Evening star., 1932-04-27
OFFICIALS SILENT
ON BROWN REPORT
Chief of Engineers Statement
on Great Falls Seen Favor
able to Park Plans.

EdIh anu ItidbAl6
to the report of Maj. Gen. Lyle Brown,
chief of Army engineers, dealing with
food control, navigation and hydro
electric development of the Potomac
River and its tributaries. They adopted
the attitude that nothing will be done
in the near future on hydroelectric de-
velopment at Great Falls as Congress
has enjoined any such move without its
express permission. The report, how
ever, was generally regarded as favorable
to the commissions stand in desiring
that Great Falls be retained as park,
but the officials declined to permit the
use of their names.
A paradoxical status was seen by the
officials in the stand of Congress, which
has said, in effect, to the water power
interests: You can't develop electricity
at Great Falls because the public needs
this for a park" but on the other hand
is throttling appropriations for the pur-
chase of land for the George Washing
ton Memorial Parkway, which embraces
Great Falls.
Lieut.. Col. U. S. Grant, Sd, vice chair
man and executive officer of the COM
mission, declined to comment on the
report as he has been out of the city
for the past few days and has not
studied it closely He said he is unable
to speak for the commission, before
which the report will be laid at its May
meeting.
Chance for Private Project.
Planning officials said they have not
had an opportunity, to study in detail
the report of Mai. Gen. Brown, who
recommended that mo work be done
by the Federal Government on the Po-
tomac River in connection with power
development or irrigation" Those
favoring hydroelectric development at
Great Falls said this leaves the way
open for power development by private
interests.
Gen. Brown is, by virtue of his Office,
member of the National Capital Park and
Planning Commission. which has gone
on record as opposing any power de-
velopment at Great Falls, insisting that
this area must be preserved in its natu-
raj state to be incorporated in the
George Washington Memorial Parkway.
officials of the United States Engineer
Office asserted that Gen. Browns re-
port. which was forwarded to Congress
on Saturday, does not say that power
DEVELOPMENT at Great Falls is not
economically feasible.
couple of years ago Mai. Brehon
Eomervell, at that time district engineer
for the War Department for the Wash
ington area, went on record as favorlng
power development at Great Falls.
Lieut.. Col Grant insisted that only park
development be permitted in the Great
Falls region. The late Lieut.. Gen. Ed
gar Jadwin, Gen. Browns predecessor
as chief of Army Engineers, also
member of the commission, backed
up Mai. Somervell in holding that
both park and power development were
feasible at Great Falls. This is the
attitude taken by Gen. Brown in his
report officials of the district engineers
Office asserted.
National Survey.
The report on navigation. flood con-
troll and hydroelectric development on
the Potomac is part of Nation-w
survey being conducted by Gen. Brown
and his associates to take stock OF the |
ccuntrys resources and adopt pre- |
Yentive measures against floods.
The Potomac River survey represents |
years of study by the district engineer |
and his associates. The present dis !
trict engineer for the War Department |
for this area is Maj. Joseph D. Arthur, |
jr. The field survey in the Potomac |
River Basin was started in January, |
1929. The report was completed by |
the district engineer in December last |
and sent to Gen. Brown for his study !
and comment Various possible COM
binations to develop the maximum pow !
er possible are set out in the report.
Under the present law, the Federal |
Power Commission is restrained from /,
granting any permit for hydroelectric |
development of power at Great Falls.
Selects Three Sites.
In his report Gen. Brown asserts that !
comprehensive development Of the pow
er resources of the Potomac River |
basin would provide a large amount !
of storage, which would reduce flood |
damage at Washington, but would not
eliminate it if the reservoirs were full
when the storm occurred" I
Dealing with water power, Gen. Brown |
said the most important section of |
the river from power standpoint lies
between Harpers Ferry and the north |
western boundary Of the District" He
says the power of this section of the
river could be developed by several pos
sible combinations of plants, adding that
the District engineer recommends the
utilization of three sites, which re
17' and Great Falls" sites.
OF the Chain Bridge site, he saws the
District engineer proposes a masonry
dam, which would afford a highway
crossing and would raise the water sur
face about 80 feet forming a lake ex-
tending up the gorge but not reaching
beyond the foot of the main rapids at
Great Falls.
Gen. Browns report continues, with
reference to the Chain Bridge site:
For the Independent oeye.opment Of
this site, he (the District engineer)
proposes to use a draWdoWn of IS feet
in this lake and to provide an installed
capacity of 114,00O kilowatts The total
energy that could be produced In a year
OF average run-of would be about
400, 200, ,000-kilowatt hours, of which
about 10 per cent would be primary
power. The drawdown of the lake for
seasonal storage would be Objectionable
from scenic standpoint. A drawdown
OF few inches would be sufficient to
meet daily peak loads. With the draw
down so limited prime power would be
reduced by nearly 40 per cent. The
estimated cost Of this development is
$8,3l2, 600"
Comment on Lock II.
OF the lock IT site, Gen. Brown has
this to say:
This site is adjacent to Great Falls.
From the present aqueduct dam above
the falls, water would be carried to the
power house through an enlargement of
the present channel along the Maryland
shore between the mainland and Great
Falls Island. The power house would
be placed near the foot of the island
Since no storage is available it would
be necessary in order to avoid destroy
ing scenic effects Of the falls to close
down this plant during the low water
season. The power would, therefore, all
be secondary and would amount TO
about 350,000,000 kiloWatt hours in an
average year. The total estimated cost
is S4.285 600"
The Great Falls site evokes this COM
ment from Gen. Brown:
THE site which the District Engineer
deSignates by this name is not located
in the immediate vicinity of Great