Recognizing that the issues created by the committee staff report and the corps' answer were so broad and yet so specific in detail that hearings thereon in full would be difficult for the committee and for all concerned, I engaged in a series of conferences with General Pick, General Chorpening, and other members of the Corps of Engineers, commencing in May. This series of conferences was for the purpose of getting the facts and making constructive recommendations to the committee.

General Pick, General Chropening, and all the representatives of the corps have been cooperating in that venture, and so this morning I am gratified to report to the committee that we will be able to present the facts here, and General Pick will testify with reference to certain recommendations of improvement.

These conferences were attended, at the direction of the Secretary of the Army, by Fred Korth, Esq., deputy counselor of the Department of the Army, who is here this morning, and Mr. Harold Pearson of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for General Management.

At the conclusion of these conferences, by virtue of an arrangement which I had made with Mr. Korth, I crystallized in a report the facts as we have developed them and the procedural improvements that I would suggest to the committee. Yesterday this report was reviewed by Mr. Korth and representatives of the corps. It is printed in full below, commencing at page 67.

I understand that General Pick has been very intensively engaged in his duties, particularly because of the Kansas flood situation, and · that he has to go to Europe tomorrow on a military tour which will occupy him until the 24th of August.

These introductory remarks have been made to bring the committee up to date as to what we have accomplished.

Mr. Korth, before we proceed, is there anything you want to add to the statement I have just made?

Mr. KORTH. I think you have covered it very well. There is one point I want to make, which I am sure was not omitted intentionally, and that was that the date on which the report was submitted to the Corps of Engineers. From the statement you made it might appear that they may have had it some 6 months, when as I understand it was some 2 weeks.

Mr. DONNELLY. I think I gave the date as April 3, 1951, as the date that this committee turned it over to General Pick, and the corps' formal answer was filed 13 days later, on April 16, 1951. Mr. KORTH. Yes.

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION MADE BY COMMITTEE STAFF

Mr. DONNELLY. At the outset I would like, if I may, to invite the committee's attention to a map here on the easel which shows the projects which were studied in the field by the investigative staff of the committee, so that the committee will be aware of the scope of the investigation.

In the Columbia River Basin the committee visited McNary project, Lookout project, Detroit project, Lucky Peak project, and Willamette Falls lock, all in this area [indicating].

Down below, in California, on the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers: Pine Flat, Folsom, Isabella, and Farmington projects;

In the Missouri River Basin: Oahe and Fort Randall projects;

In the Ohio River Basin: Dillon Reservoir and Dewey Reservoir; In the Cumberland River Basin: Wolf Creek project, Center Hill project, Cheatham lock and dam project, and lock No. 4, Cumberland River;

In the Arkansas River Basin: Port Gibson project, and Tenkiller project;

In the Apalachicola River Basin: Jim Woodruff project and Buford project;

In the Ouachita River Basin: Blakley Mountain project, and Narrows project;

The Brazos River Basin: Whitney project; and

In the Trinity River Basin, Tex., Benbrook project.

These projects were actually under construction at the time the investigators of the committee visited them. The total amount involved in the construction, $1,422,686,900.

The investigative staff consisted of engineers, accountants, and investigators. They visited the field offices of the Corps of Engineers, that is, 3 division offices, and 10 district offices, and the staff members analyzed in each district two or more civil-works projects and examined the general practices and policies of the corps in the field of civil works. These analyses and examinations embraced a study and review of files, records, and reports, discussion with corps' personnel, and field trips to the construction sites of several projects. The projects which I identified and which the investigative staff studied total 25, which involve an estimated cost of approximately $12 billion 1951 construction costs.

In addition, the staff reviewed and discussed with corps' field personnel the bulk of all projects then under construction in each of the offices visited. The 10 district offices visited were supervising the construction of projects having an estimated cost of $2.9 billion, which represented approximately 50 percent of the total estimated cost of the projects comprising the fiscal year 1951 program, which was approximately $6 billion.

Mr. KERR. How long did the investigation take?

Mr. DONNELLY. Judge-from March 29, 1950, until January 23,

1951.

TESTIMOMY OF LT. GEN. LEWIS A. PICK-(Continued)

Now, General Pick, if I may, for the benefit of the committee, I would like to ask a few fundamental questions with reference to planning procedure. I do that because on April 3, 1951, members of this committee went into the fundamentals and I would therefore like to review with you briefly the planning procedure.

STATUTORY PROCEDURE FOR THE AUTHORIZATION OF CIVIL WORKS PROJECTS

First, General, may I ask if the present statutory procedure, leading to the authorization of projects by the Congress, is carefully regulated? General PICK. I do not understand-carefully regulated at present?

Mr. DONNELLY. Yes; by statute. Do you want the question restated?

General PICK. No; I am trying to think about the answer. I think it is. It is regulated by statute; yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. Let me state what I understand the statutory procedure to be. First the Congress in an omnibus river-and-harbor and flood-control act directs the Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary examination or survey of a proposed project. Is that correct?

General PICK. No; that is not exactly correct. It may be in an omnibus bill, or it may be as a result of a resolution of one of the committees the Public Works Committee of the House or of the Senate passes a resolution directing that a survey be made or a resurvey be made, or it may come in an omnibus bill.

Mr. DONNELLY. In any event, the corps, under the law, is not permitted to make a preliminary examination of a proposed project unless Congress by statute has directed the preliminary examination to be made?

General PICK. That is correct.

Mr. DONNELLY. General, when the corps, at the direction of the Congress, makes a preliminary examination it writes a preliminaryexamination report.

General PICK. That is correct.

Mr. DONNELLY. The preliminary-examination report is finally sent to the Congress when completed; is that correct?

General PICK. The preliminary examination report is acted upon by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors and by the Chief of Engineers, and submitted to the Secretary of the Army. He submits it to the Bureau of the Budget. After clearance by the Budget, it is presented to the Congress.

Mr. DONNELLY. That is the preliminary examination.

General PICK. The preliminary examination?

Mr. DONNELLY. Yes; that is the initial step?

General PICK. Yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. Yes; without going into too much detail, the preliminary-examination report, if unfavorable, is submitted to Congress, as I understand?

General PICK. Yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. But the preliminary-examination report, if favorable, is furnished the Secretary of the Army who, under the statute, has the authority to direct the Corps of Engineers to make a survey report?

General PICK. Yes; but I was outlining the procedure under which the survey report gets to the Congress.

Mr. BEARD. A favorable preliminary-examination report goes to survey, upon the discretion or direction of the Chief of Engineers; it does not go back to the Secretary of the Army.

General PICK. That is correct to an extent, with respect to the favorable preliminary survey, which includes the necessary estimate of funds for survey, which we submit to the Bureau of the Budget with the information in support of the request for funds.

In other words, suppose we ask for $2 million for surveys, we go to the Bureau of the Budget with a list of surveys on which we want to spend the money. That is how it gets into the actual survey work.

Mr. DONNELLY. General, if I may cite the statute: the statute is the act of March 4, 1913, printed now as 33 United States Code, section 545, and to paraphrase the statute, it says:

In the event the preliminary-examination report made by the Corps of Engineers is favorable, the Secretary of the Army is authorized in his discretion to order a survey report made, and the cost and advisability of the project reported to the Congress.

General PICK. That is right. But we request funds through the Bureau of the Budget. You see, when we make up our estimates for next year, our budget is necessarily taken up with the Comptroller General of the Army, and they work over it, and finally it is submitted to the Bureau of the Budget and they work over it. And finally it is included in the President's budget and sent to the Congress. But in making up the total sum for examination and surveys, we go to the Bureau of the Budget with a justification for that amount of money, and we have to show them where we are going to use it and what it is going to be used for. That is done, although the survey money might come to the Chief Engineer as a lump sum and he apportions it out on the surveys.

Mr. DONNELLY. Now, General, the survey report, when made by the Corps of Engineers, is referred to the congressional agency, the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, for its recommendation, is it not?

General PICK. When it is made by the division and district engineers it goes through channels to the Chief of Engineers. He sends it to the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors for their consideration. They go into it, examine it, study it, hold hearings, and reach a conclusion with respect to that particular report.

Then it goes back to the Chief of Engineers; the Chief of Engineers then writes his report and forwards it to the Secretary of the Army. Mr. DONNELLY. Then the Secretary of the Army formally transmits it by letter to the Congress?

General PICK. Formally transmits it through the Budget to Congress.

Mr. DONNELLY. And then if the survey report is a favorable report, Congress prints it as a congressional document, but if the survey report is unfavorable, it is not printed, with some exceptions.

General PICK. Yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. And those exceptions are where the project is of wide national interest, of some national importance; is that correct? General PICK. Yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. General, I have here House Document No. 643, Eightieth Congress, second session, "Comprehensive Report on Central and Southern Florida for Flood Control and Other Purposes." That, General, is a survey report, is it not?

General PICK. I think so, yes. Yes; the report shows resolutions adopted by Congress May 29, 1940; October 2, 1944; October 1945; and May 28, 1946. There are several resolutions involved. And that was reported on by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors and by the Chief of Engineers. It shows a report of the Board, a report of the Chief of Engineers; submitted by the Secretary of the Army, yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. Now, as to the survey report, is that the basis upon which the project is authorized and adopted by Congress?

General PICK. That is the basis for consideration by the Congress;

yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. And on the basis of such a survey report Congress in a statute adopts and authorizes the project, does it not?

General PICK. Yes. Congress takes the report, and then it holds hearings; the committee takes testimony, and that testimony, plus the report, is the record which is made by the Congress, and from that record the Committee on Public Works takes action either favorably or unfavorably. In this particular report it was favorable. The project was authorized.

Mr. DONNELLY. That is correct. And then Congress, by statute, on the basis of this survey report, formally authorizes and adopts the projects; is that correct?

General PICK. That is correct.

Mr. DONNELLY. Now, General, may I ask you this categorically: Is there any provision in the statutes with which you are familiar, which requires any report be made to the Congress on an authorized project, subsequent to the survey_report?

General PICK. Subsequent to the survey report-I do not know of any. Possibly the Public Works Committee might send it back and say they want the report reviewed and it would be reviewed and come back to the committee, but once that is finally acted upon, there is no other report.

Mr. DONNELLY. General, with respect to the revision as requested by the Public Works Committee, let me cite you the statute: This is the act of March 4, 1913, now published as 33 United States Code, section 542, and that provides that a resurvey may be made of projects which have previously been reported on in either a preliminary examination or survey report, at the request of the Committee on Public Works of either the House or the Senate.

General PICK. Yes; that is correct.

Mr. DONNELLY. Now, General, members of the corps have indicated that of the preliminary examinations and survey reports about 50 percent of them are unfavorable. Would you say that is correct?

General PICK. I had a survey made 2 years ago, I think, and I believe it ran higher than that almost 66 percent, based on the consideration of all resolutions which had been passed by Congress. There is a large percentage of them that are unfavorable, yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. And your survey shows 66 percent?

General PICK. That is right; during the whole 125 or 126 years that we have been studying them.

PLANNING OF PROJECTS AFTER THEY ARE AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS ON THE BASIS OF THE SURVEY REPORT

Mr. DONNELLY. General, after a project is authorized by statute on the basis of the survey report, the Corps of Engineers then asks the Congress for planning funds, does it not?

General PICK. That, in general, is the practice; yes.

Mr. DONNELLY. What is the purpose of the planning funds?

General PICK. The purpose of the planning funds is to get the work in such shape, to get the whole working plans, and to get the necessary plans and specifications prepared so that work can be put under way.