (See Geological Survey Bay 9i quadrangle and Lake Survey Chart 52.) . axCsting project. Provides for deepening about 1.8 miles of ' er e channel between the river mouth and Euclid Street bridge; 45ermg Detroit and Mackinac Railway bridge by addition of two 45. foot spans; protecting by riprap the channel bottom through uetli d Street bridge, existing piers at Henry Street bridge and lotri t & Mackinac Railway bridge; and a number of utility re- tilons. Estimated (1966) Federal cost for new work is $1 tlhon, excluding $70,000 to be contributed by local interests. ia.mated (1966) total cost to local interests is $80,000. Exist- lg 6 Project was authorized by Chief of Engineers on April 7, Pursuant P6, to section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as t1ended. aLocal cooperation. Responsible local interests must furnish osurances that they will provide lands, easements, and rights- fr'Way required to complete the project; hold the United States tiee from damages; maintain and operate project after comple- of iInaccordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary f,.heArmy; prevent any encroachments on project flood channel Ih'ch Would decrease effectiveness of flood control improvements. 8 the capacity is impaired, promptly substitute capacities neces- q1 to restore the effectiveness of flood control project; assume ct . responsibility for all project costs in excess of the Federal fest eimitation of $1 million; at least annually, notify those af- eted that the project will not provide complete flood protection. coPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- ostruction planning was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. Cost and financial statement l .8alyar Totalto 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J9ne 30,1966 ......... ropriated ........................ $30,000 $25,000 $98,000 $153,000 ..................................... 15,496 32,696 9,715 57,907 51. RIVER ROUGE, MICH. lo ocation. River Rouge basin is in southeastern corner of laWer peninsula of the State of Michigan, within Wayne, Oak- al1, and Washtenaw Counties. Basin is fan shaped and extends Zbout 24 miles from north to south and about 33 miles from east 9 West. Total area comprises about 464 square miles. (See leogical Survey, Detroit quadrangle.) kt xisting project. Provides for flood protection along main ger of Rouge River from navigation turning basin to Michigan aVenue consisting of channel enlargement and straightening and teration or replacement of existing bridges. Channel work in- 1290 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 cludes deepening, widening, straightening, and paving existig river channel for about 30,300 feet along existing channel. Rea ligned channel will have a length of 22,100 feet. Channel depth$ under design discharge conditions vary from about 25 feet at na'Vl ridg gation turning basin to about 20 feet at Michigan Avenue. B work involves construction of one new railroad bridge and altera tion of two railroad bridges at Federal expense and constructiol and alteration of highway bridges at local interest expense. Project of is designed to provide protection for a peak-flood discharge l about 24,000 cubic feet per second. Estimated (1966) Federal cost for new work is $14,000,000. Estimated (1966) cost to local interests is $8,000,000. Existing project was authorized by 19 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 148, 87th Cong., 1st sess., contail latest published maps). Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must furnish areas necessary for construction; hold the United States free from damages; maintain and operate all works after completion; prescribe and enforce regulations designed to prevent encro'ac ments on proposed rights-of-way and improved channel, and keep nonpile-supported bank loads a minimum of 50 feet from top 1 bank; construct new highway bridges as required; and mak9e al alterations and additions to highway bridges, utility crossings, e sewer outlets, and interfering structures within proposed chan rights-of-way. The required assurances, dated 10 June 1966 were furnished by Wayne County Road Commission and are b ing processed for acceptance by District Engineer. Local in- terests constructed new bridges at Southfield Road and Rotun Drive; altered and extended Greenfield Road Bridge; are c nd structing Michigan Avenue Bridge; and preparing plans ad specifications for construction of Schaefer Road Bridge. CoO mission also acquired a substantial portion of project rights Of way and local interests have completed about 15 percent of utili alterations. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work : general design memorandum and feature design memoranduO e for New York Central Railroad Junction Yard Bridge and the Detroit, Toledo, and Ironton Railroad Bridge were completed. Preparation of a feature design memorandum for New York Ce d tral Main Line Railroad Bridge and preparation of plans d specifications for proposed flood control channel, the New Yorad Central Railroad Junction Yard Bridge and Detroit, Toledo, a Ironton Railroad Bridge were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not started. Cost and financial statement Total to 66 Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: $t1 Appropriated.......... ............ $62,000 $250,000 $200,000 $600,000 $ Cost.............................. 60,330 157,471 143,515 116,056 FLOOD CONTROL---DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1291 52. SAGINAW RIVER, MICH. ocation. River including its tributaries, Tittabawassee, Shi- awassee, Flint, and Cass Rivers, drains an area of 6,260 square esin east-central Michigan and empties into Saginaw Bay, Sa arIn of Lake Huron. Bay City, near mouth of river, and giiaw 22 miles upstream from mouth, are on federally im- Olved deepdraft Saginaw River navigation channel. (See Geo- logical Survey Saginaw and Flint quadrangles and Lake Survey Cart 524.) f 11R Xisting project. Provides for improvements in Saginaw river Basin for flood control and other purposes: (a) At Middle draic and South Branch, Cass River, to provide for major oanage improvements by channel improvements on Middle and estuth Branches, including a short reach of East Branch, at an o ated U.S. cost (July 1961) for construction of $1,448,000 ut Middle and South Branches; provided local interests contrib- flncash 42 percent of first cost of major drainage project on o.dle Branch, and 38 percent of first cost of major drainage othiect on South Branch, exclusive of cost of rights-of-way and Sat Work required as local cooperation, and give assurances Qisfactory to Secretary of the Army they will construct and taltain local drainage work required to fully and effectively (b)1ze improvements to be provided under the Federal projects; ar at Vassar on Cass River, to provide for flood protection of lev as northand south sides of river by channel improvement, ee construction, floodwalls , modification of Moore Drain, and tio ated work, at an estimated U.S. cost (July 1961) for construc- fo of $1,700,000; (c) at Frankenmuth on Cass River to provide 0 flood protection of areas on north side of river by channel "IProvement, levee construction, and related work, at an esti- atated U.S. cost (July 1966) for construction of $350,000; (d) 011 bolint on Flint River, to provide for flood protection of areas SW oth sides of main stem of Flint River and its tributaries, te~artz and Thread Creeks, by channel improvement, bridge al- a rations, floodwall and levee construction, and related work, at r estimated U.S. cost (July 1966) of $5,980,000 for construction; Drovided local interests contribute in cash 1 percent of first cost of rject, exclusive of costs of rights-of-way and other work re- 1ired as local cooperation; (e) at Corunna on Shiawassee River, to1rovide for flood protection by channel improvement, levee 11struction, and related work, at an estimated U.S. cost (July 9 1) of $48,000 for construction; provided local interests mod- St 5 Pillway of mill dam at Corunna at their own expense, sub.- aecttially in accordance with plan of District Engineer and sub- t to approval of Chief of Engineers, or, in lieu thereof, lo utributeto the United States actual cost of modification to be Performed by the United States; (f) at Owosso on Shiawassee Ver, to provide for flood protection by channel improvement at aestimated U.S. cost (July 1961) of $425,000 for construction; t ~ at Midland on Tittabawassee River, to provide for flood pro- wOton by channel improvement, levee construction, and related Work, at an estimated U.S. cost (July 1961) of $1,595,000 for 1truction; provided local interests contribute in cash 2 per- 1292 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 cent of first cost of project, exclusive of costs of rights-of-waYand other work required as local cooperation; (h) at Shiawassee F along lower reaches of the four principal tributaries of Sagina River, to provide for flood protection, including fish and wildlife areas, by channel improvement, levees, lateral reservoirs With control structures, and related work, at an estimated U.S. cost (July 1966) of $16,330,000 for new work, of which $13,670,000 is allocated to flood control and $2,660,000 to fish and wildlife purposes; provided local interests contribute in cash 5 percel t1 of portion of total first cost of project allocated to flood contror exclusive of cost of rights-of-way for flood control and other work required as local cooperation, and furnish one-half of lanil required for fish and wildlife areas provided that the Federl allocation for conservation does not exceed amount obtained by taking 28 percent of project cost for Shiawassee Flats unit ~n subtracting therefrom one-half cost of lands for conservatio ; and provided further that before starting works for flood control to Shiawassee Flats, Chief of Engineers and DirectOr, Fish and Wildlife Service, prepare a plan mutually acceptable to Secretary of the Army and Secretary of the Interior for opera tion of fish and wildlife areas to provide required degree of coh trolled storage of floodwaters while preserving the maximumfo and wildlife benefits. Total estimated cost for new work, sh active portion (1966) is $20,000,000 excluding $2,660,000. FrS and Wildlife costs and $660,000 to be contributed by local inter- ests. Total estimated cost (1966) to local interests, is $4,760,000 Existing project was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act W Doc. 346, 84th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published maps). h Local cooperation. Responsible local interests must make cash contributions as called for above; furnish lands, and rights"of way, including removal of buildings, for construction; hold te United States free from damage; maintain and operate all WOrto after completion; establish and enforce regulations designed t prevent encroachments on improved channels; and bear expene"e of constructing highway relocations and highway bridges, alter bridge approaches and existing highway bridges (except underpinning and bridge raising), and alter utilities. je quired assurances for Flint River at Flint were furnished by cit of Flint and accepted by the United States November 23, 196~ Estimated required cash contribution for Flint ($56,000) Wa furnished February 20, 1963. Required assurances forC . River at Frankenmuth were accepted on September 8, 196o* All necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way have been prO vided. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: For Flint, a feature design memorandum on the Chevrolet Dual Ve hicular-Railroad Bridge and Chevrolet Spur Track Bridge w completed. An interim report on the floodwalls in the second usable increment of the project, section B, was also completed Advertising for contract bids for construction of section B hd been held in abeyance pending acquisition of necessary lands an'd easements by local interests and consequent consummation of re- location agreements for Chevrolet Dual Vehicular-Railroad FLOOD CONTROL-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1293 '3ridge, Chevrolet Spur Track Bridge, and Stevenson Street hridge. The Chevrolet Division of General Motors Corp. awarded a contract for relocation of about 1,000 feet of Swartz Creek at its confluence with the Flint River, at their cost, as a feature of their current plant expansion program. Relocation will result in an estimnated $49,000 reduction in Federal costs. Total preconstruc-, co. planning costs for Flint were $168,574. Contract work is ontinuing at Flint on the Flint River on first usable increment of rOject, section A, on main stem of Flint River. Construction Sos ts Were $662,550. Preliminary planning in connection with ciawassee Flats amounted to $1,278. Preliminary planning in Conection with Frankenmuth amounted to $7,944. A contract r Frankenmuth on Cass River was awarded at a cost of $231,- 722 Total construction costs were $126,885. o ondition at end of fiscal year. Construction at Frankenmuth be the Cass River is 17 percent complete. Progress at Flint has een hampered by construction delays mainly due to remedial ork necessary to correct unanticipated subsurface conditions. he Work is 49 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Pcal ea Total to ........ 1962 1963 1... 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Nw ork. ropriated.......... $125,000 $210,000 $600,000 $650,000$1,100,000 1$2,783,000 o ................ 148,062 145,790 170,920 314,892 957,231 1,795,558 EXcludes $56,000 contributed funds. 53. SEBEWAING, SEBEWAING RIVER, MICH. Location Sebewaing River drains an area of 105 square miles in Huron and Tuscola Counties on westerly side of Thumb area SLower Peninsula of Michigan and discharges into Saginaw gay, an arm of Lake Huron, 20 miles northeast from mouth of aginaw River. Village of Sebewaing is near mouth of river. (See Lake Survey Chart 52.) ]i'Xisting project. Enlarging present channel of Sebewaing Ver through village of Sebewaing, Mich., to a capacity of 7,500 bic feet per second from junction of Columbia and State drains ta point 4,500 feet lakeward from railroad bridge near mouth; lteringrailroad bridge and three highway bridges to permit free 1assage of ice; and removal of present dike on south side of chan- ,liel lakeward from railroad bridge. Project is designed to pro- ide protection for village of Sebewaing from floods with a fre- uency of once in 15 years and with a magnitude greater than e maximum flood of record. Existing project was authorized by 1941 Flood Control Act (HI. Doc. 286, 76th Cong., 1st sess., Contains latest published maps). Local cooperation. Complied with except for furnishing ease- thents and rights-of-way for removal of remaining portion of dike Oi south side of channel lakeward from railroad bridge. COperations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Mis- cellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Govern- 1294 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ment plant and hired labor cost $64. Hydroclimatic netWOrk costs were $1,960. Engineering, design, supervision, and ad- ministration cost $225. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was complete in 1948 except for removal of remaining portion of old earth dike which is on south side of channel lakeward from railroad bridge. Cost and financial statement Total to9 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1064 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: $365642 Appropriated.. *6.42 ............................................................ Cost ........................ ..................................... 3... Maintenance: . . .. Appropriated.......... $1,980 $3,000 $123,700 -$44,000 $4,900 228 Cost.................. 1,980 1,570 12,381 -67,568 2,249 54. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Inspections were conducted of Red Run Drain, Mich.; 0CamP Perry, Ohio; Kalamazoo River at Battle Creek, Mich.; Burr Oak, Mich.; Reno Beach-Howard Farms, Ohio; Grand River at Lansing, Mich.; and Ft. Wayne, Ind., during February and June 1966. Fiscal year costs were $3,978. Total costs to end of fiscal year were $26,786. 55. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report - .. Name of project see Annual a Report Construction Operation a for- maintenanc Grand River at Lansing, Mich...................................... 1962 Mount Clemens, Clinton River, Mich.1............................. 1953 25$1136,008. Red Run, Clinton River, Mich.l................................... 1956 31,311,384 Reno Beach-Howard Farms area, Lucas County, Ohio4............... 1953 4,467. 1 Completed. 2 Includes $202,996 contributed funds. 8 Includes $360,966 contributed funds. 4 Awaiting appropriation of funds. 56. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Studies conducted during the fiscal year cost $3,519 for Black Lake, Mich.; $2,782 for Fairfield Ditch, Fort Wayne, Ind., and $11,669 for Indian Lake, Mich. Emergency flood control activities--repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Two contracts for the repair of the dike at Reno Beach-Howard Farms were awarded in the amount of $27,820. Federal costs for fiscal year were $12,317 for advance preparation, $20,790 for emergency operations, which included national emergency actiVi ties, and $1,941 for rehabilitation. GENERAL INVESTIGATION-DETROIT, MICH., DISTRICT 1295 57. SURVEYS forcal year costs were $120,110 for navigation studies, $140,500 o]uflood control studies, and $207,228 for comprehensive basin LUdi les- Special studies continued during fiscal year on Great sees harbors study, Great Lakes water levels, and soil con- levation coordination studies cost $3,231. 58. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA .During the fiscal year flood plain information studies were Ijtiated on Rouge River-Upper Branch; continued on Grand 8 ver-Lansing area, Ottawa River-Lima area, and Rouge River- outhfield area; and completed on Clinton River-Middle Branch at Stotal cost of $66,705. Completed flood plain studies Location Requesting agency Date completed Federal cost 0t . ... . ..................... City of Farmington..... .i.I.trMic February 1963.. $11,000 ver, Mich.-Main Branch..................Macomb County........ October 1964.... 25.200 i River-Middle von ver. Mich.-North Branch............ ..... Branch.......... .. ....... Macomb County........ Macomb County........ October 1964.... October 1965..... 24,000 30,000 BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT* The district comprises a portion of northeastern Ohio, north- westbern Pennsylvania, and western and northern New York, Lae racing U.S. waters of Lake Erie, exclusive of western end, e Ontario and St. Lawrence River, with their tributary drain- ie basinsnfrom and including Sandusky Bay, Ohio, to interna- tiolal boundary line east of Frontier, N.Y. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Alteration of Bridges 2 Ashtabula Harbor, Ohio .. 1297 25. Authorized alteration of 3. Barcelona, Harbor, N.Y.. 1300 bridge project .......... 1333 . lack Rock Channel and 4. Tonawanda Harbor, N.Y. 1301 Beach Erosion Control & 1304 5. Uffalo H arbor,N.Y. Cleveland Harbor, Ohio .. 7 Conneaut Harbor, Ohio .. 1306 26. Authorized beach erosion control projects ....... 1333 8. Dunkirk Harbor, N.Y ... 1310 . Erie Harbor, Pa. ........ 1311 Flood Control 10. airport Harbor, Ohio ... 1313 Great Sodus Bay Harbor, 27. Fremont, Ohio, Sandusky 1 . ................... 1315 River ............... 1333 12. HUron Harbor, Ohio ..... 1316 28. Ithaca, N.Y., Cayuga Inlet 1334 12 rondequoit Bay Harbor, 29. Lackawanna, N.Y., Smokes 18 . ....... . . . .. 1317 Creek ................. 1336 Little Sodus Bay Harbor, 30. Mt. Morris Reservoir, Gen- 1 LN .Y . ... ]........ ....... esee River, N.Y. ....... 1337 14 .Y. 1318 1319 31. Warsaw, N.Y., Oatka Creek 1338 15 Lorain Harbor, Ohio ..... Niagara remedial works, 32. Wellsville, N.Y., Genesee New York ........... Ogdensburg Harbor, N.Y. 1324 33. River ................. Inspection of completed 178. Olcott Harbor, N.Y ..... 1325 flood control projects .. . 1340 19. Swego Harbor, N.Y... 1326 34. Other authorized flood con- . ochester Harbor, N.Y... 1327 trol projects ........... 1340 21. Rocky River Harbor, Ohio 1329 35. Flood control work under 1330 special authorization ... 1341 22. Sandusky Harbor, Ohio .. Reconnaissance and condi- 2 tion surveys ........... 1332 General Investigations Other authorized naviga- 1332 36. Surveys ................. 1341 24 Ntion projects .......... avigation work under spe- 37. Collection and study of cial authorization ...... 1333 basic data ............ 1341 1. ASHTABULA HARBOR, OHIO .Location. On south shore of Lake Erie, at mouth of Ashtabula RVer, 59 miles easterly from Cleveland, Ohio. (See Lake Survey Cart 342.) Previous projects. For details see page 1963 of Annual Report or 1915, and page 1593 of Annual Report for 1938. aEisting project. Provides for: (a) outer harbor about 185 cres in area protected by breakwaters, west breakwater 7,891 oeet long, and east breakwater 4,342 feet long; (b) west pierhead l timber-crib substructure and concrete superstructure; (c) east 1i t foundation located 600 feet easterly from west pierhead, cosisting of a concrete superstructure founded on outer end of ast breakwater; (d) removal of 250 feet of old inner east break- Water and of such additional etrance channel from deep lengths as may be necessary; (e) water in Lake Erie to a point just in- 1298 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 side outer ends of breakwaters, 29 feet deep in soft material ald 30 feet in hard material; (f) channel generally 1,100 feet wide through outer harbor, parallel to and 100 feet from west breakr water, extending from entrance channel to just opposite inner breakwater, 28 feet deep in soft material and 29 feet in hard nfs terial; (g) channel extending from inside inner breakwater to New York Central Railroad Co. Minnesota slip and also to t point 2,000 feet upstream from mouth of Ashtabula River, .tl depths of 27 feet in soft material and 28 feet in hard material with no Federal dredging to be done within 50 feet of docks; () deepening and enlarging turning basin in easterly portion of outer harbor to depths of 22 feet in soft material and 23 feet in hard material; this enlargement provides an irregularly shaped area, about 1,200 by 1,300 feet; (i) modified approach channel to Ne York Central Railroad Co. Minnesota slip at such time as author ized conditional removal of 250 feet of inner breakwater is accOm* plished; modified approach provides for deepening to 28 feet ill soft material and 29 feet in hard material, triangular-shaped area portion of enlarged turning basin and a rectangular-shaped area in vicinity of portion of inner breakwater so removed; () outer harbor a 700 foot-wide access channel leading southeastVwad from harbor channel and ending in a basin 1,200 feet wide ad 1,500 feet long, all dredged to a depth of 28 feet in earth and 29 feet in rock; (lk) channel in Ashtabula River upstream of terml nus of the lower 27-foot deep river channel, to 18 feet deep (except where ledge rock may be encountered) with a bottom width O Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports June 3,1896\ Construction of breakwater............................... Annual Report, 1895, p. 2132. Mar. 3, 1905f June 25, 1910 Enlarge outer harbor by extending west breakwater and HI. Doec.654, 61st Cong., 2d seas constructing new east breakwater; pierheads on lake- ward ends of breakwaters; and remove part of old east breakwater. Mar. 2, 1919 Extend west breakwater to shore; dredge outer harbor to a IH. Doe. 997, 64th Cong., 1st sess. depth of 20 feet. Aug.30,19351 Remove portion of east breakwater, extend breakwaters to 1. Doc. 43, 73d Cong., 1st sess. present project dimensions, and dredging restrictions in portion of west basin. ) Aug.26, 1937 Dredge channel through outer harbor, channel of approach Rivers and Harbors Committee p0' to New York Central R.R. Co. slip, channel in Ashtabula 78, 74th Cong., 2d sess. River, to and in turning basin, all to present project di- mensions; remove portion of old east inner breakwater; and maintenance to 24-foot depth of portion of outer harbor. Mar. 2,1945 Extend river channel to present project limit .............. H. Doc. 321, 77th Cong., 1st sess. Sept. 3, 1954 Dredging approach channel and turning basin in east outer H. Doc. 486, 83d Cong., 2d sess. harbor to 25-fobt depth. .3 July 14, 1960 A depth of 29 feet in soft and 30 feet in hard material in en- H. Doe. 148, 86th Cong., 1st sess trance channel to just inside outer ends of breakwaters; thence 28 feet in soft and 29 feet in hard material in a channel to inner breakwater; thence 27 feet in soft and 28 feet in hard material in a channel extending to New York Central Railroad Co. slip and extending 2000 feet up Ashtabula River; 22 feet in soft and 23 feet in hard material in turning area; and 28 feet in soft and 29 feet in hard material in areas adjacent to 250-foot section of inner breakwater when that section is removed as now authorized. Oct. 27, 1965 Dredging approach channel and turning basin in east outer IH. Doc. 269, 89th Cong., 1st sess.(con harbor to 28 feet in soft material and 29 feet in hard ma- tains latest published map). terial. 1 Authorized by Public Works Administration, Sept. 6, 1933. 2The removal of 250 feet of inner east breakwater is to be restudied. S Deepening of triangular-shaped area in the harbor adjacent to inner breakwater is tobe restudied. RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1299 160 feet decreasing to 100 feet and suitably widened at southerly ead , to upper car ferry slip; thence a channel 16 feet deep (except 10 ere ledge rock may be encountered) with a bottom width of 100 feet suitably widened at bends and in turning basin, to aotherly end of turning basin; thence a channel 16 feet deep with 1 bottom width of 100 feet to 1,550 feet upstream of turning basin. project depths are referred to low-water datum for Lake Erie, SWhich is 568.6 feet above mean water level at Father Point, 1uebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Ordinary louctuations of water level are from 3.5 feet above to 0.5 foot be- W low-water datum, and extreme fluctuations, produced by 'nds or other causes, are from 4 feet above to 1 foot below low- 00ter datum Estimated Federal cost for new work is $11,237,- 0u (July 1966). Removal of 250 feet of inner breakwater as holtorized by 1937 act, at an estimated cost of $128,000 (July th4) and deepening..triangular-shaped harbor area adjacent thereto"- 0 0 ereto, as authorized by 1960 act, at an estimated cost of $427,- $56 ( uly 1961), are deferred for restudy. Non-Federal costs of Sto,69)6,000 were incurred for construction of access roads, docks, torage and handling facilities and dockside dredging. ocal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965 requires !ocal interests provide and maintain depths in berthing areas ad- lJacent to east outer harbor piers and access thereto commensurate with depths provided in related project areas and hold United States free from damages. Local interests favor improvement and it is expected that assurances will be furnished when re- Auested. All other conditions are fully complied with. oTTerminal facilities. There are 27 piers and wharves, two are "Vied by city of Ashtabula and Coast Guard. Twenty-one Scilities are along banks of Ashtabula River and six are on south Side of outer harbor. Twenty-two terminals have railroad con- nections and 15 mechanical-handling facilities. Facilities are colsidered adequate for existing commerce. (See Port Series O. 42 revised 1960, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Gov- ernment plant and hired labor cost $24,390. U.S. hopper dredges of J man and Lyman removed 250,617 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material over an area of about 100,000 square yards to east and west outer harbors and lower river entrance channel Project depths of 25, 28, and 27 feet, at a cost of $90,574. U.S. derrick boats Tonawanda and BD 6634 repaired 150 linear feet of rubblemound section of west breakwater at a cost of $49,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Exising project is about 74 ercent complete. West breakwater was completed in 1915 ex- et 580 feet of inner end which was completed in 1923, and 600 feet of outer end which was completed in 1935. East breakwater as completed in 1915; 800 feet of westerly end was removed and Slakew ardextension of 700 feet was completed in 1935. Old inner east breakwater 1,200 feet long was completed in 1909, and Sesterly 600 feet were removed in 1913 and 350 feet in 1935. The and 16-foot sections of river channel and turning basin were epened in 1939. A 25-foot deep approach channel through east 1300 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 outer harbor to easterly docks and a turning basin were completed in 1960. Deepening upper 1,550 feet of river channel to 16 feet was completed in July 1960. Deepening 29-foot entrance chan nel, 28-foot channel through outer harbor, 27-foot approac 3h channel to New York Central Railroad Co's. slip, 27-foot chan'l in Ashtabula River to a point 2,000 feet upstream from its 1mou60 and 22-foot areas in east outer harbor, as authorized by the 1960 act, was initiated in May 1962 and completed in June 1963" Harbor structures require repairs. Portions of both east and west breakwaters, rubblemound construction, where slope stone has pulled away, core stone has washed away, and deck stone5 have dropped, require major repairs. East breakwater lig foundation tilted due to displacement of rubblemound protectir ~ and needs repairs. Work remaining to complete project consis5 of preconstruction planning for and deepening an area in est outer harbor to 28 feet in soft material and 29 feet in hard ate- rial, as authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act; removal of 250 feet of inner breakwater, as authorized by 1937 act which is to restudied; and, deepening triangular-shaped area adjacent thlereto as authorized by 1960 act which is also to be restudied. Corl" trolling depth is 28 feet in entrance channel and west outer har bor, 25 feet in a portion of east harbor and 23 feet in remaini 1- portions, 27 feet in approach channel to New York Central Ral roads Co's dock and lower river entrance channel, 17 feet I Ashtabula River channel to upper car ferry slip and 16 feet uP to and including turning basin. Costs of existing project were $9,266,544 (including $536,648 public works funds) for new worl and $2,647,940 for maintenance, a total of $11,914,484. Cost and financial statement Tots Fiscal ............ year.. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June t 1,8 New work:1 $365,000$1,370,000 $252,128........................ Appropriated.......... 9 Cost................. 253,969 1,472,876 263,988............ ............. 6,8940 Maintenance: Appropriated..........129,191 116 976 70,175 $96,659 $147,474 2 Cost. .... .. 122,223 123,944 70,175 80,170 163,961 2 1Includes $565,192 for new work for previous projects. 2. BARCELONA HARBOR, N.Y. Location. On south shore of Lake Erie about 17 miles south westerly of Dunkirk, N.Y. and 29 miles northeasterly of Erie, Pa. (See Lake Survey Chart 32.) Previous projects. Adopted by July 4, 1836, River and H1arbOr Act. Only information available is in index to report of Chief o Engineers under title "Portland Harbor, N.Y." Existing project. Authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act For description of existing project see page 1506 of Annual Report for 1961. Project depths are referred to low-water datum for Lake Erie, 568.6 feet above mean water level at Father Point Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Ordinary fluctuations of water level are from 3.5 feet above to 0.5 foot RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT. 1301 below low-water datum and extreme fluctuations, produced by t.1id and other causes are from 5.9 feet above to 2.7 feet below hat plane. New work for completed project cost $1,124,286. on-Federal costs of $60,000 were incurred by local interests. Of tsh1 amount, $7,500 was a cash contribution and remainder was fr providing necessary lands and construction of public wharf. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. One fish dock and a boat livery are SiVately owned., One small-craft dock, owned by town of estfield, is open to public. .Operations and results during fiscal year. New work (recrea- ton facilities) : Previously completed 5-foot wide concrete walk- Way Was extended 30 feet to a total length of 70 feet in June 1966 Y hired labor. Maintenance: Reconnaissance and condition SUIrVeys were accomplished by hired labor in June 1966. eCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of existing proj- tWas initiated in August 1958 and completed in August 1960. i0.)struction of concrete walkway ramp (recreation facility) was t1tiated and completed in June 1965. Concrete ramp was ex- teded 40 feet shoreward in June 1966. Controlling depth in en- COance channel and harbor basin is 8 feet at low-water datum. osts of existing project were $1,129,237 for new work, including o4,951 for recreation facilities, and $1,537 for maintenance, a total 1,130,774. In addition, $7,500 contributed funds expended. Cost and financial statement ia 'T'rotal to Year 1962 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1996 NewWork. A ropri ted .......... ..... $5,000 .. ..... .151,185,002 cat ................ 3,045 $1,906 11,185,853 Aenance: 20 1,517 1,537 lOrOpriated.......... .... ............ 20 1,517 1,537 luldes $56,616 for new work for previous projects. Excludes $7,500 contributed funds. 8. BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, N.Y. Location Improvement is essentially that of upper 131/2 miles ONiagara River from its head at Lake Erie, Buffalo, N.Y., to ad including Tonawanda Harbor, N.Y. It comprises improve- t~eats formerly designated by three titles; viz, Lake Erie en- Sance to Black Rock Harbor and Erie Basin, N.Y., Black Rock arbor and Channel, N.Y., and Tonawanda Harbor and Niagara iVer, N.Y. (See Lake Survey Chart 312.) o frevious projects. For details see items 5 and 7, page 1970 1Annual Report for 1915, and page 1612 of Annual Report for 198. kfxisting project. Authorized by 1888 River and Harbor Act e odified by numerous acts to September 3, 1954. For de- .iPtion of existing project and Federally owned Black Rock r'llock, see page 1548 of Annual Report for 1962. Cost esti- 11ate (1961) for new work is $10,451,000. Improvement of guide er at Black Rock lock, as authorized by 1935 act, is considered 1302 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 inactive and excluded from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost (1954) of this portion is $931,000. The 1954 act which authorized enlarging of existing 21-foot turning basin and deep- ening lower 1,500 feet of Tonawanda inner harbor from 16 to21 feet is to be restudied and excluded from foregoing cost estilflate. Estimated cost (1961) of this portion is $339,000. Non-Fed eral costs are estimated at $1,540,000 for costs incurred by New York State for construction of Erie Basin and protecting break water, construction and extension of Bird Island pier, and by other local interests for relocation of utilities. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Niagara Frontier Port Authority .ow' two terminals along channel above Black Rock lock. Six facilities are along upstream end of channel. Below Black Rock lock ander Tonawanda Harbor there are 19 privately owned terminals. Ther are two State-owned barge canal terminals at Tonawanda, l and several marine service and supply docks for recreationt and other small craft. The Corps owns a wharf adjacent to Black Rock lock which is private. Eight terminals have railroa connections and six mechanical-handling facilities. Faciliti considered adequate for existing commerce. (See Port Series No. 41, revised 1960, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: U.S. hopper dredge Lyman removed 100,598 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material from Black Rock Canal, Niagara River Chan- nel, and Tonawanda Harbor for restoration of project depth of 21 feet. U.S. dipper dredge Gaillard removed about 47,800 cubic yards, scow measure, compacted material over an area of about 125,000 square yards of Tonawanda channel completing restora- tion of mile-long channel to project depth of 21 feet. Operatio and care (Black Rock lock): Lock was in continuous operat 305 days and closed for underwater cleaning and repairs january 19-March 31, 1966. Ordinary maintenance and repair of struC tures and grounds were accomplished throughout year by Govern" ment plant and hired labor. Total costs were distributed as fo" lows: Operation and care: 00 Operation of lock ........................................ $121000 Ordinary maintenance and repair .......................... 3'7300 Locks, guards, and maintenance of grounds ................. 46,00 Miscellaneous inspection and condition surveys .............. 22,500 Maintenance (repair and dredging) : 00 Removal of shoals from project channel (H.L.) .............. 274,000 Snagging and clearing in project channels (H.L.) ........... 60,52 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 89 percent complete. Channel from Buffalo Harbor north entrance to opposite Sixth Avenue, North Tonawanda, is complete.Di ferent sections of this channel were completed to project depth as follows: Lake Erie section in 1909; Black Rock Canal section in 1915; Niagara River section from lock to deep water pool above Tonawanda, in 1913; and Tonawanda section, including turning basin, 1921. Channel was further widened as follows: TriangU: lar area at Lake Erie entrance to canal was completed in 192 RIVERS AND HARBORS--BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1303 cand transferred from Buffalo Harbor project in 1945; Lake Erie tiOn was widened at bend opposite foot of Georgia Street, tiufalo, in 1924; Black Rock Canal section, just south of Interna- Stnal Bridge at Buffalo, in 1928, and opposite foot of Maryland ,reet, Buffalo, in 1930; and Niagara River section near esterly end of Rattlesnake Island shoal in 1928. Rock shoals xtending above a depth of 21.4 feet were removed from Lake re entrance to canal and in canal south of Ferry Street Bridge, e 1937. Rock shoals extending above a depth of 22 feet were aehoved from Lake Erie entrance to canal, in Black Rock Canal, a11d in Niagara River portion of canal in 1948-49. Widening C.e Erie entrance to canal was completed in 1958. Tonawanda eek Channel was completed in 1902. Tonawanda Inner Har- Channel was completed in 1904. Enlargement of Tonawanda tlrnllng basin and extension of Bird Island pier were completed in 1936. Lock, including wing walls and retaining walls above lock, Wa 1 9a 7 completed in 1914, and 100-foot east wing wall extension in S27 Guide pier connecting with west lower wing wall was completed in 1916, except for 200-foot northerly extension and l ~ostruction of concrete platform in the angle. Upstream 300 j11ear feet of lower west guide pier were repaired 1951-59. oock-operating houses were completed in 1924. Work remaining 0 conplete project is improvement and extension of guide ler as authorized by 1935 River and Harbor Act, which is consid- 4 ed inactive, and deepening lower 1,500 feet of Tonawanda Inner bearbor as authorized by 1954 River and Harbor Act, which is to All structures are in poor condition. Bird Island Dp errestudied. isbadly deteriorated and requires considerable annual main- Of a ce. Several sections of pier fail yearly, requiring removal estone and debris from channel and repair of structure. Op- irating equipment and controls for Black Rock lock are antiquated, cheicient, and require substantial repairs periodically. East uaannel face of lock wall was repaired in 1953, and west channel abcle in 1954. Upper wing wall of lock has shifted laterally oot 2 feet at maximum point, and concrete superstructure of lower guide pier is badly cracked, indicating a possible failure O the timber crib. Controlling depths at low-water datum are: cack Rock Channel 21 feet, 20 feet in Niagara River section of bhannel and in Tonawanda turning basin, Tonawanda Inner Har- er 14 feet, and Tonawanda Creek Channel 12 feet. Costs of eisting project were $10,457,093 (including $1,760,000 emergency olief funds and $6,000 expended for deferred portion of project) tr new work; $3,201,938 for maintenance $5,770,040 for oper- 1tilng and care; a total of $19,429,071. In addition, $1,356,007 aexPended between July 9, 1914, and June 30, 1935, on operation d care of works of improvement under provisions of permanent 1efinite appropriation for such purposes. 1304 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Tot a to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,166 New work: 5 120 Appropriated ........... i140,515,12 I$( Cost.................. ......... 1 Maintenance: 0336 091 Appropriated..........$351,600$346,500 $363,500 $591,500 $428,500 21C0327,986 Cost................. 350,073 345,528 358,221 445,845 564,025 21 ' Includes $58,027 for new work for previous projects.or Includes $4,922 emergency relief authority administrative costs transferred from new w to maintenance upon conversion to programming and budgeting system July 1, 1953. 4. BUFFALO HARBOR, N.Y. Location. At eastern end of Lake Erie, at head of Niagara River, 176 miles easterly from Cleveland, Ohio. (See Lake Sur- vey Charts 3 and 314.) Previous projects. For details see page 1967 of Annual Report for 1915 and page 1606 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Authorized by 1826 River and Harbor Ct and modified by numerous acts through October 23, 1962. 'r description of existing project see page 1368 of Annual Report for 1963. New works for completed project cost $18,837,96 Estimated non-Federal costs were $9,188,000 for deepen"' widening, and improving Buffalo River and ship canal, col structing piers, retaining walls, and dikes and performing doc side dredging. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ic Terminal facilities. There are 53 wharves and piers of Mw 3 piers, owned by Niagara Frontier Port Authority, and 9 pr vately owned and operated facilities are all on outer harbor anl along sides of Lackawanna and Union ship canal, 6 are alo01 banks of Buffalo ship canal, and 35 along Buffalo River, COqs Guard facilities are at mouth of Buffalo River along left bau City of Buffalo owns a slip on right bank of Buffalo Riverju south of Michigan Avenue Bridge for mooring city fireboyalt Forty-one terminals have railroad connections and 28 mechancal handling facilities. Facilities considered adequate for eXi5t commerce. (See Port Series No. 41, revised 1960, Corps of gineers.) wk-_969 Operations and results during fiscal year. New worlk-19 modification: Contract operations for dredging north outer harbor to 27-foot depth as authorized by 1962 act were considered complete in December 1964. About 1,819,500 cubic yards of ma- terial removed by two hydraulic dredges. Cleanup operatiols' 1 contract areas by Government plant and hired labor were coO' pleted in September 1965. Finalization of costs, including d justed contractor's earnings and costs for hired labor clean P work, resulted in costs of $507,077. 1960 modification: Finl" ization of contractor's earnings for work completed in 1964 re sulted in a reduction of $127,571. Maintenance: MiscellalieoU inspection services and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $32,572. U.S. hopper dredge Lyman removed 409,663 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material over an area RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1305 of about 50,000 square yards of Buffalo River entrance and 400,- 000 square yards of 23-foot deep area of outer harbor for restora- tion of improved depths of 22 and 23 feet, respectively, at a cost of $146,000. Snagging and clearing in project channels by Gov- ernment plant and hired labor cost $45,100. Removal of shoals Buffalo River and ship canal was accomplished by contract, enPloying derrick boat type dredge with 12 cubic yard clamshell ecket. About 108,000 cubic yards, scow measure, of material removed for restoration of project depth of 22 feet, at a cost of $191,000 U.S. derrick boat McCauley repaired about 200 linear feet of south breakwater, rubblemound construction, at a cost of $72,500. Rehabilitation (minor): Repairs to about 650 feet of suPerstructure and riprap protective stone of old breakwater Were completed by hired labor in August 1965 at a cost of $41,399. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. tetony Point breakwater was completed in 1899, a 1,000-foot ex- tesion was completed in 1914, 1,200 feet of shore end were sold to Lackawanna Steel Co. in 1918, and another 1,000-foot ex- 1sion completed in 1935. South breakwater was completed in 03, and a 300-foot extension completed in 1935. North break- ater was completed in 1901 and old breakwater in 1893. South erwas completed in 1869 and rebuilt in 1962. Removal of tree shoals to 27 feet, on direct approach to south entrance chan- ttrance was in completed Waschannel 1954. Deepening to 25 feet in south en- completed in 1954. Deepening to 25 feet in Sotherly part of outer harbor was completed in 1956. During ch55 and 1956 Buffalo River Channel, Buffalo River entrance Sannel, and ship canal were deepened to 22, 23, and 22 feet, re- cectively. Deepening 23-foot project area in outer harbor was aOmpleted in 1956 except for strips 50 feet wide along harbor line ad 180 feet wide between Merchants Refrigerating Co.'s piers aid south end of city dike. Widening Buffalo River Channel at Ohio Street Bridge was completed in July 1959. Deepening north trance channel to 25 feet in earth and 26 feet in rock, removal 1,000 feet of old breakwater, widening southerly portion of tf alo River entrance channel, relocation of Coast Guard facili- bies and construction of a detached breakwater, all as authorized y 1945 act were completed in 1962. Removal of shoals and ePening of approach to south entrance, south entrance channel, an Southerly part of outer harbor, all as authorized by 1960 act, iVere2 7initiated in June 1962 and completed in May 1964. Deepen- 1a -foot project area of north outer harbor including the 50- anctd 1 8 0-foot wide strips along harbor line as authorized by 1962 R,Was initiated in July 1964 and completed in September 1965. elairs to 650 linear feet of superstructure Were completed in August 1965 under minor of old breakwater rehabilitation pro- gram. Harbor structures are generally in good condition except b various points of south breakwater completed in 1902, and old breakwater completed in 1889, where slope stone on lakeside has en displaced. Repair of collapsed 1,400-foot long south pier oas completed in May 1962. Controlling depth in northerly part fe OUter harbor is 23 feet; remainder of north outer harbor is 27 feet; in north entrance channel is 25 feet; in south entrance chan- 1306 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 nel, and southerly outer harbor is 27 feet; 22 feet in Buffalo River entrance channel, Buffalo River, and Buffalo ship canal; all at o10W water datum. Costs of existing project were $18,837,604 (1 cluding $655,500 public works funds) for new work, $9,858,523 for maintenance and $295,457 for rehabilitation, a total of $28" 991,584. Cost and financial statement Totalto Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,166 New work: 236 $1,030,000 $1,225,000 Appropriated.......... $795,199 $1,520,692 $257,857 1$23,128 ,190 Cost.................. 1,711,145 1,329,948 568,300 1,656,901 379,506 1 3,115 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 549,261 415,845 397,473 473,171 461,678 21 755849 Cost................. 571,246 422,454 406,067 442,162 487,172 21 ,170 51,4 Rehabilitation: 295,451 Appropriated................................ 220,346 80,011 -4,900 295,4 Cost........................................ 50,997 203,061 41,399 1Includes $4,277,586 for new work for previous projects. Includes $1,883,647 for maintenance for previous projects. Excludes $390,000 contributed funds 5. CLEVELAND HARBOR, OHIO Location. On south shore of Lake Erie, at mouth of Cuyahoga River, 176 miles westerly from Buffalo, N.Y. (See Lake Survey Chart 354.)t Previous projects. For details see page 1962, Annual Report for 1915, and page 1585, Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Authorized by 1875 River and Harbor Act and modified by numerous acts through October 23, 1962. Fore description of existing project see pages 1351-53 of Annual Re port for 1963. Estimated Federal cost of new work is $39,634 000 (July 1966). Non-Federal cost estimate is $17,191,000 (July 1966) for lands, easements, and rights-of-way, participation " replacement of bridges obstructive to navigation, removal of other bridges, construction of bulkheads, relocation of utilities and dock' side dredging. Local cooperation. Negotiations are underway by city of Cleveo land to secure remaining required lands for completion of widel" ing Cuyahoga River as authorized by 1946 act. All other condi, tions fully complied with. Terminal facilities. There are 81 piers and wharves, of whic five are owned by city of Cleveland and leased to commercial i terests. Seventeen are on outer harbor, 14 on banks of Old River and remaining 50 along deep-draft section of Cuyahoga River. Forty-nine terminals have railroad connections and 48 mechanl cal-handling facilities. The Corps owns a wharf at foot of East 9th Street. Facilities considered adequate for existing col" merce. (See Port Series No. 43, revised 1960, Corps of En g " neers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: For work authorized by 1958 act, preconstruction planning by hired. labor and by concerned bridge owners, for replacement of bridge 19 (Erie-Lackawanna Railroad) and bridge 32 (Baltimore d Ohio Railroad) over Cuyahoga and Old River channels were con tinued. Final allocation of costs for completed replacement o RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1307 bridge 33 (city of Cleveland) was accomplished. Costs for work aUthorized by 1958 act were $296,836. Finalization of costs for t e completed work authorized by 1962 act were $960. Main- elance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys dy 0overnment plant and hired labor cost $49,930. U.S. hopper dredge Markham removed 589,008 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material over an area of about 400,000 square yards of the west outer harbor and entrance channel for restoration of project depths of 27 and 28 feet at a cost of $136,257. U.S. hopper dredge Gaillard removed 30,100 cubic yards scow meas- ure, of hard material, from the east outer harbor, for restoration of 25- and 27-foot project depths at a cost $47,500. Maintenance of Cuyahoga and Old River to 23-foot depth, by continuing con- tract, employing clamshell bucket dredge, continued and about 539,000 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoaled material were re- moved at a cost of $649,614. Advance dredging in upper Cuya- honco River by continuing contract, employing clamshell bucket dredge was accomplished and about 200,000 cubic yards, scow measure, of shoaled material were removed to about 26 feet below low-water datum at a cost of $270,000. Snagging and clearing in 24 ect channels by Government pln t and hired labor cost $30,- lick . Repairs to 600 linear feet of east breakwater by U.S. der- ' boat Tonawanda cost $239,000. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 75 Strcent' complete. River entrance channel was improved by con- dredging to 25 feet Seaction of parallel piers 325 feet apart, and pep at low-water datum up to New York Central Railroad bridge. iers W~ere completed in 1900 and dredging in 1935. An outer earbo1 about 1,300 acres in extent, was formed by construction of caggregate length of about 30,000 feet of breakwater, including Perell• fetVer ging arms, completedin 1915. About 1,770 linear Wet of east breakwater and 1,000 linear feet of west breakwater 196 repaired under major rehabilitation program in 1962 and tiJ Structures are generally in good condition, except for sec- eo of east breakwater where cover stone has been displaced and Settled Main entrance was widened to 700 feet and protected by 0owierging arms extending lakeward from east and west break- completed in 1908. ter, Outer harbor was deepened, 1933- to 25 feet at low-water datum throughout west basin, e entrance channel, and over a portion of east basin adjacent to 23 rance channel; over remaining portion of east basin a depth of Sfeet at low-water datum has generally been secured. Portions channel in Cuyahoga River were widened each year from 1930 1942 and breakwater in 1958. Removal of 150 feet of easterly end of west and construction of 400 feet of spur breakwater 1rOtect gap in west breakwater shore arm were completed to in d5l A concrete base for a light tower was constructed at east enof east breakwater in 1917 in lieu of east-end pierhead. providing a 1,300-foot extension of Cuyahoga River channel to project limit was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor d4 sent A . and partially completed with Defense Plant Corp. funds wasrigdeleted and remaining 1942 from portion previously classified inactive project by 1962 act. Old River to Sand Prod- 1308 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ucts Corp. dock was deepened to 23 feet in 1952. Replacement Of Norfolk & Western Railway bridge 25 was completed April 1953'. Replacement of New York Central Railroad bridge 8 was corn" pleted December 1953. Replacement of New York Central Rail road bridge 9 was completed June 1956 and channel in vicinity of structure widened during 1957. Replacement of New York Ce tral bridge 1 was completed in January 1957. Replacement.Of Norfolk & Western Railway bridge 15 was completed in larch 1959. Replacement of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad bridge 3 W completed in October 1957. Widening near New York Central Railroad bridge 1 was completed in September 1957. Widening near Baltimore & Ohio Railroad bridge 3 and . vicinity of Norfolk & Western Railway bridge 15 and deepenin Cuyahoga River were completed in July 1958. Widening CuYP" hoga River at upstream portion of Cut 4 was completed in October 1959. Widening and deepening Cuyahoga River at Cut 10v were completed in April 1961. Deepening lake approach, entrance channel, lower portion of Cuyahoga River to bridge 1 and east nd west basins (stage I of 1960 act) was completed in November 1962. Replacement of city of Cleveland highway bridge 33 Wve5 initiated in August 1963 and completed in June 1965. Widen- l ing portion of Cut 14 in Old River vicinity of bridge 33 was co n pleted in June 1965. Deepening of 27- and 28-foot areas in east basin and 25-foot deep channel through remainder of east outer harbor including approach channel to Nicholson Terminal alla authorized by 1962 act was initiated in April 1964 and completed in April 1965. Work remaining to complete existing project con" sists of: 1946 act-widening Cuyahoga River at downstrean portion of Cut 4; 1958 act-completion of preconstruction plan ning for and replacement of bridges 19 and 32, and widening Cuyahoga and Old River channels; 1960 act-stage II consistil of deepening of remainder of Cuyahoga River from bridge 1 to and including Old River which will be accomplished with simnila work authorized by 1958 act. Controlling depth in main en trance channel and through west basin was 28 feet and betWeen piers at entrance to Cuyahoga River, 27 feet. In harbor are of East Basin 28 and 27 feet, and in 500-foot wide channel through remainder of East Basin, 25 feet, including approah channel to Nicholson Terminal at easterly end of basin. Con trolling depth in Cuyahoga River was 23 feet; in Old River to Sand Products Corp. dock, 23 feet; in remainder of Old River 21 feet; and in turning basin, 18 feet. Costs of existing proj were $29,655,376 (including $616,767 public works funds) for new work, $23,432,025 (including $125,000 public works funds) for maintenance, and $464,903 for rehabilitation, a total of $53, 552,304. In addition, $50,000 contributed funds expended for maintenance. RIVERS AND HIARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1309 Cost and financial statement year Fiscal Total to ......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1986 Newwork:. ProPriated.......... $634,000 $1,430,000 $789,777$1,907,746 $296,126 131,593,803 Maintenane ............ 392,589 1,300,342 898,617 2,091,843 297,796 131,219,50 Propriated..........1,149,2251,182,9751,157,2341,262,4681,278,557 223,449,574 Rehabilit io 1,170,0481,156,8931,194,1941,108,6301,422,547 223,432,025 0ropriated.......... 200,000 253,000 -2,964 -133 ............ 464,903 t ................. 163,081 294,082 368 ........................ 464,903 s S de $1,564,154 for new work for previous project. udea$50,000 contributed funds. 6. CONNEAUT HARBOR, OHIO Location. On south shore of Lake Erie, at mouth of Conneaut lVver, 73 miles easterly from Cleveland, Ohio. (See Lake Sur- ey Chart 33.) SPrevious projects. For details see page 1964, Annual Report for 1915. Existing project. Authorized by 1910 River and Harbor Act 3Id Modified by numerous acts through October 23, 1962. For escription of existing project see page 1361 of Annual Report for 1963. Estimated Federal cost for new work is $7,770,000 (Jutly 1966). For completed work, no costs were incurred by local interests. Estimated non-Federal cost for work authorized Y 1962 act is $200,000 (July 1966) for dockside dredging and relloval of existing dolphins. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. yTerminal facilities. Seven piers and wharves. Six are pri- iately owned and operated and located in inner harbor. Remain- t~ facility is city owned and on south side of outer harbor. Six lnals have railroad connections and four mechanical-handling acilities. Facilities are considered adequate for existing com- ti er ce. (See Port Series No. 42, revised 1960, Corps of Engi- er.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- construction planning by hired labor was completed for deepening deep-draft inner and outer harbor channels at a cost of $16,744. Contract operations for deepening shallow-draft city dock ap- proach channel were completed in November 1965. About 32,- 050 cubic yards of material were removed by clamshell bucket dredge at a cost of $32,148. Contract operations for extension of east breakwater were initiated in July and completed in Novem- er 1965 at a cost of $479,920. Contract operations for deep- ng inner and outer harbor channels and removal of east pier i an in November 1965. Contractor completed removal of 995 tet sof east pier in December 1965 and continued dredging opera- tions through remainder of fiscal year removing about 485,700 cubic yards of material by dipper dredge and clamshell bucket dredges at a cost of $943,494. Maintenance: Miscellaneous in- Dection services and condition surveys by Government plant and ed labor cost $5,374. Snagging and clearing in project chan- "sby Government plant and hired labor cost $5,351. 1310 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 65 percent complete. Under existing project a length of 4,445 feet of nerW west breakwater was completed in 1916; old east breakwaterd 1,050 feet long, was extended shoreward 800 feet (completed 1911) and lakeward 900 feet (completed 1923). The 1 ,6 7 0 -fot shore arm to west breakwater was completed in 1934. ExtensiOt of west breakwater 830 feet lakeward, east breakwater 925 feet lakeward, and removal of lake arm of west breakwater were completed in 1935; 642 feet of old west breakwater were reInOved in 1916, and remaining 600 feet in 1925. Two piers were constructed at mouth of Conneaut River. Removal of west pie and 459 feet of east pier were completed in 1934. East pier now 1,008 feet long. A channel through outer harbor was deep ened to 25 and 26 feet in 1938. Inner 1,200 feet of west brea water was rebuilt to its original elevation during 1941 to 1952 and is in fair condition. Repairs to 600 feet of west breakwater and 1,200 feet of east breakwater were completed in 1964, Deepening city dock approach channel to 8 feet initiated in SeP tember 1964 and 1,150-foot long shoreward extension of east breakwater initiated in July 1965 were completed in Noveiber 1965. Removal of 995 feet of east pier was initiated in November and completed in December 1965. At several places along ree mainder of west breakwater and along east breakwater, slop stone on lakeside is disintegrating and pulling away and det stone is settling. Other harbor structures are generally in flr condition. Controlling depth in channel through outer harbor i. 25 feet at low-water datum. Work remaining to complete proY ect consists of completion of deepening inner and outer harbor channels as authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act. Costsli existing project were $5,058,411 (including $1,010,500 public works funds) for new work $2,370,272 for maintenance $651,850 for rehabilitation, a total of $8,080,533. Cost and financial statement Tottal to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1166 New work: Appropriated......... ............ ............ $200,000 $600,000 $1,500,000 1I ',83,683 Cost................. ............ ............ 45,418 270,240 1,472,306 2,10056 Maintenance: Appropriated..........$26,805 $54,740 81,745 27,198 $10 725 22,410,058 Cost................. 26,805 54,740 81,745 27,198 10,725 Rehabilitation: Appropriated.......... 17,000 277,500 359,000 -1,650 ............ 651, 860 Cost.................. 2,755 219,537 429,558 ........................ 1 Includes $805,272 for new work for previous projects. 2Includes $39,784 for maintenance for previous projects. 7. DUNKIRK HARBOR, N.Y. Location. On south shore of Lake Erie, 37 miles southwesterlY from Buffalo, N.Y. (See Lake Survey Chart 32.) or Previous projects. For details see page 1966 of Annual Repot for 1915, and page 1604 of Annual Report for 1938.ct Existing project. Authorized by 1827 River and Harbor Act and modified by several acts through June 30, 1948. For de RIVERS AND HARBORS---BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1311 ciption of existing project see page 1540 of Annual Report for $162. New work for completed project cost $418,174, excluding $11,000 contributed by local interests. trLocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Local interests con- ibuted $11,000. Terminal facilities. Three docks are in harbor, one is owned by dock. a yacht club city,Facilities dock and a privately owned marine service considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Miscellaneous in- SIection services and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $3,698. About 9,000 cubic yards of hard packed shoal was dredged from the turning basin by Government plant and hired labor at a cost of $19,270. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- di oled in 1951. Project structures are generally in good con- i 1 About 800 linear feet of lake side of west pier completed _1921 has been reinforced with stone riprap, and repairs to additional areas where concrete superstructure cracked and settled are necessary. Controlling depth in outer channel is 15 feet, c'ad 16 feet in inner channel and turning basin at low-water datumn Costs of existing project were $418,174 for new work S$906,966 for maintenance, a total of $1,325,140. In addition, 1,000 contributed funds expended for new work. Cost and financial statement al Total to Year............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 e ork. m~ain aIotnac. ropriated ....................... $1,91 .................................... 2,09,424 1$1,229,424 $14,934 pDropriated.......... $23,380 $7,710 $862 $22,968 21,083,486 14,934 o .................. 23,380 7,710 862 22,968 21,083,486 led $811,250 for new work for previous projects. Excludes $11,000 contributed funds ex- c, for new worK. ..cludes $176,520 for maintenance for previous projects. 8. ERIE HARBOR, PA. p Lcation. On southerly side of bay formed by Presque Isle eninsula, on south shore of Lake Erie, 78 miles westerly from tlffalo, N.Y. (See Lake Survey Chart 332.) orevious projects. For details see page 1965 of Annual Report r 1915 and page 1600 of Annual Report for 1938. a isting project. Authorized by 1824 River and Harbor Act des modified by numerous acts through October 23, 1962. For ecription of existing project see pages 1363-64 of Annual Re- ort for 1963. Estimated Federal cost for new work is $2,894,000 (July 1966). Extension of north pier portion as authorized by to be restudied 1899 act isEstimated and excluded from foregoing cost tihMate. cost (1955) of this portion is $1,071,000. 11tire project modification authorized by 1945 River and Harbor t PDroviding for deepening channel and basin, both 23 feet deep, is Pennsylvania Railroad coal docks at westerly end of harbor, considered inactive and excluded from foregoing cost esti- 1312 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 mate. Estimated cost (July 1960) of this modification is $1,837r 000. Part of work authorized by 1960 act, deepeni strips adjacent to north and south piers, is to be restudied andi excluded from estimate. Estimated cost (July 1962) of this portion is $78,000. Non-Federal costs for completed work were $51,000 for providing ore dock and dredging slip adjacent thereto, Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1945 authorized an approach channel 23 feet deep, including a turning basin, westerly docks, required local interests to give assurances they will provide and maintain a coal dumper and slip so that fUI utilization can be made of improvement; lower waterworks intqe line where necessary; and hold the United States free fromn dan ages. These conditions not complied with and authorized worl classified inactive. All other conditions are fully complied wvith Terminal facilities. Fifteen piers and wharves, of which 11 are privately owned and operated. Erie International Marine Terminal No. 1 owned by Port Commission, city of Erie, is along main waterfront on south side of Presque Isle Bay and Coas, Guard facilities are on north side. Two offshore oil docks are o. Lake Erie. Nine terminals have railroad connections and eight mechanical-handling facilities. Facilities are considered ade quate for existing commerce. (See Port Series No. 42, revised 1960, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: pre construction planning was completed and contract operations for deepening approach channel to Erie International Marine Term" nal No. 1 were initiated in June 1966. Contractor's dipper dredge obtained project depth in 3,722 square yards of the P proach channel. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection sef" ices and condition surveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $17,670. U.S. hopper dredges Lyman and Hoffman remnoved 308,874 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material over 1/2-mile of entrance channel and 100,000 square yards of approach channel and turning basin, for restoration of project depths of 18, 28, and 29 feet at a cost of $142,280. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 41 percent complete. Harbor structures are generally in poor condition. Concrete superstructure of north and south piers completed in 1909, has disintegrated, broken, and dropped in various sections due to timber-crib failure at these sections. In outer 200-food section of south breakwater, slope stone on channel side has pulled away and dropped. A length of 40 linear feet of south pier a"d 1,141 linear feet of north pier was reinforced and repaired With steel-sheet piling and concrete. About 1,400 linear feet of stee- sheet piling bulkhead with stone facing adjacent to mainland Presque Isle protection works, constructed in 1930, in which stone facing settled was completely covered with sandfill as provided in shore protection project authorized for Presque Isle Penins5l Work remaining to complete project consists of completion of deepening strips adjacent to north and south piers as authorized by 1960 act, which is to be restudied; deepening channel and basin' at westerly end of harbor as authorized by 1945 act which is con sidered inactive; conditional extension of north pier as authorized RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1313 P 1899 act which is to be restudied; and completion of deepen- 1 approaclh channel to Erie International Marine Terminal No. ~tS.authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act. There is a con- a n g depth of 29 feet at low-water datum in entrance channel har b 2 8 feet in approach channel to the docks at easterly end of docr , 1 5 feet to docks at westerly end, and 21 feet to public 4 2 ks, foot of State Street. Costs of existing project were $2,- fo, 763 for new work, $4,383,848 for maintenance, and $1,154 fo rehabilitation, total of $6,808,765. In addition, $154,500 ex- ended from contributed funds for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Total to ........ 1982 1963 1964 1965 1960 June 30, 1966 NowWork.- l"ttPrated , o..... ......... .......... ;... . . $490,000 .$8 9 $899,162 -.. -$840 $25,000 $300,000 1$3,419,923 M aneoance............. 493,629 898,994............ 21,888 43,919 13,160,730 I odriated.......... 47,650 69,586 106,147 8,454 159,950 24,488,748 a1litai'.-'. ......... 47,650 69,586 106,147 8,454 159,950 24,488,748 Co 385,000 -383,846 ..... .................. . .. .1,154 0 oPriated..................... . 1,1564 I. ....................... .. 1,092 . . 62 ........................ ** .. ... ud e s 21"C" $736,967 for new work for previous projects. Ies$104,900 for maintenance for previous projects. Excludes $154,500 contributed funds. 9. FAIRPORT HARBOR, OHIO o.1°cation. On south shore of Lake Erie at mouth of Grand Chver, 33 miles easterly from Cleveland, Ohio. (See Lake Survey chart 346.) o 4evious projects. For details, see page 1963 of Annual Re- for 1915, and page 1590 of Annual Report for 1938. a' zsting project. Authorized by 1825 River and Harbor Act c Modified by numerous acts through July 14, 1960. For de- 19 ~tion of existing project see page 1526 of Annual Report for 1963 Estimated Federal cost for new work is $2,525,000 (July aq3id Entire project modification authorized by 1960 River 800 flarbor Act providing for deepening lake approach channel, lVfi oot wide channel through outer harbor, channel in Grand ex.er, enlargement of turning basin, is considered inactive and of ded from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost (1963) O S modification is $3,170,000. Estimated non-Federal costs lk ,921,000 (July 1963) include expenditures of $101,000 for o1 eads and dockside dredging. Remainder is for lands, re- hea tions, utility changes, dockside dredging and dock and bulk- modifications all for the inactive 1960 project modification. c Ocal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1927 required contribute $304,000 toward cost of extending break- terinterests aal 4,000 feet, and dredge approach channel to their proposed 1T91nal at their own expense. River and Harbor Act of July 3, o waived the condition requiring local interests to contribute b eost of breakwater extension. Proposed terminal has not been ofl nor required dredging been done. River and Harbor Act hea 960 requires local interests make all changes in docks, bulk- ds and other structures; provide and maintain depths between 1314 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 new channel limits and terminal facilities; accomplish utility alterations; furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction.; and hold the United States free from damages. District Eng o neer requested Board of County Commissioners, Lake Counts ed furnish assurances by January 1, 1963. Assurances not rece~eare and authorized work classified inactive. All other conditions fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Nineteen piers and wharves, all ~aol' banks of Grand River. One facility is owned by Coast Guar Thirteen terminals have railroad connections and seven for mecdia ical-handling facilities. Facilities considered adequate exis ing commerce. (See Port Series No. 42, revised 1960, Corpso Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Gov- ernment plant and hired labor cost $12,473. U.S. hopper dredges Lyman and Hoffman and dipper dredge Gaillard (H. L.) removed 427,476 cubic yards of shoaled material from about 1 mile of Grand River Channel and turning basin for restoration of im- proved depths 22, 21, and 18 feet at a cost of $167,000. derrick boat Tonawanda repaired 250 linear feet of east break- water, rubblemound construction, at a cost of $89,158. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about er percent complete. Lengths of 400 and 275 linear feet of east 9 were repaired with steel sheet piling and sandfilled, in 1949 1958, respectively. Other end of structure requires extensive re pairs. Harbor structures require repairs. Concrete cap of Se eral cells of cellular section of west breakwater requires replcee ment. At several places along remainder of west breakwater th slope stone has disintegrated and settled. The 6,700-foot lone, rubblemound east breakwater, built in 1932, is in various stag of disrepair throughout its entire length. At several locationsdis the structure, totaling about 1,500 linear feet, slope stone has e integrated and settled and core stone washed out, leaving largl areas of structure only slightly above low-water datum. Wo- remaining to complete project consists of completion of precO0 struction planning for, and deepening lake approach channel, 8Oe foot wide channel through outer harbor, channel in Grand River and enlargement of turning basin, all as authorized by 1960 t which is considered inactive. Controlling depth is 25 feet in o harbor, 23 feet in river channel for 3,700 feet upstream fro outer end of east pier, thence 21 feet in river channel upstreas to project limit, 18 feet in turning basin, and 8 feet in project are at upper end of Grand River. All depths are referred to lo' water datum. Costs of existing project were $2,590,671 (i cluding $187,772 public works funds) for new work, and $3,6 957 for maintenance, a total of $6,277,628. RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1315 Cost and financial stat ement acaly.. Total to 1962 1963 . 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork: ~C opriated.......... $67,000 .. -- $1,331 1$2,959,611 Maitenanc.............. 59,560 $6,103 7 12,959,611 Cotropriated.......... 159,045 179,458 143,484 $109,183 $212,559 3,686,957 . ......... 160,852 179,458 143,484 53,111 268,631 3,686,957 Includes $368,940 for new work for previous projects. 10. GREAT SODUS BAY HARBOR, N.Y. tLocation. On Sodus Bay, which is a nearly landlocked inden- 0swego, tion onN.Y. of Lake shoreLake south (See Ontario, 29 miles westerly from Survey Chart 234.) 1 andprojects For details see page 1972 of Annual Report rPrevious 1915 page 1526 of Annual Report for 1938. S~xisting project. Authorized by 1829 River and Harbor Act dsc.odified by numerous acts through October 23, 1962. For ~escription of existing project see page 1380 of Annual Report fore 1963. Completed portion of project cost $249,000. Improve- ats authorized by 1962 act consisting of deepening lake ap- Oach channel, entrance channel, and inner approach channel are classified inactive. Estimated cost (1965) of this portion is 0,000. For completed work, costs incurred by local interests ot available. Estimated non-Federal cost (1965) for work dthorized lding. by 1962 act is $380,000 for turning basin and dockside rLocal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of October 23, 1962, trlures local interests provide and maintain a 22-foot depth in tling basin at coal dock and in berthing areas at coal dock; Stovide ate freeadequate coal-loading facilities; and hold the United from damages. On December 5, 1962, the District ti neer requested assurances be furnished. A resolution by bela of Sodus furnishing assurances was reviewed and found to h incomplete and was returned November 19, 1963. Assurances 4ve not been received and authorized work has been classified in- 'ctlve. All other conditions fully complied with. erminal facilities. One coal terminal which is open to ship- er s of coal and one fish dock which is private. A yacht club dock and several other privately owned servicing and storage dcks are for recreational and other small craft. Terminals are c)sidered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Mis- cellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Govern- ment plant and hired labor cost $6,147. U.S. hopper dredge Lyman (H.L.) removed 38,479 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material over about 40,000 square yards of entrance channel for restoration of improved depths of 20 and 22 feet, at a cost of $46,294. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 22 percent aonPlete. Structures are generally in good condition except for S200-foot section of east pier, where superstructure has disin- 1316 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tegrated and cracked. In 1958, 500 linear feet of west pier were reinforced with steel-sheet piling and concrete. LakeWard en of west pier 550 feet long and 880 linear feet of east pier 63were reinforced with steel-sheet piling and concrete in 1962 and 1963 under major rehabilitation program. Work remaining to coy' plete project consists of deepening lake approach channel, e62 trance channel and inner approach channel as authorized by fe9e act, which is classified inactive. Controlling depths are 22 feet in entrance channel and 20 feet in channel between piers. for. of existing project were $249,187 for new work, $1,375,781 f maintenance, and $713,544 for rehabilitation, a total of 338,512. Cost and financial statement to To tal '301 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jue New work: 161095 Appropriated... ................................................ 095 Cost... ................................... ........... .......... y 81y Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $26,939 $25,610 $33,698 $54,155 $52,441 1375 781 1'375,7x1 Cost................. 26,931 25,648 33,698 54,155 52,441 Rehabilitation: 3 7,644 713;644 Appropriated.......... 240,000 440,500 ............ -3,956 .......... Cost................. 100,508 561,056 11,814 ....................... 1 Includes $361,772 for new work for previous projects. 11. HURON HARBOR, OHIO Location. On south shore of Lake Erie at mouth of 1uron River, 47 miles westerly from Cleveland, Ohio. (See Lake 8ur- vey Chart 363.) Previous project. For details see page 1961 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1576 of Annual Report for 1938.Act Existing project. Authorized by 1905 River and Harbor de and modified by several acts through October 23, 1962. For dor scription of existing project see page 1347 of Annual Report 6 1963. Estimated cost of new work is $11,434,000 (July 196 Estimated non-Federal costs of $1,350,000 (July 1966) are o required lands, removal of structures, utility changes and dredre ing slips all for the 1962 act, costs for fully completed work ar not available. eS Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1962 requir local interests dredge areas between Federal improvement ,d terminal facilities; regulate moorings; furnish lands and righ of-way for construction; and hold the United States free froo' damages. Formal assurances were requested from city of urol in December 1962. Subsequently, the city of Huron reque modifications to project limits which were approved in May 196 On July 7, 1964, City Manager of Huron was advised of approve, deviation and assurances of local cooperation for project, as r vised, were requested. Assurances have not been received.Al other conditions have been fully complied with.d Terminal facilities. Twelve privately owned wharves .n docks, seven along left bank of Huron River and remainder alonr right bank. Five terminals have railroad connections and f0our RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1317 echanical-handling facilities. Facilities are regarded as ade- te for existing commerce. (See Port Series No. 42, revised 60, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Mis- cellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Govern- ment plant and hired labor cost $5,081. U.S. hopper dredge Hoffman removed 150,872 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material over 20,000 square yards of entrance channel for restora- tion of project depth of 25 feet at a cost of $48,000. U.S. derrick boat Tonawanda commenced repairs on a 300-foot section of east breakwater rubblemound construction, at a cost of $29,333. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 10 percent Tolplete. Harbor structures are generally in fair condition. CrOughout a length of 1,000 linear feet of west pier the con- brete superstructure cracked and settled. Many sections of east I eakwater, rubblemound construction, have settled resulting in s effective navigation protection. Repairs to 400 linear feet of minor rehabilitation program were initiated in Augustist andunder er completed in December 1963. Controlling depth in feanel is 25 feet at low-water datum. Preconstruction planning la r gand deepening lake approach, entrance and river channels, en- a e turning basin and construction of new detached breakwater, ' authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act remain to complete oject. Costs of existing project were $1,034,350 (including $561,2 6 2 public works funds) for new work, $1,794,600 for main- eanlice, and $247,030 for rehabilitation, total of $3,075,980. Cost and financial statement S Yeal ear1962 ITotal to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work. riated ... ... . . .. 1,304,139 '. .... ............ ............. . . . . 1 1,304,139 Maiaten >riated.......... $51,377 $78,697 $42,110 $75,000 $37,460 1,805,755 eO . 51,377 78,697 42,110 18,891 82,414 1,794,600 .. . ion: priated.......... 254,000 77,000 -83,970 ........................ 247,030 20,887 10,635 215,508 ........................ 247,030 Incluc lee $269,789 for new work for previous project. 12. IRONDEQUOIT BAY, N.Y. Location. On south shore of Lake Ontario, 4 miles east of chester, N.Y., at mouth of Genesee River, Monroe County, N.Y. see Lake Survey Charts 2, 23, and 238). Existing project. Provides for: (a) entrance channel about 1,600 feet easterly of existing bay outlet, 8 feet deep and 100 feet ide, extending from 8-foot depth in Lake Ontario to a point im- m.ediately within bay, an overall length of about 750 feet; (b) ner channel about 4,050 feet long, 6 feet deep and 100 feet 'de, leading to a mooring basin and public wharf, and thence to teep water in bay; (c) parallel steel sheet pile wall jetties ex- ending into lake to protect entrance channel, 180 feet apart and each about 490 feet long; (d) mooring basin 6 feet deep and about 1318 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 3 acres in extent adjacent to public wharf; (e) movable railroad bridge across new channel; (f) filling of existing opening be tween lake and bay and removal of existing railroad bridge. Project is referred to low-water datum for Lake Ontario which is 242.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Ordinary fluctua- tion of water surface are from 4 feet above to 0.5 foot below loWd water datum and fluctuations due to winds are small. Estimated Federal cost for new work is $1,760,000 (July 1966). Estimated non-Federal cost for new work is $684,000 (July 1966) including cash contribution $507,000, remainder is for lands and construc- tion of a wharf. Existing project was authorized by 1958 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 332, 84th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Assurances were furnished and accepted by the District Engineer on August 12, 1959.I Terminal facilities. Private docks for recreational craft ad privately owned servicing and storage handling facilities for recreational and other small craft. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction planning was suspended in February 1962 and resumed in No" vember 1965. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not been initiated. Work remaining consists of completion of preconstruec tion planning for and construction of project. Cost and financial statement Total to966 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work:$600 Appropriated.......... ............ ...... .$50,000 2 009 Cost.................. $2,831 2,897 13. LITTLE SODUS BAY HARBOR, N.Y. Location. Little Sodus Bay, on south shore of Lake Ontario, 15 miles west of Oswego, N.Y. (See Lake Survey Chart 22.) Previous projects. For details see page 1973 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1628 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Authorized by 1852 River and Harbor Act and modified by numerous acts to June 13, 1902. For description of existing project see page 1378 of Annual Report for 1958 New work for completed project cost $69,066. Non-Federal costs of $6,000 were incurred for channel dredging. Project depth5 are referred to low-water datum for Lake Ontario, which is 242.8 feet above mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (Interla- tional Great Lakes Datum-1955). Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Docks for small recreational craft and one passenger tour boat, all are private. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Re- connaissance and condition surveys by hired labor were accom plished during May and June 1966. Rehabilitation (major): Contract for repairs to 300 linear feet of east pier and 1,127 linear RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1319 feoet of west pier initiated September 8, 1965, and is 35 percent Crplete SCondition at end of fiscal year. Structures are in poor condi- tofl A 3 00-foot section of east pier and a 1,127-foot section of West Pier which are in critical condition are being repaired under piaior rehabilitation program. Additional 60-foot section of east Pier, shoreward of section being repaired by contract, has failed a11d needs repair. Controlling depth in channel is 13 feet at low- Water datum. Costs of existing project were $69,066 for new or, $781610 for maintenance, and $307,430 for rehabilitation, 'total of $1,158,106. Cost and financial statement Year .. .Total 1ea to 12 163 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 New work. to cAN it ed. ... .. ... ... ... . ..$ 30 1, 3 94 Doran t ............ .......... d................ .......... ............ I$301,3194 altnance: ...................... Dropriated $122,069 $10,000 -$10,427 $751 781,610 h .1 ............ ............ 1,416 96,489 23,737 751 781,610 .................... 0 P)ropriated .......... 35,563 215,000 510,000 760,563 ot ...................................... 27,710 17,980 261,740 307,430 elUdes $232,328 for new work for previous projects. 14. LORAIN HARBOR, OHIO .Location. On south shore of Lake Erie at mouth of Black Ver, 28 miles westerly from Cleveland, Ohio. (See Lake Sur- 'ey Chart357.) Previous projects. For details, see page 1961 of Annual Re- ort for 1915, and page 1580 of Annual Report for 1938. Waxisting project. Provides for: (a) outer breakwater lake- 60rd of harbor entrance, 2,180 feet long; (b) outer harbor about 6 acres in area formed by converging rubblemound breakwaters With an aggregate length of 8,500 feet and a clear channel width Of 525 feet between lakeward ends; (c) two piers at mouth 8 river 300 feet apart, west pier 1,004 feet long, and east pier i80 feet long; (d) lake approach channel with a depth of 29 feet Soft material and 30 feet in hard material, from 525-foot width at entrance in breakwater system flaring to deep water within tinof detached breakwaters; (e) depth of 28 feet in soft aterial and 29 feet in hard material for a width of 800 feet rough outer harbor to a point opposite west pier light, then narrowing to about 250 feet wide at a point 1,000 feet above west Pier light, then a channel of that width to a point 2,200 feet above West pier light; (f) approach channel 16 feet deep extending from Ott.er harbor to municipal pier; (g) depth of 25 feet in soft ma- herial and 26 feet in hard material in remaining portions of outer ~arbor; (h) channel in Black River with a depth of 27 feet in soft material and 28 feet in hard material from 2,200 feet above west Pier light to 500 feet below upstream limit of Federal project, and a depth of 24 feet in soft material and 25 feet in hard material in reallining 500-foot portion of river channel. River channel suit- 1320 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ably widened at bends and with additional widening through Nfor folk and Western Railway bridge to provide a clear channel width of 200 feet, with no dredging to be done closer than 50 feet to existing and future docks or bulkheads, except at bends; (i) bae stabilization works at cut 1 along left bank of river channel abov Erie Avenue Bridge; (j) lower turning basin 650 feet wide and 20 feet deep in bend of Black River immediately upstream froM former Baltimore and Ohio Railroad coal dock; (k) upper turI ing basin about 690 feet wide and 17 feet deep opposite National Tube Co. dock with an enlarged portion immediately downstreaM 21 feet deep; (1) replacement of existing Norfolk and Western Railway swing bridge with a vertical lift bridge to provide a clear horizontal width between fenders of about 205 feet normnalto channel and a vertical clearance of 100 feet above low.water datum. Project depths are referred to low-water datum for LDe Erie, which is 568.6 feet above mean water level at Father point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum-1955). Ordinary fluctuations of water level are from 3.5 feet above to 0.5 foot be. low low-water datum, and extreme fluctuations produced by *i and other causes are from 5 feet above to 2 feet below that plane. 'Estimated Federal cost of new work is $19,846,000 (July 1966) Non-Federal cost estimate is $4,023,000 (July 1966). For fully completed modifications $3,000 was contributed by local interests toward construction of west breakwater shorearm. For wor Existina proiect wa.s authorized by thev Jvv followina: j ... . y.°, ..- . 1-ActsWork authorizedvJ.. ... v Acts Work authorized Documents and reports sd 2d sesas. Mar. 3, 1899 Breakwaters and extensions of piers to present dimensions.. H. Doe. 131, 55th Cong, Annual Report, 1898, p.27 18. Mar. 2,1907 Extend 18-foot channel from inner end of piers to Erie Avenue Bridge. H. Doc. 560, 60th Cong., Is ses. June 25 1910 Extend breakwaters and dredge to depth of 19 feet in outer H. Doe. 644, 61stCong., 2d seas. harbor. Aug. 8,1917 Extend breakwaters to present project dimensions.......... H. Doe. 980, 64th Cong., let sess. Do...... Deepen outer harbor and river channel to Erie Avenue Bridge H. Doc. 985, 64th Cong.. sletses8. to 20 feet. July 3 1930 Extend 20-foot channel to American Shipbuilding Co. dry- H. Doe. 587, 69th Cong., 2d sess. dock 2. Aug.30, 1935 Widen 2 bends in river and enlarge turning basin opposite H. Doc. 469, 72d Cong., 2d seas. National Tube Co. dock.1 Do...... Approach channel to municipal pier...... ........... Senate Committee print, 73d Coose Do ... Deepen outer harbor and river channel to American Ship- 2d seas. Rivers and Harbors Commi tee t O building Co. drydock 2 to present project dimensions and 51, 74th Cong., let seas. extensions of river channel to upper end of National Tube Co. dock with turning basin opposite that dock. Mainte- nance dredging in Black River from American Ship- buildng Co. drydock 2 to upper end of National Tube Co. dock was authorized Apr. 7, 1934, by Public Works Ad- ministration. (2) Enlarging turning basin opposite National Tube Co. dock Specified in act. to present project dimensions. Mar. 2, 1945 Turning basin in bend of Black River immediately upstream H. Doe. 161, 77th Cong., 1stseas* from Baltimore & Ohio RR. coal dock. seas.(con July 14, 1960 Replace Norfolk and Western Railway swing bridge with a If. Doc. 166, 86th Cong., 1st vertical lift bridge; construct two detached arrowhead latest published map). tains breakwaters lakeward of existing breakwaters; construct extension of east breakwater to shore; remove 300 feet of lakeward end of west breakwater; remove outer 1,100 feet of east pier; deepen lake approach to 29 feet, 800-foot wide outer harbor channel to 28 feet, southwesterly portion of outer harbor to 25 feet and river channel to 27 feet; widen river channel at bends; and construct a new turning basin 21 feet deep near upstream limit of existing project. Oct. 27, 1965 Construct bank stabilization works at cut numbered 1 along PL 89-298. left bank of river channel above Erie Avenue Bridge. x Authorized by Public Works Administration, Sept. 6, 1933. 2 First Supplemental National Defense Appropriation Act, 1944 approved Dec. 23, 1948. RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1321 authorized by 1960 act, presently underway, non-Federal costs are stimated to be $3,975,000 for lands, relocations of utilities, bodifications of existing dock and bulkheads, construction of new actulkheads and dockside dredging. For work authorized by 1965 at local interests must make a cash contribution presently esti- ated at $45,000. teo ca l co o peration. For work authorized by 1965 act, local in- arests must contribute $45,000. Pending finalization of plan- 1g for bank stabilization works, this contribution not received All ate, for completed work, local interests contributed $3,000. Aother conditions fully complied with. th erminal facilities. There are 19 piers and wharves, of which 31r ee are on outer harbor and remainder are along banks of a PRiver. Two are owned by the city. Ten terminals have Srailroad connections and 12 mechanical-handling facilities. poiliti.es are considered adequate for existing commerce. (See rt Series No. 42, revised 1960, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work-1960 project modification: Plans and specifications for replacement t Norfolk and Western Railway bridge were completed. Invita- ion for bids was issued but opening of bids was postponed pend- o0 diSposition of local interest request to increase vertical bridge en in clearance. Contract operations for construction of outer breakWater, removal of end of east breakwater and end of east coer were completed in June 1966 at a cost of $1,389,107. Pre- botIStruction planning for dredging triangular area in outer har- 19or east of east pier was initiated and completed in December wfe < Contract operations for this work began in April and were completed in June 1966 and 156,100 cubic yards of material other than ledge rock and unclassified material were removed by contractor's dipper dredge at a cost of $569,006. For work buthorized by 1965 project modification, preliminary planning for ank stabilization at cut 1 was initiated. Costs for all precon- ruction planning underway during fiscal year were $25,210. salintenance: Miscellaneous inspection services and condition urveys by Government plant and hired labor cost $14,601. U.S. hopper dredges Hoffman and MarkJham removed 287,560 cubic yards of shoaled material over 3/4, mile of the Black River channel for restoration of 27-foot project depth and from areas of turn- ing basin to restore 21-foot project depth, at a cost of $98,000. i. derrick boat BD 6634 completed repairs to a 400-foot sec- onof east breakwater, rubblemound construction at a cost of 1,000. Snagging and clearing in project channels by Govern- eat lant an"dhired labor cost $1,782. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 81 Dercent complete. Deepening remainder of outer harbor, tri- igu9lar area near East pier, to project depth 28 feet was initiated I April 1966 and completed in June 1966. Construction of new east cellular steel sheet pile breakwater shorearm, 2,323 feet long With a 134-foot stone shore connection, was initiated in January ad completed in October 1963. Construction of new cellular Seel sheet pile outer detached breakwater was initiated in gust 1964 and completed in June 1966. Removal of 250 feet 1322 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of the lakeward end at the East breakwater and construction Of a new pierhead was completed in November 1965. Protectiol works are generally in poor condition. Shoreward section Of west breakwater, completed in 1921, has disintegrated and settle and in places is below low-water datum. At various locationS ofl lake face of lakeward section of west breakwater, stones shifted leaving holes in the wall, and in many sections of east break water stones above water have deteriorated and shifted. Severe cracks and shifting have developed in superstructure of West breakwater pierhead. East pier, completed in 1905 was reduced in length from 1,875 to 880 feet in November 1964 by removalogOf e lakeward 995 feet. Remainder of east pier is in various st of disrepair where concrete superstructure supported by timber cribs has cracked and settled. Work remaining to complete proJ ect consists of widening at bends in river channel, including c011 struction of bank stabilization works at cut 1; and, replacement of Norfolk & Western Railway Bridge, all as authorized by 1960 act and modified by 1965 act. Controlling depth is 28 feet in channel through outer harbor, 27 feet in river channel to upper end o National Tube Co. dock, 16 feet in outer harbor channel to municipal pier, 17 and 21 feet in upstream turning basin opposite National Tube Co. dock, and 20 feet in downstream turning basil upstream of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad coal dock all at low-water datum. Costs of existing project were $12,454,729 (including $165,000 public works funds) for new work and $3,255,617 (in cluding $76,300 public works funds) for maintenance, a total o $15,710,346. In addition, $3,000 contributed funds expended. Cost and financial statement Total t 0 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1968 New work: )2080 $328,000 $2,350,000 $3,754,864 $2,800,000 Appropriated.......... $633,000 1$13,19 Cost................. 337,417 2,344,8343,643,1061,322,5571,983,323 6,939 112,74 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 120,854 11,082 85,433 92,059 161,688 3,255 617 Cost................. 118,518 13,418 85,433 58,364 195,383 3,25 15,81 1 Includes $292,203 for new work for previous projects. Excludes $3,000 contributed funds. 15. NIAGARA REMEDIAL WORKS, NEW YORK Location. In Niagara River adjacent to cities of Niagara Falls, N.Y., and Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada. (See Lake Sur vey Charts 312 and 31.) Previous project. For details see pages 2189 and 2190 of Al" nual Report for 1949. Existing project. Authorized by a treaty concerning uses of waters of Niagara River between the United States and Canada as signed at Washington, D.C., on February 27, 1950, approved bY Canadian Parliament on June 14, 1950, consented to by U..$ Senate on August 9, 1950, and put into force by an exchange of ratifications at Ottawa on October 10, 1950. For detailed description see page 1552 of Annual Report for 1962. By letter dated July 14, 1953, from Secretary of State to Secretary of the RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1323 tny,the Department of the Army was designated as agency of the United States to perform its obligations with respect to plan- ig, Supervision, and construction of remedial works, to obtain Whoriation of funds necessary to carry on work connected with woe project, and to disburse such funds in connection with per- ornlance of work. By letter July 28, 1953, the Secretary of the ormy accepted arrangements and designated Chief of Engineers isupervise necessary planning and construction. In accordance W th article II of 1950 treaty, costs were divided equally between concerned Governments. Net U.S. cost for completed project as $6,069,395. 0 ocal cooperation. None required. O-.Perations and results during fiscal year. Operation and tl nary maintenance of remedial works was done by Canada and h1ited States through the Ontario Hydro Electric Power Com- yi5onl of Ontario and the Power Authority of the State of New cork. As a result of a change in the method of funding the U.S. N ovgr f operation and maintenance of the Niagara Remedial Corks, a final adjustment in funds previously appropriated to the rps resulted in a deobligation of $1,856. bCondition (at end of fiscal year. Excavation and crestfill on both the United States and Canadian flanks of Horseshoe Falls Were comrpleted in October and November 1955, respectively. 'struction of a gage house above the falls on the U.S. main- b Was completed April 1955. Construction of a gage house Celow the falls on the U.S. mainland was completed June 1957. strostruction of control house and landscaping area adjacent to rericture were completed September 1957. No construction work p ains. Final allocation of costs between the governments of i!ted States and Canada was made in 1961. Operation and maintenance of structures are continued annually. Since com- guetion of existing project, International Joint Commission on Au- ust 15, 1961, ordered and directed construction, maintenance { operation of additional remedial works be undertaken by Ydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario as follows: An swelsion of control structure in Niagara River by addition of five -lces, identical to those in existing structure; a training wall e parallel to Canadian shore, together with a concrete 1erally ueir -At downstream end of training wall; and removal of top of colbxerged weir (completed in 1944). For this additional work, Construction was initiated by Hydro Electric Power Commission In September 1961. Removal of top portion of submerged weir a. accomplished in November 1961. Construction of training .all Was completed in December 1962. Extension of control struc- ture and removal of cofferdam were completed September 1963, control building extension was put in service in December 1963 and Tower Island shoal excavation was completed in December ,63.Niagara River Control Group moved into new control lo in December 1963. Work on transferring controls from er control room to new control room were completed in May 964. Costs of existing project to United States were $6,069,395 r newV work and $510,819 for maintenance. As a result of a hnge in the method of funding, the United States costs of 1324 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 operation and maintenance of the Niagara Remedial Works proj ect is to be settled directly by the concerned power agencies and n further appropriations will be made to the Corps for this purpose. Cost and financial statement to Total year Fiscal ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 j30,1966 June New work: Appropriated.......... -- $327,221 ..................... ..... 16:433:259 1 6,433'259 Cost.................. .... Maintenance: ... . ............................ 6 Appropriated.......... 75,000 $61,000 $68,000 $95,000 -$4,931 2523 15 Cost.................. 73,821 63,208 67,128 92,836 -1,855 25623,156 x Includes $363,864 for cost of submerged weir, Niagara River, N.Y. 2 Includes $12,337 for maintenance of submerged weir, Niagara River, N.Y. 16. OGDENSBURG HARBOR, N.Y. Location. On south bank of St. Lawrence River, 62 miles by water from Lake Ontario. (See Lake Survey Chart 14.) Previous projects. For details see page 1975 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1635 of Annual Report for 1938.t Existing project. Authorized by 1910 River and HarborAct and modified by acts of March 2, 1919, and August 30, 1 For description of existing project see page 1568 of Annual Re port for 1962. Actual cost for new work for completed portion f project was $375,086. Removal of hard material shoals froM lower basin portion of project is classified inactive and estimated cost of this portion is $183,000 (1954). Local cooperation. Fully complied with.. Terminal facilities. There are 14 terminals in harbor, 13 prV vately owned and 1 owned by city of Ogdensburg is used by large passenger vessels. Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: is cellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Govern- ment plant and hired labor. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complet except for inactive portion. Channels were deepened to 19 feet in 1913. Upper entrance channel was widened to 400 feet i 1920 and to 700 feet in 1935. Removal of elevator wharf and deepening lower basin was completed in 1935, except for removal of hard material shoals, which are considered inactive. There is a controlling depth of 18 feet in channel and 19 feet in 10wer basin, at low-water datum. Costs of existing project were $37, 086 (including $174,549 public works funds) for new work, 3d $588,317 for maintenance, a total of $963,403. RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1325 Cost and financial statement Pi ear Totalto .. 1962 1963 1964 1065 1066 June 30,1966 - - - New Work. o.Propriated ........... ................................................ 1$646,466 aiost..... ................... 1646,466 0"atenanc ......... $6,900 $1,000 $107,500 $6,826 $3,805 2718,829 6..900 1,000 67,428 06,898 3,805 2718,829 I cies~ $271,380 for new work for previous projects. es $130,512 for maintenance for previous projects. e ?tion. 17. OLCOTT HARBOR, N.Y. Location.COn south shore of Lake Ontario at mouth of Eight- 6l Xile Creek about 18 miles east of mouth of Niagara River and west of Rochester, N.Y. (See Lake Survey 25.)by water 1iles 6Chart f.Previ Ous project. For details see page 1971 of Annual Report r 115 and page 1621 of Annual Report for 1938. afastilq project. Authorized by 1867 River and Harbor Act eM. modified by 1913 River and Harbor Act. For description of of Sting project see page 1555 of Annual Report for 1962. Cost ra n 11ew work for completed project was $1,500, exclusive of tou nts expended on previous projects, all of which was con- tuted by local interests. L l interests con- triocal 2 cooperation. Fully complied with. ocal interests con- uted $1,500. to erminal facilities. Private docks for recreational craft, one tiesrboat dock and privately owned servicing and storage facili- s for recreational and other small craft. Facilities are con- rdered adequate for existing commerce. p perations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: oJect condition surveys by hired labor were accomplished in enll 1966 at a cost of $1,025. Stone and riprap repairs to inner aCcost of West pier by hired labor were made in December 1965 at of $2,906. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- Creted in 1918. Wooden superstructure was replaced with con- feete eet O f 614.6 linear feet of west pier. in A length of 800 linear sht of east pier has been reinforced and repaired with steel- piling and concrete. Similar repairs to 620 linear feet of Weet pier olltroe193 began in June and were completed in November 1963 ost Tot~tolling depth in channel is 11 feet at low-water datum. Total cost for maintenance of existing project was $308,738. tia l cost for repairs to west pier under Public Works Accelera- l (. Act was $186,000 and $14,477 under the rehabilitation forilor) program. In addition, $1,500 for new work, and $5,000 Saintenance expended from contributed funds. 1326 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to66 Fical year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 New work: 1$140210 Appropriated........... ........... ............ ............ ............ ............ 1140:210 Cost.......... .......................................................... Maintenance: 1347,697 Appropriated.......... - 2,179 .................................... $3,931 1347,691 Cost.................. 44,734 ............ ............ ............ 3,931 Rehabilitation: 21,477 Appropriated............................. . $14477............$14,477 2 1............ 4,47 Cost............ ......................... 14,477 ........... ............ : Includes $140,210 for new work and $38,959 for maintenance for previous projects. Exclude $1,500 for new work and $5,000 for maintenance expended from contributed funds. 2Excludes $186,000 Public Works Acceleration Act funds. 18. OSWEGO HARBOR, N.Y. Location. On south shore of Lake Ontario, at mouth of Oswego River, 59 miles easterly from Rochester, N.Y. (See Lae Survey Chart 225.) Previous projects. For details see page 1973 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1630 of Annual Report for 1938. Act Existing project. Authorized by 1870 River and Harbor Act and modified by numerous acts through October 23, 1962. For description of existing project see pages 1383-84 of Annual ule port for 1963. Estimated cost of new work is $9,641,000 (July 1966). Remaining work authorized by 1930 River and Harbo1r Act consisting of deepening a 200-foot strip along harbor line east of mouth of Oswego River is considered inactive and excUde.d from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost (1957) of thi portion is $246,000. Estimated non-Federal costs are $4,930- 000 (July 1966), of this amount, $100,000 was for acquisitiOlO lands for completed modifications. For work authorized bY the 1940 act, it is estimated that $490,000 is for dockside dredgiDg' For work authorized by the 1962 act, it is estimated that $4,340 000 is for a terminal, wharves, cargo handling facilities and doc& side dredging. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Seven piers and wharves in harbor along river channel. In addition, Port of Oswego Author ty owns two public terminals, one of which is west of river alnd i" cludes a grain elevator and warehouse for miscellaneous frei Other terminal is east of river and used for handling alun1ni merce., and general cargo. A dock owned by the State Naval Militiao private. State of New York owns a river terminal used for mooring vessels. City of Oswego owns shore facilities for recre tional craft. Facilities considered adequate for existing corIn merce. 6dh Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 19e project modification. Contract operations for deepening otted entrance, outer harbor and lower river channels were completed in November 1965. About 341,832 cubic yards of material were removed by dipper dredge and clamshell dredge. Maintenance. Miscellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Gov emnent plant and hired labor cost $6,870, including hydroclimat RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1327 etwork measurements in Oswego River Basin accomplished by reeather Bureau and costing $653. U.S. dipper dredge Hoffman removed 40,515 cubic yards of shoaled material over 60,000 square yards of west outer harbor for restoration of 21-foot project depth at a cost Of $15,722. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 75 800 cent complete. Deepening lake approach channel to 27 feet, to2ft wide outer harbor channel including harbor turning basin i5and 1 600 feet of lower river channel to 24 feet, all as author- 1 by 1962 act, was initiated in June and completed in November 1lo Brea kwaters are generally in fair condition except that ie95 tone inportions of west arrowhead breakwater has dis- eegrated and settled and core stone in a 1,500-foot section of 1 0 0 arowhead breakwater has settled in many places. About Were0 linear feet of deteriorated sections of outer west breakwater dere repaired under minor rehabilitation program in 1962. A feetth of 24 feet at low-water datum is available in lower 1,600 t of Oswego River and a depth of 21 feet above that point to 800e oof Seneca Street. A depth of 25 feet is available in lafowide channel through outer harbor and 21 feet in re- dock fg Portions of outer harbor east of Erie-Lackawanna coal a , gexcept in a 200-foot wide strip along harbor line east of outh Of Oswego River which has a controlling depth of 18 feet. hoae250-foot channel in outer harbor west of Erie-Lackawanna low kand turning basin have a controlling depth of 21 feet at p ater datum. A depth of 27 feet is available in lake ap- coo channel to entrance to outer harbor. Work remaining to w Plete project is deepening remainder of west outer harbor aW't of Erie-Lackawanna coal dock authorized by 1940 River Cost arbor Act and completion of inactive portion of project. 7gt5f of existing project were $7,242,039 for new work, $1,459,- total of $9,0 09362aintenance, and $307,590 for rehabilitation, Cost and financial statement Total to 8tlYa.wWork. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ted.......... .... ........ .. $60,000 $200,000 $648,813 118,430,016 ......... ..... ..... . 30,031 226,093 652,6890 18,430,016 0 0riat ted.......... $67,574 $59503 57,996 13,345 22,592 22,405,417 Mat.... 67,574 45,955 71,634 13,345 22,592 22,405,417 ed.......... 310,000 . -2,400 -10 307,590 107,648 19,42.. .......... 307,590 $ eudes $1,187,977 for new work for previous projects. $945,684 for maintenance for previous projects. 19. ROCHESTER HARBOR, N.Y. se~oc.ation. On south shore of Lake Ontario, at mouth of Gene- vey River, 59 miles westerly from Oswego, N.Y. (See Lake Sur- P Chart 238.) f or revious project. For details see page 1471 of Annual Report 1915, and page 1623 of Annual Report for 1938. sting project. Authorized by 1829 River and Harbor Act 1328 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and modified by numerous acts through July 14, 1960. For de- scription of existing project see page 1556 of Annual Report for 1962. Actual cost for new work for completed project is $2,1960 514. Non-Federal costs are estimated at $2,260,000, all for act, for lands, relocation of submarine cable crossing, relocatiod of small docks and boathouses, dockside dredging, structure Mod" fications, and replacement of Baltimore & Ohio coal loader.._ Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of July 14, 1960, e quires local interests provide lands and rights-of-way for coI struction and maintenance, hold the United States free frol damages, make necessary alterations to existing structures and utility facilities; strengthen east abutment of New York Centrl Railroad bridge; provide and maintain depths between chanlect limits and terminal facilities commensurate with related proje depths; and provide adequate coal-loading and other termies facilities as needed to serve prospective commerce. Assurance, were furnished and accepted by District Engineer on FebrUar 24, 1961. Complied with except provision for replacement0 coal loading facility. ty Terminal facilities. Rochester-Monroe County Port Author - owns a terminal facility at mouth of Genesee River. Two P1t vately owned terminals are at upper end of channel. Two yact club docks and several other privately owned servicing and.StOr age docks are for recreational and other small craft. Facilit'e are considered adequate for existing commerce.I Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: cellaneous inspection services and condition surveys by Govere ment plant and hired labor cost $13,088. U.S. hopper dredge Lyman removed 225,566 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoal material over entire area of entrance channel and turning basin and about 2 miles of Genesee River Channel for restora- tion of improved depths of 21, 23, and 24 feet at a cost of $97,292. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complet A length of 1,265 linear feet of west pier was reinforced iest steel-sheet piling and concrete. An additional 1,080 feet of ure pier and lakeward 700 feet of east pier crib and superstructl4 are failing, the crib-filling stone has escaped and concrete is b ed cracked. A length of 550 linear feet of east pier was reinforce and repaired with steel-sheet piling and concrete during 190' and 1955. Present channel was completed in 1935. Stage Io work authorized by 1960 act, consisting of deepening lake AP proach, entrance channel, and lower turning basin, was initiated in May and completed August 1962. Stage II of work author ized by 1960 act, consisting of deepening river channel, up91 turning basin, and construction of two steel sheet pile cell do- phins, was initiated in October 1962 and completed in Dece er 1963. Channel is unstable and requires annual dredging to main tain adequate depth. Controlling depth in river channel and turning basin is 21 feet and in entrance channel 23 feet at lo water datum. Costs of existing project were $2,191,514 0 cluding $56,806 emergency relief funds) for new work, .a $3,127,450 (including $478 emergency relief funds) for mainte nance, a total of $5,318,964. RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1329 Cost and financial statement Beal Total to 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NeW Wo)rk. copriated....... $400,000 $800,o000 $o89o,872-$15,971 ............ 1$2,439,308 tenan''*.*..*.......... ain 323,464 855,816 903,176 -1,604 ............ 12,439,308 P~ r'at .. ... .. . .. ..... I 5 ] I030 23 744,979 OSt 0,9 1,503 5.0......... 126,811 110,058 $110,380 2 160,955 101,503 126,811 110,058 110,380 23,744,979 . . . . . 2I 11 es $247,794 for new work for previous projects. ad1is $617,529 for maintenance for previous projects and $478 emergency relief authority and budation costs transferred from new work to maintenance upon conversion to programming etilng system, July 1, 1953. 20. ROCKY RIVER HARBOR, OHIO .ocation. At mouth of Rocky River which empties into Lake OCh, Miles westerly from Cleveland, Ohio. (See Lake Survey aart735.) feet xsti project. Provides for: (a) east entrance pier 900 et long and an entrance channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep di ng from lake to a point 700 feet inside inner end of pier; !) aanchorage basin 10 feet deep, about 2 acres in extent, ad- 11el1tto west side of entrance channel at river mouth; (c) chan- abt 0 feet wide from inner end of entrance channel upstream briut 1,700 feet to a point near Norfolk and Western Railway 60 de; and above this point a channel about 1,850 feet long and ha1 ee Wide with depths of 6 feet in soft material and 7 feet in ord material with suitable widening at public dock (vicinity boaDetroit Avenue) and at its upstream end adjacent to public det.launching facilities. Project depth is referred to low-water at auntfor Lake Erie which is 568.6 feet above mean water level 1955Father Point, Quebec (International Great Lakes Datum- 5)" Ordinary fluctuations of water level are from 3.5 feet ab dove to 0.5 foot below low-water datum and extreme fluctuations the to Wind and other causes are 4.5 feet above to 1 foot below 19at Plane. Estimated cost for new work is $357,000 (July 1966) Estimated non-Federal contribution is $263,000 (July Existing project was authorized by the following: At, Ju e 1 7Work authorized Documents and reports , 9872 ast pier and dredging of channel................. ... Annual Report, 1871, p. 211. 67 Extension et 27 ,1 3 p roje c t dim sio n s.pier and deepening channel to present east of en 11. Doe. 70, 75th Cong., 1st seas. e R Reai26 ndetend clannel and construct an anchorage basin. II. Doe. 352, 88th Cong. 2d sess. (con. tales latest published map). oLocal cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965 requires tral interests to contribute in cash 49 percent of first cost of con- ret n (presently estimated at $263,000), hold United States Se rorn damages, establish properly constituted public body to fa financially and to provide and operate essential local 'erate beClities provide and maintain depths service in in channels and in ting areas commensurate with depths Federal channel, con- 1330 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tinue to maintain existing public dock and launching facil ties open to all equally. Local interests favor improvement and itAl expected that assurances will be furnished when requested. All other conditions fully complied with. . t Terminal facilities. There is no commercial navigatio r Rocky River. Terminal facilities consist of private docks for recreational craft. One public dock is owned by city of La e wood. h Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: T c project modification authorized by 1965 River and Htarbor the was selected by the Secretary of the Army for inclusion inl small authorized projects program. Preconstruction planiD for improvements to the project was initiated in March 1966 Maintenance: Project condition surveys accomplished by hi labor. ercet Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 25 perce complete. East pier, rubblemound construction, is generallY l fair condition, except for a section 100 feet long which is bad deteriorated. Completion of preconstruction planning for ad accomplishing realignment and extension of channel and co struction of an anchorage basin, all as authorized by 1965 ac remain to complete project. Controlling depth in entrance char nel is 9 feet at low water datum. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jn ne36, 166 New work: $1 :020 Appropriated.................... ............................. $26,000 Cost....... .............. .................... 4,049 Maintenance: 74 ,649 Appropriated..............................$16,200 14,649 -$2,440 719 Cost.................. .......... 6,183 7,576 719 21. SANDUSKY HARBOR, OHIO Location. On south shore of Lake Erie in southeasterly p0 tion of Sandusky Bay, 50 miles westerly from Cleveland, Ohio' (See Lake Survey Chart 365.) Previous projects. For details see page 1960 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1574 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Authorized by 1899 River and Harbor Ae and modified by numerous acts through July 14, 1960. For scription of existing project see pages 1511-12 of Annual iRepOrt for 1962. Estimated cost of new work is $6,247,000 (July 1966) excluding $325,000 contributed by local interests and amou'D expended on previous projects. Non-Federal costs are estimated at $675,000 (July 1966). For completed modifications $325,000 contributed towards total cost of authorized improvements. mainder of $340,000 is for dockside dredging adjacent to deeP ened channels authorized by 1960 act. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Local interests col tributed $325,000 for new work.q Terminal facilities. Eighteen piers and wharves, three are west end of harbor and remainder along dock channel. One is RIVERS AND HARBORS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1331 for e State-owned fish research and patrol boats. One pub- y OWned and four privately owned are used for mooring fishing 5 and recreational craft and for ferry service. Six terminals e railroad connections and eight mechanical-handling facili- e' Facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. e Port Series No. 42, revised 1960, Corps of Engineers.) Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Con- tract operations for deepening channels and enlarging turning basin all as authorized by 1960 act were completed in September 1965, finalization of contract costs remains, 73,600 cubic yards of material other than ledge rock and 26,870 cubic yards of ledge rock were removed by dragline from Bay and Straight Channels and turning basin. Maintenance: Miscellaneous inspection Vices and condition surveys by Government plant and hired or cost $25,447. U.S. hopper dredge Markham removed 719,- 743 cubic yards, bin measure, of shoaled material over 400,000 square yards of the Bay and Straight Channels for restoration of project depths of 21, 24, and 25 feet at a cost of $167,500. Snag e and clearing in project channels by Government plant and hired labor cost $19,868. U.S. dipper dredge Gaillard removed 70,300 cubic yards of shoaled material from dock channel to proj- ect depth 22 feet, at a cost of $81,300. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. 6bor structures are generally in good condition. Entire length 6000-foot east jetty protection works, completed in 1922, .'4elilng outer harbor entrance channel was repaired under r rehabilitation program. Repairs were initiated in May and completed in October 1964. Easterly 1,400 linear feet rock dike paralleling the dock channel were rebuilt in 1956. t.63, 500 linear feet of remaining 2,355 linear feet, westerly on , of dike were removed. Deepening Moseley, Straight, JaY Channel, deepening and enlarging turning basin, all as orized by 1960 act were initiated in June 1962 and completed ePtember 1965. Controlling depths: Moseley Channel 26 ' Straight Channel to intersection with Bay Chasnnel 25 feet; ainder of Straight Channel to Dock Channel 19 feet; Bay I1enel to Pennsylvania Railroad coal dock 25 feet; turning t1 24 feet; and dock channel 18 feet; all at low-water datum. Sof existing project were $6,249,913 (including $599,500 ic Works funds) for new work, $2,969,902 for maintenance, $675,606 for rehabilitation, a total of $9,895,421. In addi- ' $325,000 expended from contributed funds for new work. 1332 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement otal to96 T year Fiscal ............. 1962 1983 1964 1965 1966 Jun New work: 18729 650 Appropriated.......... $320,000 $1,800,000 $1,371,000 $1,763 $100,480 1 g,72062 Coat.................. 91,629 1,666,230 799,521 545,112 593,640 2, 9069 Maintenance: Appropriated..........157,667 31,954 148,800 151,003 255,816 2,969,90 Cost.................157,667 31,954 112,820 148,684 294,115 Rehabilitation: 6706 Appropriated.......... 10,000 200,000 367,000 98,606 ........... 675,606 Cost.................. 2,833 94,736 426,778 151,259............ 1 E l -gxcu es$325,0U ,ooum uv A contributedI .1 ±nut'tuc Arn.e.....,wo...... wr. . nc..LT. _e .. 1A1 A $,fn new fu rAuuA unds expended for new work. Includes $477,149 o for previous projects. 22. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Name of project Date survey conducted Cape Vincent Harbor, N.Y ....................... March-April 1966 Little River, N.Y ............................... May-June 1966 1966 Niagara River, N.Y. ............................ Sept. 1965, MaY Sackets Harbor, N.Y ............................ March 1966 Vermilion Harbor, Ohio ......................... June 1966 Wilson Harbor, N.Y ............................. June 1966 2. L1V" OTHER V 111LJ.V ATTTITORTZED NAVTATTON L1 V 111 WAV A." i.JA.! LfL1 f 1uL111V1\ .1 PRO.TECTS For last Cost to June30i full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction OPe ace for- I .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. Big (Cunningham) Creek, Ohiol......... (2) 3$19,763 ...... Black River Harbor, N.Y.4....................................... (2) 342,401 ** "40,6g Cape Vincent, N.Y.6............................................. 1962 275,082 Cattaraugus Creek, N.Y.S......................................... (2) 57,410 Grand View Bay, N.Y.e... ........................... 1948 1,524 Grasse River (Massena) N.Y.4 7........... ................... 1891 39,000. 8 946,804 i,0 9,20 Little River at Cayuga Island, Niagara Falls, N.Y................... 1957 Morristown Harbor, N.Y.... ........................... 1949 86,221 1301 Niagara River, N.Y.......... ................................... 1964 10559,457 33 Oak Orchard Harbor, N.Y.... .......................... 1947 13214,110 ... * ''_ Port Bay, N.Y.6................................................ Port Ontario Harbor, N.Y........................................ 1949 56,904.. * -"', Pultneyville Harbor, N.Y. 11...................................... 1934 68,219 O, Sackets Harbor, N.Y.12........................................... 4 . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1948 1325,010 1521 Sandusky River, Ohio 1894 358,000 64,16 Vermilion Harbor, Ohio........................................... 1965 133,278 78,11 Wilson Harbor, N.Y......... ....................................... 1964 8394,104 x No commerce reported. 2 Only information available is in index to reports of Chief of Engineers. 8 Amount includes maintenance: not separable. SAbandonment recommended in H. Doc. 467, 69th Cong., 1st seas. s Abandonment recommended in Ex. Doc. 16, 85th Cong., 1st sess. a To be restudied. Channel improved by local interests. SCompleted. Includes local interests contribution of $25,742. 1o Includes local interests contribution of $27,563. 11 Abandonment recommended in H. Doc. 375, 64th Cong., 1st sess. 12 Inactive. Completion not warranted by present navigation traffic. 1 Includes costs of previous project. FLOOD CONTROL-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1333 24, NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 Pisa(preauthorization) , cal year costs for preauthorization studies were $2,614 for Puls1 h0i 0neyville Harbor, N.Y. and $4,764 for Cleveland Harbor, '-Old River. 25. AUTHORIZED ALTERATION OF BRIDGE PROJECT For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual i Operation and Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance hi Street Bridge, Buffalo, N.Y.1 ....... 1962 2$2,582,440 ........... 2 Rolmleted. Sederal cost only. 26. AUTHORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance E d an Lak wood Ohio:. .... ... . . Clevel r Park 2............ .. Ciyrt a'rkl 2 . . . ************.. . tyrPar 21i g .... _ _............................... .. 0 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .. . ........... . . . . . ... *** **. .. . ... .. .. .. .. .* **** *** I n Be State Park, Lake Ontario, N.Y. ekqis Bah . . . . . . . . ... . . 4... . . . . . . N.Y.3..P. l State Park, Lake 4Ontario, . . .... . . #0.... . 0.. ..... . ~ sePeninsula, Erie, Pa. h rkShor aste rk, Lake Ontario, N.Y...................... . . . . . 1963 1963. $,0,9....$0 58,978.......... 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ****** .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. ... .. .. .. ot1 te Comm unitY Park, Ohio ****** *** ield Lake Village, Ohiol 2..................******** lhe ****** .. .. * *....... *.............. pr~lobe - I a robe trestudied eW as authorized by River and Harbor Act of September 3, 1954. 4,Redct was authorized by River and Harbor Act of July 3, 1958. 194 I ral Participation was limited to one-third of first cost when project was authorized by for r ver, and Harbor Act. Federal participation was changed from one-third to 70 percent Spraning work under Public Law 87-874. oPectWas authorized by River and Harbor Act of October 23, 1962. -c 27. FREMONT, OHIO, SANDUSKY RIVER ' Location. On Sandusky River in city of Fremont, Sandusky outy, Ohio. Sandusky River flows northerly through city of 14 'eontand enters Sandusky Bay, an arm of Lake Erie, about r miles north of city. (See Geological Survey Map of remIont-East.) la sting project. Local flood protection plan provides for en- 10 ing and partially realining a 9,500-foot reach of Sandusky oer in city of Fremont, constructing 20,600 feet of levees and toodwalls, constructing a drop structure, protecting banks, con- rUcting three pumping plants, alterations to existing sewer 1 tern and other appurtenant work. Estimated costs (July e6) are $5,200,000 Federal and $596,000 non-Federal for lands, ~ lcations and alterations of streets, pipelines, and utilities. xs"ting project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (S. bc. 136, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). . Local cooperation Local interests must provide lands and ihts-of-way, including borrow and sump areas, for construc- 1334 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tion; hold United States free from damages; make relocations and alterations of streets, buildings, pipelines, utilities, bridgeS,an other structures (except railroad facilities) ; maintain and operate works after completion; prescribe and enforce regulations to pre vent encroachment on channels, rights-of-way, and pondf areas; and at least annually inform interests affected that i', provements will not provide protection against floods of a mnlagn tude equivalent to that of March 1913. Assurances were Sub i mitted by mayor of city of Fremont on September 23, 1965, and accepted by District Engineer on September 30, 1965. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction planning by hired labor continued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction has not been initiated. Cost and financial statement 3 9to6 Total Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 une New work:$00 Appropriated............................. $100,000 $55,000 $235,000 597 Cost............... ........................ 26,188 98,812 129,975 28. ITHACA, N.Y., CAYUGA INLET Location. City of Ithaca is in Tompkins County, N.Y., Cyu Inlet flows northerly through western portion of city and ente head of Cayuga Lake at Ithaca, N.Y. (See Geological SurveY maps of Ithaca-West, and Ithaca-East.) 1el Existing project. Provides for: (a) Enlargement of chaf in Cayuga Inlet from Cayuga Lake to 4,500 feet from lae, 320 feet wide at bottom; (b) new bypass channel on new alide- ment from upstream end of enlarged channel, previously scribed, to junction with existing channel of Cayuga Inlet ,et foot of Taber Street, 75 feet wide at bottom from junction Wit above described channel for about 2,000 feet thence widened to 90 feet; (c) use at present capacity existing channel fjro 4,500 feet from Cayuga Lake near foot of Taber Streete (d) realignment and enlargement of channel generally on rote of present Cayuga Inlet channel from junction previously de scribed extending upstream 5,600 feet, 105 feet wide at bOt tom, and narrowed to 80 feet near drop structure uP stream from mouth of Coy Glen; (e) deepening of these channeS to provide uniform bottom grades; (f) construction of droV structure and fishway upstream from mouth of Coy Glen; ( construction of levee with a top elevation of 406 feet above mea sea level, top width of 10 feet, and side slopes of 1 on 21/2 from drop structure to point near intersection of Elmira and Spencer Rtoadg' (h) construction of levee with top elevation of 401 feet, similar il other dimensions to levee previously described, from drop struc" ture to point on south side of Coy Glen; (i) construction of closure structure at point where last-named levee crosses Lehigh ValleY FLOOD CONTROL---BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1335 ailroad; (I) protection of levees and closure structure against e sone ; (k) construction of 2 highway bridges across new chan- "of' at State Street and Taughannock Blvd. and; (1) construction So fne-track railroad bridge upstream from mouth of Coy Glen. Sstirnated costs (July 1966) are $3,400,000 Federal and $2,380,000 r'01*ederal ($74,000 cash contribution and remainder for lands, e cation of two highway bridges, access roads, utilities, and Way holding pens). 9ocal Cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash or ecivalent work an amount equal to 2.1 percent of first cost for estruction of flood control works, contribution presently esti- Iated at $74,000, and if in cash, to be made either in lump sum oore start of work, or installments before start of pertinent liWorkeitems, in accordance with work schedules as required by actlef of Enineers, final apportionment of cost to be made after s costs are determined; furnish lands and rights-of-way for otal main- taitlruction;. hold the United States free from damages; operate all flood control works after completion, including thl cantCd Part of existing channel and walls extending from foot of eaber Street to about 700 feet below mouth of Cascadilla Creek; a0l struct highway bridges across new channel at State Street bu- .ftaughannock Boulevard; make all necessary changes in scrildings, utilities, streets and highway bridge approaches; pre- dibe and enforce regulations to prevent encroachment on chan- cts and rights-of-way necessary for proper functioning of proj- e't including existing channel from foot of Taber Street to 700 lit below mouth of Cascadilla Creek; prescribe and enforce speed 4eits to prevent damage by wave wash to banks of project chan- of DrtOje u...t,in cash, prior to construction of that portion s; contribute • troect, incremental cost of construction of holding pens and fish apinng facilities, presently estimated at $20,000, final apportion- zenlt. of costs to be made after actual costs are determined; and, fQaltain and operate fishway, holding pens and fish trapping Siliti es. Assurances were furnished and accepted by District ifineer April 28, 1964. State of New York, responsible local oterest, furnished lands, easements, and rights-of-way for con- ruction of stages I and II and are acquiring lands for final otion of project construction stage III. Cash contribution ral,)in taard incremental cost of construction of holding pens and fish 1f ing facilities has been received. Cash contribution towards ot cost for construction of project has not been received. All ther conditions of local cooperation are being complied with, con- etlI'ren0 rrt with requirements for construction of project works. Perations and results during fiscal year. Construction of IrOJect is being done in three stages. Stage I comprises channel dilprovemnent of Cayuga Inlet from the outlet upstream to Casca- a Creek. Contract operations for construction of stage I at re completed in November 1965 at a cost of $285,813. Stage II aiuDPPer end of project comprises replacement of Lehigh Valley oad bridge, cooistruction construction of drop structure including fishway, of levee and closure structure. Replacement of rail- Sad bridge will be accomplished by contract with Lehigh Valley ailroad. Stage III comprises construction of remainder of 1336 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 channel on new alignment between drop structure at upper end of 5 project and channel at lower end of project, construction of levee and rowing course in new channel. Preconstruction plannin was completed for stage II and continued for stage III at a cos of $43,668. Condition at end of fiscal year. Improvement of channel A Cayuga Inlet from the outlet upstream to Cascadilla Creek, stge I, was initiated in January and completed in November 1965. Work remaining to complete project consists of initiation " completion of construction for stage II and completion of preCO" struction planning for and initiation of construction of remainder of project features under stage III. Cost and financial statement. Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30P106 work: New Appropriated.......... $75,000 $75,000 $251,3%0 $533,000 $200,000834 $114 330 Cost .................50,872 63,619 93,047 158,815 329,481 29. LACKAWANNA, N.Y., SMOKES CREEK Location. City of Lackawanna is in Erie County, N.Y. O Creek flows west through city and enters Lake Erie about 6 miles south of lake outlet into Niagara River. (See Geological survey maps of Buffalo-Southeast, Hamburg, and Orchard Park.) r Existing project. Provides for: (a) Channel in main streso of Smokes Creek about 9,400 feet from Lake Erie to confluence North and South branches; (b) channel in North Branch extend" ing 7,500 feet upstream from its confluence with main strealn; (c) channel in South Branch extending 5,650 feet upstream frolo its confluence with main stream, partly on a new alignment fo 2,000 feet at upstream portion; (d) deepening three channels to provide adequate waterway opening through bridges; (e) raising two bridges across main stream owned by South Buffalo RailwY Co., one about 2,000 feet and the other 2,500 feet, upstream from Hamburg Turnpike; (f) raising two Erie-Lackawanna Railroad bridges across North and South Branches, about 500 feet doWv stream from Wood Street; and, (g) protection of abutments O bridges across 3 channels as necessary to insure their safetY Estimated costs (July 1966) are $3,220,000 Federal and $1,600,000 non-Federal (includes $46,000 cash contribution and remainder for lands, relocation of two highway bridges, relocation of utilities, channel improvements, and jetties). Existing project was author ized by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 200, 86th Cong., 1t sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Local interests con- tributed $50,000 in anticipation of subsequent adjustments in contributed amount to be made upon project completion. Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction is be ing done in three sections. Section I comprises protection for bridge abutments and channel improvements on North Branch . Smokes Creek above bridge No. 22. Contract operations for thiS FLOOD CONTROL--BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1337 etion were initiated October 1964 and completed in October 1965 ab a cost of $138,408. Section II comprises protection of bridge Cr ments and channel improvements on main stem of Smokes Tueek from downstream project limits to and including Hamburg continued, re63pike Contract operations for this section were Section or 63 percent completed at a cost of $769,675. III bridprises alterations to four railroad bridges, protection of improvements on main stem of Soe sabutments, and channel Turnpike on South Branch and 0 rkes Creek above Hamburg setrmainlder of North Branch. Contract operations for this com- Ilet eo were initiated in September 1965 and are 19 percent Cat a cost of $294,671. Ceondition at end of fiscal year. Protection of bridge abut- Cre1ts and channel improvements on North Branch of Smokes COcek above bridge No. 22, section I of project, were initiated in toPber 1964 and completed in October 1965. Work remaining o reomPlete project consists of completion of contracts underway i,-construction of sections II and III for local flood protection Provements. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Yeal .Total to S 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork.[ S$135,nte.......... $135000 $78,000 $300000 $467,000$1,000,000 $1,990,000 67,638 90,666 81,069 341,052 1,202,754 1,783,079 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ........ 6... 1965 1966 Totalo June 30, 1966- New O°ntributed . ..... C buted........ ...................... $30,000............ $20,000 $50,000 ... ..... 0........ ....... ............ ..... I...... ............ ...... ....... 30. MT. MORRIS RESERVOIR, GENESEE RIVER, N.Y. nLoation. Dam is on Genesee River 66.9 miles above river N u th and about 32 miles southwesterly of Rochester, (Se* Reservoir is in Livingston and Wyoming Counties, N.Y. e eological Survey maps of Nunda and Portage, N.Y.) th0~ zsting project. For description of existing project as au- ori zed by 1944 Flood Control Act see page 1575 of Annual Re- Iot for 1962. New work of completed project cost $23,365,559. addition, $5,000 contributed funds expended for new work. .0 cal cooperation. None required. Local interests contributed S00 for new work. .Perations and results during fiscal year. Operations and ervtenance: Operation and ordinary maintenance of dam, res- rlr, and service facilities and condition and operation studies ere o2re accomplished by hired labor for $56,335, exclusive of co- l)rative stream gaging program accomplished by Geological elQVey for $6,809 and Weather Bureau reporting and hydro- 'atic networks costing $2,360. 1338 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete Construction of concrete gravity-type dam was initiated by cor tract March 1948 and completed May 1952. Clearing of reer voir area and construction of all appurtenances are comPneS Operations and maintenance of dam, reservoir, and appurtenance are continued annually. Cost and financial statement to 5 e 019 uo J Total year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J e 1_ 0 New work: i2365,6 Appropriated............ .. 65.......................... Cost....... ............................................................ 1 Maintenance: 79,98 Appropriated.......... $64,418 $66,300 $66,400 $64,400 $64,400 78,98 Cost................. 58,106 1 72,476 66,010 60,651 65,5041 xExcludes $5,000 contributed funds. 31. WARSAW, N.Y., OATKA CREEK Location. Village of Warsaw is in Wyoming County, .4 Oatka Creek flows northerly through center portion of villa (See Geological Survey map of Warsaw, N.Y.) Existing project. Provides for channel enlargement starting about 200 feet downstream from South Main Street bridge art extending downstream to about 900 feet north of West C oot Street bridge, including a riprap paved section at downstred limit; drop structure at upstream limit of project; deepeningq paving through West Buffalo and West Court St. bridges; proteC tion of channel banks with crib walls; and appurtenant WO Estimated costs (July 1966) are $468,000 Federal and $141,000 non-Federal all for lands and relocations. Project authorized by Chief of Engineers pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, o Congress, as amended. Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States free froc damages; maintain and operate project after completion, 1 , cordance with regulations prescribed by Secretary of Aryl' provide necessary relocations or modifications of buildings, tila ties, sewers and special facilities; prescribe and enforce regtula tions to prevent encroachment on channels and rights-of-i. necessary to proper functioning of project; and assume resPo. bility for all costs in excess of Federal cost limitation of $1 M' lion. Assurances were furnished and accepted by the Distled Engineer on June 29, 1965. In May 1966 local interests furnsh rights-of-way required for construction of projects. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructio planning was completed and invitation for bids was issued il June 1966.de- Condition at end of fiscal year. Reconnaissance report, d* tailed project report, and preconstruction planning completedt Construction of local flood improvement by contract, remains0 complete project. FLOOD CONTROL-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1339 Cost and financial statement 'Total to P'Scal 1966 June 30,1966 1year962 1963 1964 1965 NewWork. PPropriated..............20000 $5,063 $15,000 $389,000 1$468,163 8,017 $23,765...... 18,535 4,755 31,946 199,347 cudes $4,500 previously appropriated for reconnaissance report. 32. WELLSVILLE, N.Y., GENESEE RIVER is in Allegany County at junction of Dyke C Location. VillageRiver. vieek and Genesee (See Geological Survey map of Wells- eN.Y) .Existini Provides project.widths of 100for: (a) to 135 from a in feetChannel Genesse point 2,700 iver with bottom ft downstream from Bolivar Road Bridge to Dyke Creek, thence stth a bottom width of 110 to 135 feet to about 4,300 feet up- chreamn of Dyke Creek; a total distance of about 13,000 feet; (b) zannel in Dyke Creek with bottom widths of 50 to 70 feet from eX"uth of creek to a point about 4,025 feet upstream; (c) widening le sting channels to obtain such widths; channel deepening and vee and mbankment construction so as to confine floodflows thin these channels; and protection of channel banks and levees ainst erosion; (d) concrete drop structures; on Genesee River 30ut 3,300 feet below Dyke Creek; and on Dyke Creek about iv, feet above its mouth; (e) steel sheet pile weir on Genesee fo0 er about 3,350 feet above Dyke Creek; and (f) pier protection SSouth Main Street highway bridge and Erie Railroad bridge ver Dyke Creek and the Wellsville, Addison and Galeton Rail- -oad bridge over Genesee River. Estimated Federal cost of r'ject is $1,740,000 (July 1966). Estimated non-Federal cost S $306,000 (July 1966). For completed portion of project non- oferal costs were $170,000, which included a cash contribution of $50,000 and $120,000 for lands, rights-of-way, and relocation f utilities Remainder of non-Federal costs are for similar items oadditional proposed plan of remedial measures to completed roject works. SLocal cooperation. For additional improvements to project, el iliterests must furnish assurances that they will submit, for Di approval teor of the United States, all plans for highway im- jroveMents in the vicinity of Wellsville flood control project which etvolve or require modifications of existing facilities of that proj- I,and thereafter make such improvements in accordance with all!sso approved; provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way, Ieluding ponding areas, and make all alterations to utilities, ecessary for construction of the additional flood control improve- htents; hold the United States free from damages due to con- truction of the additional flood control improvements; )rescribe 4f enforce regulations to prevent encroachments on project chan- s as modified by the additional improvements; and maintain and Derate all of the project works after completion of additional im- erovements in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Sec- rests of tetary For completed portion of project local in- the Army.$50,000. contributed 1340 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. New York State Department of Public Works, which is responsible for manflte nance of project, reported that project requires extraordinty maintenance and requested consideration be given to feasibit that remedial measures be undertaken. Design memorandum develop a plan for remedial measures was completed inDecemb 1964. Additional studies for modifications to design memorani "0o, plan were initiated in August 1965 and a revised design mem randum was completed in April 1966. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was.c pleted in November 1957 and repairs to flood-damaged ripr"' slopes made in September 1959. An inspection of completed p~rO ect disclosed that additional work is necessary to improve COr pleted project. There has been widespread erosion of uIPVo tected portions of channel banks, particularly on outside banlk$ a bends and subsequent deposition of eroded material usually al inside banks. Plan to accomplish corrective measures is com plete. Construction of corrective measures remains to complet project. Cost and financial statement Total to966 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 6 1965 1966 Ju New work: 0 Appropriated.......... $31,000 ............ $9,000 $2,000 $16 000 Cost................. 1,747 $29,253 6,439 4,095 16,161 1Excludes $50,000 contributed funds. 33. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Inspection of completed flood control works for compliance with Federal requirements were made during May and June 1966 at cost for year of $496. Total cost to June 30, 1966 was $9,760. 34. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report .. . ._.-_ Name of project see Annual Report Construction OpetS"c for- Auburn, N.Y., Owasco Outletl...............................1962 $371,985 .. Batavia and vicinity, Tonawanda Creek, N.Y.1.................. 1957 335,386 .5 Caledonia, Genesee River, N.Y.2. ................ 1950 .............. Chittenango Creek and tributaries, New York3 4.................... 1948 12,464 Dansville and vicinity, Genesee River, N.Y.4 ....................... 1956 12,800 Eastlake, Ohio-Chagrin River............................................................... Hammondeport, Oswego River Basin, N.Y.2....................... 1951 18,691 Ithaca, Oswego River Basin, N.Y.: 2 ... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . ........ Deferred-Cascadilla 2Creek .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1950 8,159 Deferred-Fall Creek 1950 12,300 Lancaster, Cayuga Creek, N.Y.1.. .. ......................... 1964 797,300 Marsh Creek, Geneva, N.Y.......... .. ........... ............. 226,429 Montour Falls, Oswego River Basin, N.Y.1.. *...1............... 1954 1,681,785 Onondaga Creek, Nedirow, N.Y.1 e6................................ 1964 330,231 Owasco Inlet and Outlet, Montville and Dry Creek, State Ditch and 1950 281,659 Crane Brook, N.Y., Syracuse, Oswego River Basin, N.Y.1.......................... 1954 3,349,248 . Watkins Glen, Oswego River Basin, N.Y.4... .................... 1958 43,182 2Completed. 2 To be restudied. 8 Local interests required to contribute $25,000. SProject not considered economically justified and is inactive. SInactive portion of work for State ditch has been done by local interests and work on Brook has been deferred at the request of local interests. o Project authorized by Chief of Engineers. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-BUFFALO, N.Y., DISTRICT 1341 35. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) SPiscal Year costs were $9,373 for Big Sister Creek, Angola, fory* $4,923 for Little River, Cayuga Island, N.Y.; and $10,447 Sampson Creek, Seneca Falls, N.Y. Flood control and coastal emergencies (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) ti FPederal costs for fiscal year were $8,403 for advance prepara- on and $1,824 for emergency operation. Class class 36. SURVEYS Fiscal year cost lVigation studies .............................. $104,443 lOod control studies ........................ * * ...... .. 73,832 pach erosion cooperative studies..........................19,638 415,181 e ~C Studies Co .... .... .... ......................... 415,18 Co dination with Soil Conservation Service ................ 1,000 t°Prehensive Basin Study ............................. 142,643 Total ............... ...................... $756,737 37. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA fPiscal year cost was $4,964 for work in connection with Inter- "at Inal Niagara Committee of International Niagara Board of We1trol and $17,205 for flood plain information studies. Studies aWeTnitiated for Cayuga Creek, N.Y., Cazenovia Creek, N.Y. onawanda Creek, N.Y. Completed flood plain studies Date Federal completed cost Location Requesting agency b]laclk River ufal riveElyria to mouth, Ohio... June 1964...... $12,640 C ,ree N. Y.".. . .. Ohio Department of Natural Resources..... May 1966...... 11,946 New York State Water Resources Commis- qion. June 1964...... 14,199 8oklC River, Tiffin to month, Ohio.. Ohio Department of Natural Resources.... March 1965..... 7,214 larko, Ver ailion Ve o Harbor, Ohio hio............... ON.Y . . . ....... New York State Water Resources Commis- Oion. June 1965...... 11,958 Ohio Department of Natural Resources..... i U.S. LAKE SURVEY Lakes-St. LaThis district embraces the U.S. portion of the Great and f rence River drainage basin, Lake Champlain, lakes other te urally navigable waters of New York State Barge Canal sys- ti ' uand the Minnesota-Ontario border lakes. In addition, con- o t s Canadian areas are included where essential to integrity arting and other activities. IMPROVEMENTS Navigation General Investigations 1. Page Page Sluaey of North Central 2. Examinations and surveys 1349 lakes ................. 1343 1. SURVEY OF NORTH CENTRAL LAKES V Location Region in which operations are conducted lies within Illr-ont, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Allnoils, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. For additional details see Hpnual Report for 1962. of revious projects. In the region described, previous projects eh Lake Survey have specified provision of complete navigation rjat s designed to suit needs of existing use of waters. These t oJects, in addition to hydrographic and topographic surveys, cote~llated establishment of requisite horizontal and vertical altrol where not already in existence, and measurement and he ysis fother factors pertaining to navigation. A compre- ad ive statement concerning prior projects on thetoGreat Lakes, th formulation of "a general project covering completion 190 7 Poerations of the Survey" appeared in Annual Report for Plages 844 to 850. Responsibilities under prior projects in a' e a rt Lakes portion of the region covered, apart from charting le navigational aspects, consisted of those pertaining to lake Tels, hydrology, and hydraulics of connecting and outflow rivers. De 1907 Annual Report also discussed prior and existing re- p- osibilities in these reports. A board appointed by the Division stineer, Great Lakes Division, to study and clarify U.S. Lake Irvey activities in this second category formulated a report Q ich included definite recommendations. The board report was 1 9 ented to the Chief of Engineers and approved January 21, .as basic description of such responsibilities. ch sting project. Portion of existing project concerned with atlng provides for general maintenance of chart coverage. eral' l ous classes of charts are issued consisting essentially of gen- ch I charts employin g small scales; coastal, river, and sectional Scharts employin(g medium scales; harbor and confined locality forrts employing large scales; and special charts such as those ter ,ereational use employing 8cales suitable for purposes in- a -td. Number of charts and individual chart scales and cover- aesare not fixed, project being made purposely flexible to per- ch alterations to keep abreast of changing needs. Essential to as well, is the earting, and pertinent to lake levels and hydraulicshorizontal ortion of project relating to maintenance of and 1344 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 vertical control coverage. Original control was established under early projects in connection with initial surveys by U.S. Lafe Survey on the Great Lakes and by other Government agencies i the other areas of the district. Original control has been pre- served wherever possible; where destroyed, it has been replacd as needed; and where necessary, it has been augmented by add tional control for use in connection with later surveys and other Corps work. Project includes publications with information for benefit of navigation in addition to that provided by charts. These consist of such publications as the Great Lakes Pilot an supplements thereto and various lake and river level bulletins The Pilot, issued annually, supplies full descriptions of physical conditions of waters charted and particulars of constantly cha. ing conditions not adapted to adequate or prompt representatio on charts. The supplements, issued monthly during the Great Lakes navigation season, provide corrections and additions to the Pilot. Lake and river level bulletins permit maximum utilization of navigational depths in Federal projects and elsewhere. Since 1859, lake level gages installed and operated by U.S. Lake SurveY have provided a continuous record of water levels of the Greqt Lakes and their connecting rivers. Present project provides for continued operation of a comprehensive gage network., In the fields of applied hydraulics and hydrology, present project pro, vides for continuing studies of all aspects thereof required for discharge of Corps responsibilities on the Great Lakes. io duties and responsibilities of the Lake Survey Research DivisiOn established by Chief of Engineers on December 20, 1962, were e panded by the same authority on June 15, 1966, and the ttle Great Lakes Research Center was assumed. The Center rnmaes scientific investigations of all aspects of fresh-water oceanogrAP relating to development and utilization of water resources of the Great Lakes system, in conjunction with which field surveys an observations are accomplished, data collected and analyzed, an s reports published. For additional details of existing project, ee Annual Report for 1962. Operationsand results during fiscal year. Studies to deterlie effects of 27-foot navigation project in the St. Clair-Detroit Rier system and to determine effectiveness of Detroit River compenb sating works were completed. Discharge measurements to e utilized for verification of these effects on the Detroit River were started. These measurements will also serve to aid in the desig of necessary compensation. Discharge measurements were also conducted at various locations on the St. Marys River during ,the summer of 1965. Reduction of data obtained from the sumer meterings was started. Water level data were collected at le permanent gaging stations. The Gibraltar gage to Belle Isl Coast Guard station telemetering system installed in 1964 W continued. That system is used in connection with low water warning broadcasts for the west end of Lake Erie and lower Detroit River. A telemetering system was placed in operation t the Toledo, Ohio, gaging station to aid the Coast Guard in olJ taining water levels in Maumee Bay. Construction was co pleted on a new gage installation at Grand Marais, Minn. In ad U. S. LAKE SURVEY cOllec many data of a hydraulic and hydrologic nature were secteed, reduced, tabulated, and disseminated. Engineering and oeltifl analyses and studies were made of these data and re- dorts prepared thereon for use by North Central Division and its dtricts and also by navigation, power, riparian, and other public Ur private interests. Consulting engineering services were Srllished North Central Division and its districts and to various 11ternational commissions, boards, and committees concerned ith the Great Lakes and their outflow rivers including the St. I rrence River. Details of the latter are described later herein. W'hore hydrographic surveys in the north end of Lake Huron to We extended over most of the reach from the Straits of Mackinac eat alse Detour Passage. Similar surveys were made along the eof shore of Lake Michigan from South Haven to 6 miles south o iuskegon Mich. Tellurometer traverse to establish horizontal a~t r ol between South Haven and Grand Haven was completed zon traverse extended north to Ludington. Recovery of horn- betal control along northeastern portion of Lake Michigan wasa for hyU. Basic horizontal and vertical control, required River by telloaulic study, was established along lower Detroit sect.rorineter traverse and precise levels. Sounding of hydraulic ono'ons in this reach was begun. Revisory surveys of harbors ha ake Michigan were completed and surveys made of selected 1 bors on Lakes H uron and Superior and along a portion of St. 0ryS River. Maintenance of vertical control network in ap- "Priate areas was accomplished coincident with the revisory arvey Program. Thirty-two special water level gages in selected bors oi Lakes Michigan and Huron were operated for first 3 flths of fiscal year, and 20 similar gages were installed in May 1 and operated during June at selected harbors on Lakes lron and Superior for verifying or establishing vertical control. fe Program for research and investigation of all aspects of ti~ shWater oceanography, coastal engineering, and related scien- l fields pertinent to the development of the water and related is 4 reSources of the Great Lakes was continued. The research Waon entrated in the fields of water motion, shore processes, l der characteristics, water quantity, and ice and snow. In- od in the studies of the various continuing projects were: ha eb harbor currents in four Lake Michigan harbors, two waves Lake Erie w bors, and one Lake Superior harbor; deepwater and aVe indcasting for three of the Great Lakes; short-period a. t'r-level disturbances in Lake Michigan; energy transfer at the k ater interface at a research tower in Lake Michigan off auSkegon, Mich., in cooperation with the University of Michigan Lak, ,the Weather Bureau; coastal area sedimentation in lower Drooetron ; sediment barrier effects in St. Clair River at site of act sed compensation sills; physical and chemical water char- 6ceristics in Lakes Erie and Huron by the sampling of water at '11nd 76 stations at 2 and 3 week intervals, respectively, by the 10 Shenehon; additional water temperature measurements at : Sites.; overwater precipitation was measured on seven small ete"ds in Lakes Erie and Michigan; the hydrometeologic param- rs leading to determination of evaporation from Lake Michigan 1346 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 were recorded at South Manitou Island; areal distribution of ice cover on the Great Lakes; and ice structure characteristiCS f Whitefish Bay, Lake Superior. A contract with UniversitY Michigan for study of wave hindcasting in the Great Lakes wch continued. Two research reports were published: Researh Report 1-1, "Currents at Little Lake Harbor, Lake Superior) James H. Saylor, January 1966, and Research Report 5-1, Grea Lakes Ice Cover, Winter 1964-65," by R. E. Wilshaw and D. th Rondy, December 1965. Computer processing of data for both the production of routine reports and special engineering and, scientific studies increased sharply to about 80 hours per month i Computer programs were written for reduction of water leVel wind and water temperature data, statistical analyses, lae regulation, geodetic control conversions, and for automatic Plo ting of hyperbolic curves for a Decca Hi-Fix survey location SY$ tem. The digitizer was used for about 600 station-month recor e of water levels and 90 station-month records of water tempertuT at hourly intervals and 18 months record of wind speed and dire tion at 6 minute intervals. An automatic plotter was installed ald used to plot 65 years of daily mean water levels and numerous othe projects such as beach erosion profiles. Data collected by chartilce field sections, supplemented by information from numerous souc were compiled for production of 44 revised chart editions ef cluding four new compilations), 2 new recreational chart volum and 2 chart reprints. Modification in aids to navigation 8o other critical chart data was made by hand on 194,406 copies the stock of printed charts to maintain them accurate thro1h the latest Notice to Mariners to the date of issue or sale. I' undertaking involved 2,452,601 separate operations consistingO deletion of changed chart features and addition of new feature$ Revised editions of 57 charts and three bound chart volumes reprints of six charts were processed and printed for a total 0 166,650 copies. In addition to charts, 1,150 hydrographs of le levels, 76,500 copies of water level bulletins also project MaPs status maps, and flood plain maps were printed for other district including 215,000 copies of military ground maps for the Arl y Map Service. Sold 105,372 charts to the public and issued 171s4 charts for official use with total receipts amounting to $145q,0 In addition, 3,301 training charts were sold amounting to $0 The 1966 edition of the Great Lakes Pilot was prepared. Soe 575 copies of the 1965 Pilot and 45 copies issued for official usled1 3,294 copies of the 1966 Pilot were sold and 486 copies is Sl for official use with total receipts amounting to $14,441. ntl Pilots sold and issued included appropriate Pilot Suppleme " Sold 1,358 copies of Waterborne Commerce Statistics parts and 551 copies issued for official use with total receipts amountig to $1,436. In addition to the above publications, monthly and semimonthly lake level bulletins and tabulations of other hydraulic and hydrologic data of the Great Lakes were sent to individtuals' newspapers, vessel interests, industrial interests, Congressme and Government agencies in both the United States and Canada to whom the information is of concern. The monthly bulletin mentioned above was sent regularly to over 5,000 official a U. S. LAKE SURVEY 1347 t"ivate recipients. Tabulations of river discharges, precipita- al1 diversions, stages at specific locations, and other data were als 9 dispatched regularly to 300 additional receivers, these being Imr3 arily official. Total cost for the year was $1,679,848 less 13,7 3 8 for items transferred into the project on a free issue ass.8 Reimbursable printing work was $64,641 of which $52,- 6 as received for reproducing project and other special maps 0C Orps Districts and the remainder was received for Army Map erv'ice ground maps. Cost of reproduction, correction, and dis- t bution of navigation charts, printing and distribution of the reat Lakes Pilot; and preparation, printing, and distribution of the .ilot Supplements amounted to $160,075 and was charged agai st the revolving fund, these costs to be realized through the Soale of charts and related publications to the public and other gvernInent agencies. Other reimbursable work done by Lake Urvey for district offices cost $35,596 during the fiscal year. International Activities cl addition to the foregoing work, following activities were tndUcted in connection with international boards and commit- International Joint Commission. The District Engineer and SerMber of his staff attended the semiannual appearances of the Great Lakes boards before the International Joint Commission "'Ottawa and Washington, D.C. o nternational Lake Superior Board of Control. Periodic re- orts of water levels and recommendations regarding regu.lation th Lake Superior were furnished the Board. The computation of kCeeffects of Lake Superior regulation on the lower lakes is being Pt current for the Board's use and information. lV-nternational Niagara Board of Control and International ttqara Committee. The District Engineer and a member of his palf attended meetings of the Board in Washington and Niagara Salls , Ontario. The Lake Survey began studies for determining or the committee the effect of an increase in diversions and poWer operations. trinternational St. Lawrence River Board of Control. The Dis- ngineer and theOt loaerd members of his staff attended six meetings of and Working Committee-one in Washington, three in ttawva, and one each in Detroit and New York. r eguationaRepresentatives. The District Engineer is U.S. euation representative. Each Thursday he coordinates the C "ulated outflow of Lake Ontario for the ensuing week with the adia regulation representative and informs the Power 4thority of the State of New York of the quantity. Plan 958D -r isbeing used as the plan for determination of the outflow r M Lake Ontario. Plan 1958-D was developed as a cooperative Project by the Canadian and U.S. regulation representatives as Part of their responsibility to the Board. Development of a new lake is under consideration as Dart0f111 to the regulation of that ap1roach tart of this continuing responsibility. For use in this study the ortal Water supply to the lake for 1965 by quarter months was co- rinated with Canada. This data development was an extension 1348 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of previously coordinated data. Collaboration with Canada in the collection of Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River data needed for the regulation continued. The District Engineer or a nAen ber of his staff attended five meetings of the Board's Operation$ Advisory Group. During the fiscal year the regulation situatiOl on Lake Ontario, making supply forecasts, and preparing monthly reports for the Board's information concerning the effects er certain supply sequences on the levels of Lake Ontario. Another function of the regulation representative is authorization of opera" tion of Iroquois Dam. The dam was operated on seven occasions during fiscal year. St. Lawrence Committee on River Gaging. The District En" neer is chairman of the U.S. section. Inspection of St. Lawrence River water-level gages was made jointly with the Hydro Electr ice Power Commission of Ontario and monthly random checkS were made of water-level-record reductions of the power entities. one field inspection was made in conjunction with the Water 1sl sources Branch, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, of the procedures for determination of flow throug the structures of Lake St. Lawrence. Random checks of the dailY flow from Lake St. Lawrence through the several structures were made each month, and the checks were coordinated withithof Water Resources Branch. The 22d and 23d progress reports of the committee were prepared and presented to International St' Lawrence River Board of Control. Great Lakes Levels Board and Working Committee. The Dis" trict Engineer and members of his staff attended three meetiggs of the Working Committee; one in Ottawa and two in Chicao ' The District Engineer is Chairman of the U.S. Section of the Regulation Subcommittee of the Working Committee. The Su committee held three meetings; two in Detroit and one in Otts.' Two pilot studies, one on Lake Superior and one on Lake Ontarioe' for regulation and data simulation on these lakes were started and completed. A draft report covering the two studies was pre pared for the Working Committee to the Board. A work progra covering proposed regulation studies for the entire Great LakDe system was also prepared...d Coordinating Committee on Great Lakes Basic Hydraulic As Hydrologic Data and Subcommittees. The Chief Technical A5 sistant of the Lake Survey serves as a member of the U.S. sectil of the committee, while members of the Lake Survey staff serve as members of the subcommittees. (a) Lake Levels SubcomrTmt tee. Work continued on compilation of a report titled "istor of Water Level Gages, Lake Erie and Niagara River". (b) River Flow Subcommittee. Three meetings of the subcommittee were held, one in Cornwall, Ontario, and two in Detroit, ]yich. Work continued on hydraulic studies of St. Marys and St. Clair Rivers. The purpose of these studies is to determine the bes values of the flows of record. (c) Physical Data Subcommittee Work on determining areas of Lakes Superior, Michigan, anl Huron and the St. Marys River drainage basins contintlued Work started on the determination of the volume of water ill Lakes Michigan-Huron and Erie. (d) Vertical Control Subcorn- U. S. LAKE SURVEY 'ittee. Two meetings of the subcommittee were held. Plans Were made for coordinated vertical control work, required for re- 1lw and reevaluation of International Great Lakes Datum 155). Field work will begin in fiscal year 1967. eO'eat Lakes Study Group. Steering Committee. The District "gilneer and a staff member attended two meetings of the group, 0ole in Chicago and one in Toronto. Dfata Processing Branch. A meeting of the Branch, held in uly inthe Lake Survey offices, was chaired by a Lake Survey Seaff member A total of 42 "Notices of Research Projects" were eceived, printed and disseminated to members of the Study tiGroup. A "Water Temperature Network" publication was ini- ated to distribute on a monthly basis, water temperature data rselected sites around the Great Lakes. .prConditionat end of fiscal year. All new work under various $2 jects is complete. New work under existing project cost ~,755,914 and maintenance thereunder to June 30, 1966, cost $6,66 7 ,486 a total of $19,423,400. At end of fiscal year, Lake sairvey publications available for issue to official users and for ale to general public consisted of 143 charts of the Great Lakes connecting waters, including 5 charts of Lake Champlain, charts and 1 chart volume of 61 charts of New York State arge Canal System, 18 charts of Minnesota-Ontario Border akes and 4 recreational craft chart volumes (Detroit River- ,keSt. Clair-St. Clair River: 47 charts; West End of Lake She: 34 charts; Inland Route, Mich.: 12 charts; and South reof Lake Erie: 35 charts), and the 1965 Great Lakes Pilot ad supplements. A hydrograph of mean monthly lake levels is Sblished for free distribution, as well as a monthly bulletin of leke levels showing current elevations, comparisons with past ravel l vels and forecasts of future levels, and a semimonthly bulletin corecasting water levels and available depths in the Great Lakes n ecting channels. Tabulations of river discharges, precipita- I,,diversions, stages at specific locations on the lakes, and other ti4draulic and hydrologic data are also available. Other tabula- lons and compilations of data in charting and geodetic fields are sted currently for use in answering the large number of in- 'ries for such data received each year. Cost and financial statement Ya 1i1al Totalto Year.......... . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juno 30, 1966 Nework. ADoropriated... .. .,729,811 1.. c ost 136,729,811 Maintene ............................................................ 16,729,811 propriated.......... s$95,000 $1,000,00$1,160,000 $1,500,000 $1,675,000 16,728,490 685,760 916,051 1,194,078 1,523,339 1,666,110 16,667,486 11cludes $8,973,897 for new work for previous projects. 2. EXAMINATIONS AND SURVEYS da Fiscal year cost was $19,699 for collection and study of basic atain connection with International water studies and $19,687 4 connection with survey report on Great Lakes water levels. LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT * his district (total area, about 345,000 square miles) comprises e drainage basins tributary to the Pacific Ocean that are in fornia between the Mexican boundary and Cape San Martin )Ut 265 miles north of entrance to Los Angeles HIarbor); en- Colorado River drainage basin, which is in southeastern fornia, southeastern Nevada, southern and eastern Utah, EWestern Wyoming, western Colorado, western New Mexico, Arizona; that part of the Great Basin that is in southwestern 1, southern Nevada, and southeastern California; and the ed States parts of those small drainage basins in southern ona and southwestern New Mexico west of the Continental de that drain southward into Mexico. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Flood Control-Continued 1. 2. Dana Point Harbor, Calif. 1352 22. Gila River basin, Ariz.: Marina del Rey, Los An- A. Gila and Salt Rivers 3. geles County, Calif .... 1353 levee and channel orro Bay Harbor, Calif.. 1355 improvements .... peeanside harbor, Calif.. 1356 B. Gila River down- ort Hueneme (Channel stream from Paint- pIslands) Harbor, Calif.. 1358 ed Rock Reservoir 1376 6. port San Luis, Calif .... 1359 C. Gila River, Camels- 7. Redondo Beach King Har- back Reservoir site 8. bor,Diego san Calif ...... r, alif 1360 to Salt River .... IHarbor, Calif. D. Indian Bend Wash .. 1377 9. 1361 Santa Barbara Harbor, E. Painted Rock Reser- C alif. ................. 1363 voir ........... 1378 10. Reconnaissance and condi- F. Phoenix, Ariz., and tion surveys ........... 1366 vicinity (including 11. 1378 Other authorized naviga- New River) ..... 12. tion projects..... ..... . 1366 G. Pinal Creek channel Navigation work under spe- improvements .... 1379 cial authorization ...... 1366 H. Santa Rosa Wash ( Tat Momolikot Alteration of Bridges Dam) ........... 1379 3. Authorized alteration of I. Tu cson diversion bridges ............... channel ......... 1380 J. Whitlow Ranch Res- Beach Erosion Control ervoir, Queen Creek 1381 14. Anaheim Bay Harbor, 23. Little Colorado R i v e r 15. Orange County, Calif. . . 1366 basin, Ariz.: ird Rock area, La Jolla, Winslow (Little Col- 1368 orado River) ....... 1382 16. San Diego, Calif ...... Doheny Beach State Park, 24. Los Angels County drain- Calif. ................. 1383 1369 age area, Calif ........ 17. Oceanside San Diego 1383 Existing project ...... 1. County, Calif.......... . 1370 Project estimates ..... 1385 SPoint Mugu to San Pedro Authorizing acts ...... 1387 19. breakwater, California 1371 Local cooperation ..... 1387 SVentura-Pierpont a r e a, Operations and results California ........ . .... 1372 during fiscal year ... 1388 2o - Other authorized beach ero- Condition at end of Sion control projects ... 1373 fiscal year .......... 1390 Project costs ......... 1392 21 Flood Control 25. Mojave River Reservoir, 21. Alamo Reservoir, Bill Wil- Mojave River basin, liams River, Ariz ..... 1374 Calif.................. 1395 1352 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Flood Control-Continued Flood Control-Continued 26. Pine and Mathews Can- 32. Whitewater River basin, yons Reservoirs, C o 1 o - Calif.: rado River basin, Nev.. 1396 A. Banning levee- S a n 1403 27. San Diego River basin, Gorgonio River .. Calif., San Diego River (Mission Valley) ...... B. Tahchevah Creek de- 28. Santa Ana River basin, tention reservoir Calif., Lytle and Warm and channel im- 1403 Creeks.............. provements .... 1398 1404 29. Santa Ana River basin C. Tahquitz Creek .. (and Orange County), 33. Inspection of completed Calif ................. 1398 flood control projects .. Existing project ...... 1398 34. Scheduling flood control Project estimates ...... 1405 1400 reservoir operations .. Authorizing acts ...... 1400 Other authorized flood con- Local cooperation ..... 1400 35. 1405 Operations and results trol projects ....... during fiscal year .. 1400 36. Flood control work under 1406 Condition at end of fiscal special authorization . year ................ 1401 30. Santa Clara River basin, General Investigations Calif., Santa Paula Creek channel improve- 1406 37. Surveys ................ ments................ 1401 31. Santa Maria Valley levees, 38. Collection and study of 1407 Santa Maria River basin, basic data ............. 1401 Calif. ................ 1402 39. Research and development 1. DANA POINT HARBOR, CALIF. Location. 'On Pacific Coast in southern part of Orange County, about 40 miles southeast of Los Angeles and Long Beach Harborst 60 miles northwest of San Diego Harbor, and 17 miles southeast of Newport Beach Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5101.) Existing project. Plan provides for establishment of a harbor at Dana Point to accommodate 2,000 small craft and to serve asA harbor of refuge for light-draft vessels; an entrance channel 500 feet wide, 2,000 feet long, and 20 to 15 feet deep; a main channel 400 feet wide, 3,250 feet long, and 15 to 10 feet deep; an east channel 250 feet wide, about 700 feet long, and 10 feet deep; an anchorage area 350 feet wide, about 600 feet long, and 10 eet deep; a turning basin 450 feet wide, 500 feet long, and 10 feet deep; a west breakwater 5,400 feet long; and an east breakwater 2,340 feet long. Plane of reference is mean lower low water. Range of tide between mean lower low water and mean higher high water is 5.3 feet. Extreme range is about 10 feet. AP' proved estimated (1966) first cost for project is $9,200,000, coW" prising $4,604,000 Federal (including $24,000 for Coast Guar costs) and $4,596,000 non-Federal. Existing project was adopted by 1962 River and Harbor Act. (HI. Doc. 532, 87th Cong., 2d sess$., contains a map of document plan.) Local cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash 50 percent of the first cost of construction of general navigation fa' cilities; provide lands and rights-of-way for construction and fi~ ture maintenance and aids-to-navigation upon request of Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil-disposal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor or cost of RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1353 uch retaining works; hold the United States free from damages; rovide and maintain adequate service frontage and public landing wth suitable supply facilities, necessary mooring facilities and utities, and access roads, parking areas, and other necessary oblic-use shore facilities, open to all on equal terms; first phase O development to be completed within 5 years, and full develop- 11aent Witi eS .Within 15 years, after completion of general navigation ities; operate a general anchorage area and/or mooring facili- foes With reserved spaces adequate for transient boat traffic and torbreuge, open to all on equal terms, dredging of berthing areas t e commensurate with depths of Federal channel improve- igents; and secure and hold in the public interest all lands border- h development to a width sufficient for proper functioning of tr'Terminal facilities. Since 1956, Orange County Harbor Dis- est constructed the following improvements at Dana Point at an to *lated cost of $350,000: A paved access road from top of bluff by Cove; about 2 acres of filled land protected from wave action Dbltone revetment; a 300-foot-long concrete pile-trestle pier; and ic restrooms and parking facilities. lPerations and results during fiscal year. Design studies and as and specifications were completed. ti condlition at end of fiscal year. Contract plans and specifica- 0ts are complete and a contract has been awarded. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS i ear Total to ea.... ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWork. ........................ DroDriated...... $70,000 $163,000$1,000,000 $1,233,000 ........................ .......... 58,944 161,477 -82,925 137,496 OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS V1i0aly Total to ...... 1962 163 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NewWor"k: ... .. . contributed t ... .................... ... ...... ..........$635,000 $635,000 .. .................. 134,383 134,383 CALIF. 2. MARINA DEL REY, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, 5,000..635,000 cLocation. On Santa Monica Bay, in Los Angeles Los County, on Cast of southern California, 20 miles northwest of Angeles Carbor and 390 miles southeast of San Francisco Bay. (See oast and Geodetic Survey Charts 5101 and 5144.) harbor for light-draft vessels at Marina dleisting I ey. Los AngelesACounty, sponsor of project, requested mod- project. Ication of document plan. That modified plan, which replaced dclent plan, was approved by Chief of Engineers June 29, with (1959) 1956* That plan was further modified in accordance provides for master plan of local interests. The harbor, which lrotected berthing facilities for about 6,500 small craft and fa- 1354 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 cilities for parking 2,500 trailer-mounted craft, includes an e" trance and main channel, 700 to 1,000 feet wide, with comblined length of about 10,000 feet and dredged to depths of 20, 15, nd10 feet below mean lower low water. From outer ends of jettfo inland for about 5,100 feet, project depth is 20 feet; thence,.fe about 2,300 feet to a point opposite middle of mole 2, project depth is 15 feet; and thence for about 2,600 feet to north end fr main channel, project depth is 10 feet. An additional 2 feet for advance maintenance is added to 10-foot depth. Existing north Ballona Creek jetty was extended 760 feet to function as soul jetty of entrance channel and as a barrier between flood channel and entrance channel; and a new jetty about 2,000 feet long W constructed at north side of entrance channel. Improvement also includes six 600-foot-wide and two 450-foot-wide side ba sn ranging from about 1,200 to 2,400 feet long, with interveni moles about 350 feet wide. Basins are dredged to 10 feet deep, except basins A and B, where east ends are dredged to d feet to accommodate large boats. About 12,500,000 cubic yards of dredged material was utilized for construction of moles deposition on adjacent lowlands and beaches. Federal participa- tion was limited by authorizing act to 50 percent of cost of ell trance jetties and of entrance and main channel. As a result Of model studies after high tides and surge in navigation chandi during the winter of fiscal year 1963, project was further moe fled to include a 2,360-foot-long offshore breakwater about 640 feet seaward of entrance channels. Federal participation on this modification was limited to 50 percent of cost. Plane of reference is mean lower low water. Range of tide between mean lower 10W water and mean higher high water is 5.6 feet. Extreme range 'i about 10.5 feet. Approved estimated (1964) first cost for project as modified is $27,468,000, comprising $4,295,000 Federal (includI ing $42,000 for Coast Guard costs) and $23,173,000 non-Federl (including $4,253,000 required contributed funds). Existig project was adopted by 1954 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 38 83d Cong., 2d sess.). A map of modified plan is in addendum Ito "Design Memorandum No. 1, General Design for Playa Del Rey Inlet and Harbor, Venice, Calif.," prepared by Los Angeles Pis" trict November 1956. This modifled plan was further modifie to conform to the 1959 master plan of local interests and to provide an offshore breakwater as an additional protective structure fof the harbor. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. About 2,135 boats are presently berthed in 11 operating anchorages within the harbor, with additional a, chorages soon to open and slips, scheduled for completion end of 1966, for some 2,800 boats. A Coast Guard station with permanently assigned 83-foot cutter, a fire-fighting detachment with two fire boats and a land rig, and a harbor patrol with three patrol boats are on 24-hour duty. A fuel dock capable of serV icing several thousand boats, a launching hoist for trailer-borne boats, and two haulout and repair yards are in operation, one containing a marine railway. A hotel, motel, and four resta' RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1355 ratseplus two snack bars and a coffee shop, are in operation, it totl additional restaurants and a motel under construction. A 68nal of 726 apartment units have been opened, with an additional 68sunits being planned. Harbor will ultimately have slips for soe 6,000 boats and dry storage for 2,000 more. andperations and results during fiscal year. A reconnaissance d condition survey was conducted. 1ion at end of fiscal year. Construction was started Feb- itary Was 5. Construction of jetties, which are in good condition, a'.completed in November 1958; and construction of bases for wa lgation aids was completed in September 1959. Dredging t'as completed April 1962; and revetment, May 1962. Construc- aidl of offshore breakwater, together with bases for navigation Was completed April 1965. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS a Year Total to . . 162 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 ,481,198$70,652 1,116,323 820,380 -$709 14,237,737 aneena................... elt ..... ...... .193 ........................ 5,205 5,398 TOPriated........... 5,205 5,398 11............................ .193........................ cludes$1,844,446 other contributed funds. REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS PFa arca . Total to 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1066 tributed ,546,125 $403,875..... ...... $4,408,500 ... 669 $85,030 923,150 1,003,090 $6,254 4,238,456 3. MORRO BAY HARBOR,CALIF. o~Location. Morro Bay is on the Pacific coast, 110 miles south VIonterey Bay, 120 miles northwest of Santa Barbara Harbor, 4dnearly midway between San Francisco and Los Angeles. se Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5387.) b isting, project. Two randomstone breakwaters, the upcoast reakwater extending 1,800 feet south by west from Morro Rock, feet dOwnicoast breakwater extending west from sandspit 1,399 eet, thence northwest 433 feet, a total distance of 1,832 feet; an 11trance channel 16 feet deep and 350 feet wide; Navy channel h feet deep, ranging from 350 to 800 feet wide from entrance tannel to town of Morro Bay; Morro channel from town of Morro Sty to lower bay, 12 feet deep and generally 150 feet wide; a Sdike extending 1,600 feet from Morro Rock to mainland; da quarry-waste revetment levee extending 6,930 feet along tierfront at Morro Bay to retain marginal fills. A rehabilita- to Plan, to replace project-document plan, was approved in Deteriorated and channels structures existing were re- ored to1961. tgust substantially the dimensions at completion of 1356 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 original construction, except that reconstructed breakwater 100 feet bayward of original alinement and has flatter side slope and heavier armor stone. Breakwater head is a trapezoiol prismoid constructed of monolithic concrete. Plane of reference is mean lower low water. Range between mean lower low wate and mean higher high water is 5.4 feet. Extreme range is about 8.5 feet. Federal first cost for new work for completed project was $2,612,093 Navy funds. Working estimate (1965) of Federal first cost for rehabilitation is $2,200,000. Existing proJect adopted by 1945 River and Harbor Act, includes improvements as set forth in House Document 283, 77th Congress, 1st sessio and further harbor development as desired by Navy Depar ment in accordance with plans on file in Office of the Chief Engineers. A map of rehabilitation plan as approved is in,e sign Memorandum, General Design for Rehabilitation of North Breakwater and Continuing Maintenance of Morro Bay HarbOr, Near Morro Bay, California," prepared by Los Angeles District December 1960 and revised August 1961. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. None required under rehabilitation plan. Terminal facilities. Facilities, which are adequate for exi* ing commerce, comprise 640 feet of existing piers constructed b Navy, 550 feet of piers and 150 feet of floating docks construted by San Luis Obispo County, 263 feet of floating docks constructel by California Division of Beaches and Parks, 1,440 feet of privatey owned piers, and 4,925 feet of privately owned floating docks. Operations and results during fiscal year. A reconnaissance and condition survey was conducted at a cost of $4,810. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was coO' pleted in 1946. Downcoast breakwater and stone dike connect ing Morro Rock and mainland were completed in 1942; retaining levee, marginal fills along waterfront, and channel to lower baY' in 1944; the upcoast (Morro) breakwater, in 1946; and naviga tion channels were dredged to project dimensions in August 195 Rehabilitation work, consisting of reconstruction of Morro brea water, was completed in June 1964. Maintenance dredging W completed October 1964. Cost and financial statement FTotal to Fiscal year ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: Appropriated ................................ ..................... 512,083 1$2,F 61 99 Coet................. ....................................... Maintenance: o I, 400 Appropriated.......... $3,589 $438,500 -$81,152 $55,400 -57,690 22, Cost.................. 3,589 767 18,550 375,885 8,006 22,019, Rehabilitation: 493 Appropriated.......... 800,000 ............ 1,400,000 ............ -67,507 2, 132 Cost.................. 8,141 685,642 1,370,664 55,880 8,084 2, 128:411 1Navy funds. 2 Includes $307,945 Navy funds. 4. OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CALIF. Location. On coast of southern California at Oceanside, about RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1357 0 miles north of city of San Diego. (See Coast and Geodetic urvey Chart 5101.) oExisting project. Maintenance of general navigation features id]el Mar Boat Basin constructed by U.S. Navy and of Ocean- cee Harbor constructed by local interests. These features in- 0 lude approach channel common to Del Mar Boat Basin and eneanside Harbor, 700 feet long, 750 feet wide, 20 feet deep; and deerance channel to Del Mar Boat Basin, 3,800 feet long, 20 feet 0ep, With widths 300 to 400 feet. Other features, which involve fe eanside Harbor only, are (a) entrance channel about 2,000 i long, 250 feet wide, 20 feet deep; (b) irregularly shaped turn- fe1 basin about 400 feet maximum width, 900 feet long, and 20 feet deep; (c) a south harbor channel ranging from 150 to 100 ee Wide, 1,950 feet long, 15 feet deep; (d) a north harbor chan- a Ilith widths up to 400 feet, 850 feet long, 10 feet deep; (e) fe Uth jetty about 1,000 feet long; (f) a north groin about 710 turt,long; and (g) about 1,200 feet of stone revetment adjacent to aning basin and entrance channel. Existing project was C0 orized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 76, 89th ., 1st sess.) with costs to be shared equally with Navy. fe Ocal cooperation. Local interests must hold United States ag e from damages; provide and maintain adequate service front- a n d public landing with suitable supply facilities, necessary aoe rcoring facilities and utilities, access roads, parking areas, and oeated public-use shore facilities, open to all on equal terms; rOerate a general anchorage area and/or mooring facilities having o ser e d spaces adequate for accommodation of transient boats, laes to all on equal terms; secure and hold in public interest all tjids bordering development to a width sufficient for proper fune- a ilg of harbor; provide lands and rights-of-way necessary for reintelnance of general-navigation features of the harbor; and be S Sanible for any maintenance required as a result of flooding op Scan Luis Rey River over the flood-control wall into the uth harbor ~i channel. Sorg " alfacilities. plu erminal facilities. Storage for about 570 boats (519 berths rats end-of-dock ties); a fuel dock; one boat hoist; a launching s0' Which can accommodate a maximum of five trailers; about boadry-boat-storage facilities; temporary parking for about 100 0 trailers; and a boat-repair facility. C1 eratiions and results during fiscal year. Dredged 684,000 oce from entrance YardsHarbor channels to Del Mar Boat Basin and eanside at a cost of $415,372 regular and Navy funds. d 0 ndition at end of fiscal year. First periodic maintenance redging completed in May 1966. Cost and financial statement al eTotal to ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 61 .----... ... aiAetnance. Coopriated...2.......$285,000 $285,000 ... .... .222,072 222,072 Cluding $220,672 Navy funds. 1358 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 5. PORT HUENEME (CHANNEL ISLANDS) HARBOR, CALIF. Location. On California coast, 65 miles northwest of Los Angeles Harbor and 345 miles south of San Francisco. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 5007 and 5202.) HIarbor is locally known as Channel Islands Harbor. Existing project. A harbor for light-draft vessels, on coast o southern California about a mile northwest of existing harborO Port Hueneme, and shore-protection works. Ventura County sponsor of project, requested modification of document plan Of harbor improvement and submitted a modified plan that wh adopted and approved by District Engineer. The harbor, whic11 provides facilities for berthing and servicing about 500 sal craft and commercial fishing boats at about same site et that under document plan, includes an entrance channel 20 feet deep, 300 feet wide, and about 1,650 feet long-protected by tea parallel jetties about 1,300 feet long; an entrance basin 20. feet deep, 300 to 750 feet wide, and about 1,750 feet long; an inet basin 10 feet deep, 900 to 1,400 feet wide and 1,200 to 2,000 0 long; and a side basin 10 feet deep, 100 to 250 feet wide, and c feet long. Dredged material, amounting to 6,238,000 cubic yards from entrance channel, interior basin, and sandtrap was deposited in feeder-beach area to restore downcoast shoreline. A 2,300- foot-long offshore breakwater was placed to form a sandtraP conjunction with jetties about 1,000 feet seaward from ffshodSe ends of jetties and normal to them. About 1,600,000 cubic yards of material are to be dredged each biennium from sandtrap forned by jetties and breakwater. This material will also be depositef to restore downcoast shoreline as long as Federal ownershipo lands and improvements necessitates such protection. Plane er reference is mean lower low water. Range between mean lowr e low water and mean higher high water is 5.4 feet. Extreme range is about 8.5 feet. Latest (1960) approved estimate00 Federal first cost of new work on project as modified is $6,400,500 (including $1,220,000 Navy funds but excluding cost to Coas Guard for installation of aids-to-navigation). Approved est11 mated (1960) non-Federal first cost for required items of lo"C cooperation is $3,880,000. Existing project was adopted by 1954 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 362, 83d Cong., 2d sess.). 5p of modified plan is in "Design Memorandum No. 1, General pe sign for Harbor and Shore Protection Works Near Port Huenieme California," prepared by Los Angeles District May 1957. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. A 4-lane launch ramp and 2 public dock, for outboard motorboats; paved parking for 50 car trailers and unpaved parking for an additional 100 cars; 250 boat slips; bo. repair facilities (yard and boat ways for boats up to 100 tons, cluding facilities for manufacturing boats from 30 to 75 feet long) ; and facilities for fuel and marine supplies. Restaur ntr and sport-fishing facilities are available. A dry-storage yard f r 100 boats, a 3-ton hoist, parking facilities for 130 cars, 100 boat slips, and two restaurants are under construction..I Operations and results during fiscal year. Current biennial RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT dedging was completed at a cost of $470,362 regular funds and ,141 Navy funds. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was started c rueary 1959. Construction of north and south jetties was Cmleted in June and September 1959, respectively. Construe- 0 of detached breakwater was completed in October 1960. PrioiPnal harbor dredging was completed in August 1961. Cur- et biennial dredging was completed in November 1965. Cost and financial statement Total to " ea 1966 June 30, 1966 .ear 1962 1963 1964 1965 ropriated........... -$23 -$11,383 ............. -$39 ............. $5,123,345 te 209,236 39,114 -$39 ........................ 15,123,345 oPriated ........ 5,000 742,928 28,500 409,668 $496,600 1,681,496 0 ,,t 70,868 619,847 485,987 500,659 21,677,361 2 $1,361,668 Navy funds and $210,748 other contributed funds. ,xCludes Cudes $408,948 Navy funds. 6. PORT SAN LUIS, CALIF. 1Location On coast of southern California at San Luis Obispo, 190 miles northwest of Los Angeles and 245 miles southeast of al Francisco. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5386.) t."Xisting project. A rubblemound breakwater with a top eleva- teo f 6 feet above mean high water, a top width of 20 feet, ex- elding 336 feet from Point San Luis to Whaler Island and 1,820 i eet southeast from the island, a total distance, including the land, of 2,401 feet. The breakwater protects the west cove of Wa Luis Obispo Bay from storms approaching from the south- Aest. Existing project was adopted by 1888 River and Harbor At (s.Doc. 81, 49th Cong., 2d sess.). The authorized project, A~nodified by Congress in 1893 and 1898, was completed in 1913. Slauthorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (T. Doc. 148, 88th .,1st sess.), existing project was renamed Port San Luis, br .f,and modified to provide for rehabilitation of existing tieakwater and construction of a 1,500-foot extension; construc- '.11 of a detached breakwater 4,000 feet long; removal of rock les, and dredging. Improvements under modified project de include an entrance channel 500 to 550 feet wide and 30 feet bee?) a basin 400 feet wide, 1,300 feet long, and 35 feet deep; a aea 400 feet wide, 400 feet long, and 15 feet deep; an anchorage rea 75 to 350 feet wide, 4,000 feet long, and 20 feet deep; and an decess channel 400 feet wide, 4,000 feet long, and 15 to 20 feet d.e Approved estimated (1966) first cost for modifying proj- 00 s $9,280,000, comprising $7,450,000 Federal (including $20,- for Coast Guard costs) and $1,830,000 non-Federal. I LOcal cooperation. Local interests must contribute in cash 50 ercent of first cost of detached breakwater; provide lands and rlhts-of-way for construction and future maintenance of im- grovements and for aids to navigation, including suitable spoil- b.DOsal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and em- anents therefor or cost of such retaining works; hold the 1360 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 United States free from damages; provide and maintain adequate service frontage and public landing with suitable supply facilitie, necessary mooring facilities and utilities, and access roads, parto ing areas, and other necessary public-use shore facilities, open to all on equal terms; operate a general anchorage area and/or mooring facilities with reserved spaces adequate for accommoninlda tion of transient boats for refuge, open to all on equal terIs,; secure and hold in the public interest all lands bordering develoP' ment to a width sufficient for proper functioning of the harboT) provide and maintain at local expense adequate public termrni and transfer facilities, open to all on equal terms; provide aid maintain depths in berthing areas commensurate with depthe provided in the related project areas; make such utility and oth' relocations or alterations as may be required for project purposei including removal of the existing Port San Luis wharf; provid or arrange for suitable marine-repair facilities; and provide necessary access road for construction of general navigation factil ties and first-stage commercial development. Terminal facilities. A commercial pier operated by Port Oil Luis Harbor District, an oil handling pier operated by Union0 Co., a pier operated by San Luis Obispo County, and a small . Coast Guard pier. Operations and results during fiscal year. Design studies, cluding model studies, were initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Design studies, including model studies, are about 10 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total t.66 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3019 New work: $48 41 Appropriated..................... ..................................... $80,000 1,673 Cost............... ..................................... ............ 23,256 Maintenance: 50964 Appropriated.......... ............ $593 $2,178 $2,478 ........... 59:64 Cost .................. ............ 593 2,178 2,478 . 1Includes $568,417 for new work and $54,715 for maintenance for project prior to n tion by 1965 River and Harbor Act. 7. REDONDO BEACH KING HARBOR, CALIF. Location. On Pacific coast in southern (downcoast) part of Santa Monica Bay, about 18 miles by sea northwest of Los Ange' les and Long Beach Harbors and about 417 miles southeast r * San Francisco Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Char$ 5101 and 5144.) Existing project. Reconstruction of about 1,455 linear feet of original (north) 2,400-foot stone breakwater, construction of 2,830-foot extension of original breakwater, and construction of a south breakwater 600 feet long; and maintenance of origitlq breakwater as reconstructed, the breakwater extension, and son e breakwater. Improvement modified in fiscal year 1964 to provide greater protection from heavy wave action. The modificatio. included raising crest height of 2,050 feet of north breakwater RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1361 fowr Plus 14 feet mean lower low water to plus 22 feet mean pWer low water and sealing that part of north breakwater to l1ou 9 feet mean lower low water. Plane of reference is mean er low water. In Santa Monica Bay, range of tide between ean] lower low water and mean higher high water is 5.6 feet. xreme range is about 10.1 feet. Approved estimated (1964) thderal first cost of new work is $4,800,000, including $20,000 for tire Coast Guard; and approved estimated (1957) non-Federal $2,t cost of new work for required items of local cooperation is '0oo000. Existing project was adopted by 1950 River and arbor Act (H. Doc. 303, 81st Cong., 1st sess.). A map of fo ed plan is in "Design Memorandum No. 2, General Design by I edondo Beach King Harbor, Calif.," prepared March 1964 Y°s Angeles District. ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. boTerminal facilities. Consist of 1,325 berths, 75 moorings, dry- f Storage facilities, 2 fuel docks, 6 boat hoists, boat-repair alities, and a pier just outside the harbor. OPerations and results during fiscal year. Final contract pay- 'eltWas made. brCondition at end of fiscal year. Reconstruction of existing 0eakwater was started in May and completed in October 1956. iOuth breakwater was started in November 1956 and completed I Janluary 1957. Extension of existing breakwater was started October 1956 and completed in May 1958. Construction of eakwater modification was completed November 1964. Cost and financial statement Total to rar 1966 June 30, 1966 ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 NewWork. t $22 ............ $258400 $628,000 -$10,169 $4,766,898 1 733,437 25,068 4,766,898 *tea* I............... 22.............117,726 S Co riated.. ........ 2,161 $20,195 .- 68 ............ 22,288 ,01 6,28 I 3, 9........ .......... 3t.......... .. 22,288 8. SAN DIEGO HARBOR, CALIF. Pacific coast just north of United States-Mexico b Locationline,Onabout (undary 96 miles southeast of Los Angeles Harbor. ee Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5107.) see page 1976 of Annual Report evious fo r 1915 and of details page 1642For projects. Annual Report for 1938. . isting project. A rubblemound jetty 7,500 feet long on id.iga Shoal; an entrance channel 40 feet deep and 800 feet che; removal of Middle Ground Shoal and widening entrance aannel to the eastward in that vicinity to a depth of 36 feet; a ?Ychannel 35 feet deep and 2,200 feet wide from near Whalers 1 ht to naval air station; an anchorage area north of bay chan- thl 1,200 feet wide, 12,000 feet long, and 35 and 26 feet deep in f e eastern and western halves, respectively; an approach to 35- deot anchorage, triangular in shape, 900 feet wide and 35 feet ep; an approach to 26-foot anchorage, triangular in shape, 800 1362 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 feet wide and 26 feet deep; a seaplane basin 1,500 feet wide, 12,000 feet long, and 8 feet deep, landward of anchorage area; turning basin 35 feet deep, opposite municipal piers; a chanel about 20,000 feet long, 1,500 to 2,500 feet wide, and 30 feet deep in southern part of bay; a channel to National City and Cnula Vista 20 feet deep and 200 feet wide; a seaplane basin in southere part of bay, 5,000 to 8,500 feet wide, 21,000 feet long, and 10 0feet deep, using a part of dredged material to fill an area of about 110 acres adjacent to southern end of basin; and an earthen dil(e 7,735 feet long to divert the San Diego River from San Diego BaY to Mission Bay. Plane of reference is mean lower low water. Range between mean lower low water and mean higher high Wae~ is 5.7 feet. Extreme range is about 10.7 feet. Approved estinlaeted (1966) Federal first cost of new work for active part of proje is $9,700,000, exclusive of amounts expended on previous pro] ects. Approved estimated (1954) Federal first cost of new oes for inactive part, comprising the completion of dredging in are' S and in Chula Vista channel, is $1,270,100. Dredging done with Navy funds in 1961 increased depth in entrance channel froee project depth of -40 feet mean lower low water to -42 feet mean lower low water. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents - 1 1 Mar. 3,1875 Diversion dike . .. ............................... Annual Report 1873, p. 1142. 1st sess' Sept. 19,1890 Jetty on Zuniga Shoal................................... 11. Ex. Doc. 177, 50th Cong.l (Annual Report 1888, p. 2114)" Mar. 4,1913 Dredge channel through outer bar 570 feet wide and 35 feet H. Doe. 1300, 62d Cong., 3d sess. deep, and a channel through middle ground 32 feet deep. July 27, 1916 Widen approach (area B) to San Diego municipal pier by II. Doe. 648, 64th Cong., 1st sess. dredging area C (north of area B). Aug. 8, 1917 Dredging area A (south of area 1B)........................ Rivers and Harbors Committee De, 8, 64th Cong., 2d sess. s Do.... Dredge 35-foot channel through Middle Ground.......... H. l)oc. 140, 65th Cong., st sess, Sept. 22,1922 Dredging areas D and E........... .. . 11.Doc. 1000, 66th Cong., 3d se~c 2 Mar. 3, 1925 Widen approach (area C) to San Diego municipal pier 1 by Rivers and H[arbors Committee dredging a portion of area F (north of area C). 68th Cong., 1st sess. July 3, 1930 Deepen to 40 feet channel through outer bar: along south and S. Doe. 81, 71st Cong., 2d sess. north banks,main channel;dredge turning basin, widen area and dredge a channel to National City and Chula Vista. H11, Aug. 30 19351 Widen bay channel to 2,200 feet with depth of 35 feet from H. Doc. 223, 73d Cong., 2d sess. the vicinity of Whalers Bight in lower bay to naval air station opposite turning basin. Aug.26,1937 Dredging areas Q, Q-1, M, N, and 0........... ......... Rivers and Harbors Committee pe. 89, 74th Cong., 2d sess. Oct. 17, 1940 Dredge a seaplane basin (area S) of about 3,000 acres, 10 II. Doe. 844, 76th Cong., 3d sess. feet deep, and fill an area of about 110 acres adjacent to southerly end of basin. 2 Mar. 2, 1945 Dredge triangular approaches to 26- and 35-foot anchorages, H. Doe. 390, 77th Cong., 1st sess area M. 1 Included in the emergency relief program, May 28, 1935. 2 Contains latest published map. Local cooperation. Complied with except for following loc cooperation required in connection with Chula Vista chan, dredging (an inactive part of existing project): a cash co al tribution of $10,000 and deepening areas adjacent to municiPl. piers to 35 feet. (See items of local cooperation referred to 1 S. Doc. 81, 71st Cong., 2d sess.) 8 Terminal facilities. Consist of 40,770 linear feet of whalrvs exclusive of Government-owned wharves, of which 17,240 linear feet are municipally owned; and 23,530 linear feet, privately RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1363 W "ed.In addition, there are 2 wharves at Coronado and 1 e ernmnent-owned wharf at North Island. Facilities are being Xpanded to meet increased commerce. d--Pverations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance redging was completed at a cost of $226,991 regularatfunds. A a cost of $5 naissance and condition survey was conducted Sabonditin at end of fiscal year. Active part of existing project Cabout 97 percent complete. Work remaining on active part 5 of a ssts completing dredging in triangular approaches to 26- c 3 -foot anchorages in area M. Maintenance dredging was "ClDeted February 1966. Total costs for existing project to June 30, 1966 Total p Nfilar Funds New work Maintenance . tr r bli ~ yks. .... ........ . ..... rerlief...................................... . . . ............... . . . . . ... . . ..... $7,951,256 86,352 . 186,352........... $670,566 $8,621,822 86,352 1,226,793 ...................................... 1226,793. Otheraederal 9,934,967 drl9,264,401 4,441 . 1670,566 4,441 i buted2 ....................................... 9,939,408 ............................................. 9,268,842 670,56 -142 feludes $254,795 Navy funds for dredging entrance channel in fiscal year 1961 to depth of 1Neet mean lower low water (or 2 feet below project depth). o"'Iederal funds spent by the Corps for betterments desired by local interests. Cost and financial statement to ise ear...Total 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 1962 1963 1964 ork: W% hl liated .............. ............ ...................... $9,419,105 " ce:............ ....... ..................................... ... '.9,419,105 $7,320 C0 ol)riated.......... $6,017 $7,396 $13,654 $270,521 671,923 .. ......... 7,320 6,017 7,396 13,654 269,020 670,566 $154,704 for new work and $59,904 for maintenance for previous projects; $86,352 1~elucdues fa works funds; and $1,226,793 emergency relief funds. Excludes $4,441 other contributed ald$254,795 Navy funds. 9. SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CALIF. Lo cation. On Pacific coast, 90 miles northwest of Los Angeles arbor and 320 miles southeast of San Francisco Harbor. (See 'st. and Geodetic Survey Chart 5261.) N"isting project. Maintenance dredging of depths existing t193 4in harbor formed by breakwater constructed by local 1 erests Maintenance by means of a fixed sand-intercepting 4qt 4to be provided and operated by and at expense of local erests is permitted, the United States to make available for Deration of the plant not exceeding $30,000 annually, whenever (leds are allotted for such purpose, provided that there shall be ftducted from such funds the actual cost of harbor maintenance (Udnecessary if and when intercepting plant has been installed. odification was authorized by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. *. 518, 87th Cong., 2d sess.), as follows: Construction of a 10 4foot extension to existing west breakwater, making a total ellth of 2,865 feet; construction of an east breakwater 2,500 1364 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 r feet long; construction of a 1,600-foot-long detached breakWe situated to form a sand trap; dredging an entrance channel 1, feet long, 400 feet wide, and 20 feet deep; dredging a turni basin 1,000 feet long, 500 feet wide, and 20 feet deep; dredging . east channel 1,200 feet long, 350 feet wide and 15 feet deep dredging a center channel 900 feet long, 250 feet wide, and feet deep; dredging a west channel 1,500 feet long, ranging. width from 200 to 350 feet, and 15 feet deep; and dredgi an L-shaped anchorage area 15 feet deep. Plane of referenceoi mean lower low water. Range of tide between mean lower water and mean higher high water is 5.4 feet. Extreme rano is about 10 feet. Approved estimated (1966) first cost for P?. ect as modified is $6,040,000, comprising $3,090,000 Federal(eod cluding $40,000 for Coast Guard costs) and $2,950 000 non Fd eral (including cash contribution of $2,940,000). Prior to aOd tion by Congress, work was authorized by Public Works Ad ministration. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents _e Maintenance dredging present depths into harbor formed S. Committee print, 73d Cong.2d * es' Aug. 30, 1935 by breakwater constructed by local interests. Mar. 2, 1915 Permits maintenance by means of a fixed sand-intercepting 11. Doc. 348, 77th Cong., 1st se, plant to be provided and operated by and at expense of ocal interests, United States to contribute to operating expense an amount not to exceed $30,000 annually, when- ever funds are allotted therefor, funds thus contributed to be reduced by actual cost of harbor maintenance if and when intercepting plant has been installed. Oct. 23, 1962 Modification of existing project.......................... H. Doc. 518, 87th Cong., 2d s tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Under plan for existing project, no specic local cooperation is required. However, $462,986 non-Federa funds made available by local interests were spent as follow$ $450,322 to cover excess cost of depositing dredged material al the beach over estimated cost of similar dredging with disPo~Sf at sea; and $12,664 for dredging near pier forel owned by the Navy. City of Santa Barbara entered into a co tract with the United States to substitute, in lieu of fixed saLQ intercepting plant, a movable dredge to work within protecte area to shape the shoal resulting from travel of sand arou' breakwater so as to provide added protection within harbor 3t to pump surplus sand and future accretions from harbor area e downcoast beaches. The city will provide and operate a drerge of sufficient capacity to maintain an entrance channel into ha o with a minimum depth of 15 feet and a minimum width of e feet. Subject to availability of operation and maintenance funds, the United States will reimburse the city on or before June 30 of each fiscal year not more than $30,000 toward aCt cost of condition surveys and operation of dredge. This contracti dated March 6, 1956, was executed March 22, 1956, to be effective July 1, 1956. Under plan to modify existing project, lo1 interests must give assurance they will hold the United States free from damages; provide and maintain necessary rnooritg RIVERS AND HARBORS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1365 acilities and utilities, including a public landing with suitable "ulply facilities open to all on equal terms in accordance with Pats approved by the Chief of Engineers, first phase of develop- aent to be completed within 5 years after completion of general '"Vgation facilities and full development to be completed within 5 Years; provide or arrange for suitable marine-repair facilities; ecure and hold in the public interest all lands bordering develop- aet to a width sufficient for proper functioning of harbor; bear 1 Y additional cost for replenishment of beach sands east of harbor over those costs required for maintenance dredging of oer a l navigation features; contribute in cash 49 percent of forstruction cost; provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way t construction and future maintenance, including suitable eSplo-disposal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and se ankments therefor or cost of such retaining works; repair and by existing west breakwater in accordance with plans approved Sthe oDistrict Engineer, and subsequent thereto transfer owner- of ~fbreakwater to the United States; construct sand fillet east Sha erbor concurrently with construction of east breakwater to bas l continued replenishment of beach sands to downcoast Ot aes; and remove a portion of Stearn's wharf and make such he alterations or relocations required for navigation improve- lo 7 'erminal facilities. A wharf 2,200 feet long, a pier 335 feet s,I> a landing float, an open mooring and slip anchorage for Whi craft and a launching ramp for small craft. The wharf, tieh is equipped with warehouse, loading facilities, and facili- s or small-craft repair, is used for general cargo and servicing tising and oil-exploration boats. The pier, which was con- riucted by the Navy, is now operated by city of Santa Barbara a Used for servicing pleasure craft and light commercial boats. acilities are adequate for existing commerce. atOperations and results during fiscal year. Condition surveys t draaintenance-dredging reports submitted by city of Santa garbara were audited. City of Santa Barbara was reimbursed o00 under terms of maintenance-dredging contract. Work 0 e project plan was continued. nidition at end of fiscal year. City of Santa Barbara sub- Aitted evidence that it has maintained an adequate entrance 0anel into harbor. Work on modified project plan is about complete. aercent Cost and financial statement callea Total to ............ 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 "o at opriated.... . ......... .$112,000 $18,000 $130,000 f aeis ".................13,272 79,140 92,412 Copriated.......... .$30,334 $32,000 $35,000 30,880 30,000 1995,046 ............ 30,594 31,066 35,898 30,916 30,000 1995,046 i dldes $29,198 public works funds, and $11,000 working funds for work performed in 4in e to existing project. Excludes $462,986 other contributed funds spent by the Corps for tance-dredging betterments desired by local interests. 1366 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 10. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Name of project Date survey condct Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, Calif...... ........................... June 1966 Newport Bay Harbor, Calif ......... .................................. August 1965 San Diego River and Mission Bay, Calif............................................ May 1966 11. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30,196' full report Name of project see Annual rtions Report Construction Ope tenace for- 0 jelO Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, Calif......................... 1965 1$34 626,719 Newport Bay Harbor, Calif.. ......... 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . 1958 5797,997 9,79 San Diego Ltiver and Mission Bay, Calif. .... 1960 59,855,317 xIncludes $2,187,047 for new work for previous projects; $1,593,667 public worksli"u rintsef d credit of $33,050 for transfer of land at Reservation Point; and $996,792 emergency ter m Excludes $1,672,575 other contributed funds spent by the Corps for new work bet t sired by local interests and Federal funds spent by Navy for new work in middle breakwate.,ted 2Includes $139,347 for maintenance for previous projects. Excludes $87,120 other contr1 funds spent by the Corps for maintenance betterments desired by local interests. 8 Excludes $796,897 required contributed funds. 8 Construction complete. Project is being held open pending model study that has e quested to investigate surge in east anchorage (Quivira Basin) during heavy seas ou od addition, studies are being made of the advisability of extending the south jetty of the control channel to provide additional needed protection against floods. ,clude SExcludes $557,832 other contributed funds for betterments desired by local interests. yearS Y minor completion costs of $9,798, $3,838, $32,994, $8,438, $4,935 and $12,985 in fisc 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, and 1966, respectively. 12. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) C li Fiscal year costs were $880 for Cabrillo Beach Marina, 13. AUTHORIZED ALTERATION OF BRIDGES For last Cost to June 3,1966 full report Name of project see Annual ti osd Report Construction Opertsc for- aiutea Removal of West Basin bridge, Los Angeles Harbor, Calif. ............ 1958 $119,495 14. ANAHEIM BAY HARBOR, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIF. Location. On coast of southern California in Orange CoU ' 4 miles southeast of mouth of Los Angeles River at Long Je3eao Existing project. Plan as originally authorized provided O Federal participation by contribution of Federal funds toward cost of artificial placement of about 200,000 cubic yards of sand on the shore, construction of one groin at Seal Beach and place- ment of a feeder beach of 1 million cubic yards of sand at Surf Side. Existing project was later modified to provide @ Federal participation by contribution of Federal funds towa cost of work originally authorized for Seal Beach and I offshore breakwater at Newport Beach and placement of 3 MI lion cubic yards of suitable material on the beach in lieu BEACHI EROSION CONTROL--LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1367 Placement of feeder beach at Surf Side. However, in accordance th 1956 River and Harbor Act, construction of any or all 1Provements in project may be undertaken by the Corps under trangernents explained under local cooperation. Approved esti- ated (1960) first cost for Seal Beach is $272,000, comprising 5,00ederal and $177,000 non-Federal; approved estimated (1966) first cost for additional work under modified project is 6'970,000 ($4,670,000 Federal and $2,300,000 non-Federal). 0 Xisting project was adopted by 1954 River and Harbor Act (H. 1962.34p9, 83d Cong., 2d sess.). Modified project was adopted by o62iver and Harbor Act (H11. Doc. 602, 87th Cong., 2d sess., cOtais latest published map). i Lcal cooperation. Local interests must adopt project plan of C Provement and construct improvement unless Corps agrees to reoellStruct improvement upon request of local interests and upon fteeipt of required contributed funds and, if needed,submitadvanced ads from local interests. Local interests must also for troval by Chief of Engineers before starting work de- d plans and specifications for project and also arrange- main- teels for prosecuting work by local interests; assure such useful Salance of protective and improvementofmeasures during ieof project, including replenishment feeder beach at suitable Seryvals, as may be required to serve project's intended purpose; DrOvide lands, easements, and rights-of-way; assure that water hltution that would endanger health of bathers will not be per- , ed;' and assure continued public ownership of shore upon adich.amount of Federal participation is based and assure its Inlistration for public use only. Operations and results during fiscal year. Study of sand move- dellts along the shore and into Newport Canyon as a step in btui' of other phases of modified project continued. Reim- rsemlent of advanced funds was made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of groin and placement of 225,000 cubic yards of sand on the beach at Seal Beach was initiated by local interests in May and completed in September 1959. Cracks and spalling, with resultant exposure itsreinforcing steel, occurred at some places on groin since its complletion. A 5-foot cap was removed by contractor and rDlaced, and additional required repairs were made. Sand place- ofe t Under modified project is complete. Design of other phases project has been deferred pending results of sand- oodifiedstudy. M veement Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 1368 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: 7120 Contributed........... .............. ........ $712 000 ..... Cost...................................... 58,768 $54,257. 5,532 ADVANCED FUNDS Total to Fiscalyear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 196 New work: $1,447000 Advanced$..... .. $1,447,000 ... 1, Cost..........1,214,500 -$1,289,880 15. BIRD ROCK AREA, LA JOLLA, SAN DIEGO, CALIF. Location. On coast of southern California, in the Bird ock area of La Jolla, San Diego County. Existing project. Provides for construction of a continuoU$ stone revetment extending downcoast along the shore for about 1,300 feet from about 250 feet upcoast of Bird Rock Ave nue to southern line of Forward Street. Approved estimnl (1965) first cost for project is $108,000 ($27,500 Federal ar $80,500 non-Federal). Existing project approved by Chief 01 3 Engineers, October 19, 1964, under provisions of section l 1962 River and Harbor Act.d Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and rights-of-way; hold the United States free from damages; assuill that water pollution that would affect the health of batherstr not be permitted; assure maintenance of protective measur during useful life of project as may be required to serve their intended purpose; control surface-water runoff and drainage t extent that it will not endanger protective features to icl constructed; assure continued public ownership of publiC'ly owned shore and its administration for public use during eCor nomic life of project; and assure continued availabilitY for public use of privately owned shores involved in project where Federal aid is based on such use. Operations and results during fiscal year. Plans and specifica tions were initiated.30 Condition at end of fiscal year. Plans and specifications are percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to 6 Fiscal year ................ 962 1903 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19 New Appropriated......... work:$1, ........... ............ ............ $27,500 .... .g,33 Cost....................... ................................ 2,333 1Excludes $5,000 preauthorization costs. B3EACH EROSION CONTROL---LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1369 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Pheal Total to lal.......... Year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Newwork: .*.......... *.. ............ Coot, otributed .. . .... . ** ***** :... 2,430 . $6,000 ... 2,430 $6,000 16. DOHENY BEACH STATE PARK, CALIF. Location C At Doheny Beach State Park, mouth of San Juan ek,on coast of Orange County in southern California. coflristing project. Plan provides for Federal participation by Cotribution of Federal funds toward cost of following shore- botection features to be constructed at Doheny Beach, Calif., fe local interests: A protective beach 100 feet wide and 6,000 et long-not including a 600-foot section at mouth of San Juan ,reek--to be created by artificial placement of about 329,000 tic yards of suitable sand between a point near upcoast bound- 4er of Doheny Beach State Park and downcoast boundary of park S'tea Capistrano Beach fishing pier; and construction of a single 0sel or concrete sheet-pile groin, 250 feet long, at terminus of .Per le.vee bulkhead of San Juan Creek. Approved estimated 16~)6) first cost for project is $1,027,000, comprising $588,000 by eral and $439,000 non-Federal. Improvement was authorized Z 60 River and Harbor Act (H.Doc. 398, 86th Cong., 2d sess.). 0 ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. of Perations and results during fiscal year. Phase 2, consisting ofPlacement of a sandfill downcoast from San Juan River, was e'pleted at a cost of $82,742 regular funds, $254,191 required alltributed funds, and $340,014 advanced funds. Operations s1consisted of reimbursement of advanced funds and adjust- Sof overpayment in required contributed funds. C1 Ondition at end of fiscal year. Phase 1, the beach fill up- 1ast from San Juan River and the groin, was completed in June 1964 and phase 2 was completed in March 1966. Phase 3, con- tlo lg of participating in beach nourishment, is a Corps obliga- ' until 1976. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS r Yeal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwor copriated........... ..................................... $142,000 $142,000 ................................ 141,286 . . ............ 141,286 1370 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 17. OCEANSIDE, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIF. Location. On coast of southern California, in San Diego County, at Oceanside. Previous project. For details see pages 1579 to 1581 ofA nual Report for 1960. ie Existing project. A protective beach generally 200 feet W and about 13,000 feet long between Camp Pendleton Harbor li Witherby Street and 100 feet wide and about 4,500 feet 100~ south of Loma Alta Creek by deposition of about 2,200,000 subic yards of suitable material, including 500,000 cubic yards as b vance nourishment; and a groin about 800 feet long near northe limit of fill. In addition, a groin extension (not part of autho d ized project) was constructed at non-Federal expense. Approvet estimated (1962) Federal first cost is $1,350,000. Improvene was authorized by act of March 29, 1961 (IH. Doc. 456, 86th Co'*" 2d sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations con- sisted of payment for claims for last contract. About 680,000 cubic yards of sand obtained during periodic maintenance dredg- ing of Oceanside Harbor were deposited on beach at no cost to project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of groin ad its extension was completed in July 1961. Dredging was co0 pleted in April 1963. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Totalt Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June3 New work: t f369 Appropriated.......... $675,000 $673,491 -$39,300 $380 $60,000 $, 30 Cost.................. 675,000 623,171 10,828 555 55,750 BEACH EROSION CONTROL---LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1371 18. POINT MUGU TO SAN PEDRO BREAKWATER, CALIFORNIA Location. Proposed project is on California coast from To- aga Canyon on Santa Monica Bay to San Pedro breakwater at os Angeles Harbor. c"'lXisting project. Plan provides for Federal participation by tribution of Federal funds toward cost of following protective lo features under modified master plan for development of shoreline of Los Angeles County: (a) Widening existing beaches to bout 1,000 feet between Topanga Canyon and Ballona Creek, brd to about 300 feet between El Segundo and Redondo Beach 'eakwater and between proposed barrier groin near Topaz Street R edondo Beach and Malaga Cove; (b) construction of nine roins between Topanga Canyon and Temescal Canyon and a barrier groin at Cabrillo Beach; (c) construction of five groins be tween Temescal Canyon and proposed entrance to Marina del gey Harbor and a barrier groin in vicinity of Topaz Street in dPedondo Beach (all to be deferred pending demonstration of eed); (d) appurtenant drainage work comprising extension of ha~e storm-drain structures through widened beach; (e) re- 9bilitation of Santa Monica breakwater. In accordance with 1956 River and Harbor Act construction may be undertaken by corPs under arrangements explained under local cooperation. (Dproved estimated (1966) first cost of active portion of project 00abrillo Beach and El Segundo to Malaga Cove Units) is $7,820,- 0 ($3,910,000 Federal and $3,910,000 non-Federal). Existing 8oject was adopted by 1954 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 277, 14d Cong., 2d sess.). Project document contains latest published '/Local cooperation. Local interests must adopt project plan of torovement and construct improvement unless the Corps agrees Sconstruct improvement upon request of local interests and 4Don receipt of required contributed funds and, if needed, ad- obaced funds from local interests. Local interests must also obtain approval of Chief of Engineers of detailed plans and loecifications for prosecuting work before start of such work by lcal interests; provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for accorplishment of work; hold the United States free from dam- baes; prevent water pollution that would endanger health of th -ers; and maintain continued public ownership of beaches and aeir administration for public use only. State of California or hat pr'ite local authority must give satisfactory assurances lift such protective measures will be maintained during useful e of project as may be required to serve its intended purpose. ,.Perations and results during fiscal year. Design of stone to l at Topaz Street and of beach restoration downcoast of groin SMalaga Cove was continued. 1 eCondition at end of fiscal year. Barrier groin at Cabrillo ofach is complete. Design of stone groin at Topaz Street and ti beach restoration downcoast of groin to Malaga Cove is con- tiluing. 1372 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS T year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 19. VENTURA-PIERPONT AREA, CALIFORNIA Location. Proposed project is on California coast at city o Ventura about 70 miles northwest of Los Angeles. Existing project. Plan as originally authorized for Ventud Beach provided for Federal participation by contribution of Fed, eral funds toward cost of three groins. Existing project oWa modified to provide for Federal participation by contribution of Federal funds toward cost of nine groins and placenent the about 1,534,000 cubic yards of suitable material on the beach. However, in accordance with 1956 River and Harbor Act, construction under both original and modified projects was undeCa taken by the Corps under arrangements explained in local operation. Approved estimated (1966) first cost for project, modified, is $2,400,000 ($1,300,000 Federal and $1,100,000 no4 Federal). Existing project was originally adopted by 9di. River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 29, 83d Cong., 1st sess.). ]l fled project was adopted by 1962 River and Harbor Act (H. . 458, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Local interests must adopt project planO improvement and construct improvement unless the Corps agree to construct improvement upon request of local interests and upon receipt of required contributed funds and, if needed, ad' vanced funds from local interests. Local interests also m1 1t obtain approval of Chief of Engineers of detailed plans and specifications for prosecuting work before start of such workby local interests; provide lands, easements, and rights-of-waY o accomplishment of work; prevent water pollution that wotild endanger health of bathers; and maintain continued public owner, ship of beaches and their administration for public use only' BlEACHI EROSION CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1373 akte of California or appropriate local authority must give tisfactory assurances that such protective measures will be sernVetained during useful life of project as may be required to its intended purpose. SOperations and results during fiscal year. Design of phase 3 Continuing. Condition at end of fiscal year. Phase 1 of modified project, fil 1sting of three groins (Nos. 1, 2, and 4) and adjacent beach of, cmpleted June 1962. Phase 2 of modified project, consisting ftWo groins (Nos. 5 and 7) and adjacent beach fill, completed bruary 1965. Design of phase 3 (groins Nos. 8 and 9 and fJacent beach fill) continued. Groins 3 and 6 and adjacent beach were deleted. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS la Yr.Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 ew ork. ^l~ropriated ............................. $121300 Drpitd$121,300 223620 ............ $223,620 $344,920 34,920 .... ...... ... "...... 117,406 196,273 $21,241 334,920 ECludes $117,406 other contributed funds for beach-nourishment betterments. REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Pi ea Total to ........... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Nework .......... Conributed $144,667 $100000 $97375 $68,331 .410,373 $.... 138,023 82,302 60:433 73,893 $14,2 3369,012 ADVANCED FUNDS Ne8al reTotal to S1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork aeed............. $72,333 $100,000 $137,264 $23,260.. $332,857 ............. 70,999 79,086 45,107 -87,992 $785 107,985 20, OTHER AUTHORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 report full Annual see Name of project Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance Oea1e Beach, San Diego County, Calif...................... 1965 1$68,660 .............. ach,San Diego County, beach widening and groin, Calif. .... 1960 7,912........... $661 U,--3ludes $21,809 fuds , 2 other contributed funds, $21,973 required contributed funds, and dten.ed I'lant in service. 1374 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 21. ALAMO RESERVOIR, BILL WILLIAMS RIVER, ARIZ. Location. About 70 miles southeast of Kingman, Ariz., 1T1 narrow gorge at river mile 39 on Bill Williams River, Ariz, tributary of Colorado River.od Existing project. Plan provides for construction of a flod control dam and reservoir modified to meet requirements of flood control, water conservation, and recreation. Approved estimate (1966) first cost is $14,500,000, all Federal. Project was author ized by 1944 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 625, 78th Cong., sess.). ilit Local cooperation. Local interests must assume responsibility for all damage claims and adjust all claims concerning water rights arising from improvement. In addition to providing0 a surances specified in authorizing legislation, local interests would limit manmade encroachment on existing hydraulic cap ity of Bill Williams River channel downstream from Alamo )ao to permit maximum releases of 7,000 cubic feet per second frOM the reservoir. Arizona Senate Joint Resolution No. 1, 26 Legislature, First Regular Session, passed, and was signed by the Governor on March 15, 1963, to furnish required assurances Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations col sisted of continuing construction of dam and appurtenances, con. tinuing acquisition of rights-of-way, administering real esate continuing master plan, initiating construction of service road for dam and access roads for recreation facilities, initiatil operation and maintenance manual and fish and wildlife Man agement plan, and initiating construction of gaging stationsd Costs were $249,419 for acquisition of rights-of-way; $2,809,845 for construction of dam and reservoir; $60,947 for service .d access roads; $56,622 for constructing buildings, grounds, utll ties, and permanent operating equipment, including gaging sta tions; and $2,610 for recreation facilities-all regular funds.Y Condition at end of fiscal year. Project plan is complete. cess road and construction camp complete. Construction of de and appurtenances was initiated in March 1965. Work rermain ing consists of completing construction of project, completio acquisition of rights-of-way, completing master plan, operat and maintenance manual and fish and wildlife management plae completing construction of service roads for the dam and acces roads for recreation facilities, and preparing reservoir-regulati manual. Cost and financial statement Total 30 to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June ,1 New work: 88991 Appropriated.......... $138,700 $500,000 $2,610,000 $2,530,000 $2,760,000 8,0 6 Cost................. 169,692 393,364 2,660,9551,246,4333,457,739 8 22. GILA RIVER BASIN, ARIZ. A. GILA AND SALT RIVERS LEVEE AND CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS Location. Site of improvements is on Gila and Salt Rivers in FLOOD CONTROL---LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1375 1aricopa County, Ariz., between Granite Reef and Gillespie d VXisting project. Plan provides for: (a) levee extending rowstream for about 2,000 feet along left bank of Salt River bat Tempe Butte, Tempe, Ariz., to Southern Pacific for Railroad a levee extending downstream about 161 ge embankment; (b)bank of Salt River from Southern Pacific a o00feet along right a ilroad bridge embankment to 40th Street, Phoenix, Ariz.; (c) ,eef0-foot-wide cleared floodway along Salt River from Granite ee Dam to junction with Gila River and thence alongoneGila in clever to Gillespie Dam; and (d) two low-flow channels, a point abiared floodway of Gila River between Gillespie Dam and thut 1 mile downstream from mouth of Agua Fria River, and 4 e other in cleared floodway of Salt River upstream from high- aay bridge at Tempe. Project would provide complete protection aainst standard project flood (290,000 cubic feet per second at 'CODOWell damsite) for most of city of Tempe and part of city hoenix and partial protection for additional areas in city of enix for adjacent developed areas, and for other areas along 0 a and Salt Rivers from Gillespie Dam to Granite Reef Dam. go february 25 1965, the Chief of Engineers approved the divi- portion (downstream from 91st Agot of the project into an active from 91st Venue in Phoenix) and a deferred portion (upstream t nueo in Phoenix). Approved estimated (1965) Federal first l c1 for active portion is $1,270,000, less principal repayments by 9 lInterests for water conservation and flood control. Ap- toved estimated (1965) non-Federal first cost is $200,000 for folds, rights-of-way, and relocations in addition to repayments ior Water conservation and flood control. Project was author- lZed by 1960 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 279, 86th Cong., 2d aLocal cooperation. For entire project (including active i deferred portions), local interests must provide lands and 4 ls-otf-way for construction; pay for necessary highway and ee)- Irelocations; maintain and operate works after completion; tnPe Nv- o Gila limits of thinchannel flood mr and Salt Rivers free from encroach- frent within limits of improvement; hold the United States free st.r damages; adjust all water-rights claims resulting from con- i 1ction, operation, and maintenance of project; repay the aIIted States 25 percent of total construction cost in 40 equal reiual Payments without interest, payments to be made to Sec- ,ary of the Interior, who shall deposit such payments in Treas- as miscellaneous receipts; and bear at least 20 percent of Ch Part of the cost, excepting cost of planning, design, and puisition of water rights as is allocated to flood control: aovdedactual cost, or fair market value of lands, easements, to rights-of-way or of services rendered by local interests prior be completion of construction shall be included in share of cost to borne by local interests. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. aCondition 01t 445pedrcnt fiscal year. of ioletefor at endccomplete Preparation for active of project plan is out 45 percent portion. 1376 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, New work: o73 00 Appropriated.......... $20,500 $53,000 .... 171.20........ Cost.................. 17,512 38,333 $12799 $2907 -$31 1Includes $39,000 allocated to deferred portion, which comprises the reach upstream r 91st Avenue. B. GILA RIVER DOWNSTREAM FROM PAINTED ROCK RESERVOIR Location. Improvements would extend along Gila River fro Texas Hill (river mile 66.5) to Gila Siphon (river mile 8.4* Existing project. Plan provides for 99 miles of conmpacted earthfill, revetted levee-49 miles along right bank and 50 iles along left bank. Leveed channel, trapezoidal in shape, will hv a base width of 750 feet. Improvements would accommoda design discharge of 50,000 cubic feet per second measured at Dome (river mile 14). Approved estimated (1965) first cost . project is $21,760,000 ($20,900,000 Federal and $860,000 nt Federal). Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control (S. Doc. 116, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). and Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands a O rights-of-way for construction; perform necessary relocationSd highways, roads, bridges, irrigation and drainage facilitiesf ld other utilities required in connection with construction of nd control works; hold the United States free from damage;' maintain and operate all works upon completion. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. re- Condition at end of fiscal year. Work suspended pending re-l ceipt of assurances from local interests as to capability to ftlfie requirements of local cooperation. Project plan is about 57 P"- cent complete. Cost and financial statement t Tot o Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: $58 6 Appropriated.......... ............ $129,000 $252,500 $226,000 -$25,900 410,31 Cost.................. ............ 94,918 283,722 31,654 22 C. GILA RIVER, CAMELSBACK RESERVOIR SITE TO SALT RIVER Location. Middle Gila River channel improvement would e tend along about 94 miles of middle Gila River fro upper end of Safford Valley (river mile 435) to San Carlos er ervoir (river mile 357) and from mouth of San Pedro Rie (river mile 319) to Buttes Reservoir site (river mile 303). Existing project. Plan provides for a cleared floodway exten ing about 94 miles along middle Gila River. Floodway to 5 created by clearing phreatophytic growth by mechanical mean from an area of about 14,200 acres with a maximum width o FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1377 aout 4,000 feet and an average width of about 1,300 feet. Im- ioveni ent would provide partial protection from floods to areas g Safford Valley and, because of removal of phreatophytic aryth , would result in a net increase of 19,800 acre-feet of water available annually for agriculture. Approved estimated (1966) 00t cost for project is $1,640,000 ($1,350,000 Federal and $290, 0o 110n-Federal). Improvement was authorized by 1958 Flood Ontrol Act (S. Doc. 5, 86th Cong., 1st sess.) as one of the irovements under a comprehensive plan for development of .iversubject to further detailed study and specific "taOrization. aut'or Locai Lca l cooperation. Responsible local interests must provide leds and rights-of-way for construction; hold the United States tee froma damages; maintain and operate all works after comple- h;0 and keep cleared floodway free from encroachment. tra~OPerationsand results during fiscal year. Preparation of con- sact Plans and specifications continued until work on project was toPe ded pending procurement of rights-of-way by local in- reCondition at end of fiscal year. Work on project was sus- catiCd Project plan is complete and contract plans and specifi- ons are about 56 percent complete. Cost and financial statement yea Total to 1902 1963 1964 1985 1966 June 30,1966 Newk R,lPro 0 ~riated.......... $165,300 -$200,000 -$75,000 -$1900 ....... $227,400 666 4,776 15,679 4,144 $3,356 216,920 D. INDIAN BEND WASH Location. On Indian Bend Wash near Scottsdale, Ariz. etiating project. Plan provides for a concrete-lined channel ctending along Indian Bend Wash for wing about 7 miles from Arizona catal to Salt River; two channel-inlet levees upstream from C al;a siphon to carry canal flow under the channel; and a gated oastewvay to divert canal flow into the channel. Design flood et40,000 cubic feet per second will be controlled by the improve- ae* Approved estimated (1966) first cost is $8,440,000 Federal $2060,000 non-Federal. Project was authorized by 1965 10d Control Act (H. Doc. 303, 88th Cong., 2d sess.). rILocal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and ?.tsof-way; pay for necessary highway and utility relocations; tan and operate works after completion; keep flood channel T1dian Bend Wash free from encroachment within limits of 'DrOvements; and hold United States free from damages. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. dondition at end of fiscal year. No Federal work has been 1378 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 E. PAINTED ROCK RESERVOIR Location. On Gila River, mile 126, about 20 miles downstrea' from Gila Bend, Ariz., in Gila River basin, which is a part 0 Colorado River basin. t Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam with maximum heghtd of 181 feet above streambed, crest length of 4,796 feety, and detached broad-crested spillway with a crest length of 610. feet; and a flood control reservoir with a gross capacity of 2Y491) 700 acre-feet (Mar. 1953) at spillway crest, including 200 acre-feet for sediment. Operation of reservoir regulates runof from a tributary area of 50,800 square miles, reducing floW standard project flood of 300,000 cubic feet per second to a rnaxl mum outflow of 22,500 cubic feet per second. Approved esto mated (1965) first cost for project is $19,193,000, all Federal,inas cluding $13,000 for Code 710 recreation project. Project 8180 authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (11. Doc. 331, Cong., 1st sess.). a er' Local cooperation. Local interests must adjust all weeo rights claims that might result from improvement and keep floO' r channel of Gila River downstream from Painted Rock free I encroachment. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations co sisted of maintaining dam in good operating condition and ad- ministering real estate. Acquisition of rights-of-way continuei Initiated action for relocating Indians from Sil Murk Idll village at a cost of $269,500 regular funds. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of dam and0' purtenances was completed in December 1959. Work relan consists of continuing acquisition of rights-of-way and comPleting relocation of Sil Murk Indian village. Cost and financial statement Tootal to 8 Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June New work: 19,21171 Appropriated.......... $709,583 $1,700 $274,000 $598,000 $294,1500 12 Cost.................425,441 410,715 289,188 599,620 287,625 19189,3 Maintenance: 215:36 Appropriated.......... 35,400 37,878 41,355 37,700 39,500 Coat................. 35,196 38,665 41,622 35,022 36,131 SIncludes $7,400 Code 710 funds. 2 Includes$6,990 Code 710 costs. F. PHOENIX, ARIZ., AND VICINITY (INCLUDING NEW RIVE) Location. On Cave Creek and its tributaries and on Skaad Creek, Dreamy Draw, New River, and Agua Fria River in and jacent to metropolitan Phoenix, Ariz.o Existing project. Plan provides for four detention basins , each on Cave Creek, Skunk Creek, New River, and Dreamy Dr eI Union Hills and Arizona canal diversion channels; and chana, improvements on Cave Creek, Dreamy Draw, Skunk Creek, Nes River, and Agua Fria River. Plan provides for controlling much of the floodflow as possible in the drainage area involved' for diverting residual flows in Deer Valley and Cave Creek ' FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1379 ralunk..Creek,.. and for improving Skunk Creek, New River, and 'dalflos.Approved River to accommodate those residual flows. Approved esa Fria (1966) first cost is $64,300,000 Federal and $13,800,000 eSiMated S1'Federal. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act oc. 216, 89th Cong., 1st sess.). ig~ocal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and ghts-of-way; pay for necessary highway and utility relocations; a intain and operate works after completion; keep flood channels oa duelention-basin areas free from encroachment within limits DrProvement; and hold United States free from damages. Perations and results during fiscal year. None. do()le.0eldition at end of fiscal year. No Federal work has been G. PINAL CREEK CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS Location. On Pinal Creek at Globe, Ariz. le,*ting project. Plan provides for channel improvements Ynerally along alinement of existing channel. Improvements, se ich will accommodate design flood of 16,000 cubic feet per tyeond, will consist of channel-inlet wing levees; 4,100 feet of tea)ezoidal, reinforced-concrete-lined channel; 4,600 feet of rec- glgular, reinforced-concrete-lined channel; and 360 feet of esouted- and dumped-stone-lined trapezoidal outlet. Approved timated (1966) first cost is $2 million Federal and $340,000 a oPederal for all required local cooperation. Project was 2athorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 512, 87th Cong., rihL cal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and h, S-of-W ay for construction; make necessary relocations of all Ways, roads, bridges, utilities, and drainage facilities, and Dro ecessary street modifications required in connection with opJect; hold the United States free from damages; maintain and Doate works after completion; and prevent any encroachment yo improved channel that would reduce its flood-carrying capac- o ' Local interests supplied assurances of required local co- hDeration and have expended more than $100,000 for 1 ultenance and cleanup resulting from past floods. Peerations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of proj- elan continued. f'etion romplete at end of fiscal year. Project plan is 80 percent Cost and financial statement year Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work. .ropriated........$55000 $46,510 $101,510 .2,535 ........... ....... 79,128 81,663 0H. SANTA ROSA WASH (TAT MOMOLIKOT DAM) , ti Location On Santa Rosa Wash in Papago Indian Reserva- oI and about 61/ miles upstream from Vaiva Vo, Ariz.. 1380 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Plan provides for a rolled-earthfill damrn With a maximum height of 66 feet above streambed, a crest length 00 about 3 miles, and a detached spillway with a crest length of 1,00il0- feet; and a reservoir with a capacity of 181,000 acre-feet at 0SP 0 way crest, comprising 126,000 acre-feet for flood control, 15, acre-feet for conservation, and 40,000 acre-feet for sedinee Operation of reservoir will regulate runoff from a tributary arol of 1,750 square miles, reducing flow of standard project flood ic 55,000 cubic feet per second to a maximum outflow of 4,600 cb feet per second. Approved estimated (1966) Federal first cost I $7,760,000, including $1,250,000 Bureau of Indian Affairs 0osts Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. l 89th Cong., 1st sess.). Reservoir will be a part of the nltiP 1 purpose project, including Vaiva Vo irrigation project than authorized for construction in the Papago Indian Reservatio U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs. Local cooperation. Local interests must establish and enforce floodway limits and regulations for Santa Rosa Wash on Indian land downstream from Papago Indian Reservation ted maintain hydraulic capacity of existing channel; hold Ui States free from damages (downstream from Papago a Ten- Reservation) arising from construction, operation, and Ii t nance of project for flood control and arising from water-rlKe claims resulting from construction, operation, and maintena"Jd of project for flood control. U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs Won assure maintenance of hydraulic capacity of Santa Rosa Wash.1 Indian lands downstream from Tat Momolikot Dam; and provide for adjusting water-rights claims resulting from constructe ,' operation, and maintenance of project for water conservatiol fish, wildlife, and recreation purposes. The Papago Tribal Council would make available appropriate rights to landsre- quired for construction of the dam and reservoir. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. e:l Condition at end of fiscal year. No Federal work has bee done. I. TUCSON DIVERSION CHANNEL Location. In Pima County in drainage areas of Tucson Arroyo and Julian Wash, tributaries of Santa Cruz River near Tucso? Ariz. Existing project. Plan provides for protection of city of To' son, Ariz., and suburban areas by diverting runoff from upstre part of Tucson Arroyo drainage area to an adjacent drainae area, and thence to Santa Cruz River. After project was author ized, local interests developed a plan of improvement differina substantially from project-document plan and constructedtl major part of improvement under their plan. Subsequently' local interests requested a modification of project-document P191 to provide more flood control than would be available under pl1 developed by local interests. General provisions of modifl plan, which replaces document plan, were approved by Chief .O Engineers on September 2, 1958. Modified plan provides for 1V creasing capacity of diversion-channel project under construceof FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1381 yPina County to accommodate standard-project flood dis- al arge; and conveying floodflow to Santa Cruz River by means of a improved channel along Julian Wash. Work under modified allaWould involve completing diversion channel between Tucson Ieroyo and Southern Pacific railroad and enlarging that chan- a t Tucson Arroyo; enlarging existing diversion channel be- exeen Southern Pacific railroad and detention basin; completing cravation of detention basin and increasing discharge capacity; capacity of diversion channel between detention basin 9ereasing ad ,wra, Julian .g Wash; constructing an improved channela bridgs..n Julian along t reconstructing or modifying eight highway bridges and )ash; A o railroad bridges; and constructing five new highway bridges. for project is $8,840,000, c rOved estimated (1965) first cost$2,940,000 01 rising $5,900,000 Federal and non-Federal, in- e $1,008,000 spent for that part of completed improvements Irg ader Pl'andeveloped by local interests that is to be utilized under t ified plan. Existing project was adopted by 1948 Flood Con- toAct (I. Doc. 274, 80th Cong., 1st sess.). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. le OPerations and results during fiscal year. Construction of (uves and channels was completed at a cost of $1,295,836 regular teIds and $57,861 other contributed funds. Operation and main- ance manual was completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project construction was com- leted April 1966. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Year 1eal Total to .. . . 1962 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Aok $162,300 $400,000$2,000,000 $1,064,950 $2,150,000 $5,933,475 ropriated.......... ......... 127,383 227,026 2,188,1911,672,3741,347,299 5,717,616 OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS _- _ Total to year ............ 1962 _ork_ 1963 1984 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Re atributed . ...... $143,000 $249,040 $74,168..... $4664208 st. 21,449 258,276 90,743 $60,682 431,150 J. WHITLOW RANCH RESERVOIR, QUEEN CREEK abLocation. On Queen Creek, Ariz., a tributary of Gila River, 10 miles west of Superior, Ariz. Dam is reservoir. height Xisting project. A a OImpacted-earthfill withand control dam floodstructure zoned a maximum of 149 f x ceet above streambed and a crest length of 837 feet. Outlet 41orks, are at left abutment, consist of an intake structure; whichoutlet SUngated conduit; and an outlet-and-diversion structure. of dam, CO Spillway, asists an unlined structure of a broad-crested 3554,000 about weir about long;north feet feet an approach 1382 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 channel 1,080 feet long; and a downstream channel about 1,300 feet long. Reservoir has a total capacity at spillway crestllo 35,890 acre-feet (May 1957), of which 7,000 acre-feet are a cated for sediment. Reservoir regulates runoff from a tributarY area of 143 square miles, reducing flow of design floodroted 110,000 to 1,000 cubic feet per second. Approved estinIlaO (1965) first cost for project is $1,872,000, all Federal, inclucize $9,000 for Code 710 recreation project. Project was authort by 1946 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 220, 80th Cong., 1st sess. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations o sisted of maintaining dam in good operating condition, cont'to ing acquisition of rights-of-way, and administering real estate, Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was started a 1959 and completed in November 1960. Work remaining cO sists of completing acquisition of rights-of-way and completi~ reservoir-regulation manual. Cost and financial statement Tot to96 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June R New work: 868304 Appropriated.......... -$17,700 $2,446 $1,574 ............ -$1,016 861,63 Cost .................. 14,992 2,053 ........................ 1,059 Maintenance: 3869 Appropriated.......... 9,500 7,087 6,450 $6,000 6,100 37:42 Cost................. . 8,797 7,765 6,258 4,790 6,084 1 Includes $3,758 Code 710. 23. LITTLE COLORADO RIVER BASIN, ARIZ. WINSLOW (LITTLE COLORADO RIVER) Location. On tributaries to Little Colorado River at Winslo, Ariz. Existing project. Plan provides for two units of improve ito The first unit (Ruby Wash diversion levee), will be an ear o levee with a stone facing and extend generally eastward for ab o 52 miles from high ground near southwest corner of airporte Little Colorado River south of A.T.&S.F. railroad bridoe Flows in Ruby Wash and all other streams crossing the levee Pce will be intercepted and diverted to Little Colorado River. Levee will control a standard project flood ranging from 8,500 cubiC feet per second at the• . . upper end to 23,000... cubic feet per secon "el Little Colorado River. The second unit (Ice House Wash chal f improvement) will extend generally northward through citY , Winslow for about 2 miles from A.T.&S.F. railroad tracks to point near northern city limits. Improvement will be partly a rectangular reinforced-concrete channel, partly a leveed trapee zoidal channel, and partly an excavated pilot channel. Improv ment will accommodate a flood of 2,200 cubic feet per seco' which is larger than any known flood of record. Approved est1 mated (1966) first cost is $3,470,000 Federal and $210,000 nor, Federal. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act ($ Doc. 63, 88th Cong., 2d sess.). FLOOD CONTROL--LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1383 SLocal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and ' gts-of-Way; pay for necessary highway and utility relocations; wld United States free from damages; maintain and operate pprks after completion; and prevent any encroachment upon im- oved channel or within the restricted area upstream from erSion levee that would reduce the flood-carrying capacities. 0Perations and results during fiscal year. None. docandition at end of fiscal year. No Federal work has been 24. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CALIF. GLocation. Site of improvement is along Los Angeles and San therie1 Rivers, Rio Hondo, and Ballona Creek, and tributaries Peof in Los Angeles County, Calif. e revious project. For details see pages 1768 to 1772 of Annual 15 for 1941; page 1602 of Annual Report for 1942; and page 5 ?f Annual Report for 1943. 1eSting project. Plan provides for flood control improve- ts in four stream basins in Los Angeles County, Calif., as 1dWs: Los Angeles River basin, San Gabriel River basin, Rio oldo basin and Ballona Creek .basin. Provides for protection . . 0 0 a cr e s i n.d e n s el.. icabout 325000 acres in densely populated Los Angeles County, 'll dl othe ding areas in Los Angeles, Pasadena, Glendale, Burbank, and lar Cities, as well as thousands of acres of valuable agricultural V0 I* Plan provides for construction of five flood control reser- (Hansen, Lopez, Santa Fe, Sepulveda, and Whittier Narrows _eir eServoirs) . debris basins at mouths of 23 canyons; channel im- 'enients along 101.3 miles of Los Angeles River, San Gabriel aler, Rio Iondo, and Ballona Creek; and channel improvements P09 191.5 miles of tributary channels. o owing units of improvement physically completed in those r stream basins are described in Annual Report for 1962: Los Angeles River basin: Purbank-Eastern system Burbank-Western system (lower and upper) Caballero Creek CorMpton Creek: Los Angeles River to IHooper Avenue storm drain and Hooper Avenue storm drain to Main Street Dead Horse Canyon and Royal Boulevard channel H11aines Canyon 1 lansen flood control reservoir (Since 1962 Annual Report, the capacity determined in January 1962 survey has been rounded off to read 32,000 acre-feet.) Lopez Canyon diversion Lopez flood control reservoir Los Angeles River channel: Owensmouth Avenue to Lankershim Boulevard Lankershim Boulevard to Stewart and Gray Road Stewart and Gray Road to Santa Ana Branch, Pacific Electric railway bridge Santa Ana Branch, Pacific Electric railway bridge to Pacific Ocean 1384 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Long Beach Boulevard Pacoima Wash channel Sepulveda flood control reservoir Sycamore Wash Tujunga Wash channel Verdugo Wash: Concord Street to upper Canada bridge Wilson Canyon and Mansfield Street channels San Gabriel River basin: Santa Fe flood control reservoir (Since 1962 Annual Report, date of capacity survey corrected to read June 1961.) San Gabriel River channel: San Gabriel Canyon to Santa Fe flood control reservoir Santa Fe flood control reservoir to Whittier NarroWS flood control reservoir Walnut Creek inlet channel Walnut Creek system Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir Rio Hondo basin: Alhambra Wash Arcadia Wash system Eaton Wash Rio Hondo channel: Peck Road to Rosemead Boulevard (upper) s Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir to Los Angele River (lower) Rubio Canyon diversion Santa Anita Wash Sawpit Wash Sierra Madre Villa channel Ballona Creek basin (all units complete): Ballona Creek channel and jetties Benedict Canyon system Centinela Creek Sawtelle-Westwood system (including Sepulveda channel) Units of improvement not physically completed in Los Angele River basin: (a) Blanchard Canyon: Plan provides for a debrio basin at mouth of canyon and a concrete channel 0.70 mile tos Verdugo Wash channel. (b) Blue Gum Canyon: Plan provid e for a debris basin at mouth of canyon and a reinforced-concec ) pipe to Haines Canyon channel (a distance of 0.35 mile). 1 Verdugo Wash, upper Canada bridge to debris basin: od*l provides for replacing existing channel from debris basin .d.ard stream to reconstructed channel at upper Canada Boulev bridge (a distance of 0.80 mile). (d) Winery Canyon: ete provides for a debris basin at mouth of canyon and a concre channel 1 mile to Hay Canyon channel. Units of improvement not physically completed in San Gabriel River basin: (a) Coyote Creek: Plan provides for constreeu tion of concrete channel on about 10 miles of main Coyote Criel channel extending upstream from confluence with San Gabri River and construction of about 4 miles of concrete channel North Fork of Coyote Creek between Leflingwell Road and in FLOOD CONTROL---LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1385 hannel. (b) Emerald Wash and Live Oak Wash: Plan for herald Wash provides for construction of 2.05 miles of concrete Cannel upstream from confluence with Live Oak Wash channel. lat for Live Oak Wash channel provides for construction of 3.5 iles of concrete channel upstream from confluence with Marshall plreek channel at Puddingstone Reservoir. (c) Marshall Creek: as provides for construction of 3.2 miles of concrete channel Dstream from confluence with Live Oak Wash at Puddingstone 4eservoir. (d) San Gabriel River channel, Whittier Narrows oOd control reservoir to Pacific Ocean: Plan provides for apezoidal channel about 20.3 miles long, consisting of 6.5 miles O with an unpaved invert, with 7 drop structures spaced at channel ilntervals ranging from 1,500 to 9,000 feet, and with stone-re- Vetted side slopes; 9.9 miles of concrete-paved channel; and 3.9 iles of channel with unpaved invert with stone-revetted side ;4o-es. (e) Thompson Creek and San Jose Wash (including San dse Creek) : Plan for Thompson Creek provides for a concrete tannel to6.2 from outlet of Thompson Creek Dam down- miles with junction Stean San Jose Wash. Plan for San Jose Wash lrovides for a concrete channel 5.07 miles from lower end of chan- abOl n Thompson Creek downstream to a point about 2,000 feet 01ove its confluence with San Jose Creek. Plan for San Jose Seek provides for a concrete channel about 11.8 miles from stream end of San Jose Wash improvement to existing San Ose Creek diversion channel. bait of improvement not physically completed in Rio Hondo Ofi is Sierra Madre Wash. Plan provides for the construction inlet of channel on Sierra Madre Wash ex- telding 1.7 miles aboutfrom to concrete existing Santa Anita Wash channel. imated first costs for all units of improvement under existing project Latest approved estimated cost 19661 Project unit Federal Local Total Aneles River L0Coa~ basin:IN $70 MILLION PROJECT UNITS n $2,510,500 j1 PtO 411yyoCreek Los Angeles River to Hooper Ave. storm na .................................... drain. ........ 1 3 7 7 01.............. $2,510,500 ................ ,524,300 3 ,0 aiesnyon524,300 flood control reservoir.......................... fansen 1,337,700.............. 11,337,700 'o5Angeles River channel: 'Ankershini Blvd. to Stewart and Gray Rd. ............... 42,105,200 .............. 42,105,200 34,200 ......... 34,200 S,- L,veda River channel, cAngeles s flood control Long Beach Blvd.............. reservoir.........................................6,655,600 76, eataore Wash..............................................3: 50............23,500 855,200 GabS4-e11 Concord St. to upper Canada bridge......... River basin'. oWash, 855,200 .............. 1,abriel River channel: San Gabriel Canyon to Santa Fe flood control reservoir .... 2,023,300 ..............2,023,300 32,300 control reservoir to Walnut Creek.......... 32,300 .............. 1 8;nta i S. oI tflood Fe flood control reservoir............................... a ra, ash....1.08,80............. 1,108,800 lllbasbaWin. 1}3 bra Creek llna ........... n and jetties ............................ Washchannel basin: C reek 1140...........1,108800 432,000.............. . . . . .,..... 1,308,800 1,432,000 .................... SUbtotal............................. 81,289,700 .............. 81,289,700 aA UNITS OUTSIDE $70 MILLION PROJECT 13n146"18 River basin: ............................. 655,000 $306,000 961,000 I anGum Canyon ..... ..... ............................. Urd Canyon 460,000 367,000 93,000 lrank-Eastern system. ............................... 7,145,400 1,875,000 9,020,400 " footnotes at end of table. 1386 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Approved estimated cost 19661 Project unit --- Federal Local Total Burbank-Western system (lower).........................1,278800 258000 1 53 800 Burbank-Western system (lower) ............................. 1,278,800 258,000 7:2 00 Burbank-Western system (upper)............................ 4,929,800 2,000,000 7',2'00 Caballero Creek........................................... 1,484,200 520,000 2000 Compton Creek: 149000 Los Angeles River to Hooper Ave. storm drain............. 149,000... 5700 Hooper Ave. storm drain to Main St...................... 1,203,4,0 . 454 1210 00 Dead Horse Canyon and Royal Blvd. channel.................. 813,000 403 000 1 00 Lopez Canyon diversion...... .......................... 739,000 730:000 1729:9000 Lopez Canyon flood control reservoir........................ 729,000 ........... Owensmouth Ave. to Lankershim Blvd.............. ... 917,371,700 4,131,000 9,128 900 Lankershim Blvd. to Stewart and Gray Rd............... 9,128,900 590 Stewart and Gray Rd. toSanta Aua Branch, Pacific Electric 5,860,900 74,000 ,4900 railway bridge. 32,947,900 Santa Ana Branch, Pacific Electric railway bridge to Pacific 22,009,900 10,938,000 SOcean. 4 466,100 Pacoima Wash channel..................................... 3,178,100 1,288,000 9901400 Tujunga Wash channel..................................... 7,359,400 2,542,000 703000 Verdugo Wash, upper Canada bridge to debris basin............597,000 106,000 4,639,00 Wilson Canyon and Mansfield St. channel.................... 3,903,900 736,000 639,000 Winery Canyon.. .................... ..................... 510,000 129,000 San Gabriel River basin: 2645700 Coyote Creek, (including North Fork)... .................. 19,448,000 7,009,000 23'103000 Emerald Wash and Live Oak Wash.... ................... 2,087,000 1,016 000 27:000 Marshall Creek.... ................................. 1,904,000 523,000 2, San Gabriel River channel: 7,266,00 Santa Fe flood control reservoir to Whittier Narrows flood 5,748,800 1,518,000 control reservoir. 22 069 00 Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir to Pacific Ocean....18,189,600 3,880000 2'7400 Thompson Creek and San Jose Wash (including San Jose Creek). 21,839,400 3,768,000 25,6010 Walnut Creek system.... ............................ 17,232,600 7,928,000 3,072:000 Walnut Creek inlet channel................................. 2,879,000 1,093,000 32,292o000 Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir.... ............... 32,254,000 38:000 32 Rio Hondo basin: Arcadia Wash system...................................... 5,062,500 0 1,864,000 ,926500 378,100 Eaton Wash... ................................... 4,225,100 1,153:000 Rio Hondo channel: 5045 800 Peck Rd. to Rosemead Blvd. (upper).................... 4,535,800 510 000 10519:00 Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir to Los Angeles 8,040,900 2,479:000 1 0 River (lower). 1316 400 Rubio Canyon diversion.................................... 1,066,400 250,000 3,0680 Santa Anita Wash......................................... 3,035,800 571,000 1,11400 Sierra Madre Wash........................................ 1,065,400 49,000 3,4600 Sawpit Wash............................................. 2,348,600 699000 00 01,0 Sierra Madre Villa channel................................. 846,400 334:000 Ballona Creekbasin: 601000 Ballona Creek channel.................................01........ 601,000 1000 Benedict Canyon system............................... 15,368,000 3,717,000 8 Centinela Creek........................................... 4,150,000 4,710,000 1,131,0 Sawtelle-Westwood system(including Sepulveda channel)..... 9,623,000 1,508,000 Subtotal.............. 270,964,300 72,100,000 $#.......................... 352,254,000 72,100,000 424,5 plan........................ comprehensive for Grand total i Excludes estimated costof Code 710 recreation on Hansen, Lopez, Santa Fe, Sepulvedaald Whittier Narrows Reservoirs and estimated costof minor rehabilitation. hannel SApproved by Los Angeles County Flood Control District except for Coyote Creek teto estimate, which was increased by $56,000 to permit rounding of overallnon-Federal estia three significant figures. FLOOD CONTROL---LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1387 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Jue22,1936 Reservoirs and flood channels for flood control and related None. purposes at an estimated construction cost not to exceed ayY15,, 1937 $70 million. Added flood channels on Ballona Creek and tributaries to Do. e8,98 _ project. Ue28,1938 Provision of lands, easements, and rights-of-way and re- Do. locations by Federal Government instead of by local in- terests. (Resultant additional cost to theUnited States 4 P$1,51,000). 5.18, 18941 extended to include additional flood control reser- H. Doc. 838, 76th Cone voirs, flood control channels, and debris basins for flood control and related purposes. Also authorized to be ap- propriated, $25 million for further accomplishment of )ee221944 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $25 million None. for prosecution of comprehensive plan approved in Flood S4 Control Act of Aug. 18, 1941. July 24,1946Authorized to be appropriated an additional $25 million Do. ay17 for further prosecution of comprehensive plan. Rio Hondo channel improvement, Whittier Narrows Res- 1950 Do. ervoir to Los Angeles River (in lieu of enlarging channel and bridges on San Gabriel River downstream from res- ervoir). Also authorized to be appropriated, an additional ept. 3 195 A$40 million for further prosecution of comprehensive plan. 1954 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $12,500,000 for Do. uly3, 1958 Afurther prosecution of comprehensive plan.Do. Do. ly19 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $44 million for 190 Aurther prosecution of comprehensive plan. 214, S3,1960 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $32 million for Do. 4,23,1962 16 Authorized further prosecution of comprehensive to be appropriated plan. $3,700,000 for an additional Do. 30, further prosecution of comprehensive plan.. i ,0 63 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $30 million for Do. e18,196 further prosecution of comprehensive plan. 965In addition to all previous authorizations, completion of Do. improvements under the comprehensive plan for flood con- trol in the Los Angeles River basin at a presently estimat- ed cost of $31 million for completion. .Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands and hts-of-way; bear expense of all highway and highway-bridge od. " anifications; hold the United States free Itr from damages; crn ltonrr folw, and t.ftain and operate all works after completion for following t8or parts of units: Los Angeles River basin: Blanchard channel Blue Gum Canyon Burbank-Eastern system Burbank-Western system (lower and upper) Caballero Creek Compton Creek: IHooper Avenue storm drain to Main Street Dead Horse Canyon and Royal Boulevard channel Lopez Canyon diversion Los Angeles River channel: Owensmouth Avenue to Lankershim Boulevard Stewart and Gray Road to Santa Ana Branch, Pacific Electric railway bridge Santa Ana Branch, Pacific Electric railway bridge to Pacific Ocean Pacoima Wash channel Tujunga Wash channel 1388 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Verdugo Wash: Upper Canada bridge to debris basin Wilson Canyon and Mansfield Street channel Winery Canyon San Gabriel River basin: Coyote Creek Emerald Wash and Live Oak Wash Marshall Creek San Gabriel River channel: Santa Fe flood control reservoir to Whittier Nar rows flood control reservoir Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir to the Pacific Ocean Thompson Creek and San Jose Wash (including $S Jose Creek) Walnut Creek system Walnut Creek inlet channel Rio Hondo basin: Arcadia Wash system Eaton Wash Rio Hondo channel: Peck Road to Rosemead Boulevard (upper) Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir to Lo Angeles River (lower) Rubio Canyon diversion Santa Anita Wash Sawpit Wash Sierra Madre Villa channel Sierra Madre Wash Ballona Creek basin:h Ballona Creek channel downstream from inlet to was ington Boulevard and downstream from La Salle AV& nue to the lagoon Benedict Canyon system Centinela Creek Sawtelle-Westwood system (including Sepulveda chaf nel) No local cooperation is required for other units or partsd units in existing project. Information on amount expendl by local interests in connection with existing project is in a4s sequent table, "Project Costs to June 30, 1966." Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations for utlits in Los Angeles River basin: (a) Blanchard Canyon: Revised and completed contract plans and specifications. (b) Blue U0 Canyon: Completed contract plans and specifications. di- Compton Creek: Maintained channel in good operating cond) tion from Los Angeles River to Hooper Avenue storm drain. ( IHaines Canyon: Maintained debris basin and channel upstrea from Plainview Avenue in good operating condition. (e) Iafse flood control reservoir: Maintained dam in good operating tlo1 dition and administered real estate. (f) Lopez flood contr reservoir: Maintained dam in good operating condition a FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1389 mliiistered real estate. (g) Los Angeles River channel, chakershim Boulevard to Stewart and Gray Road: Maintained rtoannel in good operating condition. (h) Sepulveda flood con- t1 reservoir: Continued preparation of reservoir-regulation taumal maintained dam in good operating condition, and ad- rinlistered real estate. (i) Verdugo Wash, upper Canada bridge to debris basin: Continued preparation of contract plans and Decifications. () Wilson Canyon and Mansfield Street channel: acle contract adjustments. (k) Winery Canyon: Initiated reparation of contract plans and specifications. O0 perations for units in San Gabriel River basin: (a) Coyote creek: Completed contract plans and specifications and initiated Colstruction of part 4 and completed construction of part 3. osts from regular funds were $498,227 for utility relocation and ti126 ,510fundsfor channel construction; and costs from other con- ibuted were $328,245 for channel construction. (b) Alerald Wash and Live Oak Wash: Completed contract plans 1 Specifications and initiated construction of Live Oak Wash stjc~ from "A" Street. (c) Marshall wnstreamnioi.ated.. ...- Creek: CannIel downstream initiated con- s't 0pleted contract plans and specifications and r, ction. Costs from regular funds were $160,039 for utility otheocation and $54,135 for channel construction; and costs from , er contributed funds were $121,161 for channel construction. (d Santa Fe flood control reservoir: Continued preparation of i~servoir-regulation manual and master plan, maintained dam Q4od operating condition, and administered real estate. (e) " Gabriel River channel, San Gabriel Canyon to Santa Fe flood d.trol reservoir: Maintained channel in good operating con- oljt. (f) San Gabriel River channel, Whittier Narrows flood ,.trol reservoir to Pacific Ocean: Completed plans and speci- ahtons and initiated construction of part 3b and completed con- frjction of part 3a. Costs from regular funds were $105,281 ad Utility relocation and $2,459,851 for channel construction; eC costs from other contributed funds were $108,457 for channel flmrctohrcn elis,^truction. (g) Thompson Creek and San Jose Wash (in- 0 1ng San Jose Creek): Operations for Thompson Creek and consisted of initiating contract plans and specifica- tia , .'8s for Wash Jose part 3b. Operations for San Jose Creek consisted of S clting construction of parts lb and 2a; completing plans and tii. cations and initiating constructionspecifications of part 2b; and con- QUing preparation of contract plans andfor utility relocations for part 3. Sts1from regular funds were $169,149 and for channel construction; and costs from other con- ,Ut'.03,931 ,tted funds were $324,158 for channel construction. (h) t tier Narrows flood control reservoir: Maintained dam in Iod Operating condition and administered real estate. WOperations for units in Rio Hondo basin were: (a) Alhambra iash: Maintained channel in good operating condition. (b) rrMadre Wash: Continued preparation of project plan for R Madre Wash channel upstream from Orange Grove Avenue. OQerations for units in Ballona Creek basin: (a) Ballona eek channel and jetties: Maintained channel and jetties in 1390 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 good operating condition. (b) Benedict Canyon system: Co" tract adjustments. (c) Centinela Creek: Completed minor completion items.1 Condition at end of fiscal year. Basic operation and main tenance manual for channel and debris-basin units in Los Angeles County drainage area project is complete, and inserts are coM plete for some units that are constructed. Work remaining o this manual consists of completing inserts...r e- Los Angeles River basin: (a) Blanchard Canyon: Workore maining consists of constructing unit. (b) Blue Gum CanyOt Work remaining consists of constructing unit. (c) ComPt, Creek (Los Angeles River to Hooper Avenue storm dra or Work remaining consists of reimbursements to local interests Was rights-of-way. (d) Hansen flood control reservoir: Dam completed in 1940. Work remaining consists of completing res ervoir-regulation manual and reimbursing local interests wfos rights-of-way. (e) Lopez flood control reservoir: Daml ws completed in November 1954. Work remaining consists of pres paring reservoir-regulation manual and master plan. (f) od Angeles River channel, Lankershim Boulevard to Stewart local Gray Road: Work remaining consists of reimbursements to r- interests for rights-of-way. (g) Sepulveda flood control red0 voir: Dam was completed in 1941. Work remaining consis completing reservoir-regulation manual and reimbursing locae terests for rights-of-way. (h) Verdugo Wash, Concord se" to upper Canada bridge: Work remaining consists of reimburse ments to local interests for rights-of-way. (i) Verdugo Wash upper Canada bridge to debris basin: Work remaining0nst of completing contract plans and specifications and construc l cort WinerypantCanyon: unit. (j) wcon-Work remaining consists of #l pleting contract plans and specifications and constructing San Gabriel River basin: (a) Coyote Creek: Work rem i ing consists of completing construction of part 4 (Coyote anCree channel upstream from North Fork). (b) Emerald Wash ond Live Oak Wash: Work remaining consists of completing con* struction of part 4. (c) Marshall Creek: Work remainingfcoo sists of completing construction of unit. (d) Santa Fefoo control reservoir: Unit was completed in January 1949. Wr and remaining consists of completing reservoir-regulation manuar master plan. (e) San Gabriel River channel, Whittier Narro flood control reservoir to Pacific Ocean: Work remaining clb sists of preparing contract plans and specifications for part t (dredging downstream from Coyote Creek) and part 4 (uPstreolD from Cecilia Avenue), constructing parts lb and 4, and cO pleting construction of part 3b. (f) Thompson Creek and leon Jose Wash (including San Jose Creek): Work rermainin. Thompson Creek and San Jose Wash consists of completingork tract plans and specifications and constructing part 3b. act remaining on San Jose Creek consists of completing contr of plans and specifications for part 3, completing constructiontief parts ib, 2a, and 2b, and constructing part 3. (.q) \yhT1uve Narrows flood control reservoir: Unit was completed in^14 1957. Work remaining consists of preparing master plan. FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1391 io ect Ilondo basin: Work remaining consists of completing proj- Iian and preparing contract plans and specifications for Sierra c' re Wash channel upstream from Orange Grove Avenue and C.leting construction of unit. callona lo'al Creek interests forbasin: Work rights-of-way.remaining consists of reimbursing -A eD Project costs to June 30, 1966 Non-Federal funds1 Emergency Total Total Units Regular funds relief funds Federal funds Spent Spent all funds 0 by Federal2 by local Total Government interests3 1 I I-- I I I UNITS IN $70 MILLION PROJECT Los Angeles River basin: Compton Creek, Los Angeles River to Hooper Ave. storm drain................ $1,598,095 $745,849 $2,343,944 $25,409 ............. $25,409 $2,369,353 HainesCanyon. ..... ................................................... 353,210 233,954 587,164 587,164 j Hansen flood control reservoir.................................. 11,330,204 .............. 11,330,204 11,330,204 0 Los Angeles River channel: .............. -1,302 7,638,039 41,638,208 -1,302 41,636,906 ' Lankershim Blvd. to Stewart and Gray Rd....... Los Angeles River channel, Long Beach Blvd........ Sepulveda flood-control reservoir............................................ ................. .............. 34,000,169 13,678 6,650,561 .............. 20,566 34,244 6,650,561 155,121 34,244 6,650,561 Z M Sycamore W ash.... .... ....... .. ........................... Verdugo Wash, Concord St. to upper Canada bridge.......................... 8,835 367,805 14,711 362,557 23,546 730,362 155,121 ...155,121 23,546 0 885,483 San Gabriel River basin: San Gabriel River channel: San Gabriel Canyon to Santa Fe flood control reservoir.... ........... 1,900,514 44,686 1,945,200 1,945,200 Mr Santa Fe flood control reservoir to Walnut Creek.... ............... 32,264 .............. 32,264 32,264 Santa Fe flood control reservoir.... ............................. 12,636,949 .............. 12,636,949 12,636,949 Rio Hondo basin: Alhambra Wash............................................ 526,697 580,437 1,107,134 4,684 ............. 4,684 1,111,818 Ballona Creek basin: Ballona Creek channel and jetties........ Plant...................................................... Surveys and engineering......................................... ....................... 769,102 363,474 509,118 217,755 24,000 1,278,220 217,755 387,474 72,201 ............. .............. 72,201 1,350,421 217,755 387,474 Distribution of insurance and surplus plant accounts...... ................. -781,900 617,263 -164,637 -164,637 Subtotal-new work... .................................... 69,769,657 11,008,935 80,778,592 256,113 .............. 256,113 81,034,705 Subtotal-maintenance.................................................. ............ 4,531,252.............. 4,531,252............................ 4,531,252 Subtotal-all work ($70 million project)................................... 74,300,909 11,008,935 85,309,844 256,113 ............. 256,113 85,565,957 UNITz OUTSIDE $70 MILLION PROJECT Los Angeles River basin: Blanchard Canyon........................................................ 223,643 .............. 223,643 10,990 $371,210 382,200 605,843 Blue Gum Canyon......................................................... 138,420 .............. 138,420 140 75,360 75,500 213,920 Burbank-Eastern system.... ...................................... 7,148,810.............. .7,148,810 806,960 907,640 1,714,600 8,863,410 Burbank-Western system (lower)... ................................. 1,295,926.............. 1,295,926.............. 260,000 260,000 1,555,926 Burbank-Western system (upper)... ................................. 4,911,988 .............. 4,911,988 781,354 1,673,646 2,455,000 7,366,988 Caballero Creek.... ............................................ 1,446,949.............. 1,446,949 325,908 393,692 719,600 2,166,549 Compton Creek: Los Angeles River to Hooper Ave. storm drain.......................... 149,033 .............. 149,033 .. ....................... 149,033 Hooper Ave. storm drain to Main St.... ........................... 1,202,965 .............. 1,202,965 362,937 154,963 . 517,900 1,720,865 Dead Horse Canyon and Royal Blvd. channel.... ......................... 727,057 .............. 727,057 132,858 77,842 210,700 937,757 O Lopez Canyon diversion........... ................................. 743,458 .............. .743,458 192,673 487,827 680,500 1,423,958 Lopez Canyon flood control-reservoir.... ............................... 729,056 .............. .729,056 ...................................... 729,056 Los Angeles River channel: Owensmouth Ave. toLankershim Blvd............................. 17,371,670.............. 17,371,670 4,410,885 1,737,715 6,148,600 23,520,270 O Lankershim Blvd.toStewartand Gray Rd...........................9,000,403 ...............9,090,403 .. 9,090,403 Stewart and Gray Rd. toSantaAna Branch, Pacific Electric railway bridge. 4 ..... .... 5,860,861.............. 5,860,861 327,370 12,030 339,400 6,200,261 SantaAna Branch, Pacific Electric railway bridge to Pacific Ocean 22,009,913 .............. 22,009,913 1,582,691 8,036,609 9,619,300 31,629,213 Pacoima Wash channel................. 3,178,110.............. .3,178,110 903,238 507,862 1,411,100 4,589,210 Tujunga Wash channel............... 7,359,357.............. 7,359,357 2,286,305 878,495 3,164,800 10,524,157 Verdugo Wash, upper Canada bridge to debris basin.......... ...... .. 112,850 ...............112,850 .............. 46,900 46,900 159,750 Wilson Canyon and Mansfield St.channel... ..................... 3,917,506.............. 3,917,506 361,722 649,378 1,011,100 4,928,606 Winery Canyon................................................. 69,013 .............. 69,013 ............... 39,000 39,000 108,013 San Gabriel Riverbasin: Coyote Creek (including North Fork) ... .............................. 14,712,334.............. 14,712,334 1,189,233 7,236,467 8,425,700 23,138,034 Emerald Wash and LiveOak Wash.... .................... 1,658,620.............. 1,658,620 269,826 967,774 1,237,600 2,896,220 Marshall Creek... ............................................. 1,072,750.............. 1,072,750 146,020 354,380 500,400 1,573,150 San Gabriel Riverchannel:I Santa Fe flood-control reservoir to Whittier Narrows flood-control reservoir.. 5,939,112.............. 5,939,112 745,206 952,594 1,697,800 7,636,912 Whittier Narrows flood-control reservoir to Pacific Ocean................. 9,098,386.............. 9,098,386 1,074,091 433,409 1,507,500 10,605,886 Thompson Creek and San Jose Wash (including San Jose Creek)................9,804,727 .............. 9,804,727 1,215,425 2,971,075 4,186,500 13,991,227 Wanut Creek system..................................................... 17,127,158.............. 17,127,158 4,277,539 5,635,061 9,912,600 27,039,758 Walnut Creek inlet channel.... .................................... 2,869,424.............. .2,869,424 727,516 554,584 1,282,100 4,151,524 Whittier Narrows flood control reservoir........... ........................... 32,254,311 .............. 32,254,311 35,239 3,061 38,300 32,292,611. Rio Hondo basin: Arcadia Wash system.. ............... . ........... ........ 5,063,273 .............. 5,063,273 1,264,448 783,852 2,048,300 7,111,573 Eaton Wash.......... ..................................... 4,225,068.............. 4,225,068 932,388 403,312 1,335,700 5,560,768 Rio Hondo channel: H Peck Rd.to Rosemead Blvd.(upper).... ...........................4,411,995 .............. 4,411,995 970,312 511,888 1,482,200 5,894,195 Whittier Narrows flood-control reservoir toLos Angeles River(lower)...... . 8,164,705.............. 8,164,705 1,429,176 723,224 2,152,400 10,317,105 Rubio Canyon diversion... ....................................... 1,066,825 .............. 1,066,825 90,523 160,777 251,300 1,318,125 - Santa AnitaWash .... .......................................... 3,045,713.............. 3,045,713 412,879 110,321 523,200 3,568,913 Sierra Madre Wash................................................60,718............... 60,718 .. . . 60,718 ............. 1,700 1,700 62,418 Sawpit Wash... ........ ................................. 2,337,809 ......... 2,337,809 252,731 450,769 703,500 3,041,309 Sierra Madre Villachannel............................................ ,..... ... 846......... . 846,443 4,368 330,932 335,300 1,181,743 See footnotes at end of table. Project costs to June 30, 1966-Continued Non-Federal fundsl M Emergency Total Total Units Regular funds relief funds Federal funds Spent Spent all funds by Federal 2 by local3 Total Government interests UNITS OUTSIDE $70 MILLION PROJECT-Continued Ballona Creek basin: BallonaCreek channel.... .$600,582 .............. $600,582 ............ ........... $600,582 .............. BenedictCanyon system...1...................................... 5,424,319 .............. 15,424,319 $2,197,718 $2,034,482 $4,232,200 19,656,519 CentinelaCreek .................................... 4,083,771 .............. 4,083,771 1,696,998 2,862,702 4,559,700 8,643,471 Sawtelle-Westwood system Sepulveda (including channel) .... 9,620,767 ..............9,620,767 1,188,837 474,363 1,663,200 11,283,967 Subtotal-new work.... ................................. 241,175,798 .............. 241,175,798 32,606,504 44,266,896 76,873,400 318,049,198 0 Subtotal-maintenance................................................. .............. 690,808 . 690,808......................... .............. 690,808 work (outside Subtotal-all project)............................ $70million .............. 241,866,606 241,.866,60632,606,504 44,266,896 76,873,400 318,740,006 Total-new work... ......................................... 310,945,455$11,008,935321,954,39032,862,617 44,266,896 77,129,513 399,083,903 Total-maintenance..................................................... 5,222,060 .............. 5,222,060 n-I ................ .......... ............ 5,222,060 work (inside Grand total-all $70million and outside project)............... 316,167,515 11,008,935327,176,45032,862,617 44,266,896 77,129,513 404,305,963 x Includes $10,982,400 for betterments, some of which were constructed by local ation under terms of project authorization and betterments desired by local interests and some by Federal Government out of non-Federal funds deposited interests. Includes non-Federal funds of $1,625,989 on deposit with Federal by local interests. Government on June 30, 1966, but not spent as of that date. 2 Other contributed funds (non-Federal funds) spent by Federal Government 4 Includes funds for permanent construction of Los Angeles River at Long for required items of local cooperation under terms of project authorization and Beach Blvd. betterments desired by local interests. Note. Does not include $107,937 for minor rehabilitation and costs under * Non-Federal funds spent by local interests for required items of local cooper- Code 710. FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1395 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 1 Total to Seal 1962 163 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Newwork. n . ¢ree ... 331,01,35 $14,000,000 $8,900,000 $S323,574,583 4lnt,CroPriated $17,922,420 $14,679,594 $13,619,753 13,532634 13,024,078 0,249,3600 a............19,294,863 14,302,318 triated........ . 353,100 421,925 333,195 420,500 804,400 5,429,341 ... 368,538 374,861 379,307 420,948 6598,961 5,222,060 for new work. Excludes Code 710 funds, S 6.6888 $11,008,935 ern funds relief emergency y relief spent funds by Corps in connection with emergency relief DVroject, and $107,937 for minor rehabilitation. OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Year .9Total to .1966 June 30, 19661 ewWork.- cos~te ..... $2,89,990 $1181,884 $1,481,323 ............ 4,074,972 1,817,5631981,68 $303,497 2184,610 1,170,5871,083,078 f $34488,606 32,862,617 ertPederal funds spent by Federal Government for replacements required aspart oflocal %'" and betterments desired by local interests. Excludes $4,238,000 other contributed e by the Corps in connection with emergency relief (previous) project. S'~OJAVE RIVER RESERVOIR, MOJAVE RIVER BASIN, CALIF. beLocation. Reservoir will be on Mojave River, immediately i, confluence of Deep Creek and West Fork of Mojave S and about 14 miles upstream from Victorville, in Mojave ir basin, Calif. Idistfing project. Project-document plan of improvement pro- ed, or construction of a flood control dam and reservoir on the to~ t Fork of Mojave River. In 1964, project was modified ol ubstitute a dam at the Forks site to provide regulation of floods Qot only West Fork of Mojave River but also Deep Srtbekt Operation of this reservoir will regulate runoff from a ot ry are a of 215 square miles, reducing standard project 4 of 94,000 cubic feet per second on Moj:ave River to an ral W of ab out 20,000 cubic feet per second. Because the nat- 20,000 cubic feet r cfannlel capacity of Mojave River is about from t~second, flood protection would be provided all flows of oupstr'geam' ' ar d p ro Standard project flood magnitude originating upstream ec rl th et the project. Approved estimated (1966) first cost for proj- r 1$15,500,000 ($15,250,000 Federal and $250,000 non-Fed- )o * Project was authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act (I. al 164, 86th Cong., 1st sess.). Modification of project was L rl zed by the Chief of Engineers on November 27, 1964 e Cal cooperation Local interests must hold the United States Isfrom damages from all water-rights claims resulting from Struction and operation of project; prevent encroachment qaY~'ful to existing channel downstream from reservoir; and tai channel capacity of not less than 20,000 cubic feet per elod through improved areas. San Bernardino County Flood S1trol:District, by resolution adopted December 17, 1962, sup- li4d assurances that required conditions would be met. By 1396 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 resolution adopted October 18, 1965, local interests agreed to ~c tribute $250,000 in consideration of land enhancement benefits provided by the modified project. Operations and results during fiscal year. Continued work st modified project plan and completed preliminary modified master plan. bot Condition at end of fiscal year. Modified project plan isabOt e 95 percent complete. Work remaining consists of compe and project plan and the master plan, preparing contract plans specifications, construction of dam, preparing operation and m il tenance manual, and preparing reservoir-regulation manual#. Cost and financial statement Trotal to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1064 1965 1966 June3, New work: $500,00075 $g4990 Appropriated.......... $44,800 $118,000 $80,000 $207,000 Cost.................. 30,550 123,534 63,204 164,247 369,461 26. PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS RESERVOIRS, COLORAD RIVER BASIN, NEV. of Location. In Lincoln County, Nev., about 100 miles north, Of Hoover Dam and about 17 and 20 miles, respectively, eas Caliente, Existing project. Reservoirs are interdependent unitsod Nev. of a project for protection of lands and improvements agains fddy along Clover Creek, Meadow Valley Wash, and lower udo River, Nev., in Virgin River basin, which is a part of Colrfor River basin. Each unit consists of adam and a reservoir. ht flood control. Pine Canyon Dam is earthfill with maximum htn a of 92 feet above streambed and crest length of 884 feet. ith a saddle at left of dam is a dike (an earthfill structure) h of maximum height above saddle of 40 feet and a crest lengaloth 893 feet. A 330-foot spillway (crest elevation 5,675 feet) is"eser left wall of canyon about midway between dam and dike. 1954 voir has a total capacity at spillway crest of 7,840 acre-feet (ion of including 1,400 acre-feet reserved for sediment. Operat°are reservoir regulates runoff from a tributary area of 45 s ubi miles, reducing standard project flood from 10,500 to 322. Ur feet per second. Mathews Canyon Dam is earthfill with ma 1feet. height of 71 feet above streambed and crest length of 8O left A50-foot spillway (crest elevation, 5,461 feet) is in a saddle taY of left abutment. Reservoir has a total capacity at sp8 ed crest of 6,260 acre-feet (1954), including 1,000 acre-feet reser a for sediment, Operation of reservoir regulates runoff od tributary area of 34 square miles, reducing standard proeoried from 8,500 to 260 cubic feet per second. Project was aut sessf) by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 530, 81st Cong., 2d se Local cooperation. Fully complied with. cor* Operations and results during fiscal year. Operationsteri sisted of maintaining dams in good condition and administeri real estate. FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1397 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of reservoirs was p.1l1eted in December 1957. Work remaining consists of pre- Parireservoir-regulation manual. Cost and financial statement and Total to ,.Cos ........ ...... 063162 964 965 1966 June 30, 1966 ....................... $1401,248 M.-lICo~Prited......-$1,387. 0 19 4 era .- -1387A $17,865 1. $. $131,1248 A ea ted. ........ 8,000 9,285 13,4 9,369 76,768 19,340 8........,245 27. SAN DIEGO RIVER BASIN, CALIF. SAN DIEGO RIVER (MISSION VALLEY) )Location. Along San Diego River in Mission Valley, San o County, Calif. feet of rec- ' sting project. Plan provides for about 27,500 Areu41ar reinforced-concrete channel extending from near Zion eee in Grantville to just upstream from existing flood control end tel at Morena Boulevard; two inlet levees at upstream with end to provide a connection eg ltransition at downstream chan- els, tn channel; and short rectangular reinforced-concretestreams (A1 along downstream reaches of three tributary c 0 arado, Murphy, and Murray Canyons). Improvements will second in 8aitro .standard project flood of 115,000 cubic feet per Can- River, 17,000 cubic feet per second in Alvarado Yo, iego Murphy Canyon, and 6,000 cb t14,000 cubic feet per second in estimated ( 19 6 ~ eet per second in Murray Canyon. Approved eral6 first cost is $16,100,000 Federal and $8,500,000 non-Fed- Doc. 212' 8Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. )9th Cong., 1st sess.). cal cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and ho - Of-way; pay for necessary highway and utility relocations; w United States free from damages; maintain and operate rcs after completion; and prevent any encroachment that would 0 ce the carrying capacity of channels. CPerations and results during fiscal year Initiated studies to e e loc0al . t necessary engineering work and inspection to assure that which may become part of Federal e , is doneconstruction, ontee in compliance with Corps standards. odition at end of fiscal year. Studies are 3 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Totalto 1962 1963 1964 1965 ' 1966 June 30,1966 ............ 1398 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 28. SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CALIF. LYTLE AND WARM CREEKS. . Location. Near San Bernardino and Colton, San Bernardino County, Calif. corete Existing project. Plan provides for a rectangular cO Creek channel extending for 31/2 miles along East Branch of LytleCreek; from existing Foothill Boulevard inlet structure to Warm ireek levees extending along both sides of Warm Creek for 1.1 mile from confluence with East Branch of Lytle Creek to S-ant.santa River; and a leveed channel extending about 1 mile alongCrees Ana River from mouth of existing East Twin and Warm re concrete channel to mouth of existing natural channel of WasT Creek. Design capacities of improvements will be: ,ree Branch of Lytle Creek, 58,000 cubic feet per second; Warm iver): 60,000 to 90,000 cubic feet per second; and Santa Ana rs 156,000 cubic feet per second. Approved estimated (1966) ojecrt cost is $11,200,000 Federal and $1,900,000 non-Federal. Pro was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 5 3 , 89th C311 1st sess.). Aand Local cooperation. Local interests must provide landst i rights-of-way; pay for necessary highway and utility relocatioS; maintain and operate works after completion; hold the uaited States free from damages; adjust all water-rights claims resultle- from the project; and prevent any encroachment that woUlt se duce flood-carrying capacities of levee and channel improven Operations and results during fiscal year. None. ee Condition at end of fiscal year. No Federal work has done. 29. SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN (AND ORANGE COUNTY), CA ' Location. On Santa Ana River and tributaries and on iet. streams in Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Countieshe0 General plan of improvement. Although a single comPr~,ver sive plan for flood control has been developed for Santa Ana ts i basin, improvements provided are divided into two projectiver accordance with congressional authorizations. Santa Anaect, basin (and Orange County) project, the first of these two proj , provides for protection of metropolitan area of Orange C 1ad which includes some areas outside Santa Ana River basin;eeks flood control on San Antonio, Chino, Lytle, and Cajon .rects Santa Ana River basin project, the second of these two pron provides for flood control in other areas of basin. PertinentFor formation on the first project is in following paragraphs.orized pertinent information on second project, see other authG flood control projects. pgge: Existing project. Active units of project: (a) Brea its Improvement on Brea Creek, about 8 miles upstream from.d mouth at Coyote Creek and in city limits of Fullerton, conaro of a rolled-earthfill dam with a crest length of 1,765 feet of 87 feet above streambed and a flood cofrl maximum height reservoir with a capacity of 4,100 acre-feet (June 1964) at spii td crest. Operation of reservoir regulates runoff from a ri area of 23.4 square miles, reducing design flood from an lf FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1399 -ee d 0cubic feet per second to an outflow of 1,330 cubic feet per Carbo (b) Carbon Canyon Dam and channel: Improvement on 4 lile: Canyon Creek, near mouth of Carbon Canyon and about east of city of Brea, consists of a rolled-earthfill dam with crees stret length of 2,610 feet and a maximum height of 99 feet above fefbed; a flood control reservoir with a capacity of 7,050 acre- frcedlar. 1961) at spillway crest; and a 4,080-foot-long rein- cubi -concrete outlet channel with a capacity of 1,000 to 2,000 fro] eet per second. Operation of reservoir regulates runoff lood fa tributary area of 19.3 square miles, reducing design of 1 rom an inflow of 9,300 cubic feet per second to an outflow 0 00 cubic feet per second. (c) Fullerton Dam: Improvement at ~rst Creek coea about about and Creek, Fullerton 2 miles4 miles upstream from its mouth northeast of city of Fullerton, 44 d as of a rolled-earthfill dam with a crest length of 575 feet c0tro aximum height of 106 feet above streambed and a flood at SPill reservoir with a capacity of 217,000 acre-feet (Aug. 1960) t le -waycrest. Operation of reservoir regulates runoff from a i l eet per second. (f) San Antonio Dam: Improvement on feet of 4,600 cubic feet per second to an outflow of 240 cubic elt.er second. (d)Lytle and Cajon Creeks channel improve- for : I1mprovements, which extend along Lytle and Cajon Creeks st ,out 12 miles from northwest of city of San Bernardino to South of that city, consist of collecting levees and groins on Dre and Cajon Creeks upstream from Foothill Boulevard; an froed channel generally along West Branch of Lytle Creek IIkoothill Boulevard to Warm Creek; bank protection at Warm .i;and a diversion structure to bypass excess flows down ex- 4tiR Iast Branch of Lytle Creek. (e) Prado Dam: Improve- or on Santa Ana River about 30 miles upstream from mouth ists of a rolled-earthfill dam with a crest length of 2,280 feet o ra aximum height of 106 feet above streambed and a flood t reservoir with a capacity of 217,000 acre-feet (Aug. 1960) triblway crest. Operation of reservoir regulates runoff from a . Cry area of 2,233 square miles, reducing design flood from Sflow of 193,000 cubic feet per second to an outflow of 9,200 41eet per second. (f) San Antonio Dam: Improvement on , nt.Onio Creek near mouth of San Antonio Canyon and about Ithlles north of city of Pomona consists of a rolled-earthfill dam t crest length of 3,850 feet and a maximum height of 160 ) 9 ove streambed and a flood control reservoir with a capacity es 285 acre-feet (Aug. 1956) at spillway crest. Operation of ler v oir regulates runoff from a tributary area of 26.7 square c nreducing design flood from an inflow of 19,000 cubic feet per 1ton' to an outflow of 8,500 cubic feet per second. (g) San 1 I'o and Chino Creeks channel: Improvement extending along a Altonio and Chino Creeks for 16 miles from San Antonio t Ielo Prado Reservoir, consists of a rectangular, concrete-lined about 10.5 miles long and ranging from 20 to 30 feet wide; i".Pezoidal channel about 5.2 miles long and a bottom width ti4. from 60 to 336 feet; and 29 highway bridges, 4 railroad es, and 1 combination highway and railroad bridge. 1400 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Latest approved estimated Federal first cost for all units Estimated cost Project Latest Total revisiOS date ACTIVE UNITSI Completed: Brea Dam.... Fullerton Dam ...... .. .......... .... 11,189,068 ( 411,076 Lytle and Cajon Creeks channel improvements............................... 7,612,000 Prado Dam........................................... 9,473,273 ( San Antonio Dam............... ..................... ....... 37,001,176 Completed Carbonexcept CanyonforDamminor and completion channel.... items: ............................. 5,150,000 1960 San Antonio and Chino Creeks channel...... ....................... 10,900,000 INACTIVE UNITS4 Aliso Creek Dam ............................................... 340 000 1954 San Juan Dam.... ........................................... .............................................. 5,960,000 i4 Trabuco Dam... 2190,000 1954 Villa Park Dam ................................................ 2:270,000 196 1 For details, see following paragraphs. 2 Plant in service. * Includes $5,000 working funds. Prado,$ San For additional information see "Other Authorized Flood-Control Projects." Note. Not including estimated cost of Code 710 recreation at Brea, Fullerton, Antonio, and Carbon Canyon Dams. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents - June 22, 1936 Reservoirs and flood channels for flood control and related None. purposes for protection of metropolitan area of Orange County, at an estimated construction cost not to exceed $13 million. June 28, 1938 San Antonio and Chino Creeks channel portion of improve- HI. Doe. 688, 75th Cong., 3d sess ment. Authorized to be appropriated $6,500,000 for initia- tion and partial accomplishment of plans for those creeks. Rescinded provisions of Flood Control Act of 1936, pro- viding that local interests pay for relocations, lands, ease- ments, and rights-of-way. (Estimated resultant additional cost to United States, $3,500,000.) Aug. 18,1941 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $2,500,000 for None. prosecution of projects approved in above flood control acts. Dec. 22,1944 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $10 million for H. Doe. 534, 78th Cong., 2d sees. prosecution of projects adopted in above-mentioned flood control acts, including projects on Lytle and Cajon Creeks for local flood protection at San Bernardino and Colton, Calif. July 3, 1958 Authorized to be appropriated an additional $8 million for None. prosecution of projects approved in above-mentioned flood control acts. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Completed draft' basic operation-maintenance manual for channel and levee units- Santa Ana River basin (and Orange County) project and other San Bernardino County units. Other operations for units in existing project: (a) Brea Dam: Maintained dam in good oP erating condition and administered real estate. (b) Car.bo r Canyon Dam and channel: Continued construction of minor completion items and continued acquisition of rights-of-waY at a cost of $500,934 regular funds and maintained dam in good. opera * ing condition and administered real estate. (c) Fullerton Daln' Maintained dam in good operating condition, continued preparal tion of reservoir-regulation manual, and administered real estate. (d) Lytle and Cajon Creeks channel improvements" contract adjustments. (e) Prado Dam: Maintained dam in FLOOD CONTROL--LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1401 tood operating condition, continued preparation of master plan, 4ad administered real estate. (f) San Antonio Dam: Maintained dat in good operating condition and administered real estate. ) San Antonio and Chino Creeks channel: Constructed minor i1aPletion items, maintained project in good operating condi- o, and administered real estate. Condition at end of fiscal year. Draft of basic operation and Rlaintenance manual for channel and levee units of Santa Ana lVer basin (and Orange County) project and other San Bernar- o10 County project units is complete. Work remaining consists 0 coOmpleting manual and inserts. Other information for units in 1Usting project: (a) Brea Dam: Dam was completed in March t- 42. Work remaining consists of completing reservoir-regula- tilo manual. (b) Carbon Canyon Dam and channel: Construc- ti1n of project started in May 1959 and, except for minor comple- '0 items, was completed in spring of 1961. Work remaining coaists of completion of acquisition of rights-of-way and master blar, which is 25 percent complete. (c) Fullerton Dam: Dam Was completed in May 1941. Work remaining consists of com- Pleting reservoir-regulation manual and preparing master plan. .) Lytle and Cajon Creeks channel improvements: Existing PoJect was completed in 1948 and turned over to local interests r maintenance September 1949. No work remains. (e) Prado .ara: Dam was completed in May 1941. Work remaining con- 1ts of completing reservoir-regulation manual and master plan, Which is 30 percent complete. (f) San Antonio Dam: Dam was completed in October 1956. Work remaining consists of prepara- on of master plan. (g) San Antonio and Chino Creeks channel: Oject was completed in November 1960. No work remains. Cost and financial statement eTotal to S ear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 DPropriated .......... $32,083 -$53,376 $19,400 $6,900 $462,246 2$42,078,145 a t 72,442 224,768 61,934 -39,618 508,112 242,073,322 APpro oa r ted .......... 147,900 198,645 213,300 26,0 206,500 29,00 239,000 3s31j7 32,381,273 . 151,391 172,458 239,644 187,917 249,520 32,371,507 l . orarises funds for Brea, Fullerton, Prado, and San Antonio Dams, Carbon Canyon Dam Chchannel, Lytle and Cajon Creeks channel improvements, and San Antonio and 1ho Creeks channel (active units); $67,361 for San Juan Damn (also reported under "Other orized Flood Control Projects"); and $85,310, undistributed funds. b "cludes $5,000 working funds for San Antonio Dam. Excludes other contributed funds spent Ate Corps as follows: $124,105 for water-conservation betterments desired by local interests f. rado Dam; $8500 for betterments desired by local interests at San Antonio Dam; $234,709 $g 9.betterments esired by local interests on San Antonio and Chino Creeks channel; and 1,62 for required items of local cooperation on Lytle and Cajon Creeks channel improve- nt* Excludes Code 710 funds. Excludes $290,000 spent direct by local interests on San l ae toi and Chino Creeks channel for local cooperation items not required. 41d xcludes maintenance for Lytle and Cajon Creeks channel improvements, which are operated "1aintained by local interests. 30. SANTA CLARA RIVER BASIN, CALIF. SANTA PAULA CREEK CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS Location. Site of improvement, a unit of Santa Clara River asin project, is along lower Santa Paula Creek, a tributary of anta Clara River, Ventura County, Calif. 8 -'istingproject. Plan provides for a concrete channel, about miles long along Santa Paula Creek from a point near mouth of 1402 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Santa Paula Canyon to Santa Clara River. Plan also provide5 for stone-revetted levees at confluence of Santa Paula Creek and Santa Clara River. Improvement would protect the tof of Santa Paula and nearby agricultural areas from most floods 01 Santa Paula Creek. Approved estimated (1966) first cost $2,320,000 Federal and $110,000 non-Federal. Improvement wa authorized by 1948 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 443, 80th Cong. 1st sess.). - esy Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish necessa rights-of-way, assume responsibility for damage claims, prov cost of necessary relocations of public utilities, and maintain provement after completion. Operations and results during fiscal year. Initiated prepara tion of project plan.ert Condition at end of fiscal year. Project plan is 20 pere complete. Cost and financial statement Totsl to Fiscal year.... .............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30 1966 New work: $75,000 Appropriated.......... ............ ... ........................ $75,000 41,600 Cost.................. .... ......... ... ..... 41,690 ......... 1 Excludes non-Federal costs of $295,000 for local cooperation items not required. 31. SANTA MARIA VALLEY LEVEES, SANTA MARIA RIVER BASIN, CALIF. i1 Location. Along Santa Maria River and Bradley Canyon 60 Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties, Calif., aboutll miles northwest of city of Santa Barbara. Improvements alof Santa Maria River extend about 21.9 miles from Fugler in? t (at junction of Cuyama and Sisquoc Rivers) to Pacific Oceal Improvements along Bradley Canyon extend from canyon rnoLlt to Santa Maria River. l Existing project. Levee and channel improvements aures Santa Maria River and along Bradley Canyon. Principal featuro include: (a) About 17 miles of revetted levee along left bank o Santa Maria River from Fugler Point to State Highway 1 bridg at Guadalupe, about 5 miles of revetted levee along right bal of Santa Maria River from about 11/ miles downstream .fro U.S. Highway 101 to about 11/2 miles upstream from Southere- Pacific railroad bridge, and about 1.8 miles of channel and re vetted levee from mouth of Bradley Canyon to Santa Maria Rive; (b) clearing about 21.9 miles of channel along Santa Maria Eive from Fugler Point to Pacific Ocean; and (c) raising Souther Pacific railroad bridge. (See II. Doc. 400, 83d Cong., 2d sess-) Current (1965) working estimate of Federal first cost is $5,9 581. Estimated (1961) non-Federal first cost is $1,110,000. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations coD sisted of contract adjustments. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated i June 1959 and completed in June 1963. No work remains. FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1403 Cost and financial statement Pcal Total to ear 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Copriated...........$1,920,881 $470,000-$100,000 ......... -$33,847 $5,545,734 ....... 1,239,8091,033,471$94 6,773 .5,535,727 cludea $106,364 other contributed funds. 32. WHITEWATER RIVER BASIN, CALIF. A. BANNING LEVEE-SAN GORGONIO RIVER Location. On San Gorgonio River at Banning, Riverside ounaty, Calif. 0 zisting project. About 0.4 mile of levee, extending from Q0 uth of Banning Canyon downstream along right bank of San IrOnio River, which provides protection from flood damage to A~dential, business, and public property in city of Banning. (0Yoved estimated (1965) first cost for project is $110,000 apo,000 Federal and $20,000 non-Federal). Existing project Vlsroved by Chief of Engineers, February 14, 1964, under pro- os of section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. 0 Ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. oisPerations and results during fiscal year. Operations con- gted of completing construction of the levee at a cost of $69,005 ru'lar funds. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was completed October 1965. Cost and financial statement year Total to ............ 1962 1963 1964 , 1965 1966 June 30,1966 1 $109,002 Propr iated .. 18,000 $....... $6,000 $85,002 .. ........... 17,555 189 6,198 $73,029 96,971 . TAHCHEVAH CREEK DETENTION RESERVOIR AND CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS jocation. On Tahchevah Creek in city limits of Palm Springs, 11 hitewater River basin, Calif. 1 'isting project. A detention reservoir created by an earth- 41 embankment just below mouth of Tahchevah Canyon; an tated, concrete-lined open spillway through right end of em- t klent; a stone dike constructed upstream from embankment tdeflect flows from outlet works; an underground conduit ex- offig from reservoir to about 2,000 feet upstream from junction ete ahchevah Creek and Baristo Creek; and a rectangular con- oete channel, partly covered and partly open, extending from ~. htream end of underground conduit to confluence with 90ai'sto Creek. Reservoir has a total capacity at spillway crest of ta acre-feet (1965). Reservoir regulates runoff from a tribu- 2 area of 3.2 square miles, reducing flow of design flood from 00 to 160 cubic feet per second. Channel and conduit sections Droject would pass reduced flows through Palm Springs and 1404 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 part of Caliente Indian Reservation to existing partly improved channel of Baristo Creek. Approved estimated (1964) first Cost for project is $2,880,000 ($1,440,000 Federal and $1,440,000 non Federal). Project authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act1' Doc. 171, 86th Cong., 1st sess.). s d Local cooperation. Local interests must provide landsoand rights-of-way for construction; bear expense of all relocatdonst including required bridge and culvert modifications; hold the United States free from damages, including damages from nater: rights claims; maintain and operate all works after compeIlong and prevent encroachment harmful to improved channel lfr Tahchevah Creek and to existing Baristo Creek channel bfro Tahchevah Creek to Sunrise Way: Provided local interests bet 50 percent of cost of project, including cost of lands, easements rights-of-way, and relocations. sted Operations and results during fiscal year. Operations consite of minor completion items. Completed operation and mal nance manual. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction conimpleted ~ March 1965. Water-surface recorder equipment was instale November 1965. No work remains. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 ju 16 - ------- ---- New work:$1435,90 Appropriated.......... ............ $100,000 ........ $175,900$1,160,000 . 6,03 Cost 0. .............. ..... 68,525 103,868 1,191,100 8,701 1 Excludes $64,175 required contributed funds. C. TAHQUITZ CREEK Location. In Riverside County, city limits of Palm Spring' Calif., and about 90 miles east of Los Angeles, Calif. belo Existing project. Plan provides for a debris basin jus Iles mouth of Tahquitz Canyon and a trapezoidal channel 3.5 rilm long from debris basin to confluence of Tahquitz Creek and 50 Canyon Wash. Approved estimated (1966) first cost is$4,2 000 Federal and $1,150,000 non-Federal. Project was authori by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 223, 89th Cong., 1st sess.)ld Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands o rights-of-way; perform necessary construction or relocatio~ree highways, roads, bridges, and utilities; hold United States ro from damages; construct necessary closure to integrate the pil posed Tahquitz Creek improvement with existing levees on rel Canyon Wash; maintain and operate completed works; and Prci vent any encroachment that would reduce flood-carrying cap a ties of debris basin and improved channel. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. een Condition at end of fiscal year. No Federal work has b done. FLOOD CONTROL-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1405 88 INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Inspection costs for fiscal year from regular funds for mainte- 'ancewere $37,709. . Project Month citan levee-San Gorgonio River, Whitewater River basin, Calif.................. January ev reek levee, Santa Ann aRiver basin, Calif. ................. ........... February S ast Twin, and Warm Creeks channel improvements and Lytle Creek levee, ota A iver basin, Calif.............................................February A4ngelesCounty drainage area, California, channels ......................... January ytle and CC Creeks channel improvements, Santa Ana River basin (and Orange February RICr *YCalif, ........ February Rive eeklevees, Santa Ana River basin, Calif............................... February Sars de levees, Santa Ana River basin, Calif. ............................. January 8 iego River channel end levees, San Diego River basin, Calif................. February sa tcinto River levee and Bautista Creek channel, Santa Ana River basin, Calif. January 1ta Clara River levee and channel improvements, Santa Clara River basin, Calif. January Stea Maria Valley levees, Santa Maria River basin, Calif..................*.*** February Th C.anyon debris basin and channel, Ventura River basin, Calif. ........... January Creek detention rcservoir and channel improvements, Whitewater River ah bev b Calif a4January Wash detention basin (McMicken Dam) and outlet channel (lower Agua V1a River), Gila River basin, Ariz. ....... *............................ January t ura River levee, Ventura River basin, Calif. ................................ January ergency flood control projects: S e . . . *. *.. * *. . *. *.. * * ** ** *. Cr aig , C olo r ad o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * ** * S ep t em ber OloresColorado :................:.............................. September I.dco, Colorado en, Colorado ............ .................. ,........................................ ..... September September lufUtah ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ................. September Oanza, Utah ........................... ...........o............... September ggsWyoming ......................... September 34. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIONS I accordance with section 7, Flood Control Act of 1944, studies Of reservoir operations for flood control were conducted, and prep- arztion of regulations for use of storage allocated for flood con- 1 Was continued for following Bureau of Reclamation projects: oover Dam, Navajo Reservoir, and Lemon Reservoir. Costs orfiscal year from regular funds for maintenance were $10,271. 35. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance lit~1b8ack Reservoir, Gila River basin, Ariz........................1963 0 rek levee, San Bernardino County, Calif. 2................. .. .......... 3$400,000 ............. i0^esDam, San Dieguito River basin, Calif. (inactive)..............1958 1aslevee, Little Colorado River, Colorado River basin, Ariz. .. oo 1950 335,000.............. ail as Wash, Colorado River basin, Nev. (inactive).............. 1964 295,191.......... al h levee Joshua Tree, Calif.1 2 ..... 2,745.................. At egoRiver levees, Calif.2..... ............................ .... ( ) ........... ........... SAria River basin, Calif.: )vil, East Twin, and Warm Creeks channel improvements and 1962 67,753,612........... M'?tle Creek levee.2 S11'Creek leve2 .... 1961 7617, 890 ........... 2 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. . verside levees 2. . . . . . . . . . . . 1959 82,104,478o........... 8Natan Jacinto River levee and Bautista Creek ichanneI 1962 93,026,974........... Alina CRive r basin (and Orange County), Calif.: .... on reek Dam (inactive).... ..................................... r.Juan Dam (inactive)............................... 8a 90 67361........... a abuco Dam (inactive). . ... .......... .................................................. SaetVilla ParkDam (inactive)................ ........................................ S.Clara River basin, Calif. 2....... ...... Vent, nta Clara River levee and channel improvements 1961 102,126,672 .............. t11aRiver basin, Calif.: 2 ........ ............ Ste Wart Canyon debris and hannel 2 basin ........ .. .. . . . ............ ......... 1964 1939,909 ....... et a River levee ....... 1950 121,343,638......... . See footnotes next page. 1406 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 Authorized by Chief of Engineers under authority of sec. 205, Public Law 80-858, amended. 2 Completed.(re- SExcludes non-Federal costs of $473,432 for required local cooperation items, and $11,353 (re- vised 1964) for items not required.i 4Excludes non-Federal costs of $38,927 (revised 1964) for required local cooperationt and $1,600 for items not required. SSee San Diego River and Mission Bay, Calif., under section on navigation. r relocl SExcludes $200,000 required contributed funds, costs $3,334,459 non-Federal for local costs cooperation req r3,or for not items uired cooperation items, and $191,547 for non-Federal 7 Excludes non-Federal costs of $194,748 for required local cooperation items and $3,820df local cooperation items not required. Excludes $25,000 preauthorization study costs rlecte previous reports. SExcludes $1,863,000 non-Federal costs for required local cooperation items. o Excludes $928,021 non-Federal costs for required local cooperation items. $10,000 for 10 Excludes non-Federal costs of $924,210 for required local cooperation items and $ flectedi local cooperation items not required. Excludes $45,000 preauthorization study costs reflect previous reports. 11 Excludes $352,203 for required local cooperation items.006for 15 Excludes non-Federal costs of $140,027 for required local cooperation items and $17,006 r local cooperation items not required. 36. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 80-858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) cot Project Fiscal yearo Chino Canyon, Palm Springs, Calif...................................... $3,656 Needles, San Bernardino County, Calif. ................................... of 4,967 Oro Grande Wash, Victorville, San Bernardino County, Calif. ................ 655,380 Ridgecrest, Kern County, Calif. .. *6........................................,09 Rose Creek, San Diego, Calif. .. ........................................ 47,495 Yucca Valley, San Bernardino County, Calif ................................. 4,94 Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue Work' (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Federal cost for fiscal year was $505,994, of which $25,143 s for advance preparation, $280,948 for flood emergency operatOns (including $208,066 for Smuggler's Gulch near San Diego, C-li lo and $199,903 for rehabilitation (comprising $2,258 for IlY Ariz., $59,331 for Douglas-Simi area, Calif., $135,835 for Green Canal, Ariz., and $2,479 for Duncan, Ariz.). Emergency flood control activities (Public Law 635, 88th Cong.) Federal cost for fiscal year was $2,783 for emergency flood COT trol work in the areas denuded by the October 1964 fire inSo" nta Barbara County, Calif. Snagging and clearing navigable streams and tributaries in interest of flood control (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Cong') Federal cost for fiscal year was $58,358 for Ashley Creel, Utah; $11,492 for San Francisco River, Clifton, Ariz.; and $751 for Smith's Fork, Mountain View, Wyo. Emergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Public Law 526, 79th Cong.) r idge Way BAriz." Federal cost for fiscal year was $1,243 for AjoTucson, Tucson, Ariz.; $25,299 for Valencia Road Bridge, and $18,954 for City Well No. 12, Tucson, Ariz. 37. SURVEYS Fiscal year cost was $764,521 regular funds, of which $162,706 was for navigation studies, $6,308 for shore protection studie, $580,444 for flood control studies, and $15,063 for special stdies involving coordination with other agencies. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-LOS ANGELES, CALIF., DISTRICT 1407 38. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Fiscal year costs for flood plain information studies were $ 1,235 regular funds, comprising $3,916 for Agua Fria, $13,983 fr NewRiver and $6,000 for Wickenburg, all in $7,994 Maricopa Ariz.; $16,012 for Los Penasquitos Creek and for ~lr 8Valley Creek, all in San Diego County, Calif.; $20,015 for 0ver Las Vegas Wash, Clark County, Nev.; $4,996 for Barstow area, $1,588 for Daggett-Afton area, and $2,741 for Victorville ta , all in San Bernardino County, Calif.; and $3,990 for Moab, J ate of Utah. Fiscal year costs for research and data collection c connection with shore protection studies were $29,496 required aotributed funds. Completed flood-plain information studies Date Federal LC ocation Requesting agency completed cost, 4aricoa Col unty, Ariz.: Flood Control District of Indian $ ave Cr end Wash........................... Maricopa County ... June 1964.. $47,000 skunkC,eek............................. do................. Nov. 1965.... 38,000 reek '......................... .... do................ Mar. 165.... 24,000 ckenb urg....... .................... ........ ... do............ .... Jan. 1966.... 30,000 Tota l.............................................................. .............. 139,000 xcludis ng costs for processing study applications. 39. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Fiscal year costs were $5,678 for hydrologic studies. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT* aThis district comprises parts of southern Oregon and northern t Western California embraced in drainage basins tributary to Oregon-California State line on north to 0 Ce Pacific Ocean from to a1e San Martin, Calif. (about 150 miles south of entrance SalAdSacramento Francis c o Bay), on the south, except waters of Suisun Bay and San Joaquin River and their tributaries. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Navigation Beach Erosion Control 1, terkeley Harbor, Calif.. 19. Santa Cruz County, Calif. 1433 2. 1409 3. todegaBay, Calif.. .... 1410 20. Other authorized beach erosion control project . 1435 Crescent City Harbor, 4. Calif. ................. 1411 5. Kalfmoon Bay, Calif. ..... 1413 Flood Control 21. Alameda Creek, Calif. ... 1435 Humbolt Harbor and Bay, 1437 6. Calif ................ 1414 22. Corte Madera Creek, Calif. 23. Coyote Creek, Calif ..... 1437 7. 1onterey Harbor, Calif.. 1416 1438 IVIossLa n d i n g Harbor, 24. Eel River, Calif ........ 25. Napa River Basin, Calif.. 1439 8. Calif . ................ 1417 1440 Noyo River and Harbor, 26. Pinole Creek, Calif ....... Calif . ............ "' . 1418 27. Redwood Creek, Humboldt Oakland Harbor, d'.. if. 1420 County, Calif......... l City Harbor, aRedwood 28. Rodeo Creek, Calif ...... Russian River Basin, Calif. 1442 10. ~Calif. 1423 29. 1425 30. San Lorenzo River, Calif. 12. Richmond1 larb1or, Calif. . 31. Sonoma Creek, Calif ..... 1446 S an Francisco Harbor, 13, Calif ............ 1427 32. Inspection of completed flood control projects .. 1447 San Francisco Harbor and S a , Calif. ........... . 1429 33. Other authorized flood con- 14, San Pablo trol projects .......... 1447 Bay and Mare Ig Island Strait, Calif. ... 1429 34. Flood control work under Santa Cruz Harbor, special authorization ... 1448 16. econnaissance and Calif. 1431 condi- General Investigations 17, tion surveys .......... 1433 35. Surveys ................ 1448 Other authorized naviga- 18. tion projects .......... 1433 36. Collection and stu d y of 1448 gavigationuw ork under basic data ............. 1448 Special authorization ... 1433 37. Research and development r1. BERKELEY HARBOR, CALIF. tLocation. On eastern shore of San Francisco Bay opposite ge Golden Gate between cities of Oakland and Richmond. (See oast and Geodetic Survey Charts 5530 and 5532.) fe.xaisting project. Detached rubblemound breakwater 725 fet lon .positioned bayward of existing harbor entrance to pro- ide a 460-foot-wide entrance channel at north end and a 300-foot- ide entrance channel at south end in depths of 6.5 feet at ea lower low water. Tidal range between mean lower low ater and .meanhigher high water is 6 feet. Extreme range is about 8 feet. Completed new work cost $155,550 exclusive of 1155,551 contributed by local interests. Project was authorized SChief of Engineers on January 15, 1965, under authority of section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work performed, 1cluding a cash contribution of $155,551. 1410 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Terminal facilities. Marina-type facilities including berths, temporary docking spaces, marine repair dock), ?e launching ramps, and facilities for fueling and servicing man craft. These facilities are adequate for present and prosp e t' traffic. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work : i neering and design by hired labor and 55,107 tons of stone placed under continuing contract to complete project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project breakwater began June and completed October 1965. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total1096 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 june 196 New work: $189,000 Appropriated.......... $6,500 $21,000 $3,000 $158,500 .. 15 6 Cost.................. 5,235 16,275 8,547 21,497 $103,996 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to Fiscaloyear................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June20 1968 New work: .. ................ $....... -$33,449 $189,000 $155 155:551 Contributed............. cot. .. Co ................ ... ........................ 155,551 2. BODEGA BAY, CALIF. Location. A triangular lagoon on California Coast 85 (te south of Noyo River and 55 miles north of San Francisco. Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5603.) Existing project. Entrance jetties 1,130 and 1,650 feet 10 a bulkhead to retain the sandspit; an entrance channel 12 ee deep and 100 feet wide; thence a channel of same dimensi or to town of Bodega Bay and thence southerly along shore 400 4,200 feet, with 3 turning basins 12 feet deep and 300 tod at feet wide, one at inner end of entrance channel, the secondt@ junction of the bay and shore channels near town of BoA Bay, and the third at southerly end of shore channel; a total ch1al nel length of 16,020 feet; a 4,500-foot riprapped earth mnolet westerly of channel along easterly shore; and a channel 10 fee deep, 100 feet wide, and 3,000 feet long on north side of 1Dordl Beach Spit. All depths refer to mean lower low water. Tie range between mean lower low water and mean higher high waI~t is 5.6 feet. Extreme range is about 11 feet. Approved es00 0 mated cost of new work (1966) is $2,192,000 of which $1,602 , is Federal cost and $590,000 is to be contributed by local interest$ Major rehabilitation of jetties and channels cost $397,779, e#s clusive of $2,000 contributed funds. Existing project adopted by River and Harbor Acts of 1938 and 1965 (II. Doc$ RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1411 619, 75th Cong., 3d sess., and 106, 89th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work performed. t1Slated costs for all requirements of local cooperation for work erformed amount to $52,000 (price as of dates of compliance). fooal interests must furnish royalty-free stone and disposal areas ber Project maintenance and maintain suitable grasses or shrub- 7ry to control sands on dunes west of the bay. Act of October , 1965, requires local interests contribute 36 percent of first cost Ot Construction of the mole and 50 percent of first cost of con- trution of Doran Beach channel, such contributions estimated ot $475,000 and $115,000, respectively; provide lands and rights- MWay for construction and future maintenance of improvements, ald of aids to navigation, including suitable spoil-disposal areas, d necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments there- , or the cost of such retaining works; hold the United States ree from damages; and provide and maintain adequate service lrofltage and public landing with suitable supply facilities at each Cation, necessary mooring facilities for local and transient boats htadequate depths in berthing areas, utilities, access roads and Darking areas (including those on the mole), and other necessary liC-use shore facilities. Board of Supervisors of Sonoma Sutrances by o ultnty, Resolution No. 7674, November 12, 1963, furnished as- of willingness and ability to comply. STerminal facilities. Five commercial fish receiving and ship- i. piers, one marine fueling and boat icing pier, and two arinas with berthing for 204 craft; all privately owned. Facili- es are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Conducted condition Irveys. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 29 percent C0ilete. Work remaining is construction of earth mole and ran Beach Channel. Jetties, bulkhead, and main Bodega Bay annels and turning basins were completed in 1943. Major r eh a bilitation of channels and south jetty was completed in ugust 1961. - Cost and financial statement aY Total to ear1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 . . . $641,800 ropriated........................... CoCl ..... . 641,800 A r d.................... . ..... .................. S 132,702 lie ito......................... ......... 132,702 tion: 397,779 aPropriated..........--$7,221........ 208,721..... 397,779 xCludes $2,000 contributed funds for major rehabilitation. 3. CRESCENT CITY HARBOR, CALIF. Location. Harbor is 17 miles south of Oregon State line, 125 iles south of Coos Bay, Oreg., 70 miles north of Humboldt ay, Calif., and midway between San Francisco Bay and mouth 1412 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of Columbia River. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5895.)di Existing project. A rubblemound outer breakwater extenIn about 3,700 feet on a bearing of S. 27 0 E. from Battery Pit'ee thence about 1,000 feet on a bearing of S. 800E.; for maintenancet dredging of an outer harbor basin 1,800 feet long and 1,400 fee wide to 20 feet depth at mean lower low water, except in rocr a rubblemound sand barrier from Whaler Island to easterly sh and maintenance dredging at seaward end of sand barrier; inner breakwater extending northwesterly about 1,200 feet ffoh* Whaler Island, thence westerly 300 feet to form a protected flto boat harbor for removal of pinnacle rock in fish-boat harbo' to 10-foot depth; and a T-shaped inner harbor basin 20 feet deep 1,500 feet long extending along north side of Citizen's Dock for 325 feet, with a stem 1,000 feet long. All depths refer to nlear lower low water. Range of tide between mean lower low watds and mean higher high water is 6.9 feet; extreme range of i about 12.3 feet. Approved estimated cost of new work (1966)is $8,266,000 ($8,049,000 is Federal and $217,000 contributed V local interests). Major rehabilitation of outer breakwater cost $525,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports July 18, 1918 Breakwater.............................................If. Doe. 434, 64th Cong., 1st ses 00 4, Sept. 22, 1922 Conditions of local cooperation modified.................... Rivers and Harbors Conunittee 67th Cong. 2d sess. e. * Jan. 21, 1927 Extend breakwater to 3,000 feet long....................... . Doc. 595, 69th Cong., 2d ees poc. Aug. 30,1935 Dredge harbor basin, 1,800 feet long, 1,400 feet Aide, and 20 Rivers and Harbors Com feet deep. 40, 74th Cong., 1st seas. 7 5th Aug. 26, 1937 Sand barrier and maintenance dredging in vicinity of sea- S. Commerce Committee pri ward end therof. Cong., 1st sess. Mar. 2, 1945 Extend breakwater to Round Rock (modified by Chief of 11. Doc. 688, 76th Cong., 3d ses Engineers). , ChiefOf Do...... Inner breakwater and removal of rock in inner harbor........ Report on file in Office, Ch e t gineers. (ontainlate Oct 27, 1965 Extend inner breakwater 300 feet and dredge T-shaped basin H. Doc. 264, 89th Cong.(con 20 feet deep. published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work perfor nled Estimated costs for all requirements of local cooperation for co o pleted work, including required non-Federal contribution01s0 Citizen's and Dock 50-foot maintain berthing widebasin and project areas ortostrips and adjacent betweel Oil Termi als Co. facilities, at depths commensurate with those provided in the basin by the United States; provide lands and rightsof-aY' spoil-disposal areas and diking therefor for project constructi and future maintenance and construction and maintenance ofids to navigation; and hold the United States free from propertY damage to wharves, buildings, and pipelines. Board of Co missioners of Crescent City Harbor District, by ResolutioN RIVERS AND IIARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1413 209,toMarch 2, 1965, furnished assurances of willingness and abil- Sty Comply. o7erminal facilities. Three piers, one of which is publicly o aled and from which boats are fueled; one oil terminal; and toa PiVate mooring for barges discharging petroleum products lelilnes on inner breakwater. Facilities are considered ade- tlate for existing commerce. ti OPerations and results during fiscal year. Major rehabilita- ,,le: Final surveys and as-built drawings for outer breakwater to abilitation completed last fiscal year. Maintenance: to 1,694 com- s of stone and 1,154 cubic yards of concrete placed repair of outer breakwater under continuing contract, cost $9 3 716. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 73 percent co"Iplete. Work remaining is 300-foot extension to inner break- oater and T-shaped inner harbor basin 20 feet deep. The 3,000- 1ot outer breakwater was completed in 1930, sand barrier in S3, inn.er breakwater in 1946, removal of pinnacle rock in 1951, old Major rehabilitation of Outer breakwater extension in 1957.completed ter Oreakwater began in March was in October 1964. Cost and financial statement .al Total to Year . .......... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 1 . ......... .... Ne CWork o rated.................... $0,048,672 ro*.riated........... ....................................... ...... ,048,672 enace26,048,672 ropriated.......... ......... .......... $249,516 $400,000 $15,000 2,573,382 12,676 557,757 93,716 2,573,015 AProitatn25,000 ... .3525,000 roprited.. . . . . $200,000 300,000 25,000 . ... . ...... .. ..... 31,261 108,005 382,576 3,158 3525,000 2 cludes contributed funds of $217,116 for new work and $27,884 for maintenance. a lu(lIdes $2,138 surplus material from Corps military activities. C.udes $2,000 contributed funds in lieu of royalty-free rock. 4. HALFMOON BAY, CALIF. ZLocation. On California coast about 15 miles south of San acisco. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5520.) tiistingq project. Two rubblemound breakwaters which form Sinclosed harbor of about 245 acres in depths of 6 feet or reater, with an entrance 250 feet wide in depths of 24 feet, test breakwater extending southerly 1,000 feet from Pillar Point, hence northeasterly 1,620 feet, thence southeasterly 1,050 feet, o east breakwater 4,420 feet long. All depths refer to mean Ierlow water. Tidal range between mean lower low water ad mean higher high water is 5.5 feet. Extreme range is about 8 feet. Approved estimated cost for new work (1966) 1 $7,230,000, of which $7,130,000 is Federal cost and $100,000 botribl)uted by local interests. Existing project was authorized 1948 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 644, 80th Cong., 2d sess., cotains latest published map, as modified by Chief of Engineers.) Socal cooperation Fully complied with for construction of st breakwater and west breakwater 2,620 feet long. Exten- 1414 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 sion of west breakwater requires local interests provide lands and rights-of-way for construction and maintenance; hold the United States free from damages; and provide royalty:free tone for construction and maintenance of breakwaters. San te5 Harbor Commission, by Resolution No. 4-65 dated March 2, 1965, furnished assurances of willingness and ability to complY Wit, requirements. Lands and rights-of-way have been provided andr $24,000 contributed in lieu of providing royalty free stones of breakwater extension. Estimated costs for all requiremen siO local cooperation under terms of project authorization, inciuU required non-Federal contributions, were $1 million (pricetsie of dates of compliance). Estimated cost of additional fac.imt e programed by San Mateo County Harbor District for ultia harbor development is $1,200,000. ad Terminal facilities. One publicly owned pier with fueiln supply facilities, one privately owned pier with boat-fueling facil- o ities, and a privately owned launching ramp. These facilitiesto- gether with additional facilities programed by San Mateo County Harbor District for ultimate harbor development, are considered adequate for present and prospective commerce. * and Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering o design by hired labor and 34,300 tons of stone placed under cnt tinuing contract to initiate construction of remedial 1 ,0 5 0 fot extension of west breakwater. ent Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 73 percto complete. Work remaining is extension of west breakwatere alleviate harbor surge, presently about 20 percent comPlter West breakwater 2,620 feet long was completed in Septembr 1960 and east breakwater in June 1961. Cost and financial statement 1Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965June 301,96 New work: $585687 Appropriated.......... $631,000 $25,000 $25,000 ............ $975,0003623 I Cost ................. 627,614 22,167 9,988 $3,961 377,465 Maintenne 10000 Appropriated...................... 40,000 60,000 .100,000 Cost........................... 24,474 65,669 9,850 710 1Excludes contributed funds of $100,000 for new work and $105,000 contributed in lie royalty-free rock. 5. HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CALIF. Location. Bay is a landlocked harbor on coast of California 225 miles north of San Francisco Bay and 70 miles south or Crescent City Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Char 5832.) Previous projects. For details see pages 1982-84 of Annual Report for 1915, page 1673 of Annual Report for 1929, and page 1689 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Two rubblemound jetties at entrance,0 north jetty about 4,500 feet long and south jetty 5,100 f eet long, not including shore revetments; a bar and entrance channel RIVERS AND HARBORS----SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1415 40 feet deep tapered from 1,600 feet wide at seaward mile 0.91 7500 feet at seaward mile 0.18, thence 500 feet wide to mile 3075, with easing of bend at mile 0.75; a North Bay Channel 40 feet deep and 400 feet wide from mile 0.75 to 4.29; a channel 26 feet wide and 30 feet deep from mile 4.29 to 5.00, thence deep to foot of N Street, Eureka; a channel 30 feet deet eld 300 3ctdfeet wide from mile 4.29 across Indian Island f oal to Samoa, at mile 5.84; a channel 18 feet deep and 150 30et Wide to Arcata wharf; and a channel 26 feet deep and feet wi0 feet wide to Fields Landing, with a turning basin 600 reide and 800 feet long off Fields Landing Wharf. All depths leer to mean lower low water. high Tidal range between mean lower o Water and mean higher water is 6.4 feet at south etty and 6.7 feet at Eureka. Extreme range is 12.5 feet at south cettY and 12 feet at Eureka. New work, completed interests in 1955, ost$3,283 705 exclusive of $95,000 contributed by local c amounts expended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents Work authorized J 251910 Rebuilding the jetties... I,. Doc. 950, 60th Cong., 1st sess. 31930 Depth of 20 feet and widths of 250 an 300 feet in bay chlan-' H. Doc. 755, 69th Cong., 2d seas. 4R. 30 nels and for channel to Arcata wharf. .30,1935Entrance20channel, 500feet 193714, wide, 30 feetdeep............... Rivers74th Harbors andCong., Committee Doe. 1stsess. c, 26,1937 Widths of 400 feet in Eureka Channel and 300 feet in Samoa Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. and Fields Landing Channels, and construct Fields Land. 11, 75th Cong., 1st sess. ing turning basin, 600 feet wide and 800 feet long, all to a y16, depth of 26 feet. S16,1952 Deepen to 40 feet and widen bar and entrance channel; H. Doe. 143, 82d Cong., 1st sess. (con- deepen Eureka and Samoa Channels to 30 feet; and con- tains latest published map). struct North Bay Channel, 400 feet wide, 30 feet deep. sOa cal cooperation. Fully complied with for work performed. tunated costs for all requirements of local cooperation under erC1s of project authorization, including required non-Federal eoltributions, were $1 million (prices as of dates of compliance). ocal interests must furnish lands, easements, rights-of-way, and Stitable spoil-disposal areas for maintenance dredging. Terminal facilities. There are 37 wharves and piers, 3 of Vhich are publicly owned; 4 oil terminals; 1 privately owned sub- arine pipeline for petroleum products; 2 boat-building and re- ail.lants; 1 boat-icing plant; 6 small boat-fueling stations; 2 Slall yacht and fishboat basins, 1 of which is publicly owned; aid 11lmerous log booms and small landings; exclusive of facili- f oreOwned tOes " " by the United States." Facilities considered adequate existing commerce. OPerations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: v ineering and design by hired labor, including dredging sur- vey of project channels, and U.S. hopper dredges Harding and Davison removed 1,575,600 cubic yards of shoaled material from the bar and entrance channel, 99,600 cubic yards from Eureka channel, and 43,200 cubic yards from Fields Landing Channel and turning basin. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed in 1416 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 December 1954. North jetty was completed in 1925; south jettY in 1927; Arcata Channel in 1931; entrance channel, 30 feet deep and 50 feet wide, in 1935; Fields Landing Channel and turning basin and Eureka and Samoa Channels, to 26 feet deep, in l93 entrance channel to 40 feet deep, and Eureka, Samoa, and NOrth Bay Channels to 30 feet deep in 1954. Total cost of existig project to end of fiscal year was $14,845,280, of which $3,378 705 was for new work ($3,283,705 regular funds and $95,000 cone tributed funds) and $11,466,575 regular funds for maintenance Cost and financial statement 'ifotal to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Tel30966 New work: $5,545 076 Appropriated..... ...... ............ ............ 4........................ 46,076 Cost............. ............ ................................ Maintenance: ...... 0 7 f661 Appropriated..........$1,469,676 $917,000 $530,000 $332,000 $680,000 1 647 1 Cost................. 1,502,196 1,006,183 746,001 307,229 705:288 ' Includes $2,261,371 for new work and $98,206 for maintenance on previous project. Ecludes $95,000 contributed funds for new work on existing project. 6. MONTEREY HARBOR, CALIF. Location. About 90 miles south of San Francisco BaY, at south end of Monterey Bay, an indentation in coast of California (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5403.) 12. Previous projects. Adopted by River and Harbor Act of 191 No work was done nor expenditures made." Existing project. Provides for two rubblemound breakwater-l to form an inclosed harbor with an entrance 400 feet wide ed depths of 40 feet, west breakwater 3,300 feet long and L-shaPer east breakwater 2,150 feet long. All depths refer to mean lowd low water. Tidal range between mean lower low water and mean higher high water is 5.5 feet. Extreme range is abo 10 feet. Approved estimated cost for new work (1966)0 to $9,130,000, of which $6,430,000 is Federal cost and $2,700,000 be contributed by local interests. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Document Doc July 3, 1930 Rivers and Harbors Comml'tew- Breakwater, 1,300 feet long.............................. 12, 71st Cong ., lstsess . teeI)o Aug. 30, 19351 Extend breakwater to 1,700 feet long..................... Rivers and lHarbors Commit sess. Ist 45,72dCong., Mar. 2,1945 Harbor depth of 8 feet .................................. .Doc. 268, 76th Cong., 1st sess' Cong., 1st ses s July 14, 1960 Extend west breakwater to 3,300 feet and construct 2,150- H. Doc. 219, 86th foot L-shaped east breakwater. Eliminate sand trap and tainslatest published map). uncompleted dredging authorized by act of Mar. 2, 1945. (Maintenance dredging to be eliminated upon comple- tion of breakwaters.) 1 Previously authorized Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work performed' Act of July 14, 1960, requires local interests contribute 32 perce of project cost, either in a lump sum before start of constructiO or in installments before start of pertinent work items; provid RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1417 ad and rights-of-way for construction and maintenance; hold in United States free from damages; acquire and hold in public lands for construction of necessary berthing faclities sufficient fa1erest and public utilization thereof; provide necessary berthing aCilities and utilities, including a public landing with suitable ifreelyfacilities and utilities, open to all equally; provide royalty- ,ieStone for construction and maintenance of breakwaters; pro- exe Dt suitable marine-repair facilities; and maintain entire project 1 ce breakwaters. Council of city of Monterey, by Resolutions eo. 8776 C.S., dated April 1, 1958, and No. 9792 C.S., dated De- aber 4, 1962, furnishedtoei 'complyssan assurances obitof their willingness and iy to comply with requirements. 1.erminal facilities. Within protected harbor existingUnited com- lcial facilities, exclusive of facilities owned by the abates, consist of two publicly owned wharves with a total of tyout 2,600 feet of berthing space, two boat fueling stations, two Machine shops and other facilities for servicing fishing boats, b-d a 3 4 6-berth harbor for light-draft vessels. Outside protected ibor there is one boatbuilding and repair plant, a submarine Deel1ne between tanker moorings and shore plants for handhling Throleum lr products, and other facilities for servicing fishing boats. tes togetherwt al ~ .se facilities, together with those required to be constructed as aditen of local cooperation for authorized project, will provide equate facilities for present and prospective commerce. V~ 0 Perations and results during fiscal year. New work: Ad- ace engineering and design for construction of east breakwater trjt extension of west breakwater continued by hired labor. Pro- b e wave measurement and wave oscillation studies completed Scon tract; hydraulic model constructed at Waterways Experi- It Station and testing initiated. Maintenance: Conducted 'oldition surveys. reCondition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 10 Waent complete. Work remaining is construction of east break- ter and extension of west breakwater to 3,300 feet. The 00f O e d 0foot west breakwater was completed in 1934 and harbor teging in 1947. Engineering and design for uncompleted por- 'of project is about 60 percent complete. Cost and financial statement .ea Total to 1962 . ... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 work. New, ......... oropriated $95,711 -$7,000 $65,000 $90,000 $942,182 .ost .................. 11,445 71,055 48,664 65,002 894,636 ' cpp'opriated ................. ' '81,668.81,568 ........ 81,568 7. MOSS LANDING HARBOR, CALIF. ocation About 80 miles south of San Francisco Harbor on obiterey Bay about midway between cities of Santa Cruz and oterey. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5403.) 1418 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. Entrance channel 200 feet wide and 15 feet deep, protected by jetties, from Monterey Bay into inner agl d at Moss Landing, thence a channel in the lagoon, 100 feet wide, 15 feet deep, and about 3,200 feet long extending southerly froa entrance, with a flared widening to 200 feet for 400 feet longdal southerly end. All depths refer to mean lower low water. Tide range between mean lower low water and mean higher high w ter is 5.3 feet with an estimated extreme range of 10.5 feet. Pro.ect new work completed in 1947 cost $343,552. Existing project authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act (report on file in office of Chief of Engineers.) No map has been published. ed Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work perforte Local interests must furnish rights-of-way and suitablY bul headed spoil-disposal areas for maintenance work. Terminal facilities. Five piers, one of which has boat-fuelin facilities, one oil-receiving terminal, one marine ways, and a nor- ber of mooring and berthing facilities within the protectedab* bor. Outside the harbor in Monterey Bay there is one afr merged petroleum pipeline and one pier which is used fode- receipts of petroleum products. Facilities are considered ade quate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. MaintenanrC Engineering and design by hired labor and contract awarded for repair of north and south jetties. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project completed in 1947. Cost and financial statement year... Fiscal ............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 301191 J une New work: Appropriated....... ........................................ ...... Cost.... ................................................... Maintenance: $3183821 Appropriated.......... -$33 ............. $71,000 ............ 100,000 Cost.................. 1,302 .............. 70,868 ............ 11,610 1 F2cludes surplus material from Corps military activities ($5,337 for new wor $8,539 for maintenance). 8. NOYO RIVER AND HARBOR, CALIF. Location. Harbor is a cove on California coast about 87 ._le south of Humboldt Bay and 135 miles northwest of San Franci cl Noyo River rises in Coast Range Mountains, flows westerlY, an empties into Noyo Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic SurY Chart 5703.)t Previous projects. For details see page 1680, Annual RepOr for 1929, and page 1772, Annual Report for 1930. Existing project. Provides for two rubblemound breakWat re1 south breakwater 1,100 feet long and north breakwater 500 feet long; two entrance jetties; an entrance channel into Noyo.R V 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide and channel in river 10 feet deeP and 150 feet wide extending about 0.6 mile above mouth, thee RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1419 hlalecting channel about 400 feet long to mooring basin of about to acres 10 feet deep on south bank of river. All depths refer t o"elan lower low water. Tidal range between mean lower low water is 5.8 feet. Extreme range is aiter and mean higher high estimated exout ,11.5 feet. Approved cost for new work (1966), lusive of amounts expended on previous projects, is $14,914,- 000, $14574, 000 Federal cost and $340,000 to be contributed by loal interests. Minor rehabilitation of jetties cost $222,810, ex- usive of $1,700 contributed funds. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents mat, 1930 totrancechannel jetties, and channel in river ........... S. Doe. 1 6, 71st Cong., 2d ses. S149 Southbreakwater in Noyo Harbor ................. .. 11.Doe. 682, 7th Cong., 3d seas. by 11. Doc. 289, 86th Cong., 2d sess. S 60 Moorin basin in lieu of channel extension authorized 23 - ot. a i nor 30 148 neaer S. Doe. 121, 87th Cong., 2d sess. (con. North Breakwater in Noyo Harbora latest published map). i toiqiresdetermination by Area Redevelopment Administration thatimprovement s essential )oratlfor redeveloping the area. r iOc s ooperat Act of July 3, 1930, requires local interests mion. OVide suitable areas for disposal of dredged materials, royalty- Sone for const ructionin and repair of jetties, andsuitable orstof way needed transporting stone to jetties. These re- rin qtirementsf ully complied with for work performed. Expendi- res b-Y local interests , in meeting requirements and in construct- .ePrivately owned shore-side harbor facilities are estimated to il excess of $1 million. Act of July 14, 1960 requires local erests furnish lands, rights-of-way, and spoil-dsposal areas rn construction and maintenance; hold the United States free a damages; acquire and hold in public interest sufficient lands olnstruction of mooring basin and proper utilizatmion thereof; o"Vide bulkheads levees, revetments, and requiresd relocations, 5ecessary for construction of the basin and retention of dredge e,4ils, or in lieu thereof contribute in cash the cost of these esa, estimated (July 1966) at $200,000, a -w nd subsequently aitain fthese works; provide c necessary utilities and berthing aniities; dprovide and maintain a public landing with suitable tIPly facilities; and maiontain and operate entire mooring basin .Uing, connecting channel. Noyo Harbor District indicated 19llgness and ability to meet requirements. Act of March 2, S aS modified by act of October 23n, 1962, requires that, prior 2 4 construction, local interests contribute in cash a sum equal to e4.arcent of construction cost of project, such contribution esti- rights-of- way for construc- "t "I and $340,000; at future provide lands maintenance and and for aids to navigation upon re- qliest of the Chief of Engineers; hold the United States free from gar ages; and provide and maintain adequate public terminal and 6 1Sfer facilities for handling timber and petroleum products, al, ding necessary utilities, open to all equally in accordance with s approved bytothe Chief of Engineers, such facilities to be I Q tructed prior or concurrently with construction of break- aers, Noyo tharbor District, by resolutions dated February 2 1420 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and June 21, 1962, indicated its ability and willingness to meet requirements. Terminal facilities. None in harbor proper. In river above harbor there are two piers and six fish-receiving wharves, two boat fueling wharves; two boat building and repair plants; oe boat icing plant; and a number of mooring facilities all private n owned. These facilities are considered adequate, with exceptiO- of mooring and berthing facilities for fishing boats. Improve ment of project as authorized will provide additional protected area for required facilities.d- Operations and results during fiscal year. New work Adtrs vance engineering and design for construction of breakwaters continued. Hydraulic model testing of breakwater plans co" pleted by Waterways Experiment Station. Advance engineer ~ and design for construction of mooring basin and connecil channel initiated. Maintenance: Engineering and design e hired labor and 50,600 cubic yards of shoaled material removed from river channel by contract. ent Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 3 perc i complete. Work remaining is construction of breakwater. Noyo Harbor and mooring basin and connecting channel in river. Hydraulic model studies as basis for breakwater advance P ~ln ning are essentially complete. Advance planning for moo T d basin is about 35 percent complete. Jetties, rock removal, arl dredging entrance and river channels completed in 1931. inoer rehabilitation of jetties and north wall completed in Septelnb 1961. Cost of existing project to end of fiscal year: Funds New work Maintenance Rehabilitatio Tota Regular.... ....... $410,406 $889,971 $222,810 $1,523,18 Contributed.... ............................................... ... 1,700 jlri's81 !r,¢2887 Total..................... .......... 410,406 889,971 224,510 Cost and financial statement T otal to 61 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 186 New work: $483 ,819 Appropriated...................... -$5,000 $60,000 $75,000 $90,000 422,391 Cost..................$19,138 956 2,657 115,794 45,121 Maintenance: 9222x,28 Appropriated.......... 90,000 -963 .......... 117,000 -15,000 922,068 Cost................. 89,037 ........................ 45,690 56,150 Rehabilitation: 222, 810 -27,190 ....................................... Appropriated.......... 222,810 Cost.................. 194,955 ............ ............ ............ ........... 1 Includes $11,985 for new work and $32,097 for maintenance on previous project. J - and contributed funds of $7,180 for new work and $820 for maintenance on previous project $1,700 for minor rehabilitation on existing project. te 9. OAKLAND HARBOR, CALIF. Location. On eastern side of San Francisco Bay, opps San Francisco. Inner harbor is between cities of Oak, city of land and Alameda. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chaf 5535.) RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1421 fo Previous projects. For details see page 1979 of Annual Report or 1915, .page 1755 of Annual Report for 1921, and page 1674 Uanual Report for 1938. 1 ~stinmg project. Provides for an entrance channelFrancisco to Oak- y Outer Harbor, 35 feet deep from deep water in San t141 and 800 feet wide across shoal southeast of Yerba Buena Iaad, thence narrowing to 600 feet at Oakland Mole;Plnarwn thence a Cha to 950 feelannel and turning basin 35 feet deep and from 600 for Wide in outer harbor to Army base. Project also provides aur a8 entrance channel to Oakland Inner Harbor, 600 35 feet deep at 800 feet wide at bayward end, narrowing to feet wide fe ends OfOakland jetties; a channel from ends of jetties Island, it deep and 600 feet wide to west end of Government in additional widening to within 75 feet of pierhead line afront of Grove and Market Street (formerly municipal) piers had along south side of channel from Harrison Street 35 eastward to o a br-line point 119 in Brooklyn Basin; a channel feet deep to 35 feet d500 feet wide through Brooklyn Basin; for dredging of a maxi- Ueep a triangular area about 2,700 feet long and h1 Width of 300 feet at western end of Brooklyn Basin; a side of Brooklyn Basin 35 feet deep and 300 feanel along north basin at ide for 1,300 feet, thence 25 feet deep to a turning 12e f end of Brooklyn Basin 35 feet deep, 500 feet wide, and e feet d long; a channel in tidal canal 35 feet deep and feet 275 dee Wide from Brooklyn Basin to Park Street, thence 18 eDr San Leandro Bay; a total channel length of 81/2 miles from Da r ancisco Bay tojetties San Leandro Bay. Project also includes allel rubblemound at entrance to inner harbor, a north Existing project was authorized by the following: Work authorized Documents and reports , Je26 1874 Jetties. " .... Annual Report, Part II, 1874, p. 378. 1910 North Channel in Brooklyn Basini,25e feet eep, and tidal H. Doe. 647, 61st Cong., 2d sess. t.2, canal to 18 feet. 221922 Channel across shoal southeast of Yerba Buena Island and H. Doe. 144, 67th Cong., 2d seas. thence to Webster St.; south channel in Brooklyn Basin; turning basin at east end of Brooklyn Basin; and channel ~.21, in tid al canal 1927CChannel from Brooklyn Basin to Park St., 30 feet deep. H. Doe. 407, 69th Cong., 1st sess.1 2 from Webster St. to rookyn Basin, aintain area to within 75 feet of pierhead line south of channel from Harrison St. to harbor line point 119 in Brooklyn Basin; dredge a triangular strip about 2,700 feet long and maximum width of 300 feet at western end of Brooklyn 29,1929 30 feet deep. llasin,cooperation requirements modified to provide alter- Public Res. 28, 70th Oong. . 81928 ocal ation or replacement of bidges by local interests shill apply only to that feature of project covering deepening tidal canal to 25 feet. Drawbridges across tidal canal were required by 1882 de- cree of court in condemnation proceedings whereby title SEwas obtained to right-of-way for tidal canal. uly3,1930 Entrance channel to outer harbor, 800 to 600 feet wide....... Rivers and Harbors Committee t Doo. 2, 4 43, 71st Cong., 2d sess. S2,1945 Eliminated requirement that local interests contribute 10 11. Doc. 466, 77th Cong., 1st sess. cents per cubic yard toward deepening tidal canal. . Maintenance of 35-foot depth in channel to outer harbor and Report on file in Office, Chief of En- 0 .gineers. in outer harbor channel and turning basin t.32319623 Deepen inner harbor 30-foot channes and lower 1,300 feet H. Doe. 353, 87th Cong., 2d sess.l of North Channel in Brooklyn Basin to 35 feet. °11tains latest published maps. t deepening of tidal ca nal above Park Street Bridge to 25 feet, which is being re- ntds boincuded Federal participation in reconstruction of Fruitvale Avenue Highway Brdge 87th * Cong., 2d seas.) which is being restudied. 1422 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 jetty 9,500 feet long and a south jetty 12,000 feet long; and three highway bridges across tidal canal, two of which (at park Streeod and High Street) have been replaced by local interests. Rainled and highway bridges at Fruitvale Avenue are being unamed and operated by the United States. All depths refer to 11and lower low water. Range between mean lower low wate ee mean higher high water is 6 feet in outer harbor and 6 . oeeut in inner harbor at Park Street Bridge. Extreme range is aclub" 11 feet. Approved estimated cost for new work (1966) ,excl sive of amounts expended on previous projects, is ,$10,976)000, of which $10,892,000 is Federal cost and $84,000 contribut eda local interests. Deepening tidal canal from 18 to 25 feetig Federal participation in reconstruction of Fruitvale Avenue oijgh way Bridge are to be restudied and are excluded from fore 9o54 cost estimate. Estimated cost of tidal canal deepening (1co4) is $489,069. Estimated cost of Federal participation in re 0 , struction of Fruitvale Avenue Highway Bridge (1960) is $1,70 000. that Local cooperation. Act of January 21, 1927, requires 1 j future maintenance by the United States of north channeeIts Brooklyn Basin be contingent upon removal by local interestos of all sewers emptying therein, or, in lieu of such removal, utpo contribution of one-half the cost of maintenance. This requre ment has not been fulfilled. In compliance with a 1910 oflicense issued by Secretary of War pursuant to provisions of act Je 25 1910, local interests replaced bridges at Park Street and ted Street and are operating and maintaining them. They opera and maintained a combined highway and railroad bridge al Fruitvale Avenue until 1942 when California Court of Appeals ruled that it was illegal for County of Alameda to use appropr ated funds for sole benefit of a private corporation. Soutil Pacific Railroad Co. operated trains over combined bridge ulu8. June 1951 when a separate railroad bridge, constructed foril use by the Federal Government, was placed in operation. ( road and highway bridges at Fruitvale Ave. are maintained aid operated by the United States.) All other requirements .a been fully complied with. Only fragmentary records are alocal able of costs to local interests in meeting requirements cooperation. Recorded expenditures are in excess of $11 of liol rilocal Act of October 23, 1962, requires that prior to construction ad interests provide lands and rights-of-way for construction a maintenance of improvement; hold the United States free from damages to wharves, piers, tubes, and other marine and subrmarine structures due to initial dredging and future maintenance alter sewer, water supply, drainage, and other utility facilities; provide and maintain adequate public terminal and transfer facicl ties, open to all equally; deepen and maintain slips and berthsr and if required furnish spoil-disposal areas including necessarY dikes, bulkheads and embankments for initial dredging and futu!re maintenance. State of California, on September 12, 1961, f'w nished assurances that it will hold the United States free frOM liability for damages to Posey and Webster Street Tubes due to initial dredging and subsequent maintenance. Required assur RIVERs AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1423 laces Of cooperation for all other items provided by Port of Oak- oi and ity of Alameda. PortFederal of Oakland is negotiating for e areas w-disposal with various and State agencies con- Terra ••- Ports of filling'?of bay tidelands. 'No31"The ed Wwith, or having jurisdiction over, 0 rm nal facilities. See Port Series No. 31, "The Ports of Calan d, Alameda, and Richmond, and Ports on San Pablo Bay, tieqjilnez Strait, and Mare Island Strait," revised 1962. Facili- Sare considered adequate for existing commerce. vaIPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Ad- 1e1 ce engineering and design for deepening inner harbor chan- 776 'continued by hired labor. Maintenance: Removal of 180,- h 1 ubic yards of shoaled material from inner harbor by U.S. suer dredge Biddle cost $93,612. Predredging hydrographic and l.Vey of outer harbor by hired labor cost $1,432. Operation b ntenance of Fruitvale Avenue highway and railroad bridges Of hired labor cost $58,824. Miscellaneous minor rehabilitation cost ruitvale Avenue highway and railroad bridges by contract $37,787 is about 27 DerCOndition at end of fiscal year. Existing projectinner harbor ch1ent complete. Work remaining is deepening Advance engi- ear nels to 35 feet and portion being restudied. cornr and design for channel deepening is about 45 percent pr.Dlet e. Jetties were completed in 1894. Dredging existing 30-foot deopct channels was carried on from 1910 to 1931to when outer harbor Wl t as attained. The 35-foot depth in channel eas attained in 1942 with military funds. Cost of existing proj- fo end of fiscal year was $11,223,372, of which $2,772,241 was fqr ew work ($2,688,694 regular funds and $83,547 contributed ds) and $8,451,131 regular funds for maintenance. "- . Cost and financial statement Year Total to ...... 1062 .... 1963 1964 1965 19 66 June 30, 19661 - Nwork. $50000 $500,000 $6,056,263 $6,056,263 aoriHated...................................$35,000 Dlo ted .. $35,000 16,459 50,203 5,587,925 .......... ..................... C08"riated.......... .$333033 $372,500 $510,000 385,000 $183,400 9,661,564 t... ..... . 343,950 335,387 552,262 355,733 191,655 9,635,659 Ex- l 4~ eCdes $ 2 , 8 99 , 232 for new work and $684,028 for maintenance on previous projects. 3,547 contributed funds for new work on existing project. 10. REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CALIF. 4Location. On Redwood Creek, a tributary of San Francisco way about 20 miles south of city of San Francisco. Project Works also include a channel in San Francisco Bay east of Point , runo. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5531.) DPrevious projects. For details see page 1979 of Annual Re- ort for 1915, and page 1672 of Annual Report for 1938. 4 Zxisting project. Channel 500 feet wide and 30 feet deep aeross San Bruno Shoal in San Francisco Bay; a channel 300 et Wide and 30 feet deep to vicinity of confluence of West e oit Slough and Redwood Creek, with a basin at that lo- 2,200 feet long and from 400 to fatio 900 feet wide; thence 1424 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 a channel 400 feet wide, 30 feet deep, and about 1,300 feet long flaring to a second turning basin about 900 feet wide, 1,75 feet long, and 30 feet deep; thence a channel 150 feet wide andn5 feet deep extending to Steinberger Slough. All depths refer to te me e lower low water. Tidal range between mean lower low '0 d and mean higher high water is 6.9 feet at Point San Brunoo d 7.9 feet at Redwood City. Extreme ranges are estimated to bess 12 and 13 feet at respective localities. Authorized channel acrOed San Bruno Shoal is about 4% miles long. In the creek, authrizt deepwater channel is 3.4 miles long including basins, and a channel extends to mile 4.3. New work under project cost W $1,641,279 exclusive of $119,572 contributed by local interests amounts expended on previous projects. Existing project was authorized by the following" Acts Work authorized Documents June 25, 1910 A 5-foot channel to Steinberger Slough..................... H. Doc. 307, 61st Cong., 2d sBess July 3, 1930 A 20-foot channel to West Point Slough.................... tt ee 11. Doe. 142, 70th Con., less. . Aug.30, 1935 A 27-foot channel to West Point Slough and a turning basin Rivers and Harbors omu 27 feet deep, 1,800 feet long, and 700 feet wide. 10, 73d Cong., 1st sess. ses Mar. 2,1945 A 30-foot channel across San Bruno Shoal and enlarge and H. Doe. 94, 79th Cong., let sS deepen 27-foot channel and turning basin in Redwood Creek to 30 feet.4 . May 17,1950 Extend 30-foot channel 1,300 feet upstream and provide a 11. Doe. 104, 81st Con g., 1 s second turning basin 30 feet deep, 000 feet wide, and 1,700 tains latest published MvP)* feet long at junction of Redwood Creek and Boundary Slough. Project name changed from Redwood Greek, Calif., to Redwood City Harbor, Calif. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work performred Estimated costs for all requirements under terms of project authorization, including required non-Federal contributions, wer $2,300,000 (price as of dates of compliance). Local interes must provide rights-of-way and spoil-disposal areas with neces sary impounding works for project maintenance..f Terminal facilities. See Port Series No. 30, "The Ports San Francisco and Redwood City," revised 1962. A new pulc wharf, a privately owned pier for receipts of sand and gravels and a marine repair works pier have been constructed since 196 Facilities are adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: ina cost for channel extension and second turning basin completedi prior year. Maintenance: Engineering and design including dredging surveys by hired labor and 910,520 cubic yards of shoaled mate- rial removed from channels and turning basins by U.S. hopper dredge Davison. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project completed in January 1965. Total cost of existing project to end of fiscal year was $3,570,507, of which $1,760,851 was for new wor ($1,641,279 regular funds and $119,572 contributed funds) and $1,809,656 regular funds for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1425 Cost and financial statement acs Total to 1.........163 196_4 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 o. at0d.....0 ............ $560,000 -$63,400 ............ ...$1,672,722 "'-............... 43,067 $239 13,764 482,109 $727 1,672,722 r fo ~lUdes$31,443 for new work on previous projects. Excludes $119,572 contributed funds k On existing project. 11. RICHMOND HARBOR, CALIF. Socation. On eastern shore of San Francisco Bay about 10 snorthof Oakland. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart M istng project. Channel 35 feet deep and 600 feet wide ecacent to Southampton Shoal from deep water in San Fran- deeo Bay to outer wide channel 35 feet harbor; inner harbor entrance Richmond, a and 600 feet from deep water to Point with 500r~lng basin at that point; thence a channel 35 feet deep and t4feet wide flaring to about 600 feet at Point Potrero with a d1 at that point 1,150 feet wide and 35 feet deep except for a 01 of 30 feet at southerly apex of bend; thence 35 feet deep f8 0feet wide to entrance to Santa Fe Channel; thence 35 feet deP and 200 feet wide in Santa Fe Channel for about 2,000 Pe and maintenance to depth of 30 feet of remainder of Santa SChannel and basin; a rubblemound training wall 10,000 feet 1g extending westerly from Brooks Island; approach areas 32 Sdeep to within 75 feet of pierhead line in outer harbor at 'San Pablo and Point Orient; a channel 20 feet deep, 150 Existing project was authorized by the following: Work authorized Documents t . ,1917 Channel 24 feet deep and 600 feet wide from San Francisco H, Doe. 515, 63d Cong., 2d sess. l Bay to Ellis Slough (Santa Fe Channel); a turning basin l 1930 A 30-foot channel with lessened widths; a turning basin at Rivers Harbors andCong., Committee Doe. 1st sess. • head of navigation. 16, 70th 80,19351 Inhrease project widths in inner harbor, maintenance of Rivers and Harbors Committee Does. Santa Fe Channel to 30 feet; approach areas in outer bar- 7, 73d Cong., 1st sess. and 10, 74th 1938 Widen 32 feet.at Point Potrero and north thereof; enlarge H.Cong., bor tochannel 1stBss. Jso, '1938 Doc. 598, 75th Cong., 3d sess. '1945 42 Nand maintain to 30-foot depth turning basin at terminal o. 1. S2,1945 Channel 20 feet deep, 150 feet wide, in San Pablo Bay north H. Doe. 715, 76th Cong., 3d seas. t. C of Point San Pablo. 2 1.1054 Channel .35 feet deco and 600 feet wide adjacent to South- 11. Doc. 395, 83d Cong., 2d seas. ampton Shloal; enlarge and deepen to 35 feet approach area to Richmond long wharf; widen and deepen inner harbor and entrance channels deepen turning basin at Point Richmond and southerly 2,000 feet of Santa Fe Channel. Eliminate restriction that widening north of Point Potrero will not be undertaken until local interests furnish assur- ances industries will avail themselves of improved navi- et.27, gation facilities. 2 1965 West Richmond Channel 45 feet deep, 600 feet wide; enlarge H. Doce. 208, 89th Cong., 1st seas. and deepen to 45 feet maneuvering area at tRichmond Long Wharf (Sacramento Dist. project No. 5 "San Fran- cisco Bay to Stockton Navigation Channels"). i Cludd in part in Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. as' latest published map. 1426 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 feet wide, and about 2,000 feet long from deep waterinl Pablo Bay easterly along north side of Point San Pa o a maneuvering area at Richmond Long Wharf 45 feet deep; nout West Richmond Channel 45 feet deep, 600 feet wide, an d-8 abo 2.5 miles long through west navigation opening of Richmon Tidal Rafael Bridge. All depths refer to mean lower low water. Te range between mean lower low water and mean higher high w tr is 5.8 feet, with an extreme range of about 11 feet. Newco completed in 1957, cost $2,886,695, exclusive of $524,778 oo tributed by local interests. Estimated cost (1966) for 45 fOoest deep maneuvering area at Richmond Long Wharf and for so Richmond Channel, authorized as part of project "San Frani"ciscO Bay to Stockton Navigation Channels," is $6 million. formed. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work per thor* Estimated cost for all requirements under terms of project a'u $4 ization, including, required non-Federal contributions, wetust million (price as of dates of compliance). Local interests ace furnish easements and spoil-disposal areas for mainten~ce dredging. Act of October 27, 1965, authorizing San Francds Bay to Stockton project, requires local interests to provide lard and rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance r; for aids to navigation, including suitable spoil-disposal ares or provide spoil retention dikes, bulkheads, and embankmenupl costs of additions required solely for development of recreasvey areas; hold the United States free from damages to whvad. bridge piers, and other marine and submarine structures an ricultural lands, due to initial and future maintenance dreds n* make all utility modifications and relocations required forlte struction of project works, including new bridges or bridgea Jed tions (except for railroad bridges), and absorb any increart annual maintenance and operation costs that might result fpa such modifications and relocations; and provide and Mcai.ect necessary berthing areas, at depths commensurate with proJed depths, at all terminals and wharves to be served by the deePe of channels. By Resolution adopted August 6, 1963, Bo ard eet Supervisors of Contra Costa County indicated willingness to,le requirements applicable to West Richmond Channel and mrf vering area at Richmond Long Wharf. pr of Terminal facilities. See Port Series No. 31, "The Fort~a, Oakland, Alameda, and Richmond and Ports on San Pablovil- Carquinez Strait, and Mare Island Strait," revised 1962. ities are considered adequate for existing commerce. V Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Engi- gineering and design including dredging surveys accomplished by hired labor and 763,100 cubic yards of shoaled material re- moved by U.S. hopper dredge Biddle from inner harbor channel and entrance. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is abou1t percent complete. Work remaining is dredging West Richfll Channel and enlarging and deepening to 45 feet the maneuveriv area at Richmond Long Wharf. Dredging project channels in initiated in 1918 and carried on intermittently until 1940. Tra t ing wall was completed in 1931, and channel in San Pablo aY1 RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1427 1945 Dredging authorized by act of September 3, 1954, was iaitited in October 1955 and the Southampton Shoal Channel and Sarging and deepening to 35 feet the approach area to Richmond ir W7 harf were completed in March 1956, inner harbor channels ov cember 1956, Santa Fe Channel in January 1957, and re- al of rock near Point Potrero in October 1957. Cost and financial statement YTotal to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 ar . . .... 08t Work, ... ......... ...... $2,886,695 ........ S Okoai..ated.. S ... .................. ........... .............. ..... ................... 2,886,695 $203,000 $260,000 3,496,869 98 . t . $225,244 $235,500 $361,000 394,113 217,853 269,930 3,496,444 ... 223772 1148iio............. 181059 110,000 110,000 0Dr.oPriated ............................................. . ............... ~ contributed funds of $524,778 for new work and $34,800 for maintenance. ocat 12. SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CALIF. tj %t ocation Works San Francisco I-,. 1 are innrach ... ;..included Bay,to inGolden channels vicin- Of San Francisco and in approach channels to Golden 53th)le bay entrance. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart tot evious Report projects. For details see page 1978 of Annual1633 15 , page 1749 of Annual Report for 1921, page of ual Report for 1929, and page 1669 of Annual Report for 1938. t iinY project. Dredged channel through San Francisco o ran line of main ship channel, 55 feet deep and 2,000 feet wide; Reef Rock (i val of Presidio Shoal, Black Point Shoal, Rincon and Alcatraz She Rin con Reef Rock (outer), Blossom Rock, oal Westward of a north-and-south line 2,500 feet west of 1raz Light, to 40 feet deep; removal of Arch Rock, Shag ao I and 2, Harding Rock, Point Knox Shoal westward of orth-and-south line through Point Stuart Light, and a portion Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents 21,1927 Dredging at Islais Creek.......... " " " "' ', 'o' 11.Doc. 337, 69th Cong., 1st sesas. 1,1930 H. Doc. 196, 70th Cong., lst seas. Remove Presidio Shoal, Rincon Reef Rock (inner), incon Reef Rock (outer), Blossom Rock, and Alcatraz Shoal to 40 feet deep, mean lower low water; remove Arch Rock, Shag Rocks 1 and 2, and Harding Rock to 35 feet deep; remove Racoon Shoal and Point Knox Shoal westward of a north-and-south line through Point Stuart Light to 35 feet deep; for a bar main ship channel 45 feet deep and Au 30,19351 2,000feet wide. Doe. Rivers and Harbors Committee A 50-foot depth in bar main ship channel, 2,000 feet wide, 2 50, 72d Cong., 2d sess. remove Black Point Shoal to 40 feet dee) and certain modi.- fications of areas to be deepened on Alcatraz and Islais (reek Shoals and abandon 31-foot depth area south of A , 26 1937 flared approach channel to Islais Creek. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. Channel to San Francisco Airport 750 feet wide and 10 feet 12, 75th Cong., 1st sess. *ct, 27, 1965 deep endingin a basin2 000 feet wide. H. 1)oc. 208, 89th Cong., 1st sess. A 55-foot depth in bar main ship channel, 2,000 feet wide (Sacramento District project No. 5 "San Francisco Bay to Stockton Navigation Channels"). Eliminates uncompleted removal of Racoon Shoal to 35-foot depth. i eluded in part in Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1983, Co itains latest published map. 1428 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of shoal channelward of pierhead line near mouth of Islais Cree to 35 feet deep; and dredging a channel 750 feet wide and l.i deep from that depth in bay to San Francisco Airport end All a basin 10 feet deep and about 2,000 feet wide.-ea depths refer to mean lower low water. Tidal range betweent ort lower low water and mean higher high water is 5.7 feet at'I Point and 7.2 feet at San Francisco Airport. Extreme vDflges at foregoing localities are 10.6 and 12 feet, reSpect$134* New work completed in 1959 cost $1,658,957, exclusive of 591 contributed funds and amounts expended on previous p50 ects. Estimated cost (1966) for deepening Bar Channel fro' to to 55 feet, authorized as part of project "San Francisco B to Stockton Navigation Channels," is $2,900,000. lted. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work comPtesl Local interests must furnish suitably bulkheaded sp oil-disp Act areas for maintenance of channel to San Francisco Airport. Idto of October 27, 1965, authorizing San Francisco Bay to S project, requires local interests provide lands and rights-opa. for construction and future maintenance and for aids to v f tion including suitable spoil-disposal areas; provide neces spoil retention dikes, bulkheads and embankments, or costso hold ditions required solely for development of recreational area's the United States free from damages to wharves, bridge d 1 ra and other marine and submarine structures and agricua 1 lands, due to initial and future maintenance dredging;malof utility modifications and relocations required for constructo(eX project works, including new bridges or bridge alteratiOnsfl' cept for railroad bridges), and absorb any increased annual d , tenance and operation costs that might result from such moar, tions and relocations; and provide and maintain all neces ,t berthing areas, at depths commensurate with project depthg,e all terminals and wharves to be served by the deepened chanl By Resolution adopted August 6, 1963, Board of Supervisorst Contra Costa County indicated willingness to meet requireme applicable to deepening San Francisco Bar Channel. £af Terminal facilities. See Port Series No. 30, "The Ports Ofo*0 Francisco and Redwood City," revised 1962. Facilities are Co sidered adequate for existing commerce., ag- Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: dredg- ing surveys of project channels by hired labor and U.S. hoPi dredge Biddle removed 412,290 cubic yards of material from main ship channel. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about sel percent complete. Work remaining is deepening Bar Chanted from 50 to 55 feet. Dredging Islais Creek Shoal was comPlts in 1930, deepening Presidio Shoal in 1931, removal of var rocks in 1932, deepening Point Knox Shoal in 1934, deep, Alcatraz Shoal in 1936, deepening Black Point Shoal in dredging channel and basin at San Francisco Airport in 1941,' completion of bar channel 50 feet deep in 1959. IVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1429 Cost of existing project to end of fiscal year New work Maintenance Total Funds ig lar.... . . .. . . .or. ... $1,465,957 $4,231,277 $5,697,234 s .......... 193,000 ... 193,000 ......... 134,591.............. 134,591 td............................... Total 1,793,548 4,231,277 6,024,825 Cost and financial statement N ea r Total to 1961 1905 1966 June 30, 19661 ear 1962 1963 Wor Criated.......... o. . . ..... $2,689,356 ..... ... ... ... .. . ... .. .... .. .. .: ... 2,689,356 te .. ... ... ... t... S riated $518,283.$19,500 $161,000 $335,000 $235,000 4716,575 197,825 182,667 310,737 4,706,598 1 . ..... 528,074 neludUdea$1,030,899 for new work and $475,321 for maintenance on previous projects. Ex- $134,591 contributed funds for new work on existing project. 13. SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CALIF. oLtcation. Project applies to San Francisco Bay, lower San reisco Bay, Oakland Harbor, Richmond Harbor, San Pablo taond Mare Island Strait, Richardson Bay, and their tribu- from. San -Sting project. Collection and removal of drift portion of New work ralcgisco Bay and its tributary waters. e cBt(acquisition of plant and equipment) is considered minac- Estirnated cost of this portion (1962) is $1,110,000. Act (~i1 ng project was authorized by 1950 River and Harbor "£ oc. 268, 81st Cong., 1st sess.). 7 ocal cooperation. None required. do-erminal facilities. Described in pertinent separate project rPtions. . lOPerations and results during fiscal ofyear. Maintenance: qating debris was collected and disposed from project water- aS by hired labor. f COndition at end of fiscal year. No new work construction NYs have been appropriated. Maintenance operations under Vbtlhlg project commenced July 1950. Costs for removal of drift that time were carried as maintenance on applicable au- 'ore orized river and harbor projects in the area. Cost and financial statement 19 a Total to a ....... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1 9 June 30, 1966 14. SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CALIF. from a point in lower end of San p ocation. Channel extends Point generally northeasterly across blo Bay west of Pinole 1430 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 0,Strait Pinole Shoal in San Pablo Bay to junction of Carquinez Island and Mare Island Strait, thence northwesterly in Mare Coast Strait along frontage of Mare Island Navy Yard. (See CoSt and Geodetic Survey Chart 5533.)ort Previous projects. For details see page 1680, Annual RepOrt for 1938..S Existing project. Dredged channel across Pinole Shoal inSl' Pablo Bay 600 feet wide, 45 feet deep, and about 11 miles li 700pier aa with a maneuvering area 45 feet deep adjacent to Oleum mouth of Carquinez Strait; a channel in Mare Island StraitllY feet wide and 30 feet deep flaring to a turning basin gene1et 1,000 feet wide from former dike 6, Mare Island, to a line n 30 southerly from causeway between Vallejo and Mare Islajfeet; feet deep, except at northerly end where project depth is 2 thern maintenance of two approach areas to navy yard piers at souter. end of Mare Island. All depths refer to mean lower low .1aer Tidal range between mean lower low water and mean higeet high water is 5.8 feet at lower end of San Pablo Bay, anf about opposite Mare Island Navy Yard, with an extreme range o of 10 feet. New work completed in 1943 cost $282,669 exclusidig amounts expended on previous projects. Uncompleted dred ed of two approach areas at Vallejo and South Vallejo iscons 0, inactive. Estimated cost of this portion (1956) is $12ehoa Estimated cost (1966) of lengthening and deepening Pinole5 feet Channel to 45 feet and of dredging maneuvering area .trict deep at Oleum pier, authorized as part of Sacramento Diha project No. 5 "San Francisco Bay to Stockton Navigation nels," is $10,600,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Jan. 21, 1927Pinole Shoal channel 35 feet deep, 600 feet wide, 7.6 miles H. Doe. 104, 69th Cong., 1st sess long; Mare Island Strait channel 30 feet deep, 600 feet wide with turning basin 1.000 feet wide.dse. June 20,1938 Increase width of channel in Mare Island Strait to 700 feet I. Doc. 614, 75th Cong., 3d es. and increaselength of turning basin.ess. Mar. 2, 1945 Maintain approach areas to navy yard piers at south end of H. Doc. 217, 77th Cong., Ist Mare Island. stses2 Oct. 27,1965 A 45-foot depth in Pinole Shoal Channel, 600 feet wide, 11 ItH. Doe. 208, 89th Cong., 1st ' miles long; maneuvering area at Oleum Pier 45 feet deep (Sacramento Dist. project No. 5 "San Francisco Bay to to Stockton Navigation Channels"). 1Included dredging two approach areas at Vallejo and South Vallejo, which is consi inactive. 2 Contains latest published map.A t Local cooperation. None required for work to date. Acktof October 27, 1965, authorizing San Francisco Bay to StoCfof project, requires local interests provide lands and rights-of'ay for construction and future maintenance and for aids to n'0e tion, including suitable spoil-disposal areas; provide spoil rter tion dikes, bulkheads and embankments, or costs of additiol-s quired solely for development of recreational areas; hold te United States free from damages to wharves, bridge piers other marine and submarine structures and agricultural lan. due to initial dredging work and future maintenance dredgior make all utility modifications and relocations required for co RIVERS AND HARBORS-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1431 Str11 . t.etion of project works, including new bridges or bridge altera- tlis (except for railroad bridges), and absorb any increased an- todi,,aintenance and operation costs that might result from such Siricatio ns and relocations; and provide and maintain all neces- at llberthg n areas, at depths tocommensurate with project depths, terminals and wharves be served by the deepened chan- vi' 13y resolution adopted August 6, 1963, Board of Super- ieor Of Contra Costa County indicated willingness to meet ~iremlents applicable to deepening Pinole Shoal Channel and S6ing maneuvering area at Oleum Pier. 0akeminal facilities. See Port Series No. 31, "The Ports of C ld Alameda, and Richmond and Ports on San Pablo Bay, iti quinez Strait, and Mare Island Strait," revised 1962. Facil- S 0considered and Operations results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Engineering and design including dredging survey by hired labor and 2,665,840 cubic yards of shoaled material removed from Mare Island Strait by U.S. hopper dredge Harding. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 3 Pce0e t complete. Work remaining is lengthening and deepening adle Shoal Channel, dredging maneuvering area at Oleum Pier, portion considered inactive (approach D areas at Vallejo and Y allejo). Pinole Shoal Channel 35 feet deep was com- Waeed in 1929. Mare Island Strait Channel and toturning basmn Yea, comPleted in 1943. Costs of existing project end of fiscal $282,669 for new work and $8,782,164 for maintenance, $9,064,833. total Were Cost and financial statement Yea Total to .... 192 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 i~at ....... $1,P369,372 .......o .1,369,372 $543,200 $275,000 $434,100 $333,000 10,142,632 0 r ated$439,000 345,278 10,141,544 452,065 366,552 421,640 lqdes $1,086,703 for new work and $1,359,380 for maintenance of previous projects. 15. SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CALIF. Location. On north shore of Monterey Bay about 65 miles 4th of entrance to San Francisco Bay and 14 miles north of ( Landing, the nearest small-boat harbor. (See Coast and kdetic Survey charts 5402 and 5403.) of isting project. Provides for a small-boat harbor consisting 1 Wo entrance jetties, east jetty 850 feet long and west jetty e feet long, protecting an entrance channel 100 feet wide, 20 8 deep, and 900 feet long, thence 15 feet deep for an additional feet deep, 150 feet wide, 44d feet; an inner harbor channel 15 00feetwid,.an.207fee q014P9800 feet long, thence 10 feet deep for an additional 600 feet, losering a turning basin 10 feet deep, 300 feet wide, and 207 feet Ite, and a sand-bypassing plant if required. All depths refer to Salower low water. Tidal range between Extreme mean lower low ter and mean higher high water is 5.3 feet. range is 1432 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 about 10.5 feet. Approved estimated cost for new work (1966) $2,770,000, of which $1,798,000 is Federal cost and $9 72eOOd bY be contributed by local interests. Existing project authorsizes , 1958 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 357, 85th Cong., 2d Ses as modified by Chief of Engineers). reSS Local cooperation. Act of July 3, 1958, requires local interovidest contribute in cash 35.1 percent of first cost of project; pr of lands, rights-of-way, suitable spoil-disposal areas, and a source royalty-free jetty stone for construction and maintenane'bl the United States free from damages; acquire and hold in.~Puand interest sufficient lands for construction of turning basinn -ts, public utilization thereof; provide bulkheads, levees, revet in relocations, all dredging in berthing areas and necessary berthle facilities and utilities, including a public landing with suitable supply facilities, open to all on equal terms; provide or arracept for suitable marine-repair facilities; maintain project enel, jetties and dredged depths in entrance channel, inner chan and turning basin until commencement of sand-bypassi d which time they will assume operation and maintenance of '.sl bypassing plant, make replacements thereto, and ainla1nd dredged depths in entrance channel, inner harbor channelic3 turning basin with understanding that United States will te. burse local interests for actual cost of plant operation, "tl nance, and replacement up to a limit of $35,000 annually, and bsi further understanding that cost of any required channel or ro maintenance incurred by the United States will be deducted Cru estimated $35,000 annual Federal reimbursement. Sant hed Port District, by resolution dated December 3, 1957, fur' re- assurances of their willingness and ability to comply wit for quirements. Port district constructed portion of project 1te, which they are responsible, furnished necessary real es od f and provided a cash contribution of $915,000 as their shar a estimated first cost of jetties, channels, and turning basin, in lieu of providing royalty-free stone. ic Terminal facilities. In the natural harbor there isone In at$ pally owned wharf with facilities for fueling and servicing b cl and receiving, handling, and processing fresh fish The , boat harbor includes a municipal pier, utilities, and berd ae* marine repair and supply facilities. These are considered de- quate for existing commerce. Egi- Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: sod neering studies to determine necessity for construction of ni- bypassing plant continued by hired labor. Maintenance: nd neering and design including dredging surveys by hired labor ro(1 70,494 cubic yards of shoaled material removed by contract from entrance channel. t Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is about 85 per el complete. Jetties were completed in June, 1963 and cl~af dredging in November 1963. Work remaining is constructione sand-by-passing plant on which engineering and design has beel initiated. BEACH EROSION CONTROL-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DIST. 1433 Cost and financial statement year.Total M to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Nwwork- Ades $810,046 contributed funds. NAVIG N P8:341RO157J OTHERATHORIZE 17.... cs .Name . $80046 roject of p0 .. Date survey conducted,665 contributed funs I.iver Calif.....51105.............335,272......... April 11,513,539 6.RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION *........ SURVEYS 000July 1965,000 raael Creek, Calif............. 16, RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS .. Date survey conducted Naa , Name of project April 1966 Calif "laRVert . '4 11afael Creek, Calif . ........ o...... o ..... .00000 July 1965 17. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report see Annual Name of project Rteport Construction Operation and for- maintenance aca h r,Franecoo Bay, Calif. (inactive).................... 19356 ............. ........ .*** Calif. nel2.'........ c .. 1963 $1,021,074 $411,807 ...... 1963 drevet ments (inactive:::)......::................. tama fiver, 1965' 1,267,357 asel Creek,Calif.1................................. na0 Zara- Calif.1.. ................................... 1962 285,063 332,359 603,735 SCplleted. $ .eluSive of previous projects costs. us8ve of $41,094 contributed funds. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) $6,306, of Whiscal year cost for preauthorization studies was Calif., S$1,104 was for Gallinas Creek, Marin County, and ,202 for Petaluma River, Calif. , 19. SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIF. li cationf. Extends about 40 miles along Pacific Coast shore- boundary is about See of California. Northern limit of coastal Coast 1"iles south of city of San Francisco. (See and Geodetic "fvey Charts 5402 and 5403.) t~ sting project. Provides for Federal participation by con- hi~tion of funds toward cost of constructing, at West Cliff Drive, Nap seawall with an aggregate length of about 4,700 feet; at Qb Lakes Beach, a protective beach by placing about 712,000 itc Yards of suitable sand along eastern and western segments Sa stone groin at Black Point at east end of eastern segment; ff Drive near 49th Avenue, about 870 feet of riprap seawall; to eIral contribution to amount to one-half of first costs applicable sh Dtblicly owned portions of the shores plus a proportionate hare of first costs applicable to privately owned shores, such 4are to be based on public benefit to be derived from improve- 1434 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ment of area. Federal share of project costs, as reallocated un" 1962 River and Harbor Act and present land ownership amoulte to 32.9 percent of completed stages 1 and 2 at West Cliff Drivt 48.8 percent of remaining stages at West Cliff Drive, 50 per t of Twin Lakes Beach, Black Point groin, and Cliff Drive-49th Avenue. Plane of reference is mean lower low water. ig of tide between mean lower low water and mean higher sti water is 5.3 feet. Extreme range is 10.5 feet. Approvedt mated cost for new work (1966) is $2,350,000, of which $1 xt 000 is Federal share and $1,250,000 is non-Federal share. 4, ing project was authorized by 1958 River and Harbor Act e Doc. 179, 85th Cong., 1st sess., as modified by Chief of Engines 1 and River and Harbor Act of 1962.) Latest published map 1 project document. Local cooperation. Federal participation in project WaSal thorized subject to conditions that local interests obtain apP of by Chief of Engineers, before starting work on any proJe co detailed plans and specifications and arrangements for proseo tion of work on that project; construct riprap seawall lovi affected Federal frontage on east side of Point Santa Cruz;Yion lands, easements, and rights-of-way; control water pollut ~t 0f Twin Lakes Beach to extent necessary to safeguard heat their bathers; assure maintenance of protective measures during ~e,. useful lives, as may be required to serve their intended purp ch including replenishment, at suitable intervals, of protectivebe o at Twin Lakes Beach; and assure continued public ownershPfor non-Federal publicly owned shores and their administration ia, public use during useful lives of projects. State of Califorces through its representative agencies, the division of water reso to and division of beaches and parks, indicated its willingnesrty comply with requirements. City of Santa Cruz under a tri-pa1d agreement dated August 5, 1960, with State of California citY the United States for prosecution of work in Santa Crus eet limits completed, by 3-stage construction, about 4,50( all of seawall in West Cliff Drive section and complied wimilar requirements for work to date. City of Capitola under a si11of triparty agreement dated October 29, 1962, for prosecution, shore protection work in Capitola city limits completedriVe two-phase construction, about 640 feet of seawall at Cliff dvte. 49th Avenue and complied with all requirements for work to 'o' Operations and results during fiscal year. No construction local interests. Federal funds expended in payment of Fedeedr share of West Cliff Drive stage 3 seawall construction compPeted in June 1964 by city of Santa Cruz and Cliff Drive-49th A 1'6 phases I and II seawall construction completed in December 1 by city of Capitola.t . Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of West Cl8 Drive section of project began in March 1961 and is about sec percent complete. Construction of Cliff Drive-49th Avenue tion of project began in November 1962 and is about 70 pework complete. Entire project is about 28 percent complete. remaining is stage 4 construction in West Cliff Drive seCt 0 FLOOD CONTROL---SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1435 hase III seawall construction at Cliff Drive-49th Avenue, and beach fill and groin in Twin Lakes section. Cost and financial statement Year. Total to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, 1966 .......162 cost. ................ $70,000 ............$130,000$250,00 $50,000 61,936 68,002 $11 125,658 245,607 ............ ...... 2o,OTtER AUTHORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROJECT For last Coat to June 30, 1966 fullAnnual[ [see report . . . Name of project seeport Construction Operation and fr- maintenance inctv).................. "ct a, aif 158 ..... ...... L0 21. ALAMEDA CREEK, CALIF. o cation. Drains an area of 695 square miles of Coast Range Bay. Arroyo delaStern shore of southern arm of San Francisco miles er alle, largest subtributary, drains 173 square of south- gles P rtion of interior basin. (See Geological Survey quadran- Sewark and Niles.) arizsting project. Provides for levees, channel enlargement 0oastnk protection to be constructed by Federal Government in 1as al Plain of Alameda Creek from mouth in San Francisco a 12 miles to west end of Niles Canyon; and Federal participa- "t cost of Del Valle Dam and Reservoir to be constructed by Vae of California on Arroyo del Valle. Construction of Del 4 e s s Dam about 227 feet above streambed will provide te storage capacity of 77,000 acre-feet for flood control and to conservation. Federal Government will provide a cash detribution commensurate with flood control benefits to be ri ved from reservoir, or 30.7 percent of construction cost, but teoll exceed $4,080,000, plus present worth of operation, main- S0ceand replacement costs allocated to flood control during o 5 ' years. Approval estimated project cost is $45,100,000, 1 ic $19,324,000 pertains to Coastal Plain channel improve- pet and $25,000,000 pertains to Del Valle Reservoir; total $5 ral cost is $18,890,000 ($13,674,000 Coastal Plain and N6,000 participation in Del Valle Reservoir including a Fed- .76 contribution of $4,080,000 toward construction cost and s,000 present worth of estimated operation and maintenance os, for 50 years allocated to flood control); total non-Federal i1s $26 210,000 ($5,650,000 Coastal Plain lands and relocations ho.$20,560,000 Del Valle Reservoir). Existing project was au- r1edby 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 128, 87th Cong., 2d 140ocal cooperation. Authorizing legislation requires that local terests provide lands and rights-of-way for construction; hold ~T Tited States free from damages; relocate all highway Res, approaches thereto, and utilities for construction and 1436 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 maintenance; maintain and operate completed works; prev)ei any encroachment on flood channels, ponding areas, and reserrol; area that would••decrease "effectiveness - " of project " conrto floodafflect,, foright adjust all claims regarding water rights which mig h fflet,ple- be affected by, the project; and design and construct a multipl purpose reservoir on Arroyo Del Valle subject to review and caP proval by Chief of Engineers of features relating to *flood C0O trol. Authorizing legislation further requires that, prior to ad Federal contribution to cost of construction of Del Valle Darn wll Reservoir, Department of the Army and State of California and enter into an agreement providing for operation of dam trol reservoir in such manner as to produce necessary flood cotl 1 benefits upon which monetary contribution is based. BY s of tion No. 5937 adopted May 26, 1964, Board of Supervis.rice Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distire- furnished assurances of willingness and ability to meet req~tliS ments. Plans for various highway bridge and utility relochay have been submitted for review; construction of one hii.ghed bridge completed and a second initiated; rights-of-waY furniS'y for Coastal Plain channel improvements from San Francisconi to Decoto Road; utility relocation initiated. State of Cal1 alle has essentially completed land acquisition required for DelV , Reservoir; approved contract for Federal participation in 'so" struction of Del Valle Reservoir; is relocating about 9 mil~an Arroyo Road; and has initiated construction of Del Valle0 and Reservoir. gi- Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: 11i- neering and design for Coastal Plain channel improvements . road bridge relocation, and Del Valle Dam and Reservoir hired labor and contract. Under separate continuing conts for first three units of Coastal Plain channel improvements 485 cubic yards of excavation removed to complete first unit dredging, levee base, retaining dikes and drainage structure yd lower 4 miles of channel; 300,000 cubic yards of excavatiol and 175,800 cubic yards of embankment placed to initiate second construction in lower 7 1/2 miles of channel; and 10,000 cubic yards of embankment for fill on completed levee base (third-unit con- struction) initiated. State of California initiated constructc* of Del Valle Dam and appurtenant works and continued relc' tion of Arroyo Road. rove- Condition at end of fiscal year. Coastal Plain channel State ments began in April 1965 and are 20 percent complete.9 of California contract for construction of Del Valle Dam be e in March 1966 and is about 8 percent complete. State contrg.O for relocation of Arroyo Road began in June 1965 and is abou percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total to 6 Fiscal year............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 l', June New work: 85 Appropriated..................... $100,000 $300,000 $385,000$2,070,000 98226 cos........... ...9,237 300,469 322,961 2,099,865 FLOOD CONTROL---SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1437 L22. CORTE MADERA CREEK, CALIF. Location. Creek and tributaries drain an area of 28 square aijles • ........... Sall n Marin County, Calif., and discharge into west side of (~ee rancisco Bay at a point about 9 miles north of Golden Gate. e Geological Survey quadrangle San Rafael.) im- .ro esting project. Provides for about 11 miles of channel . geilents, including realinement, enlargement, levees, riprap- b rectangular concrete sections, interior drainage facilities, ai' relocations, and debris removal on Corte Madera Creek i~, loWer reaches of its tributaries, and a continuous channel i tof-way to deep water in San Francisco Bay reserved to as- Ape channel outlet in the event of future tideland reclamation. whrov ed estimated cost for new work (1966) is $7,900,000 of by ch $7,680,000 is Federal cost and $220,000 to be contributed C0 lcal interests. Existing project authorized by 1962 Flood ol Act (HI. Doc. 545, 87th Cong., 2d sess. as modified by the ef of Engineers). tight. cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and atti-of-way, including suitable areas for disposal of waste toeral; modify or relocate all bridges and utilities necessary fr costruction and maintenance; hold the United States free pre1 damages; maintain and operate completed project and 5evenht encroachment on flood control; channels that would decrease Sectiveness of project for flood adjust all claims regard- i ater rights that mightconstructionbe affected by project; contribute cash 3 percent of Federal cost of Ross Valley unit 0 tidal areas, an estimated $220,000. v~a erations and results during fiscal year. New work: Ad- de e engineering and design continued by hired labor. General co~ memorandum and plans and specifications for first-stage Ctruction essentially completed. Stro. dition at end of fiscal year. Planning for first-stage con- 1 n from San Francisco Bay co "pete. to Ross City limits essentially Cost and financial statement ............ 196 1966 Total to June 30, 1066 ... 1962 1 64 ooriated . ....... . .... $21,000 $90,000 $800,000 $911,000 t................. 18,886 72,591 201,668 293,145 23. COYOTE CREEK, CALIF. V gcation. In Marin County, Calif., flows on eastern slope of t i Peninsula northerly to Tamalpais Valley thence easterly to eln er Richardson Bay, an arm of San Francisco Bay, about 8 miles of San Francisco. lathRafael.) els (See U.S. Geological Survey quadrangle, eo staing project. Provides for channel improvement through lunity of Tamalpais Valley by construction of about 0.8 mile thfrapezoidal earth channel from mouth to Flamingo Road bridge, ce0.6 mile of reinforced concrete channel to head of project. 18ated cost for new work (1966) is $700,000. Existing 1438 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 project was authorized by Chief of Engineers on January 15, 1963, under authority of Public Law 685, 84th Congress, as amended Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936 P plies. Fully complied with for work performed. .As- Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: leted built drawings and operation and maintenance manual comP by hired labor.let Condition at end of fiscal year. Project essentially comP'e. and transferred to local interests for operation and mainteIigh- Work remaining is to complete lower section below state dato way 1 to final section and grade after consolidation of foundti materials. Cost and financial statement 16 Totsl to 164 1965 1966 J 1962 1963 Fiscal year................ New work: :9$7 Appropriated.......... ............ $26,000 $140,000 $491,074 .......... Cost.............................. 22,326 38,486 567,432 $3,608 24. EEL RIVER, CALIF. io Location. River drains an area of 3,630 square miles Oce1 Range in northwestern California and flows into Pacific miles south of Eureka, Calif., about 215 miles north of San a cisco Bay. (See Geological Survey quadrangle, Fortuna.) vees Existing project. Provides for construction of earth le ~ and modification of existing levees in delta area below mile re- Eel River and below mile 4.15 on Salt River, riprapped lies quired, and for a boat-launching ramp and appurtenant fac for recreational purposes. Approved estimated cost for cos work (1966) is $16,375,000, of which $16,180,000 is Federal and $195,000 was contributed by local interests. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents July 3, 1958 Levee and bank stabilization in Sandy Prairie area......... 11. Doc. 80, 85th Congfs',1giee modified by the Cie eft . Oct. 27,1965 Delta area levees and boat-launching ramp (in lieu of current II. Doc. 234, 89th Cong, retards and levees authorizcd by act of June 22, 1936). I Contains latest published map.Oed, Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work perfor." Total estimated cost for requirements for completed WOr 959 cluding non-Federal contributions, amounts to $200,000 ro*. price levels). Act of October 27, 1965 requires local intereSt s ad, vide lands and rights-of-way, access road, and parking facilitier jacent to boat-launching ramp; hold the United States free fIll damages; maintain and operate project after completilfl od cluding recreational facilities; prevent encroachment on ao channels and ponding areas, and prevent unsupervised tse boat-launching area that would impair effectiveness of imP ments; modify or relocate all utilities, roads, bridges, anIds proaches; adjust all claims regarding water rights. Act provd FLOOD CONTROL-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1439 r4ther that construction of boat-launching ramp should be con- ofrrent with or subsequent to, and be independent of, construction ab other project features when funds for that purpose are avail- le and prescribed local cooperation therefor has been furnished. cu~nboldt County Board of Supervisors, by resolution dated De- qtleiber 17, 1963, indicated willingness and ability to meet re- rerents. OPerations and results during fiscal year. None. b Condition at end of fiscal year. About 4 miles of levee on right pank of Eel River at Sandy Prairie, completed in November 1959, 0revented damages estimated at $300,000 during record floods of ceber 1964 and January 1965 which devastated Northern a lifornia. Damaged levee was repaired under emergency cothority of Public Law 99, 84th Congress. Work remaining is Flood n11struction of levees in delta area authorized by 1965 o'trol Act. Cost and financial statement YerTotal to Syear 1905 1966 June 30,19661 ewWork.- -1, 53................................... $678,816 oI)r.iated.......... -1,63 ......... ,816 8.............. $194.821 contributed funds. eCludes 25. NAPA RIVER BASIN, CALIF. SOcation- Napa River rises in St. Helenanear Mountains, flows t therly and empties into Mare Island Strait Vallejo. (See *eGeological Survey quadrangles, Mare Island, Napa and Ctingv Wharf.) t Description. Provides for improvement of Napa River be- eev iTrancas Road and downstream end of Edgerly Island (11- reach) for flood control and recreation purposes by channel plrgernent and realinement, construction of levees and flood- italls and boat-launching ramps and appurtenant recreation facil- 4 1 es Approved estimated cost for new work (1966) is $17,- be c 0,000 of which $16,800,000 is Federal cost and $610,000 to tiOtral buted by local interests for non-Federal share of recrea- Gal development. Existing project was authorized by 1965 1ood Control Act Doc. 222, 89th (H. authorized Cong., 1st sess.) in lieu of active improvements .Lcal by Flood Control Act of 1944. 7195rqie oa ilto cooperation. Act of October 27, 1965, requires local ro erests provide lands and rights-of-way, including ponding, bor- SW, and spoil-disposal areas; hold the United States free from h11ages; make necessary modifications or relocations of utilities, ih y bridges and approaches, and highways and roads, ex- oius e of railroad bridge and approaches; prevent encroachment Oe Channel works and ponding areas which would interfere with DaDer functioning, and if ponding areas and capacities are im- ired, provide substitute storage capacity or equivalent pumping Dacity; adjust claims regarding water rights which might be , ected by project; operate and maintain completed works and, t regard to recreational facilities, provide lands or rights m ands necessary to insure public control of recreational develop- 1440 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ment; and where appraised value of such land amounts to les than 50 percent of total first cost of recreational develoPIet make additional contributions sufficient to bring non-Federn share to at least that level; operate and maintain boat-launc i ramps, access roads, parking areas and necessary adjacent fcilt1 ties for boat-launching ramps; and assure access to all on et terms. By resolution dated December 17, 1963, Napa nd Board of Supervisors furnished assurances of willingness ability to meet requirements. Operations and results during fiscal year. None.o Condition at end of fiscal year. No work has been acco plished. No costs have been incurred. 26. PINOLE CREEK, CALIF. Location. In Contra Costa County, Calif., flows northWeterlY in and near town of Pinole and empties into San Pablo BaY,ad arm of San Francisco Bay. (See U.S. Geological Survey qi" rangle, Mare Island.) - Existing project. An earth-lined trapezoidal channel riPo rapped as required extending about 1.5 miles upstreamn rete mouth with two riprap chute structures and rectangular concrete sections under two bridges. Approved cost estimate for. Df work (1966) is $866,350. Project was authorized by Chief 48 Engineers on June 14, 1963, under authority of section 205, 19 4S Flood Control Act, as amended. tMed. Local cooperation. Fully complied with for work perfor Estimated costs for all requirements of local cooperation ent $121,000 (prices as of dates of compliance). Local interestS f maintain, and prevent encroachment on, project channels. t Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: neering and design including plans and specifications for addi tional riprap in areas of erosion during 1965-66 flood and opera- tion and maintenance manual by hired labor. By contract,134,- 790 cubic yards of excavation, 36,570 cubic yards of embankment, 1,315 cubic yards of concrete and 13,327 tons of stone placed to complete project construction contract. 1965 Condition at end of fiscal year. Project began in June to be and was completed April 1966 except for additional ripraP placed in areas where erosion occurred during 1965-66 floo Cost and financial statement t Tot' t966 Fiscal year................ 1962 1983 ........... 1964 1965 1966 June 30, New work: Appropriated.......... $400 $29,000 $30000 $775,000 ......... 3 Cost.................. 7,696 80 33,691 77,430 $700,378 27. REDWOOD CREEK, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CALIF. Location. Drains an area of about 283 square miles in Co Range of northwestern California and flows into Pacific O 0 - about 50 miles south of California-Oregon boundary. (See eo logical Survey quadrangle Orick.) Existing project. Provides for levees, interior drainage facil i FLOOD CONTROL-SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1441 ies, revetments, and channel rectification along lower 4 miles eft.iedwood Creek in vicinity of Orick, Calif. Approved cost state for new work (1966) is $4,600,000. Existing project was authorized 'by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 497, 87th 2d sess., contains latest published map; as modified by *04, chef of Engineers). ofL ca l cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, rights- . 7ay, borrow areas, and spoil-disposal areas; relocate and alter olns, utilities, roads, and related facilities necessary for con- ruction 'and maintenance of project; maintain and operate works 4er conipletion; and prevent encroachment on flood channels ead Ponding areas which would decrease effectiveness of flood 0 i trol improvements, and if ponding areas and capacities are lDvaired promptly provide substitute storage capacity or equiva- SDumping capacity. Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, ab certification November 16, 1965, indicated its willingness and D lity to meet requirements. T hey acquired necessary lands, rovidd funds for road relocations being accomplished as relo- part aPederal f construction contract, and essentially completed atiol of buildings and utilities. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering and de- ,i by hired labor. Under continuing contract road relocation initiated and 126,000 cubic yards of excavation and 77,500 cubic yards of embankment placed to initiate project channel. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is1966.about 9 percent o Plete. Construction was initiated in May Cost and financial statement Total to seal Year . ...... Year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 8560,000 $8, 000 $400,000 $535,000 ........... ............ M oriated...... 0.. 117174 293,213 426,555 .......... ........................ 1,168 28. RODEO CREEK, CALIF. tLocation. In Contra Costa County, Calif., flows northwesterly otrough town of Rodeo and empties into San Pablo Bay, an arm San Francisco Bay. jjoxistinq project. Provides for about 1.1 miles of channel im- rov rnent by construction of 1,450 linear feet of concrete-lined detagular section upstream from the mouth, thence 4,450 feet o earth-lined trapezoidal section, riprapped as required. New ork completed in January 1966 cost $986,615. Project was athorized by the Chief of Engineers June 14, 1963, under 'autority of section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. cal cooperation. Fully complied with for work performed. tiated costs for all requirements of local cooperation were 0,000 (prices as of dates of compliance). Local interests lstl and prevent encroachment on, project channels. -aintain, Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering and tfl including operation and maintenance manual. Modifica- o of railroad bridge completed by contract. Under continuing 1442 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of contract 82,329 cubic yards of excavation, 17,760 cubic yards embankment, 3,600 cubic yards of concrete and 11,143 tons of stone placed to complete project construction. nbe Condition at end of fiscal year. Project construction beg May 1965 and was completed January 1966. Work remaininc is completion of as-built drawings and operation and maintenance manual. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year. ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $1,000,0 Appropriated.......... -$276 $26,000 $30,000 $908,926... 98... Cost.... ......... 5,272 553 39,450 170,231 $741,987 29. RUSSIAN RIVER BASIN, CALIF. Location. Russian River rises in Coast Range in northWet ern California, flows southerly for 87 miles, and then turns Wiles erly to flow for 23 miles to Pacific Ocean at Jenner, 60 ile northwest of San Francisco, Calif. (For general locations Geological Survey map for California.) rc Existing project. Authorized project provides for constrla tion of initial stage of a dam on East Fork of Russian ie at Coyote Valley to a height of 160 feet; a dam on Dry CreelCt Warm Springs to a height of 284 feet; and channel stabilower works on Russian River between mouth and mile 98, on fromr reaches of several tributaries, and on Dry Creek downstream 959 dam. Coyote Valley Dam (Lake Mendocino), completed in1 is operated and maintained by the United States. Latest approved estimated cost for new work (1966) Estimated cost Project feature Esttiatos t Federal Non-Federal Total contribution channel im- $14,752,000 $5,598,000 120,350,000 Coyote Valley Dam and Reservoir (Lake Mendocino); 53,10000 provements below dam on lower 98 miles of Russian River. Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Dam and Reservoir; channel improve- 38,410,000 214,690,000 ments below dam. Total......................................... 53,162,000 20,288,000 uppl y Water s 1 Exclusive of $1,600,000 for recreation facilities at completed reservoir projects. 2Reimbursement by local interests to Federal Government for costs alocated to wad storage to be paid over a period not to exceed 50 years after use of storage is initia Details on project features and estimated costs Reservoir Power Name Nearest city Distance above mouth Height of dam capacity develop- Estimated (California) and type (acre-feet) ment cost Coyote Valley Dam and Reservoir (Lake Mendocino).................. Ukiah............. Mile 0.8-East Fork of Russian River 160 feet-earthfill... 122,500 ........ 1$17,550,000 C) Channel improvement (East Fork below Coyote Valley Dam and lower ..... do............. Mile 0 to 0.8, Fast Fork................ .............................. 2,800,000 98 miles of Russian River). Guerneville......... Mile 0 to 98, Russian River........... z Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Dam and Reservoir........................ Healdsburg......... Mile 14.4-Dry Creek.............284 feet-earthfill... Channelimprovement (Dry Creek beow Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Dam). ..... do...........Mile 1 to 14.4 Dry Creek... .......................................... 277,000........ 52,180,000 920,000 d x Exclusive of $1,500,000 for recreation facilities at completed reservoir projects. z tz C) U) C) 1444 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents May 17,1950 Coyote Valley Dam and Reservoir (Lake Mendocino); chan- H. Dot. 585, 81st Cong., 2d sels. nel improvements on lower 98 miles of Russian River and lower reaches of tributaries. Feb. 10, 1956 Increased appropriation authorization for initial stage of proj- Public Law 404, 84th Cong.2d Oct. 23, 1962 ect development. Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Dam and Reservoir; channel I. Doc. 547, 87th Cong., 2dses. (co improvements on Dry Creek below dam. tains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with for Coyote Valley aDt and Reservoir and channel improvements accomplished to date Responsible agencies of Sonoma and Mendocino Counties agrd storage ad that operating instructions for water conservation Control releases will be issued by Sonoma County Flood and Water Conservation District. Total estimated costs for require ments under terms of Coyote Valley portion of project authori0a tion, including a required non-Federal contribution of $5,598,O0 in full payment of conservation benefits, are $5,820,000. ide addition, local interests expended about $1 million to proi partial flood protection in area, constructed water distributO"d facilities at a cost of about $9,700,000, and plan to construct ad- ditional facilities by 1970 at an estimated cost of more than $4 million. Act of May 17, 1950, requires local interests operate and maintain channel stabilization works after com-ple. tion and prevent any encroachment on stream channel whic would interfere with proper functioning of improvements. Act of October 23, 1962, requires local interests hold the United Stat free from damages; maintain completed channel improveneie works; prevent encroachment in channel of Dry Cr et which would interfere with proper functioning of project; adju d all claims concerning water rights arising from construction. st operation of improvements, including acquisition of water right' needed for preservation of fish and wildlife resources affected b project; provide lands and rights-of-way for construction Of channel-improvement works; and reimburse the United States for all costs allocated to water supply in accordance with Water* Supply Act of 1958, as amended, such costs estimated at $14,690' 000 for construction and $73,000 annually for operation, mni'1 tenance, and major replacements. By Resolution No. DR 4770te December 17, 1962, Sonoma County Flood Control and Wate Conservation District provided assurances of their willingness and ability to meet requirements. Contract providing for reimf bursement to the United States for costs allocated to water s-Pe ply has been executed and approved by the Secretary of the Army. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: . egi neering and design for channel improvements, additional reaches on Russian River, cost $22,118. Recreation facilities, st Mendocino, by contract, including engineering and design, C $163,511. Preconstruction planning, Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Dam and Reservoir, cost $720,455. Maintenance: Operation and maintenance, Coyote Valley Dam and Reservoir, includind condition and operation studies by hired labor. FLOOD CONTROL--SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1445 Condition at end of fiscal year. Entire project, exclusive of abcreation facilities at completed project (Lake Mendocino), is adout 28 percent complete. Work remaining is construction of Of.ditional channel improvements on lRussian River, construction Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Dam and Reservoir, and channel Thlproverents on Dry Creek. Channel improvements on Russian RiVer are about 50 percent complete; advance planning for Dry Creek (Warm Springs) portion of project is about 83 percent mi- timpleted Flow regulation of Coyote Valley Reservoir waswere ated November 1958 and dam and appurtenant works ,,entially completed April 1959. Relocated State Highway 20 ,as Openledto traffic in June 1958, andstorms all work, including slides resulting from severe in 1958, was CeToval of 4-mile test section of bank- CorPleted in April 1959. An initial pabilization work on Russian River near Geyserville was com- Pleted in February 1957. Channel improvements in additional reaches on Russian River and on East Fork of Russian River were Co'aPleted in 1962, 1963, and 1964. Cost and financial statement Total to 1966 June 30, 19661 (1rpit...........575,00 .lyear .. 1962 1963 1964 1965 $85 0 ate ...... 672000 $705,000 $403,969 $5500 V88000 2$14,958,969 itera.. ............... I 539,109 971,135 333,897 511,242 744V435 314,680,634 80000 248300 222,800 1,201,270 . c... ............ 112,000 154800 I ated 231 :964232,799 1,192,707 .......... 109,601 144243 191624 for new work and $400 000 for recreation facilities at .. lude $5,598,000 contributed fundsunder Public Works Acceleration program. l 'ked Project funded as new work projects funded under miscellaneous reRjcludes $290o for recreation facilities at completed saar fund 9 r:bluuds 289,390 for recreation facilities at completed projects funded under miscellaneous r funds. 30. SAN LORENZO RIVER, CALIF. Lorenzo River, in Santa Cruz County, Calif., o generallySan gdocation. southeasterly from Santa Cruz Mountains through City of Santa Cruz where it enters Monterey Bay, about 65 miles olth of San Francisco. Branciforte Creek joins the riverSurvey from the left bank within city of Santa Cruz. (See Geological quadrangle, Ben Lomond.) S aXisting project. Levees along San Lorenzo River from mouth o Preeway Bridge below river mile 2, thence channel improve- aleht to head of project at river mile 2.4, with a concrete floodwall t tha Point; channel improvement and rectification of Branci- orte Creek from its junction with San Lorenzo River to mile 1.2; d iprovement of interior drainage system; all within city of anta Cruz New work under the project, completed in 1959, cot $4,285,608 exclusive of $418,682 contributed by local in- terests Estimated cost of interior drainage remedial work is .,000, exclusive of $2,500 contributed by local interests. lating project was authorized by 1954 Flood Control ActEngi- (H. Chief of eoc. a447, 83d Cong., 2d sess. as modified by the peers) 1446 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed work. Total estimated costs for all requirements of local cooperation under terms of project authorization, including required non- Federal contributions, are $2,600,000 (1959 price levels). Addi- tional $2,500 contributed for remedial work. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi neering and design by hired labor and remedial work to interior drainage system completed by contract.ts Condition at end of fiscal year. Project channel improvements were completed in November 1959 and turned over to loc-a'11n. terests for operation and maintenance. Remedial work to correctI an interior drainage problem resulting from shoaling due to tidal action began in September 1964 and completed in November 19. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total t196 Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1906 New work: 20608 Appropriated.......... $10,000 $763............ ............. 25,0001 061 Cost .................. ............ 4,643 763 ............ 4,810 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1063 1964 15 1966 June 1966 year............ Fiscal 162 .... New work: $421'18 $1,632.................................... Contributed........... $2,500o Cost.................. 1,682................... ................ 1,723 31. SONOMA CREEK, CALIF. Location. Drains an area of about 160 square miles in easter Sonoma County, Calif., and discharges into San Pablo 3Bay the northerly arm of San Francisco Bay. (See Geological SurveY quadrangles Mare Island and Sears Point.)les Existing project. Channel improvements in lower 15 miles of Sonoma Creek by channel enlargement and levees in lowver reaches, riprapped trapezoidal earth channel in upper reaChed interior drainage facilities, and bridge modifications. Approv estimated cost of new work (1966) is $10,600,000. Existi project authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (H.Doc. 224, 8 9th Cong., 1st sess.). *t Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, right of-way, ponding, borrow, and spoil-disposal areas for constrtic tion; hold the United States free from damages; provide 1nodi fications or relocations of bridges and approaches (except ral road bridges and their approaches), and all utilities as necessary for construction; maintain and operate completed works; prevel' encroachment on flood channels and ponding areas and, if capast ity of ponding areas is impaired, provide promptly without co to the United States substitute storage or pumping capacitY O* FLOOD CONTROL---SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1447 qal effectiveness; adjust all claims concerning water rights allin g from construction and operation of the improvement; t strengthen and maintain those local levee sections on tribu- rles which will be retained in effect as extensions of the Federal detls to such standards as may be required by the Chief of theieers to assure the degree of protection contemplated for ,e Federal project. The Board of Directors of Sonoma County odControl and Water Conservation District, by Resolution O\f Of O1I 7223-1, adopted September 24, 1963, provided assurances local cooperation. CPerations and results during fiscal year. None. ndition Di hed. at end of fiscal year. No work has been accom- No costs have been incurred. 32. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS sSection 3,Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended and arpleniented, included requirement that local interests maintain r Operate completed flood control works in accordance fiscal with heaions prescribed by the Secretary of War. During loat the following completed flood control projects transferred to hIa dinterests for operation and maintenance were inspected by e labor at a cost of $6,000: Project Date inspected .Creek, Marin County, Calif...................... January 1966 eaver Creek, Trinity County, Calif............. April 1966 Iver, Humboldt County, Calif................... February 1966 iVer, Humboldt County, Calif. ........ ........... June 1966 River, Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties, Calif ... December 1965 Creek, Contra Costa County, Calif. ............... June 1966 od Creek, Humboldt County, Calif ................. February 1966 1Creek, Contra Costa County, Calif ............... June 1966 Creek, Contra Costa County, Calif............... June 1966 n River, Mendocino and Sonoma Counties, Calif.... February 1966 orenzo Creek, Alameda County, Calif .............. May 1966 orenzo River, Santa Cruz County, Calif........ . . . . . December 1965 Total cost to June 30, 1966, was $26,968. 33. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 report - fuill Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and fo-- maintenance P, t2$0-220 542 ....... ladt.eaverCreek, Calif............................................. 3266,500 .............. jar1Ver,Calif.i . ....... 195 o.. (965..................... ora tm-C esOn Pajaro iver andd Corralitos 950 ............. .....748,283.......... Creek.................. eenCarnadero 0e Creek4........ ...................... 150....... 0.... 1 Creek, Cai. Lorei Cre, ai . ............ ... ............ ..................................... 1952 ... ... 694,2........... 75,120,921 ........... e 1clde 74,939 Public Works Acceleration program funds and $2,844 final fiscal year 1966 oats. e8 $174,939 Public Works Acceleration prga $225,000 Public Works Acceleration program funds and $698 final fiscal year 1966 coataheludes a C'Drovement inactive. 1 Clusive of $52,549 contributed funds. udsieeoengne 4i ndeign prior to June 30, 1952, and costs of $4,288 during fiscal tiatJ1962 and 1963 for a study to determine if project classification to an active category was lBclusive of $200,000 estimated value of work performed in lieu of cash contribution. 1448 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 34. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Fiscal year costs for preauthorization studies were $31,884 fo Coffee Creek, Trinity County, Calif.; $11,278 for Colma yCreeo San Mateo County, Calif.; $2,157 for Etna Creek, Sskiyou County, Calif.; $1,483 for Indian Creek, Happy Camp, SislYO County, Calif.; $27,846 for San Leandro Creek, Alameda COLul' Calif.; and $201 for South Fork Trinity River in IHyampom ley, Trinity County, Calif. Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) Federal cost was $3,410,851, of which $53,542 was for advanc preparation, $1,094,885 for flood emergency operations and POS flood reports, and $2,262,424 for repair and restoration. 35. SURVEYSo Type of study Fiscal year Navigation .................................. .......... $ 77,722 Flood control ............................................. 635,790 Beach erosion ............................................ 38,87300 Special study of San Francisco Bay ......................... 28',040 Coordination studies with other agencies ..................... Total surveys . ..................................... 792,728 36. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATAo During fiscal year, a flood plain information study of Cre River, Calif., was continued by hired labor at a cost of $14,9800 37. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ictled During fiscal year, hired labor costs of $6,215 were incurr for hydrologic studies. SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT * This district comprises basins of Suisun Bay and San Joaquin lid Sacramento Rivers, in California, and Goose Lake in Oregon; and basins of the Great Salt Lake, and Sevier Lake, in Utah; lerervening portion of Great Basin in northern Nevada and north- California. P M IMPROVEMENTS 1 Navigation Flood Control-Continued ' Middle River and connect- Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers, Calif .......... 1481 2. Ing channels, Calif .... 1449 1450 20. Martis Creek Reservoir, 8. VOkelumne River, Calif. Martis Creek, Nev. and 4 Old River, Calif ........ 1452 1484 1453 Calif ................ 5. Sacramento River, Calif. SSan Francisco Bay to 21. Merced County S t r e am 1485 1457 Group, Calif......... 1487 6 Stockton, Calif ........ Merced River, Calif..... 1489 . anJoaquin River, Calif.. 1459 22. Middle Creek, Calif...... 7Stockton and Mormon 23. 24. Mormon Slough, Calaveras 1490 Channels (diverting River, Calif........... canal), Calif........ New Bullards Bar Reser- 8. I uisun Bay Channel, Calif. 1463 25. voir, Calif............ 1491 1465 26. 1492 1 ulsun Channel, Calif ... Oroville Reservoir, Calif.. Other authorized naviga- 26. Pine F 1 at Reservoir and 1494 tion projects ......... 1466 Kings River, Calif .... 28. Sacramento River and trib- 11. Flood Control utaries, Calif., from Col- 1496 SBuchanan Reservoir, Chow- linsville to Shasta Dam 1467 29. Walnut Creek, Calif...... 12 SCalaveras chilla River, Calif.... River and Little- 30. Inspection of completed flood control projects ... 1504 john Creek and tribu- taries, including New 31. Scheduling flood control 1504 l ogan and Farmington reservoir operations .... 1468 32. Other authorized flood con- 13. Reservoirs, Calif..... trol projects........... 1505 14, Calanche Reservoir, Calif. 1471 uck Creek, San Joaquin 33. Flood control work under 1505 . 1472 special authorization ... 15. 1 County, Calif.......... idden Reservoir, Fresno 1473 Multiple-Purpose Projects 16. iver, Calif. .......... Including Power Isabella Reservoir, Kern 17 River, Calif. ........... 1475 34. New Melones Reservoir, 1505 Staweah and Tule Rivers, Calif ................. including Terminus and Success Reservoirs, General Investigations Calif... ..... 1477 1507 akeport Reservoir, Scotts 35. Surveys ................ 19 Creek, Calif. ........... 1480 36. Collection and study of 1507 Lower San Joaquin River basic data ............. 1508 and tributaries, including 37. Research and development 1. MIDDLE RIVER AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, CALIF. o Location. These waterways are part of a complicated network delta natural and some artificial, in the chan- f tidal channels, some Middle 1elan Joaquin River. River, one of the principal ts, is a by-channel of San Joaquin River, leaving Old River, an- b r by-channel above city of Stockton and rejoining main river Jaut 15 miles below Stockton. Whiskey Slough enters San oaquin River 6 miles upstream from Middle River and is con- eted by Empire Cut, an artificial waterway, with Latham 1450 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Slough and Middle River. Turner Cut is an artificial cutofat mouth of Whiskey Slough. (See Geological Survey, Caliorni quadrangles Bouldin, Woodward Island, Holt, Union sl, Stockton, and Lathrop.) Previous projects. For details see page 1290 of Annual RepOrt for 1934. 100 Existing project. Provides for a channel 9 feet deep and 100 feet wide in Middle River - • below •Borden Highway " Bridge; ut " 4~ Latham Slough between Middle River and Empire Cut; dle Empire Cut, Whiskey Slough, and Turner Cut between Vet River and San Joaquin River. Mean range of tide is about 3'e during stages of extreme low water. Total Federal cost of ne* work was $6,754, exclusive of amounts expended on previous prbor ects. Existing project was adopted by 1935 River and Is)arbo Act (River and Harbors Committee Doc. 48, 72d Cong., 1st sess Latest published map is in project document. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. othese Terminal facilities. No extensive terminal facilities onhare waterways, other than bank landings along channels, whicht e considered adequate. There is one large wharf with warehoue at Middle River station with rail connection. All facilities privately owned, but open to public use.. -ce: Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenacere Condition studies and miscellaneous inspections and reports wer accomplished by hired labor. Hired labor and rented equiproe was utilized to accomplish snagging and clearing along the proj ect channels at a cost of $10,191. .tted Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was initiat and completed in 1937. Controlling depth is project depth ofor feet at mean lower low water in all channels. Total costS ol existing project were $19,348, of which $6,754 were for new w and $12,594 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Total to _0 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 30 9661 , New work: $8,3 .......... A ppropriated ............ ............ ............ 4 33............ Cost.................. ........... ............ ............ ............ ............ Maintenance: 1,68 Appropriated.......... ............ ............ ............ ............$20,000 13,38 Cost................. . ............ ............ ............ 11,702 ............ 1 Includes $1,600 for new work and $790 for maintenance for previous project. 2. MOKELUMNE RIVER, CALIF.1 Location. Rises near crest of Sierra Nevada Mountains. ° western slope at about elevation 10,000 feet and flows 140 ,ile$ via North Fork, or 145 miles via South Fork, to empty intoel Joaquin River 20 miles above mouth. River flows southweste 119 miles to town of Woodbridge; thence northerly about 9 ile to Galt-New Hope Bridge; thence northwesterly, westerly an " southerly 8 miles by river to New Hope Landing, where it sepa rates, flowing southerly, afterwards reuniting at point 9 mil RIVERS AND HARBORS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1451 11'stream via North Fork and 14 miles via South Fork; thence logerly 4 miles to its mouth in San Joaquin River. (See Geo- cal Survey topographic map of Sacramento Valley, Calif.) tio~sSting project. Provides for removal of snags and obstruc- G. and occasional dredging of shoals from mouth of river to forN ew Hope Bridge, a distance of 35 miles, including both Mean lower low water depths sufficient for navigation needs Depth Length (feet) (miles) Location of section going upstream of river to lower junction North and South Forks.... . Fork ............ Lowra 8 .nNorth and South Forks to Snodgrass Slough va North Iork................ 9 8 e j ogh ' to up)er junction North anid South Forks via North Fork... .. ",' 09, 1 letrk Nli0, onr. Northli1 and South Forks to upper junction of same at New Hope Landing....via 9 14 PeLan'ding to Galt-New Hope Bridge... .................................... 3 Atl ,1je low 0 rir sa creo ra ri-lle , stages ng. ..between range . mean lower low water and ra a higher high water at mouth is 4 feet, with extreme tidal R8e Of 5 feet; there is no tide at upper end just above Galt-New 12 e ridge. Ordinary flood fluctuation is 5.5 feet at mouth and afeet at upper end. Extreme flood fluctuation is 8 feet work at mouth . 17 c feetat upper end. Total Federal cost of new for aoWas $8,500. Existing project adopted by 1884 River and sea bor Act, Senate Executive Document 34, 47th Congress, 1st gr (Annual Report 1882, p. 2637). (H. Doc. 1160, 63d Con- ' 2d sess., contains latest published map.) of ' ca l coop)eration. None required. Up to June 30, 1911, State a falifornia expended about $23,000 in clearing river of snags e trees for 3 miles above Galt-New Hope Bridge, and in making b - r a l cutoffs. Two-thirds of cost of this work was contributed 1 ocal Iprotection district. Result was to accelerate runoff and avirove navigation conditions in lower made river. Records are not lable for other similar expenditures by local interests. w, erm4inal facilities. Commodities are handled on small ararves or landings or on banks at various places. Facilities 0considered adequate for existing commerce. Co0 erations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: 4e dlt1on studies and miscellaneous inspections and reports were We 0thlished by hired labor. Hired labor and rented equipment oe utilized for snagging and clearing of project channels at a of $15,893. SNovdition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was initiated d Ovember 1884 and completed in December 1885. Controlling totlos at mean lower low water are 12 feet from mouth of river P lower junction of North and South Forks; thence by North \,k to Snodgrass Slough, 7 feet; thence to upper junction of J th and South Forks at New Hope Landing, 2 feet; from lower tetion via South Fork to New Hope Landing, 7 feet; and thee to Galt-New Hope Bridge, head of navigation, 2 feet. 1452 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement fTotalto Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J , $8 co New work: A ppropriated .... .... ............ ............ ............ ............ ..... 8100 Cost................. .................... Maintenance: 9701 Appropriated ......... .. $30,00 87091 Cost................. 19,55 3. OLD RIVER, CALIF."" Location. Most westerly branch of interconnecting tidal c6" nels into which San Joaquin River divides in crossing its deltt It leaves main river 21/2 miles downstream from Mossdale $ael , Highway Bridge, or 132 miles above mouth of Stockton Ch uece " and flows westerly and northerly 32 miles to its lower con with main river 23 miles above its mouth in Suisun Bay. utl Existing project. Extends along Old River from its i0' near Venice Island to its source in San Joaquin River nearMOde dale and provides for a side channel 10 feet deep and 80 feet hd to Santa Fe wharves and Phillips Cannery at Orwood; for e of nels 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide in Grant Line Canal westd of Doughty Cut, 10 feet deep and 80 feet wide from westerlY efd g Doughty Cut to Holly Sugar Factory, 2 miles north of Tr y'to feet deep and 80 feet wide from southerly end of Doughty Civer head of Old River, and 6 feet deep and 80 feet wide in oldRve from westerly end of Grant Line Canal to Lammers Ferry CRad; and entrances 8 feet deep and 80 feet wide to Fabian-Bell "All at its westerly end and also westerly of Grant Line Bridge..her depths are referred to mean lower low water and mean h th high water at head of Old River is about 3 feet; and at its oPec about 5.5 feet; ordinary flood ranges are 16 and 8 feet, respelf tively; extreme flood ranges are 20 and 11 feet, respect ivelY Total first costs were $26,785 ($23,185 Federal and $3,600rited Federal for lands, damages, and public landings). Unomple o portion of project (comprising completion of project channel l; to and at Orwood; in Fabian-Bell Canal; in Grant Line Caqti from Grant Line Canal to head of Old River in San JoaLie River; and in original channel of Old River from Grantd eX- Canal up to Lammers Ferry Road) is considered inactive anc r- cluded from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost of this po tion $63,815, of which $62,815 (July 1954) were Federal 4'd $1,000 non-Federal (1939) for lands, damages, and public alCt ings. Existing project adopted by 1937 River and IHarborhed (II. Doc. 151, 75th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest publis Local cooperation. Fully complied with for completed portio'1 map). Terminal facilities. Holly Sugar Co. refinery and terlrl"l near Tracy has a large wharf and an unloading basin with mechanical unloading and conveying units connecting With warehouse; there is also a passing basin one-half mile downstre ' There are about 100 private bank landings along project channels; l some have sheds for storage. These are all privately owned a d RIVERS AND HARBORS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1453 erated. Existing commerce does not indicate a need for pro- sion of public landings.. dierations and results during fiscal year. Mamintenance: Con- laon Studies and miscellaneous inspections and reports by hired laor, , Colition at end of fiscal year. New work was accomplished head in San afiscal Year 1939 in Old River channel from its Caqu in River to Grant Line Canal and in channels of Grant Line %al,, Crocker Cut, and Doughty Cut. Existing ecs commerce does C titiol indicate h w channel a need for completion of remaining naviga d ofconstruc- tio Channel is navigable all year. The two heads of naviga- o are at head of Old River in San Joaquin River, and at Holly Rar Factory wharf, 2 miles north of Tracy. Controlling depths: edo f-uth of river to Orwood, 11 miles, 10 feet; thence to lower of rant Line Canal, 10 miles, 10 feet; thence: (a) to Holly 1tgr FP actory near Tracy, 5 feet (low-water season), or (b) to Altd of Old River in San Joaquin River, 5 feet (low-water season). epths refer to mean lower low water. Cost and financial statement Ie1Year. to 1962 rTotal 1983 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ......... ............ ............ ............ ............ $23,185 DI)roPriated .. ............... main .... I .... oa ........ ..... ......... ........ . ..... .... .... ... 23.,1818 $30,259 $13,000 446,865 $30,000 2844(, -$1023 12 5,683 o)rorated...........$10,261 s . , ............. 446,121 26,496 4:002 33,363 12,256 5,683 4. SACRAMENTO RIVER, CALIF. focation. Rises in Trinity Mountains in north-central Cali- about 374 miles and empties into Olia flows generally southerly of San Francisco Bay, at Collinsville, Calif. Bay, an arm (sunGeological Survey topograph" Survey topographic map of Sacramento Valley, ~0 Cai.eological foPrevious projects. ForAnnual details see page 1985 of Annual Report r 1915, and page 1708, Report for 1938. . is~zting project. Provides for construction of Sacramento tolVer Deep Water Ship Channelwest from deep water in Suisun Bay o ashinjton Lake, 1 miles of Sacramento River at city a acramento, a distance of 43 miles, construction of a harbor i turning basin at Washington Lake, and a connecting canal al 11 navigation lock from harbor to Sacramento River. Project Drovides l)o'so for a shallow-draft channel 10 feet deep at mean to low water, 150 to 200 feet bottom width, from Suisun Bay etacramento, Calif., 60 miles: a depth of 6 feet at low water Ween Sacramento and Colusa, 85 miles: a depth of 5 feet at low Water between Colusa and Chico Landing 50 miles; and such 1th as practicable betweenmiles. Chico Landing and Red Bluff, 53 es, a total distance of 248 1454 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Tidal and flood conditions prevailing Range in feet Miles from Place mouth of 4 Ordinary Extrese food river Mean Extreme 2 3 tidall tidal flood . .. _ - - ~ 10 Collinsville................................. 0 4.37 8 28 Sacramento....... .................. .... 59 22.0 3 20 30 Verona (mouth of Feather River)............ 80 .......... Trace 2 32 Colusa.................................... 144 .2 2 Chico Landing............................. 193 20 30 Red Bluff......... ....................... 248 24 I 1 Mean lower low water to mean higher high water. 2 Tide at low water season only. 8 Mean lower low water to flood stage. 4 Extreme low water to indicated flood condition. Deepwater channel was formed by widening and deepeningex isting channels for first 18 miles above Suisun Bay to 6 25 above Rio Vista and dredging a new channel for remaininglow miles to Washington Lake, to 30 feet deep at mean lowero water with a bottom width of 200 to 300 feet. Triangular hsh and turning basin was formed by deepening and widening 00 i ington Lake to 30 feet deep at mean lower low water, 2,400 byhe 2,000 by 3,400 feet, with provision for future enlargement. Trb 11/-mile long canal 13 feet deep and 120 feet wide between hardes and Sacramento River, together with navigation lock provce for transfer of barges between the two different watersurla elevations. A 135-foot span single leaf combination high a and railroad bascule bridge crosses the canal at harbor en navigation lock. Principalfeatures of lock: Distance to nearest town ......... In West Sacramento, Calif. Miles above river mouth .......... 43. Width of lock chamber ........... 86 feet. Greatest available length for full width ......................... 600 feet.1 Range of lifts ................... 0 to 21 feet. Depth of gate sill at mean lower low water ..................... 13 feet. Character of foundation ............ Varies from gravels to clays. Completed ....................... August 1961. Open to navigation ................ December 1961.'barge Estimated construction cost ........ $8,470,000, including 11/2 mule canal and bridge. Includes 2 sector gates 45% feet high. SLimited operation until April 1963 when plug between harbor channel was dredged. for project (exClu Approved estimates (July 1966) of new work sive of terminal facilities for deep water ship channel): CALIF., DISTRICT 1455 RIVERS AND HARBORS--SACRAMENTO, 3 .".........-$300,000 $4,072,000 $45,712,000 ,8 delwater ship channel and 13-foot deep $41,340,0001, 000. *1a080.000 . 200 0.... .0 072,000 46,792,000 aft river channels. ... lTotal.................. ............... 42, . .. I hannel and 13-foot deep connecting bI ,o 8 local interests' costs for 30-foot deepwlsersl e uthorization were $10,741,000 Of project a facilities required under ters 1963)terminal .. ur- erls Vista at R ioCalifornia • vessels, pss Ie oceangoing Orderto permit passage of Sacramen to Riv control (reclama- teatructed bridge across$3,200,000. Salinity control (reclama- it0tflated cost of about o l of tidal areas) is consideredinactive and excluded from cost of this project aegoing cost estimate. Estimated Federal costs, for con- t (July 1960) is $2 million plus Government ruction. R,;o , '.e'nolct was authorized by the following: Documents and reports c Work authorized 55th Cong., 2d ses., and at , 1809 A depth of 7 feet below Sacramento... 55th186Cong., 3d seses.(Annual Re- I. 48,Doc. port 198, 2844 and 1.99, p. 3171). p- II Doe. 76, 62d, Cong., 1st sess. .2, 21912 For work above Sacramento...................... i. Doe. 123, 60thCong., 1st sees. o Rivers and Harbors Committee Doe. The10-foot channel up to Sacramento . l , , and 95 feet , A Adepth of 6 feet between Sacramento anda 05s 35, 73d Cong., 2d sees. Colusa and Chico Landing, at a co t of $390,000 between o ft. provided flow of river is incre ased to minimum flow Do. per second after Slnata Reerv ir is built. 65,000cubic ' Authority for feet a special direct participation of Federal Go - ernment of $12 million in cost of Shsta Reservoirll. illion O8.26 Transfer of authority for expenditure of a ove 12 ,Y of War to Secretary of the Interior. S. Doc. 142, 79th Cong., 2d ses. 24, 1916 Secretary oaed oeretnavigation OrSacramento .prolect a ship channel fodif S1946 Modified existing projer ln of a ship chwater River, Calif., to provide for contruction wide fron dee water inks 30 feet deep and 200 to 300 feet Lake, in any such worksate r acluding Suisun Bay to Washington or allev iate any to conmpenate for as may be necessary detrimental rat inity condit.o Ird tiq400 resulting frombyship chan- 2,000 by detrimental ealinity conditions depth, 2 400 by 2,000 by vel; a triangular basin of equal Lake; and connecting channel 3,400 feet at Washington ith lock and drawbridge, 13 feet deep and 120 feet wide, thence to Sacramento iver. r e ed osection above Sacramento. For map of section below ertains latest published map of sect seas., , and S. Doc. 142, 79th Cong., 2d seas. 60th Cong., to, see I. Doe. 1123, Fully complied with for deep com ie shallow-draft water ship feature. . oeratio . Ful c. Local.occcooperation. of Sac-. docks shallow-draft at fe port anel project. None required on a docks nd at port of Sac- wharves, 2'erminal facilities. Piers, ned to meet extructurese uelto for shallow-draft navigation ar mees extSacrameto hit S timber decks, some of which main wharvesto at are. wdesignrved at Sacks serveto Waters at flood stages. All seare Muni cipal-belt -f above ftracilities a'e rail connections. rear. Three of above facilities are ledded wha~rves from the o"eded city of Sacramento and remainder by private interests; harveby see "Port and ared by cityopf Sacramend.o Fnor full description ar e privately operat the. Ports of Stockton and Sacramento, comprise wharves l 1962." Deep water terminal facilities 1456 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and piers, administration and storage buildings, and belt railroad facilities. Majority of these facilities are owned and operaned by Sacramento-Yolo Port District; remainder are privately own d and operated. Facilities are considered adequate for exist"- commerce. DeeP °Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, p eP Water Ship Channel: Stone protection along left bank, So ramento River, mile 15.0 to 18.0, Ryer Island, by contract e o of $39,330; further levee shaping and stage construction leveeract Prospect Island, mile 19.0 to 19.8, Sacramento River, by cualt cost $51,595; initiated stone protection, barge canal, by con0lt . contract, at cost of $4,500. Maintenance, Shallow Draft Channel: Item Condition and operation studies, including condition surveys, 22083 hired labor .............................................. **. Removed snags, Sacramento River, Sacramento to Colusa, 138,222 hired labor and rented equipment ....................... Removed snags, Sacramento River below Sacramento and in 9,102 Steamboat Slough, hired labor and rented equipment ........... Dredging Sacramento River, Sacramento Harbor, hired labor 4,89 and rented suction dredge ................................ Dredging Sacramento River, Sacramento Harbor, hired labor 382,452 and rented clamshell dredge .............................. Dredging Sacramento River, Sacramento to Colusa, hired labor 21,05 and rented clamshell dredge ............................ Deep Water Ship Channel: 48 484 Maintenance and operation service facilities, hired labor ......... 65,116 Maintenance and operation lock and gates, hired labor ........... 32,304 Miscellaneous minor project work, hired labor ................ Dredging Sacramento River above Rio Vista, hired labor 984,559 and rented clamshell dredge .............................. * Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of 7-foot shaloW draft channel below Sacramento was initiated in September 89el and completed in 1904. Modified 10-foot shallow-draft chnaed up to Sacramento was initiated in fiscal year 1928 and comPlril in 1931. Shallow-draft channel above Sacramento began in AP. 1946 and new work is about 55 percent complete. Wor maining to complete shallow-draft portion of project is proV'l of a 5-foot depth between Colusa and Chico Landing (50 Miles) Completion of shallow-draft channel is indefinite. ConstruciO of 30-foot deep water ship channel was initiated in July 1 improvement dredging by continuing contracts resulted in Pil vision of an operational facility for oceangoing vessels duri1 June 1963. Bascule bridge was completed in April 1960,P b e lock in August 1961, and barge canal in November 1961. Enol- deepwater ship channel is about 94 percent complete. ContrOe ling low-water-season depths for shallow-draft channel were From mouth of Cache Slough to Sacramento, 10 feet; thence d Colusa, 6 feet; thence to Sidds Landing, 3 feet; and thence to Ite Bluff, head of navigation, 1.5 feet. Channel is navigable all yea however, there is no regular navigation above Colusa, 145 Mil above river mouth. Deep-draft channel will have a controlil depth of 30 feet for deep-draft vessels after annual maintenanc RIVERS AND HARBORS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT de gniitems de fr'ed ing. Project will not be completed until certain items de- haed due to site conditions or uncertainty as to requirements ship cha e been completed Items comprise: (a) Final shaping levee fills alan e l levees to provide design height, without which aoready Placed could be washed out by floodflows in Yolo Bypass; Qigdation conditions were such that shaping could only be done tes (b) patrol roadslevees; ~ta on ship channel levees to facilitate -equieaance inspection of and (c) bank protection where specific req~uijred to control or prevent erosion of channel banks; tioqulrenents cannot be entirely determined until project opera- discloses where erosion is to be expected. Total costs for existing project to June 30, 1966 New work Maintenance Total Funds halowjdraft: af :roat ef era0( n..... $585,436 $10,275,516$10,860,952 opr..tions.........................7 ane . $585,43 0,000 70,000 ena aOt ce.......... . ................ ... 3,080,637 2,282,282 41,362,919 .39,666,073 12, 627,798 52,293,871 t ar................... On l buted: Other (13 3.......................340,251 340,251 ............. 340,251 otchannel)I.... .................................... ...... .' ' I 40,006,324 12,627,798 52,634,122 Total . ..... accomplished at expense erlaxan4eous construction and engineering services (nonproject) aento-Yolo Port District. Cost and financial statement Yar l al .. 6 Total to 9 1966 June 30,1966 196 1963 1964 1965 $4790, 000 $5,267,000 000 $317,500 $48,600 1$39,882,292 $450, cated. 114,819 239,851,271 Aane 5,729,1155,024,0381,091,846 240,337 1,368,380 313,286,166 100 1,173,3001,006,420 Corriatd0......... . 536,010 217 808,715 841,141 1,887,212 413,181,518 .............. 4 17 116 94 for shallow- c,, project. $ 185,198; existing project $585,436 $39,111,658r funds-previous 658 for deep-draft. $39.1 11,Jes project, funds. $585,436 for shallow-ed project, $185,198; existing at e regular funds-previous other contributed $340,251existing funds. IleztlClde$3,00,37 and E~xcludes Excues,$53,720; for deep-draft. funor regula39,080,637 project, $10,289,975 for shallow- shallow- rft $2,372,471 fuor deepdraft; eseg and Deferred Maintenance funds-$70,000 for existing project, $10,275,516 for shallow- ft regular funds-previous project, $553,720; funds-$7 for shallow-draft. $2,282,282 for deep-draft; and Deferred Maintenance 5. SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON, CALIF. to L4ocation. On navigation channels extending from entrance a Francisco Bay to Port of Stockton through San Francisco, rin, Contra Costa, Solano, Sacramento, and San Joaquin 5527 and 5532-5534 forUnties. (See Coast and Geodetic Charts respective areas.) Project " • for "n provides det of of modification maiexisting ship challliting project. ea Francisco Harbor project by increasing depth of main ship t anlel across San Francisco Bar from 50 to 55 feet; modifica- too of existing Richmond Harbor project and by deepening from 35 oh anel 45 feet enlarging maneuvering area, constructing new through navigation opening of Richmond-San Rafael San Pablo Bay idge to 45 feet deep; modification of existing 1458 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and Mare Island Strait project by deepening Pinole Shoal Channel from 35 to 45 feet, and constructing a maneuvering area djacent to Oleum pier 45 feet deep; modification of existing Suisuntrait Channel project by deepening channel between Carquinez 1 and and Chipps Island from 30 to 45 feet, widening channe n maneuvering area, constructing new turning basin eWporO Carquinez Strait and Chipps Island, and deepening widene pto tion of project channel between Chipps Island and Pittsbur o 35 feet; and modification of existing San Joaquin River Navl30 tion Project by deepening Stockton Deep Water Channel from :on30 to 35 feet, realigning channel to follow False River route,conep, structing new turning basin and maneuvering area 35 feet deep, constructing public recreation areas and facilities along the ronel and placing rock revetment on levees bordering ship chanis Approved cost estimate (July 1966) of Federal cost (Cord) $50,200,000 (exclusive of $400,000 Federal cost (Coast tnal for navigation aids), including $1,055,000 for basic recrett ndm facilities, and $14,700,000 non-Federal costs for lands anu L" ages, relocations, berthing areas, and spoil retention dikes. bib1 interests must also, at time of construction, make cash cont in tion ($400,000) for land enhancement; and pay, contribut ect kind, or repay with interest one-half of separable cost of P. te allocated to recreation, fish and wildlife ($695,000). E gt5h project was adopted by 1965 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 208, - Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map.)bod Local cooperation. Local interests, through a public , legally authorized and financially capable, must give assuranc$ they will furnish lands, easements, and rights-of-way ford to struction and future maintenance of the project and for aiie.t navigation, including spoil-disposal areas designated by the Cads of Engineers; provide necessary spoil retention dikes, bulkhedes. and embankments except as applicable to spoil-disposal areas and ignated as public recreation areas; make utility modifications or relocations required for construction, including new bridgesbOr bridge alterations (except for railroad bridges), and absorbere- increased annual maintenance and operation costs resulting ta from; provide and maintain all necessary berthing areas, ad depth commensurate with project depth, at all terminalsnFort wharves to be served by the deepened channels and, for the Ar of Antioch, provide, maintain, and operate public termin'al an transfer facilities; and in recognition of the local land enhance ment benefits to result from landfill during dredging, contribute United States 4 cents per cubic yard of all spoil material plae during initial construction for modification of Suisun Bay Chta nel Project on areas not developed for public use. Local interest must also give satisfactory assurances, before starting constr ' tion of the affected units, that they will maintain and operate to Federally provided recreation areas and facilities, continue or maintain to adequate standards the levees altered, setback en provided revetment protection, and hold the U.S. Govern.Me free from damages due to deposition of spoil and construction new levees or reconstruction of existing levees. Local interes$ represented by Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County and CALIF., DISTRICT 1459 AND HARBORS-SACRAMENTO, stto-c RIVERS o . .. . -sruction, contribute co n iut $4Okton Port District, must,at time of constructi, pay, contribute in kindct a or 000 in cash for land enhancement; cost of and maintain- proj0 10caredaY with interest one-half of separable o($695,000); and intain at o recreation, fish and wildlife after constructi on a nd in- sta} Oerate basic recreation facilities ex- Suisunarea additional basic facilities required as demationds of n Suisun on modificatio of a* NO work shall be undertaken deepening channel between alnnel project unit, regarding proposed refinery oranuan d defacturinite plans, aotiEl1 dith and a formal assurances and reach definite plansd for cal interests furnish theoint Edith-ChiPken on modsland rachation of in stallation within undertaken oremardifing accessation of S~a 1nel. Also, no work shall be unit, t regarding access chal Joaquin River navigation projec loal interests of furnishrt Antioch. un til of Antioch, plas f Port of Antiochsts. f0r~ 1eis in vicinity and definite 904 assurances and 32, interests.30 have not been requested from local 31, Frand 3cisco Teral assurances 2, P No. f 30, San rev,, mnal facilities. See Part Ports of San Frlameda andcisco adRd 1962, titled respectively: "The Baof , Oakland, inez. Strait, and Alamedaz io edwood " aonCity, Calif."; - n an Pablo "The Ports Pablo By arqui Stockto and n Sac- aond and Ports on San The Ports of Stockton and Sac-tg ar Island Strait, Calif."; and are cons idere adequatre upon eom-xisting corento, Calif." Facilities commerce upon com- Olo.erce and will be adequate for future 0 lot of new terminal facilities. ne C erations and results during ar. None. fiscaloyejmning yeacr. funds have funds have been fiscal aConition at end of DroDriated.. No planning CALIF. 6. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, dation. Rises in east central California and flows westerly Sacra- with N1 orthwesterly about Suisun 340 miles to 48 its confluence at head of Bay, miles, northeast of San tiver PrQ)l. S roDeep water channel in San Joaquin River extends wth in ine Bayat Pittsburg to city of koles . so from itss mouth in Suisun aydedy t Chan- Skton. Waterborne access to city provided by Stockton 2 1/., miles into cut extending from river about Coast and Geodetic Survey Sheet 5527.) a........ artificial Qit' al (See from:e mc xtndn deep •ct water channel to city of toeD iasting" project. Stocktonimprovements from Stockton Chan- el cktOn and minor channel Ferry to facilitate light-draft 4 Pstream for 86 miles to HillsHarbor Act authorized original The 1927 River and e iato. with a depth of 26 feet, which was modified to aoeDWater channel latest modification of project W eet by 1935 authorization, and 19 50 Harbor Act. Before authorized by 1950 River andclannel of 30-foot depth, and ation project provided for a fl of San Joaquin 9 225t Pitos400footbotto .. width, from mouthchannel improve- i about 41 miles to Stockton; herat pitsbrg two passing basins; two settling basins; re- Qc,,,at Stockton; required for channel improvement; dams S t1uction of certain between levees removing overhanging StocktonIT trees and construction of s~lagging, existing turning basin at m90rodification provided for enlarginig 1460 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Stockton; constructing a new turning basin near Rough ad Ready Island; enlarging of upper Stockton Channel; constrctia 30-foot deep Burns Cutoff Channel around Rough and RedY Island, including construction of a combination rail and highvYer bridge; constructing a new settling basin on San Joaquin iRv upstream from its confluence with Stockton Channel; and placing bank protection on face of levee along San Joaquin River belOw Stockton that was critically damaged by traffic-induced . action. Tide and flood conditions prevailing Range in feet Miles from l in -ango 5 Place mouth of ExtreC river Mean Extreme Ordinary good tidall tidal l flood Collinsville................................0 5.8 7.08 Mouth of Stocktoo Channel.................. 40 3.2 4.5 II Moasdale Bridge............................ 56 1.5 2.5 17 Hilla Ferry.................................126 ........................ 12 1 Mean lower low water to mean higher high water. Total cost of new work for project, completed in May 1960 ?.. ....--- Federal Non-Federall t Modification prole' Corps of Coast Required Lands and Engineers Guard cash damages (includ- Total (construction) (construction) contribution ing relocations) Prior to 1950 modifisca. $4,009,938 $80,000 $1,307,500 $1,0412,000 $2,349,500 tion. 1950modification...... 1,823,179 .............. 35,000 135,000 170,000 Total.......... 5,833,117 80,000 1,342,500 1,177,0002,519,500 SExcludes $5865.0 00(Feb local interests costs for Stockton Deep Wat or Chane 1954) ',e terminal facilities required under terms of project authorization. Project units (1950 modification) reclassified and excluded from foregoing project cost: Non-Federal Federal Total t Unit (Corps of Required Lands and projec Engineers) cash damagee (includ. Total contribution ing relocations) ................ .... V 3 00 Settling Basin above head of Burns Cutoffl. $1,073,000 $30,000 $200,000 $230 97,000 Burns Cutoff improvement; new turning 37,882,000 431,000 1,455,000 1,886,000 basin; Upper Stockton Channel enlarge-., ment; dredging Mormon Channel. 4 84 Upper Stockton Channel enlargement .... 535,000 34,000 15,000 49,000 " Inactive: July 1959 price index. Deferred: July 1960 price index For lands and construction. Gh el Deleted by 1965 Flood Control Act authorization of San Francisco Bay to Stockton Sacramento District. Improvement No. 5. Modification of existing project is included as one unit of Francisco Bay to Stockton, Calif., project, authorized by 1 i Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 208, 89th Cong., 1st sess.) ; this o - fication is reported in detail under Sacramento District, Improv DISTRICT 1461 RIVERS AND HARBORS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., et No. 5. With reference to San Joaquin River, only the ade- 0acy of main channel and appurtenant maneuvering areas and in prepara- t largerent of upper Stockton Channel were reviewed 1950 " of 11. Doc. 208 The 1965 act provided for deletion of exist- othorized enlargement of upper Stockton Channel east of t~turning basin at Port of Stockton and for continuance of 26 feet to }ahtenance of this portion of channel to depth of 1965 act also pro- lson Street and 9 feet above that point. The which those portions of existing channel Wies for maintaining 4.5 miles the main channel (between20 feet be- oh0o longer be a part of25.0) to reduced depths of low0 and miles 12.5 and to allow for continued medium draft esean lower low water possible changes in flow pattern Whel traffic and to minimize fish ch could be detrimental to life and recreation use. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents ag14,1876 inrSan Provided cutting sharp bends and making cutoffs dredg- 861881 Joaquin River below mouth of Stocktu.Channel; '1,1888 ing Mormon Channel; qnagging, removing obstructions, River from and constructing wing dams in San Joaquin closing of Stockton Channel to Hills Ferry- and partial Cut, without l894 side channels at Laird Slough and Paradise Sadopting any specific dimensions. H. Doe. 1124, 60th Cong., 2d sess. 25' , A 9-foot channel up to Stockton... ......... o n....."a'o H. Doe. 581, 62d Cong., 2d sees. JM..6,191 Improve Fremont Channel and McLeod Lake at Stockton.. II. Doe. 554, 68th Cong., 2d sess.1 A R2,1927 A 26-foot channel up to Stockton.............. ... S. committee print, 73d Cong., 1st seas. ASR' 3206 The original 30-foot channel up to Stockton............ Rivers and Harbors Committee 1 Doe. The widened 30-foot channel up to Stockton........... 15, 75th Cong., sletsess. l', 1989d Modified navigation proje t to provide construction °ofa H. Do c. 752, 80th Cong., 2d sess.' 1..Y Island; new turning basin adjacent to Rough and ReadyStockton widen existing turning basin at Stockton; enlarge Channel between existing turning basin and Weber Point Rough an construct leveed channel as necessary, around a combination Ready Island, including construction ofa settling basin railroad and highway bridge; dredging Cutoff; elimi- on San Joaquin River above head of BurnsChannel; filling nation of dredging of a portion of Mormon Slough; and of a portion of Mormon Channel and Mormon levee changes and levee protective works below Stockton. l ns in e'~tdlatest published Public Works maps. tration proru, Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. fLocal cooperation Fully complied with for completed on j inactive roject; for details of required deferrdp cash contributions portion com- see Existing and deferred portions of project, ted,, inactive and r- OfTlect paragraph above. prm'na aiiisa facilities. For description of harbor facilities at port hro SStockton, Calif. see Port Series 32, ports of Stockton and t mento, Calif., revised 1962. Downstream from Stockton, rat.c is accommodated by bank landings and sheds except at andtiochtand and near tralsfer near Pittsburg, where there are wharves for shallow- faciities.at•p.bli o deep-draft vessels. Terminal transfer facilities at public 1 ta terminal of port of Stockton are adequate for present and mediate future. OPerations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: in har- bedging shoals in San Joaquin River deep water channel, dredge, Sand mouth Calaveras River, by contract suction ,129 Condition surveys of channel at various locations, plan- 1462 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ning and engineering studies required for maintenance of pro ect by hired labor cost $36,200. Minor snagging and clearingb Y hired labor and rented equipment cost $10,279. Condition at end of fiscal year. Active portion of existllg project was completed in May 1960. Construction of proj was initiated in December 1877.h as Further modifications were authorized and accomplishe follows: Modification Cople Authorized Initiated -1 I 1993 1915 191 9-foot channel up to Stockton.......................................... 1910 194 1914 Improvement of Fremont Channel and MeLeod Lake.................... 1912 1914 1933 26-foot channel up to Stockton... ............................... ... 1927 1930 1948 Dredging Mormon Channel from junction with Stockton deep-water chan- 1927 1948 nel to point near Washington Street Bridge at Stockton. 1940 Original 30-foot channel up to Stockton (included under National Industrial 1937 1938 Recovery Act). 1936 Widened 30-foot channel.................................. 1935 1934 1956 Enlargement of existing turning basin....... .................. 1950 1955 1960 Bank protection below Stockton... .......................... 11950 1957 1 All bank protection under 1950 modification transferred to Port of Stockton for nance. Controlling depths at mean lower low water Section of waterway Depth Periodti (feet) 0nvg - e year. San Joaquin River: From mouth of river in Suisun Bay to mouth of Stockton Channel and up Stock- 30 Entir ton Channel to mouth of Mormon Channel (41 miles). _June' inel. From mouth of Stockton Channel to Mossdale Bridge (16 miles)............... 1. . . . . . . . . . . . 3 April' From Mossdale Bridge to Hills Ferry, head of navigation (70 miles) l 3 Stockton Channel: e year. From mouth to Edison Street (0.75 mile).................................... 22 EntircDo. From Edison Street to Center Street (0.5 mile)............................... 9 1 Mormon Channel: )o. From its mouth to Stockton Channel to Main Street in Stockton (0.9 mile) ..... 9 )o. Main Street to Washington Street in Stockton, head of navigation ............. 6 Do. Fremont Channel and McLeod Lake, arms of Stockton Channel (0.5 mile) (both 9 Do. serve as small craft harbors). 1 Navigation in section above San Jonquin Bridge (Southern Pacific Railroad cr ossing! Mossdale, is impracticable in low stages after June. Cost and financial statement Total o966 Fiscal year ............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Ju ne3U New work: Appropriated...................... $2,685 ....................... ............ ,.n15,833, 1 ,833,1ff !,n Cost.................. - $1 .......... .............. ....................... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... 164,042 447,000 $209,600 $273,264 $280,000 Cost................. 50,880 273,953 491,288 221,746 160,298 1Includes $1,158,348 public work funds, of which $207,198 was for work dlone ai,,, -orc'- channel in Suisun Bay Channel; excludes $19,000 expended for engineering for inactis sfor of 1950 modification. Excludes $1,343,750 required contributed funds, of which $1,342,500 new work and $1,250 for maintenance. 7. STOCKTON AND MORMON CHANNELS (DIVERTING CANAL)' CALIF. Location. An artificial cut about 3 miles east of StOckt Calif., which extends from Mormon Slough northwesterly abtl near not- Channel 41/2 miles to intersect original Calaveras River RIVERS AND HARBORS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1463 St corner of city of Stockton. (See Geological Survey sheet, ockton quadrangle.) xZisting project. Provides for diverting waters of Mormon OUgh before reaching Mormon and Stockton Channels for pur- Dose of preventing debris deposits in navigable portions of Stock- to and Mormon Channels. Results were obtained by construc- . of: (a) A diversion dam across Mormon Slough; (b) a to north bVerting canal 150 feet wide, extending 4.63 miles River River; (c) enlargement of Calaveras to anch of Calaveras to its mouth at cross sectional area of 1,550 square feet, thence .a Joaquin River, 5 miles; and (d) a levee along left banks of 'lVerting canal and Calaveras River, using material excavated lor channel enlargement. Total cost of new work, completed in 923, Was $283,851, of which $253,151 was Federal cost and $30,- . (Dec. 1898) non-Federal cost for rights-of-way required for Iverting canal. Improvement No. 24, Mormon Slough, Cala- eras River, Calif., was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. 1iice local interests stated they would maintain diverting canal a d lower Calaveras River after completion of project, Federal Maintenance of existing Stockton and Mormon Channels project iverting canal) for navigation will be discontinued upon com- Pletion of Mormon Slough project. Existing project was author- Red by 1902 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 152, 55th Cong., 3d sand Annual Report for 1899, p. 3188). Latest published lap is in House Document 256, 63d Congress, 1st session. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. yVerminal facilities. See report on improvement No. 6, San Oaquin River, Calif. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Mi- O10condition inspections and engineering studies were accom- lished by hired labor. Snagging and clearing was accomplished bY hired labor and rented equipment. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of new work a'sinitiated in November 1908; under this initial construction Dhase, work along Calaveras River section was completed in October 1909, and canal section of diverting canal in September S910. During fiscal years 1922 and 1923 additional new work as accomplished in Calaveras River section to complete project. Canal is empty most of the year, but at times of extreme flood there is a depth of about 12 feet, and at ordinary flood a depth of about 10 feet. _ _Cost and financial statement ea Year............... 1962 163 164196 Total to a1063 164 1965 1960 June 10, 1966 rk: Propriated......... t ................... .253,151 ...... $253 151 nance: ApPropriated.......... $5,692 $8,000 $2,500 $2,342 $7,000 214,155 Cost...n. ......... .. 3,253 2,719 3,271 4,202 5,222 212,377 8. SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CALIF. Location. Suisun Bay is about 30 miles northeast of San 1464 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ,Which Francisco, Calif., and is an integral part of waterways hil provide access to the Pacific Ocean from inland ports oion fornia. Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers flow to a Junork and empty into Suisun Bay near Collinsville, and New d~f Slough, a distributary of San Joaquin River, leads to headc Suisun Bay at Pittsburg, Calif. City of Sacramento is on sac mento River about 60 miles north of Collinsville; access Ce has been provided by 10-foot shallow-draft channel along r route. Sacramento River deep-water ship channel, completeo8 an operating facility for oceangoing vessels in June 1963, Po vides deep-draft access to Sacramento. (For details see IMPIsat ment No. 4 Sacramento River, Calif.) City of Stockton ison Sit Joaquin River about 40 miles above Pittsburg and access to provided by Stockton deep-water channel. (See Coast and detic Survey Chart 5534.) ort Previous project. For details, see page 1756 of Annual R81P for 1920, page 1562 of Annual Report for 1926, and page 11 of Annual Report for 1938. ee Existing project. A channel 300 feet wide and 30 feet deep through Bulls Head, Point Edith, and Middle Ground Shoal~ d mouth of New York Slough, a distance of about 13 miles, afro channel 250 feet wide and 20 feet deep south of Seal Island .r.A main channel at Point Edith, mile 3, to main channel aga lo Port Chicago, mile 6. All depths refer to mean lower ea water. Tidal range between mean lower low water and higher high water is about 6 feet. Extreme range is act, 9.5 feet. Total Federal cost of new work for existing projblc completed in 1934, exclusive of work accomplished under publC works program as part of San Joaquin River 30-foot project, $142,027. No local interests costs were incurred (for details,.I page 1741 of Annual Report for 1962). Modification of eXisol project is included as one unit of San Francisco Bay to Stoc t Calif., authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act (IL. Doc. 208' der Congress, 1st sess.) ; this modification is reported in detail Un Sacramento District, Improvement No. 5. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documentsl ... Jan. 21, 1927 For a 26-foot channel through the bay.... .......... 68th Cong., 554, H1arbors H. Doe. and 2d Ite o* Comagetee Bulls Head Point Shoal and 20-foot Rivers July 3, 1930 30-foot channel across 23, 71st Cong., 2d sessa. lstss' channel south of Seal Islands............................ Aug.30, 19352 A 30-foot channel through Bulls HIead Point, PointEdith, S. committee print, 73d ConIstockt o and Middle Ground Shoals to mouth of New York Slough. (San Joaquin River an Channel, Calif.). 1Latest published map is in Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 4, 70th Cong., 1stsess* sIncluded in Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. o Terminal facilities. Along channel between western end bay and mouth of New York Slough, there are three wharvj all privately owned. Also, a naval magazine with wharves re warehouses was constructed at Port Chicago, on southern sho (mile 6). These facilities considered adequate for existing co" merce. RIVERS AND HARBORS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1465 SOperations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: En- inleering studies and condition surveys by hired labor. U.S. th1er dredge Davison was utilized in maintenance dredging be- Qeen lower end of Bulls Head Shoal and upper end of Middle round Shoal at cost of $21,817. Ceetondition at end of fiscal year. New work under existing proj- o" Was initiated in June 1930 and completed in 1934; a portion po.lis work was accomplished under public works program. grtioa of existing project authorized before public works pro- aatt-sWas completed in 1931 except for deepening 26-foot channel Bulls Head Point to 30 feet; this portion was subsequently pluded in public works program. Work under public works ograI Iwas accomplished during 1933 and 1934. Channel is avtable all year and provides access to San Francisco Bay and aVgation channels of San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers. feotrolling depth at mean lower low water in main channel is 30 costs rfe,t, and in channel south of Seal Island is 20 feet. Total ,r.Xisting project to June 30, 1966, exclusive of work under ilc works program at a cost of $207,198 as a part of San a quin River 30-foot project, were $2,042,899, of which $142,027 faor new work and $1,900,872 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Total to 1 ............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 ltroe • 2200, co~st .e. ..... $85,843 $130,913 $195,000 $132,609 $188,000 2102,191 ......... 85,870 126,531 195,125 136,866 46,498 1,960,689 uldea $58,901 for new work and $59,817 for maintenance for previous projects. Excludes new work and $5,449 for maintenance expended from required contributed fundsrk Afor or io p 8X-Droject.'" N11eail.eswork accomplished under existing project at a cost of $207,198 Public Works Ad- rtion funds allotted to San Joaquin River, Calif. o 9. SUISUN CHANNEL, CALIF. ocation In Suisun Slough, a tidal inlet with its mouth on a'rthwest side of Suisun Bay, about 7 miles northeast of Benicia navigation is at it 86 miles northeast of San Francisco. Head of (See Coast and G of Suisun, about 13 miles north of mouth. codetic Survey Chart 5534.) w, isting project. A channel 8 feet atdeep at mean lower low ater from Suisun Bay to and in basin city of Suisun, about 13 100est .; channel widths of 200 feet in entrance channel and Sto 125feet in remaining parts of project channel; and a ;0 by 150-foot harbor at Suisun, with an extension for a turn- 111basin 275 feet wide and 600 feet long. Range between mean '-r low water and mean higher high water is about 5 feet 10 feet. ung low-water season, with an extreme range offacilities), otalfirst costs for project (exclusive of terminal completed in 1947, were $254,377, of which $217,677 were Fed- l costs and $36,700 non-Federal costs for lands, damages, and r000e Overall value of terminal facilities was about $250,- 10cations. u0(1960)'. 1466 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following Acts Work authorized Documents June 25, 1910 To secure a channel up to Suisun, 6 feet deep at low water, 11. Doc. 1110, 60th Cong., 2ds5 by dredging and making a cutoff just below the town. Mar. 4, 1913 Pursuant to this act project was modified by Assistant Sec- retary of War to provide dredging a channel 125 feet wide on bottomn and 6 feet deep, mean lower low water, up to and including a harbor 6 feet deep, 150 feet wide, and 1,400 feet long in front of town of Suisun, and removal of rock about 3Y miles below head of navigation. mtto t Aug.26, 1937 Depth of 8 feet with a width of 200 feet in bar channel and Rivers and Harbors CoM contw 100 feet in cutoffs; widen four bends below Suisun; 97, 74th Cong.,2dses. remove ledge rock and extend harbor at Suisun to provide latest published map). a turning basin. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ith Terminal facilities. Three wharves in city of Suisun, WeOf " 11 total of 600 feet of berthing space. There is warehouse spa a 33,500 square feet, and an oil-storage terminal. These are privately owned and operated and considered adequate for ei d commerce. Land has been purchased, financing arranged, il plans prepared for construction of additional public-terW 1 ili facilities at such time as need becomes apparent. Certain af' ties are in use for military purposes. tVI" Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance. d gineering studies and condition surveys were accomplis eed hired labor. Maintenance dredging of project channel bY ire labor and rented suction dredge cost $158,166. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of new wor tWo initiated in March 1912; improvement of channel mOdiicati% authorized in 1937 was initiated in May 1946, and completei June 1947. Channel is navigable all year; head of navigatio eS in city of Suisun, Calif., about 400 feet above Sacramento stre Controlling depth is 8 feet in channel and harbor basin at e lower low water. Cost and financial statement Tots tod Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June3 19 New work: $2171 Appropriated....1........................................... ............ i7 Cost........ ............................................................ 81 Maintenance: 481P701 Appropriated.................... $50,000 $3,400 $11,136 $174,%20 481 Cost.................. $394 369 63,032 11,136 174,320 10. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, fullreport Name of project see Annual oa Report Construction Opera te for- ,aiates 1. . .. . ...................... .. .. .. .. . Feather River, Calif. ................. 151.... . . Suisun Point Channel, Calif.3 4................................1... $191,728 . Maintenance project, channels adequate for commerce.ctAd s Includes $10 for maintenance for previous project. Excludes $6,160 for previous proje $3,840 for existing project for maintenance expended from contributed funds. Completed. 84 SAuthorized by Chief of Engineers, October 22, 1963, under authority of Public Law 68,s ge Congress. Estimated costs (July 1964) to local interests were $12,000 for lands, dama spoil retention dikes. FLOOD CONTROL-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1467 11. BUCHANAN RESERVOIR, CIHOWCHILLA RIVER, CALIF. o cation. On Chowchilla River about 36 miles above its (Outh and about 16 miles northeast of city of Chowchilla, Calif. ee Geological Survey quadrangles for area.) S ist ing project. Provides for construction of a 202-foot high oockfill dam to create a reservoir with gross storage capacity ret eev of 15 ~ gpt flood control, irrigation, recreation, and h150,000 acre-feet for No and wildlife. In conjunction with dam, project plan provides or bout 5 miles of downstream levee and channel construction e Ash Slough to accommodate a project design flow of 5,000 obic feet per second within slough. Operation and maintenance of dant and reservoir will be responsibility of the Federal Govern- isent. Approved cost estimate (July 1966) for existing project $16,220,000, of which $16,000,000 are Federal costs, including co55), 00 for basic recreation facilities, and $220,000 non-Federal osts for lands and damages, including relocations for downstream Wvee and channel improvements. Local interests willFirst contract 'thBureau of Reclamation for irrigation service. costs tj.0 alnnual operation and maintenance costs allocated to irriga- oll function of the project will be repaid to Federal Govern- lent. These costs are estimated at 44.3 percent of joint use first cost and 41 9 percent of joint use annual costs of the years, dam and eservoir. Local interests have also, over a period of ex- eed about $500,000 for construction of low levees and clearing Wnstream channels to provide some local flood protection in 'oject area. This work is inadequate during major floods. 8isting project was adopted by 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 9 8 7th Congress, 2d sess., contains latest published map). CLocal cooperation. California officially adopted project by aPaDter 1203 of statutes of 1963, and by chapter 1438 of those statutes authorized State Reclamation Board to furnish assur- aces that requirements for supplemental channel improvements Will be met. With respect to the dam and reservoir, local in- erests must reimburse the Federal Government the portion of rst cost and annual operation and maintenance costs allocated to rgation functions of the project. These costs are estimated at 44.3 lPercent of the joint-use first cost and 41.9 percent of joint- bse annual costs. Project authorization provides for project to e financially integrated into the Central Valley project of the creau of Reclamation. Representatives of Bureau and Chow- Chilla Water District discussed contractual arrangements to be lade for reimbursement of costs allocated to irrigation functions. ucal interests sponsoring any permanent pool in the reservoir for sh and wildlife or recreation must settle all claims for water S pertaining to establishment and use of a permanent pool r these purposes. With respect to supplemental channel im- rovement work, section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, ll~ies Local interests must also preserve, or restore and there- after maintain, the other channels of Chowchilla River and Ash and Berenda Sloughs, from Buchanan Dam downstream to hOWchilla Canal, at capacities existing in 1960. Negotiations 1468 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 with Chowchilla Water District for repayment of costs allocated to irrigation have been initiated by the Bureau of Reclamation.* Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: ere construction engineering studies and design memoranda wered completed. Plans and specifications were initiated for dar a appurtenances. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planningi about 67 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Totail to Fiscal year................ 1962 1063 1064 1965 1066 June' New work: $584,397 Appropriated.......... ............ ............ $1241397 $180,000 $280000 T 71381 Cost ...................................... 98,150 173,462 299,768 12. CALAVERAS RIVER AND LITTLEJOHN CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, INCLUDING NEW HOGAN AND FARMINGTON RESERVOIRS, CALIF. Location. Streams comprising Calaveras River and LittlejOt Creek groups rise in Sierra Nevada and its foothills, flow wes erly across flatlands, of San Joaquin Valley and empty int. Joaquin River directly, or through various sloughs, in vicinis of Stockton, Calif. Littlejohn Creek is in Calaveras, Stanislau and San Joaquin Counties. The three principal stream SYstetl8 of the group are, from south to north, Lone Tree Creek Little john Creek, and Duck Creek. Calaveras River group is in Galof veras and San Joaquin Counties. The two principal streansar the group are, from south to north, Calaveras River and e3ear Creek. (See Geological Survey Valley Springs quadrangle r New Hogan Reservoir area and Trigo and Bachelor Valley quad rangles for Farmington Reservoir area.) Existing project. Consists of: (a) Farmington Reservoir with a gross storage capacity of 52,000 acre-feet, a diversi5o channel from Duck Creek to Littlejohn Creek, two dikes acros downstream channels leading from Duck Creek to Morn Slough, and enlargement of downstream Littlejohn Creek Chan nels for exclusive purpose of flood control. Reservoir is formed by an earthfill dam with a maximum height of about 60 feet ad about 7,800 feet long; it is on Littlejohn Creek 31/2 miles upstream from Farmington and about 18 miles easterly of Stockton, Caf Outlet works are in right abutment and consist of two rectdo lar concrete conduits, each 6 by 9 feet, controlled by slide ga and a stilling basin. A concrete broadcrested weir -b00 95 feet long, in right abutment, serves as spillway. DJuc Creek diversion, about 1 mile east of Farmington, co prises an earth dike across Duck Creek with two pipe outletS, el concrete overflow weir adjacent thereto, and a diversion channel about 5,014 feet long with a capacity of 2,000 cubic feet per second to Littlejohn Creek. The two dikes across downstrea channels are earthfill construction and about 3 and miles, respectively, west of Farmington. Littlejohn Creek down' FLOOD CONTROL---SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1469 treaT channel improvement comprises an enlarged and improved Channel from near Farmington to French Camp. Total first osts (July 1955 price level) for project were $3,995,684, of ifch $3,676,384 were Federal and $319,300 non-Federal o lands and damages including relocations. a(b) New Hogan Reservoir has a gross capacity of 325,000 ocre-feet on Calaveras River for flood control, irrigation, and oaer related conservation purposes. Dam is a combination rock abd earthiil structure with maximum height of 210 feet and Wiout 1960 feet long, together with four rolled-earthfill dikes oftha f combined length of about 1,355 feet and maximum height 18 feet. A gated spillway is about 600 feet south of left northeast of stutlrent of dam. Improvement is about 28 miles Hogan Dam, OnCalif., and downstream from OWhichkt present small c .asowned and operated by city of Stockton for partial Dood protection of that city. Operation and maintenance of SOject will be responsibility of the Federal Government. Initial SOrth Shore recreation area is complete. Recreation boating blaZards caused by small Hogan Dam were minimized by placing ys and marking at restricted area. At minimum pool the old "Will extend 47 feet above water surface, and at gross pool it ll be about 80 feet below water surface. Approved estimated Y 1966) Federal costs for existing project are $16 million, clu1ding $453,000 for basic recreational facilities. Local inter- ets aust pay ortion of first cost and annual operation and main- 1 ance costs allocated to conservation functions of project. ese costs are estimated at 36.2 percent of first cost aid 1~ 38 percent of annual costs. In addition, local interests con- $5bted land, the (July 1964) market value of which was 56,000. 0 Approved estimated Federal cost for additional rec- eational facilities, to be funded from Code 710 appropriations, S$550,000. Levee and channel improvement of Bear Creek, San Joa- .(c) for construction of about 41 miles of low and 24provides e County, levees miles of channel improvement for flood control rloses. Project extends from about 2 miles south of town of Aockeford Calif.,nnalong Bear Creek to Disappointment Slough, 28.lta channel which connects with San Joaquin River at mile of 5 This construction will provide a channel with a capacity A'5,500 cubic feet per second, with 3 feet of levee freeboard. estimated (July 1966) costs for existing project are DPrJoved 6,340 000, of which $3,170,000 are Federal, including re- oftbrsement to local interests of one-half of excess local interest o o nds, rights-of-way and relocations over estimated Fed al construction cost in accordance with section 3, Public Law 8,74th Congress. Reimbursement is estimated at $580,000. S1 oFederal costs included in the above amount are $3,170,000, for relocations and lands and damages, exclusive of above Federal eltrbursement. Existing project was adopted by. 1944 latest Flood ,b.trol Act (H. Doc. 545, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains blished map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with for Farmington and Tes Hogan Dams and Reservoirs. Bear Creek, San Joaquin 1470 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 County: Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, aplies' Assurances were accepted by District Engineer June 4, Ai' State Reclamation Board entered into contracts with San JoaUin County and Division of State Highways relative to county bridgl and State highways affected by project. Local interests f nlly complied with requirements for all work under contract, and i. dicated they will be able to fulfill local cooperation requir nital for remaining work. Twenty-seven miles of the proet ac- of 41 miles of levee construction, were t ransferred toand cepted by the State. e Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: NeW Hogan Reservoir, regular funds: Operations included initiatin of miscellaneous minor work in connection with recreation facil ties and continuation of engineering and various minor cleaOP construction work items. Contract for service yard paving r drainage cost $14,390. Purchase and installation of radiere porting precipitation temperature gages $41,813. Bear Cred San Joaquin County: New work: regular funds: Contlee engineering. Contract for third (final) construction unit, levee construction from Iarney Lane upstream to high ground che tinued at a cost of $878,565 ($819,931 Federal and $58,634 other contributed funds). Maintenance: Farmington Reservoir 8 Maintenance and operation activities continued; structures Wer maintained in a serviceable condition. During winter rain bfdc season, maximum flow of Duck Creek diversion was 470 cubic feet per second January 30, 1966. Maximum flow of Littlej h Creek at Farmington was 1,150 cubic feet per second Decernber 31, 1965, all from Farmington Reservoir. Maximum storage00 reservoir was 2,850 acre-feet and peak inflow to reservoir 2,000 cubic feet per second December 30, 1965. New Hogan Reser- voir-Maintenance and operation continued by hired labor, struc tures were maintained in good condition. Runoff of Calaveras River above New Hogan Dam was below normal for the year. Maximum storage of 203,800 acre-feet occurred April 1 1966, Maximum inflow to reservoir was 2,000 cubic feet per second et January 6, 1966. Flood control releases totaled 9,800 acre-feet; maximum release of 1,450 cubic feet per second was considerabt below maximum permissible flood release. During the year abot 71,200 acre-feet of water were released for irrigation and other purposes. Condition at end of fiscal year. Farmington Reservoir: Co struction of Farmington project was initiated in July 1949, ald completed for beneficial flood control operation in 1952. , Creek channel improvement was completed in November 195, and channel improvement on south Littlejohn Creek was cof pleted in May 1955. There are no recreation facilities or publiC use areas. All work completed. New Hogan Reservoir: Co1o struction was initiated May 1960 and completed for operation use in June 1964. Closure of main dam was initiated May 24 an completed November 27, 1963. Work remaining includes con, pletion of minor work on miscellaneous hydrologic and coruntn cation facilities; and provision of radio-reporting precipitti temperature gages. Additional recreation facilities are to be FLOOD CONTROL--SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1471 Drovided from Code 710 appropriations. Bear Creek, San Oaquin County: Construction began in June 1963 and is 81 cercent complete. Contract work for first and second units are c aPlete. ork remaining is completion of contract work for Ird and final unit. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to al Year . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Work- ....... New $1,203,150 1$22,523,471 $2,278,000 $2,000,000 P~opriated.......... $5,281,400 $3,450,543 4t2. 2,339,343 971,212 122,095,069 A 13000 0 )opriated.......... 14,000 36,800 127,075 157,900 420,425 13,0660 12,83 32,564 131,152 153,257 414,327 Project. $48,000 Code 710 for recreation facilities at New Hogan Reservoir I CONTRIBUTED FUNDS, OTHER Total to alYear .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 : S Work $320,000 $3,.000. ..... $871,056 0 o1ributed ....................... cs................. ............ 103,832 316,330 $29421 . $617128 859,366 - Jo iscellaneous construction under loc al cooperati on requi rements-primarily Bear Creek, 'oeaqui1 County; includes $108,056 as relatcd to Duck and Littlejohn Creeks channel im- eAts as part of Farmington Reservoir project unit. 13. CAMANCHE RESERVOIR, CALIF. tLocation. is Dam -on Mokelumne River, about 50 miles up- eaCnof its its mouth mouth andabu . and about 20 miles northeast .• of Stockton. ,e Geological Survey topographic maps of area.) b,.Eisting project. Federal participation consists of a contri- tIon toward first cost of reservoir, in an amount commensu- iate With flood control benefits to be attained. Project construc- SWas accomplished by East Bay Municipal Utility District. of deral contribution is based on provision of a maximum operation, ,0000acre-feet of reservoir storage for flood control glerally during winter months. Reservoir is a multiple-pur- os0e Storage reservoir for flood control and water supply. Im- groveMent comprises a 171-foot high-zoned earth- and gravel-fill a, creat ing a reservoir with a gross storage capacity of 431,500 erefeet. estimated (July 1966) cost is $32,920,000, .Approved hich $9,480,000 is Federal contribution toward flood control, eXlusiveof $120,000 incidental Federal costs, and $23,320,000 -o'-Federalcost for construction. Amount is based on cost- lcat'on report approved by President of the United States on arch 9 1962. House Document 436, 87th Congress, 2d session, stablished Federal contribution at 28.9 percent of actual con- Sretioncost, but not to exceed $14 million, excluding Federal ts for engineering, administration of funds, and interest on e.eral expenditure during construction period. Federal contri- authorized by 1960 Flood Control Act. 1011on Local cooperation. In consideration for a Federal contribu- 1472 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 tion toward first costs of construction, a formal contract per- taining to flood control operation of project based upon Hlouse Document 436, 87th Congress, 2d session, was consummated witd East Bay Municipal Utility District on March 19, 1962, and approved by Secretary of the Army April 19, 1962. An agree- ment dated January 3, 1961, between Utility District and State Department of Fish and Game relative to mitigation of damage to fish and wildlife was made a part of above formal contract Utility District contracted with Amador and Calaveras Counts for upstream water rights. Except for final settlement for land acquisition, the Camanche project was completed in APril 1964 and the reservoir is in operation. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Eng1 neering continued. Federal contributions of $11,465 and $38,'5 toward flood control benefits were made to the Utility District September 28, 1965, and June 28, 1966, respectively. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of main dale was initiated in fiscal year 1963; dam closure was completed November 1963; main dam was completed in April 1964. EX cept for final settlement for land acquisition, Utility District has completed project. As of June 30, 1966, Federal contributi01 toward flood control benefits to be attained was $9,394,000. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year ............... 1962 1963 1961 1065 1966 June 30 196 New work: $9 520 00 Appropriated................ ......... $3,100,000 ... $3,270,000 $3,150,000 631 3,095,747 3,152,575 3,209,119 $56,090 9 Cost................... 14. DUCK CREEK, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, CALIF. Location. Small tributary of San Joaquin River south of citd of Stockton, Calif., between Calaveras River-Mormon Slough and Littlejohn Creek. (See Geological Survey Manteca and Stockton' quadrangles.) Existing project. Provides for intermittent channel enlarge ment of Duck Creek from existing diversion dam near FarmidnP ton to French Camp Slough and raising earth section of existil diversion dam 3.5 feet with extension to high ground; to 9t channel distance from dam to French Camp Slough is 20.5 miles' Estimated (July 1966) cost for project is $1,320,000, of which $660,000 is Federal cost including $210,000 reimbursement t to local interests for 50 percent of land costs in excess of constru c tion costs.This reimbursement is in accordance with proVisions of section 3, 1936 Flood Control Act. Net non-Federal costs 1 cluded in the above amount are $660,000, exclusive of Federal reimbursement of $210,000 for lands and damages including re- locations (exclusive of railroad facilities). Existing project aP proved by Chief of Engineers, December 12, 1961, under prov"1 sions of section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands ad rights-of-way, and make necessary relocations and modificationS FLOOD CONTROL--SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1473 SStructures and utilities (with exception of railroad bridges), Sbject to reimbursement by United States of one-half of excess ai such rights-.of-way costs over construction costs, and maintain ed operate project works and channel, including prevention of o croachments on project channels by unauthorized construction o bridges, road crossings, dams, or other obstructions. Formal surances, furnished by Board of Supervisors of San Joaquin aouty Fdlood Control and Water Conservation District, were "Cepted by Sacramento District Engineer March 18, 1963. All Sgts-of-way required for construction of project have been corlished. San Joaquin County contracted for design and Ctastruction of new bridges required. A portion of local in- erests construction will be accomplished concurrently with Fed- were con- tral construction and under the same contract; funds ibuted to the United States by local interests to defray all costs curred for the county's work.a Qoaerations and results during fiscal year. Major construction eohtract was completed in June 1966; fiscal year contract costs ere $514,337, of which $395,637 were Federal costs and $118,- non-Federal. toward coond'ition at end of fiscal year. Minor cleanup work ilPetion of project remains; project is scheduled for completion all of 1966. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS x OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS SYear ... $2000.$28 Ppobuted........... 1963 1964 .. .. 1965 $140,.25,000 $125,000 1966 June 30, 1966 Total to NeynWorkq a f r ....... ....... ............ $125,000 125,000 ................ ........... cotfil dam o re. d r o ir w....i i tacrests under local cooperati requirements In connection with acquisition of rignts. on "' and u.ility alterations. O,.cElxiost 15. HIDDEN ,',T prodject.gnProvid cn RESERVOIR, egneing FRESNO frcntuton es RIVER, CALIF. of a1fotpe highes Location on Fresno River about 50 miles above its mouth Geological d about1i miles northeast of Madera, Calif. accn(Seecanelxpens tVey quadrangles ovde fo atruto for area.) ad anmieerin dontea servete lhd eroisting project. Provides for construction of a 163-foo t high dam to create a reservoir with gross storage capacity of , tihfell O0 acre-feet for flood control, irrigation, recreation and rOe . Purposes. In conjunction with the dam the project plan v des for about 7 miles of downstream levee and channel im- Co)Ve raelts on Fresno River from Fresno Riverflow by-pass to .'V.Wchilla Canal to accommodate Operation project and design maintenance of of 5,000 dam and Cbic feet per second. 1474 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 reservoir would be responsibility of Federal Government. AP proved estimated (July 1966) cost for existing project is $17,6600 000, of which $17,400,000 are Federal costs, including $590,000r for basic recreation facilities, and $260,000 non-Federal costs fe lands and damages including relocations for downstream levee and channel improvements. Local interests will contract Vith Bureau of Reclamation for irrigation service. First cost and a nual operation and maintenance costs allocated to irrigation furC tion of the project will be repaid to Federal Government. These costs are estimated at 21.2 percent of first cost and 12.1 perCent of annual costs of dam and reservoir. Local interests have als, over a period of years, expended about $300,000 for construciol of low levees and clearing downstream channels to provide sod- local flood protection in the project area. This work is ina6de quate during major floods. Existing project was adopted by 1962 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. 37, 87th Cong., 1st sess., contains la published map). Local cooperation. California officially adopted project o chapter 1202 of statures of 1963, and by chapter 1438 of those statutes authorized State Reclamation Board to furnish assur ances that requirements for supplemental channel improvem~nt will be met. With respect to the dam and reservoir local inte. ests must reimburse the Federal Government the portion of flrst cost and annual operation and maintenance costs allocated to irrigation function of project. These costs are estimated at 212 percent of the first cost and 12.1 percent of annual costs. Froect authorization provides for project to be financially integrated in"t the Central Valley project of the Bureau of Reclamation. JeP resentatives of Bureau and Madera Irrigation District discuss contractual arrangements to be made for reimbursement of cose allocated to irrigation. Local interests sponsoring any permane t pool in the reservoir for fish and wildlife or recreation must settle all claims for water rights pertaining to establishment and use O a permanent pool for these purposes. With respect to supple mental channel improvement work, section 3,Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies; relocations include relocation of hiV way facilities and utilities. Local interests must also preserve or restore and thereafter maintain, the Fresno River chanel from Hidden Reservoir downstream to the authorized channel work at the capacities prevailing in 1959. Negotiations With Madera Irrigation District for repayment of costs allocated to ir rigation have been initiated by the Bureau of Reclamation. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Free construction engineering studies and design memoranda were completed. Plans and specifications were initiated for damn and appurtenances and administration building. Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is about 72 percent complete. FLOOD CONTROL---SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1475 Cost and financial statement yeTotal ieal to .1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NwOWWork.- A ropriated..... ........................ $107,900 $270,052 $333,500 $711,452 S ......................... ............ 91,891 246,805 328,080 666,775 16. ISABELLA RESERVOIR, KERN RIVER, CALIF. Location. About 50 miles northeast of city of Bakersfield, ali, near confluence of North and South Forks of Kern River; uiliary dam is about one-half mile east of main dam. (See (olOgical Survey quadrangles of area.) tro isting project. A unit in comprehensive plan for flood con- Sand other related purposes for Sacramento-San Joaquin Ba- S Project consists of a 185-foot-high earthfill structure, an ctated concrete spillway in left abutment with a discharge Capacity of 53,000 cubic feet per second, and a 100-foot-high earthfill auxiliary dam, creating a reservoir with a gross storage tepacity of 570,000 acre-feet, for flood control, irrigation, and ilated purposes. Outlet faciilties for Borel Power Canal are '(eluded in auxiliary dam. Estimated Federal cost for new work cily 1966) is $22,007,000, including $11,600 for recreation fa- 57 ties. Local interests reimbursed the Federal Government $4,- r,000, the portion of first cost allocated to irrigation function of roject. Local interests must reimburse the Federal Govern- p.t 21.7 percent of annual operation and maintenance costs for Q0gation service, and in addition, must reimburse the Federal overnment for headwater benefits to downstream powerplants. 1 eilated Federal cost of recreational facilities for Isabella 00 ervoir, to be funded from Code 710 appropriations is $2,625,- P (July 1966), exclusive of recreational facilities previously da1ded by regular funds above. Operation and maintenance of It and reservoir is Federal responsibility. Existing project adopted 2 s ess., by 1944 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 513, 78th Cong., contains latest published map). chcal cooperation. California officially adopted project by Pfaiter 1514 of Statutes of 1945, State of California. Local I.erests represented by North Kern, Buena Vista, and Tulare ake IBasin Water Storage Districts and La Hacienda Water Dotrict were required to reimburse the Federal Government the Dltion of first cost and annual operation and maintenance costs oocated to irrigation functions of project. These costs based 04 a cost allocation study completed in December 1955, are r '73,000 of first cost and 21.7 percent of annual operation and 1956 through 1964, an interim coathtenance Celitract of years For the costs. Bureau between Reclamation and local water users DrOVided for storage and payment of irrigation water. Under 22 9 vi sions of this interim contract, local interests paid $1,936,- te through December 31, 1964. A long-term contract between e IBureau and local water users was executed October 23, 1964. chaance W'ter usersdue on allocated first cost of $4,573,000 was paid by the on March 31, 1965. Kern County assumed admin- 1476 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 istration of recreation and development and maintenance ofPsb- lic use areas at project in accordance with a 25-year licenr February 15, 1955. As a result of former Federal policY Pro hibiting charges for use of basic recreational facilities under Pr vision of existing license, the agreement with Kern County W' revised. Agreement provides for joint operation and develoPd ment by the Corps and Kern County. Permits have been gran t to concessionaires by the county to provide certain services Ilo rendered by the county. Total cost of present recreation facel' ties developed by the county and its concessionaires is aboUt i d million; $235,000 of this was a grant from the California Wild life Conservation Board and about $340,000 is investment by Co f cessionaires. This investment provided partial developmenO 21 recreational sites around the reservoir. Licenses. In accordance with Federal Power Commissi26l Docket No. E-6578, issued April 1, 1963, payment of $377,4 was made to the Federal Government by Pacific Gas and rle34 Co. ($108,352) and Southern California Edison Co. ($269,074) for headwater benefits to downstream existing plants froM bella Dam to cover benefits from April 15, 1954, to December e 1962. Subsequent to 1962, the power companies have if ene- aggregate made annual payments of $44,650 for headwater bene- fits. That amount will be paid each year until changes in operd* tion, development, or costs indicate some modification to beae visable. Cumulative use charges collected by the Federal po 0 Commission and returned to the U.S. Treasury through June 3 1966, amounted to $511,376. ular Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, regUt1r funds: Minor engineering studies by hired labor. Code 1ter funds: Engineering studies relative to revision of maste recreation plan report were continued by hired labor. Construe tion of additional recreation facilities at campground 3 was7 8 com pleted by hired labor and rental equipment at cost of $ ,786 Water supply system and additional restrooms were initiated campgrounds 3, 6, and 7 by contract at cost of $53,080. 3eaif1 tenance: Ordinary maintenance and operation of project, er cluding recreation facilities, was continued. Runoff o River above Isabella Reservoir was below normal for the yesr. Maximum storage occurred July 29, 1965, and amounted to 289 000 acre-feet, of which 281,000 acre-feet was irrigation water and 8,000 acre-feet was stored for recreation. Release of wvter for irrigation use totaled 579,000 acre-feet, of which 368,000 acre-feet, was released through Borel Canal and 211,000 acrefee was released through Kern River outlets.h Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in 1VarC 1948 and project is 99 percent complete. Construction of 'i dam and Borel Canal outlet works and appurtenances ad. auxiliary dam was completed in April 1953. Storage impoudeo ment began December 1952. Project is operating to prov flood protection and irrigation benefits for which it was desiged Items remaining to complete project consist of completion at radio-transmitting snow gages and associated relay stations.fl remote sites at high elevations in watershed (hydrologic facilit FLOOD CONTROL-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1477 reuired for efficient operation of project during snowmelt peri- 71)i Additional recreation facilities are to be provided by Code funds. Cost and financial statement Pical Year.Total to Sal ear1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Junie 30, 1966 NwWork. 5 11 $143,979 $169,957 $253,851 1$22,520,818 a e........... 00,prsteri 222,450,612 ... 18,62$2 136,237 3,074 226,588 194,996 4 teo** ........... ACo.a ated...........83000 87,000 177,000 295,824 1304,923 1,451,461 1,416,125 .......... 90,532 89,231 172,035 267,824 302,958 Icludes $519,902 Code 710 funds for recreation facilities. des $481,087 Code 710 funds for recreation facilities. 17. KAWEAH AND TULE RIVERS, INCLUDING TERMINUS AND SUCCESS RESERVOIRS, CALIF. Location. Terminus Reservoir is on Kaweah River about miles east of Visalia, Calif. Success Reservoir is on Tule River about 5 miles east of Porterville, Calif. (See Geological Survey quadrangles of area.) and rE'Xisting project. Terminus Reservoir: A rolled earthfill Ck shell main dam structure 250 feet high and 2,375 feet long, a1 auxiliary earthfill dam 130 feet high and 870 feet long, and a ung1 1ated spillway in left abutment of dam. Reservoir has a ross storage capacity of 150,000 ace-ee. acre-feet. Spreading facilities pradn o capacity contemplated in authorizing document, comprising a ahPlex system of channels, basins, and other irrigation facilities, ve been constructed by local interests since preparation of vy report. Such spreading development is rolled fully adequate r Project purposes. Success Reservoir: Along, an auxiliary earthfill "ain dam structure 142 feet high and 3,490 feet olled-earthfill dam or dike 40 feet high and 7,650 feet long across razier Valley about 31/ miles northwesterly from main dam, and 0, ungated spillway. Reservoir has a cost gross storage capacity of ,000 acre-feet. Estimated Federal (July 1966) of new Work for Terminus Reservoir is $19,360,000, including $207,000 r facuiilties. In addition, spreading works con- to basic recreation e*l1ated for Terminus Reservoir were constructed by local in- (July 1957) cost of about $750,000. "reSts at an estimated stirnated Federal cost (July 1966) of new work for Success leservoir is $14,228,000, including $193,000 for basic recreation acilities. Local interests must reimburse the Federal Govern- ralnt the portion of first cost and annual operation and mainte- aile costs allocated to conservation functions of project. These osts are estimated at 14.1 percent of first cost and annual costs fot Terminus Reservoir and 9.5 percent for Success Reservoir. I eeral construction of spreading facilities forforegoing Terminus Reser- Volirt is considered inactive and excluded from Federal st estimate. Estimated cost of this project unit (July 1957) S$750,000 for construction. Estimated (July 1966) Federal cost o recreational facilities, to be funded from Code 710 appro- )rations is $793,000 for Terminus Reservoir and $507,000 for 1478 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Success Reservoir. Operation and maintenance of reservoirs is Federal responsibility. Flood Control Act of 1944 authorized existing project and $4,600,000 for initiation and partial accoa" plishment of construction of Success and Terminus Reservoirs. Additional monetary authorization for completion of this coo prehensive plan was provided by Public Law 85-500 (i. Flood Control Committee Doc. 1, 78th Cong., 2d sess., & II. Do. 559 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). ,, formed by Terminus Dam was designated "Lake Kaweah Public Law 87-568. Local cooperation. California officially adopted projects bY Chapter 1514 of Statutes of 1945, State of California. Local interests for Terminus Reservoir are represented by Kwe Delta Water Conservation District. Local interests for Succes Reservoir are considered to be represented by the Vandaler Porterville, and Lower Tule River Irrigation Districts, the Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District, and Pioneer Water Ce.- which represent over 90 percent of irrigated land and Water right holders along Tule River below damsite. Local interests must reimburse the Federal Government the portion of first co g and annual operation and maintenance costs allocated to irri tion functions of projects. These costs are estimated at 14.1 per- cent of first and annual costs for Terminus Reservoir and 9.5 per cent of first and annual costs for Success Reservoir. Loca interests for Terminus Reservoir also stated they will continue operate and maintain spreading works and downstream chanel systems to provide required capacity for disposal of flood waters. Local interests for Success Reservoir also stated they will co"O tinue to maintain downstream channel systems to provide re- quired capacity for disposal of flood waters. Repayment contract between Bureau of Reclamation and local water users for irrig" tion supply from Terminus Reservoir was executed January aI 1965. Negotiations are continuing between the Bureau and loca water users for long-term repayment contracts for conservatlol functions of Success Reservoir. Reservoirs are being opersted for irrigation storage as well as flood control and incidentl recreation use. Tulare County acquired water for recreatiO1. pools at the projects. Local water users are being furnished irr gation supply at Success Reservoir under interim contracts vt the Bureau of Reclamation. Local interests paid the folloNVil total amounts for irrigation services through December 31, 1965 Terminus Reservoir, $213,171 and Success Reservoir, $150,69 Tulare County was granted a 25-year license for planning, devel opment, and management of public recreational areas at Success Reservoir July 10, 1960, and at Terminus Reservoir, June 5, 1961 Basic public-use facilities constructed by Corps at Success Reser voir were transferred to jurisdiction of Tulare County on January 18, 1962; facilities at Terminus were transferred June 20, 1962. As a result of Federal policy prohibiting charges 0for use of basic (gree-* recreational facilities under provisions of existing license agree ments, Tulare County by letter July 17, 1963, gave official notice that effective June 30, 1964, the county would terminate the licenses. Meetings were held with county representatives to diS- FLOOD CONTROL-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1479 uss Possible plans of joint development and operations of recrea- ota'l facilities at the projects. Tulare County letter dated .b ruary 17, 1964, and subsequent discussions with Sacramento lics t r i ct Engineer indicate that the county the would retain the i ese-s for at least another year. To date, county has not iCated any further intent to terminate the licenses. California reeartment of Fish and Game expended funds to improve fishery ofsources of Terminus Reservoir. Tulare County, by expenditure de County funds and by a lease to a concessionaire, has partially c veloped five recreational sites around the reservoir. Estimated Cost of facilities installed by the county is $53,000. California rejpartnent of Fish and Game expended funds to improve fishery OesOurces of Success Reservoir, and, in conjunction with Tulare Urtslnan's Council, developed area 8 to provide habitat for fJand game birds. County of Tulare, by expenditure of county a0ds, by leases to concessionaires, and with assistance from 41li ornia Department of Fish and Game and Tulare Sport- nan s Council, has partially developed six areas, some of which f ee Provided with temporary facilities. Estimated cost of these lities is $307,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: a erinus Reservoir, regular funds: Continuation of engineering tio ~ scellaneous minor construction in connection with recrea- re acilities by hired labor. Purchase and installation of radio- 9 1porting precipitation and temperature gage by hired labor $14,- *1 Code 710 funds: Continued engineering and miscellaneous tiesor Work by hired labor. Initiated additional recreation facili- co's at recreation area 3 by hired labor and rental equipment at tio of $16,794. Success Reservoir, regular funds: Continua- lab o engineering and miscellaneous minor construction by hired tbor . Code 710 funds: Recreation improvements and addi- $al facilities initiated at areas 3 and 4 by contract at costs of )137 and $16,109, respectively. Maintenance: Terminus eservoir: Ordinary maintenance and operation of project, in- abuding recreation facilities, continued. Runoff of Kaweah River oVe Terminus Reservoir was below normal for the year. Maxi- reservoir occurred July 1, 1965, and was 121,300 ae"' of in storage Wcrefeet, which 116,700 was irrigation water. Release of tW er for irrigation use totaled 393,000 acre-feet. No flood con- 'l releases were made. Success Reservoir: Ordinary mainte- catice and operation of project, including recreation facilities, ti tinued Structures were maintained in a serviceable condi- ron. Runoff of Tule River above Success Reservoir was below oirmaal for the year. Maximum storage in reservoir occurred wcly .7, 1965, and was 65,800 acre-feet, of which 59,000 acre-feet 9 Irrigation water. Release of water for irrigation use was 1,500 acre-feet, of which 5,025 acre-feet were released to Pio- eer Ditch. No flood control releases were made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Terminus Reservoir: Con- s ruction of project began in July 1957 and overall project ,a ) Percent complete. Construction of main dam and appurte- ,ances, initiated in February 1959, was completed in June 1962. a1 has been operating since November 1961 to provide flood 1480 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 protection for which it was designed; conservation impoundiment was commenced May 1962. Appurtenances are in good coio tion. Items remaining to complete project consist of completi l of installation of precipitation temperature stations. Additioal recreation facilities are to be provided by Code 710 funds. sc6 cess Reservoir: Construction of project began in November 1956 and overall project is 99 percent complete. Construction of Iq dam and appurtenances, initiated in October 1958, was complet'd in May 1961. Dam has been operating since October 1960 to provide flood protection for which it was designed; conservatio impoundment was commenced March 1962. Item remainingt complete project is final settlement for one tract of land uP.8l decision of pending court case. Additional recreation facuiilties are to be provided by Code 710 funds. Cost and financial statement to Total Fiscal year................ 1963 1064 1965 1966 June New work: 33 1 789 Appropriated.......... $2,898,000-$114,000 $260,000 $146,000 $255,000 3g328,068 Cost.................. 3,493,761 245,035 357,382 127,101 196,755 , , Maintenance: .120476 71,300 Appropriated.......... 155,000 157,500 161,575 175,100 720217 Cost................. 67,494 153,204 160,536 163,841 175,1421 1 Includes Code 710 funds for recreation facilities: $150,000 for Success and $196,000 Terminus.64for 2 Includes Code 710 funds for recreation facilities: $123,559 for Success and $98,64 r Terminus. 18. LAKEPORT RESERVOIR, SCOTTS CREEK, CALIF. Location. On Scotts Creek about 2 miles west of city of Lake- port, Calif. (See Geological Survey quadrangles for area.) Existing project. Provides for construction of a 142-foot hilg earthfill dam to create a reservoir with gross storage capacity a 55,000 acre-feet for flood control, municipal water supply, irriga tion, general recreation, and fish and wildlife. In conjunctiol with dam, project plan provides for about 7 miles of downstreaO levee and channel improvements on Scotts Creek below Sco Valley in Lake County to accommodate a project design floof 4,000 cubic feet per second in this reach. Operation and mat nance of dam and reservoir will be Federal responsibility. AP" proved cost estimate (July 1966) for existing project is $10,5 000, of which $10,200,000 are Federal costs, including $480,000 for basic recreation facilities, and $300,000 non-Federal costs lands and damages, including relocations for downstream levee and channel improvements. Existing project was adopted by 1965 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 259, 89th Cong., 1st sess., col. tains latest published map). Local cooperation. With respect to the dam and reservoir, local interests, represented by Lake County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, must reimburse the Federal Goverw ment the portion of first cost and annual operation, maintenanes and replacement costs allocated to municipal water supply (2 percent of first cost and 21.7 percent of annual costs) and irriga FLOOD CONTROL---SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1481 ion (16.6 percent of first cost and 8.3 percent of annual costs); feeay contribute in kind, or repay (which may be through user toees) with interest one-half of separable cost of project allocated SI'ecreation and fish and wildlife; and bear all costs of operation, faaintenance, and replacement alities. Before construction, of recreation and fish and wildlife local interests must agree to make iecessary arrangements for repayment of that part of construc- S.cost and annual operation and maintenance costs allocated to wallicipal water supply and irrigation and settle all claims for a er rights, including claims pertaining to establishment of Wrernanent pool for fish and wildlife or general recreation. 8,1 respect to supplemental channel improvement work, section ).ood Control Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Local interests 'tlust also preserve, or restore and thereafter maintain, the other fl arnels of Scotts Creek from the dam downstream to its con- uelce• with Middle Creek, at capacities existing in 1963. Formal assurances have not been requested from local interests. Operation and results during fiscal year. None. C ondition at end of fiscal year. Planning funds have not been tropriated. 19 LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, INCLUDING TUOLUMNE AND STANISLAUS RIVERS, CALIF. 4 Location. (a) New Melones Reservoir: (See Improvement 0. 34). (b) Tuolumne River Basin: Cherry Valley Reservoir O Cherry Creek in upper Tuolumne River watershed, about miles above junction with Tuolumne River, in northwest cor- er of Yosemite National Park, Calif. New Don Pedro Reservoir ,o1 Tuolumne River, a tributary of San Joaquin River, in llunne County, Calif., about 32 miles east of city of Modesto. (o Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries: On lower reaches San Joaquin River and of Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers. 'ee Geological Survey quadrangles of area.) b3xisting project. Tuolumne River Basin: A Federal contri- bution for flood protection to be afforded by local interests con- truCtion and operation of Cherry Valley and New Don Pedro tieervoirs for municipal water supply, power generation, irriga- , and flood control. Ultimately the flood protection will be ferived from operation for flood control of at least 340,000 acre- eet of storage in New Don Pedro Reservoir. First phase of evelopment by local interests was construction, for municipal Valer supply, power generation, and other purposes, of Cherry alley Reservoir in upper Tuolumne River watershed. Dam is 2composite earth and rock embankment 315 feet high and about 68,000feet 2,500 long, which creates a reservoir with a capacity of acre-feet below spillway crest. Second phase of develop- etwill be construction of New Don Pedro Dam on Tuolumne iver. Improvement will comprise a rock and earthfill dam to Create a reservoir capacity of 2,030,000 acre-feet for purpose of 'lUnicipal water supply, power generation, irrigation, and flood Coftrol. 1482 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Approved estimated (July 1965) costs for existing project Federal cost Non-Federal 1 Total Fcders 50 d Unit Incidental construction Fede deral Contribution costs Total Tuolumne River Basin: $14,235,646 Cherry Valley Dam and Reser- $9,000,000 $235,646 $9,235,616 $5,000,000 voir (completed). 79,959,000 New Don Pedro Dam and Res- 5,464,000 395,000 5,859,000 74,100,000 ervoir. 14,461,000 Total...................... 630,646 15,094,646 79,100,000 Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries: Levee and chanel improvements, for flood control, along San Joaquin River frol mouth of Merced River to San Joaquin Delta near Stockt°d necessary on to insure San Joaquin continued River. Projecteffectiveness was modifiedof channel to permitstoral interests to construct levees and channel improvements upstre , e from Merced River, where required in lieu of acquiring flowr easements. This project is an integral unit of overall plan ,. flood control and other purposes on San Joaquin River and ti taries and supplements flood control storage on reservoir Tuolumneunits and of overall plan Stanislaus invold Rivers an ni existing Friant Reservoir on upper San Joaquin River, by provi ing required channel capacity for regulated flows. Approved cost estimate (July 1966) for existing projec50* $16,450,000, of which $12,200,000 are Federal costs and $4,2 ' 000 non-Federal costs for lands and damages including reloc' tions. Local interests are also constructing levee and chanu d improvement works in area adjacent to river above mouth erce River in lieu of acquisition of flowage easements. Estimated cot of this work (July 1965) is $23,950,000. Left bank levee i Tuolumne River to Merced River reach is considered inactive an excluded from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost of this project unit (July 1960) is $300,000 for construction. Existin project was adopted by 1944 Flood Control Act (II. Flood Control Committee Doe. 2, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map) ; as modified by Public Law 327, 84th Congress, and j96 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 453, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). The 194 Flood Control Act authorized $8 million for partial accompli0 ment of project. Further monetary authorizations of $2,50000b $5 million, and $13 million were provided for this project Public Laws 235 and 780 83d Congress, and 85-500, makin' total monetary authorization of $28,500,000 available. Local cooperation. Tuolumne River Basin: In consideraticn of a Federal contribution toward first costs of construction, loca interests must construct, maintain, and operate New Don pedro Reservoir allocating 340,000 acre-feet of storage space there'l FLOOD CONTROL-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1483 for flood control, and operate such flood control reservation as 1rescribed by Secretary of the Army. A contract was negoti- t'ed in 1949 with local interests, comprising city and County of Sa Francisco and Turlock and Modesto Irrigation Districts, ereby they agreed to provide the above flood control storage I New Don Pedro Reservoir when constructed in exchange for ederal contribution. Construction of Cherry Valley Reservoir, and provision of interim flood control storage therein as well as in ~Sting Don Pedro and IHetch Iletchy Reservoirs, provided about Percent of flood control requirements for overall development, aid Federal payments totaling $9 million made to local interests tor this first phase. Second and final phase consists of construe- lolof New Don Pedro Reservoir, operation of the flood control reservation in that reservoir, and cessation of operation of up- Stream reservoirs for flood control. Local interests are pro- ceeding with planning for construction of New Don Pedro Reser- oir; bond issues for project received overwhelming approval of voters in elections held in November 1961 in Modesto, Turlock, a d San Francisco. Federal Power Commission issued a license Or roject March 10 1964. Department of the Interior and California Department of Fish and Game filed a protest in U.S. 0olrt of Appeals on May 18, 1965, against the issuance of license. O VIay 18, 1965, the Court issued an order upholding the con- it ons of the license. On June 22, 1965, the Court denied the application of irrigation districts for a new hearing regarding canditions imposed in license issued. Irrigation districts and lfornia Department of Fish and Game appealed the case to U.S. tDrerne Court, but the Court refused to review it. The irriga- 96 districts approved acceptance of the FPC license May 23, 1966. Under terms of the license, local interests have 1 year in Which to start construction. Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries: Assurances were ecepted by District Engineer January 6, 1956. Local interests lly complied with requirements for all Federal work completed Or under contract. and indicated they will be able to fulfill local cooperation requirements for remaining work as scheduled. t seve miles of the project total of 96 miles of levee construc- lon have been transferred to and accepted by the State. Ex- Penditures by local interests toward fulfillment of these require- lenmts through March 31, 1965, were about $2,879,000. State revised their plan to include a bypass in lieu of improvement of eisting levees along upper river reaches, thereby eliminating i'out 175 miles of levee construction along main San Joaquin 20 tVermilesEntire project State along will18 include construction of about of levees, with major bridges and 7 control Sructures. Work will extend along San Joaquin River from l,0uth of Merced River upstream to about 45 miles below Friant am near Fresno. State and other local interests expended about $18,874,000 as of March 31, 1966, toward above construc- o. Since 1959, State has completed contracts for about 127 oiles of new levees including appurtenant features and 80 miles Of surfacing on existing levees on non-Federal portion of project above mouth of Merced River. Additional contracts were 1484 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 awarded in December 1964 and October 1965 for 45 and 21 miles of levees and appurtenant structures at estimated costs of $3, 600,000 and $1,647,000, respectively. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries-Contract for levee construe tion right and left banks, San Joaquin River, between Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers was continued at fiscal year cost of $1, 143,304, of which $742,066 were Federal and $401,238 contributed funds, other. Contract for levee construction, bank protectiOl channel clearing and spur dikes, San Joaquin River, Old River to Stanislaus River, was initiated at fiscal year cost of $238,310,ds, which $217,385 were Federal and $20,925 contributed fud other. Condition at end of fiscal year. Tuolumne River Basil Cherry Valley Reservoir-initial Federal contributiQn toward construction of reservoir and provision of interim flood con r storage was made in 1950; total contribution to local interests was $9 million. New Don Pedro Reservoir-cost allocation s ies are complete; coordination with local interests on plafnlif activities is being maintained. Initiation of construction is I"' definite. Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries: Constr tion began in July 1956 and project is about 82 percent comPlete Work remaining is completion of construction along San Joaq River, Old River to Stanislaus River reach and along San Joall River, Stanislaus River to Tuolumne River reach. State of Cat fornia construction on non-Federal portion of project above nimouth of Merced River, initiated in fiscal year 1960, is underway. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total t196 New work: 460403 ............. $1,221,000 Appropriated... 1,810,000 438,900 $872,598 $73,000 Cost...............1,115,055 1,697,557 708,742 456,939 1,097,440 1o, 1 Excludes funds applicable to one unit of this basin authorization, which is improvement 34, New Melones Reservoir, Calif., reported under Multiple-Purpose Including Power. OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS I Total t1o6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New Contributed........... work:$ $233,300 ............ $265,000 $200,000 $470000 0 300 S1,74:621 Cost.................. 103,354i$162,548 1 100,253 199,9651 475,414 , 1For miscellaneous engineering and construction (nonproject) at expense of local Int er e under local cooperation requirements in connection with acquisition of rights-of-way forLO San Joaquin River and tributaries-levee and channel improvements. 20. MARTIS CREEK RESERVOIR, MARTIS CREEK, NEV. AND CALIF' Location. Reservoir to be on Martis Creek, a tributary.of i Truckee River, near Truckee, Calif.; intermittent channel Geo- (See provements would be on Truckee River in Reno, Nev. logical Survey quadrangles for areas.) FLOOD CONTROL---SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1485 rIsting project. Provides for construction of a 115-foot high aed-earthfill dam to create a reservoir with gross storage capac- Itof 20,000 acre-feet, for flood control and future municipal and ecdustrial water supply. In conjunction with the dam the proj- ,h Provides for construction by local interests of intermittent h.ael improvements in Reno, Nev., necessary to provide a toecarrying capacity of 14,000 cubic feet per second through see city. Approved cost estimate (July 1966) for existing proj- 1s $4,990,000, of which $4,910,000 are Federal costs and $80,- 00 -v110 add on-Federal costs for channel improvement in Reno, Nev. In abitYon, local interests have, over a period of years, expended SOtt $200,000 for construction of flood control channels within C .. ty'ist of Reno. .. This work is inadequate during major floods. ating project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. o. 435, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). C.aLocal cooperation. Local interests must provide a channel 1jacity of 14,000 cubic feet per second in Truckee River through eio., Nev., including necessary modification and relocations of tSting structures and facilities. Local interests must main- o~ completed channel as required to preserve channel capacity of 14,000 cubic feet per second; establish effective regulations to lefent any encroachment within channel in Reno, and insure that IIrdesor other structures to be built or rebuilt across channel eh eno afford an adequate and unrestricted waterway; maintain Natel 'of Truckee River between Reno and and the California- larvada State line clear of all floatable debris other drift a Re enough to restrict bridge openings in Reno during floods; 44 adequately inform interests affected that project (reservoir .related channel improvements) does not provide protection a1'st maximum floods. Carson-Truckee Water Conservancy srict by resolution December 23, 1959, indicated willingness to ish, or make arrangements to furnish, required assurances. Will of Reno Nev., by resolution January 25, 1960, indicated its te4 ness to cooperate with Conservancy District to fullest ex- o1 Dossible. Formal assurances have not been requested from cal interests. SoPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- co.struction engineering studies and design memoranda were tio bleted. Plans and specifications were initiated for reloca- COndition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is erltially complete. r* ........... 1962 193 1964 1965 ror ............... ......... ............ $93,500 $185,000 at .65,894 ....... 199,218 21. MERCED COUNTY STREAM GROUP, CALIF. ocation. Reservoirs and channel improvements are on Bear, 1486 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 d Burns, Mariposa, and Owens Creeks, in foothills of Sierra Nea about 15 to 20 miles east of city of Merced, Calif. (See od logical Survey Haystack Mountain quadrangle for Burns a) Indian Gulch quadrangle for Bear, Owens, and Mariposa areas )e Existing project. Improvement is a unit in comprehenSiven plan for flood control and other purposes in Sacramrnentosar Joaquin Basins. Project comprises four earthfill dams with re- tarding-type reservoirs and downstream channel improveenti for exclusive purpose of flood control, as follows: (a) Mar posa Dam, gross.storage capacity of 15,000 acre-feet, on 1VIaripos s Creek about 18 miles east of Merced; (b) Owens Dam, r16 storage capacity of 3,600 acre-feet, on Owens Creek abou1 miles east of Merced; (c) Burns Dam, gross I" storage cap'ast of 6,800 acre-feet, on Burns Creek about 13 miles northeas feet Merced; (d) Bear Dam, gross storage capacity of 7,700 acIe on Bear Creek about 16 miles northeast of Merced; and, e) diversion of flow from Black Rascal Creek to Bear Creek bY a 3,000 second-foot capacity canal 1.3 miles long, and diveroot of flow from Owens Creek to Mariposa Creek by a 400 seconl capacity canal 1.6 miles long, east of Merced 4 and 11 69, respectively. (For further detaild see Annual Report ford19,9- p. 1790.) In addition, channel enlargement of a constrietes tion of Miles Creek and restoration of impaired channel caPalocai of Burns, Owens, and Mariposa Creeks was accomplished bY leted interests at their expense. Total first cost for project, comPderal in April 1956, was $3,899,259, of which $2,751,259 were Feand and $1,148,000 non-Federal for lands including relocations'944 channel improvement. Existing project was adopted bY tai Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 473, 78th Congress, 2d sess., cont latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Or- Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: 0 dinary maintenance and operation of the four completed.resero voirs continued. Structures were maintained in a serviceabl condition. Runoff from drainage areas above Merced County stream group reservoirs was about normal for the year. Maximum inflow storage and outflow for projects Maximum Maximum tlo 0(ef.s.) Project inflow storge (c.f.s.) (acre-feet) Burns............................................................... 1,100 170 81 Bear ................................................................ 1,500 27011 Owens..............................................................1 115 61 M ariposa ............................................................ 2,330 1,350 Above outflows were less than channel capacity rates ill the project streams. inted Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiqto March 1948, with construction of Mariposa Dam and Reservois which was completed in November 1948. Construction of W r Dam and Reservoir, initiated in March, was completed in to 1949, and Burns Dam and Reservoir, initiated in July 1949 FLOOD CONTROL-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1487 1"Wleted R in January 1950. Bear Dam and Reservoir, initiated 0 April, was completed in December 1954. Black Rascal and tOens Creek diversion channels and stream-gaging stations were 11a leted in April 1956. Local interests completed channel en- 0 gement and restoration of channel capacities of Miles, Burns, and Mariposa Creeks in 1956 at their expense. Improve- 1ens, Ieit of Bear Creek and Black Rascal Slough, below their conflu- e , n Was deferred pending possible improvements downstream, 04tlde limits of project. Cost and financial statement .. Year Total to 1062 1963 14 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 New Work.- A opriated ................................................... .... $2 751,259 ten ..... . . . . . 2 751,259 2..... prPriated .......... $18,300 $17,000 $15,000 $14,500 $12,877 187,719 .... ....... 18,127 14,027 16,519 16,653 12,877 187,719 oat addition, $66 532 expended for new work from contributed funds, other, for miscellaneous tiyiLtion under 'local cooperation requirements as related to acquisition of rights-of-way and alterations for project. 0 *on22. MERCED RIVER, CALIF. towcation. A tributary of San Joaquin River, northeast of Sof Merced ' Calif." (See Geological Survey topographic maps the maps khe area.) Drrtectio fr zstng project. Federal interest in development is in flood voiecton afforded by multiple-purpose New Exchequer Reser- eas) constructed on Merced River about 23 miles north- . of city of Merced by Merced Irrigation District of Pa"fornia as a part of a three-reservoir multiple-purpose project. eXi Ject provides for enlargement of Exchequer Reservoir from ct tif g 281,000 acre-feet for irrigation and power to 1,026,000 bal'eet for flood control, irrigation, power, and recreation uses. It is on Merced River about 62 river miles above the mouth. eQot Exchequer Dam is rockfill incorporating the former con- ha e structure at its upstream side. Powerplant at dam 4tt installed capacity of 80,000 kilowatts with provision for eaD re enlargement to 125,000 kilowatts. Afterbay dam with Iacity of about 8,750 acre-feet is being provided about 6 miles %Stream. L Recreation facilities will be provided at both New D1.1equer Reservoir and at the afterbay. Afterbay power- i~t will have capacity of 9,000 kilowatts. Federal Government ~co11tributing toward construction costs of New Exchequer Dam fa Reservoir only, exclusive of recreation and power generating Deilities in recognition of flood control accomplishments to be , ided. Ultimate Merced Irrigation District project will in- 16e construction of Bagby Reservoir (415,000 acre-feet) about ( iles upstream from Exchequer Dam and Snelling Reservoir b ),000 acre-feet) about 10 miles downstream from Exchequer 41 and operation of the three reservoirs as a coordinated unit by of New Ex- equer Irrigation ehrced ReservoirDistrict. Floodflows will control to operation control downstream channel 1488 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 capacity (6,000 cubic feet per second) and provide ma mum flood control space of 400,000 acre-feet. Appro 0 cost estimate (July 1966) for existing project is $39 200,000 of which $9,900,000 are Federal costs, comprising $9,700,0ni-0 direct Federal contribution to local interests and $200,000 i'ds dental Federal costs for engineering and administration of funds. Amount is based upon cost allocation studies approved 'Yl President of the United States April 27, 1964. Total Feter contribution is based on 37.6 percent of actual construction COt of New Exchequer Dam and Reservoir, including all necessaryi relocations, but exclusive of cost of power and recreation fa000 ties; however, the Federal contribution is limited to $19,400,000, Non-Federal costs included in the above amount are $29,300ba comprising $16,100,000 for construction of New Exchequer ) and Reservoir exclusive of above Federal contribution he power and recreation facilities and $13,200,000 for Newehii uer afterbay, (McSwain dam) and recreation and power gaet ties. Existing project was adopted by 1960 Flood Control (I. Doc. 322, 88th Cong., 2d sess.).btio Local cooperation. In consideration of a Federal contribuee- toward first cost of New Exchequer Reservoir, a formal afi ment, based upon cost allocation studies approved by thle resih dent of the United States April 27, 1964, was consummated wthe Merced Irrigation District April 28, 1964, and approved bY for Secretary of the Army June 23, 1964. Agreement provides trol operation of New Exchequer Reservoir to provide flood co d benefits upon which monetary contribution is predicated al operation of flood control reservation in accordance with of and regulations prescribed by Secretary of the Army. Iar California adopted the Merced Irrigation District plan. I ~ o w pelod tion District was issued a Federal Power Commission ppr e (Project 2179) for project. State Water Rights Board apPrfor Irrigation District ...... application for water rights necessaryreeve. operation of project by decision D979 in August 1960. A Jre nue bond issue of $130 million was approved by voters if 1964 1961 to finance construction of the project. On July 15,16 the Irrigation District sold first block of bonds in amount ofeve million. Federal Power Commission issued a license effe March 1, 1964 (Project 2179), to Irrigation District for la struction, operation, and maintenance of a single reservoir. of development (New Exchequer Dam and after-bay inclU o recreation as a project feature). Local interests initiated 1'1 construction in June 1964 on access road and clearing, thus c plying with provisions of authorizing act that constructilon ee undertaken within 4 years of enactment. Contract bet, 0f Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the Irrigation District on sa'RleS power was completed June 1964. Main construction contract , rW awarded July 28, 1964. Closure was accomplished and the resi r voir began operating for flood control in April 1966. Resel'r o project is essentially complete and is scheduled for cornpletio early in September 1966. Operations and results during fiscal year. Engineering cold tinued. Federal contribution of $5,275,613 was made to lyler FLOOD CONTROL--SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1489 igation District. District completed closure in April 1966. rim flood control regulations were initiated in April 1966, tel New Exchequer Reservoir. On about April 26, 1966, water S Idated the old dam. Maximum storage of 393,100 acre-feet OCur1red May 31, 1966. tCondition at end of fiscal year. Merced Irrigation District ini- adconstruction in June 1964; closure began in March 1965 _ COmpleted in April 1966. Minor cleanup work remains on terv1oir construction. As of June 30, 1966, total Federal con- ution of $5,450,613, was made to Irrigation District. Cost and financial statement caYr Total to ...1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Nework. . . . .... Ropriated.......................... I........ $18,300 $200,000$5,450,000 $5,668,300 . ...... .......... 17,889 184,839 5,299,316 5,502,044 23. MIDDLE CREEK, CALIF. oaLcation. Project lies north of Clear Lake in Lake County, aliffMiddle Creek is one of the principal tributaries of Clear ae and enters the lake at its northern end. Scott and Clover reeks are tributaries of Middle Creek, draining areas to west L east, respectively. (See Geological Survey quadrangle for ePort area.) 8'isating project. Provides for enlargement of existing levees Sconestruction of additional levees and incidental channel im- troement along lower 7 miles of Middle Creek and along tribu- i y .s t reams; construction of a pumping plant for disposal of 4 eilor drainage; and construction of a diversion channel about ,000 feetwith ttogether with long,two a capacity of 8,000 cubic feet per second, diversion structures, to divert Clover Creek ledflows around town of Upper Lake. Construction includes h.ees with a total length of about 14.5 miles and with an average ofght of 8 feet, 5,100 feet of bank protection, about 8 miles Schannel improvement, for flood control purposes. Approved eot estimate (July 1966) is $3,990,000, of which $2,650,000 are a-ages costs hederal and $1,340,000 non-Federal costs for lands and and relocations. Existing project was authorized by lt4 Flood Control Act map).(H. Doc. 367, 81st Cong., 1st sess., tains latest published LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. cOPerations and results during fiscal year. Stage IV of stage estruction by hired labor and rental equipment cost $108,776. C'cofnendations for stage V of stage construction to be accom- PliShed during summer of 1966 have been approved. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated in scal year 1958; project is about 98 percent complete. Work re- '1ng comprises completion of stage construction for project. 1490 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement I 1963 19641 1965 1966 tal 1o66 Toe year................ 1962 Fiscal $2 61000 New work: Appropriated.......... $556,000 -$112,000 -$10,0 0 $75,000 $125,000 1'53 Cost................ 329,970 89,286 72,646 62,151 136,787 1 Excludes $221,376 other contributed funds. 24. MORMON SLOUGH, CALAVERAS RIVER, CALIF.to Location. A distributary of Calaveras River, heads nearFlow$ of Bellota, about 17 miles east of city of Stockton, Calif. Frei southwesterly to about 4 miles upstream from Stocktonw.eti is diverted into Calaveras River through Stockton Diver) Canal. (See Geological Survey Sheet, Stockton quadranglers Existing project. Provides for improvement of Calaver r River System, between town of Bellota and San Joaquin Riverel flood control purposes. Improvements consist of minor chlarge- enlargement of Mormon Slough below Bellota; channel enh i ment of diverting canal and that reach of Mormon Slough of mediately above diverting canal; levees along north baneaR diverting canal, and along left bank of Calaveras River upsitrof of diverting canal for about one-half mile along both bal tte Mormon Slough from diverting canal upstream to near Creek, and along left bank of Potter Creek; and three draiide pumping plants on right bank of diverting canal. Plan provt of for about 10 miles of new levees, 22 miles of enlargemen of existing levees, 14 miles of channel enlargement, and 4.6 rMiletrol channel clearing. Project will be coordinated with flood coul* operation of New Hogan Reservoir (see Sacramento District provement No. 12). Approved cost estimate (July 1966) 000 $ 840,000, of which $2,420,000 are Federal costs and $2,420,00 non-Federal costs. Local interests also expended about $2g 000 for construction of low levees in intermittent reaches aro Mormon Slough, the diverting canal, and Calaveras River to pr vide some local flood protection. This protection is inade(o during major floods. Improvement was adopted by 1962 Floes Control Act (H. Doc. 576, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains late published map). d Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish lands ion ; rights-of-way, including spoil-disposal areas for construct and make relocations and alterations of roads, bridges, utilitiesce other structures (except railroad facilities). However, Si.o such costs are now estimated to exceed construction cost of prbe ect, Public Law 738, 74th Congress, permits local interests reimbursed for one-half of their excess expenditures over tSt estimated construction cost. In addition, local interests ereate hold the United States free from damages; maintain and ope completed works, including lower Calaveras River; and presc1 and enforce regulations designed to prevent encroachment of Ae type that would impair flood control effectiveness of work. Stees of California officially adopted project by chapter 915 of statue of 1963, and by chapter 1438 of those statutes authorized the FLOOD CONTROL-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1491 state n byt Reclamation Board to furnish required assurances. Board etter dated December 13, 1963, stated that it will furnish re- asred assurances when formally requested to do so. Formal STUrances were requested from the State Reclamation Board in rch 1966. OPel results erations andand during fiscal year. New work: Chan- lprovement levee construction design memorandum was 91 rove d. esCondition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning is sentially complete. Cost and financial statement N1yeal r Total to ......... 1962 1963 1064 1965 1066 June 30,1066 work New Orol)riated .......... ot ............. ........ .......... $46,500 $99,902 $64,100 $210,502 30,354 107,877 71,673 209,904 25. NEW BULLARDS BAR RESERVOIR, CALIF. citLocation. On North Yuba River about 30 miles northeast of for of Marysville, Calif. (See Geological Survey quadrangles 'area.) risting project. Federal interest in development is in flood etectIon to be provided by multiple-purpose New Bullards Bar v ervoir to be constructed in Yuba County by the Yuba County h11er Agency. Project provides for construction of a 645-foot Sto concrete arch type dam to create a reservoir with gross capacity of 930,000 acre-feet for flood control, irrigation, Doo age er generation, general recreation, fish and wildlife, and other P oses. Flood control reservation would be 170,000 acre-feet. clae'lities for generating 330,700 kilowatts of hydropower are in- fred in the improvement. Approved cost estimate (July 1966) P existing project is $164,100,000, of which $13,100,000 are to eral costs, comprising $12,900,000 direct Federal contribution eoeal interests and $200,000 incidental Federal costs for engi- P,and administration of funds. Total Federal contribution Ib5 1ased on 11.5 percent of actual cost of construction of New tards Bar Dam and Reservoir, exclusive of power and recrea- $al facilities. Non-Federal costs included in above amount are .,270,000 for construction of New Bullards Bar Dam and Reser- tiF exclusive of above Federal contribution, power, and recrea- t, facilities. Existing project was adopted by 1965 Flood Con- lq Act (II. Doc. 180, 89th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest pub, m M ). )ed mocalc cooperation. In consideration of a Federal contribution eo1unting to 11.5 percent of the actual cost of construction of tullards Bar Dam and Reservoir, exclusive of power and ot-teation facilities, local interests are to construct, maintain, and Oerate New Bullards Bar Reservoir, allocating 170,000 acre-feet ~ot rage space therein for flood control; and operate such flood -'rol reservation in accordance with rules and regulations pre- 1492 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 scribed by the Secretary of the Army. Contract covering Federl reimbursement to Yuba County Water Agency for flood conWAS benefits upon which monetary contribution is predicatedyuba executed by District Engineer and the Chairman of the vd by County Water Agency on May 9, 1966; contract was approv o the Secretary of the Army May 13, 1966. NegotiatedC ,0 of $142,* struction contract for the project in the amountand Perint yub was executed by Yuba County Water Agency Associates on May 2, 1966.W Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction initiated by local interests in June 1966.n e Condition at end of fiscal year. Appropriations have not be provided for Federal contribution toward flood control benefit 26. OROVILLE RESERVOIR, CALIF. nt Location. Dam is on Feather River, a tributary of Sacrame 0f River in Butte County, Calif., about 4 miles northeast of toW$ee Oroville, and about 70 miles above mouth of Feather River.' Geological Survey topographic maps of area.) - Existing project. Federal participation consists of a co"lnt of tion toward first cost of Oroville Reservoir project, exclus lvo cost of power facilities, in an amount commensurate wit will control benefits to be attained. Construction of improvmenled inundate Bidwell Bar damsite, which dam was proposed as a fs eral flood control project in House Document 367, 81st Cong01r 1st session. In that document the Chief of Engineers re of mended authorization of a reservoir with storage capaCitye 1,200,000 acre-feet at Bidwell Bar site on Feather River or stora at a suitable alternate site. Federal contribution is basede provision of a maximum of 750,000 acre-feet of reservoir stor in space from mid-October to first of April for flood control operatoe of Oroville Reservoir. Oroville Reservoir is a multiple-Purp storage reservoir for municipal and industrial water supp power generation, irrigation, flood control and other purPoth The dam will be a 770 foot high earth and rockfill structure ca a total crest length of 6,850 feet, creating a reservoir with a en pacity of about 3,500,000 acre-feet. Included in improeen, are power-generating facilities of 600,000 kilowatts cap c ive Approved cost estimate (July 1966) is $299,869,000 (excyl of power facilities), of which $66 million is Federal contributo" toward new work, exclusive of $425,000 incidental Federal co tl for engineering and administration of funds in connection lion flood control reservation. Amount is based upon cost-alloca esi studies completed in fiscal year 1961 and approved by the Fprel dent of the United States on January 10, 1962. Total Feot participation is based on 22 percent of actual construction er exclusive of cost of power and recreational facilities; howeveral the Federal cost is limited to $85 million including actual Federia cost for engineering and administration of funds and interest 3/2 percent per annum on actual Federal expenditures droe construction period. Non-Federal cost included in the ab o. project amount is $233,444,000, for construction of dam and rese FLOOD CONTROL--SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1493 Vojr. Existing project was adopted by 1958 Flood Control Act SDoc. 434, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). tolrcalcooperation. In consideration of a Federal contribution taird first cost of Oroville Reservoir, a formal agreement per- al11ng to flood control operations of project, based upon cost- W4~ocation studies completed in fiscal year 1961, was consummated Alth the State on March 8, 1962, and approved by Secretary of i y,April 19, 1962. State legislature appropriated $9 million a.1956 for advance planning on project. Initiation of relo- caoions in May 1957 fulfilled proviso that authority for a Federal 4htribution would expire unless construction of dam and reservoir th^started before July 1962. In November 1960, electorate of f e State approved a $1,750 million bond issue to finance Cali- R Water plan, such funds to be applied principally to Feather awVer Project. Contract for Diversion Tunnel No. 1 was Aardled in August 1961. Main dam contract was awarded in 1ust 1962; embankment operations were initiated January 25, aw First stage of construction of Oroville Dam powerplant was Warded June 1963. During October 1964, dam embankment o co1COmpleted to elevation of 605 feet, which, together with two ofPleted diversion tunnels, will control standard project flood C 4,000 cubic feet per second to 183,000 cubic feet per second. 101 tract for construction of dual-feature spillway was awarded ll J1une 1965. As of March 16, 1966, the State expenditures l" O° cable to flood control were about $215,266,000 for advance t iig relocation of highways and railroad facilities, acquisi- ()f real estate, and construction of the dam and appurtenances. ob.Pebruary 18, 1964, the State sold the first block of general a4tion bonds in amount of $100 million; the bonds will bear 4average interest rate of about 3.52 percent. On May 5, 1964, a State sold the second group of general obligation bonds in 8unt of $50 million; these bonds will bear an interest rate of S3 Percent. On October 7, 1964, the State sold the third group h general obligation bonds in amount of $100 million; these 16lds will bear a net interest rate of 3.58 percent. On February o' 1965, the State sold the fourth group of general obligation o ds in amount of $100 million; these bonds will bear a net inter- b rate of 3.50. On December 1, 1965, the State sold the fifth theck of general obligation bonds in amount of $100 million; lese bonds will bear a net interest rate of 3.717. On June 8, 6,the State sold the sixth block of general obligation bonds in o~1unt of $100 million; these bonds will bear a net interest rate o3.926. OPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- 000ering continued. Additional Federal contribution of $12,760,- ofV as made to the State. State is proceeding with construction O roville Dam as initial project of California Water Plan. t ring February 1966, the halfway point was reached in building abI embankment. (40 million cubic yards of 80 million cubic ars required). Condition at end of fiscal year. State of California began 96o ations in May 1957, initiated main damr contract in January 93, and is continuing construction of the project. Project is 1494 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 about 68 percent complete, including power facilities. As of Jead 30, 1966, total Federal contribution of $39,750,000 has been to the State. Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juoe year................ Fiscal wo:9600 New work: 00 4006900 Appropriated.......... $25,000 $14,000,000 $4,555,000 $8,580,000 $12,830,000 4 06139 Cost................. 30,667 13,993,0134,550,4568,590,19512,825,217 27. PINE FLAT RESERVOIR AND KINGS RIVER, CALIF. Location. Reservoir is on Kings River, about 25 miles ea ver Fresno, Calif., and channel improvements are on Kings 1~es downstream from Lemoore weir, about 25 miles south of (See Geological Survey quadrangles of area.)sive Existing project. Improvement is a unit in comprehefto- plan for flood control and other related purposes for Sacraeoh. San Joaquin Basins. Project consists of a 4 2 9 -foot-high Co crete gravity dam, including a gated overflow section with a"' mum discharge capacity of 391,000 cubic feet per second, creatilorl a reservoir with a gross storage capacity of 1 million acre-fet.. flood control, irrigation, and related purposes. Outlet provieral for future power development are included in dam, but Fe1e construction of power-generating facilities is not authorized. 0t . ... a limited amount provement also includes .5 of channel improvemeS1i1e on Kings River and its distributaries on valley floor about 25 han south of Fresno. Channel improvement work will enlarge nel capacities and regulate flows in lower branches of the oi e River. There are nine public-use and recreation areas. ,tly maintained by the Corps, four by Forest Service, three joilso, by the Corps and concession, and one by Fresno County. the five boat access only areas are maintained by the CorpS 0 south side of reservoir. Approved cost estimate (July 196000 $40,920,000, of which $40,500,000 are Federal (including 1' or for basic recreation facilities) and $420,000 non-Federal rights-of-way for downstream channel improvements. Local o terests must reimburse the Federal Government for the portioted first cost and annual operation and maintenance costs allocae. to irrigation function of project. Under provision of Warr, partment Civil Appropriation Act of 1947, the Secretary ofed ae with the concurrence of the Secretary of Interior, determine to allocation of cost to irrigation should be set at an amount no er exceed $14,250,000. In addition, local interests must pay 37.4 pe cent of annual maintenance, operation and replacement cOst i. dam and reservoir allocated to irrigation function. er* mated Federal cost of recreational facilities for Pine Flat .es voir, to be funded from Code 710 appropriations is $1 millod (July 1966) exclusive of recreation facilities previously Prov.eal atto,0.20t'onoFederal of recreatlO a cost of $11,000. In addition, Federal cost of-r. - A00 facilities for Pine Flat Reservoir, funded from public wOrkS^a celeration, executive, act of 1962 appropriations, was $239,2 FLOOD CONTROL--SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1495 utly 1963), exclusive of recreation facilities provided from regu- dl4roject and Code 710 funds. Operation and maintenance of and reservoir is Federal responsibility. Existing project ca adopted by 1944 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 630, 76th Cong., 38SSess., contains latest published map). LOcal cooperation. Local interests must reimburse the Federal eovernnent for first costs allocated to irrigation functions of Servoir portion of project in accordance with Reclamation Law. ider provision of War Department Civil Appropriations Act of 19tL,the Secretary of War, with concurrence of Secretary of the at erior, determined allocation of cost to irrigation should be set estl, amount not to exceed $14,250,000. In addition, local inter- eYls "lust pay 37.4 percent of annual maintenance, operation, and S Macement costs of dam and reservoir allocated to irrigation eo1. Repayment contracts between Bureau of Reclamation re the local water users for the irrigation use of the reservoir oe re executed December 23, 1963. Bureau is administering the Oetracts in accordance with reclamation law; however, local in- 'ests are testing in court the validity of reclamation law in re- ard to the Pine Flat contracts. With respect to the down- tr'earn channel improvements, section 3, Flood Control Act of gelse 22, 1936, applies. Kings River Conservation District repre- hts local interests; assurances were accepted November 20, 1959. d al interests furnished about 90 percent of rights-of-way to '*.Three concessionaires (one each at Deer Creek, Lombardo's 1ing Village and Trimmer area) provided public use facilities aCcordance with lease agreements with Secretary of the Army. $ 13 ~ ated cost of facilities installed by these concessionaires is 8 2,000. Fresno County developed public-use facilities on an ea acre tract immediately downstream from dam for picnicking, and playground activities, at an estimated QOstfPing, $41swimming, 000 under provisions of a license agreement. Forest earvice operates a picnic area at upper end of reservoir and two D,grounds and a picnic area at sites along reservoir perimeter. al cost of development of these sites is about $36,500. cense. License No. 1988, effective April 1, 1955, was issued thederal Power Commission to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. for theroelectric power development of North Fork Kings River by C ompany upstream from Pine Flat Reservoir. Under interim o1tract No. DA-04-167-engr-1182 with Department of Army, iic Gas and Electric Co. paid for storage of power water in te Flat Reservoir May 15, 1954, through March 31, 1955. Cur- Contract No. DA-04-167-eng-1328 with Department of provides for storage of power water at the rate of 0.1375 pr r acre-foot; the contract covers April 1, 1955, through March 16 2005. Total payment under these contracts through June 30, ])6, amounts to $1,793,216; these funds are paid to Sacramento -trictand deposited for return to the Treasury. fOperations and results during fiscal year. New work, regular d1s: Minor engineering and instrumentation studies by hired cor. Code 710 funds: Construction of additional recreation cilities in Fresno County Park Recreation Area by hired labor 1496 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 196 and rental equipment cost $24,484. Maintenance: Ordinari maintenance and operation of project, including recreation fcoi ties, continued. Structures were maintained in a serviceableCon dition. Runoff of Kings River above Pine Flat Dam was belowed normal for the year. Maximum storage in reservoir occh S July 21, 1965, and amounted to 705,950 acre-feet, all of whit ldW irrigation water. Release of water for irrigation use totaled 1,689,000 acre-feet. iApril Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in n 1947 and project is about 97 percent complete. Constru'ion of main dam was initiated in January 1950 and cornpmlete June 1954. Dam has been operating since February 1954 toprol vide flood protection for which it was designed. Recreatori* facilities for various recreation areas under Code 710 apprle ation, were initiated in fiscal year 1960 and 40 percent comPud* Work remaining consists of installation of gages and com1' cation facilities for operation purposes, provision of channectio provements, and completion of recreation facilities in conne.I with overall development of reservoir area. Radiotransmicie. snow gages and associated relay station are required foreffie operation of the project during snowmelt shed nowbein ftersnowgage by allaThese 9, devlope periods. er effiien will be installed at remote sites at high elevationsi the shed after snow gages now being developed by Walla Walli trict have operated satisfactorily. Engineering and desig 1 also required in connection with above activities. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 Cost............... .. 102,496 235,805 84,667 95,418 42:670 9, 6 Maintenance: 11905818 84,1 Appropriated.......... 162,400 155,600 192,000 203,200 245,200 Cost.................. 189,533 158,761 187,961 201,061 229,631 ' Includes $419,100 Code 710 funds for recreational facilities. Engieeers 2 Includes $239,235 Public Works Acceleration, Executive (Transfer to Corps of Civil) 1963 funds for recreational facilities. Includes $405,555 Code 710 funds for recreational facilities. 28. SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIF., F0IO COLLINSVILLE TO SHASTA DAM F , Location. Rises in Trinity Mountains in north-central Ha fornia, flows generally southerly about 374 miles and empties ' Suisun Bay, an arm of San Francisco Bay at Collinsville, ad Works covered by this improvement are on Sacramento River31 2 . tributaries from Collinsville to Shasta Dam, about rile See Drainage area above Rio Vista is 26,500 square miles .d Geological Survey quadrangles of area for Sacramento River]lck upper Butte Basin; Flournoy and Fruto quadrangles for a3d Butte Reservoir; and Tuscan Buttes, Tehama, Redding,y d Hooker quadrangles for Table Mountain Reservoir.) ti- Existing project. Improvement of Sacramento River and it utaries, from Collinsville to Shasta Dam was authorized as a aUed of a comprehensive plan for flood control and other rela FLOOD CONTROL--SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1497 up108ses in Sacramento River Basin. (a) Sacramento River and l jor and minor tributaries, for flood control purposes: En- it eent of existing levees on Sacramento River between vicin- f of 1Ioulton weir and Ord Bend; construction of new levees st-1 Present levee terminus to vicinity of Chico Landing; con- wetlionof a weir near Chico Landing, extensionButte of Moulton 0 aland construction of a bypass through Upper Basin; esttrucetion of new levees in Lower Butte Basin; enlargement of a 1g levees in Sutter, Tisdale, Sacramento, and Yolo Bypasses; 1' evee construction and/or channel enlargement on following ast r tributaries of Sacramento River: Antelope Creek; Chico 1 IVud Creeks and Sandy Gulch; Butte and Little Chico Creeks; lheolkee Canal; Elder Creek; Deer Creek (Tehama County); t es Creek; and Willow Creek. Improvement provides for abolut 155 miles of channel improvement and about 294 miles of ees 'With an average height of 12 feet and a freeboard of 3 feet. tio~roveent also provides for revetment as required for protec- r $Of bypass levee slopes against erosion. Total first costs for Ot are $18 million (July 1966), of which $11,900,000 are al and $6,100,000 non-Federal for lands and damages, in- g relocations. (b) Construction of about 33,000 feet of Project units r-classifiedand excluded from cost estimate Estimated cost " Current -Unit Federal classification Non-Federall Total Odfication: o UeCreek2......... ..... . Deferred.....$1,400,000 $340,000 $1,740,000 h utte Basi3 ................ Deferred. 7,286,000 2,286,000 9,571,000 (' reek2 .. .................... Deferred.. 1,140,000 140,000 1,280,000 pa ,l eek2 Inactive... 1,200,000 120,000 1,410,000 i vees4 ... Deferred 7,100,000 940,000 8,040,000 4 . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. , ee s : : i:: nactive... 3,010,000 .............. . 3,010,000 rutte Basin2... ................. Deferred.... 3,530,000 1,787,000 5,317,000 laIds and damages, including relocations. 1960 Price level. l1eswork applicable to extension of Moulton weir (July 1954 price level). ie 961 price level. Protection Da. and minor channel improvements as required on QO anento River between Chico Landing and Red Bluff, for flood rolPurposes. Improvement also contemplates flood plain t0Jag between Chico Landing and Keswick Dam to assure main- 0'nce of present project floodway areas. Total first costs for ect Work in Tehama County, completed in March 1964, were 10 6,054 of which $914,054 were Federal costs and $92,000 Q"Federal cost for lands and damages including relocations. Struction in Butte and Glenn Counties is considered inactive slr t excluded from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost of erconstruction (July 1963) is $1,175,000, of which $1,060,000 e Federal and $115,000 non-Federal for lands and damages teeto.ig relocations. (c) Sacramento River, Calif., bank pro- ton- Addition of about 430,000 linear feet of bank erosion con- Works and setback levees at critical locations existing at time 1498 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of report or expected to develop in 10 years, within limits of 01c thorized or existing levees included in Sacramento River tlooO trol project, as initial phase of a long-range progfram to P et integrity of levee system, for flood control purposes. Total are mated (July 1966) first costs for this initial phase of project000 $31,800,000, of which $21,200,000 are Federal (including $50ri for recreation facilities) and $10,600,000 non-Federal comliprisi $8,200,000 for lands and damages includingfirst relocations and ,$- 400,000 required cash contribution toward cost. Constre (c) above supplements program of lev tion in (a), (b), and pursuant to 941 improvements which are being accomplished Flood Control Act, as amended by subsequent acts, inclu.iebris Flood Control Act, and which are reported by California trol Commission under Sacramento River, Calif., flood con r (d) Authorization also provides for Black Butte Reservor156 construction of an earthfill dam, with a maximum heightO 000 feet, to create a reservoir with a gross storage capacity of 1 atio acre-feet for flood control and irrigation and related conservab-ot purposes. Improvement is in Tehama and Glenn Counties boutary 9 miles westerly of Orland, Calif., on Stony Creek, a tr 1966) entering Sacramento River at mile 190. Estimated (Juy55,000 Federal first costs for project are $14,715,000, including paythe for basic recreational facilities. Local interests must paY ance portion of first cost and annual operation and maintehese costs allocated to irrigation functions of the project. tof costs are estimated at 39.9 percent of first cost and 40.2 percectio annual costs. (e) Authorization also provided for contruati, of Table Mountain (Iron Canyon) Reservoir, an earthfill th with a maximum height of 210 feet, to create a reservoir ntrol, gross storage capacity of 503,000 acre-feet, for flood col be water conservation, and power generation. Reservoir wou Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents e Dee. 22, 1944 Modify Sacramento River flood control project to provide H. Doc. 649, 78th Cong., 2ds for extensions in levees and other structures along Sacramento River and major and minor tributaries; construct Black Butte Dam and Reservoir; construct low-level Table Mountain Dam and Reservoir with pow- er facilities; and provision of monetary authorization of $15 million for initiation of modification.ssess May 17,1950 Improvement for protection of Upper Butte Basin (included H. Doe. 367, 81st Cong 1st e full monetary authorization). 2d sess July 3, 1958 Extend existing Sacramento River flood control project H. Doe. 272, 84th Cong., 2d s to Keswick Dam for purposes of zoning area below dam and modification of project by construction of bank protec- tion and incidental channel improvements between Chico Landing and Red Bluff (included full monetary authori- sation). Do. Additional authorization of $17 million for comprehensive plan approved in act of December 22, 1944.ess July 14, 1960 Further modification of Sacramento River flood control S. Doe. 103, 86th Cong., 2d project by construction of initial 10-year phase of bank erosion control works and set-back levees on Sacramento River and authorization 2 of $14,240,000 for prosecution of modification. 1 Contains latest published map. of pro * Extension of bank protection beyond initial phase will require report on advisability o-.A ceeding with additional work and authorization of that work. neral Total monetary authorization available, exclusive of preauthorization studies from gen vestigations appropriations, amounts to $51,800,000. FLOOD CONTROL--SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1499 aeramento River at about mile 250, about 3 miles north of tBit JIf f , in Tehama and Shasta Counties, Calif. This project e as reclassified and is in a deferred status. Estimated Fed- 20o0 cst of this unit including power facility, (July 1954) is $77,- portion of rst 00. Local interests would be required to pay the to co costand annual operation and maintenance costs allocated been ervation functions of the project. These costs have not etrrained. cooperation. (a) Sacramento River and major and C11cal apior tributaries: Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, co91es. Fully complied with for all work completed or under o tract, and local interests indicated they will be able to fulfill tirements for remaining work as scheduled. Levee construe- S (107 miles) on the "active" project has been completed, trans- heh to, and accepted by the State. (b) Sacramento River, le0 Landing to Red Bluff: Section 3, Flood Control Act of bite 2, 1936, applies; local interests must also assume responsi- o ftor flood-plain zoning. Fully complied with for portion to 19eted in Tehama County; completed work was transferred teRjld accepted by the State. Flood plain zoning ordinances were byjeeted by Butte County Board of Supervisors in July 1961 and Wor. lenn County residents in September 1963. Accordingly, orain Butte and Glenn Counties is classified inactive. Flood (c) Cotaraento River, Calif., bank protection: Section 3, also o 1troli Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Local interests must 4 dtribute an amount in cash that, when added to costs of lands ost rghts-of-way and utility modifications, equals one-third of eqt Of each unit of remedial work; this contribution is D clirated (July 1966) at $2,400,000. Local interests fully com- 4id With requirements for all work completed or under contract, er indicated they will be able to fulfill requirements for loal 1 ing work as scheduled. In addition, for reaches where lev interests request bank stabilization in lieu of more feasible o e setbacks, local interests will contribute costs over and above Crs of setbacks, and provide local contribution indicated above. (d) eted units transferred to and accepted by the State. Lo llack Butte Reservoir: None required for construction. Odlinterests must pay the portion of first cost and annual freation and maintenance costs allocated to the conservation S.tions of the project; these costs are estimated at bhe Percent of first cost and 40.2 of annual costs. Contract te een Bureau of Reclamation and State of California for 2,Dayment of costs of irrigation storage was executed March Wit.l 0 ; the Bureau administers the contract in accordance Ner Reclamation Law. (e) Table Mountain (Iron Canyon) q oir: None required for construction. Local interests tes Day the portion of first cost and annual operation and main- tihece costs allocated to conservation functions of project; since te Droject is in a deferred status these costs have not been de- rined. SOPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: (a) aeraIento River and major and minor tributaries-Engineering 1500 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and design continued by hired labor. Contract for modificatio O Chico and Mud Creeks and Sandy Gulch unit cost $139,otheOf which $79,383 were Federal and $60,579 contributed funds,3 0ther Contract for revetment of west levee of Sutter bypass for 27 o feet upstream from Karnak Pumping Station cost $662d2fuds, which $660,008 were Federal costs and $2,219 contribute dfni- other. (b) Sacramento River, Calif., bank protection -ec~-i neering and design, including preparation of plans and specWhic h tions, continued by hired labor at a cost of $325,354,p ofited $242,616 were Federal costs and $82,738 required contru funds. Construction accomplished and contract costs Required Totl Contract Federal contributed Contract No. 4 completion (selected $344,67 1 sites above mile 111) ................ $257,124 $87,547 (mile 63-65) ........................ 816,792 278,104 1, 0 Contract No. 6 initiation (other selected 739,10 sites below mile 60) ................. 551,383 187,737 Contract No. 14 initiation and completion (various sites, Sacramento, Feather, and 601,10 American Rivers and Elder Creek) .... 448,421 152,679 Contract No. 8 initiation, (Sacramento River, miles 143.0-111.0, and 566,730 Feather and Bear Rivers) ............ 422,781 143,949 Contract No. 9 initiation (selected sites: 193,280 Sutter and Miner Sloughs) ........... 144,187 49,093 (c) Black Butte Reservoir, new work: Hired labor or continued on minor real estate activities, miscellaneous ald work in connection with main dam, recreation facilities, - permanent operating equipment. Maintenance: OrdinarY#ies, ation and maintenance of project including recreation fac.ition continued. Structures maintained in serviceable con tear. Runoff above Black Butte Dam was below normal for the y7e Maximum storage of 125,850 acre-feet occurred July 1, 1965.., lease of water for irrigation totaled 257,700 acre-feet. Maxicod inflow to Black Butte Reservoir was 6,534 cubic feet per S~feet on February 4, 1966, and maximum outflow of 4,894 cubiease per second occurred on January 7, 1966. Flood control rele of 109,690 acre-feet caused no damage below Black Butte Dari 9 Condition at end of fiscal year. (a) Major and minor Y 9der taries (active portions) : Construction was initiated in on Deer Creek and Butte Creek units; Cherokee Cana,bee Creek, Chico and Mud Creeks, and Sandy Gulch units havebet completed. Active portion of this improvement is 79 Ppeass complete. Work remaining to complete project includes b hico levee revetment. Completion of (b) Sacramento River, etio Landing to Red Bluff: Active portion of project, bank proted 4 in Tehama County, was initiated in June 1963 and comp.le~s March 1964. Work authorized in Butte and Glenn Counties r, reclassified inactive in October 1963. (c) Sacramento . ted Calif., bank protection: Construction of first unit was 1 in June 1963; project is 33 percent complete. Work remiain FLOOD CONTROL-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1501 aand 1 Plete improvement includes completion of work underway set- bac Provision of additional bank erosion control works and to de- Vel leveesat critical locations now existing or(d)expected Black Butte during authorized construction period. 99 ervoir: Construction began in March 1960 and project is J, Dercent com plete. Construction of main dam was initiated in bere 1960 and substantially completed in June 1963. Dam has tio operating since November 1962 to provide the flood protec- be n f ° r which it was designed. All project lands required have Wen acquired; final settlement of condemnation cases is pending. 144iremaining includes completion of basin hydrologic and conm- eilecation facilities and installation of radio reporting and pre- ation and temperature gages. nand temperature gages. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 962 1963 1064 1965 .......... "Opriated $4300,500 $3,284,000$3,002,200 $3,106,354 $4,243,000 1$30,916,486 3,044,381 130,415,538 "*' 'ie.. 4,021,842 3,471,585 3,605,791 3,155,518 oriated....... ......... 28,000 78 000 927 125, 144,000 375,927 .... 24,339 81,000 126,297 143,098 374,734 ldes $614,608 forTable Mountain (Iron Canyon) Reservoir which has been deferred and for Sacramento River and major and minor tributaries portions which are considered *and deferred. OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS aYer Total to 1062 1963 1064 1065 1066 June 30, 1066 DroPriated .......... $52,000 $10,316 $126,100 -$2,202 $25,104 252,421,828 S . 114,296 ............ 13,879 900,195 88,626 71,284 22,411,888 S ous ellane construction and engineering and design services (nonproject) accomplished at t oht State of California under local cooperation requirements in connection with acquisition t 1101el s 'ofway and utility alterations (primarily for . Sacramento River and major and minor Droject) euo d s. of $789,008 State Highway Commission as payment for use of excess ex- Sfro m Chico and Mud Creeks and Sandy Gulch (Sacramento River and major and lio lrtributaries) for freeway embankment through city of Chico, and Sacramento River, anding to Red Bluff-$25,582. 29. WALNUT CREEK, CALIF. rocption. Project is on Walnut Creek and lower reaches of its 101Pal tributaries, Pacheco, Grayson, San Ramon, and Las ,. Pas Creek in Contra Costa County, Calif. Improvement extend from Suisun Bay to head of project about 1 mile above 1502 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 19(66 southern limits of city of Walnut Creek. City of Walnut Creel( is about 10 miles south of Suisun Bay. (See Geological Survey quadrangles for area.) C. Existing project. Comprises extension of existing levees Cof struction of new levees and concrete channels constructi pumping plants for disposal of interior drainage, channel recon* cation and enlargement, and utilization of improvements jou structed or planned by local interests. Plan provides for drop 14.3 miles of channel improvement, two reinforced-concrete doP structures, one stilling basin, 13.8 miles of levees, 4.2 miles oft e crete channel and one pumping plant. Approved cost estrnad r~land (July 1966) is $30,700,000, of which $20,600,000 are Federl id $10,100,000 non-Federal consisting of $8,450,000 for lands,000 damages and relocations except railroad facilities, and $1,65 required cash contribution for land enhancement benefitsabot vided by the project. Local interests have also expended t1 $2 million for flood control in the project area during the Ps of years, including concrete conduits constructed through cilty1, Walnut Creek by local interests at an estimated cost of the 000, considered a preproject condition to be incorporated I f Corps project and cost thereof is not included in above costrol local cooperation. Improvement adopted by 1960 Flood COlhedt Act (II. Doc. 76, 86th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest publs map). 2 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of Junes2. 1936, applies, except that relocation of railroad facilities e a Federal responsibility. In addition, local interests must macent cash contribution to the United States, in amount of 7.4 per~ by of cost of construction, for land enhancement benefits provide6 50 ,*. project. Cash contribution is estimated (July 1966) at $1,nt 000. Local interests are represented by Contra Costao.0r Flood Control and Water Conservation District; formal g'sr ances, including evidence of financial and legal ability to ful ctre- quirement for the cash contribution, were accepted by the atrol mento District Engineer November 15, 1963. Flood COfanzd District furnished all rights-of-way required to datere indicated that it will furnish all requirements as needed for fut re construction. Flood Control District will arrange for high o bridge modifications and utility relocations before start th work by the Corps contractor or the work will be coordinated Wted that of the Corps contractor. Payment of required contribuet funds will be made in installments in amounts equal to 7.4 percent year of the estimated construction expenditure for each fiscal To date $598,000 has been furnished.o Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: J work accomplished and fiscal year costs: FLOOD CONTROL---SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT 1503 Required Contributed contributed funds, funds other Total Item Federal I Saeering and design, hired $180,858 $14,454 $ 4,181 $199,493 rotepimprovement stone PYcection, Bancroft Road, 13,327 1,065 .... 14,392 anSel contract ............... Imrnprovement, Suisun aIto Grayson Creek, n°tract by otinue . . . . .a o . .continuing 52,387 .... 707,925 655,538 rel Improvement, Grayson oI to drop structure No. 1, '0ntinue by continuing tract ................ 52,186 20,620 725,839 653,033 ret improvement, drop Ucture No 1 to down- oeam of drop structure or, initiate continuing .... 205,601 190,387 15,214 ol lafneous minor construc- oll, hired labor ........... 29,983 2,396 ... 32,379 ndition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated 1964; project is about 17 percent complete. Planning con- d and is closely coordinated with Soil Conservation Service. .remaining consists of completion of work underway and tlon and completion of remaining project units. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 111 1063 1964 1965 REQUIRED CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Totalto 1068 16 1966 June 30,1966 a...........192 16 Oortrb't.............................. $187,000,$240,000 $171,000 $598,000 ou tributed $187,000 28,378 $240,000 116,211 ot *..*. 149,606 294,285 r land enhancement benefits provided by project. OTHER CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1 l yearTotal to 10**............ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work. lropriated. . ... $70,000 $20,000 $90,000 .... ................... ................ 180 27,006 27,186 slcellaneous De- construction and engineering and design services to be accomplished at ex- ItEl"ocal interests under local cooperation requirements in connection with acquisition of O-Way and utility alterations. 1504 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 30. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Approved regulations for operation and maintenance of iood control works, part 208, title 33, Code of Federal Regulaloc provides for inspection of completed projects transferred to local interests for operation and maintenance to determine staltuscal project and insure compliance with regulations. coofDuring acramnto -sen year inspections were made of: Completed units of Sacrae of River and major and minor tributaries; completed units Sacramento River flood control project; American River leveeof Middle Creek; Duck Creek diversion and Littlejohn Creek, a California; Truckee River, Calif. and Nev.; completed untsoeek Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries, Calif.; Big Dry dC' Reservoir and diversion, Calif.; Sevier River, Redmond anthor cinity, Utah; various emergency flood control works under aUi and ity of section 208, Flood Control Act of June 30, 1948, dent September 3, 1954; Public Law 99, June 28, 1955, and anteca 94 6 . legislation; section 14 of Flood Control Act of July 24,1ee- Maintenance inspections conducted indicate that existing grted ments and regulations are being complied with on coimplove flood control works. Continuing effort is required to li re- maintenance practices and active steps are being taken by ore sponsible State and local agencies to achieve desired results. d to cal agencies were advised, as necessary, of measures require bed maintain these projects in accordance with standards presc as by regulations. Total cost of inspection for fiscal year $20,037. 31. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIONS In accordance with section 7, Flood Control Act of 1944, su01 maries of monthly operations at Folsom, Friant, Shasta,ear, manche, Wanship, Echo, Pineview, Prosser Creek, Don pedirs Cherry Valley, Hetch Hetchy, and Big Dry Creek Reser ' n were prepared and distributed. The Reservoir Regulation M, l ual for flood control for Friant Dam and Reservoir waS re mitted for approval. Interim flood control regulations wli prepared for New Exchequer and Los Banos Reservoirs in for fornia. Work was initiated on flood control regulations fel Devils Creek Project, Malad River, Idaho. Corps person provided advice as requested during flood control operationsls Echo, Wanship, and Camanche Reservoirs. Fiscal year cost $16,063. Total cost to June 30, 1966 was $153,677. TULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DIST. 1505 . OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report i.. Name of project !, .Rep~ort see Annual Construction Construction Operation and Operation and __for- maintenance l iver, Calif. ......................... 1959 22,125,848 .............. Reservoir and diversion, Calif....................1955 31,369,931 .............. h M1 ford, Beaver County, Utahl 4......................... 1961 217,879.............. I Valy eao CrQIe reek' ev .......... , American River, Calif............. ........................... ... 1957 63,012,598......... 1963 3,810........... boldt 0 Creek, Solano County, Calif.1 7 . . 6........................1963 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,026........... D 1ver Itle1 and tributaries, Nevada 1951 54 947.......... Ltl eal Reservoir Utalh8 .......................... 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .oo . ......... . . . . . . . . 1963 17:703 .. ... ... at Lale WashlIagna, Utah . .. 1951 vievRiv [ty Jordan River, Utahl ............................ 1961 101,227,570........... at,Ivear Redmond, Utahi ........ .................... 1952 11919,000........... ruckee X r e verUtal8 ....................................... 1955 20,000.#......... eb;i bIver and tributaries, California and Nevadal 13.............. 1964 993,960.......... r and tributaries Utah................................ . 1963 1254,432........... 2rrnlted. lqre-lcudesd$ 5 4 , 9 1 9 other contributed funds for miscellaneous construction for local interests Wer $tto requirements of local cooperation. Total costs for all requirements of local cooperation a e $l,100(1959), for lands and relocations. Ri e $4 4 8 other contributed funds for miscellaneous construction in connection with 1Cs1truction pursuant to requirements of local cooperation. Total cost to local interests for 84t1treahoents of local cooperation was $370,000 (1959), for lands and relocations. t orized by Chief of Engineers, August 13, 1959, under authority of Public Law 685, ogress leted except for minor real estate costs. $41,149 incurred this fiscal year primarily for O o96 real estate condemnation settlement. Transferred to Bureau of Reclamation in May Varller ODeration and maintenance by that agency in conjunction with other units of Central 6eVDro -Ject, Ceqg thorized by Chief of Engineers, November 17, 1958, under authority of Public Law 685, 84th S restudy of project. Restudy resulted in reclassification to active on February 10, 1964. 11 red status. IhSti v status. (J1 2ated costs to local interests for all requirements of local cooperation were $463,000 vly it 196 ) for lands and damages including relocations. ell $488e 000 requ ired contributed funds toward first cost. Costs to local interests for ltbcrerents of local cooperation, including required contributions, were $118,000 (1951). Wi. nning deferred in July 1962 due to lack of assurances from Morgan County for work e county ;. $17 incurred this fiscal year primarily for coordination with local interests. 111 St to local interests for all local cooperation requirements were $224,000 for lands, relo- and debris removal facilities for Derby Dam. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION P3. Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, S 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) year costs for preauthorization studies are $3,449 for r. Creek, Shasta County, Calif.; $8,514 for North Fork, Pit I.e at Alturas, Modoc County, Calif.; $1,699 for Reese River, le ountain, Lander County, Nev.; $2,588 for Barton and ill Creeks, Davis County, Utah; and $151 for Kays Creek, Davis uty, Utah. negency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work S(Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) oP ederal cost for fiscal year was $876,058, of which $22,960 was r advance preparation, $401,370 for flood emergency operations, $451,728 for repair and restoration. 34. NEW MELONES RESERVOIR, CALIF. about three-quarters mile Location. On Stanislaus RiverDam WaStream from existing Melones and about 35 miles north st of city of Modesto. (See also Improvement No. 19 for Tuo- 1506 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 lumne River Basin and Lower San Joaquin River and tribu taries.) (See Geological Survey quadrangles of the area.)m to Existing project. Provides for construction of (a) a da 0 0 0 create a reservoir with gross storage capacity of about 2,40ti0 acre-feet for flood control, irrigation, power, general recrebo' fish and wildlife, and other purposes, and (b) a powerplantbelo the dam with an installed capacity of 150,000 kilowatts. completion of construction of dam and powerplant by the CorPst the project shall become an integral part of Central Valley projr ect and operated and maintained by Secretary of InteriorPtrl suant to Federal reclamation laws, except that the flood conntd operation of the project shall be in accordance with rules age regulations prescribed by Secretary of the Army. Maintenaqui of Stanislaus River channel from Goodwin Dam to San Joq als0 River to a capacity of at least 8,000 cubic feet per second wied be Corps responsibility. Approved estimated (July 1966) local eral cost is $133 million. Based on cost allocation studies er interests would be required to pay portion of first cost (33. ent) cent) and annual operation and maintenance costs (10.8 percof allocated to irrigation. Local interests must also pay portio'nee first cost (33.8 percent) and annual operation and maintenaI costs (62.9 percent) allocated to power. In addition, local 1of terests expended $300,000 for levees along lower reacheSood Stanislaus River. Existing project was adopted by 1962 l o t Control Act (H. Doc. 453, 87th Cong., 2d sess., contains hi published map). This act modified original authorizaCo adopted by 1944 Flood Control Act. (II. Flood Control Commas tee Doc. 2, 78th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published niap- modified by Public Law 327, 84th Congress. The 1944 Flood 0o trol Act authorized $8 million for partial accomplishment of pr. ect. Further monetary authorizations of $2,500,000, $5 mInllod and $13 million were provided by Public Laws 235 and 780, of Congress, and 85-500, making aY total monetary authorizationf t) 'r Sal $28,500,000 available for the basin plan comprising Lowe.~s Joaquin River and tributaries, including Tuolumne and Stans Rivers, Calif. •loca Local cooperation. Based on approved preliminary cost a tion studies (July 1965) local interests will be required to pay oi percent of first cost and 10.8 percent of annual operation and Main tenance costs will be allocated to irrigation. In addition, 33.8 pe" cent of first cost and 62.9 percent of annual cost would be alloca to power. Local interests must also maintain existing private le er along Stanislaus River from Goodwin Dam to San Joaquin lver and prevent encroachment on channel and floodway between leveof so as to preserve safe carrying capacity throughout that reached at least 8,000 cubic feet per second. Recovery of costs alloca0t to irrigation and power will be responsibility of Bureau ith Reclamation. Reimbursement of costs will be in accordance Wit Bureau of Reclamation's policies and procedures for the Centra Valley project. State of California officially adopted project chapter 918 of statutes of 1963, and by chapter 1438 of thlos statutes authorized State Reclamation Board to furnish reqUired assurances. The board by letter dated December 13, 1963, stated GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-SACRAMENTO, CALIF., DISTRICT Will furnish required so.o assurances when formally requestedto 1 lOperations and results during fiscal year. New work: Engi- ieerilg Wering studies pertaining to preparation of design memoranda tioe continued and plans and area specifications for initial construc- l contract (administration and access roads) were com- t -ed.Equipment rental contracts were utilized for explora- lolAtrenches,I exploration drifts at "right "and left abutments, and PhOto otogrammetric mapping of damsite at fiscal year costs of $195,- ,$117,831,and $30,338, respectively. Total engineering costs, i inglu"n contracts, were $832,388. Preacquisition real estate Ql ds Hing for project was continued at fiscal year cost of $31,554; required for initial construction contract were acquired in ay 1966. v Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning work on this project ]' suspended in December 1957 due to depletion of funds al- oitted to project and to Senate Appropriations Committee deci- o0that no expenditure of fiscal year 1958 allocation would be Sade until project authorization had been modified to include Po.Wer features. A special feasibility report on project was sub- Wbatted in 1957; review report, on which current authorization is iased, was submitted in May 1961. Some of data obtained from 1eld Work accomplished for superseded project can be utilized on j 1 Project Engineering and design studies were resumed in a buary 1964. Initial construction contract is scheduled for award in July 1966. Cost and financial statement Iacal Ya .. . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Total 30, Junoe to1966 S Dropriated $448 ............ $119,200 $690,000 $1,500,000 252,562,804 at ....... 4,937 . . 105,513 627,022 940,047 21,900,186 ieludes funds applicable to other units of this basin authorization (Lower San Joaquin and tributaries and Tuolumne River Basin, Calif., which is Improvement No. 16,reported da re Ie toodControl, rDortCludes $110,000 for preparation of 1957 economic feasibility report and of revised feasibility applicable to 1962 reauthorization of project. 35. SURVEYS igation studies ............................................. $35,099 S control studies .. ....................................... 505,618 with Soil Conservation Service labo ration with .................... 1,280 ordination Bureau of Reclamation pertaining to 7,713 Q0rOjects under regular reclamation program................... aboration with Bureau of Reclamation under Co00 all Reclamation Projects'............................. ... 1,097 ordinationwith other agencies on Truckee, Carson, and Walker River Basins ................................... 6,000 Total ........................... .... ............... 556,807 36. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA o lood plain information studies were made at a fiscal year cost $8,852 for Feather River, Calif., Oroville to Marysville; $6,936 1508 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 for Tulare County Streams, Calif., Kawah River above Termins Reservoir; $3,785 for Lower Jordan River Basin, Utah La taho Great Salt Lake; $5,569 for Upper Jordan River Basin,ae Utah Lake and tributaries; and $3,269 for Davis County Stream Utah. Completed flood plain studies Federal Location Requesting agency Date completed i i Steramento County, Calif., streams: Sacramento County $5213 American River between Folsom Dam and Sacramento River. .................... Apr. 1963...... 9,935 Arcade Creek between North Sacramento and Citrus lHeights. ................... Oct. 1965..... 12,462 Chicken Ranch and Strong Sloughs, north of American River .. ...do........ and east of North Sacramento. 9,2223 Dry Creek between Roseville and Rio Linda.............. ... do.... 15,181 Morrison Creek Basin (tributary to Snodgrass Slough chan- .................... Sept. 1963.. nels-southeast of Sacramento near towns of Elk Grove and Florin. 10,093 Snodgrass Slough area east of Sacramento River, between .................... Aug. 1963.. Sacramento and Mokelumne River including Stone and Beach Lakes. West side San Joaquin Valley, Calif: State of California Primary purpose to develop hydrologic and other data .................... July19651...... with particular regard to streams along California aqueduct. 1 State costs were $37,756. 37. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 500 Hydrologic studies ....................................... .* 116961 Engineering studies: ES100 Hydrologic Engineering Center ...... 127,461 Total ............................................... ** HONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT * Il T h is district comprises the State of Hawaii and the Marshall prands. The district also performs such actions pertaining to about the servation and protection of navigable waters on and 18and of Guam as provided for under River and IHarbor Act of 9'9In addition, the district will supervise and prosecute Civil 0orks construction as directed by the Division Engineer, Pacific cean Division. IMPROVEMENTS Navigation Beach Erosion Control--Continued . Waleiwa Small Boat Har- 13. Other authorized beach ero- 1509 sion control projects .. 1520 2. bor, Oahu, Hawaii .... Rilo Harbor, Hawaii, 14. Beach erosion control work 8 awaii ............... 1510 under special authoriza- Honolulu Harbor, tion .................. 1520 Oahu, 4. 5 Hawaii ............... auaii ..HIIarbor, Rahului Slaupapa Harbor, Molo- . . . .Maui, . . Flood Control 15. Hanapepe River, Kauai, Hawaii ............... 1520 1514 16. Kawainui Swamp, Oahu, 6. - ai, Hawaii ........... Hawaii ............... 1521 aunakakai Harbor, Molo- 17. Kuliouou Stream, Oahu, 7 kai, Hawaii .......... . 1515 Hawaii ............... 1522 awaihae Harbor, Hawaii, 18. Wailoa Stream and tribu- 8. Hawaii ............... 1516 anele Small Boat Harbor, taries, Hawaii, Hawaii .. 1522 19. Inspection of completed 9 Lanai, Hawaii....... 1517 flood control projects .. 1523 awiliwili Small Boat lar- Other authorized flood con- 1 bor, Kauai, Hawaii .... 1518 20. trol projects .......... 1523 econnaissance and condi- 21. Flood control work under 11. tion surveys .......... 1519 special authorization .. 1524 Other authorized naviga- tion projects ......... 1519 General Investigations 22. Surveys ................ 1524 12. Beach Erosion Control 23. Collection and study of l anapepe Bay, Kauai, Ha- basic data ............ 1524 Waii .................. 1519 24. Research and development 1524 1. HIALEIWA SMALL BOAT HARBOR, OAHU, HAWAII oLocation. On northwestern coast of island of Oahu, at town Of1-aleiwa. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 4110.) 10P'xisting project. Authorized March 26, 1964, under section 107 River and Harbor Act of 1960. Project provides for an ltrance channel 610 feet long, 120 feet wide, 12 feet deep; a revetted mole 1,200 feet long; a trapezoidal riprapped river diver- 101n channel 500 feet long and 80 feet wide; and a dike 320 feet Et* This shallow-draft harbor is designed to accommodate bout 220 boats. Plane of reference is mean lower low water. eof tide between mean lower low water and mean higher h Water is 1.6 feet, and extreme tidal range under normal con- o s is 4 feet. Approved cost estimate (Jan. 1966) is $672,- Sof which Federal costs are $302,970 and non-Federal costs trit $370,000 including lands and rights-of-way and cash con- Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Non-Federal cash contribution is $197,000. 1510 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Preconstructio planning completed in December 1965. A construction contrahe the was awarded in January 1966, in the amount of $357,322 for Federal project. Condition at end of fiscal year. Overall construction progres is 66 percent complete. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Joe 30 TotAl to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $ $3,000 Appropriated.......... $22,000 $10,000 $165,000 $97,970 20 2,942 Cost.................. 18,214 1,324 7,531 175,977 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS = = 966 Junleotal to966 30,1'go year.............. Fiscal . 1962 1963 1964 1965 19.66 Ju New work: $252,000 176,323 Contributed................... ....................$277,000 -$25,000 Cost.... .......................................... 4,979 171,344 2. HILO HARBOR, HAWAII, HAWAII Location. On northeastern coast of island of Hawaii at city of Hilo. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 4103.) e. Existing project. Completed portion of project compris feet rubblemound breakwater 10,070 feet long, an entrance 3 nd35 deep, and a harbor basin 1,400 feet wide, 2,300 feet long an tect feet deep. Uncompleted portion (1960 modification) to pro against tsunami and improve navigation conditions comPr strengthening and raising existing breakwater to a total leon of 10,570 feet, and constructing a west breakwater 4,000 feetwer and a 6,600-foot land dike. Plane of reference is mean aed low water. Range of tides between mean lower low water afdr mean higher high water is 2.4 feet, and extreme range un of ordinary conditions is 5.4 feet. Approved estimate (1964) .i total project first cost for new work is $28,520,000, of WI h $22,566,000 is a Federal cost and $5,564,000 a non-Federal cas contribution. Current estimate of total project first cost for eW work is $43,460,000, of which $34,270,000 is Federal cost alndo$ 460,000 is non-Federal cash contribution. These costs are for revised plan from the authorized plan, based on results of harbor model tests. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar. 2, 1907 For rubblemound breakwater ....................... . I. Doc. 407, 59th Cong., 2d seSs. July 25,1912 Dredging entrance of Kuhio Bay without increasing original H11. Doe. 417, 62(1Cong., 2d sess. limit of cost. Mar. 3, 1925 Extension of the breakwater and dredging in the bay........ H. Doe. 235, 68th Cong., st sess. (c July 14. 1960 Modification of existing breakwater to total length of 10,570 II. )oc. 197, 87th Cong., 1stsesa5 feet and construction of west breakwater and land like. tains latest published map)* Oct. 23, 1962 Adjustment of cash contribution required of local interests. RIVERS AND HARBORS-HONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT 1511 oocal coo peration. Fully complied with oni completed portion. or 19 60 modification local interests must furnish lands and from damages; main- t" sof-vway; hold the United States freecompletion; Utthe dike and west breakwater after accomplish Ytalterations as necessary, and provide a cash contribution, SrrentlY estimated at $9,460,000. State has provided continued Dport ofp reconstruction planning work and financing required r IiloHarbor model construction and operations. Final as- Sralces will be provided upon completion of design report. eterminal facilities. Three piers, sheds, and pipelines for the roleum andproducts, liquid fertilizer and molasses, owned by estate, privately owned facilities for handling bulk com- a dties and for storage of sugar, molasses, petroleum products ae lituid fertilizer. Equipment includes heavy-lift cranes. oacilities are open to all on equal terms and considered adequate Sexisting commerce. OPerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- -lstruction planning work continued. The Hilo Harbor Bay thlodel studies at Honolulu were completed in March 1966 and te laboratory and facilities were turned over to the State of ca'Waii in accordance with the memorandum of understanding . Y. . . cated r December 10, 1963. Total costs to the State of Hawaii for C0119 8t struction of model was $90,704. settled Financial aspects of the eate cost sharing on the model were in February 1966. a oort on Hilo Harbor Bay model is about 95 percent complete. SablitY and harbor model tests were completed by the Water- realS Experiment Station at a total cost of $359,267. Detailed taAlysis of economics was accomplished. A design conference 196,S and an economic conference at OCE were held in February gy to review overall project design and economics. Hydro- MaPhic and topographic surveys were partially completed. Re- Sluing survey required on seaward slope of existing breakwater boa deferred due to high wave conditions. Contracts for land rings and submarine borings were awarded and work initiated. fet cratering for construction materials investigations was de- eerred until construction plans and specifications stage based on lco ornlc considerations. Contract for architect-engineer serv- f^or plans and specifications for test cratering is being termi- thate . The consensus at the public hearing held March 1966 was at tsunami protection was urgently needed and that the Corps ,Sc plan was most suitable. Maintenance: A condition survey Wa Completed in February 1966. a'Ondition at end of fiscal year. Work authorized before 1960 De. completed in July 1930. Preconstruction planning is 80 rcent complete. Overall foundations and materials investiga- as Work is 60 percent complete. Model report, design memo- CAOdum, and materials design memorandum are scheduled for U letioni next fiscal year. Controlling depth (Feb. 1966) is 1512 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to year................ Fiscal 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $5503,82 Appropriated.......... $115,000 $600,000 $600,000 $550,000 $230,000 5,098,7 Cost.................. 81,659 398,592 601,054 331,198 276,406 Maintenance: 1772 967 Appropriated.......... 34,800 ............... -611. 1,72* Co t....33,186 1,004............................ 3. HONOLULU HARBOR, OAHU, HAWAII Location. On southern coast of island of Oahu, HaWaii city of Honolulu. Existing project. Completed portion of project coiPre , three channels 35-40 feet deep, two harbor basins 35 feet .ect and a double-leaf bascule bridge. Last full report on this prOJ . is on pages 1828 and 1829 of Annual Report for 1962. Unolr pleted portion provides deepening seaward 3,600 feet Of ro Armstrong entrance channel to 45 feet, and removing a,,naar strip from northeast corner of Sand Island; deepening mail bor basin and Kapalama Channel to 40 feet; widening Itapalae Channel by 60 feet along Sand Island side for 3,100 feet; a led s location of project line to provide a 100-foot offset from pier het of in Kapalama Channel and at piers 9, 10, and 11 and an off~' ted 50 to 75 feet elsewhere in the harbor. Approved estim f (1966) total project first cost for new work is $4,525,00Oral which $2,315,000 is Federal cost and $2,210,000 is non-Fetion costs for lands, relocation, and cash contribution. Modificaes. was authorized by House Document 93, 89th Congress, 1st e sion. ect Local cooperation. Fully complied with on existing projeh* State of Hawaii assures fulfilling their requirements of fur she ing lands and rights-of-way for construction and future 0 1 nance and hold the United States free from damages.1 Federal cash contribution is $60,000..l Terminal facilities. There are 34 piers and 2 mfar9 wharves, which include 3 piers and 1 marginal wharf owneb the Federal Government; 13 piers and 1 marginal wharf owvney the State of Hawaii; and 18 piers privately owned. All Dai Federal piers are open to all on an equal basis, although cer or ones are reserved for passenger terminals, for container sh5PId for handling specific bulk commodities such as petroleum pr ucts, pineapple, sugar, animal feed, and cement. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work:Pre construction planning work continued on oceanographic and 51b surface investigations. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was eC pleted in fiscal year 1962. Preconstruction planning on modi C's tion is 10 percent complete. Controlling depth (Mar 1965)35.0 38.5 feet in entrance channel, 36.1 feet in Kalihi Channel, feet in Kapalama Basin, and 30 feet at east side of pier 39. RIVERS AND HARBORS-HONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT 1513 Cost and financial statement Fscal .......... 1962 1963 1964 19{5 1966 Total to June 30, 1966 NJcoat $726f t'293 .. s.....08 0124 AM ro'Prated ..........$76025 $5,000 -$6853 ............. $75,000 1$8,553,252 a at................1,849,144 . 60,781 3,39312,906 8,491,248 .C 111,654 980,371 a roprted... . 111,654 163,000 -11,492 .71 . .. .......... 105,249 158,737 ........... s Selude $784,800 public works funds. Excludes $10,214 preauthorization study funds. 4. KAHULUI HARBOR, MAUI, HAWAII XL ocation. 0 On northern coast of island of Maui, at town of ahului. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 4124.) :Existing project. Rubblemound breakwaters on east and est sides of harbor, about 2,850 and 2,396 feet long, aeslectively, and an entrance 600 feet wide between breakwaters d a harbor basin 2,050 feet wide, 2,400 feet long, and 35 feet ep Range of tide between mean lower low water and mean her high water is 2.2 feet and extreme tidal range under ormal conditions is 4.5 feet. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Documents Work authorized Cong., 2d ses. S 27,191 Extending east breakwater and dredging the basin........... 11.Do. 593, 61st 1916 For the west breakwater........o... 11. Doe. 1330, 62d Coug., 3d seas. - .. 21, 1927 Extend both breakwaters and enlarge drdged .basin. .. Doc. 235, 69th Cong., 1st seas. 4Y Doe. 109, 86th Cong., 1st ses. (con- Enlarge harbor basin, 600 feet wide, 2,400 feet long, 35 feet I. tains deep. latest published map). ocal cooperation. Fully complied with, b Terminal facilities. Two wharves owned and operated tState of Hawaii which are open to shipping on equal errs Pipelines for fuel oil, distillate, kerosene, gasoline, molas- are available. ' and waterstorage There is also a bulk-sugar plant S0,000-ton capacity with a conveyor loading system tisable of conveying at a rate of about 750 tons per hour. Facili- tes are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: contract was awarded for placement of tribars and removal of hoal in the amount of $649,816 including all modifications to lte**Shoal removal work cost $69,982, which included $67,812 teral funds and $2,170 non-Federal funds. This work under oe harbor enlargement was completed in June 1966. Placement tribars and casting of ribs on east breakwater was completed SJanuary 1966. Placement of tribars on the west breakwater P eing delayed due to stiffleg crane failure in February 1966. oeJect cost for completed harbor enlargement is $651,169 and r breakwater rehabilitation is estimated $1,700,000. C ndition at end of fiscal year. Harbor enlargement project ab completed in June 1966. Rehabilitation of breakwater is out 90 percent complete. Placement of tribars on west break- t er is scheduled for completion in September 1966. Con- olling depth (Feb. 1965) is 32.5 feet in harbor basin. 1514 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, .M4 New work: Appropriated.......... -$6,000 -$15,000 -$55,479 $80,000 . $234,, 2,38. Cost................. 532,034 239 177 3,693 $70,32 Maintenance: 2,82904 Appropriated.......... 40,900 -8,900 -890 ............ 4,000 2,624 Cost.................. 101,832 134 19 ............ 65 Rehabilitation: 1,70007 Appropriated.......... 100,000 ..... 800,000 800,000 .. 1:519, Cost.................. 43,481 47,485 69,660 832,296 526,149 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total t Fiscal year........... ... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1986 New work: Contributed........... ... ..2 2001 Cost.................. $17,635 $8 68 ,250 5. KALAUPAPA HARBOR, MOLOKAI, HAWAII Location. Kalaupapa is on a peninsula at the foot of cliffs Molokai's rugged north coast and on the west coast of Makanlt Peninsula. It is approximately 57 nautical miles east of flofo and 7.5 statute miles from Kaunakakai Harbor.eci Existing project. Authorized 2 December 1965 under Sectioist 107, River and Harbor Act of 1960. The existing harbor con of a 100-foot breakwater, a small natural basin with depths var' ili from 2 to 6 feet, a wooden landing, and a stiff-leg derrick tuse0- small craft in and out of the water. The plan of improvement p- poses to strengthen the existing breakwater and to deepen the n ural harbor basin. .dth Breakwater. Length of the breakwater will be 114 feet; wthe at the crest of the concrete cap will be 312 feet; elevation or crest of the concrete cap will be 11 feet; crest elevation of the.; stone is 4 feet. The structure will be protected by 8-ton mini' -l armor stone with 1 on 2 side slope. t t Basin. The dredged dimension of the basin will be 110 feeot the seaward end and 70 feet near shore. The length will be d 10 305 feet and depths will be 13 feet below MLLW for the seawar the feet, a 10-foot-wide transition from 3 to 8 feet, and 8 feet for the shoreward portion. Range of tide between mean lower low wate and mean higher high water is 1.8 feet, and extreme tidal rnge under normal conditions is 3.8 feet. The total estimated Fede:dal first cost of the recommended plan of improvement is $240,000 nd the total project cost is $254,000. Local cooperation. Local interests will be required to modif the existing landing deck and provide mooring dolphins. The tte Harbors Division has provided their assurances of local cooperatth: Terminal facilities. A 2,000-foot landing strip is on the n thi.s west corner of the peninsula. Only light aircraft can use facility. Operations and results during fiscal year. Prepared plans and specifications. RIVERS AND HARBORS-HONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT 1515 St Codition at end of fiscal year. Pending receipt of funds, con- tion istentatively scheduled to begin in April 1967. Cost and financial statement 51Year Total to S............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 e oro)riated............. .. .......... $4,000 $11,000 $15,000 st. ***.................... ... ......... 3,920 7,857 11,777 KAUNAKAKAI HARBOR, MOLOKAI, HAWAII I6. of ction. On south central coast of island of Molokai, at town 4121.) a aunalkakai. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 4120 feet sting project. Provides for an entrance channel 500 feee40 feet deep, and about 1,100 feet long; a harbor basin 35 \vi .ra deep comprising about 62 acres; a separate basin for light- Dpat Vessels 15 feet deep over an area of about 10 acres; and b"otective breakwaters and jetty with a total length of 6,300 feet. Iths refer to mean lower low water. Estimated total first cost daS$8949,000 including $445,000 non-Federal costs for lands and of ages, relocations, and a cash contribution of $320,500. Range S2de between mean lower low water and mean higher high water eet. •n xrm "g for.normal ia range . conditions is about 4,5 ,feet and extreme tidal Existing project was authorized by the following: Work authorized Douments 3 harbor basin about 1,500 feet long, 600 feet S 0 19351 Dredging wide, H. Doc. 35 73d Cong. 1st sess. 23 196 and 2 feet deep. * ew entrance channel 40 feet deep, 500 feet wide, and about i. Doc. 484 87th Cong. 2d sess. (con- deep of about 62 acres; I1,100 feet long; harbor basin 35 feet tains latest published map.) separate basin 15 feet deep of about 10acres for light-draft vessels; and protective breakwaters and jetty. clded in Public Works Administration program, Sept. 6, 1933. th cooperation. Fully complied with on completed project. of .lhe 196,2 modification local interests must assure establishment Q0odustrial facilities (pineapple cannery) related to transpacific t erce; furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction and Ue maintenance hold the United States free from damages; deoPllish utility alterations as required; provide and maintain 40 ts in berthing areas commensurate with the project depths; tie Vide aind maintain adequate public terminal and transfer facili- 1 0 pen to all equally; construct, maintain, and operate adequate Iv'1ng facilities for about 225 small craft, and a public landing ac suitable service and supply facilities open to all on equal terms; o~ 'Ide an adequate refrigeration and storage facility in support Dr CoInercial fishing operations; and provide a cash of contribution f.sently estimated to be $320,500. Establishment industrial ities (pineapple cannery), which is a requirement for con- 1516 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 struction of the deep-draft harbor, has been deferred by ~l1 a terests. There is no indication of when they will fu es of responsibility. The State of Hawaii has not given assurnce ard toW when their cash contribution of $280,500 will be available construction of the lightdraft harbor. bsi Terminal facilities. An existing State wharf with 713 feet eet, frontage; a transit shed with a roof area of 1,646 square ad storage tanks for petroleum products; fuel and waterlines; three tracked cranes. These facilities are adequate for exSin commerce. R funds Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular s 87d5 General design memorandum for the light-draft harbor W14S proved in September 1965. No further work is scheduled pendi appropriation of State cooperating funds. ver e Condition at the end of fiscal year. Work authorized bytion o was completed in 1934. Preparat o and Harbor Act of 1935 1934.Pr eothe plans and specifications for construction deferred becausey State has no funds for accomplishment of work in fiscal ad 1966. Controlling depth (Feb. 1966) is 23 feet in channe harbor basin. Cost and financial statement Total to 6 Fiscal year. . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: 1389q0g Appropriated......... .......... .......... .$46,000 ............ 16,009 $18,195 -$10,300784 138:1 Cost.................................... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $18,800 -$1,500 -3,401................... Cost.................. 13,799 100 ............................ x Includes $103,200 public works funds. 7. KAWAIHAE HARBOR, HAWAII, HAWAII Location. On northwestern coast of island of Hawaii, in4167*) of Kawaihae. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart trnce Existing project. Completed portion comprises of an enharbor channel 400 feet wide, 2,900 feet long and 40 feet deep; a basin 1,250 feet square and 35 feet deep; a rubblemound bloer water with maximum crest elevation 13 feet above mean 1-With low water and 2,650 feet long, and 3,335 feet of fill protected 1o heavy stone revetment. Plane of reference is mean loWv ace water. Uncompleted portion provides for widening enreet channel to 500 feet at outer end, tapering to existing 522000 width at inner end; enlarging harbor basin to maximnum b foot width and 500-foot length; extending existing breakwa tide 750 feet; and constructing a small-boat harbor. Range is 21 between mean lower low water and mean higher high water eet feet, and extreme range under ordinary conditions is 4.5 Act Existing project was authorized by 1950 River and Harbor s (H. Doc. 311, 81st Cong., 1st sess.), and the modificatiol ed authorized in HI. Doc. 75, 89th Congress, 1st session. Estiederal total project cost is $2,337,000, of which $2,290,600 is Fe cost and $46,400 is non-Federal cost. RIVERS AND HARBORS-IIONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT 1517 LOcal cooperation. Completed portion fully complied with. tiorllodifications, the local interests will provide a cash contribu- flo, suitable terminal facilities, furnish lands and rights-of-way tr construction and future maintenance, and hold the United is $ 0tes free from damages. Non-Federal cash contribution qTerminal facilities. A 605-foot concrete wharf and 12,000 and a4 e foot pier shed accommodates transpacific commerce; accotot long 40-foot wide apron and 3,600-square foot pier shed 0th modates interisland tugs and barges including livestock. and considered adl facilities also open to all on an equal basis ton capacity bleqU 1 ate for existing commerce, include a 20,000 1e SUgar storage building, 10,000 ton molasses storage tank, taioleurM tanks of 1.2 million gallon capacity and aqua ammonima 0s of / million gallon capacity. coerations and results during fiscal year. New work: Pre- ardstruction planning work was initiated. Quarry investigations are completed. Design memorandum on da harbor drilling about July 1966. Main- tedging is scheduled to be completed dar'ce: A condition survey was conducted in February 1966. II ondition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was completed of th uly 1962. Preconstruction planning on dredging portion ge 1:dification is 60 percent complete. Preconstruction plan- Con- tr on breakwater modification is 10 percent complete. (""ty, depth is 35 feet in harbor basin and 40 feet in channel Web. 1966). Cost and financial statement Neal Yar.6 Total to 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Ne ........... 1962 .... ear .....1 ,o o .......... 1963 1964 ....., ... o~o $100000 $4,783,384 C 0 riated.. . . .$500,000 -$2,853 ... .......... 46,614 14,729,998 192.. 1..1....51..9 .......... 381,956.1.5P hldes $950 expended for rock stock pile. 8. MANELE SMALL BOAT HARBOR, LANAI, HAWAII Location. On southern coast of island of Lanai about 6 miles of Lanai City. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart i.isting project. Authorized May 6, 1963, under section 107, for a 470-foot exer and Harbor Act of 1960. Project provides breakwater with a ':Ktslon of an existing 100-foot long stub blemound breakwater with crest elevation of 14 feet at head "d 6 feet at root, an entrance channel 12 feet deep, main access ofannel 8 feet deep, and maneuvering area 8 feet deep. Plane I reference is mean lower low water. Range of tide between egean lower low water and mean higher high water is 1.8 feet, and mremetidal range under ordinary conditions is 4 feet. This allow draft harbor is designed to accommodate about 130 boats. al al project cost is $429,420, of which Federal costs are $189,576 S on-Federal costs are $239,844. . ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. 1518 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Project constructil completed December 1965. Condition survey conducted inpe cember 1965. _,leted Condition at end of fiscal year. Breakwater was complber in April 1965. Shallow-draft harbor was completed in Decemd7 1965. Controlling depth is 10.8 feet in entrance channel alcio feet in main entrance channel. Claim submitted by colnstruc ed contractor covering alleged extra costs as a result of ch 1oast conditions encountered in construction of Manele Snall Harbor is pending. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Total t1o6 year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 6 New work: $2006212 $21,000............ Appropriated.......... $183,000 -$4,000 ........ Cost .................. 5,670 $12,267 8,628 162,999 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1905Totli, to6 1963 164 165 1966 year................ Fiscal work: New Contributed................................... $138,000 $108,000 .... $4 .................. Cost.......... ............ 6,429 135,895 $97,52 9. NAWILIWILI SMALL BOAT HARBOR, KAUAI, HAWAII Location. On southeastern coast of island of Kauai, at 1'o ) of Nawiliwili. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 41tij Existing project. Authorized May 22, 1964, under sect o 107, River and Harbor Act of 1960. Project provides .ide, entrance and main access channel 1,600 feet long, 120 feet ted and 12 feet deep; a revetted dike 954 feet long; and a reveter. mole 1,380 feet long. Plane of reference is mean lower loww gher Range of tide between mean lower low water and meanhnord Il tO high water is 1.8 feet, and extreme tidal range under conditions is 4 feet. This shallow-draft harbor is designe res accommodate about 200 boats in an area of 5 eral Approved cost estimate (Jan. 1965) is $394,000, of which Fed costs are $211,000, and non-Federal costs are $183,000. yd Local cooperation. Local interests must provide landsvide rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance, al l and maintain mooring facilities and utilities open to all eq loe provide utility and drainage relocations or alterations as de a sary; hold the United States free from damages; and provide cash contribution, estimated to be $156,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. si Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on project deferred ce local interests cannot furnish required contribution. IEACH EROSION CONTROL-HONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT 1519 " .Cost and financial statement ear Total to 1962.1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 1 ~ew_________ CPlropriated ..... 3 $2,714 $24,500............$............-$37,786 21,714 3,316 $15,788 2,339 . ..... $2711 10. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS NaDate survey l of reconducted ... June 1966 . June 1966 ' i Harbor, Kauai, Hawaii ................................... o llt H oille June 1966 arbor, Kauai, Hawaii .......................................... 1. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For lost Cost to June 30, 1966 full report - Name of project see Annual Report Construction Operation and for- maintenance arero lb p'itl 1 arbor a)l ............................. (M "a Int Harbor,u l rbo .. , . . .4 ............................. ..... ......... .............. (4).............. (4) .......................... 10 0H rhbO Ke-op lor, h .............................. ui(4) ...................................... a r, 11 ahul(4 ah l l .. ..... ...... ........... ..... (4)956 .. $3318000 . $ "'857 Lal S ' h ....................... a arO .. .... .... 1227...... (.4 ..................................... atbor , au nul(4) k Ita I., :::::::: ......... . .:::.. !~ 162 .. :.................... $334,005 4)62 ...... : : : ....i 752,645 4,857 222,31:6 a r aubhu, .................... aar ia.................................... 1. • ' ae 0lar, al ................................. . . .. (4) .... 2 2 t rleo , Ha waiil .. 1950 .... 2,488,056 2,111 Siarbor OV.° ake Island ....................... ... 19 0 .. . .. . rorraft vessel harbor. . . . . . . .. . . . . . al'tdand. rnDlto h iz by 1965 River and Harbor Act (11. Doc. 93, 89th Cong., 1st sess.) 1965 River project authorized by and Harbor Act Io O fullreport; i1965Rier and Harbor Act. fusn $7fin al cost in PY66 orn breakwater surveillance program. 12. HANAPEPE BAY, KAUAI, HAWAII 1ocat . On southern shore of Kauai, just east of Puola i on 51 nautical miles west-southwest of Nawiliwili habor.about ti esatin.g project. Provides for a rubblemound seawall with e evatons of 91/3 feet above mean lower low water and a length 8 0 0 feet. The shares of cost to be borne by the Federal are o Percent of the costs applicable to protection of the publicly- which Sel! dPortion of the shore. Estimated cost is $134,000 uthe s $65,000 Federal and $69,000 non-Federal. Project was rized by 1958 River and Harbor Act. a]rocal cOperation. Complied with exceptLocalas noted below in cagraph Condition at end of fiscal year. interests must affSt uct rubblemound seawall along privately-owned portions of eed shore; maintain and repair project; provide necessary easements and rights-of-way for construction or mainte- lce; hold the United States free from damages during con- Set ioand maintenance; maintain for public public ownership submit be- oly of the property during the improvement; and 1520 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 fore starting work, detailed plans, specifications, and details of arrangements made for prosecution of the project. slected Operations and results during fiscal year. Project wa rized by the Secretary of the Army for inclusion in "Small Aus sectio9 Projects" program. Construction of Ianapepe shore pro d re- project was not undertaken this fiscal year since the low bit oof ceived for complete project construction was over the amrounts funds which can be made available this fiscal year. ot have Condition at end of fiscal year. State of Hawaii doesno Ac- sufficient funds in the immediate future for this projecd the cordingly, construction has been deferred indefinitely an Federal funds of $65,000 have been revoked. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Tot too Fiscal year .............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: Appropriated.................................... $65,000 -$65,000 Cost.............................. .. ........................... uno0166 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jos ne New work: * 7,862 Contributed...................... $9,500 .... ........... ,638 14...- Cost............................. 1,854 $5,573 $135........* 13. OTHER AUTHORIZED BEACH EROSION CONTROL P Operatio c For last Cost to full report - - Name of project see Annual maubte.% Report Constructio for- Haleiwa Beach, 0ahu........................................ 1) .. Waikiki Beach, Oahu........................................... 195 3$216,3 Waimea Beach, Kauai.......................................... (2) ........ 1 No previous full report; project authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act. No previous full report: project authorized by 1958 River and Harbor Act. SExcludes $29,212 preauthorization studies cost. BEACH EROSION CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL 14. AUTHORIZATION Beach erosion control activities pursuant to section 103, Public LaW 88 (preauthorization) Fiscal year costs were $14,076 for Kekaha Beach, KIaUa, $183 for Kaimu Black Sand Beach, Hawaii. 15. HANAPEPE RIVER, KAUAI, IHAWAII Location. On southwestern sector of island of Kauai, tIaWS and flows through town of Hanapepe into Hanapepe BaY. . . Geological Survey map (advance sheet) Hanapepe, IaWall minute series.) FLOOD CONTROL-HONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT 1521 aloistinl project. A levee and floodwall about 2,200 feet long abolg left bank commencing at new Kauai Belt Highway Bridge aorut One-third mile above river mouth and extending to cliffs at feetheast corner of town of Hanapepe; and a levee about 4,465 ab01ng along right bank, commencing at old highway bridge too"t one-half mile above river mouth and extending upstream l aground. Existing project was authorized by 1944 Flood .o Act, in accordance with recommendations of Chief of WRiteers in a report submitted to Congress by the Secretary of at oiarch M 15, 1944 (and as modified by the Chief of thileers) rcntuto cooperation. Fully complied with. a ocal toeaw.. Locea l Peratlions and results during fiscal year. Preconstruction ka ing completed in October 1965. A construction contract awarded in December 1965 in the amount of $201,500. project was com- AetnCdition at end of fiscal year. Existing on the eted illAugust 1963. Overall construction completion Ofication is 56 percent. Construction completion is scheduled tober 1966. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS ealYear Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 . ........ SWWOk . ................... -$115,000 $242,500 $788,499 $6,84 $13,t105 131,819 676,538 o - ....... $5,419 149,486 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Yea.'. Total to S1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 ork:.... ew ICobuted.$10,100 $9,000.....- $3.$....... .. .16,3300100 ......... 9,117 $2,006 . $200 2,007 13,330 16. KAWAINUI SWAMP,OAHU, HAWAII 'ation. On southeastern sector of island of Oahu, Hawaii, r a ilua, 13 miles from the city of Honolulu. (See Geological 4 y rnap Mokapu, Hawaii, 7.5 minute series.) -eteting project. Provides for a trapezoidal with channel 9,100 e lolg and 80 to 110 feet wide; earth levee maximum tot elevation of 9.5 feet totaling 8,740 feet in length; stub e 50 feet long; shore revetment 50 feet long; silt basin 370 leothng and 10 feet deep; and drainage outlets. Project was Srized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 214, 81st Cong., ess.). Total project cost is $2,648,000, of which $1,380,000 e deral cost, and $1,267,926 is non-Federal cost for land and ages, relocations, and bridge. Socal cooperation. Fully complied with. Section 3, Flood Otrol Act of June 22, 1936, applies. Perations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: 1522 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Overall project is 99 percent complete. All work essentially complete except for demolition and site cleanup work. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was basically co" pleted and placed in useful operation in June 1966. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1065 196 New work: $1380 Appropriated................... ............ $93,500 $630,000 $610,0009 , Cost .................. $119............ 50,221 582,804 618,462 17. KULIOUOU STREAM, OAHU, HAWAII island Location. Kuliouou Valley is on southeastern corner osideof of Oahu, about 10 miles southeast of Honolulu on leewar Koolau Mountains. e d han Existing project. Provides for dredging a 300-foot longtecrec- nel into Maunalua Bay; constructing a reinforced concreble tangular channel, utilizing and improving existing cement rtding masonry walls, where applicable, for about 1,300 feet; proVlired reinforced concrete floodwalls on west bank of existingdeiD" trapezoidal channel; and adding a rectangular ditch andaiage forced concrete box culvert to accommodate interior drai.ect flows from mouth of existing lateral ditch. Estimated projend first cost is $1,500,000, of which $1 million is a Federal cos , $500,000 is non-Federal cost. Project authority is section 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Local cooperation. Local interests will provide all landS, ease ments and rights-of-way for construction, hold the Unitedilities free from damages, provide all relocations of buildings, tl highway bridges, sewers, related and special facilities and ved betterments, provide assurances that encroachment on imprestir. channels will not be permitted, provide cash contributionk s i mated to be $66,000 and maintain and operate all the worthe accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary o Army. fPreri of Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation plans and specifications initiated in April 1966. All field survey have been completed.is Condition at end of fiscal year. Preconstruction planning s about 70 percent complete. Cost and financial statement Total t~o Fiscal year ................ 1963 1961 1065 1966...30 New work: $141,10 Appropriated..................... $18,000 $10,100 $4,000 $90,000 56 Cost............... . .. ......... 7,524 20,069 3,259 6,455 18. WAILOA STREAM AND TRIBUTARIES, HAWAII,TTAWAII Location. Wailoa Stream and its tributary streams of ain FLOOD CONTROL--HONOLULU, HAWAII, DISTRICT 1523 a4and Iawili are on northeast sector of island of Hawaii, and a through city of Hilo into Hilo Bay. (See Geological Survey D' advance sheet) Waiakea, Hawaii, 7.5 minute series.) ito 'sling project. Starts above Waiakea Pond, which empties ad Wailoa Stream, about 1 mile from mouthconfluence of stream of a"continues for about 11/, miles to just above improvements coraakea and Kawili Stream. Kawili Stream to rise1 clearing natural streambed in upper reaches, a combina- channel 235 feet long and levee 327 feet long to divert the colC4b ar red flows of Waiakea and Kawili Streams into a long and levee 8 Swale area, a combination channel 1,100 feet longCam- and N 1 00 feet long to protect the University of Hawaii Hilo the ornitory;feettwo small diversion levees, one 75 feet long and a Other 190 long, to divert the flows from the swale area to 0 fexcavated channel 4,680 feet long; earth levees totaling bo0 feet along excavated channel; a new 122-foot concrete drai clvertand an 80-foot concrete bridge; and an Existing interior rojae structure. Total project cost is $1,042,000. (ljet Was authorized by section 203, Flood Control Act ofmap). 1954 Loc. 529, 81st Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published 0cal cooperation. Fully complied with. Proerations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: for Ject Was completed and turned over to the County of Hawaii CoPeration and maintenance September 15, 1965. of project com- bletondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of 8-hour labor lawe Al'ugust 1965. Pending final resolution contractor is being held vlation, final payment to construction Cost and financial statement Total to 1ar June 30, 1966 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 00pto riated.. . .... .... ... $12,000 $182,000 $17000 $182000 $3,000 $1078000 .. 130 15,521 29,852 31 39 30 28 96-7 5891 ,0 .. 74033 . 1,044,888 .. ISPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS ection 3 Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended and ablemented, included requirement that local interests maintain oregerate completed flood control works in accordance with ere ions prescribed by the Secretary of War. Inspections A e0 conducted during October-November 1965 at Ilanapepe River o rotec"tion works, Kauai; lao Stream snagging and clearing Sject1aui; and Kaunakakai $531. Stream flood protection project, 'ai; at a cost of 2o. OTHER AUTHORZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1999 full report Name of project seeAnnual Report Construction Operation arVI for- maintenance v1aakai StrN am, Molokai, Hawaiil 1950 $73,748 ............. CO55I~etec 1524 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 21. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATIO Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, ea s 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Fisca t Study identification $2,186 Aiea Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ............................................ ***. 21,868 Kahoma Stream, Maui, Hawaii ......................................... ..... 258 Kamooalii-Kaneohe Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ................................... 8,266 Keaahala Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ... .................................... 214 Moanalua Stream, Oahu, Hawaii .......................................... 1056 Niu Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ......................................... ....... 4,39 Waialae-Nui & Kapakahi Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ........................... 493 Wailani Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ................. 2,312 2.....................*** Wailua River, Kauai, Hawaii. ........................................ . 2,911 Wailupe Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ... .- 0.4488 *.....***..**.................... Waimalu Stream, Oahu, Hawaii .......................................... 4930 Waimanalo Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ................................. Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescUe ork (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation). Federal cost for fiscal year was $27,889, of which $prationS 0 1 ii for advance preparation, $11,838 for flood emergency opeamoo and $7,307 for repair and restoration (Kawa and a Streams, Kaneohe, Oahu). Emergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Public Law 526, 89th Cong.) . e 8t0 Project and location Fisca$991 Kahaluu Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ..................................... ..... 994 Kawa Stream tributary, Oahu, Hawaii ................................. 991 Kaalaea Stream, Oahu, Hawaii ........................................ 994 Kaneohe, Oahu, Hawaii' ............................................ SUnfavorable report completed. 22. SURVEYS for Fiscal year costs were $71,140, of which $30,338 Wc for navigation studies; $37,642 for flood control studies; $2 ?21 ti0 beach erosion cooperative studies; and $933 for coord' studies with other agencies. 23. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA .blished Flood plain information study for East Molokai was pIud' la in January 1966. A draft of Koloa-Poipu,? Kauai,• floo.d r Field study was submitted to higher authority for review. ie e veys and hydrologic studies were completed on the Pfloo Paumalu, Oahu, flood plain study. Fiscal year costs f plain information studies were $21,878. Completed flood plain studies Location Requesting agency Date completed East Molokai, Molokai, Hawaii..... Dept. of Land and Natural Resources, State January 1966. ofHawaii. 24. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 4)1 Fiscal year costs for hydrologic studies were $7,542, and $' for civil works investigations. PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT * rial limits of Portland District include southerly portion tate of Washington which lies within watershed of River and tributaries downstream from a point between River and Rock Creek; that portion of State of Oregon )lumbia River watershed below John Day Dam site and Vatershed of John Day River and tributaries, together ;h central Oregon west of Malheur River and Steens , but not including that part which drains into Klamath River. Coastal drainage area of Oregon is also in- IMPROVEMENTS 1 ' Navigation Flood Control--Continued 2. Ctco River, Oreg.... . 1526 26. Bear Creek, Williamette 1559 Clumbia and Lower Wil- River Basin, Oreg .... .hette Rivers below 27. Beaver Drainage District, 1560 p ancouver, Wash., and Columbia County, Oreg. .Oolrtland, Oreg....... 1527 28. Blue River Reservoir, Oreg. 1561 4 unbia River at Baker 29. Cascadia Reservoir, Oreg. 4' olay> Wash. ............ 1531 30. Cottage Grove Reservoir, 1562 ouabia River at the Oreg.................. , sUth, Oregon and 31. Cowlitz County Consoli- 5Colu ington Sabia River . .. . ... . . . . between 1532 dated Diking Improve- 6 ancouver, Wash., and ment District Wash............... No. 2, SCoh eDalles, Oreg....... 1533 Cowlitz County Diking Im- COos Bay, Oreg.......... 1536 32. provement District No. O and Millicoma Rivers, 2, Wash............... 1563 9. quil e River Oreg..... . 1539 33. Cowlitz County Diking Im- provement District No. 1564 12,Leep 11, Wash..... iver,Oreg....... 1540 13, Wash............. Bay, 0 River, Wash....... 1541 34. Cowlitz County Diking Im- 1 t°Orford, Oreg...... 1542 provement District No. 15, Wash ............. 1565 14,. ,d River, Harbor at 1565 5 ius B each, Oreg ..... 1543 35. Dorena Reservoir, Oreg.. . S" a River, Oreg .... 1544 36. Elk Creek Reservoir, Rogue 1566 1546 River Basin, Oreg ..... illRiver, Oreg....... 17, rygook Bay and Bar, 37. Fall Creek Reservoir, 1569 1547 Oreg.................. 18 juPqua River, Oreg. ... . 1548 38. Fern Ridge Reservoir, 19, etport Slough, Oreg... 1551 1568 Oreg................. paolette River above 39. Gate Creek Reservoir, 20. rtliand and Yamhill Oreg ................. Wliver, Greg.......... 1551 40. Johnson Creek, Portland 1569 i. la mette River at Wil- 1554 and vicinity, Oreg...... aq.ette Falls, Oreg. 41. Kalama River Cowlitz (South 22,p 2 Orjn Bay and Harbor, 1555 g"a.............. area) levees, tnnaissance and condi- County, Wash.......... 2, t h surveys....... 1558 42. Lower Columbia R i v e r 1571 24, ter authorized naviga- Basin, Oreg. and Wash. *YP .......... Prorojects 1558 43. Lower Columbia River Siation work under Basin bank protection ecial authorization . 1558 works, Oreg. and Wash. 1573 2,. 4 F lood Control 44. Midland Drainage District, Plegate Reservoir, Columbia County, Oreg. 1573 ue River Basin, 45. Rainier Drainage District, 0 og 1559 1574 re , . .. . . . . . Columbia County, Oreg. 1526 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Flood Control-Continued Multiple-Purpose Projects 46. Sauvie Island Drainage Including Power District (Areas A and 58. Columbia River at Bonne- 1583 B), Multnomah and Co- ville, Oreg ..... .****"' 1585 lumbia Counties, Oreg.. 1575 59. Cougar Reservoir, Oreg. 1586 47. Scappoose Drainage Dis- 60. Detroit Reservoir, Oreg.. trict, Oreg............. 1575 61. Green Peter Reservoir, 1588 48. Shelton Ditch, Willamette Oreg............... River Basin, Oreg ..... 1576 62. HTills CreekReservorr 1589 49. Wahkiakum County Con- Oreg............ solidated Diking District 63. Lookout Point Reservoir' 1590 No. 1, Washington ..... .1576 Oreg. 1591 50. Wahkiakum County Diking 64. Lost Creek Reservoir, Oreg. District No. 4, Wash. .. 1577 65. The Dalles Dam, Columbia 1592 51. Washougal area levees, River, Wash. and Oreg. Clark County, Wash .. 1577 66. The Dallas Dam, Columbia 159 52. Willamette R i v e r Basin, Oreg. (bank protection) 1578 River, Wash. and Oreg. (additional power units) 53. Willamette River B a s i n 67. Other authorized multipl (Portland Dist.) ....... .1579 purpose projects includ 1594 54. Inspection of completed ing power ..... **.. . flood control projects .. 1581 55. Scheduling flood control Investigations reservoir operations .... 1581 General 1594 56. Other authorized flood con- 68. Surveys ........ "* " ' ' ' trol projects .......... 1582 69. Collection and study of 1595 57. Flood control work under basic data .... "' 159 special authorization ... 1583 70. Research and development 1. CHETCO RIVER, OREG. al Location. Rises in Siskiyou Mountains of Coast Rang elevation of 4,000 feet, flows for about 51 miles in a CI1 route, and empties into Pacific Ocean at Brookings, Or miles south of entrance to Columbia River and 345 mileN of San Francisco Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey 5702 and 5896.) Existing project. Construction of two jetties or: authorized was accomplished December 1957 at cost of $4 Modification in 1965 authorized an entrance 120 feet wide feet deep; extension to north jetty about 450 feet in lenlg an increase in elevation of existing portion; a barge turnin about 250 feet wide, 650 feet long, and 14 feet deep; a pr( dike about 1,800 feet long with a top elevation of 16 feet small-boat access channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep. lower low water is plane of reference. Tidal range in c tween lower low water and mean higher high water is and extreme is from 2.6 feet below to 9.7 feet above meal low water. Estimated cost of project modification (1966) 350,000. Existing project was authorized by 1945 RiV Harbor Act (11. Doc. 817, 77th Cong., 2d sess.) and 196 and Harbor Act (S. Doc. 21, 89th Cong., 1st sess.) Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965 stat before construction local interests provide lands, easemen rights-of-way for construction and future maintenance and navigation upon request of Chief of Engineers, including $ spoil-disposal areas and necessary retaining dikes, bulkhea( RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1527 inkments therefore or the costs of such retaining works; hold led States free from damages; provide and maintain adequate de terrninals and transfer facilities open to all equally; pro- cesaed maintain depths in berthing and mooring areas and local oVidS channels serving the terminals, commensurate with depths ided in related project areas; accomplish alterations as re- , sn ewer, water supply, drainage, and other utility facili- ts Well as their maintenance; and contribute in cash 6.5 per- cesf cost of construction by Corps of Engineers of small-boat clh ch annel and that portion of dike adjacent thereto, and that 4 betribution, presently estimated at $9,000 be paid inm a lump Te ore starting construction. 4iinal facilities. At Sporthaven dock there is a private Ci1t Open to all on equal terms for loading lumber barges. sh lauber facility is barely adequate for existing commerce. 0e111 boat basin is downstream from town of Harbor, Oreg. Operations and results during fiscal year. Dredging entrance channel to boat basin by Government plant and rented dragline and tractor was accomplished with removal of 22,875 cubic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of jetties was 4d in June and completed December 1957. Removal of rock "4 es and an abandoned bridge structure was accomplished t e 19 59 No work accomplished under 1965 modification. t, "llig depths at entrance (Mar. 1966) was left quarter 41/2 idehannel 7 feet, and right quarter 7 feet. Cost and financial statement ar Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 ........... $8,4 08~t. 'e ed. ............... ............ ............ . . .. ...... . .. 489,548 $489,548 . . . . . ... . . . . . . .. .... .... . .. .... .... .... .. . aI I".. 1 d 103 aclioe. Project embraces miles of Columbia River ,ktVadcover Wash, and 14 miles of Willamette River below rerie10 re, Froj River see Improve Columbia of ln rev "4 and of Willamette River, Improvement No. 19. 14a ()Iproject. For details see pages 1995 and 1998 for of sa1 Report for" 1915, and page 1746 of Annual Report It4J uvier rting r.ect. aVnc Provides ;atrnnWasi a channel 35 feet deep and 500 formlsovrWash.;40teRietdeep, bide fromriver mile 106.5 to 105.5, distance between exist- 10idges; for a channel 40'feet deep and 600 feet wide from 'LVer Wash., river mile 105.5 to mouth of Columbia River, fee 3. a turning basin at Vancouver, Wash.; 40 feet deep, ) W'Wide, and about 5,000 feet long; a turning basin at Long- Wash.; 40 feet deep, average width of 1,200 feet, and about 1528 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 6,000 feet long; and a channel 40 feet deep in Willamette Rie with varying widths of 600 to 1,900 feet from mouth (riversmile 0) to Broadway Bridge (river mile 11.6) which encompasfrose Portland Harbor area, subject to provisions that chaouverVash mouth of Willamette River to turning basin at Vancouverdth is be limited to 500 feet in width until need for additional demonstrated by n Existing developed traffic."ee 0 project also proVvides feet wid a ar .eithI Cfhae, ah,30fe for auxiliary channels 10 feet deep and 300 feetWidleieS Cathlamet, Wash., 30 feet deep and 300 feet wide in St. etid (Oreg.) Channel, and 30 feet deep and 500 feet wide connectl of upper end of St. Helens Channel with main ship cha1tloW Columbia; 24 feet deep and 200 feet wide along frontage ofo deeP of Rainier, Oreg., extended at its upper and lower ends tothis water in Columbia River, 8 feet deep and 150 feet wide fro to a depth in Columbia River through old mouth of Cowlitz ier in. point about 3,000 feet upstream from present termsaa downstra of harbor line; a channel from Longview Port dock Co., along pierhead line and past Weyerhaeuser Timber Plfoat Longview, to a connection with main ship channel below Existing project was authorized by the following. Acts Work authorized Documents 3d ses'; Feb. 27,1911 2 pipeline dredges and accessories...... ............ H. Doc. 1278, 61st Cong 3 ses July 25, 1912Increasing main channel to 30 feet......... ................ H. Doe. 1278, 61st Cong.o' July 27,1916 Consolidating improvement below Portland, Oreg., and No prior report. . between Vancouver, Wash., and mouth of Willamette. Aug. 8, 1917 For the Cathlamet Channel............................... H. Doe. 120, 63d Cong.. 3de s. Sept.22,1922 Construct an additional dredge (dredge was not built) and H. Doc. 1009, 66th Cong. accessories for better maintenance, and construct con- traction works. H. Doe. 156, 67th Cong. 2d se Mar 4,19232 Channel from deep water in Willamette Slough to deep water in Columbia River. Mar. 3, 1925 Depth of 25 feet and width of 300 feet from mouth of Willa- mette River to Vancouver, Wash. H. Doe. 126, 68th Cong.,1st 1st 5 O Mar. 3, 1927 Closing east channel at Swan Island in Willamette River Rivers and Harbors Committee on condition that main channel to be opened to project 10, 69th Cong., 2d sees. sod amittee Doe dimensions on west side of island by port of Portland. July 3, 1930 For a 35-foot channel 500 feet wide from Portland to the sea. II. Doe.s19.5, 70th Con Rivers and har bors 1 8, 71st Cong., 1st sess ~es. Sept. 6, 19333 A channel 28 feet deep and 300 feet wide from mouth of H. Doec. 249, 72d Cong.. Willamette River to Vancouver, with 2 turning basins, each generally 28 feet deep by 800 feet wide by 2,000 feet long. Harbors CommitteeDc Aug.30, 1935 A channel in Columbia River from mouth of Willamette to Rivers and interstate highway bridge at Vancouver, Wash., 30 feet 1, 74th Cong., let sess. p deep and 300 feet wide, with 2 turning basins at Vancouver. CommzitteeD Do...... Maintenance of not to exceed 35-foot depth at low water Rivers and Iar1 rs s 1mmittee in Portland Harbor and Willamette River between its 6, 73d Cong., 1st se. mouth and Broadway Bridge at Portland. Do...... Auxiliary channels, 30 feet deep, 300 and 500 feet at St. Helens. II. Doe. 235, 72d Cong.mittee gssess) pond Aug.20, 1937 Extension of lower turning basin at Vancouver, Wash., 1,000 Rivers and Harborss tsl feet downstream. 81, 74th Cong., d se t Do...... An auxiliary channel 24 feet deep and 200 feet wide along II. Doc. 203, 75th . Cong.o i waterfront at Rainier, Oreg. 1st js; Mar. 2. 1945 Improvement of old mouth of Cowlits River............... H. Doc. 341, 77th Cong.o 2d se Do.... An auxiliary channel in vicinity of Longview, Wash.......... H. Doc. 630, 77th Cong. 2d ses, July 24, 1946 A small-boat mooring basin at Astoria, Oreg............... 1H.Doc. 692, 79th Cong.. st sem* Oct. 23, 1962 A channel 35 feet deep and 500 feet wide from mouth of H. Doe. 203, 87th Cong. Willamette River to Interstate highway bridge at Van- couver, Wash., with 2 turning basins of same depth. 2d se Do...... A channel 40 feet deep and 600 feet wide from Vancouver, H. Doe. 452, 87th Cong., Wash., to mouth of Columbia River; a turning basin at Vancouver, Wash., a turning basin at Longview, Wash., and a channel 40 feet deep in Willamette River from mouth to Broadway Bridge which encompasses Portland Harbor area. 1 Contains latest published maps. SPublic Resolution 105, 67th Cong. * Public Works Administration. RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1529 the downstream 2,400 feet of this channel to be 30 feet lid 300 feet wide and remainder to be 28 feet deep and 250 de; construction of a small-boat mooring basin at Astoria, to include a sheet-pile, sandfilled breakwater about 2,400 tg with a 30-foot roadway along its full length, and steel- 9re wings totaling about 1,460 feet long and for construc- Stone-and-pile dikes and revetments. Plane of reference ary from mouth to Harrington Point is mean lower low thence to Portland and Vancouver, low water. Ti.dal between mean lower low water and mean higher high 't mouth of Columbia is about 8 feet, and at Portland and ver about 21/2 feet at low stages of rivers. Extreme tidal are about 13 and 3 feet, respectively. Annual freshets tle effect on depths at mouth of Columbia; at Portland and Ver they average about 20 feet, while highest known I a stage of 33 feet above low water at Portland. Esti- Federal cost of new work (1966) is $22,600,000. cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1962 provides that terests furnish lands and rights-of-way for construction ;ure maintenance and aids to navigation upon request of 'fEngineers, including suitable spoil-disposal areas and ry retaining dikes, bulkheads, and embankments therefor S of such retaining works; hold the United States free rlages; provide and maintain adequate public terminal and V'facilities open to all on equal terms; make alterations as tired in sewer, water supply, drainage, and other utility s for construction and maintenance of the project; assist ' of improving and maintaining main ship channel in la and Willamette Rivers by loaning the United States a 'Pipeline dredge in good operating condition, with full Id equipment, without charge other than reimbursement OPerating costs of dredge on a basis approved by Chief neers, said operating costs to include proportionate main- costs based on period of time dredge is in use for the States; provide and maintain depths in berthing areas 8s8channels serving terminals, including 50-feet adjacent ead lines, commensurate with depths provided in related areas; and contribute in cash 1.8 percent of cost of con- 11of 40-foot channel by the Corps for enhancement of tied by Port of Portland and contribute in cash 3.5 percent 3f construction of 35-foot channel by the Corps, and that itributions estimated at $386,000 be paid in lump sum commencement of construction. This sum was paid in [Otal non-Federal cost is $474,000. rnal facilities. At Portland, Oreg., there are 20 terminals lilities to handle general cargo, bulk grain, lumber, and leous other cargo. Also available at this facility to the ,re 10 fuel oil and gasoline wharves and piers, mechan- dling devices, and heavy lift equipment. Also within Y of Portland harbor there are facilities for storing 12,- bushels of grain for transhipment by water. At Oreg., there is a large municipal terminal with a 1-mil- hel capacity grain elevator and facilities for receiving 1530 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and handling all types of general cargo. At Vancouver,. Wash.7 ele_ there are two municipal facilities and two grain Fport vators with a total capacity of 7,500,000 bushels of grain. nd a of Longview has a public terminal on Columbia River 3 5O000 privately owned grain elevator with a capacity Of 5 Port'and bushels. At other locations on Columbia River between f ties and Columbia River entrance there are sufficient private alities, to accommodate river vessels and fishing craft. These fac ilstig iof with planned extensions, arePortconsidered adequate for commerce. (For details see Series Nos. 33 and 34,rO Engineers, published in 1953 and 1954, respectively.) .author* Operations and results during fiscal year. Dredgingrt and ized 40-foot channel in Columbia River from Portland, Oregt.inder Vancouver, Wash., to the sea is 30.7 percent complete.a il three contracts, rock removal at Warrior Rock and W,"giver, Columbia River and in Portland Harbor in Willamette tion dredging at Tongue Point and Upper Sands Bar, and const dof of pile dikes at Miller Sands Bar were completed. Atturenig fiscal year dredging Vancouver Bar and lower and upper tMiller basins in Columbia River at Vancouver Wash., dredging ici, Sands Bar near mile 24, and construction of pile dikes at ipro Upper Westport, and Wauna-Lower Westport Bars, were ifurther ress. Plans and specifications were being prepared for fower l Vancouver Bar and turning basin dredging and at Wauna, and upper Westport Bars, in fiscal year 1967. Dredging was underway with 10,391,404 cubic yards of material removede - 5,- 130,807 cubic yards with Government plant and 5,260,597 cubic yards by contract. Maintenance: 10,152,636 cubic yards of ma- terial were removed from bars and shoals in main and side chan- nels-Government plant 9,109,636 cubic yards and contract 1,043,- 000 cubic yards. Following work was accomplished in Columbia River: Erection of survey dolphins and dredging range doleoa between miles 8.7 to 98.4, erection of a platform on Desof 0 dol- Sands dolphin, and repair of pile dikes and construction as phins at various locations. Also accomplished in by contracth o dredging and disposal of excavated material old mouth of Cowlitz River Channel, Wash. Condition end of fiscal year. Project as authorized bY ael of July 24, 1946, was completed September 1950. Main cha was completed in 1933, except that a revision at arri5 and had Point was made in 1935. Dikes were completed in 193 extension of Vancouver turning basin in 1939. Auxiliary clye" nel in vicinity of Longview was completed in 1949, and iPr a ment of mouth of Cowlitz River and small boat mooring b4 0-0 iiver, Astoria were completed in 1950. In progress is dredging channel in Columbia River, from Portland, Oreg., and Vanco 1 96 Wash., to the sea, authorized by the act of October 23, its Controlling depth at low water in Columbia River from f mouth to mouth of Willamette River is 35 feet. Above M t toth Willamette River, Vancouver channel has a controlling deP 30 feet and in Willamette River from its mouth to Broqaail Bridge controlling depth is 33 feet. Project depths arelodi tained all year except during short shoaling periods fol RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1531 1sets which generally occur in May, June, and July. In Colum- at Pand Willamette Rivers between mouth and Broadway Bridge is ortlaad a draft of 33 feet at low tide and 35 feet at high tide .Practichable all year. In Columbia River between mouth of atlllette River and Vancouver, Wash., drafts of 28 and 30 feet loand high tide, respectively, are practical all year. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966 New work Maintenance Total Funds ra.... ....... $11,726,958$53,263,784$64,990,742 e liefa y al l istration. .............................. 138,449 98,668 237,117 St 8...... ....... 12,311,703 53,362,452 65,674,155 247,340 *ti all. ..................................... . 223,026 24,320 Sfunds 12,534,729 53,386,772 65,921,501 Cost and financial statement Yearl Total to 000 $4 100,000 $14,107,090 ho anecs . 'I.........I.... lA ........ $99000 716,002$2,300 73,678 $704,000 1,97,091 4,161,355 13,841,116 o ated. .. $2 00 3003700 2864241 79500 3,345,096 254,706,443 l.2867,7430......94,882 2951667 2711,633 3,339,009 54,591,830 lC5 $22 41fa ,$1,529 fr 5 ance for previous project. Ex- S $36) or h2,1 new and $24,320 for maintenance expended from contributed funds. work toom .e $361.000 contributed by Port of35-footPortland and $17,900 by Port of Vancouver, paid W()lel cernent of dredging 40- and $1rnm channel authorization. Iac$509 5 allotted from deferred maintenance funds, Code 700, and $62,296 for public celerted program repair. WASH. S( 3. COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, Baker Bay is a shallow body of water about its c a ti on . 15 Sq River near re miles in extent on north side of Columbia 8411 Bay . is separated from river by Sand Island, a low-lying Qeoet r only a few feet above high tide level. (See Coast and c Survey Chart 6151.) i stie rojc. A main channel, 10 feet deep and 200 feet S11 lxtending through easterly passage at Sand Island to port co, a distance of about 5 miles; a mooring basin 10 and 12 aeet v ddeep, about 20 acres in extent, east of port of Ilwaco dock, C01DProtecting t-h zewtfeet deep channel 10 breakwaters; and a westouba W, with a dth ting basin with deep water in Columbia River, e o, 150 feet, increased to 200 feet for 2,000 feet at southerly eMean lower water is plane of reference. Tidal range be- eel leanlower low water and mean higher high water is about Sand extreme about 13 feet. --- - Act --Existing project was authorized by the following: .. . Work authorized Documents 4 ' 93 Main channel ................................ Public Works Administration . .. doa*......1H. 5*j193 .. Doc. 44, 73d Cong., let sess. West cchannel 195 West unl8fe d. Doe. 443, 76th Cong., 1st sess. 10 feet deep and mooring bas titectig S. Dc. 95, 81st Cong., 1t ses. breakwaters. 1532 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. for Terminal facilities. Wharves, floats, ramps, and berth,dPrd or f'pr fishing craft, barges, and towboats. Small-boat basin an tecting breakwater provides moorings for numerous ishidng a e adeqUte recreational craft all year. Facilities are considered for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing of west channel by Government plant removed 44,951 cubic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Channel extending throdging easterly passage of Sand Island was completed in 1934. Dredgin west channel to 8-feet was accomplished September 1948. Deepr ening west channel to 10-feet, and boat basin and breakwterd construction at Ilwaco, Wash., finished December 1957, completed the project. Controlling depth (June 1966) in entrance ofwest channel is 4 feet. Cost and financial statement Total to. Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juno 30,1966 New work: 941,$ Appropriated......... .............................................. 8$941 Cost............................... Maintenance: 718,47? Appropriated.......... ............ $154,000 $12,001 .......... ... $33,458 Cost................. $89,299 128,106 39,213 ............ 29,525 4. COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OREGON AND WASINGTON Location. Rises in British Columbia, through which it flow for 425 miles. It enters the United States in northeastern Wely ington, flows southerly to mouth of Snake River, thence westery between Oregon and Washington, and empties into Pacific of 645 miles north of San Francisco Bay and 160 miles south. Strait of Juan de Fuca. Total length of river is 1,210 53, (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 5902, 6151, 6152, 61 6154, 6155, and 6156; also Geological Survey map of Washingtol'o Previousproject. For details see page 1999, Annual Report 1915 and page 174 of Annual Report for 1938.o it Existing project. Provides for a channel across bar of .for able alinement with depth of 48 feet at mean lower low wate a width of one-half mile, to be secured by dredging and constru tion of a spur jetty on north shore. Tidal range on bar betwee, mean lower low water and mean higher high water is about 8 ee and extreme tidal range is about 13 feet. Estimated cost for nre work (1966) is $23,600,000, exclusive of $9,400,000 for jettY re habilitation. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar. 3, 1905 Extend south jetty and construct north jetty and dredging.. H. Doc. 94, 56th Cong., Ist ses.(on Sept. 3, 1954 Bar channel of 48-foot depth and spur jetty on north shore.. Hi.Doc. 249, 83d Cong., 2d oe tains latest published Map) RIVERS AND HIARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1533 ve O~r.New 4ocal cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: In- vestigation of beach erosion south of south jetty was continued. Third year surveys were underway. Tests were made in fixed Modelof lower Columbia River estuary of 35- and 40-foot Aa nel base tests. Model is at Waterways Experiment Station. A 0otract was awarded June 16 for Sand Island pile dikes re- ta, Nos. 4.01 4.47 ,and 5.15. Maintenance: Dredging en- trance channel was accomplished by Government hopper dredge with 2,201,682 cubic yards of material removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is 63 percent Q1)lete Project as originally authorized, consisting of exten- ti4 of south jetty constructed under previous project, construc- aof north jetty, and 40-foot channel depth over entrance bar, Plete~ mpleted in 1918. Dredging 48-foot bar channel was com- leeSeptember 1957. Rehabilitation of south jetty was com- d new work funds September 1964 and rehabilitation of thiWith oete jetty in March 1965. A condition survey (June 1966) 4 ed a controlling depth in entrance channel of 48 feet left out- 8 feet left inside, 45 feet right inside, and 42 feet right out- 4ide, oat mean lower low water. At Clatsop Spit, controlling depth r left quarter is 40 feet, center of channel 47 feet, and right ter47 feet. Total costs to June 30, 1966, from Federal funds g $39,153,814 of which $14,763,406 was for new work, $3,- 8237 for jetty restoration, and $20,667,171 for maintenance. Saddition, $475,000 and $25,000 were contributed by Ports of 4land and Astoria, Oreg., respectively, and expended for new Cost and financial statement 41yea Total to ........ 1962 1963 1904 1965 1966 June 30,19661 $300,000 $95,000 $170,000 )opriated.......... $27,000 $105,000 $16,855,253 . 33,752 19,345 16,749,659 284,754 117,564 152,013 4......... 28e,,75* ,,r' . .. ... 20 4 7 42 1 ~a 1,806,000 ou9riated......... 503,430 501,459 561,000 554,386 602,509 622,229 595,000 509,162 20,758,855 220,667,171 *I2,014,320 lriated......... 692,000 1,250,000 400,000 1,632,000 30,000 4,054,000 0 7,072 3,723,237 "* .......... 23,259 8906,5281,286,3911,491,300 S es $1,986,253 for.new work for previous project. Excludes $500,000 contributed funds Work. es$1,188,625 allotted under deferred maintenance, Code 700. SCOLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WASH., AND THIE DALLES, OREG. VOcation. On Columbia River, between Interstate Bridge at 'Couver, Wash., 106.5 miles above mouth and The Dalles, Oreg., e191, a distance of 84.5 miles. For description of Columbia ,see Improvement No. 4. fet sting project. Channel 27 feet deep at low water and 300 ide between Vancouver, Wash., and The Dalles, Oreg., 85 WN te ; a channel 10 feet deep at low water and 300 feet wide at up- a11 entrance to Oregon Slough, Oreg., a suitable turning basin acent to site of port development in vicinity of Camas and 1534 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Washougal, Wash., a boat basin at Hood River, Oreg., 50b 1,300 feet and 10 feet deep at normal Bonneville pool levely, tWti connecting channel of same depth to deepwater, and a Pronttecll breakwater on easterly side; a barge channel to waterfro, 2 00 Bingen, Wash., 10 feet deep at normal Bonneville pool leetdeep feet wide and about 1 mile long, and an access channel 7 00 feet at normal Bonneville pool level, 100 feet wide and about ,0end of long, to a natural mooring basin for small boats near east rovide channel; and construction of The Dalles Harbor, Oreg., to p 8 0 0 a breakwater and shear boom protected basin about 4004b feet feet in size with depth of 8 feet below a pool elevation of'7ft waterdaat at mean sea level. Tidal range between mean lower lowi()fetand mean higher high water at Vancouver is about 2 feetdarenme Bonneville about 0.2 foot at low stages of the river. AnnU3l tidal ranges are about 3 feet and 0.4 foot, respectively. est freshets average about 21 feet at Vancouver, while the highe known stage reached 33 feet above low water. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Construct a channel 27 feet deep by 300 feet from Vancouver, IT. Committee Doc. 94,74th Cong Aug. 26,1937 1 Wash., to Bonneville, Oreg. sess. Ist sess. Mar. 2, 1945 Construct Camas-Washougal turning basin.................I. Doe. 218, 76th Cong*, 2d ses. July 24, 1940 Construct a channel 27 feet deep by 300 feet wide from H. Doe. 704, 79th Cong., Bonneville, Oreg., to The Dalles, Oreg. Do..... Construct a channel 10 feet deep and 300 feet wide at upper Do. entrance to Oregon Slough Oreg. Do..... Construct a boat basin at ifood River, Oreg., 10 feet deep, Do. 500 feet wide, by 1,300 feet long. Do..... Construct a barge channel at Bingen, Wash., 10 feet deep, Do. 200 feet wide, by I mile long, and an access channel 7 feet deep, 100 feet wide, by 1,000 feet long to natural mooring basin. Do..... Construct The Dalles Harbor 8 feet deep, 400 feet wide by S. Doe. 89, 79th Cong 800 feet long. 1 Contains latest published maps. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ly Terminal facilities. At Vancouver, Wash., immediateo ect stream from the two highway bridges are a privatelytW ot sand and gravel facility, a Coast Guard dock, a private fac'il moorage equipped with marine railway and shipbuildig river ities, and facilities for transfer of bulk petroleum fro nc er barges. (For further details concerning facilities atVa 1953.) see Port Series No. 33, Corps of Engineers, published in 1 jA In northern section of Portland, Oreg., on south bank of Coltai River, about 1.7 miles upstream from interstate bridges, isbetwee with a 110-ton derrick used for transfer of cargoes b i trucks and barges. About 3.5 miles upstream fro itl terstate bridges are two liquid-fertilizer storage tanks eacheq a capacity of 229,000 gallons. This facility has necessary e4 At ment for unloading tanker barges and loading trucl- there Camas, Wash., about 13.5 miles upstream from Vancouver, a l is a private wharf used for transfer of papermill suppls ol" paper to and from barges, and facilities for discharging ut lo from barges. Port of Camas-Washougal has a wharf 528 fee RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1535 aon shougal, Wash. At port of The Dalles (mile 44 above by Ieville) there is a municipal wharf 125 by 1,100 feet for use eraot Ocean vessels and river boats. There are two 1-story tim- Whaf corrugated iron warehouses, each 94 by 461 feet, on this lal r With rail connections. There is also a municipal oil termi- abo01, sistn g of a concrete and timber wharf 27 by 193 feet, Wit C mile below main wharf. There are private storage tanks hacda total capacity of 2,300,000 gallons near this terminal for ate ing petroleum products. Storage tanks have rail, truck, and b,,er connections. A private elevator with a capacity of 40,000 dl eI and a public elevator of 868,000-bushel capacity for han- elev bullk grain to river craft are also at The Dalles. Public tor has rail, truck, and water connections. There is a pri- -. Owned rail connection about three-fourths mile below bet 1 Dal wharf where certain types of cargo may be handled r een railroad cars and river boats or barges by means of a et c of up to 22-ton capacity. At numerous locations over fo e Waterway are log rollways for transfer of logs to water trucks. Facilities are considered adequate for present eColerce. rederations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Dredging channel was accomplished by Government plant with removal of 187,240 cubic yards of material. Repair of existing pile dikes and construction of dolphins was accomplished by con- atrtes t various locations. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete. h uction of The Dalles Harbor, Oreg., was completed in 1949. 1sel dredging at upper end of Oregon Slough was accom- e 11n 1957. Project depth of 27 feet between Bonneville and )alles, Oreg., was achieved April 1959. The 27-foot channel t boetween Vancouver, Wash., and Bonneville, Oreg., except as r'eoval of some submerged rock and dredging to be done, o1 corpleted May 1960. Improvement of lower entrance of b1eville Dam lock was completed in May 1961. Construction of a t basin at Hood River, Oreg., and of Camas-Washougal, tr,., turning basin was accomplished February 1962. Con- an of a barge channel in Columbia River near Bingen, 111 **Was completed October 1962, except for removal of rock tacles encountered. This was accomplished by contract telrber 1963. 1536 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement June3 o301 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June A' New work:$59 Appropriated.......... $148.200 -54,195 -$11,330 -1,072 ............ 6,98 Cost.................. 378,033 116,703 24,742 ......................... .549 Maintenance: 25,659 Appropriated...........152,500 134,210 33,000 1514000 11,000 6 Cost.................142,072 142,466 3S,382 141,719 113,523 XIncludes funds allotted under Code 721 (small authorized projects) $30 -E tocot Oregon Slough; $161,897 Camas-Washougal turning basin; $2 27,008-food 'IRiver basin; $157,470-Bingen, Wash., barge channel. Total Code 721 is $577,668. 2 Includes $2,033,408 allotted under Code 700 (deferred maintenance). 6. COOS BAY, OREG. Location. On Oregon coast 200 miles south of mouth of colu, bia River and 445 miles north of San Francisco Bay. It is aout 13 miles long and 1 mile wide, with an area at high tide of aO0 15 square miles. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart and 5984.) Repor Previous projects. For details see page 1987 of Annuale for 1915, and page 1728 of Annual Report for 1938. tis Existing project. Two rubblemound, high-tide jetties at entrance; a channel across outer bar 40 feet deep mean lower low water, , and a suitable wittd'dimension• ae with with suitble width re- duced gradually to Guano Rock; a channel 30 feet deep at lower low water and generally 300 feet wide thence to feet lo1 Isthmus Slough; turning basins of same depth and 1,000 fe orth and 600 feet wide opposite Coalbank Slough and at city of t ile Bend; anchorage basins 600 feet wide by 2,000 feet long t wide 3.5 and near mile 7; a channel 22 feet deep and 150 fee a from Smith's Mill (mouth of Isthmus Slough) to Millinh1arle o S mooring basin, about 500 by 900 feet, for small boats at Cde, to ton, with a connecting channel, 10 feet deep and 150 fee~t rel deep water in Coos Bay, and construction of a protecti'f - water and a bulkhead. Existing project was authorized by the followingv Acts Work authorized Document let sess. June25,1910 Dredging the ocean bar channel......................... H. Doe. 958, 60th Cong., 1sts ' Mar 2,1919 A channel 22 feet deep to Smith's mill.................... . I).Doo. 325, 65th Cong. 2d eS ' Sept.22,1922 Restore north jetty 9,600 feet long, construct a south jetty H. Doe. 150, 67th Cong., about 3,900 feet long. extend 22-foot bay channel from Smith's mill to Millington. Jan. 21, 1927 Extend jetties to such lengths as may be practicable within estimate of total cost of jetties, $3,250,000 as given in II. Doe. 150, 67th Cong. 1st a July 3, 1930 A channel 24 feet deep and 300 feet wide through Pigeon I. Doc. 110, 70th Cong.,' Aug.30, 1935 ForPoint 24-foot following Reef,channel a loeation from along westerly Pigeon Point side of bay. Reef to Smith's Cong*, mill S. committee print, 73d Cong and a turning basin above Marshfield.2de July 24,1946 Increased dimensions of channel across bar and to Isthmus S. Dec. 253, 79th Cong., 2d Slough and turning basin opposite Coalbank Slough and at city of North Bend; anchorage basins at mile 3.5 and near mile 7.2ds June 30,1948 A mooring basin and connecting channel at Charleston.......11. Doc. 646, 80thCong ' 1Contains latest published maps. he Plane of reference is mean lower low water. Mean of the h (t high water above plane of reference and extreme tidal ral %o0 entrance are 7 feet and about 11 feet, respectively, and a RIVERS ANn T ARuPRSPORITAND. A OREG.. DISTRICT 1537 7 ,3 $ a nd 11 feet, respectively. Federal cost for new work 0 0 0 ' 7, 0, exclusive of $1,579,230 for jetty rehabilitation. cal cooperation. Fully complied with. 649 rminal facilities. At North Bend there is a municipal dock ow feet long fronting on channel, about 1,780 feet of privately At C Mill docks, and three oil-receiving terminals in vicinity. 1,~ os Bay there is a privately owned dock with a frontage of 1%1s eet, open to the public on equal terms; several small land- with 1,0 0 o fishing and harbor craft; and three lumberAtdocks Eastside, sth 576-, and 500-foot frontages, respectively. thb nus Slough, there is a 200-foot dock to accommodate coastal er schooners. At Empire there is a privately owned lumber oYwc 'ith frontage of 510 feet, and an oil terminal, also privately blileed for receipt of petroleum products by barge. About with 11/2 elow Empire there is a privately owned pulp mill SfroDubl.tage of 480 feet. At Charleston there are two wharves, onedock feet land one private, with usable areas of 1,200 and 2,400 asquare ,eat respectively, for receipt of fresh fish and shellfish and large Dalloo0d receiving and processing plant. There is also a munici- oI oned small-boat basin, open to all on equal terms, capable oeoring 25 0 fishing and recreation craft. Servicing facilities ra4nal craft are available at all facilities, and public launching in- tere[shave been constructed in Charleston area by private has owned floating moorage on Joe Slough Cairit*A forprivately mooring about 50 fishing vessels. These facilities 0 cosidered adequate for existing commerce. Delations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance: Dredging entrance channel with removal of 2,729,077 cubic yards of material. Government plant 1,496,663 cubic yards and con- tract 232,414 cubic yards. Under contracts was accomplished tion of dredging range structures and dredging of Coos c9clannel and Charleston Basin entrance. Condition at end of fiscal year. South jetty was completed in ion ' north jetty in 1929, and 24-foot channel in 1937. Excava- 4tr Of channel to 30 feet deep and generally 300 feet wide from )t alece to Isthmus Slough was completed in 1951. Dredging na bar channel to a depth of 40 feet, decreasing to 30 feet at 4red o Iock 1lete completed in 1952.• Existing project was com- cwswas compedi 1 September 1956 with construction of jetty small boat basin at )ec eston reg. Rehabilitation of south was completed at iber 1963. Controlling depths (May 1966) are 28 feet on 0 ad 22 feet from entrance to Coos Bay. Total costs to June were $24,- 25, 6 , from Federal funds under existing project tt. of which $8,077,000 was for new work, $1,579,230 for irestoration, and $15,268,912 for maintenance. In addition i't for new work and $8,387 for maintenance from con- ted funds were expended. 1538 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement 1 2 163 16 105 1966 Total tO Juo3 196 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 196 oae New work: 879 096 Appropriated................... .............. ..... ................. 7909 Cost... ................................................................. Maintenance: 2 580 686 Appropriated.......... $533,000 $399,023 $482.362 $404,000 $953,959 1 471713 Cost................. 422,242 587,691 474,551 398,443 842,849 Rehabilitation: '60 00 Appropriated.......... 480,000 1,190,000 ............ -120,000 . ........ 79 230 Cost.................. 12,535 369,988 1,171,288 2,815 5,6641 udesx "Includes $802,096 for new work and $178,801 for maintenance for previous project. $43,513 for new work and $8,387 for maintenance expended from contributed funds. Includes $1,444,640 allotted under Code 700, deferred maintenance. 7. COOS AND MILLICOMA RIVERS, OREG. Location. South Fork and Millicoma Rivers rise in CoS Range in southern Oregon, flow generally westerly and joinftO make Coos River, 5.3 miles above mouth of Coos River in 'Coo Bay. (See Geological Survey, Coos Bay Quadrangle.) Existing project. Provides for channels 5 feet deep and 50 feet wide from mouth of Coos River to Allegany on Millicoa River, mile 13.8 and to Dellwood on South Fork, mile 14, an thence a channel 3 feet deep and 50 feet wide to mile 14.7e01 South Fork, including stabilization works on Coos River. Mean lower low water is plane of reference. Mean of higher h1ll waters above plane of reference and extreme tidal ranges unldee ordinary conditions at mouth of Coos River are 7.3 and 11 of respectively, and there is tidal range of about 1 foot at head hO navigation in both forks. Freshet stages usually reach a heig of from 10 to 15 feet at Allegany, head of navigation on Millico1D River. Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $436,000. x ing project was authorized by River and Harbor Acts of June 3, 1896 (H. Doc. 237, 53d Cong., 3d sess.) and June 30, 1948 ( Doc. 124, 80th Cong., 2d sess.). Latest published maps are in these documents. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1948 provides thal local interests furnish lands, rights-of-way, and spoil disPosl areas for construction and future maintenance; construct, oper" ate, and maintain adequate terminal facilities open to all on equal terms; and hold the United States free from damages. In january 1965, local interests were requested to submit assurances. Con tributed funds (other) from Port of Coos Bay, in amount of $80,000 were accepted March 1965, to cover additional cost oI disposing of dredge spoils in Coos Bay, Oreg., in lieu of local interests providing lands for this purpose. Terminal facilities. Several small privately owned docs and landing places on the river that are used by towboat and pleasure craft. There are no publicly owned docks. Present facilities are considered adequate for existing commerce. Proj ect modification provides for construction of terminal facilities open to all on equal terms.t Operations and results during fiscal year. Under contract awarded July 1965, channel and canal improvement, dredgin' snagging, and sweeping, were completed March 1966. Rock was RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1539 "countered during channel operations and removal will be done by Government plant and hired labor. Contract dredging amounted to 124,483 cubic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Originally authorized project roviding for a channel from mouth of Coos River to head of navigation in both forks, to provide a depth of 3 feet generally aId 1 foot near head of navigation, was completed in 1899. In March 1966 construction of project as modified by 1948 River and 1arbor Act has been accomplished except for removal of rock encountered Since scour that had been anticipated in Coos River has not developed, it has been recommended that construction of Stabilization works be held in abeyance until need has been estab- lshed. Controlling depth (Mar. 1966) is 5 feet in Coos River and 1 foot in Millicoma River. Coos River South Fork had 3 feet, survey of January 1966. _Cost and financial statement l e~ Total to AYear 962 ............... 1963 1064 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 e work: A ropriated... ...................... $23,000 ............ $555,000-$150,000 $436,000 c t... mMaitenance: ........... .... ............ 10,352 $5,942 25,780 297,741 347,815 Aoropriated.. ........ ,515 1,887 5,833 10,000 -8,458 112,398 cost .............. 1,515 1,887 5,833 1,542............ 112,398 8. COQUILLE RIVER, OREG. Location. Rises in Coast Range, flows generally westerly for about 100 miles, and empties into Pacific Ocean at Bandon, Oreg., 225 miles south of mouth of Columbia River and 420 miles north Of San Francisco Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 5802 and 5971.) Previous projects. For details see page 1986 of Annual Re- Dort for 1915, and page 1727 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. Two rubblemound high-tide jetties at river 1houth, south jetty 2,700 feet long and the north, 3,450 feet; and a Channel 13 feet deep at mean lower low water and of suitable Width from the sea to a point 1 mile above old Coquille River Lighthouse, and snagging to State highway bridge at city of Oquille. Mean lower low water is plane of reference. Tidal range between mean lower low water and mean higher high ater at mouth is 6.8 feet and extreme range about 10 feet. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents JOne 25, 1910 Dredging shoals between mouth and Riverton, and removing 1H Doc. 673, 61st Cong., 2d sees. Sobstructions between mouth of North Fork and Bandon. Jt. 2, 1919 For a 13-foot channel from the ocean to Bandon..........1.. 1. Doc. 207, 65th Cong., lst sess. 3 3,1930 Deepen channel to 16 feet between sea and eastern end of H. Doe. 186, 70th Cong., 1st sess. 1 A north jetty. S30, 1935 Present project depth between sea and eastern end of north S. committee print, 74th Cong., 1st sese;. Mrjetty. 'ar.2,1945 For 13-foot depth from sea to a point I mile above Coquillo If. Doe. 672, 76th Cong., 2d seas. 1 River Lighthouse and snagging to State highway bridge. published maps. Contains latest 1540 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. At Bandon: A privately owned mill dock used exclusively for shipping lumber on coastwise vessels, a pb- licly owned wharf, and a small basin open to all equally. Above Bandon, on navigable waterway: A privately owned lumilber shipping facility and numerous log booms and rollways. Fac'ili ties are considered adequate for present commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredging entrance channel by Government hopper dredge removed 66,810 cubic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Jetties were completed in dn and entrance channel in 1933. North jetty was reconstructe d in 1942 and a 750-foot extension to easterly end was constructed in6 1951. South jetty was repaired in 1954 and north jetty in 1956. Controlling depth on bar is 9 feet (Apr. 1966) and in inner chn30 nel to mile 1.3 is 12 feet (Sept. 1965). Total costs to June 3, 1966, from Federal funds were $2,013,255, of which $316,640 's for new work and $1,696,615 for maintenance. In addition, $ 891 was expended for new work from contributed funds. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $657 366 Appropriated.. .. ......................................................... 67:366 Cost............ ............ ................................ 6 Maintenance: 78 16 Appropriated.......... $40,000 $57,000 $42,500 $50,000 $52,000808 Cost.............. ... 41,240 54,268 31,390 62,463 24,310 1Includes $340,726 for new work and $41,467 for maintenance for previous project, Excl $72,891 contributed funds expended for new work. 2 Includes $78,500 allotted under Code 700, deferred maintenance. 9. COWLITZ RIVER, WASH. :Location. Rises in Cascade Range in Washington, flows wst" erly and southerly about 120 miles, and empties into Columbi River about 69 miles from its mouth. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6153.) Previous project. For details see page 2,000, Annual RepOr for 1915 and page 1763, Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A channel 4 feet deep at low water and 50 feet wide from mouth to Ostrander (9 miles), 21,, feet deep and 50 feet wide to Castle Rock (10 miles), and 21/2 feet deep at lo water and not less than 40 feet wide to Toledo (18 miles) to be secured by snagging, dredging, and regulating works. Water level, due to tides, varies from 4 feet at mouth to zero at Ostrander. During ordinary freshets a stage of 20 feet, and at extreme floods a stage of 25 feet is reached in river at 10.1. Wash. Actual cost of new work is $32,908. Existing project was adopted by 1910 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 1167, 6 0th Cong., 2d sess., from mouth to Castle Rock, and H. Doc. 404,61bt Cong., 2d sess., from Castle Rock to Toledo). For latest gob lished map see House Document 1167, 60th Congress, 2d session. Local cooperation. None required. RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1541 Terminal facilities. Privately owned and operated landings, a tad and gravel dock, log rollways, and storage booms. Facili- es are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance Dredging with Government plant removed 10,900 cubic yards of taterial. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- bleted in 1913. Channel is maintained to project depth of 4 feet etween mouth and Kelso, Wash. Above Kelso channel is in DOor condition with controlling depth at low water of less than 1 foot, condition survey of April 1961. Controlling depth (Mar. 966) from mouth to mile 5 was 4 feet. Total costs under exist- 116 Project to June 30, 1966, were $541,880, of which $32,908 was fr new work and $508,972 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Total to Year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 )Propriated Cost... . .............. . ... ............................................ ... $37,907 37,907 ainteane:...................................................... A ;DDropriated .......... $23,000 $2,305 $33,400 $14,500 $12,000 558,558 ot . . ......... 46,593 2,305 32,867 14,148 11,544 557,156 1Includes $4,999 for new work and $48,184 for maintenance for previous project. 10. DEPOE BAY, OREG. oLocation. Harbor on Oregon coast 100 miles south of mouth of Columbia River. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5902.) Modification of existing project. Project as authorized was cotipleted June 1952. This modification approved February 1965, for construction under section 107, River and Harbor Act of 1960, atuthorized entrance channel from 30 to 50 feet wide and 8 feet deep at mean lower low water, construction of a concrete break- Water, and placing of stone for a spending beach. Local cooperation. Furnished by Port of Newport to meet all 11ormal requirements and cash contribution of $42,000. Operations and results during fiscal year. A contract was awarded April 1966 for excavation of entrance channel, con- truction of breakwater and placing stone for a spending beach. ork is 54 percent complete. Condition at end of fiscal year. Removed 1,555 cubic yards of rock from entrance channel. Foundation for breakwater has been cleaned and forming started, although no concrete pours ade. Controlling depth of entrance channel (May 1966) was 6 feet. Total costs from Federal funds to June 30, 1966 were 144,726 for improvement of entrance channel under section 107. 11. LEWIS RIVER, WASIH. Location. Rises in Cascade Range in Washington, flows west- erly and southwesterly 110 miles, and empties into Columbia iver about 88 miles from its mouth. (See Coast and Geodetic urvey Charts 6153 and 6154.) 1542 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 Previous projects. For details see page 2001, Annual Report for 1915, and page 1762, Annual Report for 1938. d50 Existing project. A low-water channel 6 feet deep and 50 feet wide to mouth of East Fork (33 miles) ; 4 feet deep and feet wide on East Fork from its mouth to La Center (3 miles) 4 feet deep and 50 feet wide on Lewis River (North Fork)and from East Fork to Woodland (21/2 miles), secured by dredgint and construction of regulating works and clearing channel to Ariel (16 miles from Woodland). Maximum variation of water level, due to tide, ranges from about 3 feet at mouth to 1 /2feet at La Center and Zero at Woodland. During ordinary fresht a stage of 14 feet and, at extreme floods, a stage of 24 feet is reached in main river at Woodland, Wash. Existing project was adopted by 1913 River and Harbor Act (I-. Doc. 28, 62d Cong., 1st sess 4 For latest published map see page 3557 of Annual Report for 190 Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. At Woodland on Lewis River there are several privately owned facilities for mooring fishing and pleas* ure craft. Facilities considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance dredg- ing and disposal of excavated material accomplished under con- tract removed 23,913 cubic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co1 pleted in 1927. Controlling depth (Sept. 1965) entrance to Rail road Bridge (mile 1.8) of 5 feet. Total cost of existing project to June 30, 1966, was $239,928, of which $35,880 was for new work and $204,048 for maintenance. Cost and financial statement Tats.51 to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3 New work: 132 $58 Appropriated......... ....... .......... 58,132 Cost............................................... Maintenance: 212 9 Appropriated.......... $35,500 $56,570 $22,500 -$200 $13,000 212,146 Cost............. .. 35,201 56,096 17,666 3,667 14,718 SIncludes $22,252 for new work and $8,098 for maintenance for previous project. 12. PORT ORFORD, OREG. Location. On Oregon coast 250 miles south of Columbia dive entrance and 390 miles north of San Francisco Bay. (Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5952 and Geological Survey Quadrangle, Port Orford, Oreg.). Existing project. Improvement of harbor by 550-foot exte sion of existing locally constructed breakwater. Construction was authorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (S. Doc. 62, 88th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated cost of new work (1966) is $724,000. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1965 provides that local interests agree to provide lands, easements, and rights-Of way for construction and for future maintenance and mainte. nance of aids to navigation upon request of the Chief of Eng neers; hold the United States free from damages; provide and maintain adequate public terminal and transfer facilities open to RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1543 all equally; and contribute in cash 0.9 percent of cost of construc- lotI by the Corps, and that such contribution, presently estimated Sabout $6,000, be paid in a lump sum before starting construc- Terminal facilities. A lumber dock which is a timber piling tructure about 210 by 70 feet, equipped with two fork lifts for ndling bundled lumber and a fish dock, attached to inshore end Of lumber dock, 120 feet long by 70 feet wide. About 25 local Shing boats make Port Orford their home base. These facilities are considered adequate for present commerce. SOperations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of a esign memorandum was initiated. SCondition at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering was ini- tiated. Cost and financial statement iscalYear.. 1962 ........ '18%1yearTotal 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, to ApPropriated ........ ............................................. $20,000 $20,000 Cost.. ...................................................... 3381 3,381 13. ROGUE RIVER, HARBOR AT GOLD BEACH, OREG. Location. Rises in Cascade Range in southwestern Oregon, foWs westerly through Coast Range, and empties into Pacific Ocean 264 miles south of mouth of Columbia River and 381 miles nOrthli of San Francisco Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5951.) Existing project. Provides for two jetties at entrance, and a hannel 13 feet deep and 300 feet wide from ocean to a point 1rn1ediately below State Highway Bridge, about 1 mile, heluding widening channel at a point about 0.25 mile below bridge to form a turning basin 13 feet deep, 500 feet wide, and 650 feet long. At request of local interests, turning basin was lo- cated in south portion of estuary downstream from a point 0.25 mile below bridge. This change was effected to permit adequate terminal facilities to be constructed adjacent to turning basin. map showing this revision is in Portland District office. Mean Wer low water is plane of reference. Range of tide between ean lower low water and mean higher high water is 5.5 feet, a(Id extreme range of tide from lower low to higher high water is estimated to be 14 feet. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $3,853,439 exclusive of $700,000 for rehabilitation of horth jetty. Existing project was authorized by 1954 River and arbor Act (S. Doc. 83, 83d Cong., 2d sess., contains latest pub- lished map). Local cooperation. Authorizing act provides local interests fUrnish lands, rights-of-way, and suitable spoil-disposal areas for new work and future maintenance; provide adequate public ter- "linlal and transfer facilities open to all equally; dredge and maintain project depths in berthing space adjacent to and Within 50 feet of terminal and transfer facilities; and hold the 1544 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 United States free from damages. Total estimated cost for all requirements under terms of project authorization were $225,000 (1965). Terminal facilities. One-half mile below 1 0 1-IighW'Y bridge is a steel sheet piling and fill dock used exclusively.for shipment of lumber by ocean-going barge. There are varior other landings for fishing and recreational craft. At Wedder burn, across river from Gold Beach, is a facility to accommoat excursion passengers and small freight items destined for variou private landings between Wedderburn and Agness, Oreg. Facli ties considered adequate for existing commerce.. Operations and results during fiscal year. New wor Dredging north side turning basin to barge dock on Rouge River right bank was accomplished by contract November 1965 w'ith removal of 135,053 cubic yards of material. Under contract awarded for rehabilitation of north jetty, quarry development was initiated in June 1966. Maintenance: Dredging river chanc nel and entrance bar by government plant removed 65,175 cubic yards of material.n Condition at end of fiscal year. Jetty construction began June 1959 was completed September 1960, with 678,836 tons of stonel placed in the two jetties at the entrance. Dredging river chane by contract and entrance bar by government plant was accom plished in fiscal year 1962. North jetty along channel side 5O1 fered considerable damage from December 1964 flood. Contro ling depths (June 1966) are 2 feet on bar, 7 feet from entrance to basin, and 3 feet in basin. Cost and financial statement Ti otal to6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: $3 853439 Appropriated.......... $150,000 -$75,000 ............ $683,071 -$138,132 $ 853 439 Cost.................. 318,105 480 $19,158 345,658 210,556 3 Maintenance: 407500 Appropriated.......... 42,000 9,000 207,000 104,500 45,000 402718 Coat.................. 40,691 8,148 206,590 105,209 42,080 Rehabilitation:A00 Appropriated.......................................................... 500,000 50 ,28 Cost........................................................9:,287 14. SIUSLAW RIVER, OREG. Location. Rises in coast range, flows about 110 miles westerly and empties into Pacific Ocean about 160 miles south of entrance of Columbia River and 485 miles north of San Francisco 3Y Calif. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 6023 and 5802.) Previous project. For details see page 1988, Annual Report for 1915. Existing project. Provides for a 600-foot extension of north jetty; and entrance channel 18 feet deep and 300 feet wide from deep water in ocean to a point 1,500 feet inside the outer endOf existing north jetty; thence a channel 16 feet deep, 200 feet wide with additional widening at bends, and about 5 miles long, to a turning basin, 16 feet deep, 400 feet wide, and 600 feet long' RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1545 Posite Siuslaw dock at Florence, and a channel 12 feet deep, 150 feet Wide from Florence to Cushman. Mean lower low water is Dlane of reference. Mean of higher high water above plane of reference and extreme tidal ranges at mouth of river are 6.6 feet ad about 11 feet, respectively. During low stages of river, tidal elect extends to Mapleton, 201/2 miles above mouth. Estimated ederal cost of new work (1966) is $2,810,000, exclusive of 879,285 for jetty rehabilitation. Existing project was authorized by the following: taWork authorised Documents r. 1910 426 Extension of jetties............................. Doc. 648, 61st Cong., 2d sess. H11. 1925 12-foot deep channel........................... S. Committee print, serial 68th Cong., 4Y 3,1st sess. 3 1158 H. Doe. 204. 85th Cong., 1st sess.1 18-foot bar channel and 16-foot river channel.............. contains latest published maps, Local cooperation. Fully complied with for all completed ork . River and Harbor Act of 1958 provides local interests traish lands, rights-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas for con- t"ruction and future maintenance; hold the United States free from damages; provide a public landing with suitable terminal acilities, open to all on equal terms; and that construction of Iorth jetty extension be deferred until experience demonstrates, Judgment of Chief of Engineers, that this work is advisable. ~stiraated costs for all requirements under terms of project au- thOrization were $156,000 (1966). Terminal facilities. Port dock at Florence is principal termi- al facility on river. This dock 150 feet wide and 350 feet long, 1 about 5.3 miles above river entrance and accommodates a fSh.receiving station at east end of wharf which maintains a Winch of 2-ton capacity and supplies gasoline, oil, and ice to h ermen Other facilities at Florence consist of various float- ays which provide docking facilities for fishing vessels and Other small craft and a new floating dock with accommodations for 68 commercial fishing vessels. Across the river and below highway bridge at Glenada are floatways used by small craft. At "Ushinan, LaDuke Lumber Co. maintains a dock for loading Oceangoing barges with packaged lumber. There are also a num- er of private landings and log booms between Cushman and .aleton, to accommodate river traffic. These facilities are con- idered adequate for existing traffic. Operations and results during fiscal year. A design memo- randum was submitted April 1966 covering authorized dredging of 18-foot bar channel and 16-foot river channel. Maintenance: U.s. hopper dredge removed 156,560 cubic yards of material from entrance channel. Condition at end of fiscal year. Extension of jetties con- tructed under previous project was completed in 1917. The 12- toot channel was completed in 1930. In March 1958, rehabilita- o0 of north jetty was accomplished. No work has been done jeder authorization of July 3, 1958. Rehabilitation of south etty was completed December 1962. Controlling depths are 10 1546 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 feet from entrance to mile 2, (Apr. 1966), 8 feet from mile 2 to Florence (May 1966) and 8 feet for 2 miles above Florence, (e re 66). Total costs from Federal funds to June 30, 1966, wr $2,406,879, of which $382,455 was for new work, $879,285 for jetty restoration, and $1,244,006 for maintenance. In additon, $322,532 expended for new work from contributed funds. Cost and financial statement Total to66 Fiscal year ................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,l New work: $546,589 Appropriated..................................................... $20,000 534,156 Cost.................. ......... ............ ............................. 7,567 Maintenance: 21,258,349 Appropriated.......... $31,0C0 $61,000 $75,000 $50,000 101,000 1244, Cost ................. 32,123 54,139 79,800 47,925 91,3002 Rehabilitation: 879286 Appropriated.......... 500,000 370.000 -20,715 ................. ........ 819:2 Cost.................. 53,751 805,939 365 ........................ SIncludes $151,701 for new work and $10,611 for maintenance for previou project. cludes $322,532 for new work expended from contributed funds. 2 Includes $188,000 allotted under Code 700, deferred maintenance. 15. SMITH RIVER, OREG. Location. Rises in Coast Range in southern Oregon and flow about 40 miles generally westerly to join Umpqua River oPPosi Reedsport, about 11 miles from Pacific Ocean. Course of river meanders to such an extent that its total length is abou.thi s miles. Lower 23 miles is tidal. Section of river included i. his project is lower 20.8 miles. Head of navigation is Sulphur Sprin Landing, mile 20.8. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey har 6004.) l Existing project. A channel 6 feet deep at mean lower otw water and 100 feet wide from river mouth to mouth of Northe t Fork, and thence 4 feet deep at mean lower low water and 75 feet wide to Sulphur Springs Landing with a passing place 125 ofeet wide and 800 feet long near mouth of North Fork. Pla at reference is mean lower low water. Average range of tideher mouth is about 7 feet between lower low water and higher high water, and at head of navigation (mile 20.8) tidal rangei about 4 feet. Existing project was authorized by 1948 River Harbor Act (S. Doc. 94, 80th Cong., 1st sess., contains latest pub lished map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. iver Terminal facilities. Only terminal facilities on Smith Rie are privately owned landing floats. On lower reach of river are several boom and rafting grounds for collecting logs for move- ment to mills downstream. Ample space exists along lower sec tions of river for development of terminal facilities as maY be necessary to meet needs of commerce.o Operations and results during fiscal year. Partial survey o river was accomplished by hired labor. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project construction inititae in August 1956 was completed February 1957. Initial chanel maintenance was accomplished in July 1963. Controlling depth (Mar. 1966) entrance to mile 2 was 5 feet. RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1547 Cost and financial statement y YerTotal to ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 ,l~l~rorriated ............ .$ 4 , 0 ............ ............ ............ ............ $143,120 'oaMroriateil.. ............... 143,120 ait nce.................... ............................................... 5P ropriated .......... . $796 $47,1500 -$3 857 . . . $1,719 53,572 Qost................. 7961 21,556 22:087.............. 1,719 53,572 16. TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR, OREG. JLocation. Bay is on Oregon coast about 50 miles south of outh of Columbia River.0 (See Coast and Geodetic Survey harts 5902 and 6112.) Previous project. For details see pages 1989 of Annual Re- Dort for 1915, and page 1474 of Annual Report for 1936. Provides for a jetty about 5,700 feet long orth sideproject. oOilX'isting of entrance and a jetty 8,000 feet long on south side; Channel through bar 18 feet deep and of such width as can be Dractically and economically obtained; for a channel 200 feet wide d18 feet deep from deep water in bay to Miami Cove; and for thitial dredging to 12 feet deep of a small-boat basin and approach ereto at Garibaldi, Oreg. Project also provides for improve- t t of Bayocean Peninsula, Oreg.; for navigation, by construc- oof sand and rockfill dike 1.4 miles long, on alinement extend- lg between Pitcher Point and town of Bayocean. Mean lower ao Water is plane of reference. Mean of higher high waters 74oVe plane of reference and extreme tidal range at entrance are ' feet and about 13.5 feet, respectively. Estimated Federal Cost of new work is $11,090,350, exclusive of $2,988,000 for jetty tehabilitation. HIobsonville Channel portion of project is inac- oe and excluded from foregoing cost. Estimated cost (1955) Sthis portion is $99,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents 26 1912 Construct north jetty 5,700 feet long and dredging channel H. Doe. 349, 62d Cong. 2d sess. at:2 1913 16 feet deep, 200 feet wide, to Bay City. r a 1919 Abandon that portion of project above Bay City.... ...... If. Doc. 730, 65th Cong., 2d sess. S1925 Abandon Bay City Channel and present project dimensions H. Doc. 562, 68th Cong., 2d sess.1 eJ~e3 of channels and turning basins with needed.. regulating works . as S1948 Dredging small-boat basin and approach at Garibaldi, Oreg., H. Doe. 650, 80th Cong., 1st sess. t to a depth of 12feet. 2 oet. 27, 1954 Closure of breach in Bayocean Peninsula...................8S.. Doe. 128, 83d Cong., 2d seas. 2 o1965Construct south jetty, 8,000 feet long...................... Doc. 43, 89th Cong., 1st sess. 1 elUdes following work, classified inactive. A channel to Hlobsonville 200 feet wide and e et deep, with a turning basin 500 feet wide at liobsonville, and regulating works as ded cntains latest published rmap. 'Local cooperation. Complied with for all work except con- trluction of south jetty. River and Harbor Act of 1965 requires Cal interests provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way for 'Struction and future maintenance and aids to navigation upon of the Chief of Engineers, including suitable spoil- .quest DPosal areas, and necessary retaining dikes, bulkheads, and em- 1548 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 bankments therefor or the costs of such retaining works; hold United States free from damages; provide and maintain adequand public terminal and transfer facilities open to all equallY ss provide and maintain depths in berthing areas and local aced channels serving the terminals, including the 50-foot striPd jacent to pierhead lines, commensurate with depths provided related project areas..cility Terminal facilities. At Garibaldi: A privately owned fatil for shipping lumber and receiving logs, a public landing suitable for mooring fishing vessels, towboats, and other craft. Se boat basin has adequate facilities for mooring fishing and recre* tional craft. At Bay City: A privately owned wharf used clusively for receipt of fresh fish and shellfish. Near citYe- Tillamook: Several log rollways. Facilities considered d- quate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitation Of north jetty was completed by contract (Sept. 1965) with 193,439 tons of stone placed and 11,960 tons produced but not placed. Maintenance: Dredging bar and inner channel was accominplished by Government plant with 30,500 cubic yards of material re- moved. Condition at end of fiscal year. Under existing project ecep.. for construction of H1obsonville Channel portion, classified ilac tive, channels were completed in 1927, north jetty in 1933, ~1 provement of Bayocean Peninsula in 1956, and small-boat basin in 1958. Rehabilitation of north jetty was accomplished Septe ber 1965. No work has been done on construction of south jet Controlling depths (Sept. 1965) showed 10 feet on bar and 12fe in channel to Garibaldi, at mean lower low water. Total cos c of existing project to June 30, 1966, were $5,627,862, of whic $1,730,350 was for new work, $2,628,538 for jetty restoration, aa $1,268,974 for maintenance. In addition, $592,622 expendedfor new work and $6,450 for maintenance from contributed fundS. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 J une o New Appropriated, work: . ........ 251 S l659 Appropriated ............. ............................................. .,807:5 C ost .............................. . ............ ............ Maintenance: 1,357 003 Appropriated.......... $4.,000 $35,000 $76,000 $34,000 $49,000 1047 Cost................ Rehabilitation: 45,751 36,301 76,123 32,645 32,64 36,074000 36074 2,88 Appropriated.......... 40,000 490,000 1,000,000 488,000 970,000 2,62838 Cost .................13,307 352,331 102,813 931,125 1,228,962 2, 1Includes $77,209 for new work and $71,498 for maintenance previous project. In addit $592,622 for new work and $6,450 for maintenance expended from contributed funds. asi Includes $57,767 allotted under Code 720 (small authorized projects) Garibaldi Boat 17. UMPQUA RIVER, OREG. Location. Rises in Cascade Range, flows westerly about miles, and empties into Pacific Ocean 180 miles south of ColUIbi River and 465 miles north of San Francisco Bay. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 5802 and 6004.) RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1549 Previous projects. For details see page 2967 of Annual Re- port for 1898, and page 1732 of Annual Report for 1938. Existing project. A jetty on north side of entrance about ,000 feet long, westerly from highwater line to the sea; aSouth jetty 4,200 feet long extending to a point 1,800 feet soUth of outer end of north jetty; dredging to provide a usable entrance channel 26 feet deep, and a river channel 22 feet deep and 200 feet wide, from mouth to Reedsport, a distance of about 11 miles with a turning basin at Reedsport 1,000 feet long, 600 feet wide and 22 feet deep; a channel 12 feet deep and 100 w. wide from deep water in the river to vicinity of docks in nchester Bay with a mooring and turning basin 12 feet deep, 175 feet wide, and 300 feet long at inner end; and a channel 22 feet deep and 200 feet wide from main river channel near mile 8 to Gardiner, Oreg., and a turning basin of same depth, 500 feet wide, and 800 feet long, opposite Gardiner. Project was modi- fedin 1954 to provide a channel in Scholfield River, 12 feet deep at mean lower low water generally 100 feet wide from its colfluence with Umpqua River to a point 0.5 mile below first rail- road bridge a distance of 2 miles, entrance to be widened to 300 feet in 500 feet. Mean lower low water is plane of reference. Tidal range between mean lower low water and mean higher high Water at river mouth is 6.9 feet, and extreme range is about 11 feet. Federal cost of new work is $2,664,635, exclusive of $2,535,- 000 for jetty rehabilitation. Scholfield River channel portion of Plroject is classified inactive and excluded from foregoing cost estimate. Estimated cost of this portion (1957) is $54,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents 0t.22,1922 North jetty 7,500 feet long ... H. Doc. 913, 65th Cong., 2d sess. . 21, 19273 Present bar. project dimensions of north jetty and dredging' ocean , IDoc. 320, 69th Cong., 1st sess. Auly3 1930 A short south jetty............................. IL.Doc. 317, 70th Cong., 1st sess. A.30,1935 A full length south jetty and maintenance dredging to a 26- Rivers and Harbors Comnmittee Doe. 1 3 foot length. 9,72d Cong., 1st sess.1 1 port. 22 feet deep and 200 feet wide from mouth to Reeds- S. Doc. 158, 75th Cong.., 3d sess. e20,1938Channel k4r* 2, 1945 Channel 22 feet deep and 200 feet wide from river channel S. Doe. 86, 78th Cong., 1st sess. Io to Gardiner and turning basin and 800 feet long. 22 feet deep, 500 feet wide 0......Channel10 feet deep and 100 feet wide from river channel S. Doe. 191, 77th Cong., 2d sess.l to dock in Winchester Bay with mooring and turning basin J deep, 175 feet wide, and 300 feet long at inner end. 10 feet 12 1 S30,1948Channel feet deep and 100 feet wide from river channel S. Doc. 154, 80th Cong., 2d sess. to dock in Winchester Bay with mooring and turning basin 8t 12 feet deep, 175 feet wide, and 300 feet long at inner end. 31954 Channel 12 feet deep, Scholfield River........ 3. .. ........ S.Doe. 133, 81st Cong., 2d sess.1 a Contains latest published maps. Local cooperation. Complied with for all work except Schol- field River channel modification. River and Harbor Act of 1954 lrovides in connection with construction of Scholfield River chan- nel, that local interests contribute in cash $10,000 toward cost of new work; furnish suitable spoil-disposal areas for initial work and future maintenance; and hold the United States free from da4nages. A non-Federal contribution of $10,000 is required under terms of project authorization. Submission of assurances Was requested of Port of Umpqua, July 3, 1956. On April 8, 1957, 1550 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 local interests reported inability to furnish required cooperation Terminal facilities. At Gardiner there is about 650 feet of wharf frontage of which 60 feet is publicly owned. At river mile 8.6, Gardiner, there is an oil unloading facility owne by International Paper Co. for exclusive use of tanker barges At Reedsport there is a privately owned mill dock for shiplent of lumber, and a dock for receipt and shipment of river-run sand and gravel. Port of Umpqua owns one wharf with 456 feet Of water frontage, of which 228 feet is usable for vessels and an other with about 75 feet of water frontage which has not been used generally for commercial shipping. On Bolon Island acroSS the river from Reedsport a wharf was constructed which has about 5 acres of open storage for lumber and available to all on equal terms. At Winchester Bay, 2 miles from river entrance, there is a public-landing float with a wooden pile and timber shore approach, and a privately owned wharf used by excursion and commercial fishing vessels. Facilities are considered adequat for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance Dredging entrance channel was accomplished by Governinen plant with 399,825 cubic yards of material removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is complete North jetty was completed in 1940. Extension to original so. jetty was completed in 1938 and construction on a new train9 jetty on south side of entrance to replace original south Jetty which was partially destroyed by storms was completed in 195 Dredging a 22-foot channel from mouth of river to ReedspO was completed in 1941. Gardiner Channel and turning basin was completed in 1949 and Winchester Bay channel and moorl basin in 1956. Remaining under authorization is construction of 12-foot channel in Scholfield River, currently classified inactive and south jetty wave gage surveillance. Rehabilitation of south jetty was completed August 1963. Controlling depths are feet on bar; 22 feet from entrance to mile 3; and 17 feet mile to 8; 13 feet mile 8 to 12; and 21 feet in turning basin, survey of May 1966. Total costs from Federal funds, June 30, 1966, wer $10,408,959, of which $2,664,635 was for new work, $2,484,3d for jetty restoration, and $5,259,971 for maintenance. In add tion $276,500 expended for new work from contributed funds. Cost and financial statement Total to ., Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30,19 New work: $, 877 Appropriated.............................................................2,70-'1 Coat............ ................................................ ............ 2,703P Maintenance: ,21616 Appropriated.......... $168,000 $103,200 $84,500 $163,000 $300,000 5,2911 Cost.................. 98,395 170,636 83,801 152,357 285,820 6,259, Rehabilitation: A,3015 Appropriated.......... 500,000 1,785,000 220,015.... 363 Cost.................. 18,328 1,511,319 890,849 37,087 10419 484 1 Includes $39,242 for new work for previous project. Excludes $2'76,500 contributed fu for new work.d Includes $58,824 allotted under Code 720 (small authorized projects) Winchester Bay and Scholfield River, Oreg. RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1551 18. WESTPORT SLOUGH, OREG. Location A side channel of Columbia River about 70 miles below Portland, Oreg. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6152.) IL'Xisting project. Provides for a channel about 3,500 feet on1g, 32 feet deep at low water, 300 feet wide in entrance and to about mraidpoint of its length, and generally 250 feet wide in upper 1,800 feet. Low water is plane of reference. Average tidal 'angeduring low water conditions in Columbia River is about 5 feet. Actual Federal cost of new work is $16,276. Project to0dification (32-foot channel) authorized in 1950 was classified deferred for restudy and excluded from foregoing cost estimate. cost of modification (1957) is $234,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts NWprk authorized Documents a 26,1937 Channel 28 ft. deep and 200 ft. wide........... ....... . Doc. 79, 75th Cong. 1st sess. I,1950 Channel 32 ft. deep and 300 ft. wide......... .. ....... H. Doc. 134, 81st Cong., let sess. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of May 17, 1950, )rovides local interests give assurances they will furnish lands, easements rights-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas, including neces- sary bulkheads, for construction and subsequent maintenance; old the United States free from damages; and provide and main- tal a channel 32 feet deep and 200 feet wide from upstream terminus of existing project to upper end of mill dock, an addi- tional distance of about 1,300 feet. Total estimated costs for all equirements of local cooperation under terms of project author- lzation were $45,000 (1957). Terminal facilities. Privately owned wharf of Westport umber Co. which is considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Dredging channel Was accomplished by Government plant with removal of 67,238 Qbic yards of material. Condition at end of fiscal year. Channel 28 feet deep and 200 feet wide, as originally authorized, was completed in 1939. No ork has been done on 32-foot channel authorized as a project 1)odification. Controlling depth was 17 feet (June 1966). -____ Cost and financial statement iscal Year................ Total to 1962 1963 1964 1065 1966 June 30, 1966 ia .......... ..... $1 27 CD Ne Work. a ostppriated...................... ........................ ..... .................. $16,276 enance:6,276 A )propiated.......... $25,000 $26,500 -$1,488 ............$22,785 178,367 Cost................. 24,246 25,767 ....................... 22,785 178,367 19. WILLAMETTE RIVER ABOVE PORTLAND AND YAMHIILL RIVER, OREG. Location. Willamette River rises in Cascade Range in south- 1552 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 western Oregon, flows northerly, and empties into Columbia iver about 100 miles from the sea. Its length from source of 14iddlet Fork is about 294 miles. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6155 and Geological Survey map, State of Oregon.) Yahill River rises in coast range, flows easterly, and empties into Wrao mette River about 42 miles above Portland. Its length ro source of South Fork is about 52 miles.p Previous projects. For details see page 1997 of Annual Repor for 1915, and page 1754 of Annual Report for 1938 . . tte Existing project. Provides for improvement of Willaf River between Portland (14 miles above mouth) and Oregon det (mile 26) by a channel 8 feet deep at low water, 200 feet wi below Cedar Island and 150 feet wide thence to Oregon City; such channel improvement and contraction works as may be neC essary to secure with streamflow regulation, controlling dePtho of 6 feet at low water and of no prescribed width, from Oregol City to mouth of Santiam River (mile 108.5), 5 feet from 'that point to Albany (mile 120), 2.5 to 3.5 feet deep from Albanyto Corvallis (mile 132), and for necessary snagging between Cor vallis and Eugene (mile 185). Project also provides for a chad nel in Yamhill River 4 feet deep at low water and 60 feet Wide from its mouth to McMinnville (18 miles) secured by mean of a lock and dam near Lafayette and by removal of obstructios. Section of Willamette River in vicinity of Willamette Falls at Oregon City is covered by Improvement No. 20. For Willamette River below falls at Oregon City ordinary fluctuation of s ge of water is 15 feet and extreme fluctuation due to flood condito0 35 to 50 feet. Above Oregon City ordinary fluctuation is 12 to feet and extreme is 20 to 27 feet. For Yamhill River ordinary fluctuation is 35 feet and extreme 48 feet. Tidal changes vrY from about 21/2 feet at mouth of Willamette to zero, 26 miles above mouth. Estimated cost of new work (1966) $3,350,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports June 3,1896 Improvement of Willamette River above Oregon City........1H. Doc. 260, 54th Cong., 1st ses (A nual Report, 1896, p. 3300). Do...... Improvement of Yambill River by lock and dam construction. Annual Report, 1895, p. 3602. Project modified in 1904 by abandoning 20-mile stretch of Annual Report, 1904, p. 3529. river between Harrisburg and Eugene as unworthy of improvement. July 25, 1912 A 6-foot channel in Willamette River below Oregon City.... H. Doc. 438, 62d Cong., 2d sess (coo. July 3, 1930 For 8-foot channel between Portland and Oregon City... . I)Doc.372, 71st Cong., 2d aeS' and tains latest published map). June 26,19341 Operating and care of lock and dam at Yambill River provided for with funds from War Department appropria- tions for rivers and harbors. June 28, 19382 Streanimflow regulation with controlling depths of 6 feet to I. Doc. 544, 75th Cong., 3d ses. mouth of Santiam River and 5 feet to Albany with en- largement of locks at Oregon City. I Flood Control Act. Permanent Appropriations Repeal Act. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Between Ross Island Bridge at portll and Willamette Falls at Oregon City: Privately owned Mill docks, sand and gravel wharves, a cement loading facility, a small shipyard, and oil-receiving stations. Above the falls there are RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1553 1riVately owned landings including a facility at Pulp Siding (3 es above the falls) with rail and water connections for ship- etof clay and receipt of papermill products by barge. At ilsonville and Newberg there are sand and gravel facilities. At Salem there is a 420,000 gallon fuel tank which is serviced by taker barges. At numerous locations as far as Corvallis (river ile 132) there are log rollways with water and rail or truck Co1tections to facilitate moving logs to mills in lower Willamette d Columbia Rivers. At Oswego there is a dock for the receipt Oi lirnerock used in the manufacture of cement. Facilities con- 'dered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year: Maintenance. Channel dredging above Oregon City, Oreg., was accomplished with removal of 625,772 cubic yards of material by government plant and 18,035 cubic yards by rented equipment. At end of fiscal year contract was awarded for dredging Willamette River, mile 24.4 to 24.8. Releases of stored water from Fern Ridge, Cottage Grove, Dorena, Detroit, Lookout Point, Hills Creek, d Cougar Reservoirs aided materially during low water periods i Providing sufficient depths for existing traffic. For informa- 01 on reservoir release see reports covering these reservoirs tider flood control projects. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project is about 19 percent complete. The 8-foot channel between Port- ci and Oregon City and 2.5- to 3.5-foot channel between Oregon 7tand Albany were completed in 1939. The 2.5- to 3.5-foot ea.nnel between Albany and Corvallis was completed in 1945. Sterjaining work required to complete project consists of con- truction of such contraction works and channel improvements t rIay be necessary, with streamflow regulation, to secure con- rolling depths of 6 feet at low water from Oregon City to mouth antiam River, and 5 feet from that point to Albany. Con- 111ing depths at low water are 8 feet from Portland to Oregon , and 3.5 feet from Oregon City to Corvallis. Due to lack of oe by commercial traffic for which facilities were provided, 13eration of Yamhill lock was discontinued February 7, 1954, ad the lock and adjacent property reported surplus and turned OVer to Yamhill County January 16, 1959. Total costs of existing DrOJect, from Federal funds were $13,622,829 of which $615,170 WIS for new work, and $13,057,659 for maintenance. In addition $16,433 expended between September 24, 1900, and June 30, Of 5, on operating and care of improvement under provisions t~ermanent indefinite appropriations for such purposes. Addi- o)nal $7,500 expended from contributed funds for maintenance d $299,900 emergency relief administration funds for new Work. 1554 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement --.- Total to Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 J une 30, 19601 New work: $862,618 Appropriated........................ . ............ 2862,918 Cost....... ................................................... Maintenance: 313 ,084,098 Appropriated.......... $612,000 $506,949 $623,935 $576,000 $655,000 Cost.................577,276 618,730 546,805 684,691 632,639 13,057,659 x Includes $247,748 for new work for previous project.. tecti'* * Excludes $484,900 Emergency Relief Administration flood control funds for bank pr .public a Includes $51,500 allotted from deferred maintenance funds, Code 700, and $35,935 fro -1 a Works Acceleration program repair, In addition $7,500 for maintenance was expente,,Of contributed funds and $246,637 on operating and care of improvements under prow11 permanent indefinite appropriation. 20. WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OREG. Location. Locks and dam covered by this project are atWilla mette Falls, a rocky reef in Willamette River at Oregon IV Oreg., about 26 miles above mouth of river. . le- Existing project. Provides for construction of a new s 6 lift main lock and a guard lock each with clear dimensions l ce by 400 feet and a minimum depth over sills of 91,. feet, to rePli. existing facilities which were provided for by purchase, reha al tation, and deepening to 6 feet at low water of existing canal and locks is about 3,500 feet. Principal features of existing ca and locks at Willamette Falls: Usable lock dimensions ...... Series of 4 locks, each 175 by 37 feet. et, Lift of each lock .......... Lock 1 (lower), 22.5 feet; lock 2, 87fee lock 3, 10.9 feet; lock 4 (upper),6 8.1 f - Depth on miter sills at low Lower lock, 8.4 feet; upper lock, feelt. water. Character of foundation .... Rock. Kind of dam ............... Fixed.' Type of construction ........ Concrete. 26, Year of completion ......... .1873; purchased by United States Apr. 1915. Cost ....................... Unknown; purchase price, $375,000. dof SA guard lock 210 by 40 feet, which is used only at higher stages of water, is at upper ed canal basin. el sr aA concrete division wall,1,227feetlong, extending from lock4 to g-uardlock,seater upper basin of canal from head race, wh;ch formerly led directly from basin and supplied rGo for powerplants operated by Crown Zellerbach Corp., and Portland Ry., Light & powe which is now being operated by Portland General Electric Co. a The dam is owned by private parties. e Ordinary fluctuation of stage of water above locks is 12 fl and extreme, due to flood conditions, 20 feet. Below locks, or nary fluctuation is 15 feet and extreme 50 feet. Estimated ied- eral cost (1966) is $13,200,000. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports ses.0d For purchase and rehabilitation of system add construction H. Doc. 202, 56th Cong., lst June25, 1910 of concrete division wall. s 1 Annual Report, 1900, p.4374, Aug. 8,1917 Deepening of locks................................. E. Doc. 1060, 62d Cong., 3d e June 26, 19342 Operation and care of canal and locks provided for . 0with, funds from War Department appropriations for rivers and harbors. Mar. 2, 1945 Construction of New Willamette Falls lock................. 75th Cong., 3d8'0 H. Doe. 544.1, SContains latest published maps. Permanent Appropriation Repeal Act. RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1555 Ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. herminal facilities. Crown Zellerbach Corp. has a timber e earf about 850 feet long, extending to and supported by Thiscon- ~ e division wall built in lock canal by United States. larf is used for receiving mill supplies and shipping paper and products. Per hPperations and results during fiscal year. Under minor re- gabilitation funds bids were invited June 1966 for replacement of 4tes Nos. 6 and 7. Maintenance of facilities and grounds was 4eCoplished as required. In June 1966 contract was awarded fo furnishing and installing remote control equipment for lock Iqondition at end of fiscal year. Existing canal and locks orig- ay constructed by private interests in 1873 were purchased Sthe United States in April 1915 for $375,000. Final report 11Urchase and rehabilitation of canal and locks is in Annual ePort for 1923, when project was reported 98 percent complete. o further work on that phase of existing project has been ececssary. Controlling depth is 6 feet at low water on miter sill aupper lock. Existing locks and grounds are in fair condition Sin continuous operation except when flooded out by high ater or undergoing repair. Facilities are obsolete and inade- to for existing traffic. No construction work has been done on a'1 guard lock, which was authorized to replace existing and lo lities, by Flood Control Act of 1939, and River and Harbor of 1945. Cost and financial statement ear. Total to . ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1066 June 30, 19661 W ork. ... . ................................. .0,oriated............................ opriated. .520,005 ADropriated.......... $162400 $227,700 $217,800 $153,400 $158,400 25,1903,90 .. . 160,471 198,671 219,451 166,301 152,686 5,165.420 ao : ., 85,400 85,400 OPolrated.............. ..... ................................ 85,400 85,400 24,980 ............... .. . .. ....... .. [24,980 '..... ....... ....... 24 ,980 24,980 $300,000 contributed funds for new work. $es Clud es $452,110 expended on operation and care from permanent mindefinite appropriation. 21. YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OREG. tOcation. Bay is on Oregon coast, 113 miles south of mouth %Columbia River. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 2 and 6058.) 1Previous projects. For details see Annual Report for 1893, a 4, page 3314, House Document 68, 54th Congress, 1st session, Annual Report for 1938, page 1736. t~ane,AmVcisting project. Two high tide rubblemound jetties at en- north jetty 6,500 feet, and south jetty 7,600 feet long; t lur jetty on channel side of south jetty 4,700 feet from its sea S" 800 feet long; five groins channelward from south jetty; bflael 40 feet deep for a general width of 400 feet across bar "'at outer end of entrance channel; a channel 30 feet deep and 1556 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 300 feet wide to a turning basin of same depth, 900 to 1,200 feet wide and 1,400 feet long, and a channel 18 feet deep and 200 fee wide from 30-foot channel at about mile 1, along city docks at Newport, thence upstream to abandoned railroad terminlUd Yaquina, a distance of about 41/2 miles. Project also provider for a small-boat mooring basin at Newvport, Oreg. Mean laer low water is plane of reference. Mean of higher highwaer above plane of reference and extreme tidal range are 8.1 and ) feet, respectively. Estimated Federal cost of new work (1966) is $29 million. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents Mar. 2,1919 Restoration and extension of jetties constructed under pre- 11. Doc. 109, 65th Cong., lst gsess vious projects, rock removal at entrance; and dredging in st bay up to railroad terminus at Yaquina.1se Aug. 26, 1937 Extension of north jetty seaward 1,000 feet................. S. committee print, 75th Cong' Mar. 2,1945 26-foot channel of suitable width across entrance bar, so S. Doc. 119, 77th Cong., l ~e far as rock bottom will allow, a 20-foot channel 300 feet wide along south side of bay to and including a turning basin 22 feet deep, 1,000 feet wide and 1,200 feet long. July 24, 1946 Construct a small-boat mooring basin at Newport, Oreg..... S. Doc. 246, 79th Cong. 2dse, July 3, 1958 40-foot bar channel and 30-foot river channel and extension S. Doc. 8, 85th Cong., 1st ses of jetties at entrance. SContains latest published maps. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Acts through July 8, 1946, fully complied with. River and Harbor Act of July 3, .ale provides local interests furnish lands, rights-of-way, and suitable spoil-disposal areas for construction and future maintenlan hold the United States free from damages; provide adeqU terminal facilities open to all on equal terms; and that south jett shall not be extended until experience demonstrates, in judgae of Chief of Engineers, that this work is advisable. Total est0 mated costs for all requirements under terms of project authori zation were $43,000 (1966). Terminal facilities. At McLean Point, on north side of baY' about 2 miles from entrance, Yaquina Bay Dock & Dredge One Inc., has two berths capable of serving oceangoing e3 vessels. is450 of these berths is 420 feet long; the second, a new berth, isai feet long. At the time the new berth was dredged, a new retai ing wall and fill of 6 acres was constructed adjacent to deeP water. The company now has 17 acres of filled land adjae, to deep water, and of this total, 7 acres was constructed in 19 5 6 1 This facility has necessary carriers and lift trucks for handlinl lumber cargoes, and is open to all on equal terms. On south Side of bay immediately above 101 Highway Bridge, about 114t ,ile$ above entrance, Georgia-Pacific Corp., maintains private dol ro# with a frontage of 700 feet for loading oceangoing vessels froo barges. Port of Newport has a public wharf with 400 feet frontage for servicing fishing boats. In addition, port of Ne port maintains about 500 feet of protected float landings for us of seagoing fishing vessels. There are several seafood compalie on the bay which have their own facilities for handling re fish and crab. Supplies and petroleum products are readily ava RIVERS AND HARBORS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1557 able for small vessels. On south side of bay about 11/2 miles above trance, Newport Dock Co. maintains a wharf, bulkhead, and Olphins for loading ocean-going lumber barges. These facilities econsidered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Repair tt. extension of north jetty was 90.9 percent accomplished with tal of 563,334 tons of A, B, and C stone and 110,119 tons of bed- ding material placed. Select A stone stockpiled amounted to 84,- 412 tons. Dredged 250,810 cubic yards of material with govern- ment plant at project entrance channel to authorized 40-feet. Advertisement for bids was issued in May 1966 for dredging ba~nel and turning basin to depth of 30-feet. Maintenance: Dredging entrance bar and inner channel accomplished by U.S. plant with 180,915 cubic yards of material removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project as authorized through a of July 24, 1946, was completed May 1952. In May 1963, Co contract was awarded for extension of north jetty, initial 0 struction for project modification authorized by River and arbor Act of 1958. Restoration of jetties was completed in 4 and extension of north jetty in 1940. Rehabilitation of arth jetty was again accomplished in 1956. Main channel from Olter ends of jetties to McLean Point, 20 feet deep and 300 feet ide, with turning basins at upstream end was completed in May 195 2 ch 2, and channel 18 feet deep and 200 feet wide from 20-feet to nnel at mile 1 along city dock at Newport, thence upstream 40 aabandoned railroad terminus at Yaquina and small boat-moor- it' basin at Newport were completed in fiscal year 1949. Con- Olling depth on bar is 16 feet, entrance to highway bridge 18 et,from bridge to turning basin 20 feet, survey of May 1966. al costs for existing project from Federal funds were $11,- 08,241 of which $7,981,057 was for new work and $3,702,184 r£ aintenance. In addition, $729,168 expended for new work 1 contributed funds. . Cost and financial statement Na ea Total to year............. .1962 1963 1064 1065 1966 June 30, 19661 W~ork.. .0 propriated.......... $225,000 $403000 $890,400$1,700,000 $3,306,000 2$9,815,49 455,987 . 37,348 1,222,3181,658,1492,467,302 8,858,370 nopriated.......... 54,000 110,000 210,800 175,500 104,000 3,710,747 **................ 64,568 99,956 217,228 178,768 103,931 3,708,210 eludes $707,313 for new work and $6,026 for maintenance for previous project and $170,000 1)5, 4oDriated from public works acceleration program for north jetty rehabilitation. $729,168 contributed funds for new work. xcludes 1558 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 22. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Name of project Date survey conducted Clatehanie River, Oreg............................................ ................ June 1965 h 19 Coos and Millicoma Rivers, Oreg........................................ Multnomah Channel, Oreg............................................. Nehalem Bay, Oreg................................................. Oregon Slough, Oreg................................................. Skipanon Channel, Oreg............................................... W estport Slough, Oreg............................................... Yaquina River, Oreg................................................ Youngs Bay and Youngs River, Oreg... .................................. Columbia River between Chinook Wash. and Head of Sand Island... .............. Deep River, W ash.................................................. Elokowin Slough, W ash.............................................. Grays River, W ash................................................. Lake River, Wash... ............................................... Skamakawa Creek,Wash..... .......................................... 23. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30,1966 full report Name of project .Re. ort see Annual for- an d totruction Construction Oeace Bridge across Columbia at Cascade locks & Hood River, Oreg.1l........ 1944 Clatskanie River, Oregonl 2.... . . ...... 1963 Columbia River between Chinook, Wash., and head of Sand Islandl 2.. 1965 Columbia Slough, Oreg........................................... 1953 Deep River, Wash.1 2............................................ 1963 Depoe Bay, Oreg.l 2............................................. 1964 Elokomin Slough, Wash.1 2....................................... 1965 Grays River, Wash.l 2 ........................................... 1941 Lake River, Wash.1 2............................................ 1965 Multnomah Channel, Oreg.1 2................................... 1949 Nehalem Bay, Oreg.l 2............................................ 1955 Oregon Slough (North Portland Harbor) Oreg.l 2.................. 1963 Salmon River, Oreg.1 2.......................................... 1949 Skamokawa Creek, Wash.1 2..................................... 1963 Skamokawa (Steamboat Slough), Wash.4........................... 1932 Skipanon Channel, Oreg.l........................................ 1964 The Cascades Canal, Columbia River, Oreg.l 5...................... 1939 The Dalles-Celilo Canal, Oreg. & Wash.1 6......................... 1957 Yaquina River, Oreg.l 2.......................................... 1963 Youngs Bay and River, Oreg.1 2.................................. 1949 1 Completed. 2 Channel adequate for present commerce. 8 Excludes $304,826 contributed funds for new work. SClassified inactive. * Project abandoned due to flooding by Bonneville Dam pool. 6 Project abandoned due to flooding by The Dalles Dam pool. 24. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) 08t5 Study identification Fiscal yeare Alsea Bay and River, Oreg., small boat basin ................. $860 Beaver Slough near Clatskanie, Oreg., channel improvement ... 1,547 Columbia River at Baker Bay, Ilwaco, Wash., small boat basin .. 2,192 Columbia River, Cascade locks, Oreg., small boat basin ......... . 7,400 Cowlitz River, Longview, Wash., channel improvement ........ 736 Elokomin Slough, Cathlamet, Wash., mooring basin ........... . 1,702 Rogue River Estuary, Gold Beach, Oreg. boat basin ............ 5,031 Youngs Bay to mouth of Lewis and Clark River, Oreg., removal of shoals ..................................... 2,578 ' Yaquina River, Toledo, Oreg., extension of navigation channel .. 966 1 / Total ............................................ 23,018 FLOOD CONTROL---PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1559 25. APPLEGATE RESERVOIR, ROGUE RIVER BASIN, OREG. .Location. In Jackson County, Oreg., on Upper Applegate 8Ver, a tributary of Rogue River, at river mile 46.5, about 23.6 airline miles southwest of Medford, Oreg. xisting project. Plan provides for a rockfill embankment dat,'221 feet high from streambed to crest with an overall length , 1,430 feet. A gate-controlled concrete chute-type spillway, 'egulating outlet tunnel, and intake tower with multilevel intakes ill be on right abutment. Reservoir, 4 miles long will provide ,000 acre-feet of usable storage for flood control and water con- ervation utilization. Project will control runoff from a drainage rea of 220 square miles. In addition to flood control, reservoir ill be operated to provide irrigation, fish and wildlife enhance- lent, water quality control, and recreation benefits. Project was d orized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 566, 87th Cong., Sess.). Estimated cost of project (1966) is $27,400,000, of Which $8,400,000 is for lands and damages including relocations, l $19 million for construction. 0 Local cooperation. Authorizing act requires that State of r egon take action, prior to construction, to insure maintenance 11stream of flow to be released for fishery. In addition, costs allocated to irrigation would have to be repaid in a manner and to (1extent consistent with Reclamation laws and policies. OPerationsand results during fiscal year. Site selection design p lorandum was submitted to higher authority April 1966. 4ltParation of memoranda continued, covering hydrology and esteorology; general; preliminary master plan; relocations; real t ;and fish facilities. rleParation Under advance engineering, at end of fiscal year. was Condition of design memoranda in progress. Cost and financial statement Yeal 1962Total to ear..1962 1963 1904 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NewWork. 9ProDriated.......... ....... .......... ............ $134,000 $190,000 $324,000 S ........................... 86,331 190,949 277,280 26. BEAR CREEK,WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN, OREG. Location. In northwestern Lane County, Oreg., heads in ast Range west of Fern Ridge Dam and runs to join Long b' River at point 4 miles west of Junction City and 8 miles 0w the dam. t Eisting project. Plan provides channel for Bear Creek from "1 Tom River upstream to mile 4.4 and channel for Owens peek from its junction with Bear Creek upstream to mile 2.0. o.Ject is unit of general comprehensive plan for flood control, iavgatio n , and other purposes in Columbia River Basin and atthorized in 1950 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., ess.). Estimated Federal cost (1965) is $347,000. Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides local 1560 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 interests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary igh" way, highway bridges, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate completed works. Estimated costs for all requirements of local coopera65) tion under terms of project authorization were $118,000(19 Operations and results during fiscal year. Project placed i inactive status April 1966, due to opposition by property owners. Condition at end of fiscal year. Due to opposition of project by local interests, inactive status was issued in April 1966. Cost and financial statement Total0 to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3 New work: 00 Appropriated............. ..................... $5,000 9 5............ Cost .............................................. $3,879 $720 27. BEAVER DRAINAGE DISTRICT, COLUMBIA COUNTY, ORE' Location. In Columbia County, Oreg., north of town of Clat skanie and extends along Columbia River and Bradbury S l ough between river miles 49.7 and 55.4.. .Existing project. Plan provides for raising and strengthenl portions of existing primary levee, strengthening levees alOng Tank Creek diversion canal, and increasing pumping capacity of district. Existing project was authorized by 1950 Flood C~onl . trol Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1965) is $808,500. Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950, provides loc interests furnish lands and right-of-way; make necessary ghd way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the Uite States free from damages; and maintain and operate works after completion. Estimated costs for all requirements of local coO operation under terms of project authorization were $158,00 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. Meeting held V1th local interests in regard to required rights-of-way. Condition at end of fiscal year. No construction has been dofe. Advertisement for construction bids cannot be issued until re., quired assurances of cooperation have been received from, local interests. Sponsor experiencing difficulty in securing rightO3 of-way originally requested April 1962 and revised July 1963e Of all required, 85 percent is in possession. Sponsor has halte proceeding with acquisition on present project plans because certain features are unacceptable to landowners. Cost and financial statement Totalt0o Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 JuneA30 New work: -l900 Appropriated.......... $242,000 -$181,000 -$4,600.31 ,Coat...........39,615 17,159 4,874 $267.$234 FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1561 28. BLUE RIVER RESERVOIR, OREG. .Location. On Blue River, a major tributary of McKenzie giVer, 1.7 mile above confluence of the two streams at the con- Iuence of Quartz Creek and Blue River and about 38 miles easterly of Eugene, Oreg. XExisting project. Plan provides for a gravel-fill embankment bout 1,200 feet long at crest and 270 feet high above stream- ed. Spillway will be a gated-chute type on left abutment. 0 1Utlet works will be in left abutment. On left shore of reservoir c low saddle between Blue River and McKenzie River will be closed with an earth- and gravel-fill dike about 1,400 feet Og and having a maximum height of 70 feet. Reservoir will beOduce 85,000 acre-feet of usable flood control storage and will . Plerated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system to protect llanette River Valley and increase low waterflows for navi- gation and other purposes. Project is one of two reservoirs atIthorized by 1950 Flood Control Act to be constructed in lieu , uartz Creek Reservoir, authorized by 1938 Flood Control Act. Stiated cost of project (1966) is $31,400,000 of which $5,200,- 000 is for lands and damages including relocations, and $26,200,- Sfor construction. Local cooperation. None required. OPerations and results during fiscal year. Upstream portal and spillway area excavation and concrete lining of diversion tun- hel Were completed by contract November 1965 and construction Of auxiliary dam, reservoir clearing and left bank road was ac- cOlished December 1965. Construction of main dam and com- V1etion of auxiliary dam, initiated by contract November 1965, as 19 percent accomplished at cost of $3,022,608. Clearing of reservoir area No. 4 was cornipleted by contract March 1966 9oStruction of County Road, Simmonds Creek-Quartz Creek, was P ercent accomplished by contract. U.S. Forest Service Road o 149, initiated by contract March 1966, was 21 percent com- Pleted 4condition at end of fiscal year: Construction of project began caY 1963 and is 39 percent complete. Planning is underway for 1ostruction of 3 roads and Blue River bridge. Cost and financial statement 134 al Yeo ar ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, to Total 19661 e Work. ACDropriated..... .. -$43,300 $600,000 $871,500 $2,563,000 $8,400,000 $12,978,200 ............... 41,575 591,053 870,681 2,560,2077,606,369 12,238,093 fecludes $96,000 pro rata share of site selection costs in lieu of Quartz Creek Reservoir. 29. CASCADIA RESERVOIR, OREG. cLocation. In Linn County, Oreg., at river mile 48.3 on South Qatiam River, about 38 miles southeast of Albany, Oreg. alxisting project. Plan provides for a rockfill embankment Al,240 feet high from streambed to crest and 1,170 feet long. A gate-controlled concrete chute-type spillway and regulating out- 1562 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 let works will be on right abutment. Reservoir will provide 145, 000 acre-feet of usable flood control storage. Project will control 179 square miles of drainage area. Project was authorized bY 1962 Flood Control Act (I. Doc. 403, 87th Cong., 2d sess.) to be constructed in lieu of Sweet Home Reservoir, Oreg., authorized bY Flood Control Act of 1938. Estimated cost of project (1966) is $39,600,000. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Initiated design memorandum covering site selection.. Condition at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering was j1l tiated this fiscal year. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30 New work: 000 ......... Appropriated.......... ............ ........................... $50,0006 Cost.................. ......................... ........... ........ 7,245 1 Includes $112,000 pro rata share of site selection costs in lieu of Sweet Homrne Reservoir. 30. COTTAGE GROVE RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On Coast Fork of Willamette River, 29 miles frorm mouth. Coast Fork rises in Douglas County, Oreg., on western ang , slope of Cascade Range and northern slope of Calapooya R e flows north for 49 miles, and unites with Middle Fork to form main Willamette River. Drainage area tributary to this reser" voir is 104 square miles. Existing project. An earthfill dam, 1,750 feet long at crest, 95 feet above streambed, with a reservoir providing for storage of 32,900 acre-feet. Spillway, 264 feet long, is a concrete, gray ity, overflow type forming right abutment. Outlet works, co. sisting of three gate-controlled conduits, pass through spillway section. Reservoir is operated as a unit of coordinated reservoi system to protect Willamette River Valley and increase low water flow for navigation. Existing project was selected for constru.c tion under general authorization for Willamette River Basin I2 Flood Control Act of 1938. Flood Control Acts of December 22s 1944, July 24, 1946, and September 3, 1954, modified project for" recreational facilities. Construction of additional recreation f cilities for completed project is estimated to cost $764,000. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Dam and reservoir were in operation with ordinary maintenance accomplished as re quired. Debris cleanup of reservoir was accomplished by col tract August 1965. One freshet was regulated by Cottage Grove Reservoir on Coast Fork Willamette River. Highest flow oc- curred January 4, 1966, with a peak inflow of 8,500 cubic feet per second. Storage of 26,500 acre feet was used to control this freshet. FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1563 SCondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project ini- tiated August 1940 was completed April 1952 except for con- truction of additional recreation facilities. Dam and reservoir ve been in continuous operation since September 1942. _Cost and financial statement Total to year ............... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 NewWork. ApPropriated.......... $15,000 . ............ -$167 $1,100 $173,000 $2,561,927 Cost.. *3,882 $10,285 366 880 33,251 2,421,958 Mntenanc ce: priated.......... AsroX C-ost.. 51,500 105,200 81,600 83,300 79,000 919,415 48,821 77,119 108,454 62,508 92,034 906,185 Includes $188,633 allotted under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed project. 31. COWLITZ COUNTY CONSOLIDATED DIKING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2, WASH. Location. In southwest corner of Cowlitz County, Wash., at CoInflUence of Lewis River with Columbia River and extends down- Stream along Columbia River between miles 80.5 and 86.5. . "-xistingproject. Provides for raising and strengthening ex- 1'ting levees and construction of new levees adjacent to town of Woodland to provide added protection. Existing project was auIthorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H.Doc. 541, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $1,320,000. 0 Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides local 1hterests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary high- Way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate completed Works. Estimated costs of all requirements of local cooperation u1der terms of project authorization were $85,000 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. Design memo- randum was submitted June 1966. Preparation of plans and SWecifications continued. •Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning for construction is ' progress. Cost and financial statement Total to eal Year............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Wwork: i ..... APPropr ated.......... $20,000 $39,000 $25,500 $50,000 $134,500 .......... 12,783 34,721 7,211 45,074 99,789 32. COWLITZ COUNTY DIKING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2, WASH. Location. In Cowlitz County, Wash., between Cowlitz and oweman Rivers, near Columbia River mile 68.3. Existing project. Raising and strengthening levee along Cole- an River, installing toe drains, placing impervious embankment 0 utside of railroad embankment, and extending existing tide oxes. Existing project was authorized by 1950 Flood Control 1564 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $370,000. oc Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides lhoal interests furnish lands, and rights-of-way; make necessary high way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the jUnted States free from damages; and maintain and operate conmpleted works. Estimated costs of all requirements of local cooperatio under terms of project authorization were $38,700 (1966). of Operations and results during fiscal year. Final inspection construction made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction began FebruarY 1964 and was completed June 1965. Authorized plan was nodi fled to eliminate impervious blanket on railroad embankment and additional pumping capacity. Remaining work includes pressure oiling system for pumping plant, and operating manual. Cost and financial statement aIto Tota 0,1966 Fiscal year................1902 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 3 New work: $0 000 Appropriated.......... .$15,000 $12,000 $328,000 ............ -$12,000 g0812 Cost................... 13,828 26,900 107,669 $199,139 491 33. COWLITZ COUNTY DIKING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. , WASH. Location. In Cowlitz County, Wash., on left bank of Cowlitz River south of Kelso, opposite Columbia River mile 68.3. Existing project. Raising and strengthening levee, installin toe drains and additional pumping capacity and filling dePres sions adjacent to landward toe of levee. Existing project wad authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $65,652. Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides loca interests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary high" way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate works after completion. Estimated costs of all requirements of local cooper ation under terms of project authorization were $10,400 (1966)i Operations and results during fiscal year. Final inspection o construction made. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction initiated by cofl tract February 1964 was completed June 1965. Authorized plan was modified to eliminate additional pumping capacity. Remaifl ing work involves preparation of operating manual. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1 New work:"65 Appropriated.......... $5,000 $5,000 $48,652 ... 662 Coat.................. 649 7,477 11,314 $35,849 6 FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1565 84. COWLITZ COUNTY DIKING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 15, WASH. Location. In Cowlitz County, Wash., about 8 miles west of Longview and extends along Columbia River and Fisher Island Channel between river miles 57 and 59.6. E'xisting project. Raising and strengthening portions of exist- i8 levee., additional levee for a portion of reach along Fisher laid Channel, and construct a type 1 toe drain between stations 0+00 and 55+00. Existing project was authorized by 1950 llood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Pederal cost (1966) is $305,500. i Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides local "Ierests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary high- way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate completed orks. Estimated costs of all requirements of local cooperation 4Ader terms of project authorization were $36,000 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of e'vee improvement was completed November 1965. C ndition at end of fiscal year. Construction began in January ald completed November 1965. Remaining work consists of lreparation of operating manual. -Cost and financial statement Year ieal Totalto Yar ............... 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 No work. APDropriated ..................... $14,643 $42,348 $264,500 -$16,000 $305,491 .. t .. . ............ ......... 12,362 40,079 146,457 98,790 297,688 35. DORENA RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On Row River, Oreg., 7 miles from mouth. Row iver rises in Lane County on western slope of Cascade Range, ocs8northwest for 19 miles, and enters Coast Fork of Willa- ette River 191/2 miles above mouth. Drainage area, tributary tthis reservoir, is 265 square miles. lyxisting project. An earthfill dam, 3,388 feet long at crest ris- i1 145 feet above streambed, with a reservoir providing usable storage capacity at normal pool level of 70,500 acre-feet. Spill- Way, 200 feet long, is concrete gravity, overflow-type, forming lht abutment. Outlet works of five slide-gate-controlled con- tits pass through spillway section. Reservoir, controlling Dractically entire drainage area of Row River, will be operated as V1it of coordinated reservoir system to protect Willamette River alley and increase low waterflows for navigation, and other pur- oses. Existing project was selected for construction under gen- eal authorization for Willamette River Basin in Flood Control Act of 1938. Flood Control Acts of 1944, 1946, and 1954, modified proJect for recreational facilities. Construction of additional rec- reation facilities for completed project is estimated to cost $1,034,000. Local cooperation. None required. 1566 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Dam and reservoir were in operation with ordinary maintenance accomplished as re quired. Debris cleanup of the reservoir was completed by con tract November 1965. One freshet was regulated by Dorena Reservoir on Row and Coast Fork Willamette Rivers. 8lghe t flow occurred January 6, 1966, with a peak inflow of 14,600 cubic feet per second and required 60,000 acre-feet of storage space for control. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project ini ated June 1941 was completed October 1952 except for construc' tion of additional recreation facilities authorized in 1954. Dar and reservoir have been in continuous operation since Novemnbe 1949. Cost and financial statement total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Junoe 30, 166' New work: 13673 439 Appropriated.......... $19,600 $23,000 $75,466 $5,900.......... 13,673,421 Cost............... .. 28,738 27,156 74,985 6,413 $132 Maintenance: 744,422 744,42257 751,716 Appropriated.......... 45,500 66,900 47,800 95,50()0 68,600 Cost................. 43,800 51,338 64,811 57,820 94,401 x Includes $143,966 allotted under Code 710, recreation facilities, on completed project. 36. ELK CREEK RESERVOIR, ROGUE RIVER BASIN, OREG. Location. In Jackson County, Oreg., at river mile 3, on erly Creek, a tributary of Rogue River, about 26.5 miles north from Medford, Oreg. k- Existing project. Plan provides for a rock and gravel emba 1 1 ment dam, 235 feet high from streambed to crest with an overal- length of 2,670 feet. A gate-controlled concrete chute-type P 1 way, regulating outlet tunnel and intake tower with multileve intakes will be in right abutment. Reservoir 5.5 miles long d provide 95,000 acre-feet of usable storage for flood control and water conservation utilization. Project will control runoff frod drainage area of 127 square miles. Reservoir will be operated to provide irrigation, fish and wildlife enhancement, and recra tion benefits. Project was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 566, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated cost of project (1966) is $21 million, of which $4,300,000 is for lands and dan ages including relocations and $16,700,000 for construction. o Local cooperation. Authorizing act requires that State Oregon take action, prior to construction, to insure maintenance in stream of flow to be released for fishery. In addition, coSt allocated to irrigation would have to be repaid in a manner and to an extent consistent with Reclamation laws and policies. ode Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation o d sign memoranda continued covering site selection; hydrology andl meteorology, general; preliminary master plan; relocations; re estate; and fish facilities. Condition at end of fiscal year. Under advance engineering' preparation of design memoranda was in progress. FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1567 Cost and financial statement Year Total to ical ear1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 Work. ... propriated ................................... $104,000 $100,000 $204,000 Cot .......................... .................... 53,972 132,758 186,730 37. FALL CREEK RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On Fall Creek, a tributary of Middle Fork Will- ahlette River, about 7 miles above confluence of the streams and about 19 miles southeasterly of Eugene, Oreg. Existing project. Provides for an earth-and-gravel-fill em- bankment, about 5,100 feet long at crest and 180 feet above Streambed. Spillway will be a gate-controlled type, in left abut- Ient. Outlet will be in right abutment. Reservoir will provide 115,000 acre-feet of usable flood control storage and will be op- rated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system to protect Wil- lanette River Valley and increase low waterflows for navigation, ad other purposes. Project was authorized by 1950 Floodcost Con- tlAct (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated of Project (1966) is $21,013,000 of which $4,900,000 is for lands and anMages including relocations, and $16,113,000 for construction. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results duringq fiscal year. Construction of Winberry Creek left bank road, upper section, and bridge, was completed December 1965, with road grading for bridge ap- Iroaches and surfacing of 6 miles of right bank road essentially accomplished under a separate contract. Reservoir clearing of tWo areas and final cleanup of reservoir were completed Decem- er 1965. Construction of Fall Creek Dam was accomplished Oetober 1965 except for punch list items and demobilization, con- tiderably ahead of schedule. Cost of dam was $12,376,282. At ed of fiscal year construction of relocated county road, Peninsula section, removal of reservoir debris, and fencing and miscellaneous 1Provements at damsite, were in progress. One freshet was regulat ed by Fall Creek Reservoir on Fall Creek, a tributary of Middle Fork Willamette River. Gates were closed January 4, 1966, to initiate filling to minimum conservation pool. Highest 'flow had a peak in-flow of 6,000 cubic feet per second and re- qtiired 45,000 acre feet of storage space for control. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project be- gan1 VMay 1962 and is 97.3 percent complete. Reservoir storage for flood control was initiated October 1965 with dedication cere- monlies held. Road relocation work and miscellaneous improve- raents are in progress. Completion of project is June 1967. Cost and financial statement 1568 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 38. FERN RIDGE RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On long Tom River, 23.6 miles from the mouth. Long Tom River rises in Lane County, Oreg., on eastern slope of Coast Range, flows north for 50 miles, and enters Willamette River 147 miles above its mouth. Drainage area tributary to this reservoir is 252 square miles. Existing project. Plan as originally authorized provides for construction of an earthfill dam, 6,360 feet long at crest, and two auxiliary dikes, 850 and 3,680 feet long, along northeaster boundary of reservoir. Main dam has a maximum height of feet above streambed. Spillway, near left abutment, consists of a gravity section concrete overflow structure controlled by sie automatic radial gates. Outlet works are in spillway structure Project includes rectification of channel of Long Tom ie downstream from dam. Reservoir has a storage capacitY Of 101,200 acre-feet at full pool. Provision of additional storagefor flood control was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act. The additional storage, obtained in 1965, was provided by raising e bankments 2 feet to 46 above streambed, securing usable st o rq g to 110,000 acre-feet. Reservoir at full pool, protects Long Tom River Valley and is operated as a unit of coordinated reservoir system to protect Willamette River Valley generley and to increase low waterflows for navigation. Existing project was selected for construction under general authorization for Willamette River Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Flood Control Acts of 1944, 1946, and 1954, modified project recreational facilities. Construction of additional recreato facilities for project, estimated to cost $1,852,000. Raising da I to provide additional storage for flood control, completed AP . 1965, at cost of $136,482. Estimated cost of project (1966) $6,484,262. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. Installation of recreational facilities, Orchard Point area, second phase, was cornm pleted by contract March 1966. Plans and specifications for coe struction of additional facilities, Orchard Point, third phase, were essentially completed. Maintenance: In addition to ordinarY operation of dam and reservoir, removal and disposal of stumPp was accomplished by contract. One freshet was regulated Y Fern Ridge Reservoir on Long Tom River. Highest flow occurre January 4, 1966, with peak inflow of 16,900 cubic feet per second and required 100,500 acre-feet of storage space for control. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project i itiated April 1940 was completed August 1951, except for con struction of additional recreation facilities authorized in 1954 an- provision of additional storage for flood control authorized in 196 and completed April 1965. Dam and reservoir have been in co- tinuous operation since December 1941. FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1569 and financial statement 0sCost Total to tolYer ear ............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 wWork: lropriated .......... $30,600 $47,000 $142,287 $360,000 $81,295 $5,189,962 tn .............. 47,423 49,078 96,624 252,297 106,554 5,055,662 a9 ce: .......... 120, Prropriated 300 144,800 151,100 232,000 118,800 21,583,096 .............98,223 119,724 188,525 218,025 131,456 1,571,085 8 4clUdes 1136 $575,700 allotted under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed project and 82 allotted under Code 721 (small authorized project) reservoir modification. $9,750 allotted under Code 700, deferred maintenance. cludles 39. GATE CREEK RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. In Lane County, Oreg., at river mile 0.4 on Gate reek, a tributary of McKenzie River, about 27 miles east of ,ne Oreg. xasting project. Plan provides for a gravel embankment A,270 feet high from streambed to crest and 1,200 feet long. 6,ate-controlled concrete spillway and regulating outlet works ill be on right abutment. Reservoir will provide 50,000 acre- 96of usable flood control storage. Project was authorized by o62 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 403, 87th Cong., 2d sess.) to be 0 tructed in lieu of Quartz Creek Reservoir, Oreg., authorized lFlood Control Act of 1938. Estimated cost of project $22,- 00,000 4Ocal cooperation. None required. OPerations and results during fiscal year. Initiated design 4,W oraidum covering site selection. tiCondition at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering was ini- '4ted this fiscal year. Cost and financial statement se Total to Year. ..... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Nork: C lropriated................................................$75,000 $170,000 .... ............ ... ......... ........... .73,589 168,589 $95,000 pro rata share of site selection in lieu of Quartz Creek Reservoir. Icludes 40. JOIHNSON CREEK, PORTLAND AND VICINITY, OREG. .Location Johnson Creek, a minor tributary of Willamette rises in low foothills of Cascade Range and flows westerly ofher, 0 oUgh towns of Gresham and Lents, along southeast boundary Scity of Portland to its confluence with Willamette River at town ilwaukee. ".-istingq project. Provides for channel improvements and 'I-protection at various locations between mile 15.26 and I uth. Through town of Gresham, project provides for about m1ile of channel clearing and improvement; between mile 10.3 fr 9.27 for channel clearing; and between mile 7.79 and mouth, i,,PChannel improvement, clearing, and revetment work includ- excavation of a bypass channel to pass floodwaters through 1570 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 constricted industrial and residential reach between mile 7.79 and 5.19. This will provide protection through town of Gresham against floods of a frequency of once in 7 years, andonce betwee. mile 10.3 and mouth against floods of a frequency of in 2 Control Act years. Existing project was adopted by 1950 Flood Federal to" (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated (1966) is $772,000. ,Ferld Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands and rights-of-way; make necessary highway, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; aid maintain and operate completed works. Estimated cost for all requirements of local cooperation under terms of project authorization were $771,000 (1966). Local interests fornimed subdistrict, the Southeast Johnson Creek Water Control District and furnished approved assurances of cooperation. Required rights-of-way have not been secured.to Operations and results during fiscal year. Due to inability to receive acceptable easements of rights-of-way from local interestS project was placed in active status May 1966. Condition at end of fiscal year. Sponsor of the project, $outh east Johnson Creek Water Control District, was dissolved NoveM- ber 1964 due to inability to secure acceptable easements of righ$" of-way from local interests. Project was placed in inactive statS May 1966, with a 5 year status of limitation. Cost and financial statement year Fiscal ................ 1962 1963 161 1966 1966 New work: " 4000 Appropriated.......... ............ -$18,000 -$30,000 .... Cost............... .. $12,624 4,371 1,834 $1 '195 $2,129 41. KALAMA RIVER (SOUTH AREA) LEVEES, COWLITZ COUNT' WASH. Location. Area is in Cowlitz County, Wash., and extends along Columbia River between mouth of Kalama River, mile7 upstream to high ground about one-fourth mile above town o Kalama at mile 75.5.O Existing project. Provides for construction of about 14,700 feet of levee embankment, additional revetment, a tide box and pumping plant at north end of area, and an emergency pumlid plant at Kalama. Existing project was authorized by 1950 Flod Control Act (I. Doc. 531, 81st Cong. 2d sess.). Estimated Fed eral cost (1966) is $1,010,000.cal Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides 100h interest furnish lands and rights-of-way: make necessary hig way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the Unite States free from damages; and maintain and operate works after completion. Estimated costs of all requirements of local cooperfa tion under terms of project authorization were $133,000 (1966) Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of de- sign memorandum continued. FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1571 Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning for construction is Underway. Cost and financial statement Yea Total to year Yeal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work. Aoropriated...................... $4,000 $6,343 ............ $50,000 $60,344 .o................ ............ 268 9,665 $48 670 10,651 42. LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, OREG. AND WASH. Location. On Columbia River and minor tributaries, channels, and sloughs, between Sandy River, Oreg., about 15 miles east of Vancouver, Wash., and mouth of Columbia River. 'Existingproject. Plan for bank-protection work, construction of flood control works, and improvements to existing projects, in Lower Columbia River Basin, was authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). The plan, as fol- lOWs, provides for new construction and supplementing and ex- ending projects constructed in Columbia, Lewis, and Cowlitz iver Basins under authority of 1936 Flood Control Act: (a) Lower Columbia River Basin levees at new locations, Oregon and ashington-provides for construction of flood control works at: 1Ashougal area, Clark County, Wash., about 5.5 miles of levee and appurtenant works at an estimated cost (1966) of $1,- )70,000. Non-Federal costs are $98,000. Kalama River (south rea), Cowlitz County, Wash., about 3 miles of levee and ap- Purtenant works at an estimated cost (1966) $1,010,000. Non- 'ederal costs are $133,000 (1966). Vancouver Lake area in icinity of Vancouver, Wash., about 11 miles of levee and a4lurtenant works at an estimated cost (1966) of $4,910,000 NO-Federal costs are $1,550,000 (1966). Total estimated costs (1966) are $7,490,000 Federal and $1,781,000 non-Federal. Fol- lowing locations reclassified and excluded from foregoing esti- mate: Clatskanie River area, Columbia County, Oreg., deferred. Iederal estimate $185,000 (1959); non-Federal $11,000; and Tayden Island, Multnomah County, Oreg., inactive. Federal estimate $617,000 (1960), non-Federal $64,000; (b) Lower C4olumbia River Basin bank protection works, Oregon and Wash- h'ton-provides for bank protection works at 61 locations on Clumbia River and tributaries between Sandy River and mouth Of Columbia River, totaling about 133,680 linear feet. Estimated total cost (1966) is $9,790,000 Federal and $200,000 non-Federal; (c) Lower Columbia River Basin levees and improvement to existing projects-provides for improvements to existing works at ollowing locations: 1572 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Locat~on Estimated c0 of Location work approved, 16 Beaver Drainage District, Oreg........................ or o08 Cowlitz County Diking Improvement District 2, Wash......... . . '382000 Cowlitz County Diking Improvement District 13, Wash . ........ 65,652 Cowlitz County Diking Improvement District 15, Wash. .. 32700 Cowlitz County Consolidated Diking Improvement District 2, Wash 1,320, Midland Drainage District, Oreg. ......................... 1500,000 Multnomah County Drainage District 1, Oreg ............... 1,560000 Peninsula Drainage District 1, Oreg........................... P160o, Rainier Drainage District, Oreg ............................. 166 Sandy Drainage District, Oreg............................. 5' Sauvie Drainage District, Oreg. ............................. 683, 00 Scappoose Drainage District, Oreg. ........................ 1,020,' Wahkiakum County Consolidated Diking District 1, Wash. . 1,690,000 Wahkiakum County Diking District 4, Wash. .................. 520,00 Woodson Drainage District, Oreg. .......................... 162 Total estimated cost, Federal funds.............. 10,70 Estimated non-Federal cost ................... o...... 884,00 1Cost is for engineering only. Project was constructed by local interests. Following locations reclassified inactive or deferred and e- cluded from foregoing cost estimate: Bachelor Island, Wash. ............................. ...... $865,000 (1955) Clatskanie Drainage District 1, Oreg .................. 25,000 (1960) Clatsop County Diking District 4, Oreg.............. 35,000 (195) Clatsop County Diking District 6, Oreg ............... 61,000 (1960) (1955) Columbia Drainage District 1, Oreg .................. 1,071,000 Cowlitz County Consolidated Diking Improvement District 1960) 1, W ash .......................................... 1,570,000 (1960) Deer Island Drainage District, Oreg .................. 548,000 John Drainage District, Oreg ......................... 151,000 1960) Lake River delta area, Wash ........................ 1,110,000 (1957) Lewis River area, W ash ............................. 729,000 (1955) Magruder Drainage District, Oreg .................. 77,000 (1960) Peninsula Drainage District No. 2, Oreg .............. 507,000 (1960) Clatskanie Drainage District, Oregon ............... 573,850 (1964) Cost of these locations is .................... 7,322,850 Approved (1966) Federal cost for all approved work under project, Lower Columbia River Basin, Oreg. and Wash., as att thorized by 1950 Flood Control Act is $28,072,652. Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides lo0 ' interests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary high way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate comnpleted works. Total non-Federal costs are $2,865,000 (1966). For details of status or requirements of local cooperation see indi vidual project reports. Operations and results during fiscal year. See individual proJ" ects. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of improverne to existing project in Sandy Drainage District, Oreg., was com pleted by local interests at no construction cost to the Govern ment. Construction of Multnomah County Drainage District1 Oreg., improvement was completed June 1962. Improvements 0 levees has also been accomplished by contracts at the followi locations: Sauvie Island Drainage District, Oreg., in October 1962; at Woodson Drainage Dist., Oreg., December 1963; Rainier Drainage District, Oreg., in June 1964; Cowlitz County Dikiln FLOOD CONTROL---PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1573 1rMlrovement District 15 in December 1965; and Diking Improve- Alett Districts Nos. 2 and 13, Wash., in June 1965. Under authorization for Lower Columbia River Basin bank protection Works, construction is complete at 26 locations, of which 23 are in 8drainage districts. 43. LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN BANK PROTECTION WORKS, OREG. AND WASH. Location. On Columbia River and tributaries between Sandy 4iver, Oreg., and mouth of Columbia River. 1'xisting project. Provides for construction of 133,680 linear feet of bank protection works at 61 locations along Lower Colum- bia River below river mile 125 and along principal tributaries in 'his reach, to protect existing improvements such as levees and developed industrial lands from further erosion. Existing proj- ect is a unit of general comprehensive plan for flood control, 1avigation, and other purposes in Columbia River Basin and was authorized in 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $9,790,000. .Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides local t1 terests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary high- ay, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate works after Completion. Estimated costs for all requirements of local co- oPeration are $200,000 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of bank Protection works was accomplished November 1965 at Chapman location in Scappoose Drainage District, Oreg. Three contracts ere awarded in April 1966 and bank protection work was in rogress at 4 locations: Slough and Navigation in Clatsop Co. iking District No. 6, Oreg., Powell in Multnomah County Drain- ge District No. 1, Oreg., and Coal Creek Slough in Cowlitz ounty Diking Improvement District No. 15, Wash. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project construction initiated Uly 1961 is complete at 26 locations, of which 23 are in 8 drain- .e districts. Planning for construction at three additional loca- Olns is underway. Cost and financial statement Total to yar................ Yeal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 ReWork: Appropriated.......... $400,000 $390,000 $580,000 $453,900 $670,000 $2,929,900 Cost.......... ...... 440,667 571,356 685,024 457,247 205,216 2,466,362 44. MIDLAND DRAINAGE DISTRICT, COLUMBIA COUNTY, OREG. Location. In northwest part of Columbia County, Oreg., 21/2 Miles west of town of Clatskanie along left bank of Wallace Slough opposite Columbia River miles 47.7 and 49.7. Existing project. Plan provides for strengthening existing levee and providing additional pumping capacity. Existing proj- ect was authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st 1574 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $282,900. Local cooperation. Flood Control Act 1950 provides local,'h- terests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary-hige way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the united States free from damages; and maintain and operate completed works. Estimated costs of all requirements of local cooperai1 under terms of project authorization were $33,400 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. A contract ws awarded May 1966 for procurement of pumps. Bids were opened for construction of a pumping plant and levee improvement. Condition at end of fiscal year. Additional funds received June 30 will allow award of contract for construction of a pumtP ing plant and levee improvement. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1905 1966 June30, New work: $282006 Appropriated ........... ....... $16,500 $1,500 $226,706 2 0 $107 Cost.................. . $47 1,429 14,661 1 7,202 45. RAINIER DRAINAGE DISTRICT, COLUMBIA COUNTY, OIgG. Location. In Columbia County, Oreg., west of town of Rainier along Columbia River between river mile 62.2 and 66.8. Existing project. Raising and strengthening spur levee alonId Rinearson Slough and constructing a dredged fill levee parallel anl contiguous to railroad embankment. It also provides for in" creasing pumping capacity of district. Existing project Iva' authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H.Doc. 531, 81st Cong' 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $606,000. Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides locl interests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary h way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate works after completion. Estimated costs for all requirements of local cooperaS tion under terms of project authorization were $33,000 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation o required project operation and maintenance manuals is in prog" ress. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project JI provement initiated October 1961 was completed June 1964 Improvement of pumping station and procurement of a pumP were accomplished November 1962. Currently underwaY i preparation of operation and maintenance manuals. FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1575 46. SAUVIE ISLAND DRAINAGE DISTRICT (AREAS A AND B), MULTNOMAH AND COLUMBIA COUNTIES, OREG. Location. In Multnomah and Columbia Counties, Oreg., at up- 8treant end of Sauvie Island, and extends along left bank of Co- dwlabia River from mouth of Willamette River, at river mile 101.5, Onstream to mile 98.3. E'xisting project. Raising and strengthening portions of levee, 0Stalling toe drains as required, placing gravel road surfacing o4 levee crown not presently surfaced, and increasing capacity Pf lDumping plant. Existing project was authorized by 1950 lood Control Act (11. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Federal Cost of project improvement (1966) is $683,000. cocalcooperation. Requirements of 1950 Flood Control Act coplied with. SOperations and results during fiscal year. Observation and ee-ck of water pumping system was in progress. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project im- loement initiated July 1961 was completed October 1962. 41or changes and improvements are in progress. Cost and financial statement Total to Yal ear.... 1............ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New Work: ApiCropriated ..........$543,300 -$70,000 -$4,900 $4,900 ....... 0 .ost................. 6528,044 26,032 4,074 1,46 $52 665,451 47. SCAPPOOSE DRAINAGE DISTRICT, OREG. Location. In Columbia County, Oreg., along left bank of kltnomah Channel opposite Columbia River miles 90.3 and 97.0. .Existing project. Plan provides for raising and strengthening 2,000 feet of levee, construction of toe drains, and additional P1,ping capacity. Existing project was authorized by 1950 od Control Act (H.Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated ederal cost (1966) is $1,020,000. .Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950, provides local hiterests furnish lands, easements, and rights-of-way; make neces- rY highway, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the hited States free from damages; and maintain and operate Completed works. Estimated costs of all requirements of local coloeration under terms of project authorization were $118,000 (1966). . 0Operations and results during fiscal year. Advance engineer- 9 on authorized levees and pumping plant was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning for construction is t~derway. Cost and financial statement ial 196 Total to .Y....ear 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NevWork: Propriated.......... ............ ............ ............ ............ $20,000 $20,000 Coat.................... .................................... 1,158 1,158 . ....... 0... 1576 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 48. SHELTON DITCH, WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN, OREG. Location. About 2.6 miles long, almost entirely within south ern part of city of Salem, Oreg., flows westerly from diversion structure in Mill Creek to Willamette River..o Existing project. Provides for construction of 2.3 miles oe concrete lined channel. Project is unit of general comprehensive plan for flood control, navigation, and other purposes in Columbia River Basin and authorized in 1950 Flood Control Act (1. D i 531, 81st Cong. 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) $2,100,000. ocal Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides I h. interests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary high way, highway bridges, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate comple' works. Estimated costs for all requirements of local cooper ation under terms of project authorization were $163,000 (1966) Operations and results during fiscal year. Hydraulic studY indicated that Shelton Ditch has substantially adequate capacity to pass design flood. Project will be recommended for inactive status.I Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning for constructiof halted. Cost and financial statement Totalto Fiscal year....... .. . 1962 1983 1964 1965 1966 June 30 New work: $43,000 Appropriated.................................. $10,000 $25,000 $8,000 39416 Cost.................. . .... ... 6,953 14,035 18,488 49. WAHKIAKUM COUNTY CONSOLIDATED DIKING DISTRICT NO. 1, WASHINGTON Location. District occupies both Puget and Little Islands Columbia River between river miles 30 and 44.5. These island are in Wahkiakum County, Wash., near town of Cathlamet Existing project. Provides for raising and strengthening al levees encircling islands, filling adjacent borrow pit ditches constructing about 6,000 feet of major drainage canal, and a ditional tide box, and a pumping plant. Existing project wa authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong.' 2d sess.). Estimated Federal cost (1966) is $1,690,000. Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides c1- interests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary hi g d way, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate completed works. Estimated costs for all requirements of local cooperatio under terms of project authorization were $40,000 (1966).o Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of a design memorandum covering construction of levee and pumIPing plant, essentially completed, was halted due to lack of receipt O assurances of local cooperation. Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning for construction 1 near completion. FLOOD CONTROL---PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1577 -. Cost and financial statement Total to sal year . 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NwWork.- APpropriated.......... ........... $6,000 $20 000 -$10,500 ............ $111,500 $2563 724 10,029 614 $52 104,005 50. WAHKIAKUM COUNTY DIKING DISTRICT NO. 4, WASH. Location. 1iver In Wahkiakum County, Wash., between Columbia miles 33.7 and 37.0. Existing project. Plan provides for raising and strengthening existing levees, improving drainage facilities, and constructing tWo short levees. Existing )roject was authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated Fed- eral cost (1966) is $520,000. . Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides local 111terests furnish lands, easements, and rights-of-way; make 11ecessary highway, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United States free from damages; and maintain and operate COmpleted works. Estimated costs of all requirements of local Cooperation under terms of project authorization were $28,000 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. Initiated design helMorandum for construction. .Condition at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering was ini- tlated this fiscal year. Cost and financial statement Total to SealYear................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Work. .............................. )proriated ...................... $15,000 $15,000 Cost......... ....... ............ 13,219 13,219 51. WASHOUGAL AREA LEVEES, CLARK COUNTY, WASH. Location. Area is in southeastern part of Clark County, Wash., and extends along Columbia River about 4 /2miles, from awton Creek on the east to Washougal River on the west, and includes parts of towns of Washougal and Camas. Existing project. Construction of about 52 miles of levees and two tide boxes and pumping plants to protect area from a flood of the 1948 magnitude. Existing project was authorized S1950 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.). stimated Federal cost (1966) is $1,720,500. . Local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1950 provides local interests furnish lands and rights-of-way; make necessary high- ay, highway bridge, and utility alterations; hold the United tates free from damages; and maintain and operate completed orks. Total estimated costs of all requirements of local co- oPeration under terms of project authorization were $98,000 (1966). 1578 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction of flood control works and construction of pumping plant were coM- pleted under two contracts May 1966, except for minor de ficiencies to be accomplished after high water recedes. In Jue 1966 contract was awarded for construction of gate well structure in an existing sewer crossing Washington State Highway 8. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project begal April 1965 and was essentially completed May 1966. Minor work will be accomplished in fiscal year 1967. Cost and financial statement .Totalto Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June , 1966 New work: $877,000 $1,720,500 Appropriated .......... .......... $70,500 $700,000 Cost......... ........$1,906 . $ 6,075 75,369 231,050 1,266,462 1, 52. WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN, OREG. (BANK PROTECTION) Location. On Willamette River and tributaries, between Cas- cade range and coast range, from a point south of Eugene to Portland, Oreg. Existing project. Provides for clearing, sloping, and revettinl riverbanks; construction of pile-and-timber bulkheads and drift barriers; minor channel improvements; and maintenance of eX- isting works for control of floods and prevention of erosion at various locations along Willamette River and its tributaries. Existing project was authorized by Flood Control Acts of 1936 and 1938. Flood Control Act of 1950 authorized similar work at 77 additional locations. Estimated Federal cost of project (1966) is $13,100,000. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, aP* plies. Estimated costs for all requirements of local cooperatiol under terms of project authorization were $263,000 (1966). Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: Col" pleted 11,718 linear feet of bank protection works at following locations: Quantity Location Nature of work (linear feet) Williamette River, 8-A, D/S. ext., right bank, mile 169.0... Stone revetment, wood drift barrier ...... 435 Willamette River, Gavette, U/S ext., left bank, mile 163.5.. Stone revetment....................... . 451 Willamette River, Junction City, left bank, mile 166.2..... Stone revetment.......................9 8763 Santiam River, Edwards, both banks, mile 3.6............ Stone revetment channel improvement. '498 North Santiam, Lafky, both banks, mile 13.6........... . Stone revetment, channel improvement. 2'660 North Santiam, Pritchard, right bank, mile 12.3.......... Stone revetment......................1'985 South Santiarm, Powell, left bank, mile 20.6.............. Stone revetment......................1988 Calapooia, Brownsville No. 3 left bank, mile 39.5......... Stone revetment...................... Contract plans and specifications for construction of bank protec- tion works in 1966 have been essentially completed. Mainte- nance: Spraying wood growth on 80 existing revetments on Willamette River and tributaries was accomplished by contract. Bank protection work and revetment repair was completed at 8 locations. FLOOD CONTROL---PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1579 Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project began S1938 and is 87 percent complete. A total of 410,773 linear feet of bank protection works at 184 locations, consisting of revet- ent, of riverbanks, pile and timber bulkheads, drift barriers, 1d channel improvements, have been completed on Willamette Ver and tributaries. _Cost and financial statement Total to 1cal Year 1962 1963 1961 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 ework. 1APPropriated.......... $550,000 $610,000 $597,000 $500,000 $865,000 $11,412,424 Cost.. 591,284 634,226 576,441 531,525 852,020 11,393,188 Doropriated.......... 109,600 39,300 49,300 66,100 108,000 1,728,050 Cost .................. 105,981 49,663 57,735 53,331 99,511 1,705,456 SIn addition, $77,469 contributed funds expended for new work. 53. WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN (PORTLAND DIST.) Location. Willamette River is formed by Coast and Middle ~orks which join a few miles above Eugene, Oreg., flows north 189 miles, and enters Columbia River 101.5 miles above its mouth. asin has an area of 11,200 square miles and lies between Cas- cade range on the east and coast range on the west. Major tribu- taries of Willamette River rise in Cascade Mountains and consist Of Coast and Middle Forks and McKenzie, Calapooya, Santiam, olalla, and Clackamas Rivers. Important tributaries that had in the coast range are Luckiamute, Yamhill, and Tualatin gi'lers Minor tributaries, all of which enter main stream from thers. Swest, are Marys River, Rickreall Creek, and Long Tom River. Existing project. Flood Control Act of 1938 approved general coYplrehensive plan for flood control, navigation, and other pur- DOses in Willamette River Basin (II. Doc. 544, 75th Cong., 3d sess.) and authorized $11,300,000 for initiation and partial ac- complishment, of plan recommended for initial development, reservoirs and related works to be selected by Chief of Engineers. SUbsequent Flood Control Acts, 1941 through 1965, authorized additional flood control and other works and increased monetary authority to $1,141,300,000-Columbia River Basin, including illamette River Basin. 1580 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Reservoirs and other improvements included in Willam ette River Basin comprehensive plan r._.._.---- d Ftimate Federal cost-.-d1966 Project Authorizing act i $31,4 00 Blue River Reservoir, McKenzie Basinl 3.............. May 17, 1950, H. Doe. 531, 81st Cong. 39,800,000 Cascadia Reservoir, South Santiam Riverl 4........... Oct. 23, 1962, H. Doe. 403, 87th Cong., 2d sess. 3005,000 Channel clearing and 6 snagging on Willamette River and May 17, 1950, II. Doe. 531, 81st Cong., 2d major tributaries. sess. 00 Channel improvements for flood control and major1 drain- ..... ... ................. do ................. 2,100,0 age on 16 streams tributary to Willamette River. 7 Cottage Grove Reservoir, Coast Forki.................. June 28, 1938, LI.Doe. 54,4,75th Cong., 3d 3,131,204 seas. Cougar Reservoir, South Fork McKenziel 3............ May 17, 1950, H. Doe. 531, 81st Cong. 2d 54,700,000 sess. and Sept. 3, 1954, S. Doe. 131, 83d Cong., 2d sese. 2 62,729,08 Detroit Reservoir, including Big Cliff regulating dam, 1 June 28, 19)38,II. Doe. 5,14,75th Cong., North Santiam River. 3d ses. and June 30, 1948, Public Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858. Dorena Reservoir, Row Riverl....... June 28, 1938, H11.Doc. 544, 75th Cong., 14,563,473 . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 3d ses. Fall Creek Reservoir, Middle Forkl...... May 17, 1950, H. Doe. 531, 81st Cong., 21,013,0 2d seas. Fern Ridge Reservoir, Long Tom Riverl................. June 28, 1938, H. Doe. 544, 75th Cong., 3d 6,484,262 seas. Floodwall levees, Portland, Oreg.6......... ............. May 17, 1950, 11. Doe. 531, 81st Cong., 18,000,000 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d sess. Gate Creek Reservoir, McKenzie Basin .... Oct. 23, 1962, H. Doe. 403, 87th Cong., 2d 22,300,000 seas. Green Peter Reservoir, including Foster regulating dam, May 17, 1950, H1.Doe. 531, 81st Cong., 82,300,000 Middle Santiam.t 4 2d seas. and Sept. 3, 1954, S. Doc. 131, 83d Cong., 2d sess. July 14, 1960, S. Doc. 104, 86th Cong. Hills Creek Reservoir, Middle ForkI................. May 17, 1950, 11. Doe. 531, 81st Cong., 2d 45,800,00 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sess. 13,300,000 Holley Reservoir, Calapooya River ...... 1 . . . . . . . . . . do ................................. ..... Johnson Creek, vicinity of Portland, Oreg. ... .. .do.... Lookout Point Reservoir, including Dexter reregulating June 28, 1938. H. Doe. 544, 75th Cong., 890,051,7 dam, Middle Fork.1 3d sess., and May 17, 1950, 11. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sets. 9,470,000 Strube reregulating Dam and Reservoir, Oregon ........ Oct. 23, 1962, If. Doc. 403, 87th Cong., 2d seas. (8) Waldo Lake tunnel and reregulating works North Fork, May 17, 1950, H. Doe. 531, 81st Cong., Middle Fork, Willamette 6River. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d sess. 214 00 Willamette Falls fish ladder ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....do . .... . ... ...... do ............. Willamette River bank protectionl...... June 22, 1936, Special Report Division 13,100,00 Engr., June 28, 1938, I. l)oc. 544, 75th Cong., 3d seas. May 17, 1950, HIf.Doe. 531, 81st Cong., 2d seas. 1 See individual reports for details of the project. 2Actual cost. SFor construction in lieu of originally authorized Quartz Creek Reservoir. 4For construction in lieu of originally authorized Sweet Home Reservoir. 5Project deferred for restudy. o Project reclassified inactive. SDoes not include $13,871,000 reclassified locations. 8 Authorization rescinded August 28, 1958, Public Law 85-820. Local cooperation. Section 2, Flood Control Act of June 1938, applies to reservoir projects. Local cooperation for other projects is in individual reports for those projects. Operations and results during fiscal year. See individual re- ports. 0r Condition at end of fiscal year. Following projects were co * pleted as authorized and in continuous operation: Fern Ridge Reservoir, completed August 1951; Cottage Grove Reservoir, March 1952; Dorena Reservoir, October 1952; Detroit Reservoir, December 1960; Lookout Point Reservoir, June 1961; Hills Creek Reservoir, June 1963, and Cougar Reservoir, March 1964. Under the authorization for construction of recreation facilities ol completed projects, work has been accomplished at Fern Ridge,e Cottage Grove, Dorena, and Lookout Point Reservoirs. Constru c FLOOD CONTROL--PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT tiol of Green Peter, Fall Creek, and Blue River Reservoirs is in rOgress. Advance engineering and design for proposed con- t'ruction of Holley Reservoir project was placed in deferred status pending completion of a study to determine extent of in- Creased capacity required in Calapooia River for flood control operation of the reservoir. Details of operation, construction, Ald financial status of projects are in individual reports. Dur- & low-water season, July-September, supplemental water re- leases are made from Willamette River Basin reservoirs for Coservation purposes. Interests which benefit from increased downstream flows include irrigation, navigation, power, pollution abatement and recreation. Although optimum regulation can- not be provided for every conservation interest, water released rM reservoirs during the low-water season for a particular pur- lDose will usually provide benefits to other conservation uses as Well. Basic policy is to provide most beneficial overall regulation, consistent with established water-use priorities. 54. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS Sflunds appropriated for inspection of completed local flood pro- teeticon projects are used to determine condition of completed WOrks and to ascertain whether those works are being properly M1aintained by local interests. A total of 46 leveed areas and 95 bank protection works were inspected at various locations along both banks of Lower Columbia River below Bonneville Dam, along Oregon Coast and Willamette River Basin. Of this total, 3 leveed areas in Oregon and 8 leveed areas in Washington along LOWer Columbia River; 3 leveed areas and 1 revetment along Oregon Coast; 4 revetments along Cowlitz River; and 2 leveed areas in Willamette River Basin were inspected August 1965 orOugh May 1966. Also during May 1966, 90 revetments along Willarnette River and tributaries were inspected. A representa- tive of sponsoring districts accompanied the Portland District t.eDresentatives performing the levee inspections. Aerial inspec- tlo of revetments in Willamette River Basin was supplemented ~ an on site inspection at locations requiring maintenance. eficiencies in maintenance and need for repairs were discussed Wth sponsoring districts' representatives and a report was made o each sponsor with recommendations for improving mainte- alnce. The campaign to improve maintenance of completed Fed- eral projects initiated by House Appropriations Committee on iVil Functions was continued. Periodic contact was maintained ith uncooperative areas reported in fiscal year 1965 to ascertain ay change in attitude and to provide technical assistance, if re- ested. Of the 141 local flood protection projects inspected in POrtland District, 8 were reported deficient in maintenance. cal year costs were $19,919 and costs to June 30, 1966 were 84,453. 85. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIONS Corps of Engineers monitored flood control operation of three 1582 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Bureau of Reclamation constructed reservoirs; Prineville, OchOCo, and Emigrant. These irrigation reservoirs were partially con- structed with flood control funds and therefore come under seCd tion 7, Flood Control Act of 1944. All reservoirs were operated effectively for flood regulation. There were no major floods ex perienced in the respective basins and the operation was of routine order. Flood control reservoir regulation manuals for these proJ" ects are being reviewed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, spOn" sor of the projects. Total costs for fiscal year were $1,215. 56. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30 1966 full report -_-__ ___ s d Name of project seeAnnual on Report Constructiono peratnc for- mainteoal"C COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN 1 . . . .. . . . . . Diking and Improvement District 5,Cowlits County, Wash. 1940 $161,380 *. .. Beaver Drainage D)istrict, Columbia County, Oreg.1.................. 1940 274,578. Magruder Drainage District, Columbia County, Oreg.l ............... 1940 61,186 .. ... Midland Drainage District, Columbia County, Oreg., ................. 1939 77,743 Marshland Drainage District, Columbia County, Oreg l............... 1940 39,474 Webb District Improvement Co., Columbia County. Greg............ 1940 84,591 . Woodson Drainage District, Columbia County, Oreg.l................ 1940 22,796 .. .. . Westland District Improvement Co., Columbia County, Oreg.'........ 1940 205,531 .. Trenasillahe Island, Clatsop County. Oreg.1......................... 1939) 133,778 .. . Blind Slough Diking District. Clatsop County, Oreg.1.................1939 163,396 .. Drainage District 1, Clatsop County, Oreg.1......................... 1939 240,939 . Diking District 2, Clatsop County, Oreg.l........................... 1940 43,149 . Diking District 5,Clatsop County, Oreg.l ........................... 1940 25,608 . Warrenton Diking District, No. 1, Clatsop County, Oreg.!............ .1940 69,503 Warrenton Diking )District2, Clatsop County, Oreg.1................ 1940 117,142 ". Warrenton Diking District 3, Clatsop County, Oreg.1 ................ 1940 0. 74,596 Consolidated Diking and Improvement District 1, Cowlitz County, Wash1 1941 163,290 . Diking District 1 and 3 (Puget Island) and Little Island, Wahkiakum 1941 258,795 . County, Wash.. Diking Improvement District 1, Pacific County. Wash.i.............. 1941 26,810. Karlson Island, Clatsop County, Oreg............................. 1941 25,773 . Deep River area, Wahkiakum C'ounty, Wash.1....................... 1942 69,723 Sandy Drainage District, Multnomah County, Oreg.1.................1942 138,955 . Peninsula l)rainage District 1 Multnomah County, Oreg.1............ 1942 211,160 . Peninsula Drainage District 2, Multnomah County, Oreg.t ............ 19,12 241,148 .. .. Scappoose Drainage District, Columbia County, Oreg.)............... 1942 424,303. Rainier Drainage District, Columbia County, Oreg.I..................1942 47,661 Knappa area, Clatsop County, Oreg.1.............................. 1942 18,788 John Day River area, Clatsop County, Oreg.1......................1942 33,080 Walluski River, Clatsop County, Oreg.t............................ 1942 66,932 . Youngs River dikes, Clatsop County, Oreg.l........................ 1 .. ............... 1942 218,802 . Lewis and Clark River area, Clateop County, Oreg. 194,12 158,418 ... Deer Island area, Columbia County, Oreg.......................... 1943 574,122 . Westport District, Columbia and Clatsop Counties, Oreg.1............ 1. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 1943 140,657 .. Skamokawa Creek area, Wahkiakum County, Wash. 1946 178,884. Upper Grays River area, Wash................................... 1947 61,283 Multnomah Diking District 1, Oreg.l... ........................ 1 11951 610,652 .. Sauvie Island areas A and B, Multnomah County, Oreg. ............1 1951 1,023,505 Diking and Improvement District 4, Wahkaikum County, Wash. ...... 1951 169,542 Prescott area, Columbia County, Oreg.1............................ 1911 124.. .. Diking District 3, Clatsop County, Oreg.i........................... 1938 258 .. . Total Columbia River Basin..................................... 7,188,152 LEWIS RIVER BASIN Diking and Improvement District 11,Cowlits County, Wash.'......... 172,521 .... COWLITZ RIVER BASIN Cowlitz County Drainage Improvement District 1, Wash.i.............1939 42,978 .. Diking Improvement District 2, Cowlitz County, Wash.l.............. 1940 121,165 Diking Improvement District 13, Cowlitz County, Wash........... 1939 28:592 . Total Cowlitz River Basinl........................................ 192,735 .. See footnotes next page. MIULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1583 OTtER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS-Continued For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Repor t Construction Operation and for-- maintenance Mille5 iddi1O.rainage District, Yaquina River, Oreg. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1919 118.433........... CedN River, Oreg........................ .................... 1950 5,000 .............. Uq River, Oreg.2..... .............................. 1948 908 .............. Vlie Oiver and tributaries, Oreg........................... 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 1952 428,881 .. ..... 4te R1 ehalem, Nehalem River, Oreg. ... 1952 45,679 ........... Ar oek, Cowlitz River, Wash. ....... ......................... 1957 104,921........... e rvoi rGreg.l 01ei ICreek, 3..................................... Orgn1963 . . 1960 241,990 ........... 1,214,300 . WilGY 0 'ervoir, Oregon.................................. 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1963 . . . . . . . . . 241P990........... S e e ek Reservoir, Oreg. 112,000 .............. illa nd levees at Portland, Ore.2............2 . . . . . . . ...................................... . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. lte iver Basi Channel clearing and snagging ielf0 i Falls fish ladder, Oreg.2 . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ( nnProtection projects, Columbia River Basin, Oreg. and Wa.h.1 1982 20.8,065 .. acimprovement for flood control 5 and major drainage on tribu- 1962 35,888 .............. t Willamette River, Oreg. 1c a U)rnleted. adton $154,751 contributed funds expended for new work, $88,784 "Required" and " 474Othier"P ecomnendation for early authorization rescinded by S. Doc. 1C4, 86th Cong., in Flood o ftrAct 1960. ur locations classified deferred for restudy. Ten locations classified inactive. 57. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION tudSoto~m1nldnoncto " ot Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Study identification Fiscal year costs GetralPoint, Oreg......................................... $57 eCaucan River, Paisley location, Oreg ..................... 302 Iy Of Burns, Oreg.............................. ......... 577 lacka as River, Barton Park, Oreg..........................597 Qckamas River, Dixon Farm Location, Oreg.................3,200 lekamas River at Paradise Park, Oreg.................... 2,067 Viha, Oreg............... .............................. 144 pe lmicum River, Oreg.................................... 425 rk Place area, Willamette and Clackamas Rivers near 0regon City,Oreg....................................... 112 dsport, lower Umpqua River, Oreg........................ 29,966 n1 River, Otis, Oreg.................................... 228 11a Creek near Sisters, Oreg.............................. 162 of Coberg, McKenzie River, Oreg. ................... 1r1elity 1,760 l' ity of Natron, Middle Fork Willamette River, Oreg.........4,294 o1 1gs River, Oreg.................... .................... 318 Total .............................................. 44,209 Emergency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) ,Viscal year costs were $1,977,492 for repair and restoration. 58. COLUMBIA RIVER AT BONNEVILLE, OREG. 1Location. atll(I Project is on Columbia River, 42 miles east of Port- 1 l ri t,,, Oreg., 101c^^'T146 miles above mouth of river. 1-". about For descrip- 11of Columbia River see Improvement No. 5. Wisting project. A dam, powerplant, and lock for power and 1584 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 navigation. Spillway dam extends across main channel froe Washington shore to Bradford Island, which divides the river at this point. Overflow crest at 24 feet above mean sea level is surmounted by 18 vertical-lift steel gates placed between Piets which extend to elevation 99 feet where a service roadway permits operation of two 350-ton gantry cranes for regulating gates. Powerhouse extending across Bradford Slough to Oregon shore has an installation of 10 units, consisting of two units of o43,200 kilowatts each and eight units of 54,000 kilowatts each, t tal r 518,400 kilowatts. Ordinary and extreme fluctuations of river at lower lock gate are about 21 and 47 feet, respectively. Project includes fish ladders and locks to serve both main channel qe Bradford Slough channel. Navigation lock and powerhouse re founded on andesite, and main dam rests upon solidified S.edi mentary rock of volcanic origin. Pool created by dam provides a navigable channel with a depth of 30 feet and over betwe.e Bonneville and The Dalles Dams, a distance of 47 miles. PrI- cipal data concerning navigation lock, spillway dam, and poWer plant: Navigation lock Dimensions: Clear width of chamber ............ 76 feet. Greatest length available for full width 500 feet. Lift (vertical) : At extreme low water and normal pool level .................... 66 feet. At normal river stage .......... 59 feet. At extreme high water ......... .About 3C Sfeet. Depth over miter sills at adopted low water ........................... 24.2 feet Character of foundation ................ Andesite Opened to navigation .................. January 1938. Spillway dam Type of construction .................... Concrete gravity. Completed ............................ 1938. Capacity .............................. 1,600,000 cubic feet per sec0. Elevation of gate sills on crest of spillway.. 23.3 feet Height above lowest foundation .......... About 1 70 feet. Length of dam proper .................. 1,090 fee t. Length of dam overall .................. 1,230 fee t. Width at base ......................... 200 feet. Gate openings ......................... 18. Crest overflow (above mean sea level) .... 24 feet. Pool elevation (normal) (above mean sea level) ............................... 72 feet. Powerplant Length ............................... 1,027 fec t. W idth ... ............................. 190 feet. Height (roof to bedrock) .............. 190 feet. kw. 0.8 power factor. Generator (station unit) ............... 1 4,000- Generators ............................ 2 43,200--kw. 0.9 power Ior 8 54,000- -kw. 0.9 power factor Total rated capacity ................... 518,400-1 kw. 0.9 power factor' Speed ................................ 75 revol utions per minute. Dam, navigation lock, 10-power unit generating installation' fishways, and attendant buildings and grounds cost $83,239 5' of which $6,072,480 is for navigation facilities, $39,350,824 f MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1585 DoWer facilities and $37,816,091 for point facilities, consisting of darm, fishways, buildings, and grounds, and headwall section of DOWer units 0 to 6, cost of which ($2,106,000) is allocated to dar and reservoir facilities. Under separate authorization, Code 710, construction of recreational facilities of $1,219,000 is Dianned. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports Existing project was originally authorized Sept. 30, 1933, Aug0 by Federal Emergency Administration of Publc Works. S30,1935 Existing project authorized by Congress ................ S. committee print, 73d Cong., 2d sess., (report of Chief of Engineers dated Aug. 21, 1938). Aug.O,1937 Completion, maintenance, and operation of Bonneville project under direction of Secretary of War and super- vision of Chief of Engineers, subject to certain provisions therein relating to powers and duties of Bonneville Power Administrator. Operations and results during fiscal year. Ordinary mainte- 1ance (operation and care) continued. Under contract awards, Ievetmnent restoration was completed, and warehouse dock, steel storage facilities, and reroofing of warehouse accomplished. In te 1966 contract was awarded for drilling water well for ecreational facilities. Lock was in operation except from Otober 3-15, 1965, for maintenance. During fiscal year 4,107,- 572,000 kilowatt-hours of electrical power energy were generated, of which 4,091,990,000 kilowatt-hours were delivered to Bonne- Ville Power Administration, the marketing agency. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project started October 1933, was completed February 1953. Modification of DOWerhouse control equipment started March 1957, was completed telbtember 1958. First two power units were placed in opera- io0 during fiscal year 1938. Powerhouse with complete instal- lation of 10 units, was in operation December 1943. Cost and financial statement Total to Year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 NwWork.- Ppropriated...................... ................................... $210,000 $83,449,395 at .......... ......................................... ...... 3,557 83,242,952 enance: APropriated .......... $2,151,000 $2,016,800 $1,857,700$1,745,1001,685,000 234,529,839 C t.....2........ 2243,9621 2,210,198 1,866,329 1,756,358 1,652,600 34,453,236 710Incldes $32,440,700 emergency relief administration funds and $210,000 allotted under Code a2recreation facilities on completed project. neludes $540,000 allotted from deferred maintenance funds, Code 700. 59. COUGAR RESERVOIR, OREG. SLocation. At mile 4.4 on south fork McKenzie River which Joils McKenzie River about 56.5 miles above its confluence with Willlamette River. Dam is about 42 miles east of Eu- gene, Oreg. Drainage area above damsite is 210 square miles. E xisting project. A rockfill dam with an impervious earth 1586 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 core, about 1,400 feet long at crest and 515 feet high abe foundation. Dam forms a reservoir 6 miles long with a ght capacity at full pool of 165,000 acre-feet. Spillway is on rigleh abutment and outlet and power tunnels in left abutment. Outlet tunnel is provided with a chute and stilling basin. Powerp nt consists of two 12,500 kilowatt units with minimum proVisi for installing a third unit of 35,000 kilowatts for future peate capacity. Improvement will function as a unit in coordialter system of reservoirs for multiple-purpose development of waters- resources in Willamette River Basin. Project is one Nofted tWo ervoirs authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act to be construco. in lieu of Quartz Creek Reservoir authorized by 1938 Flood 0 trol Act. Flood Control Act of 1954 authorized installatio000, power facilities. Estimated project cost (1966) is $54,700A of which $9,900,000 is for lands and damages including relo tions, and $44,800,000 for construction. Local cooperation. None required. of Operations and results during fiscal year. Modificationsl fingerling pass in regulating outlet was accomplished. Also cOO pleted by contracts were installation of adjustable gates on land facility fish racks and fingerling passage gate valve operations f controls, installation of fingerling evaluator, and modificatio e fingerling bypass in regulating outlets. Ordinary maintene (operation and care) continued. During fiscal year 64,57 tOf kilowatt-hours of electrical energy were generated at projec,-le which 63,535,000 kilowatt-hours were delivered to Bonnevlls Power Administration, the marketing agency. One freshetNVer regulated by Cougar Reservoir on South Fork McKenzie bic which occurred January 6, 1966, with a peak inflow of 6,200 cubior feet per second and required 20,000 acre feet of storage space f control. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project 1i'd ated June 1956 is essentially complete. Generating units r 2 were placed in commercial operation March 23 and Februtol 4, 1964, respectively. Physically inservice date for flood cont was November 29, 1963. Cost and financial statement year................ 1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1966 f ne 30, New work: 20~~8 $53 Appropriated.......... $9,900,000 $8,979,000 $3,908,400 $585,000 $164,014 Cost..................9,953,815 9,935,008 4,551,287 535,950 176,224 Maintenance Appropriated..............................84,000 226,900 267,500 Cost.................................... 76,493 217,216 253,756 1 Includes $96,000 pro rata share of site selection in lieu of Quartz Creek Reservoir. 60. DETROIT RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On North Santiam River with dam 50 miles fr mouth and 45 miles southeast of Salem, Oreg. North Souath River flows north and west for 85 miles, and unites with IULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1587 raam ti River to form Santiam River, which 10 miles down- a lenters Willamette River 108 miles above its mouth. boi sting project. One main dam and a reregulating dam, facilities. Detroit Dam is a con- ete with power-generating and 454 feet.. high f ra fgra..vit structure about txY structu~re aDbt1, 1,522 feet long . &... . ove'rR oundation to roadway deck. Spillway is a gate-controlled tr ow section, and outlet works are gate-controlled conduits S gl dam. Powerhouse with two units having a capacity to below da,0 kilowatts each is in right abutment immediately pool of 454,900 ae 'eReservoir has a storage capacity at full Ya efeet. It is being as a unit in coordinated reservoir operatedValley .. ten to protect Willamette from floods, to increase low Dozerflows in interest of navigation and irrigation, to generate t er, and for other purposes. Reregulatmng dam 3 miles down- hi ah at Big Cliff site is concrete gravity type, about 172 feet con- ist from foundation to roadway deck. Power installation Reservoir crete one unit with a capacity of 18,000 kilowatts. ooed by dam has a storage capacity of 5,930 acre-feet at full a'd *tProject is a unit of comprehensive plan for flood control elecocter purposes in Willamette Basin. Existing project was tettfor construction under general authorization for Willa- Acts o iver Basin in 1938 Flood Control Act. Flood Control faci oi 1944 and 1946 modified project to p)rovide for recreational project to roliti~s and 1948 Flood Control Act modified existing ties-~dfor installation of hydroelectric power-generaitng facili- 1,cluding construction of a reregulating dam. OOcal COoperation. None required. habivO'ations and results during fiscal year. With minor re- funds, interim repair of Minto Dam, located on North itcio l..n 6'larn River, was completed by contract August 1965. In May bar) contract was awarded for total erosion repair of the Minto ax*1t-Project was in operation all fiscal year with ordinary 445 te nance (operation andofcare) continued. During fiscal year Dro ).4,000 kilowatt-hours electrical energy was generated at oJect, of which 443,009,000 kilowatt-hours were delivered to f es'Ieville Power Administration, the marketing agency. One at et Was regulated by Detroit Reservoir project on Northa l1o an River. Highest flow occurred required January 6, 1966, with 9 f 13,000 cubic feet per second and 50,000 acre feet So0rag' for control. SA diton at end of fiscal year. Construction of project begun l0.1aY 1947 was completed December 1960. The two power- 14die generating units xwere placed in commercial operation June At Big Cliff powerhouse, single respectively.ntm.. 1953,wspae 'eOctober e1J,..g unit June 1954. Use of Big aing unit was placed on-the-line Va1s am for reregulating fluctuating flow from Detroit units ected October 1953. 1588 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total t6 years................1962 Fiscal 1963 1964 1965 1060 June 3,600 New work: Appropriated................ ..................... .......... 722,72968 62,729,6 Cost... ...................................................... Maintenance: 591,518 Appropriated.......... $453,900 $515,000 $4167,700 $497,300 $509,600 Cost.................521,077 502,743 499,749 468,912 460,885 650 Minor rehabilitation: Appropriated.......... ............................... 63,000 258,600 383,607 Cost................ ......................... ........... 6,000 77,476 61. GREEN PETER RESERVOIR, OREG. .. e Location. At approximate mile 5.5 on Middle Santiam Eits which joins South Santiam River about 56.8 miles aboveth confluence with Willamette River. Dam is about 30 miles Sou. east of Albany in Linn County, Oreg. Drainage area above0 site is 277 square miles. Existing project. Provides for construction of a concrete gr v aStilling ity dam with a gate-controlled spillway. Outlet works WillCo" sist of two conduits through spillway, discharging into atilo- basin. A powerplant with an installed capacity of 80,00 bsi. watts will be on right bank adjacent to spillway stilling atl Dam will form a reservoir having a storage capaecity, aCreel pool of 430,000 acre-feet, extending 6.5 miles up Quartzvillection, and some 7.5 miles up Middle Santiam above creek jul col forming a Y-shaped pool. Under Flood Control Act of 1960'ileS struction of a multiple-purpose dam at Foster, Oreg., abouto re- downstream from Green Peter Dam site was authorized ader place White Bridge reregulating dam which was authorized iver 1954 Flood Control Act. Foster Dam on South Santiam will about 38.5 miles above its confluence with Santiam River teo consist of an earthgravel rockfill 3,500 feet long with a Will controlled spillway and stilling basin. Power installatiol t be two units with a capacity of 20,000 kilowatts. Imnprovef 0 will function as a unit in coordinated system of reservOirs ette multiple-purpose development of water resources in Will ate River Basin. Green Peter Reservoir project was origInally thorized by 1950 Flood Control Act to be constructed in liuef Sweet Home Reservoir authorized by 1938 Flood Contro cili" Flood Control Act of 1954 authorized installation of power 66 is ties at Green Peter Dam. Estimated cost of project ( 1 9 il. $82,300,000 of which $18 million is for lands and danmlageS cluding relocations, and $64,300,000 for construction. Local cooperation. None required.o Operations and results during fiscal year. Constructiofcet Green Peter Dam and powerhouse substructure was 92.6 perti0 accomplished with concrete placed in highest blocks to elevae 1005. Completion of powerhouse and installation of govern'"e e furnished equipment, initiated by contract October 1965 tc* 52.3 percent completed. Total costs under the two contro,- $30,615,270. Construction of Foster Dam, about 7 miles do stream from Green Peter Dam site was 71.7 percent comPlete MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1589 post Of $10 027,954. Under contract awarded March 1966, the eqite powerhouse and installation of government-furnished a.prnent mobilization of equipment and materials and preparing weas for batch plant erection, aggregation of stockpiles, etc., ~f i progress. In April 1966 contract was awarded for ritdation drilling, grouting, and drainage at Green Peter Dam. ele.r. g Was underway at end of fiscal year. Under contract, co 9g of Green Peter reservoir areas, "U," "V", and "W" was "CnPleted May 1966 and underway in five Foster reservoir areas. Co0tr uction of Quartzville Bridge and Peninsula Road was ac- of 'lished by contract June 1966 and was continued on relocation POW * Highway 20, South Santiam River. Procurement of C rhOUse equipment is in progress under various contracts. Ju ditionl at end of fiscal year. Project construction began P~te 1961 and is 78.2 percent complete. Construction of Green ser and Foster Dams, powerhouses, relocation of highways, i Or clearing, and procurement of powerhouse equipment are olr Oogress. crn Cost and financial statement Total to a82 1065 1066 June 30, 19661 1962 1963 1964 . ACo'riated. $5,214,071 CO ...... $,200,000$5970,000 $13,017,500 $14400100 $23,120000 5710,158 12,63,400 13,02,08223,271639 64,345,267 ........6,153,182 de $113,000 pro rata share of site selection costs in lieu of Sweet Homrne Reservuir. 0 cati 62. HILLS CREEK RESERVOIR, OREG. r ocation. On the Middle Fork, Willamette River, 47.8 miles h uthand 26.5 miles upstream from Lookout Point Dam. Fork, Willamette River rises on west slope of Cascade e and flows northwesterly to its junction with Coast Fork, ee tte River. Dam is about 45 miles southeast from Eu- 10 reg. Drainage area above dam is 389 square miles. eet1 Project. An earth-and-gravel-fill dam about 2,150 g o~ Ofl at the crest and 338 feet above foundation. A gated e4t ayof straight-chute type with a flip bucket is in right abut- tora am forms a reservoir about 8.5 miles long, with a usable- hte e capacity of 249,000 acre-feet at fullis pool. A diversion ow ' anoutlet tunnel and a power tunnel in right abutment. f erhouse with two 15,000 kilowatt units is isbetween spillway I earth dam. Hills Creek Reservoir project an integral unit il (Prehensive plan for development of water resources of o0 mette River Basins. Hills Creek and Lookout Point Reser- )f Will be operated as a unit for control of floods and generation o r er on Middle Fork Willamette River. These reservoirs, in o ,1 t tion with Dexter reregulating dam and Fall Creek Fork flood d reservoir, will effectively control floods on Middle ill Provide maximum efficient generation of hydroelectric power. IoqCreek Reservoir project was authorized by 1950 Flood Con- 00ie*I'otal cost of project is $45,700,619, of which $10,977,- $34,723,- 19 for or lands and damages including relocations, and COnstruction. 1590 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. None required. _ ainte- 106o0 Operations and results during fiscal year. Ordinaryyeared and care) continued. During fiscal 733,000(operation nance kilowatt-hours of electrical power were genera ille 733,000 gne ille which 105,937,000 kilowatt-hours were delivered to 3on tes Power Administration, the marketing agency. One freshe ett regulated by Hills Creek Reservoir on Middle Fork Willa e t River. Highest flow occurred January 6, 1966, with a0 Pre inflow of 18,000 cubic feet per second and required 45,00 feet of storage space to control. r jiti Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of projl eous ated May 1956, completed June 1963, except for miscellae minor improvements continuing into fiscal year 1966. Cost and financial statement Tt Juno0196 Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: 610 Appropriated..........$1,100,000 $225,000 $441,000 $106,000 --$70,881 Cost.................2,544,087 328,821 657,118 49,089 1,60 Maintenance: Appropriated......... 28,800 153,000 141,600 123,800 130,700 Cost.................. 31,019 152,551 143,400 118,292 130,603 63. LOOKOUT POINT RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On Middle Fork, Willamette River at Meridi 21.3 miles from mouth. Middle Fork, Willamette River, 1 Lane County on western slope of Cascade Range and flows westerly to its junction with Coast Fork, which is head o stem Willamette River. Dam is about 22 miles southeas Eugene, Oreg. Drainage area tributary to reservoir square miles. Existing project. A main dam at Meridian site and al lating dam 3 miles downstream at Dexter site. Both da earth-and-gravel-fills with concrete spillways and have generating facilities. Main dam has a height of 258 fee foundation to deck and is 3,381 feet long at crest forming 8 voir 14.2 miles long providing storage of 456,000 acre-1 full-pool level. Spillway, 274 feet long, is a gate-controlled flow type, forming right abutment. Outlet works consisi slide-gate-controlled conduits pass through spillway S Powerhouse has three main generating units with a cape" 120,000 kilowatts. Reregulating dam has a maximum hel 107 feet above foundation and is 2,765 feet long at crest, f a full pool of 27,500 acre-feet extending upstream to rMal and providing pondage to regulate Lookout Point powe water releases to a uniform discharge. Spillway consist gate-controlled overflow section 509 feet long forming righ ment. Flow regulation will be accomplished by use of SF gates and releases through powerhouse, which contains one I kilowatt unit. Lookout Point and Dexter Dams are oper a single unit of a coordinated system of dams to protect mette River Valley against floods, to provide needed MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1591 er Power, and to increase low waterflows for navigation, argation, and other purposes. Existing project authorized as iW of comprehensive plan for flood control and other purposes Act illa te River Basin, was authorized by 1938 Flood Control 1944.(11 Doc. 544, 75th Cong., 3d sess.). Flood Control Acts of to , 1946, and 1954, modified project for recreational facilities. hoddeC Ontrol Act of 1950 (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.) t'i .ed project to provide power-generating facilities. Con- ee ction of additional recreation facilities for completed proj- is estimated to cost $1,271,000. Ocal cooperation. None required. iaiPerations and results during fiscal year. Ordinary mainte- debe (operation and care) continued. In addition, reservoir by is cleanup and erection of a log trash boom were accomplished elecontracts. During fiscal year, 304,660,000 kilowatt-hours303,- of 14, 0rical Power energy were generated at project, of which 11 .i000kilowatt-hours were delivered One to Bonneville Power Ad- by Ltration the marketing agency. freshet was regulated If- ookout Point Reservoir on Middle Fork Willamette River. 1 yest flow occurred January 6, 1966, with an unregulated peak feet of 31,100 cubic feet per second (reduced by 16,100 cubic acre er second at Hills Creek Reservoir). Storage of 105,000 Coefeet Was used to control this freshet. of roect initi ated ition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project initi- qf a_.ay 194 7 was completed June 1961, except for construction oqta dtional recreation facilities authorized in 1954. At Look- colllnt powerhouse, generating units 1 and 2 were placed in )eetercial operation December 1954, and February At Dexter 1955, re- ,Ively. Unit 3 was placed on-the-line April 1955. May 1955. 8se rhouse the single unit was placed on-the-line from Look- .Dexter Dam for reregulating fluctuating flows 01nt units was effected in December 1954. Cost and financial statement el YeaTotal to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 qewWwork. - I 0oPr000 $20,000 $000....................... $87,851,483 n a e... . .. 800 87,850,260 ... 31,869 22,7,0 10,294........................ Cosrat opriated 585,000 444,700 486, 400 $560,000 $638,200 5,355,900 Ile.. 00 ]10 (I r70 558,491 rr eatin 452,893 facflite 493,657 517,658 o 534147 5,178,572 e $70,700 allotted under Code 710 recreation faciliti on completed project. LosT CREEK RESERVOIR, ROGUE RIVER BASIN, OREG. leocationo.On upper Rogue River at mile 153.6 about 26.5 o northeasterly from Medford, Oreg. Project will provide l. runoff from drainage area of olf 674 square miles. Tetin! project. . Provides for rock and gravel-fill embank- t11 about 3"27 feet an t) rrf 3,850 high from streambed with an overall oTtro'o feet with impervious earth core and a gate- Frncis-typeN" O~se-two Powerhouse will be on right installed abut- capacity ed n and spiliway. se two Francis-type concrete turbines with 1592 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of 24,500 kilowatts each. Regulating outlet facility with pro visions for temperature regulation for releases in lnteres 10 fishery enhancement will also be in right bank. Reservoi miles long will provide 315,000 acre-feet of usable storag 1 be addition to hydroelectric power generation, reservoir W .I operated to provide flood control, irrigation, future water ect pojrTth fish and wildlife enhancement, and recreation benefits.*5 6 was authorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (HI. Doc. 6 8,t Cong., 2d sess.). Estimated project cost (1966) is $83,10 oca- of which $13,996,000 is for lands and damages including , tions and $69,104,000 for construction. ludng lcie Local cooperation. Authorizing act requires that local ag. be furnish assurances prior to construction that demands .1 that made for future use of water supply storage within a perio d to will permit repayment of costs, including interest, allocatke water supply within life of the project; that State of Oregoamt of action, prior to construction to insure maintenance in strea to flows to be released for fishery; in addition costs allocttept irrigation would have to be repaid in manner and to an eoated consistent with Reclamation laws and policies; and costs alloles to power will be repaid on a system basis by revenue fron sille of power in Pacific Northwest Federal system by ,onnevi Power Administration. 5if Operations and results during fiscal year. Site selection and memorandum was approved September 1965. Hydrology a d meteorology memorandum was submitted February 196, hydropower capacity in May 1966. . as Condition at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering continued during the fiscal year. Cost and financial statement AND 65. THE DALLAS DAM, COLUMBIA RIVER, WASh. 0R1e ville Dam, about 193 miles above mouth of river and 9 0 Il east of Portland, Oreg. l ad Existing project. A dam, powerplant, navigation loc i appurtenant facilities. Improvement provides for navig 'or and hydroelectric power generation. Dam is designed for a" r mal pool at elevation 160 mean sea level. Normal pool forlac reservoir extending upstream about 25 miles providing 5 l water to John Day Dam site. The Dalles Dam is 8,700 feet " and consists of a rock, gravel, and sand river closure section Oregon shore connecting to a nonoverflow section which joins powerhouse, then concrete nonoverflow sections con-echtinat spillway with powerhouse and spillway with navigation l.lities right abutment on Washington shore. Fish-passing fac 4ULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1593 ding two ladders are provided. Powerhouse is constructed 1 units which are installed initially and substructure con- ted for 8 additional units, an ultimate total of 22 units. al nstallation, including two 13,500 kilowatt fishwater units, 119,000 kilowatts. Structures are founded on Columbia ' asalt. Principal data concerning lock, spillway, and rOuse: lock Single lift. 04Navigation . feet. 87.5 lift. l ho**.Single ....... . . . :al . . . ... ear length............d 86 ear width ...........................do... S h over upper sill................ .do... 20 lower sill ................. do1... 1 Septh over to navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 17, 1957 Spillway dam I .frest.. . ..... .......... Controlled 2....... Screst gates ............................... do... 162 rf gates ............................ feet.. 50 by 43 * ... . do... 120 flood ton to crest) ....... ........ 2,290,000 0 0 . 0.............................. si n s Powerplant * : . feet.. 240 by 2150 Ouse dimen o. ............ *.* r o n ai units ....................... initial.. 14 .... u ltim ate .. 22 ty Of --- " u n its. . ............. ..... 78,000 ea. Y Of main units.........................kw.. o....................f.eratoa fclt a t osupp y units .............. ...... kw... 13,500 ea. Y Of flshwater supply units ........ :......... 2 Iervie units 3,000 ea. tyOf stationservice units.................kw. of which ated Cost of new work (1966) is $247 million, relocations, and 0,000 is foir lands and damages including o000 f orconstructaion. Under separate authnorization, 710, construction f recreational facilities in amounte of authorized bya o1950 and)isHarbor 00 Planned. Existing and Flood Ac was project Control (. Doc 53,8stCn. Ihih 0tu e hveredsog lcooperation. None required. m a . i01o and results during fiscal year. Drilling of a water SCuelilo Park was accomplished by purchnase at order and in 966 bids were opened for channel excavation Celilo boat and care)con- , outine project maintenance (operation • Maintenance of the navigation lock required closure of oll October 3-15, 1965. During fiscal year 6,498,245,000 proj- of electrical power energy were generated at -tthours were delivered to Which 6,477,193,000 kilowatt-hours the marketing agency. Ville Power Administration, "iionat end of fiscal year. Construction of project, initi- ebruary 1952, is complete except for minor items. 1594 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 6 New work: $246 988321 Appropriated.......... $195,000 $245,000 $73,800 $66,000 $62,000922822 Cost................. 702,275 336,502 395,692 45,413 26,489 246, Maintenance: 11967100 Appropriated.......... 1,482,700 1,486,000 1,439,500 1,379,500 1,570,500 11,780,134 Cost................ 1,488,5711,400,6831,424,698 1,372,776 1,19,142 x Includes $62,000 allotted under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed project. 66. THE DALLES DAM, COLUMBIA RIVER, WASH. AND ORFG. (ADDITIONAL POWER UNITS) Location. On Columbia River at head of pool behind Bonne ville Dam, about 193 miles above mouth of river and 90 miles eas of Portland, Oreg.e Existing project. Reported in No. 65. This plan of impr o ment provides for extending powerhouse from existing 14 unit to authorized 22 units and for addition of 8 turbines and generaO units. Estimated cost (1966) is $64 million. Authorized bY 1950 River and Harbor Act (11. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.)* Local cooperation. None required. of a Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation o a preliminary design memorandum for completion of powerhou 0o units 15-22, inclusive; initiated. Planning for completiono- existing powerhouse; and procurement of turbines and trans formers in progress.A Condition at end of fiscal year. Advance engineering wa underway this fiscal year. Cost and financial statement 30 1to Total Fiscal year ................ 1962 1963 1964 1065 1966 June New work: 000 ....... Appropriated.......... ... ............. ........................ $160,000 17,696 C ost ............................... .117,595 67. OTIHER AUTHORIZED MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS INCLUDING POWER For last Cost to June full report Name of project see Annual 0 n Report 0 )peratio for- Construction rintooance Bonneville lock & dam, Oregon & Washington, second powerhouse....... .. .. Restoration of Indian Fishing Grounds, Bonneville, Oreg.......... ... 1965 . $i44,726 Strube reregulating Dam & Reservoir, Oreg....................... 1964.. Waldo Lake Tunnel, Oreg.l1................................................... 1 Authorization rescinded August 28, 1958 (Public Law 85-820). 68. SURVEYS Fiscal year costs were $586,630 of which $31,625 were for navigation studies, $100,568 for flood control studies, $5,924fr special studies, and $448,513 for comprehensive basin study. GENERALi INVESTIGATION-PORTLAND, OREG., DISTRICT 1595 69. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA uring fiscal year area supplements one and two of the Lane County study were completed and forwarded for approval. The uPPlements contain photo maps of flood plans on Coast Fork d Middle Fork Willamette Rivers, McKenzie River, and a por- tonl of Willamette River downstream from Eugene. Interim re- Ports for Rogue, Umpqua, and Willamette Rivers have been com- leted and forwarded for approval. Crest gages were installed a Cowlitz River and water surface profiles plotted. Flood plain tudies Federal Location Requesting agency fiscal year costs Lane(.1 tyOr e Cunty, Oreg.......... ...................... State Water Resources Board................. $26,606 4 l,0 iIlamette Basin, Oreg..................... ... . do........ ............................. Rue,Umpqua, Willamette Basin, Oreg.--Interim ..... do ..................................... 19,843 7,396 County, Wash............................ 'Wt3 Washington State Department of Conservation.. 4,945 70. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Water quality investigations: Cooperative program to study effects of water impoundments on quality of downstream flows cotinued during the year with cooperation of U.S. Public Health Service. Basic data being assembled for inclosing in a comple- tiol report. Monitoring of chemical, biological, and physical con- itions was periodical through the summer and fall months. A Drogress report was submitted on fiscal year 1966 activity at etroit and other reservoirs where water quality data was ob- Served. Hydrologic studies: Continued research in the field of eservoir temperature analysis, flood forecasting and water re- Oturce management. Computer program: Continued work on development of a program for simulating system analysis. Civil torks investigations: During the fiscal year preliminary con- cret erosion test begun last fiscal year in the Detroit Test Con- duit (ES 825) was completed after 390 hours of operation. A Qorprehensive testing program for the next several years was eveloped This program will test epoxy grout, epoxy mortar, ad rubber coated treatments on superior quality concrete panels. S new test panels were poured and the first panel finished 41d installed in the test structure. Testing restarted June 29, 1966. Analysis of previous data obtained in the Detroit Test Chute (ES 826) was continued. Plans were developed for in- stallation of permanent electrode leads from midpoint of chute to jarking lot level. Wiring for the leads was obtained. A g9thened staff gage tip for the movable carriage was designed a4d machined. Rubblemound prototype studies (ES 862) were attinued including repair of the wave gage transducer system. obttl research and development costs were $20,556. SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT * This district comprises Washington except southern and south- aStern portions, northern Idaho, and northwestern Montana em- ~laced in drainage basins tributary to Pacific Ocean south of iternational boundary to Cape Disappointment, and to Columbia Ver above Yakima River, inclusive. IMPROVEMENTS 1. Navigation Flood Control-Continued 2. Bellingham Harbor, Wash. 1597 19. Mud Mountain Reservoir, Belingham l Harbor, Wash. White River, Wash .... 1622 1599 20. Sammamish River, Wash. a. (I&J Street Waterway) Skagit River, Wash. (Avon 1622 4. dmonds Harbor, Wash.. 1600 21. Bypass).............. EVerett Harbor and Snoho- 1623 Sraish River, Wash .... 1601 22. Startup, Wallace River, W ash . ............... 1625 Grays Harbor and Chehalis 23. Stillaguamish River, Wash. 6 K River, Wash. ........... 1603 Tacoma, Puyallup River, 1625 24. Singston Harbor, Wash.. 1606 Wash. ............... Lake Washington ship ca- 25. Wynoochee R e s e r v oi r, 1625 g nal, Washington ...... 1607 Wash. .............. Puget Sound and its tribu- 26. Inspection of completed 1627 9 tary waters, Washington 1609 flood control projects.. 1~ Quillayute River, Wash... 1610 27. Scheduling flood control 1627 11., SWinomish Channel, Wash. 1611 reservoir operations .... 1612 28. Other authorized flood-con- 1628 12, coma Harbor, Wash... l2._Willapa trol projects.......... River and Harbor 29. Flood control work under 1628 18 and Naselle River, Wash. 1615 special authorization .. 1628 .econnaissance and condi- 14 tion surveys .......... . 1617 Multiple-Purpose Projects Other authorized naviga- Including Power 15, tion projects .......... 1618 30. Albeni Falls Reservoir, Navigation work under Pend Oreille River, Idaho 1629 Special authorization . 1618 31. Chief Joseph Dam, Colum- bia River, Wash ...... 1630 16, Flood Control 32. Libby Reservoir, Kootenai . Clark Fork at Missoula, 1631 . River, Mont. ......... Columbia River Basin, 17 Vont................. 1618 General Investigations Columbia River Basin, lo- 33. Surveys ....... . :..... 1633 cal protection projects .. 18, 'IOWward 1619 34. Collection and study of A. Hanson Reser- basic data........... 1633 Voir, Wash............. 1620 35. Research and development 1633 1. BELLINGHAM HARBOR, WASH. 'cation Part of Bellingham Bay, an arm of Puget Sound, lellingham, in northwestern Washington. (See Coast and letic Survey Chart 6378.) revious projects. For details see page 2006 of Annual Re- for 1915 and page 1888 of Annual Report for 1938. tisting project. Channel 30 feet deep in Whatcom Creek erway from deep water to head of harbor, 363.2 feet wide 50 feet from inner end, thence 18 feet deep for inner 750 Squalicum Creek Waterway, including dredging an entrance lnel 200 feet wide and 26 feet deep from deep water in the bay rain pierhead line, and maintenance of southerly half and 'erly end of Squalicum Creek basin to 26 feet deep, provided 1598 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 that no dredging can be done within 75 feet of wharves pierstOr similar structures; and small-boat basin adjacent to Squatlicn s Creek Waterway by construction and maintenance of two sectiOf , of rubblemound breakwater with combined length of 3,900 feet including removal of existing rubblemound breakwater heretoIl maintained under existing project, and using rock therefron' f construction of new breakwater, and including maintenancfer minimum depths of 12 feet in entrance to basin. Plane of refer- ence is mean lower low water. Range between mean lower OV water and mean higher high water is 8.6 feet. Extreme rangei about 16 feet. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents . ong 2dseSs. June25,1910 Whatcom Creek Waterway 26- and 18-foot channels........ .Doc. 1161', 60th Cong.1tsess. . July 3, 1930 Entrance channel in Squalicunm (CreekWaterway..... ........ Doc. 187, 70th Cong.,l 1 ittee PO Aug. 26, 1937 Maintenance of southerly half and westerly end of Squalicum Rivers and Harbors Co. Creek Basin. 70, 74th Cong. 1st 2d sess. .2 Sept. 3, 1954 Small-boat basin adjacent to Squalicum Creek Waterway..... .Doc. 558, 82dCong"1ssess July 3, 1958 Whatconm Creek Waterway, 30-foot channel................ S. Doc. 46,85thCoDg 1Contains latest published map of Squslicum Creek Waterway. 2 Contains latest published map of small-boat basin. * Contains latest published map of Whatcom Creek Waterway. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Funds contribuie by Port of Bellingham have been expended, $31,581 (ineices cash contribution of $29,421 and credit of $2,160 for selocal performed by the Port.) In complying with terms ooriig cooperation, the Port expended $1,921,473 for dredging,t and terminal facilities and utilities, and land development. i# Terminal facilities. Forty wharves and piers in Bellinic ' Harbor; 10 are on Whatcom Creek Waterway, 7 on SqGsli' Creek Waterway, 4 on I&J Street Waterway, and 19 on Eellie ham Bay. Three wharves on Whatcom Creek WaterwaY serblicve general cargo terminals. Two of these, one which is pd are owned and operated and one privately owned and operatevtely suitable for use by oceangoing vessels; the other one is pritrade. owned and operated and serves vessels in the Puget sound t1ed; The 7 wharves on Squalicum Creek Waterway are publicly o .are one oil-handling wharf is publicly operated; the other I are privately operated. The 4 wharves on I&J Street Waterwlree r privately operated. The remaining wharves on Squalicurm ed f Waterway and the other wharves on Bellingham Bay are us various industrial purposes. There is also a protected basil ~ure licly owned and operated, for commercial fishing and pl CO craft. These facilities are considered adequate for existin, cani, merce. (See Port Series No. 37-Ports of Everett, Belling Port Angeles, and Anacortes, Wash., revised 1963.) fds: Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular ft Maintenance, contract: Maintenance dredging in Wlh0o Creek Waterway started February 23 and was 99 percent com- plete in June, with removal of 20,000 cubic yards of material Work is being accomplished in conjunction with I& RIVERS AND HARBORS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1599 aterway project, under section 107, 1960 River and Harbor Act, Veyot ed separately. Maintenance, hired Creek labor: Condition sur- Waterways and seaof Whatcom Creek and Squalicum Creek Waterway was adl boat basin adjacent to Squalicum e in June 1966. Whae is complete. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project completed tefi in in 191tcorn Creek Waterway 26- and 18-foot channels August 1960 to Ieb,' and lengthened and deepenedin to 30 feet, channel Squalicum Creek Waterway Wasruary 1961. Entrance solth.completed in 1931. Local interests have since dredged westerly end of Squalicum Creek Basin; and in 19344 , erly half and a detached rubble breakwater 1,500 feet 101 they constructed extensions to it. sout11h of basin and later constructed pileeasterly Si section of the 1945, they have also constructed part of adjacent to " ederll project breakwater. Small-boat basin1957 and com- )latlieurn Creek Waterway was started in August of rock breakwater. Port of P!l October 1959 by construction telngham completed dredging the mooring basin in July and t1 5 Costs for existing project to June 30, 1966, were ork 258 ederal funds and $31,581 contributed funds for new .... 11.4 300 rer W aterway: 8 re te ar way: Entrance channel................ .. Creek qasin adjacent to 9qicirn 20 0 Nortaterway: 14.0 10 South entrance channel.... ....... .......... ad Cost and financial statement ot s o3! s 24.5/ oo220 co~ ni...... ................................... l ................ 62 1963 1 64 1965 1966 30,to JuneTotal 19661 P .ear, - -: . ..... ""...... cs.$O5ria te ... r .24.21,566,840 1,566........... c . 0 ................. 5,30 12,840 est $56,582 for new work and $11092 for maintenanc olr for previous projects. l......................... .. o _€"' .....- contributed funds, and.xc ...... ....... ,....expendedby ,,,,- . 473 1,921 $ e.18.000US . .. CoastPort of Bellingham Guard funds ex- be u $31581 delling of local cooperation. expended requirements as 55,530s 1,93 230 27,0 2. tlILLINGHAM HARBOR, WASH. (I&J STREET WATERWAY) e ocatilo . Street Waterway is on eastern shore of J.The e min north- 963n 4 1Sound, atBellingham, )liW e37 enhi'ndgton. (Seedfnstand1exdedbySPrtelnham Iristin .Pr t. Channel 100 feet wide and 18 feet deep in Street Waterway from the 18-foot contour in Bellgham 1600 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Bay to within 250 feet of landward limit of Federal pierhead line, a distance of 3,200 feet. Plane of reference is mean lower lowe water. Range between mean lower low water and mean higher high water is 8.6 feet. Extreme range is about 16 feet. tst mated Federal cost is $166,000 (May 1964). Estimated. no Federal costs for rights-of-way, removal of dolphins or pilingfI area to be dredged, provision of disposal areas, and berthing area dredging, are $5,600 (Nov. 1964). Project was authorized 4by e Chief of Engineers May 5, 1965, under authority of section 107, Public Law 86-645. Local cooperation. Local interests must provide lands, rights of-way, spoil-disposal areas and retaining dikes; hold the United States free from damages; maintain at project depth, approafoot and berthing areas adjacent to terminals bordering 18-ot channel; alter utility facilities as required; make a cash contrib" tion equal to Federal first costs greater than $200,000; reover dolphins, piling, or other structures in area to be dredged. port of Bellingham was requested on January 26, 1965, to furnish So surances; and by letter dated February 1, 1965, they agreed to accept responsibility for all required items. The Port adopet Resolution No. 492 on October 12, 1965, which meets requirement for furnishing assurances. Furnishing of lands, easements, ne rights-of-way will not be required, since dredging has been below ordinary high tide, because of government's right of naV- gational servitude. Spoil areas, retaining dikes, and alterat lofl to utility facilities were not required, because dredged mt1ter was disposed of in deep water. Dolphins, piling, and structures were removed prior to dredging.ter- Terminal facilities. Four wharves and a log slip on the wate- way, which are privately operated. Facilities are considered ade quate for existing commerce.ed Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, hired labor: Preconstruction planning was completed, and contrac was awarded in January. New work, contract: Work started in February and was 99 percent complete in June, with estimante 150,000 cubic yards of material dredged. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was essentially com- pleted in June 1966 to authorized dimensions. Cost and financial statement ~ Totalsof Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 New work: 2 481 Appropriated.......... ............ $1,500 $11,054 $15,000 $134,92712,119 Cost.................. ............ 1 327 11,192 1,531 112:129 3. EDMONDS HARBOR, WASH. Location. On easterly shore of Puget Sound in northwester Washington, about 9 miles north of Seattle and immediately nort of Edward's Point. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6445e Existing project. Maintenance of breakwaters and entrance channel of small-boat harbor, at estimated cost of $5,000 annuall RIVERS AND HARBORS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1601 Project consists of mooring basin about 600 feet wide and 1,100 feet long, varying from 8 to 13 feet deep; a rubblemound break- Water about 1,850 feet long and with a top elevation of 18.5 feet, extending along southerly and westerly sides of basin; a rock- reinforced treated pile and plank breakwater about 250 feet long, extending from shore along northerly side of basin; an entrance channel 13 feet deep and about 610 feet long, with a minimum idth of 65 feet between deep water in the Sound and the basin; a4d the necessary navigation lights. Existing project was au- thorized by 1965 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 147, 88th Cong., lst sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Local interests must furnish all lands, ease- flents, rights-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas; hold the United tates free from damages; provide and maintain planned depths 11 interior basin, and the necessary mooring facilities and utili- ties, including a public landing with suitable supply facilities Open to all equally; and regulate the use, growth, and free devel- Oment of all necessary moorage facilities with the understanding that said facilities will be open to all on equal terms. Shore .facilities have been provided for the small-boat harbor, ferry, barge, and other terminals. Terminal facilities. Two wharves and 4 pleasure craft handling acilities at Edmonds Harbor. One wharf is publicly owned and operated as a ferry terminal, the other, privately owned, is a travel-unloading facility. There is also a Port-operated and "OWned small-boat basin. These facilities, with exception of the Sball-boat basin, are considered adequate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed by local interests in April 1962. 4. EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WASH. .Location. On Port Gardner Bay, at northern end of Posses- loa Sound, an arm of Puget Sound at Everett, in northwestern Washington; and Snohomish River for 6.3 miles above mouth. ee Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6448.) Previous projects. For details see page 704 of Annual Report for 1905, page 2005 of Annual Report for 1915, and page 1883 of A11nual Report for 1938. Existing project. Training dike extending from a point op- Dosite 23d Street northward 12,550 feet to outlet of Snohomish 41Ver, with spur dike extending 400 feet to pier-head line from 11Orth end of main dike; spur dike extending 1,410 feet westward .fron Preston Point; removal of a section of training dike north of Snohomish River outlet; channel 150 to 425 feet wide and 15 feet deep from deep water in Port Gardner Bay to 14th Street dock; thence a settling basin 700 feet wide, 1,200 feet long, and 20 feet deep, thence a channel 150 feet wide and 8 feet deep up river to head of Steamboat Slough, a total distance of about 6.3 11iles; settling basin within upper channel reach about 1 mile long With a capacity of 1 million cubic yards; rectification works 1602 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 at heads of Steamboat and Ebey Sloughs to reduce sedimentatio in downstream section of Snohomish River; and maintaining East Waterway to 30 feet deep. Plane of reference is en lower low water. Range between mean lower low water is mean higher high water is 11.1 feet. Extreme tidal range about 19 feet. Existing project was authorized by the following.: Aets Work authorized Documents June 25, 1910 Training dike 10,500 feet long extending across bar at outlet H. Doc. 1108, 60th Cong., 2dsess of Oh River Channel. , 2dsess July 3, 1930 Raise 6,000 feet of training dike, extend spur dike, widen H. Doe. 377, 71st Cong., 2 gap in dike as required, maintain East Waterway and channel to gap. June 20. 1933 Abandon project for Snohomish River, and provide settling 11. Doe. 516, 75th Cong., 3d 3dsess basin near 14th Street. Sept. 3, 1954 Spur dike at Preston Point, remove training dike north of II.Doe. 569, 31st Cong., 2dSO- river outlet, enlarge channel to 14th Street, and deepen settling basin. Jaly14, 1960 Widen channel from settling basin to gap; extend channel to H. Doc. 348, 86th Cong., 2dsee (O head of Steamboat Slough; a settling basin within upper tains latest published map). channel reach: and rectifioation works at heads of Steam- boat and Ebey Sloughs.) SA portion deferred. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. rett Terminal facilities. There are 39 wharves and piers on Evere, Harbor and Snohomish River including 9 on Port Gardner i.3Y 16 on East Waterway, and the remainder on Snohomish -1 ter' Of these, seven, one of which is publicly owned and operadi are used by oceangoing vessels. Remaining wharves serve vaed ous industrial purposes. In addition, there is a publicly oWt . and operated protected basin for fishing and pleasure crafe. These facilities are considered adequate for existing compo-rt (See Port Series No. 37-Ports of Everett, Bellingham Angeles, and Anacortes, Wash., revised 1963.) hired Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance, hirsh labor: Condition survey of East Waterway and Snoho~d ~ River from gap in dike downstream to deep water was iaed March. Predredging surveys of upstream settling basin stae r in June. Maintenance, contract: Dredging in Snohomish River started in December and was completed in February, with re- moval of 67,627 cubic yards of material from gap in dike up- stream to Great Northern Railway bridge. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was0 pleted April 1963 except for rectification works at Steamboat g s Ebey Sloughs which are to be restudied. East WaterwaY ex dredged by local interests. Main dike was in good conditiontio cept for southerly 2,850-foot portion, which varies in eleva96 6, from 5 to 9 feet. Costs for existing project to June 30,16 were $2,097,420, of which $1,354,153 was for new work ($1, 535 Corps funds, $43,000 Coast Guard funds, and $5,618 co tributed funds), and $743,267 for maintenance. RIVERS AND HARBORS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1603 Controlling dimensions Section Depth and width in feet Date ascertained 0'ha1nel fro March 1966. 1966. t lbfrom lower harbor to settling basin ........ 11.1 x 125 ........................... March t9 basin ........... pro 7.3 least depth........................ .. Do. Do. ailGettling basin upstream to Great Northern 6.9x 130... ...................... t April 1965. tr.iRrea U ettl Northern balsin. Railway upstream to upstream 6.5 on centerline..................... tea 1 settling U~r,, rn basin.......................... .0.7 (least depth), 500,000 cubic yards June 1966. etigcapacity. basin.................. Ptes from settlin 92.on centerline.....................Do. tWaterway 29 1 (least depth).................. March 1066. 20........................ Cost and financial statement Total to Ye year. 19062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 10661 ~wWork. Pro'priated.......... $183120 $408,000 -$9,543 $66,00 ............ $1,723,744 .. 50 66,060c............ . 723,744 ostIt55. .... enance. ... 2 PPoprted.2,000 13124 $66,136 7404 .6,01 20 2 5 t13,07032,208 68P228 740136 $5,6 udes $418,209 for new work and $5,869 for naintenance for previous projects. Excludes Guard funds expended for new work, and other non- iedea8 contributed funds and $43,000 Coast1962) costs estimated at $256,000 (July ral for dredging and relocations. 5. GRAYS HARBOR AND CHEHALIS RIVER, WASH. Location. Harbor lies at mouth of Chehalis River, in south- 1estern part of Washington, 45 miles north of entrance to Co- fmbia Rver. Inner portion comprises two main channels, the Outh and the north, connecting harbor proper with Chehalis WVer at Aberdeen. Chehalis River rises in southwestern part of ashington about 40 miles east of Pacific Ocean, flows generally ':orthwesterly and empties into eastern part of Grays Harbor. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6195.) Previous projects. For details see pages 2002-03 of Annual eport for 1915, and page 1863 of Annual Report for 1938. baL'x isting project. Provides for an entrance channel across the l 600 feet wide and 30 feet deep, to be secured by a south jetty 3,734 feet long and a north jetty 16,000 feet long, both at an ele- vation of 16 feet, and by dredging; maintenance of channel 30 Harbor eet deep and 350 feet wide from deep water in Grays 4riles to Cow Point; thence 30 feet deep and 200 feet wide, ulitably widened at bends, to a point 13,700 feet upstream from 'rllon Pacific Railroad bridge at Aberdeen, a distance of 41/8 lil es; a turning basin 30 feet deep, 550 feet wide, and 1,000 feet o9 at upstream end of 30-foot channel near Cosmopolis;City; a chan- b1 14 feet deep and feet wide in South Bay to Bay o10 two teakwaters at, and maintenance of entrance channel to, West- leaven Cove;' and protection of Point Chehalis for an exposed eth of about 7,500 feet. Plane of reference is mean lower low mean Water. Tidal range between mean lower low water and Iher high wa.,ter is 9 feet at Point Chehalis, 9.9 feet at Aberdeen, feet at Montesano. Extreme range is 15 feet at Point d 8.1 fhalis, 18.1 feet at Aberdeen, and 23.8 feet at Montesano OVer flood of 1935). 1604 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reports i. June 3, 1896 South jetty......... . . ......... .. .. Annual report, 1895 pp. 3517-3533) ee Mar. 2, 1907 A north jetty 9,000 feet long..... ................. Rivers and Harbors Committ P oe 2, 59th Cong., 2d sess. Do...... The 18-foot channel............................. . H. Doc. 507, 59th Cong., 1stsess. oe. June 25, 1910 Extend north jetty 7,000 feet; length of south jetty fixed at Rivers and Harbors CommitteeV 13,734 feet. 29, 61st Cong., 2d sess. Do...... A 6-foot channel above Cosmopolis......... ............... H. Doc. 1125, 60th Cong., 2d as "se,; Aug. 8,1917 Dredging in bar channel.................................. H1. Doc. 1729, 64th Cong.,2Se-. Jan. 21, 1927 H. Doc. 582, 69th Cong., 2d July 3, 1930 16-foot channel from Cosmopolis to Montesanol ............ 11. Doe. 315, 70th Cong., e1stsess Do Aug. 30, 1935 Reconstruct north and sotuth jetties to an elevation of 16 feet Rivers and Harbors Committeepe above mean lower low water. 2, 74th Cong., 1st sess. .Rivers Do..... Maintain 26-foot channel below Aberdeen (as authorized by IH. Doe. 53, 73d Cong., 1st sess. ;74th and Harbors Committee Doc. , Public Works Administration Dec 11, 1933) and cormbin- ing projects for Grays Harbor and bar entrance, and Grays Cong., 1st sess. Harbor, inner portion, and Chehalis River, under a modi- fied project for Grays Harbor and Chehalis River. Mar. 2, 1945 Maintain 30-foot depth in channel from deep water in Grays Report in Office, Chief of Engineera Harbor to port of Grays Harbor Commission terminal, which was deepened from 26 to 30 feet with Navy funds. June 30, 1948 14-foot channel to Bay City; breakwater at Westhaven; Doe. 635, 80th Cong., 2d sees. H11. protection of Point Chehalis; 2 and maintenance of West- haven entrance channel. Sept. 3, 1954 Dredging and maintenance of a 30-foot channel and turning HI. Doe. 412, 83d Cong., 2d sess. basin from Aberdeen to Cosmopolis. sletsess.(co* Do..... Additional breakwater, 1,400 feet long, at Westhaven Cove... H. Doc. 30, 84th Cong., tains latest published map). 1 Inactive. SA portion deferred. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. There are 40 wharves and piers on G~a Harbor and adjacent inland waters; 15 are located at Ijoquianl 16 at Aberdeen, 1 each at Junction City and Cosmopolis,. 2 at Markham, and 5 at Westhaven Cove. Fifteen of the facilitie handle forest products; 9, receipt of seafood; 2, sand, gravel, and crushed rock; 2, petroleum products and bunkering of vesseli and 1 publicly owned facility handles general cargo in domes" and foreign trade; the remaining 11 are used for mooring ate making marine repairs. These facilities are considered adequo for existing commerce. (See Port Series No. 35-The Ports0 Tacoma, Grays Harbor, and Olympia, Wash., revised 1963.)d Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds Maintenance, hired labor: Channel condition surveys were m,,16 U.S. hopper dredge Pacific, October 5, 1965, to March 7, 1966 removed 488,415 cubic yards from Sand Island shoal, and 385,- 075 cubic yards from Crossover channel, a total of 873,490 cubic yards, bin measurement. Maintenance, contract: pipeline dredge Robert Gray, leased from Port of Grays Harbor Commis-. sion, removed 790,690 cubic yards of material from Chehalis River and north channel, July to December; and 30,000 cubic yards in June 1966. All dredges removed 1,694,180 cubic yards of material from the ship channel. In February 1966, 500 tons of rock were placed in revetment between groins 1 and 7 at Point Chehalis. Rehabilitation, contract: Restoration of 4,000 feet of the south jetty started in January, and is 48 percent complete' with 281,355 tons of rock placed.0 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was c pleted in November 1959, except for engineering studies d observations of Point Chehalis protective works, and excluding de- RIVERS AND HARBORS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1605 ferred and inactive portions. The 412-foot section seaward of econstructed jetty is at elevation of mean lower low water, and 800-foot section shoreward of reconstructed jetty has sanded in. heamination of reconstructed jetty, made in August 1960, owed that sea action had reduced crest of outer 528-foot section -ro~ elevation plus 30 to approximate elevation plus 20 feet, next 200 feet showed a maximum settlement of 15 feet to elevation 4 5 feet, and next 2,200-foot section has settlements varying rom 10 feet to zero. A section of old jetty rock has been ex- tosed by a breach in the sand spit at inshore end of reconstructed Work. In 1963, Breakwater B was reinforced by planking and rbock Placement. In 1964, Breakwater C was extended 200 feet . Planking and placement of rock and gravel. A field recon- alssnce (Feb. 1966) indicated that extension of west shore re- etnt at Point Chehalis was not required at present, and iting protective works at Point Chehalis were in good con- tifon Remaining 2,200-foot portion of revetment was classified Beawae byIn194 With Navy funds, 26-foot channel previously dredged beferred. belowng Aberdeen Port of Grays HarborC ontroll depth was deeepened to 30 ee)and widened to 350 feet in narrow section, from port terminal o eep water in lower harbor in 1945, at a cost of $162,000. A r"n"1g basin 600 by 1,000 feet was dredged by Port of Grays bridge in arbor Commission downstream from Union Pacific 1962., Controlling depths Depth Width (feet) (feet) Date ascertained Section tar . .... 1) e ad entrance 36.0 1,000 September 1965. i n lower harbor to Cow Point....O2.1 7200Ja nya 6une 1966. 00 Jnar 06 '~rI tobCos0mopolis ............................ 580 by 800 March 1966. bridge.............. .303 g b1 below Union Pacific Railway " Sudt ok,ay30.5 Sound to locks; Lake Union to Lake aS h 1 lowcks to Lake Union; and 28.3 feet, ashington. Cost and financial statement Total to Neal 1964 1965 1906 June 30, 19661 1962 1963 ditures of $2465.67 by t d .............. d es sos Excludes e endtures of $246,67 by projects. tt t $485,002 for new work for previs hannel above the locks and r by King County in ex6avatio of expended betweern 1916 and t and $742,071 i nof concrete revetment at the portagen; and $r1,631,195 under provision of the permanent 6,,ructio 1ati Operation and care of works of improvement, it aulPropriation for such purposes. WATERS, WASHINGTON b 'UET SOUND AND ITS TRIBUTARY icateon Puget Sound istOlympia, inbwestern part of Washington. Everett,. Belli ngham, and Of Seattle, Tacoma, Q iSmall towns are on its 6450, bays and inlets. (See Coast and and 6460.) 1 a Survey Charts 6300, nic 2003 of Annual Report "Ousprojects. For details see page fp ahb and page 1869 of Annual of Repor t for 1938. Maintenance Puget Sound and its tribu- taristng project. and dre dging; and removal, in coopera- t a by snagging Waters debris from Seattle Harbor tare With citY of Seattle, of floating Harbor .' xisting project was adopted by 1892 River and At p. 3425). Latest pushe ico- Rep forfor Ieport nual 1893, 1913, page '127. ... - 111nual Report None reuired..City ~iclaeu of Seattle is coop-t. era ,L cooperation. octo of floating debris in Seattle Hiar- bort 19 in a program for control itierminal facilities. Terminal facilities at numerous local- . Puget Sound and its tributary waters are, in general, "1dered adequate for existing commerce. year. U.S. snag boat w erations and results during fiscal monthsacopihn Prll.estonwas operated for about 1012 -. 11.gwork: Obstructions removed Location Miscllaneous Snags Piles 270 b6'2bulls. 2......... Verett8'y and Duwamisli River.. bulls, 3logs, and 12 pile beads. liver. arbor and Snobonish 1 2197 ...........2922 1ile beads, 32 cubic yards of debris, 36 floats, !4kSaI gton ship..anl........ Sahington 6 houoeboats, and 3 bulls.debris. lk, of 2(9....... 136........... 2 and* ..514 cubic yards 2 floats 8k 0 W1.8 1 1ton slip canal... . l-,t 8 ............. 10t aiver 74 .3.c sand. bic ya and 63 ubil o..................... ar sofd ed ig . .. rn~~~~~~sh~9 . . .. Cha. . ......... o . .2bll 7r f loas maIf- n ......... °AA 1610 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Floating obstructions to navigation were removed from shiP lanes in Seattle area by other U.S. vessels. of Condition at end of fiscal year. Work consisted chieflY ent snagging in principal tributaries of Puget Sound. No permanr e results are obtainable, but maintenance of existing channelsi1' quires practically continuous operation of snag boat. Contrlio depths range from 1 to 40 feet at mean lower low water. Cork of existing project to June 30, 1966, were $43,337 for new and $3,856,201 for maintenance, a total of $3,899,538. Cost and financial statement Total to 61 Fiscal year.............. 1962 1063 1864 1965 1066 u$43ne New work: 43,331 Appropriated........................... ........................... Cost... ................. .................... .......... .......... Maintenance: 3,924,369 Appropriated.......... $161,000 $169,116 $195,667 $206,400 $221,222 3,923, Cost.................. 160,718 169,398 180,715 221,267 220,571 1 Includes $67,496 for maintenance for previous projects. 9. QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WASH. Location. River is formed by junction of Soleduck and l c hiel Rivers, in northwestern Washington, and flows westerlCape miles to Pacific Ocean at La Push, about 30 miles south of Flattery. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6102.) ast Existing project. Provides for: (a) Jetty 15 feet high on est erly side of river mouth and a dike on westerly side, with a,1 of stabilizing entrance; (b) channel 10 feet deep and 100 (c)fe wide extending 2,000 feet upstream from deep water; and basin 10 feet deep, 300 to 425 feet wide, and 2,400 feet long P stream of channel. Section included in project is 4,400 feet 1og Plane of reference is mean lower low water. Range betwee. mean lower low water and mean higher high water at La Push 8.3 feet. Extreme range is about 15 feet. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents July 3,1930 Jettt (5 feet high) on easterly side of mouth, and a dike If. Doe. 125, 71stCong., 1stsess withgroins, on westerly side, to stabilize entrance.1t sess Mar. 2, 1945 Maintenance dredging to provide a channel 6 feet deep and IH.Doc. 218, 78th Cong.,1st ' of suitable width from ocean to within river mouth. < se (c' Sept. 3,1954 Raising jetty to 15 feet; 2 channel 10 by 100 feet, 2,000 feet II.Doc. 579, 81st C , 2d ( long; moorage basin. tains latest published np x A portion inactive. d in this SMaintenance of these items, as well as sandspit north of James Island, is included i thi modification. $20,000 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Expended contributed funds. -h of Terminal facilities. Six terminals at La Push, near mo ted Quillayute River; of these, four privately owned, and one ooblic by Port of Port Angeles within project basin, are open to P1 rd use, the sixth, owned by the United States, is part of Coast Ott RIVERS AND HARBORS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1611 cratloll ai on. In addition, there is a protected basin, publicly owned e~c operated, for commercial fishing and pleasure craft. With the aee)tio of the protected basin, these facilities are considered 0uate for existing commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance, hired labor: Condition survey of Quillayute River channel and boat basin was made in March. Maintenance, contract: Dredging of entrance channel, started June 23, 1965, was completed July 24, with 40,283 cubic yards of material removed. Dredging of entrance channel under new contract started June 14, 1966, and was 50 percent complete at the end of June, with 19,500 cubic yards of material removed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was com- 1960 reconstruct- 11ted in February with completion of A and extending landward end of jetty 100 feet shoreward. J.timber and rock dike protecting the basin was completed in June 1966 showed the jetty and dike 963. A survey made in Controlling 1966 be in good condition. dimensions in March boat Were 2.5 by 100 feet in the channel from deep water to the basin, and 8.3 by 260 by 1,000 feet in the boat basin. Cost and financial statement Total to etar - 1962 ....... 1N0e62 1963 1063 1964 1965 1966 June 30,19661 Work_____- ....... . .......... .. - - .... ...... PIr riated $521,850 .... .......... ..* . . . . ... ..... 521,850 t *t. * ............. 08 . 2$8127250 . .1............ A7,0ro 5 027 $57,466 1,103,725 24,730 71,032 1,056,082 213,839 23,702 77,261 non-Federal ste of, $46,000 costs for 000des mooring rNavy ingx funds for o new work wof', •...$46 and ef1l u( $20000 ltie8ali -2,00 o' contributed rns Navy fundsex. in5d ooil d aPublic landing constructed by Port of Port Angeles. Excludes for channel dredging 948 'eing river channel in 1944; and Coast Guard funds expended 10. SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WASH. Saratoga PaLocation An inland passage, 11 miles long, between ase and Padilla Bay in northwestern part of Washington, Chaut 60 miles north of Seattle. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey lys 300,6376, and 6380.) feet deep for ltin project. A channel 100 feet wide and to12deep water in 1 miles from deep water in Saratoga Passage aladilla 3ay, by dredging and dike construction where neces- and fremoval of projecting rocky points of McGlinnand 1 Islands obstructing Olal navigtion at "Hole-in-the-Wall." 41el Iof reference is mean lower low water. Range between feet at It" Ower low water and mean higher high water is 11.5 th end of , 8.5 feet at north end, and 6.5 feet at La Con- -,1', ut 19 feet at south end of slough tidal range is abo%/ '"Xtrem.e about 16 feet at north end. 1612 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the followin. Acts Work authorized Documents and report D- ongS 1 and 1,t52d July 13, 1892 Channel 4 feet deep and 100 feet wide, and dike oonstruction. II. Do . 31, 52d 21 , lt Annual Report, 1892p.2752.st Aug. 30, 1935 Enlargement ofchannel to present project dimensions........ S. committee print. 73d 2 s1.(0" Oct. 23, 1962 Removal of navigation hazards at "lole-in-the-Wall"...... H. Doc. 499, 87th Con.0d tains latest published a8 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. piers Terminal facilities. There are 15 wharves, docks, 'anowned. on Swinomish Channel, all but 1 of which are .bprivately , e od els; Of these, 3 are used for handling general cargo; 4 are usedls clusively for moorage, unloading, and servicing of fishing vesre 3 are used for handling petroleum products; and 2 facilteae used for construction and repair of vessels. Three plrjal cra owned facilities for launching, mooring, and servicing sI~ ,T are within city limits of La Conner. Terminal facilities forI eral cargo are considered adequate for existing commerce. hired Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenanc cen* labor: Quarterly condition surveys were made on chated Ja" terline. Maintenance, contract: Channel dredging startes Jan- uary 31 and was completed April 16, with removal of 116,454 cubic yards of material. co0 Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project waollig pleted in March 1965. Dikes are in fair condition. Cont 1 feet depth (Apr. 1966) along the centerline of the channel was f at mean lower low water. Cost and financial statement o8l Fiscal year................ 1963 1961 1965 1966 J aneo New work: $gaS133, Appropriated.................... ... .......... $90,000 $309,302 ............ S019431gg Cost........................... 34,448 364,854 ......... Maintenance: d07.54 Appropriated.......... $156,100 $183,379 47,371 70,841 $98,298 1,94 Cost......155,951 86,855 5,947 110,395 104,842 a ,d 1 Excludes $41,000 non-Federal costs for new work, including $32,000 for rock $9,000 for lands and damages. 11. TACOMA HARBOR, WASH. tr Location. Harbor includes Commencement Bay and tribute waterways at Tacoma, in northwestern Washington. Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6407.) 0 Previous projects. For details see pages 1372 to 1376foreof19 3 nual Report for 1934 and page 1875 of Annual Report for for Puyallup Waterway; and page 1702 of Annual RePoridu 1944, and page 1502 of Annual Report for 1954 for Port trial (Wapato) Waterway. .W ter Existing project. Provides for: (a) Channel in City. Con, way 500 feet wide and 29 feet deep from deep water 1 fedet mencement Bay to 11th Street Bridge, 500 feet wide and 2ide deep to 14th Street Bridge, and varying from 500 to 250 fee RIVERS AND HARBORS SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT ad 19 feet deep from 14th Street Bridge in to end of this waterway, ylebos Waterway 30 total length of 8,500 feet; (b) channel et deep, 3.1 miles long, and 200 at feet wide except where width is of 50 feet bendbelow 11th Street, East lon reased ha alsr a maximum bot0 fAvenue , enln bend, ntmo and t to02.510iyfeet leos and 770 includ- feet, to 300 feet at Lincoln Corp. cleetively, at turning basins near Pennsalt Chemicalstraining a n 0A at head nu ofat r0gcnd waterwayoof Puyallup River; and W each about 700 feet long, at mouth 2.6 miles long, includ- tid channrael in Port Industrial Waterway a portion seaward of East 11th Street 650 feet wide and 30 deep over nortery o fee ovhe southerly 350 feet, and 35 feet deep and 1.50feet wide S feet; and remaining portion, 35feet mith and Street 1 ast 11th Street, 600 feet wide between East co Avenue, and 300 feet ai wide between Lincoln Avenue and Plane of ~e, 00 foot wide turninglow basin at head of waterway.mean lower water. Range between loweren e is mean lower high water is for 11.8 feeto. Extreme ti ter and mean higher Cost estimate new work is $5,- 549 range is about 20 feet. f$2,527,00 Fede funds, local ral Co n0 (July 1965), including (including $62,700 value in work), and clribution of $656, 000 aernon-Federal costs estimated at $2,366,000. by the following Existing project was authorized Work authorized re- rDocuments -20 r e u ................ H. Doe. 76, 56th Cong., 2d sess. 441y 3,9022 City Waterway ..................... Rivers and Harbors Committee Does 91, 419 2, 1930 tylebos Waterway................................. e25, 71st C ong., 2d se s., and i n ge a t e r a ti on. t o. p r o 74th Cong., 2d sess. e 1 9d37 fs193p a i 55 S a author- ivers andHarbors Committee Doe. f Puyallup River (previously Training walls at mouth Administration 72d Cong., 2d ess. ept. 6, 1933). S o ized by Public Works extension............ . 101, 87th (ong., 2d sees. or Industrial (Wapato) Waterway .ta1slatent published maps). Oct23 , 1992 extension............ ort Industrial and lylebos Waterways cooperation. Scal Fully complied with. There are 89which facilities. Harbor piers, wharves, and terminal cargo;ere f'iernal aliti o 9 of handle generalhandling products (1 of o l d these sn is.. also .. used for O andle petroleum QCDer " 1 for 4e r, 1 for wood chips,.1 for industrial chemicals,forand handling fuel;,17 are used lo ; 4 facilities receive hogged sand and gravel. 2 receive ore and concentrates; 2 receive normal to a are used for various activities o Daning facilities (For the latest full description of terminal ct of this size. of Tacoma, Grays see Port Series No. 35-ThePorts 1963.) 1eilities,and Olympia, Wash, revised rarbors year. New work, con- tq eraions, and results during fiscal was shut down May 20ct: Port Industrial Waterway dredging Port Rail- to proceed with relocation of utilities, and ' 1Pending authorization loweringo city of Tacoma rd Pelt Line facilities, a areaaaration te P of coma of additional disposal 6,577,000 cubic An estimated YaJVr to proceeding with dredging. under the contract,a which is about 87 of material was removed Bertig area dredging, Port responsi- bil.ercent complete. contract, at the Port's re- ity, is included in the Government 1614 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 quest. Maintenance, hired labor: Project condition surveYS were made. O Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was co0n pleted in August 1956, except for the 1962 modificatio. "05 April 4, 1943, a slide destroyed east training wall. AbOu true feet of this wall were replaced by an untreated contact-pile 5 otc- ture during July 1954, which was soon destroyed by teredO the tion. Construction of a treated contact-pile wall to replace re untreated structure was completed in May 1956. Both walls rd in good condition, but the river delta has extended itself se'qca to a point where the right wall is no longer effective. Ecxtensl5 . of Port Industrial Waterway was completed in August Port of Tacoma dredged about 1,588,000 cubic yards of th Fer. eral project work in the waterway. Extension of Hylebos f ort way was completed in June 1965; and further extension o ent Industrial Waterway, started in July 1964, is about 87 per. 192,051, Federal complete. funds, Costs of including existing project$51,609 to Junepublic works 30, 1966 werefds; $62,697 of value of work contributed by local interests, a $deral 980 contributed funds, all for new work; and $485,393 Fel of funds and $5,000 contributed funds for maintenance; a to $3,203,121. Controlling depths Depth Width Date ascertsin'd Section (feet) (feet) - 1 - i _ ______ City Waterway: Commencement Bay to South 11th Street................ 27.0 340 April 1966. South 11th Street to South 14th Street................... 21.7 400 D)o. South 4th Street to South 16th Street.................... 18.1 150 April 1966. South 16th Street to head of waterway................... 13.0 120 June 1966. Hylebos Waterway: Deep water in Commencement Bay to East 11th Street .... 28.8 150 June 1965. East 11th Street to bend below Lincoln Ave................ 29.0 150 Do. d ne 96,5. Bend below Lincoln Ave. to downstream turning basin...... 29.6 300 to 175 March and Juo Least depth in downstream turning basin... .......... 30.1 ........ 266' D)o. Downstream turning basin to upstream turning basin....... 30.0 June 1965. Upstream turning basin....... ................. 130.0 ............ May 1966. Port Industrial Waterway: Deep water in Commencement Bay to 11th Street Bridge.... 35.0 300 Do. At 11th Street Bridge................................... 29.3 150 Do. East lith Street Bridge to Lincoln Ave................... 33.0 300 to 600 1)o. x Least depth. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS t Trots 6 Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1065 1066 New work: ,5,63 Appropriated................................. $76,000 $628,000 $700,000 2,35 Cost............................. 51,410 453,188 747,175 40 Maintenance: 49040 Appropriated.......... $76,000 $58,901 4,530 1,735 21,563 490, Cost.................. 3,739 131,162 4,530 1,735 21,563 1Includes $159,584 for new work and $5.347 for maintenance for previous projects. * Funds from reconnaissance and condition surveys program. WASH., DISTRICT 1615 RIVERS AND HARBORS-SEATTLE, CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1964 1965 196 166 30, to19661 Total June S63 .ew..... 1962 1962061 -96 --.-----.. -- 250 $321,900 536,47 520,677 bute152 2152:250 305,730 ot...... ntributed ...... ........................ . ......................... . . o $ 5,0000...... 0............. 00.0.. Port of Tacoma. Balance of $118,850 ed for00 aoft es 697 2value in new work contributed by in escrow... Exclues $750,000 contributed for 1962 modification is on deposit of which $596,077 s $593,000 Rq for berthing area dredging, ab ort responsibility, in S Taoma2 unobligated, and $134,150 remains on deposit ow, $2,782 was undelivered order, $16,991 teludes $282,850 returned to Port of Tacoma. AND NASELLE RIVER, WASH. 12. WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR laL tion.l Willapa Harbor consists of lower reaches3of Wil- orth oer and Bay, an inlet ific Ocean about 30 miles 1 erman Bof annonu afiPacieO ni Willapa livr Of mouth Columbia River inWashingtofl. ballynear itsstery, gthe ae rises about 30 miles east of harbor, flows near 6185)its Naselle River enters the bay mpties into the bay. eo~t and Geodetic Survey Chart 6185.) Prerly end. (See Coast Annual Reports for 1915 (reevous projects. For details see (page 1861). b INe 2001) 1910 (page 968), and 1938 (a) Channel over bar at sting project. Provides for: 500m deet waterine; (bth of Willapa Bay, 26 feet deep and at least from deep water300 ince Channel 24 IVi feet deep and 200 feet wide at South Bend,0 feet wide to0 feetaPa Bay to foot of Ferry Street 250 feet wide to narrows, thence foyWide to westerly end of a cutoff channel ouh; (c) ns of river at Raymond, including dike at Mailboat Slough; ba- ba- (c)dee ehll at narrows and a closing feet wide up south fork to12th Streetp siannel 24 feet deep and 150 ith aove Cram lumber mill, and up north fork to 12th Street, long, and 24 feet dee aturning basin 250 feet wide, 350 feet and 40 feet wide point; (d) channel 10 feet deep ftal t latter with widening t eep water in Palix River to Bay Center dock, basin; (e) mooring basi oreward end to provide a small mooring and 600 feet long adjacent to Dor15 feet deep, 350 feet(f)wide, entrance channel at Nahcotta 10 f eet Wharf at Tokeland; 10 feet deep, 500 and mooring basin feet deep and 300 feet wide, by a rubblemound break- Wate ide, and 1,100 feet long, protected and ote about 1,600 feet long; andchannel (g) removal of snags, piles, of Naselle River between las vbstructions in navigable about 26 miles of channel fror e and mouth. Project includes forks, 2,800 feet of Palix iveretrance through Willapa9 River of Naselle River upstream Of !v5.ay Center channel, and milesof reference is mean lower w Highway 101 Bridge. Plane h- rater. Tidal range between mean lower9.9 low water and mean her high water is 8.9 feet at Toke Point; feet at Raymond; 10.8 feet near Naselle. Extreme 2 f at Bay Center; and at Raymond; 16 feet at Seis18 feet at Toke Point; 19.3 feet Center; and 18 feet near Naselle. 1616 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project was authorized by the following Acts Work authorized Documents I uly 27, 1916 Channel 24 feet deep, 200 feet wide, in Willapa River, and H1.Doc. 706, 63d Cong., 2d sess. 150 feet wide in the forks. tepo Aug. 30, 19351 Maintenance of channel over bar to a depth of 26 feet and Rivers and Harbors Commlee minimum width of 500 feet. 41, 72d Cong., let sess. po0. Do2..... For cutoff channel at narrows............................ Rivers and Hiarbors Conm1t 37, 73d Cong., 2d sess. 2 ses Mar. 2, 1945 Channel from deep water in Palix River to Bay Center dock. IH.Doe. 481, 76th Cong., 2d ses(O Sept. 3, 1954 Widen Willapa River Channel to 360 and 250 feet between I. Doe. 425, 83d Cong.,2, South Bend and the forks, Tokeland and Nahcotta Basins; tainse latest published map). and Naselle River clearance. 1Included in Public Works Administration program, Dec. 11, 1933. 2Included in emergency relief program, May 28, 1935. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. iver Terminal facilities. There are 24 wharves on Willapa iil and Harbor, including 5 in Willapa Bay, 4 in Bay Center, 1 e Raymond and South Bend, and 1 in Tokeland. Two of the whaeae at Raymond and South Bend are suitable for use byo going vessels; one of these is publicly owned and operate ill. a general cargo terminal,.dnd and one is located at a saw The other wharves, including three that are publicly owned Ae operated, are used by shallow-draft vessels. These facilities considered adequate for existing commerce. fred Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance, rds labor: U.S. hopper dredge Davison removed 250,770 cubic yards of material from the bar channel and 13,252 cubic yards of mate- rial from the inner channel, July 16 to August 31, inclusive. U.S. hopper dredge Pacific removed 27,680 cubic yards of material, bin measurement, from inner channel, March 8-17, inclusive. dition surveys were conducted on the inner and bar channels. Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was ct0 pleted in November 1958. Snagging Naselle River was complete in 1957; channel was in good condition following maintenao snagging in November 1959. Rock breakwater at Nahcotta .dth basin was completed in 1958 to 1,500 feet long and a crest w1its of 6 feet at elevation 15 feet above mean lower low water; t condition was good in June 1965. Dike at head of Mailbo Slough is in good condition. Controlling dimensions Depth Width tied Section (feet) (feet) Date ascertl Willapa bar.... ..................................... 22.0 1,000 June 1966 Inner channele: Below South Bend.................................... 20.0 150 Feb. and April 6 South Bend to Forks at Raymond....................... 23.1 140 April 1966. Lower 800 feet of North Fork... ....................... 21.4 100 l)o. Lowe. 1,500 feet of South Fork......................... .19.1 150 Do. Upper portions of North and South Forks................. (1) (1) () Bay Center Channel...................................... 6.5 40 May 1966. Turning basin.... ................................. 5.3 Variable D)o. Nahcotta boat basin...... ................................. 7.3 500 by 1,000 June 1966. Entrance channel....................................... 9.8 200 Do. Tokeland mooring basin... ............................... 3.2 3,10by 420 April 1966. Entrance channel... ............................... 10.8 100 Do. 1 There has been no deep-draft navigation in upper portions of the forks, and no soon taken in recent years. RIVERS AND HARBORS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1617 S Total costs of existing project to June 30, 1966: Funds New work Maintenance Total bor .......................... ................. $1,158,871 $5,694,600 $6,853,471 .* Co dst(I f..........78,533 78,533 40,000.............. 40,000 I relief........................................ ............... 04tri 0"s....... ... ot~l, ................ ...... 192,314 ::....... 192,314 "Qt .S.. 1,391,185 5,773,133 7,164,318 Tot . ............ " ...... " ....... ...... 0... 71,775.............. 71,775 ,all............. 1,462,960 5,773,133 7,236,093 Cost and financial statement Islyea. l 1063 1964 J 1065 1966 Total to e Joa30,t6 - 19.... ed '......... - " ..at ........... . .... ... 1 1 579,269 I........ .............. .. 4 rit .ated ... $1,579,269 ... 1......,.34 .. $. .... , ..... t.. 1r0ted 8,579,269 $216,000 5,857 cot. .$176,650 $415,707 $279,834 $734,000719,613 223,308 5,780,310 192,62 420,810 277,585 S .600....... ' $228 084 f I. f nance for previous projects. Excludes M4 eorint d funds for new work, and estimated non-Fderal costs of $111,000 for lands lti4 e nyisting roject;moorage e bbulkheads, facilities and $6,597 contributed funds for Tokeland, at Nahcotta and and breakwater at Toke- eih 8 for previous re, *uei -.f'unjubiworks ' ' fundsproject. Includes.$192,314 for maintenance of e-- lrojr ds for new work, and $78,533 public e Excludes estimated $40,000 Coast Guard funds expended for new wor . 13. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS hingtOll Name of project Date survey conducted tor: November 1965. Cozrtes Harbor ............................. cla 1 ie Harbor .............................. May 1966. April 1966. io iersley Inlet .................... .......... March 1966. gUian River ................................ April 1966. h Crockett................................ o lay ................................... March 1966. Sp~1ia Harbor ............................... April 1966. ort Angeles IHarbor.......................... August 1965. ort Gamble Harbor ............ *..**...... May 1966. ..... Do. S ar Bay ........................ ort O .................................... September 1965. May 1966. til arbor .............................. June 1966. k Shole Bay, Seattle.......................... August 1965. Wate tRiver................ Bay, W connecting Port Townsend and Oak Vay September 1965. a . 101 (Portage Canal)..................... iseCtion, only. 1618 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 14. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS For last Cost to June30166 full report ..........- d Name ofproject seeReport Annual Oper tioQ e ,,;iatenal' for- Construction [pi . ... .. _-$ 915'103 Anacortes H~arbor, Wash... 1965 1965 2$222, 2$222,315345 59089 ABacortes Harbor, Wa .h.1..................................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Blaine Harbor, Wash. .. 11, 5 36 0 1 Columbia River, Wenatchee to Kettle Falls, Wash................ 1923 206,385 , .. Flathead River, Mont....................................... 1901 9,811 .. 14,' Hammersley Inlet, Wash.. .. ................. ......... 1950 9,000 866 Hoquiam River, Wash.l...................................... 1950 51,294 1 7 Kootenai River, Idaho and Mont............................... 1933 9,255 Lake Crockett, Wash........................................ 1961 260,240 24, ea Neah Bay, Wash.l.......................................... 1960 2,057,266 17 59 Olympia Harbor, Wash........................................ 1 . ........................... 1963 446,082 248 Polson Bay, Flathead Lake, Mont. 1918 4,491 2,1 Port Angeles Harbor, Wash.................................... 1960 470,873 IS Port Gamble Harbor, Wash.................................... 1953 311,911 10 Port Orchard Bay, Wash.1.................................... ...... .. 1928 42,804' 4 480,89 1 . . . 5 Port Townsend, Wash. ........................ .... 196 9 1'48 Seattle Harbor, Wash....................................... 1965 170,335 451 Shilshole Bay, Seattle, Wash.l................................. 1962 2,575,092 Skagit River, Wash........................................... 1950 99,:930 Stillaguamish River, Wash..................................... 1946 4,234 130171 Waterway connecting Port Townsend and Oak Bay, Wash. (Port- age Canal)l .... ... ........................... of 1964 73,322 I Completed. 2 Excludes $59,523 contributed funds expended. 8 Excludes $21,260 contributed funds expended. 4 Excludes $85,223 contributed funds expended. SExcludes $69,333 contributed funds expended. 15. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZA f0001or Fiscal year costs for preauthorization studies were $2, sh. Des Moines, Wash.; $2,739 for Edmonds IHarbor, Edmonds, tsy $3,390 for Langley Harbor, Wash.; $19,377 for Mats IVM .rbor Wash.; $15,187 for Oak Harbor, Wash.; $248 for Olympia alSh Wash. (East Waterway); $3,625 for Sammamish River, $17, $3,186 for Swinomish-March Point Channel, Wash.; and for Tulalip, Wash. 16. CLARK FORK AT MISSOULA, COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, 00 Location. On Clark Fork at Missoula, in southwestern-Idh0' tana, 190 miles above its mouth in Pend Oreille Lake, (See Geological Survey quadrangles Missoula and Bonner, ot1e Existing project. Provides for construction of flood P .r city works to prevent flood damage attwo locations Withcte limits of Missoula, consisting of a levee and floodgate s txrst at area 5, levee and floodwall at area 3, and extension of ftO000 ing State highway levee. Estimated cost of new work im000 $69is (July 1965), including non-Federal costs estimated at.o.l d for lands and damages, relocations, floodwall, and backfill -def levee below area 3. Existing project was authorized unoic Columbia River Basin plan, subject to determination ofe4., justification, by 1950 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 531, 81Sore 2d sess., contains latest published map). Jus ileafic n Vee 1ic1LeI port was approved by Chief of Engineers June 12, 196. 19 extension was approved by the Chief of Engineers Juneu, Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of Jocte 1936, as amended, a)pplies. Local interests must also relca d public utilities, including telephone and power lines, ros5 r- bridges, as required. Fully complied with for area 5. FLOOD CONTROL--SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1619 es of local cooperation for area 3, which was deferred at the o et of local interests, were requested from city of Missoula eCityober 14, 1963, and July 9, 1964. On September 29, 1964, for Mtissoula furnished assurances of local cooperation, except il e additional cost of providing a floodwall which they desired the of a levee. They were advised on October 20, 1964, that 0deity Would be required to assume the additional cost of thea lsolall. On January 25, 1965, the city of Missoula adopted ihiion establishing Special Improvement District No. 301, includes sewer main installation in area 3, and covers the hDorti Oftho of expense in which the city is involved in construction the City Oef floodwall1. By resolution dated September 21, 1965, tOof~'1issoula agreed to furnish the required items of local Dayoli"; and on September 20, 1965, contributed $13,500 to co oe the additional costs of the floodwall. The sponsor has bodaled With all items of local cooperation necessary to accom- 0 te the levee and floodwall. lab PraCttions and results during fiscal year. New work, hired Work Engineering and design were completed for area 3. New of ' ontract: Construction of 3,100 feet of levee and 900 feet CoodWall started November 26 and was completed June 27. ete .ion of fiscal year. In area 5, new levee was com- at end Ail n January 1964 and stoplog structure was completed in 966. . In, area 3,' levee and floodwall were completed in S1965 Cost and financialstatement yea Total to 1983 1964 1965 1966 June30, 19661 rk- . ............. --- . . 1I $157,400......... ______________ 9,032 $198,000 375... $385,012 375,000 1 , $93,2 29,152 210,089 ty of $13 500 contributed funds expended for additional cost of floodwall requested by L7. COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECTS Q0oalon. Improvements included in this project are along Sb-a River and its tributaries. Columbia River rises in We ia Lake, British Columbia, at elevation 2650, flows north- Lerly for nearly 200 miles, then southerly through Upper and Cr Arrow Lakes to enter the United States near northeast at of the State of Washington. From international bound- Ithe river flows south 112 miles to a point below mouth of e River, then we(,st 100 miles to mouth of Okanogan River. arlg south, the river follows eastern foothills of the Cascade W 111s for 209 miles to its confluence with Snake River.A f0 2 iles below the Snake, it turns sharply westward and flows 04 fIiles, forming Washington-Oregon boundary, to the Pa- cean. Projects in Seattle District are on Crab and Wilson s '. Entiat, Methow, Okanogan, Wenatchee, and Yakima Sin Washington Clark Fork at Missoula and St. Regis ',VIont.; andLightning Creek, Clark Fork, Idaho. 1t ting project. Flood Control Act of 1950 approved a gen- Co1Dnlrehensive plan for Columbia River Basin for flood con- 1620 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 trol and other purposes as set forth in House Document 531, 81st Congress, 2d session, and authorized to be appropriated $75 mil- lion for partial accomplishment of projects. Of this authoriza- tion, an amount not to exceed $15 million was authorized for construction of local flood-protection works in Columbia River basin, individual projects to be selected by Chief of Engineers with approval of the Secretary of the Army, subject to condition that all work undertaken pursuant to this authority shall be economically justified before construction. Projects eligible for selection are: Estimated EsFtimated Project Federal non-Federal cost cost Lightning Creek, Clark Fork, Idaho............................................ 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i$42,726 $2,000 Clark Fork at Missoula, Mont. ...... 400,000 69,000 St. Regis River, Mont.... ............................................ 85,000 ............. Crab and Wilson Creeks, Wash.... ...................................... 393,000 170,000 Entiat River, W ash................................................. 139,000 (3) M ethow River, Wash... .............................................. 364,000 (3) Okanogan River, W ash........................................................ 197,000 (3) W enatchee River, W ash........................................................ 137,000 (3) Yakimna River at Ellensburg, Wash............................................. 1,0355,000 60,000 12Actual. Reported in detail in an individual report. 3 Not yet evaluated. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. Non-Federal costs are evaluated in justification reports prepared for each proposed location. Operations and results during fiscal year. Work on project, Clark Fork at Missoula, Columbia River basin, Mont., is reported separately. Condition at end of fiscal year. Project for Lightning Creek, Clark Fork, Idaho, was initiated in January and completed in March 1959, and was in good condition in May 1966, except for an area about 100 feet long which showed almost total loss of rock armor along lower portions of riverward slope. Project for Clark Fork at Missoula is reported in an individual report. Proj- ects for Crab and Wilson Creeks and Yakima River at Ellensburg, Wash., expired in July 1964 and June 1965, respectively, due to lack of local cooperation. Flood Control Act of 1965 estab- lished expiration date of June 10, 1970, for Yakima River proj- ect, unless local interests shall before such date furnish acceptable assurances that the requirel local cooperation will be furnished. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1904 1965 1966 June 30, 196 New work: Appropriated..................... $157,400 ............ $9,032 $198,000 $427,738 Cost.............................. 21,919 $93,209 29,152 210,089 417,735 1 Excludes $13,500 contributed funds expended on Clark Fork at Missoula, Columbia River Basin, Mont., for additional cost of floodwall requested by city of Missoula. 18. HOWARD A. HANSON RESERVOIR, WASH. Location. Green River, in northwestern Washington, flows FLOOD CONTROL-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1621 ita"lY for 40 miles to Auburn, thence northerly 32 miles to th in Elliott Bay at Seattle. Dam is at river milefrom 64, Nes southeast of Kanaskat, and 1 mile downstream et of North Fork. (See Geological Survey topographic ', "Cedar Lake quadrangle, Wash.") 6ill Ing Project. Rockfill dam about 235 feet high, with gated Sayaving a concrete weir at elevation 1,176 feet above Z seawith at elevationDam gates acre-feet. and topofof106,000 levelcapacity 1206, creating isa along crest 1 675 feet long. Improvement is designed to control flooding dreer River Valley to alleviate agricultural and urban flood age anld make possible further expansion of Seattle indus- t rea. Existing project was authorized by 1950 Flood Con- ed et (11. Doc. 271, 81st Cong., 1st sess., contains latest pub- dl cooperation Fully complied with. Contributed funds , $2 million. ~r.tions and results during fiscal year. Newdeferred work, hired S Land acquisition, water surveillance, and rail- C0struction ca work continued. Rehabilitation of piezometers zoaecomplished. New work, contract: Drilling of additional bor. eter holes was completed in August. Maintenance, hired was 4QQ*i-OPeration continued all year. Routine maintenance ditches, Werlt ished on roads, gages, debris booms, turbidimeter, .lie, and other project features. Work was completed on continued Wy1 treatment to right abutment seepage. Work and channel aijt surveys, water storage studies, tr qualityMaintenance, contract: Deferred maintenance, Sthernstudy. te1 Pacific Railway, started in December and was 48 per- c'h pPlete in June. Woitonat end of fiscal year. Work 1963, on project began in ary 1956 J and was completed in June except for minor items. Relocation of roads, utilities, and structures, e Pacific Railway main line is complete. The defNorthern eN ferred construction period for the railway ma in line be- y 23.1959, for the portion downstream from dam, and Work has t r'1 1962, for portion upstream from dam. erfOrmed as necessary on the line, under agreement with 1962 on the ' llR*Y Contract work was completed April permanent as oillway,works, administration Outlet building, road, operations area, and general utilities. Cost and financialstatement 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 1962 1963 1964 .7. riated .. $3,950,0244 - 4 ............ $1,151 $37,048,060 _$9,134I 29,675 37,048,060 , t .. .130536 3,852,375.. 76,400 106,883 132671 104,000 232,000 662,954 14:910 122:444 164,589 594,841 S::: .O $2million contributed funds for new work. 1622 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 19. MUD MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR, WHITE RIVER, WASIL Location. On White River, principal tributary of puyal t River, near Mud Mountain, 28 miles above its confluence .iver, Puyallup River, and 38 miles above mouth of PuyalUP PAsh Dam is 6 miles southeast of Enumelaw, in northwestern Wa se ington, and 38 miles east of Tacoma. (See Geologlcal Uv topographic sheet "Cedar Lake quadrangle, Washington.") eleVa Existing project. Rocklill dam, 700 feet long at crest 8 ac. tion, rises 425 feet above bedrock. Reservoir has storage but* ity of about 106,000 acre-feet. Outlet works are in riget per cubic fee dis ment and permit controlled discharge of 17,700uncontrolleddis' with second through two concrete-lined tunnels charge over spillway having maximum capacity of 139,000WChite feet per second. Improvement affords flood protection to, 1 di* and Puyallup River Valleys and protects Tacoma industr%ial trict in conjunction with Puyallup River project at crae against floods about 50 percent greater than maximum disted 6 of record. Estimated cost of recreation facilities for comp 93 was authorized project is $26,000 (July 1965). Project Puyallup River, by ash, ' Flood Control Act (S. Committee print, 74th Cong., 2d sess.). d Local cooperation. None required. In 1958, $3,928 f cds on acceSS contributed by King County were expended for changes road bridge. ce hired Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance,ance labor: Project features were operated all year. Maintower- was accomplished on dam facilities, gages, debris boomnS, d 994 lines, roads, ditches, and fish facilities. Tank trucks hauled of fish past the dam. Rehabilitation, contract: Constructioed downstream access bridge, started in April 1964 but poStP to due to unfavorable weather conditions, was completed Ju September 1965. tarted Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project was in 1939, completed June 1953, and is in good condition. Cost and financial statement Fiscal year ............... 1962 1963 19681 1965 1966 New work: 83 Appropriated......... ........... ............ Cost............................ Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $136,400 $96,317 $136,829 $120,300 $142,100 Cost................. 120,635 123,392 147,790 121,641 139,391 Rehabilitation: Appropriated..................... 200,000 40,908 415,000 Cost............................. 27,860 112,022 110,284 35,74 1 Excludes $3,028 contributed funds. 20. SAMMAMISH RIVER, WASH.I, Location. Originates at northern end of Sammamish e 11 miles east of Seattle, Wash., and flows northwesterly 15 mld to northern end of Lake Washington, which forms eastern oto ell, bot'o ary of Seattle. (See Geological Survey quadrangles Kirkland, Redmond, and Edmonds, East.) WASH., DISTRICT FLOOD CONTROL--SEATTLE, ~a l r v ~ sfor r j c , Provides Ilf r o m S am - . . a nimprovement Y -drainage :o major is" .project. n river canths an average d artial flood protection by enlarging Lake to Lake Washington, increasing depths e'tMish f about 15 feet from an averal of ouis$3908,- aeet, and increasing widths cost of. project is $3,908,-o 00 rnge of 32 to 50 feet. Estimated n o ad Corps futher non-Federalt Gc(July 1964), including $2,717,000 other non-Federal co st r funds; and cerd funds; $722,000 contributed relocation of- ow stimated at $468,000 for lands and dnamages,aud and coby terlunes, utilities, and farm bridges, an engineetorizeng o58coordination. Existing project was o authorized byon- 1 Cong., st sess., con- Act (H. Doc. 157, 84th latest Control ls Flood ta98 published map). c wth Contributed funds wt. eL ca l cooperation. Fully complied e1ded, $684,337.m -a Regular and con- tribPerationsand results during fiscal year. egotiations were codeted funds: New work, hired labor: Co. rides . regarding ad- ad- previouslyng diti01ted with the Northern PacificRauilway four b ridges previously at one of the alte a remedial workof a slide area adja cent to the railway trlred. nSurveillance 1oth near Woodinville was continued. New work, contract: Pacific Railway Co. drove piling in preparation for rthern b 'ge extension and slope flattening work.a a i p at end of fiscal year. Projelee rect consistsof c onCdition to complete pro ecfour bridgestsOf r COmplete. Work remaining 21 one of thefour bridges P .ial work to railway bridge ofns were trans- project fe Ously altered. Completed feature operation and maintenance on Novem- berA'd to King County for 18 ,1964. statement Cost and financial REGULAR FUNDS Total 19ea 1065 1988 June 30, 19 a 1962 .****........... 1903 1964... --. ,o l Wok $67753 $760,000$2 ,82 C ropriated.......... .$67348 $1,060,6521542,002 684,021 83 ,4,2 75P297- ............ 75,297. 195,642 -9,642---- -- CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to 30,19661 Pleal Yea................ . ..... . 1964 1965 ---- --.- 1June 1966 -.-..- "(I r.I - $65000 ~Ontributd$9 .... 3 ,000 e c r2 8:3 o td.............3.. ......... of extra haul, not a required cash con $7,400 other contributed funds for cost i eiuldes BYPASS) 21. SKAGIT RIVER, WASH. (AVON om of Maout city On Skagit River, in northesternamr 19 oation. 6 miles ups from city of Mount tream M i 11les above the mouth, crTnd lona 1 mile downstream from Burlington. (See Geo-) des for a diver- ical Survey quadrangles, La Conner an Mot provides for a diver- )i .iting proec. VXis of improvement ela of project. Plan improvgemenkagit miles Rive r for 2 levee, widening stream right-bank right-bank levee (Avon Bypass), upstream of the diversion channel, and hannel c"t -ream 1624 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 to divert excess floodflows from Skagit River between hnUl Vernon and Burlington into Padilla Bay. The diversion cchannel 8 miles long, has a design capacity of 60,000 cubic feet per secnl Structures along new channel will include a gated intake cOntrOla downstream overflow weir, two intermediate weirs, eight '1ghwveea bridges, and two railway bridges. Upstream right-bank levee consists of 4 miles of levee construction upstream of thile b entrance. Estimated cost for new work is $25,900,000 ( 1966), including $21,400,000 Corps funds and non-Federal. c 0o estimated at $4,500,000 for lands and damages, and relocatiLon93 bridges and utilities. Existing project was authorized 936ts Flood Control Act (H.Doc. 187, 73d Cong., 2d sess., contains lat published map). Ild Local cooperation. Local interests must provide easements ao rights-of-way; hold the United States free from damages; re cate highway bridges and utilities as required; and mainta sl" operate the project after completion. Skagit County Co0-, to sioners, by letter dated August 1, 1962, expressed willingneg for sponsor the project and furnish the non-Federal requirementsf construction. hired Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, t e labor: Engineering and design work started. Site seleceo trance of bypass be shifted downstream 3 miles and include miles of river widening with the 61/ 2 -mile-long bypass chanfse. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction not started. Cost and financial statement year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Juneo30, New work: 30 Appropriated......... ........................................ $30,355 30 Cost.........................30,355 22. STARTUP, WALLACE RIVER, WASH. Location. On right bank of Wallace River near its jUnctii with Skykomish River in Snohomish County, in northwesal Washington, about 35 miles northeast of Seattle. (See Geologi Survey quadrangle, Index.)-V Existing project. Levee about 7,000 feet long between. komish and Wallace Rivers and joining Great Northern Railw embankment at each end, and side channels to divert flow a from levee. Project was authorized by Chief of Engineers , cember 6, 1963, under authority of section 205, Public Law 80th Congress, as amended. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, c° tract: Contract for levee and riprap was awarded and Wor started in July, and was completed in October. i Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was completed October 1965 and is in good condition. WASH., DISTRICT FLOOD CONTROL--SEATTLE, . . . and financial .Cost ,I statement I I ot l to 5 June 30, 19661 Year ........... eal 162 1963 1964 1965-196 11,o38 09 0 $45,197 $240,150 AP.ro'priated..........13............ cost, 1,23 1,23 4:547 ' 1:,264 I 1-- '-----"-- 178,080240,150 cludes on w work estimated at $22,500for rights-of-way, borrow 1)it udes non-Federal costs for ne i quarry royalty. WASH. 23. STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, Formed by confluence Wof its north and south .'Ocation. northwestern ,ashingtontillagumshn oks at Arlington, in miles a to Puget ound entering Port Susan iver flows westerly22 through Pass, and Skagit 645,andBay rough Hat Slough and South Su Marveysvillehart and lla- 6450, Coast and Geodetic Stilla- st Pass. (See quadrangles Stanw ' and olOgical Survey amish, Wash.) and erosionArlington to reduc bank erosiotween channel ndand project. Works to reduce bank ehamgesrojetwoks hsting Arlington andllows River 15 miles between hages on Stillaguamish Cook Slough, 3 miles l; oncre g, as follows:eir ad of Hat Slough, and on and Cook lough; concreteSlh weiro loug ¢vetment at 26 places on river piersaoff chead of Cook aouh l.feet long between steel-sheet-pile and two cutoff channels each abouta It flow through slough;sharp bend C s Slough. TidaFloo in ook P feet long, to eliminate into ee haveFloodr section. improved flfuence extends about 3 miles at Cook936 weir loodugh have een 0 aes of 16 feet above low water by 19936 Flood Control Act was authorized btains latest published map Poetwsahrized (ger'ved. Project (1erved. 3d sess., conai le o~ . ioc. 657, 71st Cong., Cntrol Act of June.28, locality). 3, Flood Control Section 2, .Flood Control Act 19 8cal cooperation. io nterests comple wont time of author iztio t, applies. itsAt196, sinterestsaintenancelired co t 1936, ap aplie. applied, and local of June 22, ired 8requirements. lhear 1aintenance, in June. results during fiscal yea brush killer, was stared la OPerations and4 miles of revetmentswitinlg rojec or: Sprayed xistingprojct was startedion. year. iCndition at end of fiscal and is in good condition. 1939, "1986 and completed in Cost and financial statement Total to lC osI 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 1963 1964 a962 1962 ------ -- 4 ........... 9 , 8 .......... , 0 00 ... .... $220,594 4 98 2 , 28,73 tain I)ropr t ropriated .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. .$.10.. 0 ,200 ..$5 1 3 058 4 ta .neo tlle nla ..* .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .... I ...... l 000o .... o° 1 0000 $5000 o,800 St 3 IoAIo , sto irk $3d80 $330 2.. a..n......... $10,0 3i -^---" ... ... .... . 3, $18,73350,8 002$333000 .... . . FxcueOO i to meet requirements relief w work. funds0or new andrugrts-o..e ldes $85,999 emergency for use in securing lands, ease 'or nlo-'hgton cooperation for new work. RIVER, WASH. 24. TACOMA, pUYALLUP in glaciers on west- River has its source :cation.Puyallup Mount Rainier, Was slopes -,~ lcation. ., - of Puyallupnt Rainier, Wash,flows northwesterly 50 miles, 1626 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 and empties into Commencement Bay, an arm of Puget r at Tacoma. Work covered by this project is on PuyallupRve, within city limits of Tacoma. (See Coast and Geodeticsurve Chart 6407.) od- Existing project. A channel with a capacity of 50,000 senter feet between East 11th Street Bridge and lower end ofi'te- county improvement, a distance of about 2.2 miles, by straig ald ing channel, building levees, revetting channel and levees, e at making necessary bridge changes. The 11th Street 3ri.i.er. reme lower end of project is 3/ mile above mouth of Puyallupextreth Diurnal tidal range at mouth of river is 11.8 feet and range is 20 feet. Improvement was planned in conjunction 'out Mud Mountain Dam and affords protection against floodSaeet 50 percent greater than maximum discharge of record. Prijet was authorized by 1936 Flood Control Act (S. Committee Pr Puyallup River, Wash., 74th Cong., 2d sess.). Local cooperation. None required. hired Operations and results during fiscal year. Maintenance,ontal labor: Detailed survey was made in November, and hortn and vertical controls were reestablished. tarted Condition at end of fiscal year. Existing project wasbie in 1947 and completed in 1950. Reconstruction of six ed ia channel improvement, and levee construction were comP 1950 1949. Placing additional riprap was completed in MVay Project is in good condition. Cost and financial statement 'Tots gto 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June~ year................ Fiscal New work: Appropriated.............................................. Cost........................... ........... .................... Maintenance: Appropriated.......... -$6,000 $9,600 -$200 $4,800 $5,000 Cost................. 4,838 3,440 6,827 1,395 3,239 25. WYNOOCHEE RESERVOIR, WASH. , Location. On Wynoochee River, a tributary of Chehall , about 28 miles north of Montesano, Grays Harbor CountY'Valley (See Geological Survey quadrangles, Grisdale, Wynoochee and Montesano.) O 0P00 Existing project. Provides for a dam and reservoir of.g acre-feet of total storage for water supply, flood control, i11 tion, fish and wildlife, and recreation. Estimated cost for - work is $10,500,000 (July 1965). Existing project waC5g. thorized by 1962 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 601, 87th er" 2d sess., contains latest published map). Installation of Poi0 generating facilities was not authorized, pending a reexarni rAl report by the Chief of Engineers. In February 1966, the e Power Commission asserted that power production as part Wynoochee project is not feasible at this time. s 1 Local cooperation. Local interests must repay all coSply located to water supply, in accordance with the Water P WASH., DISTRICT FLOOD CONTROI--SEATTLE, estimated at $7,735,000. Ini- ct 1958, as amended, presently to be $81,000 for construction, a rn,ual payments ents are estimated and replacements. ad paymforual are esa, operation ',n w ere passed by the city o f Aberdeen in November 1y1965, 196lUons were passed by te giving assurance that 61, February 1965, and December aid Local interests allocated water supply costs will be repai .onas are law; later de- allocated toearelamation and tet. also repay such costs reclamation law; and under Federal h .olMined to be "Ined to repayable be States free under, repayable es for the from damage o ofo the roject. claims water-rights rd th e United and operation project.erg and sting from construction results during fiscal ye. Engineeringandm, d Perations and continued. Site se lection design memorandumt rive 4 . work a nonpal of this planat river 111ing the most feasible plan to be approval of this plan, a "lile 51.8 wssbite.Followinig elel 51.8, was submitted. Following and design m ere submitted. apmemoranda on con- Stleral design memorandumand spillway design flood not submitarted. wereio n 011 materials eCtion not started. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction Cost and financial statement l 1962 -- '-- to Total _ 1965 - .__ 1966 - ---- " June 30, 1966 1962 163 1963 --- 1964--- Year ........... $499645 $699,645 . . . . . . . 21,543 .................................. .. . . ........ .. 7 494 'troPriated... ",t .................. FLOOD ONTROL PROJECTS 26 INSPECTION OF COMPLETED d local flood protagencies nstructerests, tio spections are made of federally co os agencdvised local interancests,andre are maintained lymaintenance a of dvised tloll rojects, which and are 'OnsibleI for their operation were madethow, repairs. During fiscal year, inspetions 1965; Methow, oi needed Rivers in September Ok ooksack and Skagit Yakima, Naches, Entia , and 'ln Wenatchee ake, Lightning Rivers and y S1Ogan ann Yakima, Naches, Entiat, Oster Creek in October 1965; Coeur AlJoene Lightningark Flathead, ek , and Coeur d'Alene, Kootenai, St. Joe, 166F Stllaguthead, Clarksh o H1966;illaguam April and rwater, Dungeness, and St. Regis Rivers inElwha, rliv, Sammamsoh, and crwater Dungene r in March 1966; luck, Chehalis, Sammamish, a quiao -an rNisqually, p, Quinault, Sol Lake in April 1966. Fiscal year 1uyallup Rivers, and Costs Americandat have been $43,672. costs were $3,805. to date have. RESERVOIR OPERATIONS 27, SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL reserved in Hungry Horsewith prescribedr oloOd control storage was ith pr la t and Ross Reservoir, Wash.,werein aaccordae the flood con- made sduring were Gts rves Guidance forecasts werer on operations t S Urves. 41br-Season,'of reports valley storage•ah lostmenlloy as required, and monthly storage at I litted. Storage for replacement Ralpids Dams, in Wash- i er ,Baker, Rocky Reach, andP with rule curves and flood reparation or revision of o' n was provided in accordance inpripon during the year regcasts. Coordination niecessary e careon toah during cL. p r j yrojects.a se these t•thh regulatiomanuals was itrvoir Pi. calagencies responsible for the oper Year costs were $19,482. 1628 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 28. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD-CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30 full report Name of project see Annual Operation and Reportaintenanc for- Construction a - American Lake, vicinity of Fort Lewis, . . . . . . .3................. 3 Wash. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 1957 2559 582 ...... Coeur d'Alene, Spokane River, Idaho .. 1942 152,872 .. Crab and Wilson Creeks, Columbia River Basin, Wash.4........... 1958 9,000 ... I)ungeness River, Clallam County, Wash.1 3 .................... 1964 392,104 .. Entiat River, Columbia River Basin, Wash..................... 1958 ................ ....... Hloquiam, Aberdeen, and Cosmopolis, Chehalis River, Wash.5...... 3 1948 83,631.* Lightning Creek, Clark Fork, Columbia River Basin, Idaho ...... 1959 42,726 .. ***. . Methow River, Columbia River Basin, 1 .Wash..................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . 1958 .............. t ::::::: Mission Creek at Cashmere, Wash. ... 1955 10,856 Okanogan River, Columbia River Basin, Wash.....o............. 1958 1100 ...... Priest Rapids Dam, Columbia River, Wash...................... 1954 6350,000 .. Raymond, Willapa River, Wash.............................. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . 195 23,743 ... . ., St. Maries, St. Joe River, Idaho ..... 1942 357,698 ... . .. St. Regis River, Columbia River Basin, Mont................... 1958 1,400 ...... Spokane, Spokane River, Wash................................ 3 ....... .. .. .. ... . .. ....... . 1939 2,944 .. Upper Puyallup River, Wash. .... 1938 771,495 * Wenatchee River, Columbia River Basin, Wash.................. 1958 3 . . . . . .River Yakima River at Ellensburg, Columbia . . . . . Wash.8....... . . . . Basin, .......... .. 1958 ......... . .. Yakima, Yakima River, Wash. .. 1948 381,961. SAuthorized by Chief of Engineers under authority of section 205, Public LaW 85,8t Congress, as amended. 2 Excludes $10,000 contributed funds. 8 Completed. 'Project expired in July 1964, due to lack of local cooperation. Project expired in October 1952, due to lack of local cooperation. frist 0Excludes funds expended for acquisition of lands under partnership arrangement .ctCa Rapids and Wanapum Dams, in accordance with Public Law 544, 83rd Congress. Projec structed by Grant County public utility district. 78 Project Excludes $13,704 contributed funds. expiration date extended to June 10, 1970, by 1965 Flood Control Act. 29. FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) 354f Fiscal year costs for preauthorization studies were $5,354 a Blackfoot River, vicinity Lincoln, Mont.; $2,500 for Canyons 1 ad 2, Wenatchee, Wash.; $17,758 for Clark Fork near MissoulA Mont. (Orchard Homes); $25,808 for Crab Creek at Odess' Wash.; $13,777 for Crab (Dry) Creek, Ephrata, Wash.; 2 ,t for Latah (Hangman) Creek, Idaho; $1,950 for Mercer Sloug - Bellevue, Wash.; $1,872 for Pine Creek, Idaho; $35,121 for PlCe Creek, Wallace, Idaho; $8,488 for Puyallup River, Drainage trict No. 10, Wash.; and $8,028 for St. Joe River at St. Mr Idaho. Emergency flood control activities--repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) 0o Project Federal oS Advance preparation ........................................ 1$30)512 Flood emergency operations .................................. 1 Repair and restoration: 8052 Unfavorable miscellaneous repair investigations ............... 5930 Cherry Creek, Duvall, Wash ............................... 4485 Ebey Slough, Snohomish River, Wash ................. ......... 814641 Green River, Wash .......................................... Kootenai River, Idaho (Diking District 12 and North 26 Bonners Ferry Diking District). ............................ 33956 Pilchuck River, Wash., French Slough .......................... 3318 Pilchuck River, Wash., Meadows Farm....................... Pine Creek at Pinehurst, Idaho ............................... ,41 Placer Creek, Idaho ........................................... WASH., DISTRICT 1629 MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-SEATTLE, cost ProjectFederal Project 014,471 .. , Devil's Butte Farms...........7,525 r~uIlndand Crabbs Wash,itEe iver,y Wash., S1ohom.iSh11 iver ..... ,5080 oshRiver, Wash., Ebey Island (three locations)...... 64,315 River, Wash., Ebey Island (six locations) .............. 31,547 Soo is River, lhish River,Wash.,LazyVa anch.................. Wash., Lazy Valley Ranc .nrolDistrict'..... 52,479 o.sh River, Wash., Marshland Flood Cont732 10,260 o River, Wash., Spencer Island ........................ Island ............. ... .... 39,577 ohmish River, Wash., Smith ........... ... ........ 83,060 hoish River, Wash. (five locations) ......... 730 S River at Yakima, Wash. (Mo ee Bran ch).... .... M River, Wash. (Terrace Heights Bridge)...... gi and clearin naiabe streams and tributariesin interest of flood 0 208, (sec.ai 1vg954 Flood strol Cone Act, Public Law 780, 83d Cong.) otrol 0 'seal year cost was $15,000 for C Coffee Creek, Wash., in Lewis feet. Project was com- leted, from mouth upstream 2,000 leted in January 1966. ergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Public Law 526, 79th Cong.) Fi*,-L l ear costsI Project and location - $20,293 River, Gleason Bridge, Wash, left bank ., Was......... ce Road, Chehalis River, Thurston Cou y... .... 41,646 ............. ........................ 17,719 er. Was' So/ 1Sagit Highway, left bank .'....* I t $1,446 expended contributed funds for Missoula, Mont., protection of sewage treat- o right bank, completed in May 1965. ed in August 1965. (,e(d in September 1965. in ay 1966. PEND OREILLE RIVER, IDAHO ALI3ENI FALLS RESERVOIR, west River about 25 miles ocation. Dam is on Pend Oreille alPoint, in northern Idaho,90and 50 miles northeast of Spo-uths ash. Dam is 838 and miles upstream from mouths f Rivers, respectively. Geolog- (SeeNewport, ,lubia and Pend Oreille sheets, San point, Idaho, and as~rvey topographic power, i i) Providesflood control, hydroelectric stin pwater uses on Pend flOreille River as a part of the water usesforondpen omet Pated of Columbia River Basin, l' At the dam, channel was for- idieurose latin for development. feet.a by recreatiod island and an deveisland by an ana a lowt. o inlf ofchannel waterfall about 7and aig . livded right and a in left channel Do e a gated, gravity-structure spillway of 42,600 kilowatts in right tallation aving areservoir witht a usable storage capacity of rlA)ouse hhating an a, EstimatedWIcost oervoir creatin a r-feet. f recreation facilities for 00 acre-feet. Estimated cost966) Existing project was Vleted project is $967,000 (July 1966. o c 9 81st Cong., 1st orized by 1950 Flood Control Act (S. Doc. contains latest published map). S*, SO cat cooperation. None required. r Code 710 funds: 42erations and results during fiscal yuies continued. Con-: hired labor: Engineering studies coneation area wasCon- str . ork, wasork, recreation areaPriest tateon of camp loopand road at Riley Creek complete. New workf is 96 percent C011t'. in November ofanitary facilities of Priest act: Work on modernization 1630 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ifl River and Riley Creek areas continued. Regular funds. is 14th tenance, hired labor: Reservoir was operated throughl me- annual cycle of storage and release. Routine structuralWAy chanical, and electrical maintenance was performed onspht for dam, powerhouse, and equipment. Acquisition of land col rightse d, nr. alleviation of erosion damage for reservoir was Maintenance, contract: Alleviation of erosion damage as rol~r vided at one tract, March to May. Modification to drift ce started in March and was 75 percent complete by end of Julled Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project stc rted in January 1951 and was completed in June 1957. Project u d to operations in June 1952, impounding storage which was'l'shree increase minimum flows through downstream powerplants. t generating units have been in commercial operation sincelerable 1955. Evaluation of reservoir effects on erosion of vulere public and private properties is continuing. Negotiationstec- a proceeding with a view to satisfying claims or providing proe tion for damaged •It)0 'y 66,. "n v Al9 properties so far as legally required. ' tion of erosion damage at one tract was provided in VaYAlbenl Recreation facilities for public use have been provided at e, Cove, Priest River, Riley Creek, Trestle Creek, Johnson CrleY and Springy Point. Improvement of Priest River and Creek areas and planning for additional areas are underwaY Cost and financial statement Toa oo Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June New work: $ 1'9, Appropriated.......... $31,825 $161,990 -$12,961 $70,000 $75,000 111 Cost................. 51,299 139,323 13,240 29,539 74,140 800 Maintenance: 3,9'g4 Appropriated.......... 350,994 580,200 450,000 408,200 479,500 3,944 Cost................. 356,459 370,525 632,603 428,932 476,371 1Includes $210,829 from appropriation for recreation on completed projects, Code rk. o $136,736 from appropriation for Public Works Acceleration Act projects, for new 31. CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, COLUMBIA RIVER, WAST* Location. On Columbia River in north central Washi geke, at river mile 545, just upstream from mouth of Foster $urveY 11/2 miles upstream from town of Bridgeport. (Geological , topographic sheet Okanogan, Wash., shows general localitY')d , Existing project. A straight concrete gravity overfloW by 220 feet high; powerhouse; and intake structure with gat 4 0 for 27 generating units. Ultimate installed capacity depen 1 future development of upstream storage. Powerhouse l or generator units installed, and provides superstructure o of units and substructure for 20 units. All installed units arf'cli 64,000 kilowatts capacity. Estimated cost of recreatiOn tW ties for completed project is $878,000 (July 1966). Projec 79 th authorized by 1946 River and Harbor Act (HI. Doc. 693, Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). t i Local cooperation. None required. Local interests cnl uted estimated value of work and materials of $15,000 MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1631 for bank protection at Brewster, 12 miles downstream from 959) ,Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: Salntenance, hired labor: Project was operated all fiscal year, S routine -maintenance performed. Studies were started work taller number and size of future additional units to be in- Rehabilitation, hired labor: Planning for underwater lepai. Je.rs to stilling basin was completed and contract awarded in Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of project started is com- p etepePtember 1949 and is complete. Land acquisition bee except for one tract of land for recreation development. All 16 ' Powerhouse structure, and relocations are complete. with t4l OWAer units of the initialininstallation have been installed, itie last unit put on-the-line September 1958. Recreation facil- spesprovided at Elmer City and damsite for public use. An in- aeeti.on. made in November 1964 revealed need for major re- e ilitation to prevent continuing erosion from endangering the Dlere stilling basin. Planning for underwater repairs was com- ed in 1965, and contract was awarded in June 1966. Cost and financial statement 'Yarl -Total to 1963 194 1965 1966 June 30, 19661 Aear 1962 $10409 $79,010 $4,700....................... $144421,962 ostPrated.......... . 42423 61,056 22,654...................... 'An e ............... 1,183,00.1,32,50 $1,006,600 1,021,500 10,402,230 1,142,406 work. ' 10; and for new Code projects,projecs. completed Accelerationon Act fo recreation 0 fr oprpriation 25,1 rom for Public on apropr .rom Works .. ...... .......... ......... 193 1 7:793.. ........ ............ ..... 32. LIBBY RESERVOIR, KOOTENAI RIVER, MONT. Mont., about 17Ltocation. On Kootenai River in Lincoln County, from con- S iles upstream from Libby, and 219 miles upstream with Columbia .River.. (See .nGeological Sur- .bu Ve ce of Kootenai 174"tion. £i On Kootena veri onyM., sheet, Thompson Lakes, Mont.) 0 0?o.graphic o s project. Provides for storage for local flood control ptin te tectioin Montana and Idaho downstream from dam; main ge 1 flood control in Lower Columbia River; hydroelectric power le ration at-site and at downstream plants through storageasre- a and recreation development. Project will be operated ofYe of Columbia River a of-co.mprehensive system for improvement .11 for flood control, navigation, hydroelectric power, and other f20es. Straight concrete gravity atoverflow dam will be about feet high, with normal full pool elevation 2459 feet above (al Sea level. Powerhouse will have an initial installed capacity X 000 ki owattsfrom four hydroelectric generating units. as ervoir, back.g.water into Canada, will have a usable storage a of 4,965,000 acre-feet at 50 percent drawdown. Con- 1632 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 struction of dam is in accordance with treaty between Unie States and Canada relating to international cooperation in ~Yte resource development of Columbia River basin. Cost est1s for new work (4 units) is $352 million (July 1966). IE~XS531, project was authorized by 1950 Flood Control Act (i. Oc. 81st Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. None required. . hired Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, hid labor: Preconstruction planning was completed. MVajor si effort was concentrated on dam, highway, and railroad reloctreat Final design was completed on portions of the 60-mile Northern Railway line change, including 7-mile tunnel and re. miles of clearing and grading contracts; and continued on tleto maining portions. The Great Northern Railway Co. enteretd o a relocation contract in January. Final design was completed re- the first 12.5 miles of the 50-mile Forest Development Road for location; initiated on the reservoir bridge; and continue ent the second and third units (23 miles) of the Forest Develope 5 2- Road. Final design work was initiated on 13.8 miles of thetate mile Montana State Highway relocation. The Montan.a Feb Highway Commission entered into a relocation contracti il d ruary. A revised design memorandum for relocation of Warl. Ranger Station and Work Center and Rexford Work Center, Ws Forest Service facilities to be inundated by the reservoir, completed. Final design work on relocation of Warland $asger Station and Work Center (now referred to as Canoe Gulch) was completed, and contract was awarded in June. Additional strdie on number and size of future units and studies on donstrdie reregulating facilities continued. Final design work on the W was initiated and neared completion. Final design work Yed completed and invitation for bids issued in June on cor~it: visitors' center and residency facility. New work, contrch Construction started in April with the award of contracts .ile include the first 13.7 miles of clearing and grading anl iles of tunnel at the Great Northern line change, and first 12.7 50-mile Forest Development Road relocation. er Condition at end of fiscal year. Planning studies are 98o*" cent complete. Final design work is 59 percent complete. April struction is 0.3 percent complete. The construction start inApi implemented the Canadian-United States treaty. Cost and financial statement o ,, toloT tal 6 year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June3 New work: $14,7408308 Appropriated.......... $1,639,352 $7,500,000 121960,200 $1,009,339 $1,350,000 $2,350,648 Coat................. 1,669,4332,031,1221,240,7491,344,9685,829,961 GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS-SEATTLE, WASH., DISTRICT 1633 33. SURVEYS 33. Elass Fiscal year costs Cch reosion cooperative studies ........................... $8,995 Pd ensive basin studies ...... * *...........403,883 . atontrol studies.................................... 31,670 udies.... ........................ .......... 524,717 ldies. ............... **....................37406 'xXeludes$13,290 expended contributed funds. S34. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA The Work programmed for collection and study of basic data t vers international water studies and flood plain information godies. Work on international water studies included checking rotenay Lake storage computations to determine compliance of st0 Power & Light Co. with orders of International -ootenay 08 1it Commission, and coordination with Kootenay Lake and )oYoos Lake Boards of Control in enforcement of International i1 Commission orders. Completed draft of supplement to t igo~o plain information study for Nooksack River, Wash., cover- 8.lSurnas River, a tributary to the Nooksack. Work started on t IimaRiver basin, and was underway on flood plain informa- l"" studies of Skagit and Snohomish River basins, Washington. scal year costs were $889 for international water studies, and $0,279 for flood plain information studies, a total of $71,168. Completed flood plain studies Date Federal Location Requesting agency completed cost u5arish River, Wash..... State of Washington; Department of Conservation...... Nov. 1963.... $30,947 35. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Work programed for research and development consists of storm t"lies and other hydrologic studies. Fiscal year costs of these lies were $3,081. WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT * This district comprises southeastern Washington, exclusive of atershed of Columbia River and tributaries above and including akima River, Wash.; Idaho except northern part and a small Southeastern portion; a portion of western Wyoming; a small part of northwestern Utah; part of northeastern Nevada; and a part of eastern Oregon. IMPROVEMENTS . ,,.eD^ Page rage Flood Control-Continued 1 Navigation Columbia River and tribu- 20. Willow Creek Reservoir, 1650 Heppner, Oreg.......... taries above Celilo Falls 21. Inspection of completed 1651 2. to Kennewick, Wash... 1635 flood control projects .. ther authorized naviga- Scheduling flood control 1652 3 tion project .......... 1637 22. reservoir operations .... Navigation work under Other authorized flood con- special authorization ... 1637 23. trol projects .......... 1652 24. Flood control work under 1653 Flood Control special authorization ... 4. Blackfoot Reservoir, Black- Multiple-Purpose Projects 1637 Including Power S foot River, Idaho ...... Bose Valley, Columbia 1639 25. Dworshak Reservoir, North 6. River Basin, Idaho .... Fork Clearwater River, Catherine Creek Reservoir, Idaho ................. 1653 7. Oreg.................. 1640 Ice Harbor lock and dam, 26. 1654 Colfax, Palouse River, Snake River, Wash .... Wash ................ 8. Columbia River Basin, local 1640 27. John Day lock and dam, Columbia River, Oreg. 1656 1641 and Wash............ 9 flood protection project . 1642 28. 10. Connell, Wash . ........ . Little Goose lock and dam, 1657 Dayton, Touchet River, Snake River, Wash ... 11 W ash . ................ 1643 29. Lower Granite lock and 1658 *l Ieise-Roberts Extension, dam, Snake River, Wash. Columbia River Basin, 30. Lower Monumental lock 12. Idaho ................ 1643 and dam, Snake River, SJacason Hole, Snake River, Wash ................ 1659 1644 McNary lock and dam, Co- 13.. Wyo ................ John Day River, Colum- 31. lumbia River, Oreg. and Wash. ............. 1661 14. bia River Basin, Oreg. . Lower Grande Ronde Res- 32. Snake River downstream 1646 from Johnson Bar Land- 15. L ervoir, Oreg ........... ing, Oreg., Wash., and SLuc ky Peak Reservoir, 1662 1646 Idaho ................ 16. Boise River, Idaho .. : SIVill Creek Reservoir, 33. Other authorized multiple- W ash . ................ 1647 purpose project includ- 17 Milton-Freewater, Walla ing power ............ 1664 8. alla River, Wash. 1648 General Investigations Portneuf River and Marsh 34. Surveys ................ 1664 Creek Columbia River Basin, Idaho .......... 1649 35. Collection and study of 1664 19. Rilrie Reservoir, Willow basic data ............ Creek, Idaho.......... 1650 36. Research and development 1664 1. COLUMBIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES ABOVE CELILO FALLS TO KENNEWICK, WASH. of Location. Project includes improvement of 128 miles Columbia River between head of Celilo Falls and Kennewick, ash. (See Geological Survey map of Washington.) Previous project. For details see page 1992 of Annual Report or 1915; page 1889, Annual Report for 1931; and page 1845, Anual Report for 1938. 1636 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Existing project. A channel 7 feet deep and 150 feet wide t low water from Celilo Falls to Wallula, with no specified depth or width between Wallula and mouth of Snake River and for a approach channel 6 feet deep at low water from navigation cha nel in Columbia River to site of port development at Arling d Oreg. Incomplete channel rectification work at Owyhee Rapidy Squally Hook, and Indian Rapids, is classified inactive. Et mated cost (1954) of this portion is $419,000. Constructionool The Dalles Dam and raising reservoir provided a slackwaterPoOl extending upriver to site of John Day Dam and provided ai.col water over lower 25 miles of original project. Creation of Pol behind McNary Dam (river mile 292) provided slackwater over upper 36 miles of original project. Remaining reach of river included in this project is comprised of about 67 miles of open river between The Dalles pool and McNary Damn. UPOe creation of pool behind John Day Dam, slackwater will alSO d provided over this reach of river, and project will be obviated Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents' Apr. 8,1935 Emergency Relief Appropriation Act authorized existing Rivers and Harbors Committee Do* project as an emergency relief project. 16, 73d Cong., 2d sess. Aug. 30, 1935 Adopted existinR project as a river and harbor project ....... Do. Mar. 2, 1945 Arlington approach channel.... .................... S. Doe. 28, 76th Cong., 1st ses Do...... Kennewick approach channel............................I. Dc. 324, 77th Cong., t18 x Contains latest published map. SConstruction of McNary Dam has obviated necessity for this work. Local cooperation. River and Harbor Act of 1945 provide' that for Arlington Channel, local interests construct a suitable freight terminal, open to all equally. Assurances were approyed December 29, 1947, but site will be inundated when pool is raisto behind John Day lock and dam. Port of Arlington agreed to provide adequate public terminal facilities after pool is raised. Terminal facilities. On Columbia River from Celilo to 1IcNarY lock and dam there are five privately owned grain and oil ter- minals with connections to truck and rail. Facilities are ade quate for existing commerce. Above McNary lock and damn are five publicly owned terminals which handle general cargo an are open for public use. These terminals are adequate for exist ing commerce, and general development is keeping pace W1 increasing demands. In addition, there are 15 privately owne terminals serving grain, petroleum, and chemical industrie' Also there are five commercial marinas. Operations and results during fiscal year. On Columbia River, reconnaissance and condition surveys of navigation channel fro", NcNary lock and dam to John Day lock and dam site were col" ducted in August 1965. No dredging was required. - Condition at end of fiscal year. Authorized 7-foot channel 150 feet wide, is complete to McNary lock and dam. For tht portion of project in McNary pool and The Dalles pool, depths are in excess of 7 feet with minimum depth of 15 feet over uPPer lock sills. Arlington approach channel was completed in 19 4S. FLOOD CONTROL--WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1637 Costs of existing project were $1,356,584 for new work and 990,976 for maintenance, a total of $2,347,560 regular funds. Cost and financial statement 'al YearTotal to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 year. ............ 1962 ork.l ...................................... Few $1,851,195 co.Priated........... .. ........ ...... 11,851,195 t ........ ................................................ $28,982 $47,157 $1,914 $2,500 21,091,805 P)tr ated...........$33,641 760 29d471e10919805 39,441 5,370 l. ..... ... 33,152 contributed funds. flnCludes $494,611 for previous projects, but excludes $25,000 des $100,830 for maintenance on previous projects. 2. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECT [full report Cost to N see Annual June 30, 1966 Name of project Report for for- construction atilla arbor, Oreg' .. ................................... . .............. 1................ No funds appropriated for work. Inactive. 3* NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION 86-645 Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law (preauthorization) Fiscal year cost of preauthorization studies for Snake River avigation channel vicinity of Weiser, Idaho, was $21,918. 4. BLACKFOOT RESERVOIR, BLACKFOOT RIVER, IDAHO 'Location On Blackfoot River in Caribou County, Idaho, about 40 miles southeast of city of Blackfoot. (SeeFlat, Geological Survey Uadrangle sheets Paradise Valley, Cranes Portneuf, and er.ry for location and surroundings inm immediate vicinity of Droject) eisting project Dam and reservoir is owned and operatedby of Indian Affairs, Department of In- tr Hall Agency of Bureauis 52 feet high, is a rockfill structure terior Main dam, which core. A low earthfill dike known as toChina Hat btl a concretearm of reservoir near its upstream end minimize am closes an orage loss due to seepage in pervious formation of that area. aki dam structure includes a spillway min right abutment and an 0 uItlet tunnel in left abutment. Reservoir has a usable storage eapacity of 413,000 acre-feet at design maximum water surface elevation 6124. H owever, due to experience with seepage losses ro-m southern end of reservoir, and past demands foror water, about Derating level has been limited to about elevation 6120, 40,000 acre-feet storage capacity. Water stored min reservoir is sed to irrigate lands in Fort Hall Indian Reservation in vicinity S lackfoot and south. Recommended modlification of project capacity by oUld provide 38,000 acre-feet additional storage 1638 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 raising concrete core wall of main dam 6 feet, reshaping earth an d rock dam around core, modifying spillway and outlet workd be raising China Hat Dam 8 feet. New earthfill dikes also woutrol required across two other southern arms of reservoir to co seepage. By removal of these minor arms from reservoir are g is anticipated that seepage problems experienced when opera n between elevations 6120 and 6124 would not be aggravated ld could be mitigated to some extent. These modifications woVu permit operation of reservoir for flood control to a maxinuma- water surface elevation of 6126, and remove difficulties of irrigt tion storage use to 6124. Spillway capacity would be increasel 5 7,000 cubic feet per second by lowering crest elevation from 61d to 6113 and installing new gates. Outlet works to be modernid and rehabilitated, with a capacity of 2,700 cubic feet per second to work more adequately for flood control operation. RecOn mended modification was authorized by Flood Control Act O 1962. Construction to be accomplished by the Corps, With sti- tinued operation of project by Bureau of Indian Affairs. s mated Federal cost of proposed modifications (July 1966) $978,000. Local cooperation. None required. e- Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation o of sign memorandum No. 1, hydrology, leading to establishmein o a standard project flood and maximum probable flood deter m3o tion progressed. Preparation of general design memoran .. 2 was started.. No.Condition at end of fiscal year. Modification of dam and re.'- voir in interest of increased flood control for Blackfoot Vertr Basin was first presented as a potential project in review rred for Upper Snake River Basin dated 1961, which was prepa re jointly by Walla Walla District and Regional Office of Bureauoed Reclamation in Boise, Idaho. That review report was authorid by a Senate resolution adopted March 19, 1954, which requesWteith review of House Document 531, 81st Congress, 2d session, y particular reference to Upper Snake River Basin above We Idaho. In referenced review report, modification of Blacl cets Dam and Reservoir was presented as one of the potential proJe 0 t warranting early consideration for construction. Interim rePted No. 2 on modification of Blackfoot Dam and Reservoir, da March 1962, included additional information and analysil.St February 1962 floods and confirmed project economic feasibllt. It is on this latter report that congressional authorizationei based. Design memorandum 1, hydrology, is about 93 per e complete. Foundation exploration drilling at China Hlat aDfM and at Blackfoot Dam is complete. General design memorandU 2 is about 86 percent complete. No construction has been done. FLOOD CONTROL--WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1639 N.ar Total to a 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NwWork- Ap r riated..$46,000 $24,000 $70,000 38230 64208 S ................................ 2,78 5. BOISE VALLEY, COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, IDAHO SLocation. Proposed project is on Boise River in intermittent eaches of channel from vicinity of Boise, Idaho, river mile 52, ownstream to Snake River, river mile 0. LExisting project. Previous emergency flood control projects .ave been accomplished at various locations on this portion of IVer. Plan provides for raising existing levees and structures S existing hydraulic design criteria. It also provides for con- Struction of levees in reaches where protection does not presently xst. Project was conditionally authorized under Columbia tiVer Basin plan by section 204, Flood Control Act of 1950, subject Seco10mic justification. Economic justification was established l fiscal year 1962. Portion of project in Canyon County from t'ver mile 1 to 37 is in inactive status due to inability of local in- terests to meet sponsorship requirements. Estimated cost of Ada County unit (July 1966) is $714,000 Federal and $18,400 lr1t-Pederal for rights-of-way and relocation of utilities. Esti- Elated Federal cost of inactive Canyon County unit (July 1962) S$652,800 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936, as amended, applies. The officials of Ada County furnished a letter of intent to sponsor portion of project in Ada County. Operations and results during fiscal year. Continued protests Flish and Wildlife Service and by Idaho State Department of sh and Game against Ada County portion of project delayed tart of preparation of plans and specifications. Meetings con- t1ued to be held to resolve problems and correct misinformation. SCondition at end of fiscal year. A general design memorandum or Ada County portion of project is approved by higher authority. fforts continue to make minor revisions in project plans in order to satisfy all local interests. Ada County is acquiring sig- latures of all landowners in project area to show their intent of rlishing rights-of-way. Before preparation of plans and speci- cations can be started, further action will be necessary in con- tliation of borrow areas and in final coordination with fish and ildlife interests. No construction has been done. Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 1965 1Consists of Ada County unit, $45,386; inactive Canyon County unit, $10,600. 1640 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 6. CATHERINE CREEK RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On Catherine Creek about 8 miles above Union, 7, Township 5 South, Range 41 East, Willamette Oreg., in Section Meridian. Existing project. Dam will be an earth embankment withan impervious core protected by sand and gravel filters. Shell s of rial will consist of granular fill covered with substantial zone by rockfill on outside surfaces. Upstream face will be protected b riprap. Effective height will be about 197 feet and crest lent P Ybe in a saddle in left abutment abot 790 feet. A spillway• will oot 1,000 feet from dam. Spillway will have three 15- by s18.:1o n tainter gates, having a capacity of 11,740 cfs. Reservoir Will con- tain 61,000 acre-feet of water with 58,000 acre-feet of usable space at elevation 3440. Improvement will provide for flood COn- trol, irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply, water quality control, fish and wildlife, recreation, and downstrlem hydroelectric power. Project was authorized by 1965 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost (July 1966) is $8,520,000 Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Funds have not been apP" priated for this project nor included in fiscal year 1967 budget. 7. COLFAX, PALOUSE RIVER, WASH. River Location. On Palouse River and South Fork of Palouse ein at and adjacent to their confluence and on Spring Flat Creek eastern Washington.int SExisting project. Provides for flood control works in vicdini' of and through Colfax, Wash., by channel enlargement and mo1i- fication, levees, floodwalls, revetments, and modification ofrald road bridges. Existing project was authorized by 1944 o Control Act (H. Doc. 888, 77th Cong., 2d sess.). Federal costo completed project is $5,546,200. Estimated non-Federal ciost are $298,000 for lands and damages, relocations and modificatol to existing facilities. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ec Operations and results during fiscal year. Construction Of see ond unit-South Fork Palouse River and Spring Flat Creek sites-was completed. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started in Ja"n uary 1962 and was finished in December 1965. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June '966... New work: 646 200 Appropriated..........$350,000$1,100,000 $603,000$1,995,0001802,4 $3546,2 Cost................. 130,589 1,362,723 878,629 1,851,825 148,004 1 Includes an assumed revocation of $7,507 surplus funds to completed project. FLOOD CONTROL--WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1641 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS Total to lYear...............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Nwwork. Contributed ............................. $40,000 $4,500....... $44,500 cot................. 11331 32,484 $685 44,500 8. COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, LOCAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECTS Location. Improvements included in this project are along OUmbia River and its tributaries. e. risting project. Flood Control Act of 1950 approved a gen- rl comprehensive plan for Columbia River Basin for flood con- and other purposes (H. Doc. 531, 81st Cong., 2d sess.) and col athorized $75 million to be appropriated for partial accom- 9 shnent of certain projects. Of this authorization, not to ex- ceed $15 million was authorized for construction of local flood o0tection works throughout Columbia River Basin, subject to Colditions that all work undertaken pursuant to this authority shall be economically justified prior to construction, and local co- eration specified in 1936 Flood Control Act, as amended, shall ,. required. Protection to following areas, in Walla Walla Dis- isst,considered under 1950 authorization: Status June 30, 1966 Project Estimated Federal cost Appropriated Cost 'l Area, Snake River, Idaho .......................... 2,796 ,r t ,eIdaho lkoie 0]is Ver, Idahol.... ..................................... . .391,143 391,143 nt3 ......................................... 'AC ounty Unit3 1 10 $$714,000 8 4 04 48,400 , 8 45,386 C on County ..................................... nit4 .652,800 10,600 10,600 doubtful)S .............................. ... 8,3,0 .666.' 9,080 9,080 Onde(feasibility te-1 as Ceek or 1 Valley? Oreg. 6............................... 0,5 0,5 e sxte bl'... ............. . 8,639,009,08 1 ,,04 Idaho0 3 ................................. ion, Idaho 200,377 179,548 bOberts • Extension, 3 . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,250,000 XeZdi 'YRiver Area, Oreg. .... 626,000 83,232 777,365 P otlateh 4ttleer Wood River, Idahoi ................................ (2) 59,941 59,941 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64,000 River, Idaho (Carey) 8 ............................. .... 21,334 21,334 4 l ala Wala River, Wash. (not feasible) .. 4,000 4,000 *-Vale . SRiver, Oreg. nit, o.......................... . . ....... (2) , 0 () ()338,580 338,50 ,.. . . ....... . 338,580 8..38j580 ill " Cr eek Jnit 10.......... Creek . . . . . . .to266,000. .... . . ................ . . . . .Uitt 9 . . . . . ..... ........ .............. eeke Wash. (not feasible) . . . . . . 3,37537 9 . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P,, Use River, Idaho e Area,W ash (not feasible) ................. .....o ................... 8 4 0,0 0 .. ... o.... .... .,996 . . . . . . 5,996 . . . tt Valley, Idaho s................................................. 23,178 23,178 nouf River and Marsh Creek, Idaho Po t .................................... 6,800,000 688,276 419,631 tlloMrk Unit ........ O............................ .. 750,000. ey m-Area Snake River, dho . 1 32335. 50,000................................. 32,335 TetF rk, Clearwater River, Idahol 9. . . ......................................... . . ......... .... ........ .............. 3,899 3.899 T01chever, Idaho (not feasible) 9o. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. 10,387 10,38 tRtill iver. Wash. (not feasible) 11,198 11,198 879,000 24,145 24,145 Welatie.1lRiver.O ver, 1 12................................ reg. (Echo)1 1dahol 0........................................ 1,180,000 88,427 1388,427 i Creek. Idahol I ..................................................... 1,896 1,896 Total ............................................................ 2,205,215 1,906,860 c eDorted under "Other authorized flood control projects." 4etosIlleted project. ~P1e0onomic justification of work inproposed was established in compliance with conditions in 4' Control Act of 1950. Reported detail in an individual report. % active, 5 year limitation on project authorization began April 18, 1962. ! etive, 5 year limitation on project authorization reached March 23. 1965. ? ~erred for restudy. pncludes $17,000 spent on unfeasible otnotes continued next page. areas. 1642 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 8 Inactive, 5 year limitation on project authorization reached April 21, 1965. 9 Inactive. Inactive. Lacks local cooperation. o10 n Construction of emergency work at this location has obviated need for project. 2 Inactive, 5 year limitation on project authorization reached November 19, 1964. 18Includes $74,800 spent on unfeasible Cambridge and Midvale areas. Note. This list does not include improvements in Portland and Seattle Districts. June 22, Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of 1936, as amended, applies to all flood control projects. i* Operations and results during fiscal year. Costs were r curred on the following fully authorized projects which arn; re ported in detail in individual reports: Boise Valley, Idaho Heise-Roberts Extension, Idaho; John Day River AreaOre and Portneuf River and Marsh Creek, Idaho. Condition at end of fiscal year. The following projects5are reported in detail in individual reports: Boise Valley, Idaho; Heise-Roberts Extension, Idaho; John Day River Area, Ore k o and Portneuf River and Marsh Creek, Idaho. Due to lac of funds, no work has been done on Palouse River, Wash., sice project was conditionally authorized. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 To i,166 New work: 7 Appropriated........... ........... ............ ............ ............ ............ 173,11 Cost.................. ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ SComprises following conditionally authorized projects: Camas Creek, Idaho; LowerWash.; Walla River, Wash.; Mill Creek, Wash.; Mud Lake Area, Idaho; Palouse River' Tou Payette Valley, Idaho; South Fork, Clearwater River, Idaho; Teton River, Idaho; horie River, Wash.; and Whitebird Creek, Idaho. Excludes projects reported under "Other. ValleY flood projects". Excludes projects reported in detail in an individual report: 13oiiv0era d Idaho; HIeise-Roberts Extension, Idaho; John Day River Area, Oreg.; and Portneuf vSeatie Marsh Creek, Idaho. Does not include amounts for improvements in Portland an Districts. 9. CONNELL, WASH. Location. In Franklin County at bottom of Esquatzel Coulee' Existing project. Plan involves main channel ofEsquat Coulee and side drainage. Improvement of main channel cet sists of 21/2 miles of channel stabilization and enlargemn ile throughout entire area. Side drainage consists of one-half ra1l of channel and levees designed to direct any flow from natural canyon east of Connell to a low depression south of Connell' Project was selected for construction by Chief of Engineers a 16, 1963, authority of section 205, 1948 Flood Control Act,s amended. Federal cost of physically completed project is $2, 958. Non-Federal cost is estimated to be $81,000 for right way, relocation of utilities and a Washington State highwaY bridge. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Operations and results during fiscal year. A contract coil tinued and work was completed January 27, 1966. Liquidated damages were assessed the contractor for time beyond the sche uled completion date of December 13, 1965. FLOOD CONTROL-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction started in June 65 and was physically completed in January 1966. Final set- with contractor remains to be made. t 1ent Cost and financial statement 16%93 16rTotal to .Year .... 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 -- work.: New $20,000 $299950 -$63,300 $296,650 . ...... $40000 coPropriated 30,331 15,168 226,679 288,958 6,998.. ,791 10. DAYTON, TOUCHET RIVER, WASH. Location. On both banks of Touchet River, through city of northeast of Walla Walla, Wash. a Yton, 25 miles earth and gravel I tiiting project. Construction of revetted channel through city of be'es and enlargement and straightening prtects Dayton against floods with a discharge than Project 1.5 as great as that of maximum flood of record which by 1941 Flood OCCUrred in 1931. Existing project was authorized t is, $380,6.17.) ll . I 4t i otrol Act. Federal cost of completed project is $380,617. relo- ~hfiated non-Federal cost is $3,700 for rights-of-way and aton of utilities. LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. 0 fiscal year. Perationsand results duringmcal d buit drawings "As built" "As \vlre Prepared. suu wea. pdiretpion at end of fiscal year. Construction started in May ,, and project was completed in March 1965 except for as ilt drawings prepared this fiscal year. Cost and financial statement S Year 1Total to 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 .1..9............. WWork: $32,000 $256742 $59,000 -$18,567 $380,617 oprt .... $5,000 380,617 32,484 270,747 14 ,94i6t1..........33,190 11. HIIEISE-ROBERTS EXTENSION, COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, IDAHO of Roberts and Location On Snake River, Idaho, between city This general area outh of Henrys Fork, river mile 819 to 836. es about 20 miles north of city of Idaho Falls, Idaho. provides channel rectification and S 'isting project. Planof Snake River from river mile 819 to ees along both banks Proposed channel de- 6 With intermittent riprap protection. cubic 1 capacities are based on a project design flood of 33,000 DtPer second in Snake River. Project was conditionally au- rizedunder Columbia Basin plan by section 204, 1950 estab- Flood S1 \trol Act, subject to economic justification which was hed in 1963. Estimated cost of project (July 1966) is $2,250,- . Federal and $73,500 non-Federal for rights-of-way and relo- lo1ns. 1644 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 1936, as amended, applies. dg Operations and results during fiscal year. General desi- memorandum was completed. Preparation of plans and specifi tions started. . aedqd Condition at end of fiscal year. Project is fully authorlizednaly general design memorandum has been approved. All preliilie surveys are complete including property lines and sectiolti~tn Foundation explorations are 80 percent complete and found tio and materials design work is 70 percent complete. Construt0 r plans are 32 percent complete with real estate drawings 8 per.i cent complete. Local sponsors fulfilled their required obliga are and are ready to obtain easements when real estate drawilgs ar complete. Specifications are about 15 percent complete, he been delayed pending final refinement of designs. No construc tion has been done. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 june 30P196 New work: 400 Appropriated..................... $5,000 $75,000............ 100,000 95 cost...... .... ........ .......... 27,550 28,995 102,626 12. JACKSON HOLE, SNAKE RIVER, WYO. Location. On both banks of Snake River near Wilson, WY o Existing project. A levee with full riprap protection onri bank, extending from J. Y. Ranch, which is 10 miles ups trA from Jackson-Wilson Highway Bridge to 3.5 miles below i bridge-a total length of 13.5 miles. Also provides a levee ie full riprap protection along left bank, extending from north.Io of Lucas Ranch, which is 10 miles upstream from Jackson-Wiles Highway Bridge to 5 miles downstream and extending 1.5 ~ to immediately upstream from Jackson-Wilson Highway Bridgeted 3.5 miles below bridge for a total length of 10 miles. EstiniS500 cost of project (July 1965) is $2,230,000 Federal and $18, non-Federal consisting of rights-of-way furnished by sponsor. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. _ ls Operations and results during fiscal year. Design floodfl of 15,000 cfs for riprap protection were experienced during spr_ ee of 1965. Direct lateral flow of the river attacked the le previously constructed in three isolated locations requirin* emergency repairs to preclude an avulsion. Since stream el e tions did not completely follow design criteria, a study is bei made to determine the adequacy of present improvements. . Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction was initiated6 November 1957 and project essentially completed in May 19 except for possible corrective work being considered. FLOOD CONTROL-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1645 Cost and financial statement YTotal to Il year 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1966 June 30, Nwwork. PPropriated..........$50,000 $20,000 $626,000 .. ..... . ....... $2,235,000 " ................. 27,872 14,360 644,741 $7,154. $1590 2230,178 13. JOHN DAY RIVER, COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, OREG. Location At intermittent locations along John Day River, rea from Spray, river mile 167, to a point above city of John ay, near river mile 143 and along lower 12 miles of North Fork Of John Day River and lower 4 miles of South Fork of John Day RiVer. Existing project. A general design memorandum dated De- ceMber 15 1963, shows two areas with required economic justifi- cation. Area "1" begins immediately below town of Mount Vernon, river mile 233, and extends upstream for 2 miles. Area 24"begins about one-half mile below city of John Day, river mile 241, and extends upstream 1.5 miles through John Day and up- strearn .7 mile along Canyon Creek which converges with John )ay River in city of John Day. Project was conditionally au- horized under Columbia River Basin plan by section 204, Flood Control Act of 1950, subject to economic justification which was established in 1962. Estimated cost (July 1966) is $626,000 Fed- eral and $101,300 non-Federal for rights-of-way, 1rrigation facili- ties, bridge alterations, utilities, and relocations. These amounts illclude only the two areas found to be economically feasible. Local cooperation. Section 3, Flood Control Act of June 22, 1936 as amended, applies. After submission of general design letiorandum, officials of Grant County and city of John Day tirnlished statements of inability to meet sponsorship require- ents due to unanticipated local financial problems. Five-year aitation on project authorization began April 8, 1964. Follow- 1 the December 1964 and January 1965 floods, local interests requested project be reclassified to "active" category. Office of Chief of Engineers approved reactivation April 22, 1965. Operations and results during fiscal year. Preparation of a revised general design memorandum by an architect-engineer firm Was initiated and is in progress. Condition at end of fiscal year. Revision to general design 1ernorandum is about 70 percent complete. No construction has been done. Cost and financial statement 1646 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 14. LOWER GRANDE RONDE RESERVOIR, OREG. Location. On Grande Ronde River about 11 miles upstreanl from city of La Grande in Union County, Oreg., in sectiOnS i, and 12, Township 3 South, Range 36 East, Willamette Meridi n' Existing project. Dam will be an earth embankment structure with an impervious core protected by sand and gravel filtersi Shell material will consist of granular fill covered with substanti l zones of rockfill on outside surfaces. Upstream face of dafin l be protected by riprap. Effective height will be about 184 feet and crest length 2,270 feet. Spillway will be in a channel cut in rock thru left abutment and consist of an ungated concrete ogee section with a capacity of 31,500 cfs. Reservoir will store 160,000 acre-feet of water, with 152,000 acre-feet of usable space at elevation 3218. Reservoir will be about 6 miles long. Id" provement will provide for flood control irrigation, municipal d industrial water supply, fish and wildlife, recreation, and do 'e stream hydroelectric power generation. Project was authoried by 1965 Flood Control Act. Estimated Federal cost is 300,000. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. None. Condition at end of fiscal year. Funds have not been appro priated for this project nor included in fiscal year 1967 budget. 15. LUCKY PEAK RESERVOIR, BOISE RIVER, IDAHO Location. On Boise River in southwestern Idaho about 10 miles southeast of city of Boise, and about 12 miles downstream from Arrowrock Reservoir.h Existing project. A rolled-earthfill dam about 250 feet high and 1,700 feet long at crest, with a reservoir providing a de-total storage at normal pool level of 306,000 acre-feet. For further de- tails see page 2000 of Annual Report for 1962. Project waS thorized by 1946 Flood Control Act. Federal cost of compleen project was $19,081,250. Construction of additional recreation facilities for completed project is estimated to cost $260,000v raising total project estimate to $19,341,250. Local cooperation. None required. I ,m Operations and results during fiscal year. New work: C,0 struction of recreation facilities and planning for future develo ment continued. Additional land was acquired for recreationo purposes. Maintenance: Normal operation and maintenanceO project continued. Reservoir water quality studies were co" tinued. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of existing prOJ, ect was initiated in November 1949 and completed in June 1961 Improvement and enlargement of recreation facilities by Federl agencies and local interests continue. FLOOD CONTROL--WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1647 Cost and financial statement Na Ye Total to *1.. .aYear 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 SWork.- 2 zt e.. $15,300 $36,000 $130,974 1094 $'419 $1726 - ' ' -$3,550 1$19,321,700 cos A~Poriated.......... $1,0 3,0 k ela 'n*............... 10,881 29,429 33,656 132,210 7,713 219,313,977 ,Aenance. l~ro'ri'.: a[ o n[ 0,9,600 ] 97,000 [ 123,100 I 941,4 95,500 9,00 9,00 123,100941740 00 3t.P isted ............ 91600 90,466 74,112 123,977 81,881 15,8 920,760 ...... lides $240 450 allocated under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed projects. 'Incldes$232:727 expended under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed projects. 16. MILL CREEK RESERVOIR, WASH. Location. In and upstream from Walla Walla, Wash., on Mill Creek, a tributary of Walla Walla River. f isting project. Off-stream storage dam, outlet works, diver- io1 Works, and diversion structure were authorized by 1938 Flood ofltrol Act. Channel through city of Walla Walla was added to DroJect by 1941 Flood Control Act (II. Doc. 719, 76th Cong., 3d ess.). For further details see page 2005 of Annual Report for f62. Completed project cost $2,162,155. funds),Recreation facilities ocompleted project cost $68,446 (Corps raising total oJect cost to $2,230,601. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Ordinary operations ad aintenance by local interests for calendar year 1965 were lDrforred at a cost of $150,000. Total expenditures to date by 0ocal interests are $553,182. For further details see page 2006 OfAnnual Report for 1962. aOperations and results during fiscal year. A contract was ,-Warded for construction of a vault-type toilet in the recreation rea. Ordinary general maintenance by Government forces con- tlued which included routine regulation of reservoir and care of recreation area. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of dam and ap- lrtenant works was completed in 1942. Paving channel through it of Walla Walla was completed in 1948. Park and recreation aeilitieswere opened to public July 1, 1964. For dates of minor arovements, relocations, and extraordinary maintenance see cge 2006 of Annual Report for 1962. Cost and financial statement to Total ........... 1962 19 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 09ropriate.d $3,524 $22,000 $6,000 $4,000 -$78 12$2,230,601 o ........... *...... 7,713 42,986 9,334 5,365............132,230,601 enance: ,' D r ri t .......... .I copriated...22,000 " I ..26,800 25,800 44,200 30,600 818,870 o .............. 21,854 24,710 27,347 33,195 35,948 812,494 S1Xludes $80,000 contributed funds. S. 6446 a lluotted under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed projects. $8lude lcludes $68,4416 expended under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed projects. 1648 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 17. MILTON-FREEWATER, WALLA WALLA RIVER, OREG. Location. On both banks of Walla Walla River between Joe West and McCoy bridges near Milton-Freewater, Oreg., 8 mi south of Walla Walla, Wash. cation Existing project. Initial plan provided for channel rectificatnear and improvement of about 7 miles of Walla Walla River near l Milton-Freewater (formerly towns of Milton and FreeWte , Oreg., at time of initial project authorization). Lower 5.3 miler between McCoy Bridge and Milton-Freewater powerplWannel to be protected by levees with necessary revetment and chaniles improvement designed for a flood of 18,600 cfs. Upper 1.7 mest extending from Milton-Freewater powerplant upstream to joe We Bridge were to be improved by some channel clearing. frer Freewater and other lower-lying areas extending from f-were town of Milton to McCoy Bridge in Walla Walla River Valley s intended to be protected from floods with discharge two timet. oof great as that of maximum flood of record. Serious deterior18 of riprap has occurred during past few years, and high flo s December 1964 and January 1965 peaked at 9,300 cfs .n neet- massive damage to levees. Subsequent determinations I.n ade ings with OCE and NPD indicate that existing project is ect quate for a flow of 18,600 cfs. Proposed rehabilitation of p.rodr will provide protection from flows of 12,000 cfs. Revised Yonce logical data indicates these flows to have a frequency occuIrrct of 170 years. Project was authorized by 1941 Flood Controt as (H. Doc. 719, 76th Cong., 3d sess.). Initial cost of projecas, placed in operation in fiscal year 1956 is $886,956 Federal fUand $59,600 for lands and damages paid for by local interests ecn- $6,300 contributed funds. Additional Federal cost for reobe struction under initial project authorization is estimated 99 t1 $800,000, plus $700,000 under authority of Public Law ',JulY Cong., and antecedent legislation, bringing total estimate n ral 1966) to $2,386,956 Federal funds, and $65,900 no -Fed funds. tially Local cooperation. Fully complied with for project as inly constructed. In addition, for rehabilitation, sponsoring ag ,d has furnished a quarry, partially cleared brush from levees, furnished assurances of maintenance.l3 Operations and results during fiscal year. Rehabilitation pla- ning report was completed, and preparation of plans and specifica tions started. to Condition at end of fiscal year. Project was turned overto sponsor in fiscal year 1956. Planning report is complete. ref and specifications for reconstruction and rehabilitation of a damaged by high floods are 80 percent complete. FLOOD CONTROL---WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1649 Cost and financial statement 1icaYe Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 N Work. DrOpated. ................................................ $20,000 22,755 1$906,956 12889,712 ..... ................................................ ,cludes $6,800 contributed funds. 1ad6di io lt$89,067 was spent from funds authorized by Public Law 99. 84th Cong.. and ent legislation. 18 PORTNEUF RIVER AND MARSH CREEK, COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN, IDAHO .Location. At three areas along Portneuf River and along en- Ilahength of its main tributary, Marsh Creek, all in southeastern s isting project. Original authorization provides for channel Saghtening and improvement, removal of obstructions, and con- Sctlionofnew levees and revetments or improvements to exist- a levees in Blackrock area, in and adjacent to city of Pocatello, fo ir icinity of Inkom, all on Portneuf River. Plan also provides r .channel improvement along lower 39 miles of Marsh Creek. 1oec)Ject was conditionally authorized under Columbia River Basin 4at by 1950 Flood Control Act subject to economic justification. p tification for Pocatello unit was established in fiscal year 1953. I for Pocatello unit was modified by design memorandum No. l1brlitted July 22, 1964, which provides for a rectangular con- te channel thru city of Pocatello with revetted levee at either ~w here development is less extensive. Estimated cost of 0 catello 41iit%p for(July unit 1966) is .$6,800,000 rights-of-way Inomashal . Federal . and . $481,700 . t'ederal for rights-of-way, a new bridge, and relocation of Ities Inkom-Marsh Creek unit is considered inactive and exclUded from foregoing estimate. Estimated cost of this unit lJY 1964) is $750,000 Federal and $38,000 non-Federal for 5 and damages and relocations. 0 ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. Perations and results during fiscal year. Plans and specifi- tios for Pocatello Unit were completed and a construction con- et Was awarded. i" Ondition at end of fiscal year. Construction of Pocatello Unit t~cheduled to start early in fiscal year 1967. Local interests in ,areas have expressed little desire to participate in plan of oer rOvement of inactive Inkom-Marsh Creek Unit, and economic "tification has not been established. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS 982 1963 1964 1965 1650 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS 1962 1963 1064 1965 1966 year................ Fiscal New work: $300 Appropriated....................... ....................... ............ $36,800. Cost.......................................... .............................. 19. RIRIE RESERVOIR, WILLOW CREEK, IDAhO Location. On Willow Creek, a tributary of Snake River Bonneville County, Idaho. Proposed channel improvelevter tends from junction of Sand and Willow Creeks to Sna3ke te about 4 miles upstream from city of Idaho Falls, Idaho.te e Geological Survey quadrangle map, Ucon, Idaho.) Damsidov about 5 miles below confluence of Willow Creek and 1Veao. Creek and about 15 miles northeast of city of Idaho Falls, Ia'O' (See Geological Survey quadrangle map, Poplar, Idaho.) 40 feet Existing project. Provides for a rockfill dam about8 d w long at the crest and 184 feet high above foundation an d roCk stream channel construction. Spillway will be an unlined r ed channel in right abutment Outlet works will be a re l hve concrete conduit at the toe of left abutment. Reservoir will Ive gross capacity of 100,000 acre-feet; 90,000 acre-feet of 80000 storage for flood control, irrigation and recreation; and tion* acre-feet dead storage for sediment storage and conservatity Floodway channel will be about 8.2 miles long and have a caFloodC of 900 efs. Existing project was authorized by 1962 Fed- Control Act (II. Doc. 562, 87th Cong., 2d sess.). Estimatedfnds, eral cost of new work (July 1966) is $12,800,000 Corps and $53,000 for value of public-owned lands. Local cooperation. None required. a-r Operations and results during fiscal year. Design nmemo 66. dum No. 1, hydrology, was completed and submitted in April eti Design memorandum No. 2, project scoping and site selecti submitted in June 1965, is being reviewed by OCE. Ited memorandum No. 3, general design, was completed and submster in April 1966. Design memorandum 11A, preliminary moved plan, was completed and submitted in February 1966 and appro by letter dated April 4, 1966. e Condition at end of fiscal year. General design studies haS been completed and work on feature design memorandums been started. No construction work has been done. Cost and financial statement year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 16g New work: $96003 Appropriated.......... ............ $75,000 $386,177 $24,0,061 $258,800 933 Cost.................. ............ 62,964 276,713 242,767 35 1,087 20. WILLOW CREEK RESERVOIR, HIEPPNER, OREG. Location. Ieppner Dam site is on Willow Creek directlY i^ stream from Heppner and just downstream from junctiOl FLOOD CONTROL-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1651 4e Pork and Willow Creek in Section 35, Township 2 South, a 26 East Willamette meridian. feet 4isting project. Dam will be a rockfill embankment about 155 32"t igh and an overall length of about 1,700 feet. Top will be a4eetWide with crest elevation of 2125. Spillway will be in an un- ab4t 130-foot concrete ogee section in a rockcut channel left tootlent. A flood control outlet will consist of an ungated 37- ab Wide slot in center of spillway ogee. Outlet will discharge o 1efs. Channel improvement will provide a channel Iaacity1,500 eaout of1acity of 1,500 cfs through city of HIeppner for a total distance a 2 miles. An irrigation outlet will consist of a 30-inch di- 0 eter pipe in a 6-foot diameter concrete access Vo conduit. Reser- WithIll have a gross storage of 10,200 acre-feet at elevation 2098, O a surface area of 224 acres, and extend 1.45 miles up Willow Ve carmn and 1 mile up Balm Fork arm. Improvement will pro- ijgfood control, irrigation, water quality control, municipal and astrial water supply, and recreation. Project construction was (a rized by Flood Control Act of 1965. Estimated Federal cost 4 1966) $7,640,000. oal cooperation. Local interests will provide lands, ease- Drv 5, rights-of-way, and relocations required for the channel im- e Venent. hold United States free from damages; and prevent iteroachments on channel downstream of dam which would reduce flood carrying capacity. CPerations and results during fiscal year. None. ppOndition at end of fiscal year. Funds have not been appro- ated for this project nor included in fiscal year 1967 budget. 21 INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS ill n completion of construction, projects authorized subject to cified conditions of local cooperation are transferred to respon- Wlt ocal interests for operation and maintenance in accordance d requirements of authorizing legislation. Inspections are give todetermine compliance of local interests with assurances on regarding operation and maintenance and the physical dition of the improvements. Local interests were advised, as eeSsary, of measures required to maintain these projects in ac- .ance with the standards prescribed by the regulations. 1ber of projects inspected in various river basins: e ' Number of bain projects Month inspected akfoot ................................... 1 September 1965 ater .................................. 2 February 1966 itat eelCoulee ....................... .. 1 February 1966 e W ood ................................. 2 May 1966 eur .0 o0 0 o o0................1 September 1965 ,use 9................................. 2 February 1966 N latch ..................... ............. 1 February 1966 Ek on ............. o .0 ....... 2 June 1966 Te . a *oo.........................0.[: 5 March 1966 l .................. ............... 3 July 1965 tilla ........... .2 January 1966 Wa ......................... 4 January and ia March 1966 ..................................... 1 January 1966 1652 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Fiscal year costs were $9,312. Total cost to June 30, 1966, i $67,402. 22. SCHEDULING FLOOD CONTROL RESERVOIR OPERATIONS Coordination of functional regulation of non-Corps reser°l. was maintained under several authorities. Regulation o rli sades, Little Wood, and Anderson Ranch Reservoirs was c ree. nated under section 7, Flood Control Act of 1944. Formal ead ments in connection with operation thority for functional coordination ofofJackson reservoirs provid rck Lake, ArrO , of Reservoir, and Lake Lowell for flood control. Regulat for American Falls, Owyhee, Cascade, and Deadwood Reservoirets. r flood control was coordinated under informal arrange vet Provisions of Federal Power Commission's license to Idaho i of Co. were the basis for coordinating functional regulatioe Brownlee and Oxbow Reservoirs. In coordination with theper- reau of Reclamation, work continued in preparing a plan o er- ation for Bully Creek, Warm Springs, and Agency Valley 0es voirs in Malheur River Basin. Fiscal year costs were $10027 23. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS -Cost For last 30 o full report Name of project see Annual t Report co f" for- Arlington, Alkali Canyon, Oreg.... 2105043 ~ 3$236 Blackfoot Area, Snake River, Columbia River Basin, Idaho4 . . . . . .. . . . . 1958 918 4. . . . . ............. . . .......... . Blackfoot River, Columbia River Basin, Idaho 1965 10 38 Grande Ronde Valley, Columbia River Basin, Oreg...........................1058 1 9:91 Heise-Roberts area, Snake River, Idaho4........... 4 . ........................ .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 1955 . '5 . Kendrick, Potlatch River, 6Columbia River Basin, Idaho 960 19i0 Lewiston-Clarkston levees .............................. 1950 - 894 Little Wood River (Carey), Columbia River Basin, 4Idaho7.......................1960 Malheur Improvement District, Snake River, Oreg. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . bi g 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . Malheur River, Columbia River Basin, Oreg., Vale unit 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 1961 .. Malheur River, Columbia River Basin, Oreg., Wil!ow Creek units 1901 Mission and Lapwai Creeks, Idaho4 9.................. .......................... 19(65 ,. . Pendleton levees, Umatilla River, Oreg., Riverside area units....................... .. ............. 1960 7143' Pendleton levees, Umatilla River,4 Oreg., State Hospital and City area 1900 148 Pilot Rock, Umatilla Pendleton, River, Birch C;reek, Oreg. .... Oree.10. ....... ............. 19394P 1963 19'.3 Pilot Rock, Birch reek, re ................................................. 1953'13 Pullman, Palouse River, Wash.1 1. .......... 1964 3214 Shelley area, Snake River, Columbia 'iv.erBin,'Iah .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5 2, Umatilla River (Echo), Columbia River Basin, Oreg.12.... 1960 890 Weiser River, Columbia River Basin, Idaho8... .............................. 1960 3 Yakfma River, West Richland, Wash.4 9......................................... 1964 1Inactive. Necessity for development will be eliminated when John Day pool is raised. Co SReported by Portland District prior to 1951. w 5, 84th SIncludes $3,328 spent in fiscal year 1960 under authorization of Public Law 68 gress. See Annual Report for 1960, page 1887. SCompleted. gef 5 Deferred for restudy. SWithdrawn as a local flood protection project June 1959. Included as a feature of Granite lock and dam, Snake River, Wash. SInactive, 5 year limitation on project authorization reached April 21, 1965. * Inactive. Awaits local sponsorship. SAuthorized by Chief of Engineers. 10Inactive, 5 year limitation on project authorization began December 2, 1963. SInactive, 5 year limitation on project authorization began April 17, 1964. ISInactive, 5 year limitation on project authorization reached November 19, 1964. 13Includes an estimated $74.800 spent for planning on nonfeasible areas. MUL.-PURPOSE PROJ.-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1653 2~, LOOD CONTROL WORKS UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) Study identification Fiscal year costs reek, Kendrick, Idaho ............ **** .......... $1,458 ~ od and Little Wood Rivers, Richfield-Gooding, Idaho ... 12,007 qreek, Ririe, Idaho .......... C *........*............... 958 apzwel Coulee, Mesa, Wash................. ............ .. 668 wai Creek, Culdesac, Idaho......... .............. ..... 1,789 i a Creek, Sweetwater, Idaho. ........ * .... ......... 4,352 Lers Creek Kamiah, Idaho .............. ........... 13,117 o ill Cryek, Walla Walla, Wash ....................... 4,498 an Creek, Idaho ................... **.............. 1,406 tCreek, Rosalia, Wash .................... **............ 1,924 h euf River, Lava Hot Springs, Idaho .................... 12,875 tl rver, Stephens location, Blackfoot, Idaho .............. 3,371 o Clearwater River, Kooskia-Stites location, Idaho .. Irk 1,960 et River, Waitsburg, Wash................ ........... 729 ton River, Starbuck, Wash ... o....................14,012 oite"River, Camp Wooten, Wash ....................... 2,216 Canyon, Kennewick, Wash ........................... 4,253 igency flood control activities-repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Cong., and antecedent legislation) cost for fiscal year was $9,959 for advance preparation; 22 ed eral ,051 for flood emergency operations; and $179,514 for repair drestoration. cin and clearing navigable streams and tributariesin interest of flood ontol1 (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Cong.) Fiscal year 1 ROec and location costs Completed "River ......................... $43,558 October 1965 evray.River, S pray, Oreg ........... .23,477 November 1965 iver, Ba er, Oreg............ 20,075 November 1965 Emergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood ControlAct, . Public Law 526, 79th Cong.) ical year Federal costs were $988 for a preliminary report L ending emergency bank protection at Emmett City Sewage a, Payette River, Idaho, and $373 for levee repair on Tucan- 2lVer near Marengo, Wash. ] ORSHAK RESERVOIR, NORTH FORK CLEARWATER RIVER, lidQ IDAHO cilet ion. Damsite is on North Fork of Clearwater River 1.9 above its junction with Clearwater River, near Orofino, eIda , and about 35 miles east of Lewiston, Idaho. .ing project. Project as authorized is to provide a straight lQV,,t -gravity dam 630 feet in effective height at maximum pool ion 1600 and 3,300 feet long at crest. Dam will create a hi r with a gross storage capacity of 3,453,000 acre-feet, of S million acre-feet will be effective for both local and t'i0al u ati flood control, and for at-site and downstream power gen- a-In addition, reservoir pool, extending 53 miles into a D and relatively inaccessible timberland, will provide im- .,ittransportation savings inafford connection with movements of etable logs and will also substantial recreational 1654 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 b~~I benefits. Powerhouse will provide two 90,000 andts.-foone 220,000 ree id - kilowatt generating units initially, with provisions for tc'ity ditional 220,000 kilowatt units for an ultimate installed capur of 1,060,000 kilowatts. No significant runs of salmon Oclhead Clearwater River; however, considerable migrations of sted not trout are recorded at Washington Water Power Co. dam at Le ton, Idaho, near mouth of Clearwater River. Fish passage us feasible so a hatchery will be provided to mitigate ther wild- Dworshak Reservoir site is habitat for elk, deer, andothrir life. Project plans propose acquisition of land outside resevoir. limits to mitigate losses of browse areas inundated by reservance Planning was authorized by 1958 Flood Control Act in acco, st with plan presented in Senate Document 51, 84th Coigres 7 session. Project authorized for construction by Public L.ulie 874. Initial appropriation for construction was bYnforew Works Appropriation Act of 1962. Estimated total coSt million. work (July 1966) is $245,740,000, consisting of $243and Corps funds and $2,740,000 for value of public-domain lands. Local cooperation. None required. desif Operations and results during fiscal year. Specific. dana memoranda were forwarded to higher authority for ailities; ancillary features supplement 1; main dam postcooling oncrete log handling facilities, permanent fish facilities at damn; crplalt aggregate and concrete properties investigations; p .poNNelo preliminary design report; damsite visitors viewpointCotrctue ment and engineering requirements for construction. co for access and detour road and the diversion tunnel wereleted. pleted. Resident office contract was awarded and coIMPoriry Contract for 2d reservoir clearing was advertised. TemP n) fish equipment contracts were awarded. Main contrac t was advertised. secific Condition at end of fiscal year. Work on following ad Fish design memoranda is continuing: Dent Bridge; Steelheain da Hatchery; Highway District Road and County Road. fia 1yeqr contract bids will be opened and awarded in early fsca esti' 1967. Construction started in April 1963 and project i mated to be 9 percent complete. Cost and financial statement 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 i' 0 year................ Fiscal 0 5 New Appropriated.......... work: $9,797,200 $23,3 #249 $5,277,000 $3,500,000 $700,000$1,920,000 Cost................. 586,199 1,936,2183,590,9454,020,43710,449,948 26. ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, SNAKE RIVER, WASh " At Location. On Snake River, 9.7 miles above river nt co, head of McNary lock and dam pool, and 12 miles east o 1 Wash._1 fish Existing project. A dam, powerplant, navigation lo , jn ladders, appurtenant facilities, and relocation of railroads.e er" provement provides for navigation, hydroelectric power ge 1MUL.-PURPOSE PROJ.-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1655 o'11and incidental irrigation. Dam is designed for a normal pool eitlevation 440 mean sea level. Normal pool creates a reservoir tending upstream about 31.9 miles, providing slack water to eWer Monumental lock and dam site. Structure is about 2,700 "et ong. Beginning at south, project consists of a concrete non- eerefl ow section, a concrete powerhouse, a spillway dam, a con- ll e nonoverflow' section, a navigation lock and an earth and rock Cl enmbankment at north abutment. Fish passing facilities, in- I~ildng two ladders, are provided. Powerplant has an initial th tallation of three 90,000 kilowatt units, with provision for ree. additional units, an ultimate total of six units. Spillway e Is 610 feet long, and overflow crest at elevation 391 mean fe evel is surmounted by 10 radial gates, spillway50 feet wide by 52.9 t high, which provide capacity to pass a design flood sof850,000 cubic feet per second. Deck is at elevation 453 mean .4e l and provides a service road and track for a gantry crane. o 9igation lock is a single lift type and has clear plan dimensions O. 86 by 675 feet. A navigation channel 250 feet wide and i. rlum depth of 15 feet is provided from mouth of Snake Ver to dam Existing project was authorized by 1945 River tl1.arbor Act (H. Doc. 704, 75th Cong., 3d sess.). Estimated 1l cost for new work (July 1966) is $128,091,800, consisting of ,900,000 Corps funds, $87,000 for Coast Guard navigation d, $22,300 Federal funds for value of public-domain lands, and ch2 500 non-Federal funds contributed for artificial spawning coanIel. Construction of additional recreational facilities for Spleted project is estimated to cost $173,000 Corps funds, inLg total project cost to $128,264,800. 0 Ocal cooperation. None required. t. Perations and results during fiscal year. Deferred construc- P'. continued under relocation agreements still in effect on Union aclfie Railroad, Northern Pacific Railway, and Spokane, Port- lih Seattle Railway. Repair of lower navigation lock mono- As Was completed by installation of prestressing system. Navi- gation lock was reopened to traffic August 18, 1965. Total COi:ract cost of repair was $1,950,000. Contracts for first phase cotstallation of equipment at Ice Harbor project for remote Sehtrol of Lower Snake River powerplants have been awarded and S eduled for completion next fiscal year. Preparation of a de- cra memnorandum for public use facilities at Charbonneau Park of ereation area was started. Delivered 2,098,308 megawatt hours k electrical energy to Bonneville Power Administration, the mar- 8igagency. tCondition at end of fiscal year. Contract for initial construc- a Is complete. Project was placed on a permanent operating SIs January 1962, and reservoir pool was raised to normal ele- tr 440 April 1962. Navigation lock was opened to normal in October 1962. Land acquisition is complete. Basic rec- iation facilities are 95 percent complete. Construction started ecember 1955 and entire project is 99 percent complete. 1656 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement1 Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 P9 New work: 2$127,4 73 Appropriated.......... $9,000,000$1,165,000 $820,000 $472778 $2,490,000 3127,347,6 Cost.................. 8,985,842 1,726,146 875,742 2,038,326 962:238 3 121 Maintenance: 3,531,404 Appropriated.......... 150,000 509,400 707,200 1,252,800 912,000 3,330,1 Cost................... 148,877 480,055 716,883 1,085,880 898,710 1 Corps funds only. Excludes $82,500 contributed for artificial spawning channel: . 2Includes $4,978 allotted under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed projeects. * Includes $4,964 expended under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed prj 27. JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, COLUMBIA RIVER, OEG AND WASH. OREG. strea Location. Site is on Columbia River, about 3 miles doWnrth from mouth of John Day River and about 215 miles above r0th of Columbia River. 8lant Existing project. As modified consists of a dam, powerPh navigation lock, fish ladder, and appurtenant facilities 1 aid slackwater pool about 75 miles long extending to McNary loc and dam. Included is relocation of railroads, highways, utilitiees communities affected by proposed reservoir. Project proVpoleS 500,000 acre-feet of flood control storage between minim~ ouse elevation of 257 and a maximum elevation of 268. Powe ritial provides for 20 generating units of 135,000 kilowatts each. .5, installation was revised upwards to provide for 16 units 0o criP 000 each for a total of 2,160,000 kilowatts. A detailed decraid tion of project as authorized and modified is on pages 19 new 1933 of Annual Report for 1962. Estimated Federal cost ollion work (July 1966) is $448,477,000, consisting of $448 l144,o Corps funds, $333,000 for Coast Guard navigation aids, and 000 for value of public-owned land. Local cooperation. None required. i Operations and results during fiscal year. Relocations Of di ways and railroads in reservoir area continued. Three fr i contracts were awarded for 28 miles of railroad and one oer ere miles of main line tracklaying and ballasting. Contracts awarded for six additional turbines, transformers andd heon major electrical and mechanical equipment. Work continued on powerhouse with about 650,000 cubic yards of concrete placed. A contract was awarded for installation of 16 turbines, .1ec 0 ical and electrical • " equipment q "p in " p weueuse.ofPreparatiol powerhouse. plans and specifications for remainder of work continues..tof Condition at end of fiscal year. Completed 123 miles °uuder 140 miles of railroad grading. Remaining 17 miles are the contract and about 65 percent complete. Tracklaying Oldbe~d south shore is progressing on an additional 17 miles of rooca and is about 50 percent complete. Grading for highway reto tions is substantially completed and all but 5 miles are oPe 1a.. traffic. Work has started on Arlington sewage disposal Po e Work is continuing on construction of powerhouse, sout is fish ladder and nonoverflow dam. Railroad relocation wor9 84 percent complete; highway relocation work is 93 percen ' MUL.-PURPOSE PROJ.-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1657 lete; miscellaneous relocations, including towns, schools, ceme- -ves, and utilities are 74 percent complete; and dam, lock, power- ose, and fish facilities are 58 percent complete. Entire project S70 percent complete. Cost and financial statement (Corps funds) Neal Total to .alyer 1962 1903 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 $72,800,000 $315,802,900 $52672,900 $75,190,000 $39,010,000 ....... $20,400,000 S ropr.at 313,599,167 S ............. 0723411 74,146532 74,68,000 28. LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, SNAKE RIVER, WASH. heLocation. Site is 70.3 miles above mouth of Snake River, at vad of Lower Monumental pool, about 40 airline miles north of alla Walla, Wash., and 50 miles northwest of Lewiston, Idaho. lo kisting k, project. Provides for a dam, powerplant, navigation and appurtenant facilities. Improvement will provide for avigation, hydroelectric power generation, and incidental irri- tio n. Dam will be designed for a normal pool at elevation 638 sea Seanlevel. Normal pool will create a reservoir extending Q1Stream about 37.2 miles and providing slack water to Lower ralite lock and dam site. Dam structure will be about 2,660 eet long and consist of a powerhouse, spillway dam, navigation ick and necessary nonoverflow sections. Fish passing facilities elude one ladder with entrances on both shores with a fish chan- l through spillway which connects to powerhouse fish collection i8ten and south shore ladder. Powerhouse will be constructed or-three 1.35,000 kilowatt generating units to be installed initially, th provisions for three additional 135,000 kilowatt units for an C installed capacity of 810,000 kilowatts. Spillway dam Ilate PlProvide capacity to pass a design flood of 850,000 cubic feet r econd. Navigation lock will be single lift type and have ear plan dimensions of 86 by 675 feet and provide a minimum e1dth of 15 feet over lock sills. Relocations along reservoir in- icde 36 miles of Camas Prairie Railroad, 7.2 miles of county oads, 2.8 miles of State highways, and Central Ferry bridge. 1-sting project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act S*'oc. 704, 75th Cong., 3d sess.). Estimated total cost for new rk (July 1966) is $152,090,000, consisting of $152 million rts funds, $87,000 for Coast Guard navigation aids, and $3,000 rValue of public-owned land., . cal cooperation. None required. t,OPerations and results during fiscal year. Construction con- oued on $71,956,573 contract for powerhouse, 8-bay spillway, a Crete nonoverflow dam sections, navigation lock, fish facilities d north abutment embankment structures. Mobilization of li Pient including excavators, aggregate processing plant, re- ereration equipment, concrete batching plant, and whirley Sahes were placed in operation. Foundation excavation for all 0 oAete structures has been completed and 110,000 cubic yards of concrete placed in spillway, powerhouse, and navigation lock 1658 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 structures. Supply contracts were awarded for three c enmain o n r ol unit service transformers, main s , ndI te rcontn transformers, station ih ' switchboards, 4,160 volt switchgear, 480 volt control cent dies 500 KV disconnects and lightning arresters. Relocations siuad to determine necessity for relocation of Camas Prairie Railroadt were continued. Studies continued on relocation of Count Roads, Washington State Highway, and Central Ferry Bridgel Condition at end of fiscal year. Foundation excavation feoral project features is complete within cofferdam and all constru ace- plant equipment has been mobilized for project. Concre d to ment for all structures began in April 1966 and is considei of be 7 percent complete. Supply contracts for a major poretiqouiP all electrical, mechanical and miscellaneous powerplant nds ment are in force at present. Acquisition action for proecaas is about 50 percent complete. Relocation studies on a Prairie Railroad and County Roads are being continued in ojd tion to other design memorandum studies on minor prJS 25 features. Construction began June 1963 and entire project i percent complete. Cost and financial statement (Corps funds) Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 New work: $3,4811 100 Appropriated.......... $715,000 $1,850,000 $7,100,000 $9,625,000 $18,100,000 992 cost............... 624,480 1,878,3737,100,7796,044,991 21,330,324 29. LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, SNAKE RIVER, WAS8at Location. Project site is at river mile 107.5 on Snake River head of proposed Little Goose pool, and about 33 miles dov" stream from Lewiston, Idaho. ation1 Existing project. Provides for a dam, powerplant, navif ees lock and appurtenant facilities, and requires backwater and near head of pool in Lewiston, Idaho, Clarkston, Wash.'lude Asotin, Wash., areas. Benefits afforded by project will inci- slack water navigation, power generation, recreation, and ses dental irrigation. Normal pool elevation of 738 feet meanileS level will create a reservoir extending upstream about 36 rea. and provide slack water navigation in Lewiston-ClarkstOna ill Dam structure will be about 3,200 feet long. Iteces* consist of a powerhouse, spillway dam, navigation lock, ower sary non-overflow sections, and fish passing facilities. ._to be plant will be constructed for three 135,000 kilowatt units ~.ilar installed initially with provisions for three additional Sd units. Spillway will provide capacity to pass a design floogle 850,000 cubic feet per second. Navigation lock will be a"d lift type and have clear plan dimensions of 86 by 675 feeter provide a minimum depth of 15 feet over lock sills. Backre0 levees will be about 10 miles long in Lewiston-Clarksto0n arzed and 1 mile long in Asotin area. Existing project was aut°hors. ). by 1945 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 704, 75th Cong., 3d 8sei Construction funds were provided by Public Law 89-16. MUL.-PURPOSE PROJ.-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1659 m1ated total cost for new work (July 1966) is $194,032,000, con- s1sting of $194 million Corps funds, $30,000 for Coast Guard lavigation aids, and $2,000 for value of public-owned lands. Local cooperation. None required. Operations and results during fiscal year. A $7,397,977 con- ract for first stage construction was awarded July 29, 1965. A $1,177,166 contract for grading sections 1, 2, and 3 and surfacing sections 1 and 3, south shore access road was awarded May 16, 66. Supply contracts for control switchboards and turbine rication were awarded. Specific design memoranda covering resident office facilities, real estate, concrete non-overflow dam, roerplant, preliminary master plan and architectural treatment ere submitted to and approved by higher authority. COndition at end of fiscal year. Work on following specific 'esignmemoranda is continuing: fish facilities, Camas Prairie cilroad relocations, East Lewiston levee, Whitman County oads, and Lewiston and Clarkston City streets. Contract draw- gs for main dam contract are 15 percent complete. First stage lonstruction contract is 90 percent complete. South shore access toad contract is 11 percent complete. Supply contracts for con- rol switchboards and turbine fabrication are 6 and 5 percent coMplete respectively. Construction started in July 1965 and en- tre Project is 7 percent complete including land acquisition. Cost and financial statement (Corps funds) Year........Total to Year seal .... 962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 NwWork. $500,000 $650000 $884000 $760000 $10,330,000 $13,264,823 0 RfPtrirated.......... 864949 10143,862 13,001,662 ..........37,16 721916 759966 30. LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WASH. 4Location. On Snake River at head of Ice Harbor pool, about SMiles northeast of Pasco, Wash. lExisting project. Provides for construction of a dam, power- lant, navigation lock, relocation of railroads and highways above or0Opsed Pool level at elevation 540 feet, mean sea level, and ap- tIrtenant facilities, creating a slack water pool about 30 miles ug extending to site of Little Goose lock and dam. The dam, ocated in the tailwaters created by Ice Harbor dam, will raise the ater surface about 100 feet, and will be concrete gravity with aerthfill and rockfill abutments, will be 135 feet high (above 'rearnbed), and 3,800 feet long (including abutments, spillway, avigation lock, and powerhouse). Fish ladders will be pro- wded, one at each end of the dam. Powerhouse will have three 50-kilowatt units installed initially, and a substructure for tree additional units, for an ultimate total of six 135,000-kilo- att units, or 810,000 kilowatts. Spillway will be 508 feet long, d Overflow crest at elevation 483 feet above mean sea level will S9urmounted by 8 radial gates, each 50 feet wide and 60.5 feet SI. Deck will be at elevation 553 feet, and will provide a serv- 'ce road and track for gantry crane. Navigation lock is single- 1660 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 lift type, with lock chamber 86 by 675 feet, providing a miniU depth of 15 feet over lock sills. Reservoir capacity at eleVa94 540 is 376,000 acre-feet. Existing project was authorized bY 194 River and Harbor Act (IJ. Doc. 704, 75th Cong., 3dsess00 Estimated total cost for new work (July 1966) is $191,102, -d including $191 million Corps funds, $87,000 Coast Guard finds for navigation aids, and $15,000 for value of public-domain lanl Local cooperation. None required. ,hired Operations and results during fiscal year. New work, hi- labor: Acquisition of all project lands was completed. Engt neering and design work continued. New work, contracte South shore construction continued and is essentially completek including 71/2 bays of spillway, non-overflow dam, navigation locd. fish ladder, abutment embankment, and completion of access ad North shore construction continued. Contract includes abutiil embankment, spillway and non-overflow dam, raising upperer block and modification of lock upstream gate, fish ladder, poWer 0 house and intake structure, miscellaneous equipment, taIaces rockfall correction and project to Windust detour road, access road, railroad spur to powerhouse, downstream navigation chaler nel, permanent visitors' facilities (south shore), permanent .I., supply, third-step cofferdam, temporary fish facilities, steel pite- removal of first-step cofferdam cells, Government-furnished mate- repairs to seonrk rials, miscellaneous construction facilities, and step cofferdam. Contract is about 44 percent complete. 't on supply contracts continued, as follows: Turbines (3 una were about 96 percent completed. Combined spillway and inage gantry crane (100-ton) was completed. Powerhouse brod crane (600-ton capacity), being installed by north shore c s) tractor, was about 73 percent completed. Generators (3 uite. to be installed by the supplier were about 31 percent complet Main unit transformers were about 12 percent completed. GOv- ernors (3 units) to be installed by equipment installation c onl tractor were about 5 percent completed. Work was underway er1 supply contracts for metal-clad switchgear, substations, baeh switchboards, motors and controllers, bus and breakers, e pumps and turbines, water-level sensing devices, autonmatic way controls, control switchboards and appurtenances, and ta- tion service transformers, with completion varying frolm 4 tod percent. Hydraulic intake hoists were completed. RelocatIO of Union Pacific Railroad Co. Hinkle-Spokane main line to bypass dam construction area and also for shoofly constructions to flete tate relocation of remaining main line relocations, was compited under temporary agreement, except for deferred construlctiol Agreement with the company for relocation of remaining ail Spokane main line, Tekoa-Ayer and Tucannon Branch Linesp, o Camas Prairie Railroad, including related facilities, was5 cle tinued and is 58 percent complete. Completed items of Ain, Spokane main line included: Shoofly No. 2 (Magallon to Ayeed roads (Matthews to Ruxby), and water wells at the reloc facilities at Matthews and Ayer. Work continued on remailad grading and embankment required for main line relocation area county roads, and is about 81 percent complete. Colnstr MTUL.-PURPOSE PROJ.-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT tio0 of relocated station facilities for Matthews and New Ayer 8asstarted and is about 58 percent complete. Relocation of eslunbia REA lines and Pacific Gas Transmission gas line was 0 set ally completed. Relocation of Inland Power and Light Sline was started and is about 50 percent complete. PCIondition at end of fiscal year. Final design work is about 90 exent complete. Construction started in fiscal year 1961 and c1 dlre project is about 52 percent complete. Completed items in- e land acquisition; relocation of Indian graves; shooflies, adillg, ballast production, and embankment protection for the (akle-Spokane main line relocation, Union Pacific Railroad 10 rt I); first stage of north abutment embankment for dam and ,t hoisting equipment for fish facilities; access roads; down- Siea rt navigation channel; visitors' facilities on north shore; ta-lities for visitors' facilities on south shore; microwave radio stion and building; and wind gage supports for Joso Bridge. Cost and financial statement (Corps funds) ear... Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30,1966 Nr~oriated...........$9,200,000 $17913,515 $22,905,000 $21,450,184 $29,924,800 $104,603,499 cot................ 8,14,438 18119,15923,607,788 16,904,556 29,713,145 99,656,217 31. McNARY LOCK AND DAM, COLUMBIA RIVER, OREG. AND WASH. SLocation. On Columbia River 292 miles above mouth, near atilla, Oreg., and 3 miles above mouth of Umatilla River. Ntisting project. A dam, powerplant with 14-power-unit gen- i ag installation, navigation lock, fishways, attendant build- ts and grounds, levees, drains, pumping plants, incidental and ir- ,giation and modification of railroad bridges over Columbia ake Rivers in order to eliminate hazards to navigation. For Ore detailed description see page 1990 of Annual Report for 1962. 1isting project was authorized by 1945 River and Harbor Act *' oc. 704, 75th Cong., 3d sess.). Estimated total cost for new C0ork (July 1966) is $294,212,600, consisting of $295 million Stral s funds, a net reduction of $850,400 for cost and property a%,sferred from project, and $63,000 for Coast Guard navigation Ne.,' Construction of additional recreation facilities for com- Qoted project is estimated to cost $293,000, raising total project to $294,505,600. 0 Ocal cooperation. None required. oOerations and results during fiscal year. Negotiations were w inued with Union Pacific Railroad and Northern Pacific Rail- ._ to consummate contracts relative to modification of their Wres over Columbia and Snake Rivers, respectively. Contracts 40 awarded for installation of equipment at McNary power- ese for remote control system of Lower Snake River dams. A n memorandum was 75 percent completed for a marina and ther general development of recreation facilities. Routine and tal maintenance of project continued. Delivered 6,064,932 1662 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 megawatt-hours of electrical energy to Bonneville power Ad ministration, the marketing agency. roj Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of existingp 6 1 ). ect started May 1947 and is 97 percent complete (June ae Modification to two railroad bridges over Columbia and ner Rivers remains to complete project. Project was placed on Pe manent operating basis and pool raised to normal operati nne , vation 340 in December 1953. Except for routine mam lten all 14 power units have been in commercial operation since ruary 1957. 1 Cost and financial statement Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966t0 New work: 1$286,836'3 Appropriated.......... $9,176 $11,000 -$193,974 $3,274 $70,650 2285,776, Cost.................. 20,297 1,925 11,874 4,573 11,602 360 Maintenance: 18613,3 Appropriated.......... 1,710,000 1,602,5001,558,000 1,368,500 1,583,000 18:262, Cost.................. 1,700,449 1,359,3711,591,3881,361,8211,346,327 c5 SCorps funds only. Includes $71,626 allotted under Code 710, recreation facilities pleted projects.ludes 2Includes $850,375 net value of cost or property transferred from project. Inc expended under Code 710, recreation facilities on completed projects. DI G ' 32. SNAKE RIVER DOWNSTREAM FROM JOHNSON BAR LAN OREG., WASH., AND IDAHO .S"BI Location. On Snake River downstream from Johnso .ib. Landing, river mile 231. Snake River, which is largest tr, tary of Columbia River, rises in Yellowstone National parbod western part of Wyoming, flows generally westerly for aSh 1,000 miles and empties into Columbia River near Pasco, 324 miles from Pacific Ocean. 198 Previous projects. For details see Annual Reports, page 1986 for 1962, page 1991 for 1915, page 2246 for 1903, and page 1 for 1906. 704, Existing project. River and Harbor Act of 1945 (H.Doc. 75th Cong., 3d sess.) authorized construction of such daas 4 are necessary and open channel improvements for purpose of providing slackwater navigation and irrigation between odfiee Snake River and Lewiston, Idaho. This authorization antl previous authorizations only for that portion of improveme~ e low Lewiston, Idaho. Acts of June 13, 1902, and August 30,d 935 as they pertain to open river improvement from Lewiston,Oh to Johnson Bar Landing are part of existing project. dCost Estimatedde ly Improvements included in existing project (Corps /* 0 Ice Harbor lock and dam, river mile 9.7.................... $128,000 Little Goose lock and dam ................................ 152,00 Lower Granite lock and dam .............................. 194,000110 Lower Monumental lock and dam .......................... 2 19 1 Open-river improvement-Lewiston to Johnson Bar Landing' R. Total .......................................... . 1Includes $178,000 for recreation facilities on completed project. 2 No channel dimensions specified. Local cooperation. None required. Terminal facilities. Six privately owned grain facilities 0 Snake River. Four of these are on open river and limite MUL.-PURPOSE PROJ.-WALLA WALLA, WASH., DISTRICT 1663 se for waterway shipping due to shallow channel depths. Two al on Ice Harbor pool. There are two privately owned termi- 4.s below Ice Harbor lock and dam. In addition, there are four dlicly owned marinas and 14 small boat launching ramps, all en to public use. Facilities are adequate until slack water coigation is available and shipping volume increases following Dolltion of dams now under construction above Ice Harbor. SOperations and results during fiscal year. In individual re- ortsiry lCe for Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monumental, and Idah arbor locks and dams. On Snake River from Lewiston, sur- elo, to Johnson Bar Landing reconnaissance and condition re- atys Were conducted navigation aids were in August 1965, navigable at river lred, from and debris was removed d$641 r channel mcainenanie 'le 218.8. Candition at end of fiscal year. Costs of existing project were o7 8,433,247 for new work and $3,604,614 for maintenance, a .l of $282 037,861 regular funds. Additional cost of existing 0 t Was $82,500 for new work from contributed funds for p cial spawning channel at Ice Harbor lock and dam project. ollo ing table summarizes status of work on existing and eious project authorization. Cost to June 30, 1966 cost work new Totalappro- Mainte- Percent plete corn- started Construction ProectEstimated Project (Corps funds priations to Mainte- plete started only) June 30, 1966 New work nance la lockad dam... 2$128,073,000 $127,434,951 $3,330,404 $127,347,673 99 Jan. 1956. etra t.ook and dam . 152,000,00038,480,100 37,992,932............ . 11 June 1963. t o,lock and dam 194,000,000 ............ 13,264,823 13,001,662 2 July 1965. n darIuientallockand 191,000,000104,603,49999,656,217............ 37 June 1961. Lewi8,,..Unovemnent,- ad toJohnson Bar 34,613 334,613 334,613 83,290.................. ver .......... 4,350 ...................... Col improvement. touLewiston. ............. .*.............. -..... .-- revi Total. ?tiotal existing project. .................. 665,107,613283,817,986278,033,0973,418,044 o4 Jeets-pasco to 400,150 400,150 400,150 186,570..................... Total authorized proj- eets. v, 665,507,763 284,218,136278,433,2473,604,614 .................. ecta e, 1i individual preort. l $173 000 for recreation facilities on completed project. tenance accomplished prior to 1953 with new work funds. - .Cost and financial statement Neal Total to 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 A - Q opri ated...... $19,415 $58,827,578 1S284,218 $34,325,184 $31,709,000 000 $21,578,515 136 e t **** ... 18,126,906 62,149,569 1278,433,247 25,852,822 32,344,275 22,445,593 oDPro ated..........151,551 514,668 710,646 1,256,153 916,404 23,807,307 -11,lU10 . . ............ 150,428 485,323 719,329 1,090,232 901,417 23,604,614 9 8 Lewiston). Excludes $167,. ,150 for new work on previous projects (Pasco toprevious eltd$400 ributed funds for new work consisting of $85,000 on projects (Pasco to spawning channel, (Ice Harbor lock ,and $82 500 for new work on existing artificial Droject) . es $186,570 on previous projects (Pasco to Lewiston). 1664 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 33. OTHER AUTHORIZED MULTIPLE PURPOSE PROJECT INCLUDING POWER For last June30, 19 full repo J for Name of project seeAnnua construoton ~ for- Asotin Dam, Snake River, Idaho and Wash........................................ 1964 34. SURVEYS Fiscal year cost of surveys was $204,195, of which $16,451 d for navigation studies, $162,598 for flood control studiesric $25,146 for cooperative studies with Soil Conservation ev and Bureau of Reclamation. 35. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA Completed flood plain studies Requesting agency Date completed Location Richland, Wash................. ................. City of Richland......July 1963... 36. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Sect Investigations to improve forecasting procedures with re5Pdy to floods and seasonal runoff volumes were continued. Aasitt and analysis were made of June 1964 storm in Clearwater est Other general hydrologic studies were continued. Fiscal yer costs of hydrologic studies were $5,495. ALASKA DISTRICT* This District consists of the State of Alaska. IMPROVEMENTS Page Page Flood Control 1. Navigation 17. Gold Creek, Alaska ...... 1680 2 nchorage Harbor, Alaska 1665 Skagway, Skagway River, 18. 2. Cordova Harbor, Alaska . 1666 Alaska ................ 1680 4. illingham Harbor, Alaska 1667 S omer Harbor, Alaska .. 1668 19. Inspection of completed flood control projects .. 1681 6. odiak Harbor, Alaska .. 1670 20. Other authorized flood con- 7. Ninilchik Harbor, Alaska. trol projects......... 1681 8. ore Harbor, Alaska .. . 1671 21. Flood control work under etersburg Harbor, Alaska 1673 special authorization .. 1681 10. eldovia Harbor, Alaska 1674 1675 Multiple-Purpose Projects 11. Seward Harbor, Alaska 1676 Including Power 12. Sitka Harbor, Alaska .. Stikine 1677 22. Snettisham, Alaska ...... River, Alaska .. 14, Valdez Harbor, Alaska .. 1678 23. Other authorized multiple- 4 econnaissance and condi- purpose project including power ................ 1683 tion surveys ......... 1679 1 Other authorized naviga- General Investigations 1679 24. Surveys ............... 16. tion projects .......... avigation work under spe- 25. Collection and study of 1683 cial authorization ...... 1679 basic data ............ 1. ANCHORAGE HARBOR, ALASKA Location. Anchorage is in south-central Alaska on southeast Shore of Knik Arm and north of Turnagain Arm near junction 1ith Cook Inlet. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 8553 ald 8557.) 11 isting project. Provides for a deepwater harbor by dredg- 8 adjacent to existing and proposed municipal docks to a depth 35 feet below mean lower low water and constructing two or other protective works when required, along northerly letties Ad southerly ends. Tidal range between mean lower low water 1d mean higher high water is 29.6 feet and extreme range is V.7 feet, based on pre-earthquake data. it Large ice masses in Viter months form into floe ice making extremely hazardous or Small-boat navigation during that period. Cost estimate for be Work (1966) is $6,290,000. Existing project was adopted 71958 River and Harbor Act (H.Doc. 34, 85th Cong., 1st sess.). ., ocal cooperation. Local interests must provide easements, flghts-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas; hold the United States aiee from damages; and construct wharf facilities adequate for adling of cargo. Terminal facilities. Three wharves capable of handling ocean olut vessels and open for public use are the city wharf which temporarily handling petroleum products and two wharves ,Wh and operated by private individuals. Five additional .arves are privately owned and used for industrial purposes. railitary owned wharf damaged by earthquake in 1964 is un- able and about 20 feet of seaward side will be removed under f66 Anchorage Harbor dredging contract. Construction by city Permanent Pr oil-handling and bunkering facilities and expan- o of existing wharf for dry cargo is underway. On completion 1666 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 of port expansion, facilities will be considered adequate for pres- ent commerce.new Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, nea work: Design memorandum supplement for dredging was aP: proved and contract was awarded April 20, 1966. Mainte nance:st Emergency maintenance dredging contract was completed oust 18, 1965. Removed 23,000 cubic yards common material for a cost of $46,485.du Condition at end of fiscal year. General design memoranhedm for maintenance dredging, plans and specifications with sc ie uled bid opening were completed prior to March 1964 earthquke Scope of maintenance dredging changed due to area subsidena s of about 3.6 feet and coupled with heavy traffic, dredging aOs postponed in 1964. Dredging contract for first phase o au- thorized project was awarded April 20, 1966. No work for ae thorized project has been done. Emergency maintenance derdging was performed in July and August 1965. I Cost and financial statement Total t9 year Fiscal ...............1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 JTne 30, l1 $470 ,0 New work: Appropriated......... ................... .................... $470,000 Cost................. ...................... 57,900 Maintenance: 100 Appropriated...................... $6,287 $34,558 $52,942 1,013 100,103 Cost............................ 6,287 19,678 13,735 55,100 2. CORDOVA HARBOR, ALASKA to Location. On Orca Inlet, a strait near eastern entrance t Prince William Sound, Alaska, about 150 air miles so h southeast of Anchorage, Alaska. (See Coast and GeodeticS vey Charts 8520, 8525 and 8551.)bot Existing project. A sheltered harbor for small boats atier 8.26 acres in area with a depth of 10 feet at mean lower low Wat and 10.4 acres in area with a depth of 14 feet at mean lower ad water protected by a north breakwater about 1,100 feet longee, a south breakwater about 1,400 feet long. Tidal range bet eet mean lower low water and mean higher high water is 12.4 edata. with an extreme range of 22 feet, based on pre-earthquake ta Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents (co 2 I. Doc. 33, 73d Cong., 2d sess. Aug.30,1935 Basin 8.26 acres in area with depth of 10 feet MLLW and rock-mound breakwaters 1,100 and 1,400 feet long. tains latest published maP)*t pub Aug. 19, 1964 Expand basin within existing breakwaters..................(M of modified harborn lisfled). Local cooperation. None required. ble of Terminal facilities. One privately owned wharf, capabe a- handling deep draft vessels, has oil-handling and bunkering ra cilities and is open for public use as passenger and general-carg terminal. The municipal dock, with capability of handling deeP draft vessels is open for use as passenger and general-cargo ter' RIVERS AND HARBORS-ALASKA DISTRICT 1667 al. State of Alaska ferry terminal, a public loading dock, and ish and Wildlife Service float are in the small boat harbor. Three additional wharves are privately owned and used for in- dustrial purposes. Facilities are considered adequate for present commnerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Area uplift of 6.5 feet average resulting from the March 1964 earthquake necessi- tated harbor rehabilitation. In addition, expansion of sheltered harbor was designed for future expansion within breakwater area and new construction was phased with rehabilitation por- t'on. Rehabilitation: Restoration phase consisted of north breakwater repair by contract awarded June 1965 and essentially cOmpleted October 1965. b Condition at end of fiscalfor year. The harbor with protecting reakwaters was designed future expansion within break- ater area and original .construction was completed October 1938. aitenance dredging was completed October 1962. Construc- 0 was initiated June 1964 for restoration phase and November 1964 for expansion phase. Project was essentially completed Utle 1965. Minor north breakwater repair contract completed Otober 1965. Modification for entrance breakwater was sub- 11itted for approval June 1966. Cost and financial statement Total to year Yeal 1962 . . .. .. 1964 1965 .. 1966 ..... June 30, 1966 Work.. NOW Appropriated... .................................... $540,000 ............ $793534 ost .................. ................. ............ 404,478 $69,465 727,497 naltenance: 6,73 217,297 Apropriated.......... $141,000 -$26,803 $221......................... ,3 116,466 .. . . . . 221......................... 217,297 ehabl . h A'ation: .... . 620,000 25,700 30,000 675,700 Ppropriated.................. ........... 22,663 497,008 123,229 642,900 Coat.................. ................. : :.... 3. DILLINGHAM HARBOR, ALASKA Location. At head of Nushagak Bay, an arm of Bristol Bay right bank of Nushagak River just below itsofconfluence with od River, and about 470 miles northeasterly Dutch Harbor, laska. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 9052.) histing project. A small-boat basin 230,000 square feet in area with a depth of 2 feet above mean lower low water along Scandinavian Creek with entrance channel 1,100 feet long and a ottom width of 40 feet in Scandinavian Creek, and sheet-pile a top elevation of 7 feet above mean li across basin outlet with design stage project was revised to 'wer low water. During inlude a rock sill with adjacent scour-protection blankets and ellbankent relocated to include a berm between low basin and em- akment. Tidal range between mean lower and mean her high water is 19.8 feet. Extreme range is 27.5 feet. Ex- ti g project was adopted by 1958 River and Harbor Act (H. Doc. 90, 84th Cong., 2d sess., contains latest published map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. all Terminal facilities. Three docks at village of Dillingham, 1668 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 privately owned, two are used for salmon-cannery operatio1ls and one as an oil-handling and bunkering terminal. Facilities ar, considered adequate for existing commerce. Approach and floats were installed in small-boat basin in summer of 1963. Floats are removed before fall freezeup and replaced each spring to the eX tent permissable, governed by shoaling conditions. Operations and results during fiscal year. A maintenance Pro gram to study siltation problems in existing small-boat basin continuing. Condition at end of fiscal year. New work consisting of b6asi dredging and rock sill construction was completed July 1962. Controlling depth (June 1965) is about 12 feet above mean lover low water due to continuing siltation in small-boat basin. Cost and financial statement Total to Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June30, 1 Now work: $548 0 Appropriated.......... .$65,000 $51,790 ............ . 648,790 Cost...1..............150,730 151,287.ene Maintenance: 47,419 Appropriated...................... 2,094 $19,289 $12,106 $13,930 43,140 Cost............................. 2,094 5,307 17,224 18,515 4. HOMER HARBOR, ALASKA .e Location. In Kachemak Bay, on Kenai Peninsula, 1521 by water southwest of Anchorage and 15 miles northeast of Sei via. Harbor site is land based near the extremity of HomnerSit which extends 41/2 miles southeasterly from mainland. (See Cost and Geodetic Survey Charts 8554 and 8531.)ort Previous projects. For details see page 1593 of Annual Iepr for 1964. Existing project. Provides for sheltered small-boat harbor relocated and land based within Homer Spit about 10 acres e area with 2.75 acre berthing area 12 feet deep and 7.25 acre anchorage area 15 feet deep with north entrance channel, PrO tected by main rock breakwater 1,018 feet long and seconda e rock breakwater 238 feet long. Plane of reference is mean loes low water. Tidal range between mean lower low and ieet, higher high water is 18.2 feet, with an extreme range of 28.5 f based on pre-earthquake data. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents HI.Doc. 34, 85th Cong., 1st seas.(C July 3, 1958 Basin 2.7 acres in area with 12 feet deep below MLLW and 1,260-foot long rock breakwater. tains latest ublished maP).blisbed)o Aug. 19, 1964 Expand basin provided within relocated and rehabilitated (Map of modifed harbor notpu' basin. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. af Terminal facilities. One publicly owned and operated Whfd capable of handling ocean going vessels and serving passenger general-cargo is adequate for existing commerce. RIVERS AND HARBORS-ALASKA DISTRICT 1669 SOperations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds: Stablishment of harbor lines was initiated. Condition at end of fiscal year. Harbor was essentially de- stoyed by March 1964 earthquake. Contractor resumed repair ork, from standby status, in July of raising first leg of break- water and completed work August 1964. Harbor restoration hase for construction of extension to breakwater, removal of a l ortion of breakwater for entrance, removal of basin material ald disposal of material in a protective berm around landward Sides of basin was started August 1964 and completed May 1965. t-Pansion phase of harbor within confines of berm for excavation of basin and extension of breakwaters was started November 1964 and completed March 1965. Relocation of harbor lines is Uaderway. Cost and financial statement NTotal to ezalYear 62 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 Newwork. ......... .... $3,970 $250,707 $640,000 ............. $1,518,677 I.Ppropriated itenane: .$0,66 ....... 0616 23 50 263,450 3271,742 81 595,649 $23,525 1,497,851 aote......... . ....................... oAPPrpriated 29,512367,811 660 ............ 397,983 .. ......... 14,499 191,709 119805 397,983... lhabcost . ............. APPropriatied ............................... 85,000 -17,000 -26 67,974 co.................. .................. 29,225 36,285 2,464 67,974 5. KODIAK HARBOR, ALASKA oLocation. On northeastern shore of Kodiak Island, lies in orthern portion of St. Paul Harbor and southern half of North annel, and is about 260 miles southwest of Anchorage, Alaska. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 8534, 8545 and 8556.) Iiisting project. A channel between Near Island and Kodiak sland 22 feet deep at mean lower low water and 200 feet wide, and a small-boat basin 11.7 acres in area with depths of 12 and 8 feet, below mean lower low water protected by two rock break- lo aters, 1,250 and 760 feet long. Tidal range between mean lower o Water and mean higher high water is 8.5 feet with extreme range of 17 feet, based on pre-earthquake data. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents A.. 30, 1935 Channel 200 feet wide and 22 feet deep with additional width H. Doc. 208, 72d Cong., e1stsess. Oct 17 9. at the wharves. 332, 76th Cong., t sess.l 194 Deletes additional width at the wharves................ H.. Doc. apt. 3 1954 Doc. 465, 83d Cong., 2d sess.l Small-boat basin ......................................... IConftains latest published mrnaps. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Terminal facilities. Three wharves in Kodiak Harbor: one gQeneral cargo dock within small boat basin, and city-owned wharf anchorage about and one oil dock are in innerfacilities one half mile west of town of Kodiak. These are considered adequate for existing commerce. 1670 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, re- habilitation: Relocation of harbor lines was initiated. r Condition at end of fiscal year. Channel was dredged in fro"t of Erskine wharf in 1942 and project depth was available o a width of 170 feet. Dredging and rock removal in channel to project depth with a width of 190 feet began in June and was completed in November 1955. Construction of southetin breakwater began in October 1957. Dredging basin begano r November 1957 with suitable material placed as base A southwest breakwater. Project was completed in July 1958.th big portion of small-boat harbor was destroyed by 1964 eart quake. Rehabilitation on both breakwaters was initiatedMa 1964 and completed August 1964. Controlling depth, due to sidence caused by earthquake, was 5 feet below project depthbor channel and small-boat basins, April 1964. Relocation of harbr lines is underway. Cost and financial statement Total to year.............. Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jine30, 1 New work: 49 $1,297 Appropriated.... ........................................ 1:291,049 Cost... ...................................................... 3456 Maintenance: 3,458 Appropriated............................. 350 Cost................ ........................................ Rehabilitation: 594,300 Appropriated................................ $950,000 -$325,700 -$30,000 565:6,529 Cost..................................... 240,447 318,790 6,292 6. NINILCHIK HARBOR, ALASKA Location. At mouth of Ninilchik River in Cook Inlet about ch g40 miles upcoast from Homer and 112 miles southwest of An ora e. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 8554.) 15feet Existing project. A small-boat basin 320 feet long by 10th wide dredged to 2 feet deep above mean lower low water, dto an approach channel 400 feet long and 50 feet wide dredge an elevation of 9 feet above mean lower low water, protected by pile jetty 410 feet long. During design stage pile jetty was feet leted and harbor dimensions revised to 125 feet wide and 400he long. Range between mean lower low water and mean hilgsed high water is 19.1 feet, with an extreme range of 30 feet, tbba 1 on pre-earthquake data. Existing project was adopted bY Ju 3, 1958 River and Harbor Act (II. Doc. 34, 85th Cong., 1st sess.)' Local cooperation. Fully complied with.es Terminal facilities. None available at Ninilchik, supp ie are usually unloaded on beach. A cannery dock is availafor for unloading fish at favorable tide stages. State contractfor installation of approach and floats in small-boat basin was, et pleted in May 1964. Facilities considered adequate for exist1 commerce.e Operations and results during fiscal year. Submittal of red vised supplement to general design memorandum was delayed after completion of comprehensive analysis of basin sedirment tion, beach erosion, and related problems due to emergency wor RIVERS AND HARBORS-ALASKA DISTRICT 1671 Performed during June 1966. Emergency work consisted of realignment of entrance channel and construction of timber groin on south side of channel. Condition at end of fiscal year. Work under existing project as commenced and completed in 1961. Westerly bank of inllchik River was repaired and basin dredged. Repair of up- treani sill, removal of accumulated shoaling from basinm, and a ealignment of entrance channel was completed October 1963. In une 1966 the entrance channel was realigned and a timber groin Was constructed on south side of channel. Corrective measures rol)osal will be submitted for approval early next fiscal year. Cost and financial statement Year Total to al Y ................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 'lAP N~ewworkPrinted .......... - :8 0 I - $2 .$202,720 $182,000 $720........... ............ ............ $0,2 c0ost. *....... iaenance: . .. . 7,95.................................... 202,720 S171739 ................ ...... .. A ro)riated................. .. mv:I ..... 42,500 6,43 -J $31,403 06,995 $2,534 6,907 $32,091 33, 834 108,528 107,166 7. NOME HARBOR, ALASKA Location. At mouth of Snake River on northerly shore of orton Sound, an arm of Bering Sea. It is a shallow, open roadstead, 581 nautical miles north of Dutch Harbor and 2,288 latical miles northwest of Seattle, Wash. (See Coast and Geo- etic Survey Charts 9302 and 9380.) Existing project. Provides for two jetties, the easterly 951 eet long, and westerly not exceeding 676 feet long, at mouth of nfake River; a channel 8 feet deep at mean lower low water aid 75 feet wide from Norton Sound through Snake River to Y1oths of Bourbon and Dry Creeks, in city of Nome, ending "a basin of similar depth 250 feet wide and 600 feet long, revet- ting banks of rivers; and protecting all existing waterfront im- PrOements on easterly beach by means of rock-mound seawall S350 feet long extending easterly from east jetty. Extreme tidal range is 7.5 feet and range between mean lower low water Ad eanli higher high water is 7.6 feet, but water levels are lafluenced more by wind than tide. Levels of 5 feet below mean 'oWerlow water have been observed during offshore winds, and level of 14 feet above mean lower low water has been observed uring a southerly storm. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents and reportsl * 8,1917 For 2 jetties, easterly 335 feet and westerly 460 feet long, H. Doc. 1932, 64th Cong., 2d sess. revetment, channel, and basin 2200 feet wide and 250 feet ........... .. .. .. .. A 30 ,1935 Exension of the jetties and basin .... Doe. 404, H.Rivers 71st Cong., and Harbors 2d sess., Doe. Committee and 38, 73d Cong., 2d sess. Ue16,1948 Seawall... ....... ...... ........ ... .... ... .......... ......................... Chief of Engineers dated M ar. 8,of1948. Report a O'ltain latest published maps. by-L of east jetty about 616 feet and west jetty not more than 216 feet authorized atension Ver and Harbor Act of 1935 (H. Doc. 404, 71st Cong., 2d sess.) inactive. 1672 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Local cooperation. Fully complied with. Total actual Cot for all requirements of local cooperation under terms of original project authorization are $2,500 annually.ves- Terminal facilities. Cargoes and passengers from ocean es sels are lightered to and from shore a distance of about 2 mil" Traffic enters dredged channel and is handled over revetmetn' where transfer facilities that are open to public use have been a' installed by a lighterage company. Facilities considered quate for existing commerce.ds Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fudOh maintenance: Government plant and hired labor, July 1 throug November 15, 1965, and June 15-30, 1966, dredged 16,100 cubic yards of material from turning basin and entrance channel at a cost of $53,922. Completed contract for repair of east and West jetties at a cost of $16,351. •, .5- Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of original nd and 460-foot jetties and revetments was commenced in 1919teto completed in 1923. Reconstruction of jetties with concrete90 modified lengths of 240 and 400 feet was completed in 1940. Dredging channel and original 200- by 250-foot basin was coml menced in 1919 and completed in 1922. Construction of seawill was commenced in 1949 and completed in June 1951. Dredging 400-foot extension of basin was commenced in 1949 and is col plete with exception of small areas in northerly portion of smare boat harbor extension and around Corps marine ways whilch lh not required. A portion of east jetty was repaired in 1954 W f a concrete fill. Defaulted contract for repair of eroded areab r both jetties was reawarded in July 1964 and completed in Octot e 1965. Jetty extensions of 551 and 546 feet to complete.s-a authorized project lengths is inactive. Controlling depth Isu feet in channel and southern end of turning basin and 4 feet i northern end of turning basin. Depths refer to mean lower lOW water plane of reference. Cost and financial statement REGULAR FUNDS , to ]Ttal Fiscal year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,16 New work: 348,240 Appropriated.......... ,............ ............ ............ ..... ............ 8,240 34....... Cost .... .............. ................................ ......... Maintenance: 202466 Appropriated.......... $59,000 $158,175 $57,800 $66,150 $100,502 2:00,286 Cost ................. 48,911 80,570 62,371 143,291 85,947 CONTRIBUTED FUNDS t° Fiscal year................ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 Jun( 0! New work: *126 Appropriated.......... ........................ ............ ........... ............ Cost............ ........ ........................ ....................... 11000 Maintenance: Appropriated.......... $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 110, Cost.................. 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 RIVERS AND HARBOR---ALASKA DISTRICT 1673 rt. 8. PETERSBURG HARBOR, ALASKA -Lcation. Inside northern entrance to Wrangell Narrows, on Srthwesterly end of Mitkof Island 779from miles northwesterly from seattle and 107 miles southwesterly Juneau. (See Coast ad Geodetic Survey Charts 8170, 8002, and 8201).11 isting project. Dredging suitable approaches with a depth Of2o 4 feet to existing wharves; a small boat basin 11 feet deep be- 40een Trading Union wharf and Citizens wharf; a short channel f0eet wide and 8 feet deep to south side of Forestry Service ,at; and deepening outer one-third of the small boat basin to 15 be All depths are referred to mean lower low water. Range letween mean lower low water and mean higher high water is 16.4 feet. Extreme range is about 25 feet. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents 4 R.30 1 35 "- .. .. .. '3,1935 Approaches to wharves; original small boat basin between H. Doe. 483, 72d Cong., 2d sesas. wharves to a line substantially following mean lower low ,r. 2,1945 water line; and a channel to Forestry Service float. 0 1 large original small boat basin by dredging about 135,000 H. Doe. 670, 786thCong., 3d sess. (con- elt, 2 , 1954 adjacent sq. ft.outer to andofshoreward of original basin. tains latest published map). Deepen one-third small boat basin to 1 ...... . Doe. 501, 83d Cong., 2d sess. LOcal cooperation. Fully complied with. erminal facilities. Six wharves and one float in Petersburg arbor. One privately owned and operated wharf which serves g assenger, general cargo, and cold-storage terminal is open for a lic use. Another privately owned and operated wharf serves Secannery, cold storage, and moorage for government vessels. jlblicly owned float is open for public use for mooring and reicing small craft. All other wharves are used for industrial 'rl3oses. These facilities are adequate, except that additional Iorings are required for small boats. te OPerationsand results during fiscal year. Regular funds, main- tellance: Plans and specification work was initiated for main- anlee dredging. At the request of local interests, maintenance Work has been deferred. ,Condition at end of fiscal year. Original dredging was com- leted in 1937. Enlargement of small boat basin adjacent to and aoreward of original basin, and deepening outer one-third of blall boat basin was completed in 1957. Cost and financial statement i Year Total to cal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 e ork: $251,630 Aropriated ...... . .......... ............ .... . . . . ....... ............ ............ 1251,630 roriated... .$410 $1,308 $3,350 $12,000 19,451 Cost. ***410 1,308 3,350 10,159 16,710 Icludes $8,000 expended from contributed funds. 1674 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 9. SELDOVIA HARBOR, ALASKA Location. In Seldovia Bay, an arm of Cook Inlet indenting southwestern coastline of Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, 146 miles bY water route west of Seward. (See Coast and Geodetic SurveY Charts 8531, 8554, and 8589.) ohannel Existing project. Removal of obstructions in entrance ch afll- near Watch Point to 24 feet deep, and construction of a6So boat basin 700 feet long, 300 feet wide, and 12 feet deep proe tected by two rock breakwaters with gravel cores 400 to 60rfeet long. All depths refer to mean lower low water. Tidal ~rge1 between mean lower low water and mean higher higha k..e 17.76 feet. Extreme range is 29 feet, based on pre-earthqut data. Rehabilitation of basin provides for raising by 4f breakwaters that were damaged by 1964 earthquake. Existing project was authorized by the followin.. Acts Work authorized Documentsl Mar. 2 1945 Remove obstructions in entrance channel near Watch Point H. Doc. 702, 76th Cong., 3dsess. to a depth of 24 feet. July 3 1958 A small-boat basin protected by 2 rock breakwaters......... 1H. Doc. 34, 85th ong, tse 1 Contain latest published maps. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ted, Terminal facilities. One wharf privately owned and.ope trial capable of handling ocean going vessels is utilized for indusraf purposes. Municipal city dock is capable of handling deepcargo, vessels and serving passengers and handling wet and dry tcoOf Facilities will be adequate for existing commerce on completiOf city dock. - of Operations and results during fiscal year. Area subsidence about 3.5 feet resulting from March 1964 earthquake necessit,,ta harbor rehabilitation. Regular funds, rehabilitation: elOc tion of harbor lines was initiated. tober Condition at end of fiscal year. Project work began Octdte ite 1961 and was completed December 1962. Facilities accom1mod about 140 small boats. Earthquake of March 1964 resUlt nTer subsidence of coastal area of Seldovia causing damage to ilitate harbor facilities and breakwaters. Construction to rehab 1 96 4, breakwaters was initiated June 1964 and completed October feet Controlling depths at mean lower low water: In channel 24 fdepth and in basin 12 feet (1962) with about 3.5 feet additional le due to land subsidence, March 1964. Relocation of harbor lies is underway. RIVERS AND HARBOR--ALASKA DISTRICT Cost and financial statement Total to June 30 1966 ear ............... 1963 1964 1965 1966 -$33,000 -$18,719 ......... .......... $651,883 tPoropriated.... 651,883 $324,174 264,552 13,069 ......... .......... aiitenatn ............. 3,806 o0priated $3,806 3,806 3,806 e6 o ..n . . .. 400,000 500,000 -100,000 .9,685 ..... 369,796 o priated.... :31,740 ..... 328,371 10. SEWARD HARBOR, ALASKA Location. At Seward, Alaska, on west side of north end of esurrection Bay, about 75 miles south of Anchorage, Alaska. ee coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 8529 and 8552.) project. For details see page 1602 of Annual Report f~or164. ~ious boEXisting project. Provides for sheltered and relocated small iat harbor about 17 acres in area at depth of 12.5 feet ieluding 4.75 acre berthing area and 12.45 acre anchorage area, lthentrance channel 15 feet deep, protected by two rock mound reakwaters 1,060 and 1,750 feet long. Plane of reference is ean lower low water. Tidal range between mean lower low Water and mean higher high water is 10.5 feetdata.with an extreme ge of 18.9 feet, based on pre-earthquake Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts..... Documents Work authorized South breakwater and dredge basin........................ IT .Doe.and109, 70thbCong.,s ist D. A 3 ' 1930 e Doe. Comming., , North breakwater...................... ................ 374tRiversHarborsl sess.1 1et 3, 74th Cong., let seas. V3 1954 Raise south breakwater, and construct 2 pile breakwaters II. Doc. 182, 83d Cong., 1st sess.1 196 on east side of basin. 1964Pa basin provided within relocated and rehabilitated (Map of modified harbor not published). basin. latest published maps. a ins Ocal cooperation. Fully complied with. erminal facilities. Docking facilities, except for a small 'rtion of Alaska Railroad dock, were destroyed by March 1964 Srthquake. Reconstruction of Alaska Railroad facilities is Vecer contract. One wharf capable of handling ocean goinmg SaSels and serving passengers is handled by city of Seward. tee State of Alaska ferry termminal has been completed. Facili- 8are considered adequate for existing commerce. wo Perations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new aork Dredging basin expansion within protected area of break- t ters, under modification to rehabilitation dredge rental con- 4ct, was completed November 2, 1965, at a cost of $18,848. ecation of harbor lines was initiated. tr ondition at end of fiscal Vear. Harbor was completely de- teoyed by March 1964 earthquake and recession of shoreline essitated relocation of equivalent authorized harbor. Resto- 1676 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 ration phase for construction of breakwaters was started August 1964 and completed June 1965. Dredging for expansion p9 was accomplished incrementally with other waterfront dreli projects, with first small-boat basin increment accom po October 1964 and final increment of expansion completed NoVew ber 1965. Relocation of harbor line is underway. Cost and financial statement Total to year................ Fiscal 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 309,6 New work: $623b Appropriated..................... .......... $2,528 $400,000 -$70,000 Cost.......................................... 2,528 191,152 128,027 179 64 Maintenance: Appropriated..........$100,000 -$4,000 222 .......... .......... 175 *3b4 Cost................. 65,347 30,653 222 ................... Rehabilitation: 6992 Appropriated.......... ....................... 90,000 ... 26 6O2 Cost........................................ 42,147 46,250 1,629 11. SITKA HARBOR, ALASKA s Location. On Sitka Sound in southeastern Alaska one shore of Baranof Island, about 806 miles northwest of Seattl tic 158 miles westerly from Petersburg. (See Coast and Geo Survey Charts 8002, 8244, 8252, and 8255.)Ge Previous projects. For details see page 2069 of Annual e port for 1940 and page 2020 of Annual Report for 1941. oc Existing project. A channel on easterly side of HIarbor Roval 150 feet wide and 22 feet deep at mean lower low water; rent1 of Indian Rock; improvement of Crescent Bay by dredgin ater, area of about 13 acres 10 feet deep below mean lower low ( of and constructing protective breakwaters; and improvemeo ol Forest Service basin by dredging a 130- by 270-foot area toee feet deep below mean lower low water. Tidal range betgeet mean lower low water and mean higher high water is 9 . e Extreme range is about 18 feet. Existing project was authorized by the following Acts Work authorized Document Aug. 30,1935 Channel on easterly side of Harbor Rock, and removal of Rivers and Harbors Com ittee o' Indian Rock. 59, 74th Cong., 1st seas. 2d eee s Mar. 2,1945 Improvement of Crescent Bay............... ....... H. )oc. 744, 79th Cong"'2ds . Sept. 3, 1954 Improvement of Forest Service Basin...................... H. Doc. 414, 83dCong., 2 Local cooperation. City of Sitka agreed to meet all necessary requirements and will also provide bulkheads to retain sPo material. Terminal facilities. There are 13 piers, wharves, and floatse Sitka Harbor. Four privately owned and operated wharv ,hich open for public use. City of Sitka owns three float systems craft. are open for public use for mooring and servicing small vice. Former Navy facilities are being used by Alaska Native Se RIVERS AND HARBOR-ALASKA DISTRICT Remaining facilities are used for industrial purposes. Facilities re considered adequate. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular funds, new cork: Construction of a small-boat basin, by contract, at Cres- cent Bay and dredging of Forest Service Basin began July 30, 1964, and was completed December 24, 1965. About 27,100 tons of rock were placed and about 304,300 cubic yards of ordinary material were removed at a cost of $481,466. oCondition at end of fiscal year. Indian Rock and an isolated ulder w removed and channel on easterly side of Harbor cock was completed in 1937. Project depth was available in hannel in May 1948. Small-boat basin project is complete. SCost and financial statement Total to icaYear ........ ........ 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30,1966 NW ork: clostropriated Uot......................... Maitenanee: ................. ."............ $31,000$1,222,567 11,206 70,183 $7,000 $149,580 639,273 687,634 $1,474,944 1,373,093 ............ ............ ............ ............ 4,606 Ap ropriated................. ..................................... ............ 4,606 ................... 12. STIKINE RIVER, ALASKA Location. Rises in northwestern Canada and flows southwest- rlY through Canada for about 200 miles, then about 30 1es Westerly across Panhandle of Alaska to Sumner Strait. wouth of river is on coast of mainland about 3 miles north of rangell. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 8201:) ab 2isting project. Snagging Stikine River from its mouth out 30 miles to Canadian border. No data available concern- 1e stages of high and low water in river. At mouth, tidal range letween mean lower low water and mean higher high water is 9*3feet, and maximum range is about 25 feet. Tidal effects aVe been reported at a distance of 20 miles from the mouth. bXlsting project was adopted by 1935 River and Harbor Act (H. lo10 ,72d Cong., 1st sess., contains latest published map of Local cooperation. None required. 1?Terminal facilities. None along Alaskan portion of river. acisels operating on Stikine River are dependent on terminal aerilities at Wrangell Harbor. Two privately owned wharves ervlies a general cargo and passenger terminals, one of which in- cold-storage facility, are open for public use for mooring ad servicing small craft, and two privately owned floats serve Oibhandling facilities. Small-boat harbor facilities accommodate about 200 vessels. Operations and results during fiscal year. Removed 29 snags IVMay 1966 at a contract cost of $2,683. o Condition at end of fiscal year. Removal of snags between mouth river and Canadian border has been accomplished by contract Ilder maintenance funds as needed. Annual snag removal was itiated in 1964. 1678 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Cost and financial statement 13. VALDEZ HARBOR, ALASKA Location. At head of Valdez arm, a narrow tidal inlet e tending northeastward 26 miles from Prince William Sound ia Gulf of Alaska. It is 125 miles east of Anchorage, Al'a'- (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 8519 and 8551.) ort Previous project. For details see page 1604 of Annual epor for 1964. Existing project. Provides for sheltered, small-boat harbor relocated and land based, about 10 acres in area 12 feet deepa e mean lower low water including 3-acre berthing area and 7-acre anchorage area, with entrance channel 12 feet deep, protecter- two rock mound breakwaters 625 and 685 feet long. Plane of rer ence is mean lower low water. Tidal range between mean lwe low water and mean higher high water is 11.8 feet with an e treme range of 22.0 feet, based on pre-earthquake data. Existing project was authorized by the following: Acts Work authorized Documents e ss June 20, 1938 Dredge basin and divert creek............................ H. Doc. 415, 75th Cong., 2d ~s . (co '. (cOO' tains latest published maps)D Sept. 3, 1954 Rock and gravel breakwater 475 feet long and 2 pile break- H. Doc. 182, 83d Cong., 1'"t waters 490 feet long partially close west side. tains latest ublished maps),blished)* Aug. 19, 1964 Expand basin provided within relocated and rehabilitated (Map of modified harbornotP1 basin. Local cooperation. Fully complied with. ch Terminal facilities. All facilities were destroyed in Marce 1964 earthquake. Office of Emergency Planning has providea placement of one public owned wharf capable of handling generad cargo ocean going vessels. A ferry slip, boat launching ramP a grid as well as float facilities within the relocated small-boat ba.sil have also been furnished. Facilities are adequate for existl commerce. Operations and results during fiscal year. Regular fuad Relocation of harbor lines was initiated. de- Condition at end of fiscal year. Harbor was completelyland stroyed by March 1964 earthquake and large submarine tor* slide at harbor site necessitated relocation of equivalent autllr, ized harbor. Restoration phase for construction of bre waters and dredging of basin was initiated August 1964.e completed June 1965. Expansion phase dredging was initi a. December 1964 and essentially completed March 1965. Existi project was completed June 1965. Relocation of harbor lines underway. RIVERS AND HARBOR-ALASKA DISTRICT 1679 Cost and financial statement yTotal alyear............. 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 to June 30, 1966 N Work: ............................... APpropriated ..... $2,713 $415,000 $586,027 Mitest 2,713 369,053 $25,494 565,574 Apprriated.......... $118,000 -$4,988 221 ........................ 217,942 Rehaiit . ............. 7,150 111,809 221 ........................217,942 )1ation: APPropriated ........................ 87,000 -14,000 ............ 73,000 Cost ............. ..................... 36,888 36,112............ 73,000 14. RECONNAISSANCE AND CONDITION SURVEYS Date survey .Name of project conducted a1 Harbor ......................................... November 1965 Va Strait ........................................... December 1965 cky Pass ...................... ............... Nov.-Dec. 1965 rangel Narrows ........................ July 1965 15. OTHER AUTHORIZED NAVIGATION PROJECTS Forlast Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual Report Operation and for- Construction maintenance 2........................ ra Mout Of Yukon R.,Alaskal 1920 $128,896 $2,154 i 48 , , Alaskal. . . ................... .1958 377,260 4,138 P a rbor, Alaskai. ........... 1963 282,019 2,821 P ar, R . skal.. ............................ .. 1960 943,351 7,575 le.,Alaskal................................... 1959 154,191 555 1i l ael Channel, Alaskal........... ................... ..... 1964 789,461 121,681 Jliuk Iarbor, AAlaskal.................................... 1941 66,037............. 53,799 wthik ar r Iaskal............ ...................... 1964 1,381,150 Htk arbor, Alas1kal...96................... 1965 1,602,417 147,030 1956 4286,470 3,905 erlat iharbor, r, ................................... Alaskal 196125~i Chuck Harbor AlaskaS ... .................................. .................. 4 e9 t R, A skal............... ..................... 1960 155,009 4,893 Ne'tait.Alakal 1960 155,009 4,893 lrr, ........... 1954 ................................ a ka ........ ..... 1964 369,683 19,063 S ander, Alaskal ..................................... 1949 17,000 694 Oc a1'5r'r9 Ott and r,Alaska ls a .................................... . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . ....... . 1949 337,66 17 0 0. . ......... ......... 504:66 1,07 1...ek916 aHarborAlskal...............................1957 Wrane Hlarbor. Alaska5 ................................. 1963 ....... .............. gelNarrow 8 , Alaskal............................ 16 ,6,4 8,3 laet cmmended in H. Doe. 467 79th Cong. 1st sess 0rplete. 5a 1 idonment recommended in H. Doe. 467. 79th Conic., 1st sees. ob o Ilaintenance required at present. uacdes$40,000 expended from contributed funds. 8k d tO.Partly fund a joint civil works and maintenance project for emergency work on "y]Rver. 16. NAVIGATION WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Navigation activities pursuant to section 107, Public Law 86-645 (preauthorization) Tliscal year costs for preauthorization studies are $352 for Old ar'bor, Kodiak, Alaska; and $1,298 for St. Paul Island, Alaska. 1680 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S.ARMY, 1966 17. GOLD CREEK, ALASKA mOf Location. Rises in coastal mountains about 4 miles east d Juneau and flows through western section of city of Juneau and empties into Gastineau Channel. Its total length is about 5 nd and it drains an area of about 10.2 square miles. (See Coast a Geodetic Survey Chart 8235.)Re Previous projects. For details see page 1608 of Annual e port for 1964. Existing project. A reinforced-concrete channel lining 1,717 feet long for portion of Gold Creek passing through city of Juneu together with necessary intake and downstream energy dissipation structures. Project will provide protection to city of Juneau di a project flood of 4,800 cubic feet per second. Project modifled 1962 reinforcing concrete lining of channel, removal of material to form a catch basin, construct concrete weir or check dam and place derrick stone for channel protection at head of channel. Projec was authorized by 1954 Flood Control Act (H. Doc. 54, 82d Cong' 1st sess., contains latest map). Local cooperation. Fully complied with. lined Operations and results during fiscal year. Scouring e channel continued since completion of contract awarded in IMarcl 1962, and does not present an immediate problem. Suptple x't design memorandum will be submitted for approval early ' fiscal year. Condition at end of fiscal year. Construction of reinforce concrete-lined channel was commenced in April 1957 and cofl" pleted in March 1958. Establishment of staff gages in the strU" ture for engineering research purposes was accomplished in f tcal year 1960. Rehabilitation of channel lining and construees of a stilling basin was accomplished in 1962. Four test areas in the channel, each 25 feet long, were included to test materigl for cohesion and resistence to abrasion. Two of the four test areas installed in 1962 deteriorated and are considered failure. Cost and financial statement Fiscal 1962 year................ 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 16 New work: 84 604 Appropriated..........$109,500 ............$18,000 ............ $42084,4 Cost.............. ... 103,004 $2,827 14,751 $2,712 4,516 18. SKAGWAY, SKAGWAY RIVER, ALASKA Location. Skagway River rises in White Pass at boundary forb tween British Columbia and Alaska, and flows southwesterly f 14 miles to discharge into Taiya Inlet at town of Skagway, Alas' 94 miles northwest of Juneau. (See Coast and Geodetic surY Charts 8202 and 8303). . Existing project. Plan provides for restoration of exist breakwater to original project cross section and construction R 300-foot extension thereto; restoration of dike adjacent to c't ; and reconstruction of existing dike at sanatorium. Diurnal tid range at mouth of river is 16.9 feet, and extreme range is. feet. Approved (1964) cost estimate for new work is $1,173, FLOOD CONTROL--ALASKA DISTRICT 1681 S 1tilng project was authorized by 1946 Flood Control Act H. Doc. 9 79th Cong. 2d sess. contains latest published map). thocal cooperation. Local agencies must furnish assurances that 7t Will provide lands easements, rights-of-way, and quarry iats; hold the United States free from damages due to the im- b ovenindts; and in lieu of maintenance of the project dike and toward eak ater ' extension thereof, contribute $500 annually braintenance of reconstructed and extended city dike and harbor eakwater. Local interests have been advised of requirements. OPerations haa8 and results during fiscal year. Restudy of project been completed and negative report submitted. d Condition at end of fiscal year. No construction work has been polle. Operations have consisted of field and office studies and ePlaration of negative report. Cost and financial statement 1 Total to Year 1062 1963 1964 1965 1966 June 30, 1966 ,, Ac.propriated .. $5,000 $26,385 t...*........ ** 2,842 24,227 sance ............................... propriated .. 253 253 253 .......... ............................... ' INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS order to determine com- S11Spections are made of all projects ingiven aed of local interests with assurance to the United States rding maintenance. . Project location Date of inspection l ~ks oweani flood control, Alaska ......................... April 1966 N1 Creek at Seward, Alaska ........................ May 1966 YcOlRiver at Nenana, Alaska ......................... June 1966 ja- y River, Alaska ............................ ..... March 1966 leetna River, Alaska ............. **** **.............Feb. 1966 20. OTHER AUTHORIZED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS For last Cost to June 30, 1966 full report Name of project see Annual NmofpoetReport Construction Operation and _for- maintenance i 0 od control Alaska... ........................... . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. 1964 $310,000 $505 1945 557,000........... 1 I anana 6r River zALo.ell o and Chena Slough, Alaskal 16 19.... 2416,382 30,097 ......................................... 1963 * 3 637,770" 4163,324 * River,Ala,. let lver, as ka ............................... **** * ... .* ............. " eras......................................... 10leted and transferred to local interest for maintenance. tiddton. $25,000 expended from contributed funds. , r OddI!on $7,000 expended from contributed funds. on, $27, 400 expended from contributed funds. Iati lactire. des $34,197 expended from P.W.A. funds. 21 FLOOD CONTROL WORK UNDER SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION Flood control activities pursuant to section 205, Public Law 858, p 80th Congress, as amended (preauthorization) t ical year cost for preauthorization study was $4,102 for Klu- D river at Copper Center, Alaska. Preparation of a detailed Ject report for Klutina River was initiated, total cost $336. 1682 REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, 1966 Emergency flood control activities--repair,flood fighting, and rescue work (Public Law 99, 84th Congress, and antecedent legislation) Federal costs for fiscal year were $14,705 for advance preprao tion, $25,553 for flood emergency operations and $1,100,124 for disaster assistance administration. Snagging and clearing navigable streams and tributaries in interest of fd control (sec. 208, 1954 Flood Control Act, Public Law 780, 83d Congress) ld Emergency flood control contract was awarded October 22 ear for fiscal Year was completed November 2, 1965. Federal costs were $4,693. Emergency bank protection (sec. 14, 1946 Flood Control Act, Public Law 526, 79th Congress) and cOn* Emergency contract consisting of channel cleari an eted struction of a primary groin and six shorter groins was cOcoi0. November 14, 1965. Federal costs for fiscal year were $47,010. 22. SNETTISHAM, ALASKA the Location. At mouth of Speel River, between Crater Lake t of west and Long Lake to the north, 28 nautical miles south St) Juneau, Alaska. (See Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 82e2 oUt* Existing project. Provides for concrete gravity dam at rllit let of Long Lake to raise level of lake to elevation 895 and '170 two tunnels, one 6,000 feet long to tap Crater Lake, and on 0 'and feet long to tap Long Lake. Separate penstock tunnels 1,7Lto co 1,690 feet long will be drilled from respective lake tunnels oTP- vey water to a 70,000 kilowatt powerplant at tidewater leve.clude nel intakes, gate shafts, trashracks, and surge tanks are inpo in waterway construction. From the switchyard, adjacent to d to erplant, a 47.3 mile, 138,000-volt transmission line will extenco a substation near Juneau, Alaska. Estimated Federal cost o ved struction (1965) is $56,600,000. Existing project was appr by 1962 Flood Control Act. (H. Doc. 40, 87th Cong., 1st sess. Local cooperation. None required. an of Operations and results during fiscal year. Selection of P30ad development and general design memoranda were cornp"leteties approved by higher authority. Access and constructiOn fcroyal. design memorandum was completed and submitted for apP are Plans and specifications for access and construction facilitieesif essentially complete. Design work is underway on feature s'1'0 memoranda for powerhouse preliminary design report, tradiper sion facilities, power tunnel, surge tanks, valve, gatesanoutlet essntti co ntat stocks, dam,y spillway einwr and isunderwafon fcmpleestructure, intake goenand diversion fad*'1 works. Wate Condition at end of fiscal year. Hydrology, preliminaryn o plan, selection of plan of development and general desigthority randa have been completed and approved by higher aent ep- Construction by contract, of camp quarters for government ployees was initiated October and completed November 1964o. construction planning activities are nearing completion. GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS--ALASKA DISTRICT 1683 Cost and financial statement 23. OTHER AUTHORIZED MULTIPLE-PURPOSE PROJECTS INCLUDING POWER For last Cost to June 30, full report Name of project see Annual Report Operation and for- Construction maintenance .......... yLake, Alaska.............................. . 24. SURVEYS Scal year cost of $306,974 for surveys include $252,025 for 'iation studies, $11,291 for flood control studies, $27,630 for ch erosion studies, $16,028 for special study of Rampart Can- hydroelectric project. 25. COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA )ear gaging funds of $106,000 were transferred to U.S. fical Survey to operate and maintain 27 stream gages at following locations: Bradley River at Bradley Lake; Chandalar r ear Venetie; Glacier Creek near Girdwood; Hammer Slough etersburg; Kenai River at Soldotna; Ketchikan Creek at kan; Knik River near Palmer; Kobuk River at Kiana; ukuk at Hughes; Kuskokwim River at Crooked Creek; Kuskok- 1 iver at McGrath; Lowell Creek at Seward; Melozitna River e Ruby; Mill Creek at Wrangell; Nenana River near Nenana; ana River near Windy; Ninilchik River at Ninilchik; Porcu- River near Fort Yukon; Resurrection River at Seward; Sal- River at Hyder; Skagway River at Skagway; Snake River SNomne; Tanana River at Nenana; and the Yukon River at part Village, Eagle, Kaltag and Ruby. Transferred $8,400 eather Bureau to support ten climate stations and four wind lrng stations. Geological Survey, Water Quality Branch, col- d sediment and temperature data at eight locations at a cost 8,000 to Alaska District. Transferred $6,250 to Soil Con- ation Service for operation and maintenance of seven snow ses in Chena River basin and four snow courses in the Crater ;Long Lakes area near Juneau. Alaska District spent about 00 on operation and maintenance of 15 snow courses in Susitna er and Copper River Basins. 'od plain studies: Federal costs were $32,282 for completion plain study on Kenai River between Kenai and Soldotna. P(od BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS he Board by beoYcreated of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors is a continuing section 3, 1902 River and Harbor Act. The Board Con{rlses 7 senior engineer officers: The Chairman is the Deputy base of Engineers; 5 members are Division Engineers (rotative 1sis)from continental U.S. divisions; the seventh officer is as- S led full time as Resident Member and directs the staff. Ap- Do'irnents are made by the Chief of Engineers for unspecified Perodd s . dtp The Board meets on call of the Chairman. Statutory ses of the Board as set forth in the act of June 13, 1902, and le lequent acts and amendments are: (a) to conduct an inde- and handent review of survey reports covering projects for river by tor, flood control, and multiple-purpose improvements prepared of the Corps in response to an act of the Congress or a resolution its e House or Senate Public Works Committees; and to report beeconclusions and recommendations thereon to the Chief ofrecom- Engi- q ' who forwards the reports with his conclusions and C0 dations to the Secretary of the Army for transmission to the rgress; (b) to conduct an independent review ofChief all special re- ""1er a( rs orderedby " the " Congress and report 'etdbthe thereon in the same of Engi- e- er a.s for survey reports when directed by the Chief of Engi- fka' (c) to consider and approve general plans for major modi- otlr and reconstruction of any lock, canal, canalized river or th er Work for the use and benefit of navigation. All functions of of former Beach Erosion Board pertaining to review of reports atAVestigations made concerning erosion of the shores of coastal fer e waters, and the protection of such shores, were trans- toted to the Board under section 3, Public Law 88-172. Addi- k al statutory duties were assigned the Board under terms of tierchant Marine Act and various River and Harbor Acts, par- (0) lar ly that of September 22, 1922. Under these acts, the Board: com- Dil i cooperation with Maritime Administration, collects, U.S. ports: De and publishes information on characteristics of o sical characteristics of the ports are the responsibility of the the -' and administrative characteristics are the responsibility of cOlle aritime Administration; (b) provides staff supervision over Of ection and compilation of statistics on the volume and nature elco mnierce on inland waterways, which include entrance chan- ,, for ocean ports of the United States. Statistics are published t ually in two categories: "Waterborne Commerce of the United or e, in five parts (7 volumes), showing nature and amount of .. Olo ity, passenger, and vessel movements; and Transportation ,