For the year 1960 the total anticipated demand is 28.1 million gallons per day as compared to a minimum supply derived from the ultimate development of presently owned water rights of 13.3 million gallons per day. Existing wells will provide an additional 2.9 million gallons per day, making a total of 16.1 million gallons per day available from all presently owned or controlled sources. If all of the conditions represented in this analysis actually prevailed it would be necessary to withdraw 12 million gallons per day, or a total of 4,380 million gallons during the year of minimum runoff. This withdrawal would represent 45 percent of the storage capacity now provided by the Colorado Springs system, as of 1957.

For an average year the supply available from surface sources would be 24.6 million gallons per day, which would be increased to 27.5 million gallons by the use of available ground water. For all practicable purposes, the necessity for withdrawal from storage to provide an average of 28.1 million gallons per day would be negligible.

The comparison for the year 1975 is based upon the assumption that all three potential sources of additional water supply will have been procured and developed by the city prior to that time.

Under this condition the total anticipated demand would be 38.4 million gallons per day, the production during a minimum year would be 31.7 million gallons per day, and the total production including ground water would be 34.6 million gallons per day. Accordingly, a deficiency of 3.8 million gallons per day would have to be withdrawn from storage. It should be pointed out, however, that the anticipated demand does not include any allowance for water requirements at Peterson Field or for water requirements that may result from proposed military construction that has not been announced. During a minimum year the requirement for these additional facilities would necessarily be withdrawn from storage but these requirements could certainly be fulfilled from available surface water during an average year.

Particular attention is directed to the fact that the city's experience in furnishing water for military installations provides an adequate reason for assuming that the actual usage will be a great deal less than the theoretical daily demand. During the time when Fort Carson (then Camp Carson) was occupied by approximately 52,000 people, the maximum actual daily usage was 3 million gallons as compared to a theoretical demand based upon military design criteria of 5 million gallons. It is important, also, that this was the maximum daily demand and that the average daily demand throughout any one year was considerably less than 80 percent of this maximum demand.

Upon the basis of this experience it is entirely logical to assume that the annual demand by military installations will be approximately 50 percent of the theoretical demand as determined by design criteria. If this condition should prevail, the theoretical requirement for water in 1960 would be reduced to 22.6 million gallons per day and the necessity for withdrawal from storage during a year of minimum production would be reduced to about 24 percent of the capacity of the storage reservoirs. This would be a reasonable withdrawal for a year of minimum supply.

Using the same reduction, the comparison for 1975 would indicate an estimated demand of 32.5 million gallons per day and the surface runoff during a minimum year would provide a surplus of 2.1 million gallons per day which could be used by military installations other than those which have been specifically included in this analysis.

The results of this analysis lead to the conclusion that if the city does develop all of the water available under its rights by 1960, its position in regard to furnishing the necessary water for the announced proposed military installations will be tenable but not satisfactory. The city should make every effort to obtain at least one of the potential sources of additional water supply prior to that time. It may also be concluded that if the city does procure all of the potential sources of water indicated in this report, or other comparable sources, it will be in a satisfactory position for supplying the water required by all announced proposed military facilities plus a substantial amount of other military facilities. Comparison of the results of the analysis with information previously submitted by the city establishes only two points of variation. For this analysis the amount of water available from the Blue River during years of minimum runoff has been taken as 52 percent of the average as compared to the 72 percent used by the city. The assumption used in this analysis represents the most extreme known condition. There is little doubt that when the actual development of the Blue River Basin by the city of Colorado Springs and the city of

Denver has been completed, arrangements will have been made under which tne municipal usages will not be curtailed to the extent assumed during years of minimum runoff. It is entirely possible that the 72 percent assumption of the city is more realistic than the assumption used in this analysis. It should be noted that if the city's assumption is correct, the increase in available water for both 1960 and 1975 would be appreciable.

The second variation relates to the difference between the actual demands and the theoretical demands at military installations. This difference has been discussed in a previous portion of this report and it is again emphasized that the estimated actual demands are probably more accurate than are the theoretical demands.

It has been impossible to establish a correlation between information set forth in this report and the yields which are included in an article titled, "Colorado Springs Gets Water From Western Slope," and included in the July 1954 issue of Waterworks Engineering. It is believed that the yields set forth in that article represent an estimate of water available from the east slopes sources of the city of Colorado Springs prepared upon the basis of average and minimum annual precipitation as set forth in the article. The yields contained in the article are somewhat higher than the anticipated yields included in this report and it is entirely probable that the determination of probable yields upon the basis of rainfall is more accurate than that based upon actual withdrawals from the east slopes systems. This statement is based upon the fact that prior to 1950 the records did not include water which was wasted from the supply system.

As previously stated, this analysis has been made upon the basis of readily available information and, therefore, cannot be considered conclusive. In order to prepare a conclusive report the following additional steps must be accomplished:

1. A detailed study of the decrees of the water rights now owned by the city to determine whether the present usage can continue indefinitely.

2. A tabulation and analysis of daily flows during the years for which records are available to establish the necessary reservoir capacity required to accomplish complete diversion of all available water and to assure adequate storage for a series of dry years.

3. A detailed investigation of the claims regarding the potential sources of additional water. These investigations must include the study of the water right decrees and an analysis of daily flows as mentioned for No. 1 and 2, plus a check upon the assumptions regarding yield from the watersheds.

4. An investigation of the potential maximum ground water supply. Under the conditions it is believed that such a detailed study cannot be justified A review of the results of this analysis indicates that the ability of the Colorado Springs water supply system to meet all anticipated demand is entirely dependent upon the procurement of additional sources of water. Potential sources of additional water are not limited to the three which are mentioned in this report but include many sources of water which are now being used for irrigation purposes. The preponderance of irrigation water that can be used for this purpose is such that the procurement of all necessary water is dependent only upon economic justification of the cost of such procurement.

The significant aspect regarding the probability of the city's procurement of additional sources of water supply is the continuing increase in cost of such procurement. It is often difficult or impossible to provide economic justification for the procurement of high-priced water without an established indication of demand for such water. It may be noted from the letter addressed to the Chief of Engineers, under the date of July 5, 1955, that the city anticipates a total requirement for military facilities of 7,778 acre-feet per year or 7.0 million gallons per day as compared to and ultimate requirement of 11.9 million gallons per day as set forth in this report. Based upon past experience, the city's assumption in this regard is sound. Without positive proof of additional future demands there can be no economic justification for the procurement of additional high-priced water.

Colonel SHULER. I am familiar with the Arizona and California problem on the upper Colorado River, and this has no effect on that. Mr. KILDAY. How about the frying pan problem? Colonel SHULER. I don't know about that.

Mr. BROOKS. Somebody called me the other morning at 3 a. m. to explain about the lack of water and they said they were on the other side of the divide, they were taking water from the other side of the divide and bringing it over to Colorado Springs, and the people didn't like that diversion of the water from one side of the divide to the other. He entertained me for 40 minutes the other morning at 3 a. m.

Colonel SHULER. This report goes very thoroughly into the entire situation.

The CHAIRMAN. That is what we are up against at Fort Carson. Of course, we don't want to interfere with training, but it looks like there will be ample land, water space and everything out there.

If it is all right with the committee, we will approve Fort Carson in acquiring 24,000 acres of land, but we will certainly have a few remarks about the value we place on the land.

Now Fort Benjamin Harrison, troop housing, $140,000.

Colonel SHULER. Fort Benjamin Harrison, Marion County, Indiana: mission, logistic support of Army Finance Center, Army Finance School, the Adjutant General School, and Headquarters, Indiana Military District.

Reconversion of 4 buildings to barracks, $140,000: This project is required to provide permanent housing for students attending the AG and Finance Schools at this station. The buildings being converted were former barracks buildings which were converted to classroom use at the time the schools were established at this station. A new academic building is now under construction and since these buildings will no longer be required for classrooms, it is planned to reconvert them to barracks use. The elimination of this project will result in not effectively utilizing the permanent buildings to their fullest advantage; it will require enlisted students to continue living in substandard quarters; and, it will prolong the high maintenance and operation costs in keeping World War II mobilization type barracks active.

May I divide these items into two categories. The first one is the third item on the page. I am on page 225, sir. The first item is the third item on the page, which is a BOQ with field ration mess at an estimated cost of $641,000 which we need sorely at Fort Leavenworth with regard to the Command and General Staff School and the other activities there.

Now the other group of items have to do with additional authorization over and above what we were provided last year, on a communications center building, a radio transmitter building, and a radio receiver building.

Now the reason for this, Mr. Chairman, is that further study on the Army communications facilities showed that if we added to this facility at Fort Leavenworth, we would not have to ask for an automatic relay center in the Fourth Army area-that is Fort Sam Houston at a later date. This would save us a lot of money, and I have an officer here from the Signal Corps with a map who can give further explanation.

The CHAIRMAN. We will approve it and go to Fort Riley, Kans., and St. Louis Supply Center. Fort Riley, $1,850,000.

Colonel SHULER. Fort Riley, Geary County, Kans.; mission, logistic support of infantry division and helicopter unit training.

71066-56-No. 61-13

This project is required for training and recreation for 4,000 enlisted men to be housed in a new area located approximately 4 miles from any existing theater. Except for the main theater all other theaters are of mobilization type and only adequate for the areas in which they are located. These 3 mobilization-type theaters have a total capacity of 2,678 seats. They are in good condition and will continue in use. The elimination of this project will necessitate personnel living in this area to travel distances of a minimum of 4 miles to the nearest theater with no assurance of obtaining seats. These conditions will adversely affect the welfare and morale of troops stationed here.

Regimental Headquarters, $146,000: This project is required to provide an administrative facility for troops which will be stationed in the new permanent area, Custer Hill development. Present need is being met by the use of a mobilization-type building, located in Camp Funston, 8 miles distant. When no longer required this mobilizationtype building will be disposed of. The elimination of this project will necessitate the continuous use of existing mobilization-type facility, remotely located with attendant ineffectiveness of command and administration.

Regimental gymnasium, $365,000: This project is required to provide recreational facilities that cannot be furnished otherwise for the enlisted men that will be stationed at the new Custer Hill development. Present need is being met by the use of two field houses located in Fort Riley and Camp Funston. They were built primarily for athletic contests, namely for intrapost and Fifth Army competitive sports and are not suitable for contests on the battalion and regimental level. In addition the two field houses are not conveniently accessible to troops housed at Custer Hill. Fort Riley is 4 miles and Camp Funston 8 miles distant from the Custer Hill site. The elimination of this project will deny recreational facilities for troops stationed in the Custer Hill site.

Regimental chapel, $191,000: This project is required to provide religious facilities for the enlisted men that will be stationed in the new Custer Hill development. The Custer Hill development is a division area, and will have permanent facilities, which will replace the existing mobilization-type facilities of Camp Funston. Present need is being met by the use of mobilization-type building, 3,746 square feet, built in 1940 at Camp Funston. The elimination of this project will necessitate the continuous use of existing mobilization-type building at Camp Funston which is not large enough to accommodate the troops stationed at the Custer Hill site.

Bachelor officers' quarters, $314,000: This project is required to provide permanent housing for nurses assigned to the 250-bed hospital now under construction at Fort Riley. Present need is being met by the use of a mobilization-type bachelor officers' quarters which is one-half mile distant from the hospital site. The elimination of this project will necessitate the continuous use of existing temporary-type facility. Nurses subject to call would be one-half mile distant from the hospital site and nurses must be available on a 24-hour basis.

Enlisted men barracks (Medical Detachment), $323,000: The barracks for 198 enlisted men (medical) is required as no permanent quarters presently exist to house the enlisted men required for operation of a hospital with 250 beds which has been approved for construc

tion.

Existing housing is mobilization-type construction, located one-half mile from the hospital site. Permanent quarters are required at the new hospital site for efficient operation of the hospital. Corpsmen are required on a 24-hour basis and also are on call for emergency service. Failure to provide this barracks will necessitate continuation of poor living conditions in substandard facilities improperly located with respect to the new hospital.

Expansion of water supply facilities, $180,000: Two additional wells are required to handle the increased load of the permanent strength of the installation. Existing water supply facilities consist of two each 1,000 gallons per minute, two each 500 gallons per minute, and one each 300 gallons per minute pumps. The 5 pumps existing are capable of producing 3,200,000 gallons per day if operated 16 hours per day. The present average daily demand of the post is approximately 3,600,000 gallons per day. The anticipated demand based on permanent strength is 5,100,000 gallons per day. Two additional wells, each capable of producing 1,000 gallons per minute (1,900,000 gallons per day), are necessary to provide for the total demands of this installation.

As you know, this is logistic support of an infantry center and we have helicopter training here.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the item is approved.
St. Louis Supply Center.

St. Louis Area Support Center, St. Louis County, Mo., $3,346,000. Colonel SHULER. St. Louis Area Support Center, St. Louis County, Mo.; mission to provide administrative and logistical support to all Army activities in the St. Louis area.

The relocation of the St. Louis Medical Depot from St. Louis, Mo. to Louisville, Ky. completed in January 1956 made available 848,340 square feet of unoccupied warehouse space. 562,423 square feet is needed to house this activity. This project proposes converting 497,423 square feet of this space to office-type occupancy and the installation of air-conditioning. This conversion will provide Government-owned space for Army activities now occupying leased space at an annual rental of $1,095,423 in the St. Louis area for which no Governmentowned space is currently available. It will also provide space for the relocation of the Armed Forces Examining Station now located in GSA property, which if not relocated will require expenditure of $120,000 for necessary improvements. Cost of conversion of this facility will be amortized over a 5-year period taking into account the annual repairs and utilities cost estimated at $421,817.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that comparable to the supply center in Atlanta ? Colonel SHULER. I don't believe it is, sir. This is a support center for the whole St. Louis area.

The CHAIRMAN. What, exactly, is a support center?

Colonel SHULER. This means, sir, that we will put a lot of Government activities in this one building. What this amounts to is that by converting this warehouse space to office space, we will eliminate the payment of $1,095,423 in annual rental by getting these Government agencies out of these rental places and putting them in this building. The CHAIRMAN. You have intrigued me now with a new line of approach. These are various different Army activities scattered about over the country.