xt70zp3vt865_125 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70zp3vt865/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70zp3vt865/data/63m46.dao.xml unknown 14 Cubic Feet 31 boxes archival material 63m46 English University of Kentucky Copyright has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky.  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Harkins Family papers Mineral rights -- Kentucky -- Floyd County -- History. Law reports, digests, etc. -- Kentucky. Mining leases -- Kentucky -- Floyd County -- History. Practice of law -- Kentucky. Bankers -- Kentucky. Banks and banking -- Kentucky -- Prestonsburg. Coal trade -- Kentucky -- Floyd County -- History. Lawyers -- Kentucky. Big Sandy Valley Association text Big Sandy Valley Association 2016 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70zp3vt865/data/63m46/Box_16/Folder_2/0001.pdf 1945-1947, undated 1947 1945-1947, undated section false xt70zp3vt865_125 xt70zp3vt865 LAW OFFICES
February 5, 1945.
Mr. Joseph P. Harkins, Jr.,
Dear Mr. Harkinsz—
Herein my notion of what our plan of organization
should be. Of course, at present, it is only something
for all of us to "shoot at."
Read it carefully and be prepared to suggest modi-
fications and additions when we meet here next Friday night.
Very truly yours,

 8’ ' 5 ad ‘Wd!

6? d 7 6%

Herein is a brief statement of the aims and
purposes of this organization. what it is, and
what it is doing and trying to do.

1. The office of the Association is

Suite 1010,
Second National Bank Building,
Ashland, Kentucky.

2. It is a non-profit Kentucky Corpora—
tion, with members, individual and corporate, in
each of the Counties in the valley of the Big
Sandy and its main tributaries, Tug and Levisa.

3. The Corporation has one or more
directors in each County in the valley. Its ex—
ecutive affairs are conducted by an Executive

4. Its officers, in 1945, are:

President—Dr. O. W. Thompson,

Pikeville, Kentucky.
Secretary—Lewis Tierney,

Bluefield, W. Va.
Executive Vice—President—

E. M. Merrill,

Suite 1010,

Second National Bank


Ashland, Kentucky.

All communications should be addressed
to the Ashland office.


5. Its prime purpose is to promote and f
expand the well—being of all in the valley, its
natural resources, transportation facilities, in— ‘
dustrial and agricultural interests.

6. Just now, one of its main purposes
is to make seaports of Williamson and Pikeville
and all of the towns and villages between them i
and the Ohio River, by promoting a system of 1
locks and dams in the Big Sandy and in Tug and ,
Levisa which will render them navigable for ‘
steamers and barges the year around, with a
nine-foot stage of water.

7. The Association is earnestly engaged
in this work and, through its officers and direc—
tors, expects to continue until the proposed sys—
tem is completed. All those resident here and
engaged in business here, who believe such in—
stallation is desirable should unite in the effort
by becoming members of the Association, and
lending active aid to its work.

8. The proposal is feasible and desir—
able. The Corps of U. S. Engineers has expend—
ed $400,000 during the past five years, and has
completed surveys and studies and has found
that the Big Sandy, Tug and Levisa Forks,
thereof can be made navigable as far up stream
from the Ohio as Sprigg, on the Tug Fork, and
as far as Russell Fork on the Levisa Fork. That,
with the placement of ten dams and proper stor—
age basins, there will be then available, a nine—
foot stage of slack water the year around.

 9. Other valleys and sections have slack

water — some less important than this valley—
’ and we in this valley should vigorously seek to
l bring it here.

10. For more than a half—century, the
U. S. Congress, working through its Rivers and
Harbors Committee, upon recommendation of the
Engineers of the War Department, has been
authorizing and appropriating government funds
for use in improving rivers and harbors. Usually

. public funds so employed are returned manifold
, in the benefits and savings resulting from the

11. Not to mention the other products
which could use water transportation, if avail—
able, this project has two and a half billion tons
of coal within ten miles of the slack water, and
a saving of only ten cents the ton would mean
two hundred fifty million dollars saved in freight
rates, on shipping that quantity of coal alone.

12. Water transportation rates are much
lower than rail or truck rates and this alone will
more than justify the expense of this system,
To illustrate: the rail rate on a ton of coal from
the Williamson or Pikeville coal field to Cincin—
nati is now about $1.90. The cost for water
transportation, with the completion of the system,
would be just about one—half that.

13. Moreover, the streams would be
beautified, there would be fine pools for fishing
and boating and swimming in addition to the
cheaper transportation afforded.

, .

 14. It is estimated it will require several
years to complete the whole project. Our job
is to get it started. and then push it through.
Your job is to join up and help. Don’t sit by and
leave the work to a few. Turn in and help.
15, Soon, we will have danger of unem—
ployment. The actual work of dredging the
river and constructing the locks and dams will
require the labor of several thousand men for
several years — this is worth considering.
16. If you want more information, write
the Ashland office. If you are ready to join, see
the director for your County. Annual dues for
individuals are $5. Corporate dues are from $25
up, according to capitalization. Enclosed is an
application blank. Sign and return it.
Big Sandy Valley Association,
1010 Second National Bank Building,
Ashland, Kentucky.

July, 1945

 ‘ _._ _
.__-.'.: CGPY GI? ’
Randolph Bias 2 . V
_ Cinderella Building, . .
‘ Williamson, 23.2.73. , .
Illness prevents my attanaence at meeting tonight.
J .R. Hurt. and I nominate Bud White, Prestonsburg as
director at large. '
‘ JoDo Harkins, Jr.
Phone 3701 ,

Thken Fro: Remarks of E. H. lerrill
hbmry 24. 1945
It is first necessary to educate the residents of the Big Sandy

River Valley of the desirability of the project of canalising the Levine
and Tug Forks. It is necessary to point out to then the benefits which
thoy end the industry in the area and adjacent areas will accrue from the
project. This should be done by preparing a prospectus to contain naps
showing the Big Sandy with both of its forks and the proposed locks and
-dnns thereon. There should he naps setting forth the districts which
will be competitive to teter~borns transportation and outline of the
coll fields to he served, with particular attention to indicate the amount
of recoverable cool within s three ails sons from the developnent, and

.3 tithin\a ten silo sons fro: the development. The economic survey, node by

1* tho Unitod States Engineers, indieetee that within a three wile sons there
are in excess of 781,000,000 tons of recoverable coal and, within e ten
sile sons, there are 1,957,944,051 tons of coal, or enough cool to Justify
125 years of s\ter;borne transportation in that commodity alone. The
quality of the Big Sandy coals should be stressed, and the volume of the
prospective ssrkets should be broughtout. The econosic survey indicated
that in towns lying udgccent to the Ohio, Hisoissiypi, Missouri, and
Illinois Riversjthero were markets which would absorb 30,000,000 tons per
yeer. Savings from this moons of transportation to Cutletsburg would be
40¢ per ton; to Cincinnati, 81.14 per ton; to St. Louis, 60¢ per ton;
to Chicsgo, tron 40¢ to $1.02 per ton; and to the Shin Cities 81.05% per
ton; or o total annual sevings on freight alone of $3,270,000 — sufficient
to Justify a $60,000,000 investsent. It should be brought out that in
addition to cool the transportation of oil, lusher, end other products,

 would tend to greatly assist in the industrialization of the Levies and
Tug Forks, and there would be provided an outstanding recreational facility.
The steps required to accomplish the cenulizution of the Big
Sandy are -
1. To obtain support in the ereee immedintely effected through
' the prospectus, personal contacts, the press, and Association
meetings with good outside speakers.

2. Immediately upon the approval by the army engineers to identify
the Association with the several river associations in Washington
to become active with than.

3. To get Congressional and Senatorial approval from Representatives
from Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia.

4. Contacts by strong delegations in the Senate, Congreee, war

‘ Department, Arly Engineers, and Rivera & Harbors Committee.
/ 5. than approval is obtained, apply all possible pressure to get
3 the funds made available so that the actual work of caneliaetion
,I’ my be started.

' In mailing you the extracts of the Engineer's reports regarding
Big Sandy, I am assuming that you will not violate the conditions
’ under which we were given access to these reports.

a In order that you may be fully advised the following communica—
tion was received from Col. C.L. Hall, Division Engineer and your
particular attention is directed to the next to the last paragraph, ’
key statement in which is underscored; ~

ORDER 8 June l9h5
Subject: Notice of Partially Favorable Report on Survey of Big
Sandy River and Tug and Levisa Forks, Kyo. W. Va., and
Va., for Flood Control and Navigation.
Dear Sir:

It having come to the notice of the undersigned that you have
expressed an interest in the pending proposition for the improve-
ment of the Big Sandy River and Tug and Levisa Forks for flood
control and navigation, you are hereby informed that the report
thereon, authorized by the Acts of Congress, approved June 22,1936
(Public No. 738, 7hth Congress) and June 25, 1936 (Public No. 815,
7hth Congress), and by a Resolution of the Committee on Rivers
and Harbors, House of Representatives, adopted January 19, 19LO,
has been made by the District and Division Engineers and is
partially favorable to the improvements desired. The report is
wholly favorable to the navigation improvements desired, in that
it recommends canalization.to obtain a 9-foot project depth from
the mouth of the Big Sandy River to Sprigg, West Virginia, on Tug
Fork, and to the junction of Levisa and Russell Forks on Levisa '
Fork, by the construction of two locks and dams on Big Sandy River
and four locks and dams each on Tug and Levisa Forks. Local
interests would be required to construct adequate terminal and
transfer facilities for utilization of the waterways and to main-
tain all relocated railroads and highways and all bridges and,
utilities affected by the project. The report is unfavorable to
the construction of any improvements for flood contrOl at this
time, except for Dewey Reservoir on Johns Creek; a project which
is authorized at the present time. The principal reason for not
recommending any additional improvements for flood control is
the lack of sufficient benefits to justify the costs involved.

You are further notified that all interested parties have
the privilege of an appeal from this conclusion to the Board of
Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, a permanent body sitting at
washington, D.C., to which all examination.and survey reports of
this character are referred. Parties desiring to present any
statements or facts concerning the proposed improvements may be
heard on appeal by the Board either orally or in writing. Written
communications should be addressed to the Board of Engineers for
Rivers and Harbors, No. 2 New York Avenue, N.W., washington 25,
D.C., and should be mailed in time to be in the possession of
the said Board within four weeks from thetiate of this communi-
cation. II, however, you have important data to communicate to
the Board which cannot be collected and put in shape for proper
presentation within four weeks, the Board should be informed

 of this fact without delay and request made for an extension or

the limiting date for submitting information. If Oral hearings .
are desired, dates for the same may be arranged for by corres-

pondence With the Board.

Any further information needed may be obtained by application
to the U.S. Engineer Office, Huntington 18, W. Va., or to this
office, but attention is invited to the following regulation as
to the manner in which such information may be furnished.

"Where interested parties desire date necessary for

the preparation of their appeal to the Board of Engineers

for Rivers and Harbors, they will be afforded full op—

portunity to examine the contents of the reports of the

District and Division Engineers in their respective

offices, subject to the understanding that no part

of the contents of these reports Will.h§.EUbl shed in

the newspapers or otherwise until the re orts have

been submltted to Con ress. copies of tfie reports

will not be furnished or loaned for use outside of

the office, but interested parties will be permitted

to make such notes of the contents as they desire."

You are requested to communicate the foregoing to any persons
known by you to be interested in the improvements and who, not
being known to this office, do not receive a copy of this com-

(Signed) C.L. Hall


Colonel, Corps of Englneers
Division Engineer"

,' _ COLLMBUS 16, OHIO ' ‘
8 June 19245
Subject: Notice of Partially Favorable Resort on Survey of Big Sandy River
and Tug and Levise Forks, Ky., T. Va., and Ve., for Flood Control
and Navigation. '
Deer Sir:

It heving Come to the notice of the undersigned thpt you hevc expressed
en interest in the bending orooosition for the improvement of the Big Sendy
River and Tug and Levisa Forks for flood control and nevigetion, you or:
hereby informed that the report thereon, authorized by the Acts of Consrcss '
epnrovcd June 22, 1936 (Public No. 758, Tuth Congress) and June 25, 1936
(Public No. 81}, 7hth Convross), and by a Resolution of the Committee on
Rivers end Herbors, House of Representatives, edonted Jenucrv 19, lQhO, has
been medo by the District and Division Engineers end is oertifllv fevoreblo
to the imorovomonts desired. The ronort is Wholly favoreble to the DPVlgfl—
tion imorovnnents desired, in thEt it recommends cenelizetion to othEn a
9-foot uroject depth from the mouth of the Big Sandy River to Sprigg, fast
Virginia, on Tug Fork, and to the junction of Levise and Russell Forks on
Lovise Fork, by the construction of two locks end dams on Big Sandy River
end four locks end dams each on Tug end Levise Forks. Locol interests would
be reouired to construct edecuate terminal end trensfor fecilities for utili—
zation of the waterways and to meintein ell relocoted rrilrocds and highways
end all bridges and utilities effected by tho uroject. The resort is un—
fovoroble to the construction of eny imnrovements for flood control et this
time, exccut for Dewey ReServoir on Johns Creek, a project which is ruthorized
9t the present time. The orincinel roeson for not recommending eny edditionel
improvements for flood control is the lock of sufficient benefits to justify
the costs involved.

You are further notified that ell interested pertics hsvo the oriviloge
of en eopcel from this conclusion to the Board of Engine rs for Rr7ers 5nd MM
Herbors, r nermenent body sitting 5t Washington, D.C., to which ell 3X“mine-
tion end survey resorts of this cherrcter are referred. Perti s desiring to
present any stntomonts or facts concerning the proposed imorovmnvnts m'y be
heerd on epoool by the Boerd either orelly or in writing. written communica—
tions should bo addressed to the Boerd of Engineers for Rivers end Harbors,
No. 2 New York Avenue, N.W., mes‘nington 25, D.C., end should bx mailed in
time to be in the mossession of tho ssid Boerd within four Weeks from the
dots of this communication. If, howavor, you hrvo importent drto to communi—
cete to the Borrd Which cannot be collected and out in sheoo for oronor
orosentotion Within four weeks, the Borrd should be informed of this feat
without doley and roouest made for en extension of the limiting date for
submitting information. If orel heerings are d'sired, drtos for the some
mey be errenged for by corresoondoncc with the Boerd.

- 1 _

 Any further infonnstion needed may be obtained by Poplicrtion to tha
‘ U. S. Engineer Office, Huntington 18, W. Vf., or to this office, but Pttontion
is invitod to the following regulption Ps to tho msnncr in which such informs—
tion mPy be furnished.

' myhero interested norties-dosiro data necessrrv for the nronsro—

tion of their apnosl to the Board of Engineers for Rivovs Fnd Horbors,

they will be affordmd full onoortunitv to exomino thw contents of the
reports of the District 9nd Division Engincors in their résnectivo
offices, subject to the understsnding thst no nort of the ccntents of
these riports will be nublished in the newsnspers or otherwise until

the reports havo been submitted to Congress. Genius of the reports

will not be fhrnished or loaned for use outside of th: office, but

interested parties will bo normittad to msko such notes of tho contgnts

PS thoy dosiro."

You Pro requested to communicpto tho foregoing to any persons known by yet
to be intorgstid in tho imnrovcments Pnd who, not being known to this office,
do not recoivo a copy of this communicstion. ‘ _

' i ,R’ #1, i 3‘ '
. . LL/I-‘HKJF if “Eli/v QM] .
C. L. HALL -
- Colonel, Corns of Enginssrs
Division Engineer »


(Extracts taken hurriedly from The ma; District Engineer and

Ohio Division Engineer reports on The Big Sandy River Naviga~

tion project by Ernest M. Merrill on June 26 _and 27. More

comprehensive notes could not be taken on accOunt of lack of
time. It is interesting to note that four representatives

of The Norfolk and Western Railway had been screening these

reports for four days before Merrill arrived.)

Subject: Transmittal of Report of Big Sandy River and Tug

and Levisa st., W. Va., Va., and Ky., for Flood .
Control and Navigation.

H. 800.92 (Big Sandy R.) - 2 H. ORDGR. lst. ind.

Office Division Engineer, Ohio River Division, Columbus, 0.

25 May l9h5.

To: Chief of Engineers, washington 25, D.C. For SPEKW.

Omit l, 2, 3, h & 5.

Paragraph 6. The engineering plan presented by The District
Engineer for the navigation project is considered quite satisfactory
for the purposes of this report. It does suggest, however, the
desirability of further consideration of the following comments in
the event the project is authorized and more detailed planning is

a. The location of some of the locks and dams might possibly
be improved for better foundation or approach conditions and for
equalizing lifts. In the latter regard Dams Nos. 7 and 8 appear
susceptible of improvement, which would include an easing of the
water supply problem.

3. The location and type of Dam No. 1 should be studied further
for danger of flanking around the abutment end.

3. The proposed clearance at 5 feet between dam gates in the
raised position and high water seems rather small in view of the
narrowness of the valleys and the steep character of the watershed.

Q. Further study of the water supply problem should involve:

(l) Adjustment of lifts to reach the minimum requirement.

(2) Study of small reservoirs which may supply a part of
the ultimate requirement and produce incidental benefits.

(3) Possibility of deferring installation of at least some
of the pumping capacity until such time as the actual traffic re—
quires it.

C.L. Hall
Colonel, Corps of Engineers,
Division Engineer.

 5 may 19h5
Subject: Transmittal of Report on Survey of Big Sandy River and
Tug Fork and Levisa Fork, Ky., W.Va., and Va., for Flood
Control and Navigation. 1
To: The Chief of bngineers, U.S. Army, Washington, D.C.£SPEKW)
(through The Division Engineer, Ohio River Division,
Columbus 16, Ohio (ORDEP).
l, 2, 3 & h omitted.
5. The Governors, or designated representatives of the
States of Ky., Va., and W. Va., have been notified that this office is
forwarding the subject report to the Div. Engr., Ohio Riv. Div., for
review. In the event that any expressions are received from these
agencies they will be forwarded for appending to the report.
‘ Harry Pockras,
Lt. Col. Corps of Engineers
District Engineer.
Paragraph 121 - pg. 13§.
Total Market demand for water—borne coals. Table E in Appendix
C, presents a detailed analysis of the questionaire returns, showing
the relationship between normal annual reouirements of the several .
types of coal from sources now used by firms and persons contacted,
and the prospective tonnage which they would obtain from the Big
Sandy, or other southern fields, in view of the reduced cost result-
ing from water transportation.
Paragraph 122 - pg. 136
Since conditions with regard to prevailing rail and water freight
rates, switching charges, and accessibility to waterways are consider.
ed to be analogous, if not identical in the canvassed and uncanvassed
markets. The relationship shown by the partial canvass has been ap-
plied to the known normal consumption of each type of coal as given
in detail by the records of the Solid Fuels Branch of the Interior
Department, and included in the total tonnage of 80,33L,000t. The
prospective coal tonnages thus obtained are shown in Appendix C. to be
3h,700,000t. of high volatile and 11,300,000 t. of low volatile; in
all, h6,000,000 t.
Paragraph 122. The foregoing tonnage would produce a savings much
greater than necessary to Justify even the most extraordinary expendi-
ture for an adequate, modernized navigation system, and exceeds the
tonnage which the contemplated facilities could readily handle, in
towing units adapted to this waterway. 0mmission.
The annual prOSpective movement for both the canvassed and uncanvassed
markets, as used for computing benefits, was, for the above reason,
reduced to only 15,000,000 t. of high-volatile coal; a tonnage which
would neither overtax the waterway, nor exceed the average annual
tonnage capable of being maintained for 50 yr. by reserves directly
accessible to the waterway. The prospective movement of low-volatile,
or smokeless, coals has been totally disregarded, because it is
dependent upon the establishment of a proportional rail-rate not now
in force, although there is apparently ample precedent for its es-
tablishment, and the smokeless producers claim they could and would
obtain and make use of it for large shipments via Tug Fork.
Paragraph 12g - pg, 132 - River cost estimated at 33¢ per ton as
age nst 2¢ per ton .o.b. barge cost by rail. , 15,000,000 t. at
average savings of 29¢ equal $A,300,000 on Big Sandy only.
- 2 - ,

 Paragraph 125 - pg. 132 - Total savings to destinations estimateg,to
be ¢ oer ton on high volatile or total of $13,350,000. The dif—
ference of $9,000,000 per annum could be applied profitably by im-
proving such,channel conditions as chain of Rocks, etc.******0mmission,
Paragraph 125 - pg. 132. Division of tonnage between Tug and Levisa
orks. "It is therefore assumed that river traffic will develop on
Tug Fork more rapidly than on Levisa. An accurate apportionment
cannot be based on present production or market demand.
Total prospective river traffic creditable to each at the forks, on
the basis of a 29¢ reduction in transportation cost to the mouth of
the Big Sandy River, would be as follows:
Levisa Fork: 9,000,000 t. @ 29¢ « $2,610 000
Tug Fork: 6,000,000 t. @ 29¢ - 1,740,000
TOTAL 15,000,000 t. @ 29¢ m h,350,000
Paragraph 182 - pg. 155
TABLE XXXVIL Elevations Lift.
Lock_& Dam N0. §tream Miles from Lower Pool Upper Pool
Ohio River
1 Big Sandy 0.71 h9§.5 52h.6 26.1
2 Big Sandy 21.29 52a.6 555.0 30.h
3 Levisa h6.29 555.0 585.0 30.0
L Levisa 70.36 385.0 615.0 30.0
5 Levisa 93.39 615.0 6h0.0* 25.0 ,
6 Levisa 111.92 6h0.0 662.5 22.5
7 Tug 38.65 555.0 590.0 35.0
8 Tug 63.39‘ 590.0 610.0 20.0
‘ 9 Tug 71.28 610.0 637.5 27.5
10 Tug 87.21 637.5 555.0** 17.5
* Allowable drawdown for increasing low flow 2.5 ft.
*# n n n n n n 5.0 ft.
Paragraph 122 ~1pgg 156 - Quantities of dredging required ~- Total
4,310,000 yds. Total estimated cost tu,007,000.00 or 45¢ to 60¢ per
yard. Disposal is a difficulty at some points.
Paragggph 125 - Navigation structures. Vertical lift. double—leaf
gates, 100k dimensions 80 x 500 ft. Additional width provided per-
mits h- 35 x 195 ft. barges or 6-26 x 175 ft. barges S-abreast. Lock
walls 5 ft. above upper pool elevations. *
Paragpgohwggg - Capacity of Project. High water losses 60 da. per -
year. firedg ng and repairs 7 days , net operating days 292. Minimum
yearly capacity 10,100,000 per year on each fork or total of
20,200,000 t.
Egpggpgph 211 - pg, 152 - A summary of total project costs by
individual dams and navigation pools:
Item Big Sandy Levisa Fork Tug Fork Total
Dams h,l22,350 6,698,500 5,771,8h0 16,592,690
Locks 5,100,220 10,886,770 10,625,760 26,652,750
facilities h96,510 577,510 533,550 1,607,570
Removal ex—
Structures 75,670 --~—- ------ 75,670
Bridge Alter— ‘ '
ations ----- 773,500 952,500 1,726,000
..3. '

 Paragraph 211(continued)
Item Big Sandy Levisa Fork Tug Fork Total
Lands & ' ' ' ' '
damage 3,925,000 5,965,000 5,737,000 15,625,000
General ' '
Items 55.780 109,550 109,550 273,880
Aid to Navi- '
gation 8,860 52,250 32,020 85,120 V
TOTAL $15,214,390 $26,259,070 $25,181,220 $65,654,680
Paragraph 212 - Operation 2 Maintenance. The annual cost of operas
tion and maintainance is estimated to average $55000 per lock and dam,
and provides for a permanent operating force of 17 employees at each
lock and dam, etc. The annual cost of channel maintainance is es-
timated at $100,000. Annual pumping cost estimated at $u3,3uo. Cost
of maintaining navigation aids $10,370 per year.
Paragraph 215 - pg, 128 - Ratio of annual costs to annual benefits.
The total annual Federal carrying charge on the proposed project is
$3,537,820. The tangible benefits derived from conservative analysis
of transportation savings amount to $5,350,000. The ratio of
economic cost to economic benefits is therefore 1 to 1.27.
Paragraph 325 - pg. 162 ~ "A lost time factor" of 50% increases
estimated tonnage cost to 5.0 mills per ton mile.?? :21 ‘
L. Conclusion.
Paragragh 225 - pg, 168 - From the foregoing investigation of the
B g an y River and Tug and Levisa Forks in the interest of naviga—
tion, The District hngineer concludes that; provision of an ade-
quate navigation system from the mouth of Big Sandy River to Sprigg,
W. Va., on Tug Fork and to the confluence of Russell Fork and
Levisa Fork is feasible from an engineering stand point; the pro-
ject will produce tangible benefits substantially in excess of the
costs, deepite a most conservative analysis; the entire cost of
construction should be born by the Federal Government; and that
the project is justificable and worthy of adoption as a Federal
Paragggph_2§§ - Navigation. From his investigation of the Big Sandy
River and Tug and Levisa Forks, Kentucky, West Virginia and Virginia,
the District Engineer finds:
(a) Development of an adequate navigation system is
practical from an engineering stand point.
(b) The project would produce benefits in excess of costs,
having an economic ratio of costs to benefits of 1 to 1.27. .
It is, therefore, recommended that:
(a) The existing antiquated navigation system on Big Sandy
River and Tug and Levisa Forks be replaced by construction of 10
new locks and dams so as to provide a channel of 9 ft. project
depth with 3 ft. overdepth having minimum bottom width of 200 ft. on
Big Sandy River, 150 ft. on Tug and Levisa Forks, said project to
begin at the mouth of Big Sandy River and extend to the N. & W. Rail-
way bridge at Sprigg, W. Va., on Tug Fk. and to the mouth of Russell
Fork on Levisa Fork.
_ ' h -

 (b) The project be adopted substantially in accordance
with the general plan presented in this report, at an estimated first
cost of $65,560,560 with $593,3h0 annually for maintainance and op—
eration of the project, exclusive of costs for aids to navigation.

(c) No local co-operation be required in initial construc-

- tion at the project, but that local interests be required to maintain
all railroads, highways, bridges, and utilities affected by the pro-
ject, and to construct adequate terminal and transfer facilities for
utilization of the waterway.

(d) The locks and dams on Big Sandy River and Tug Fork be
constructed during the first three-year period, with those on Levisa
Fork during the next two-year period.


(9) Funds totalling $65,560,560 be allocated in annual
amounts as follows:- $1h,000,000 for each of the first, second and
third year, $13,000,000 for the fourth year and $10,560,560 for the
fifth year, to provide for efficient prosecution of the work by
continuing contracts.

Harry Pockras,

Lt.Col.Corps of Engineers

District Engineer.
Subject: Report on survey of Big Sandy River and Tug and Levisa Forks,
Ky., W. Va., and Va., for Flood Control and Navigation.(Ltr. fm. Hunt.
Dist. to OCE. thru ORD.dated may 1945) ARD. G.R. 1
Office Division Engineer, Ohio River Div., Columbus, 0., 25 May 1905.
To: Cheif of Angineers, Washington 25, D.C. For SPEKW

(1) This report is a very carefully prepared document and
in fact constitutes a distinct contribution to engineering literature.

(2) The Big Sandy River is a type of stream common in the
mountains south of the Ohio River, in that it is subject to flash
floods and has a very narrow flood plain. In the nature of things,
it is very difficult to provide any method of flood control for this
narrow flood plain except at a cost entirely disproporfiionute to the
benefits conferred. After a very careful analvs;s o? the flood
problem, the District Engineer finds no economical method of reducing
the flood damages in the valley other than the construction of the
Dewey Reservoir4uhich has already been authorized by Congress and for
which engineering plans have already been prepared. The Division
Engineer concurs in the findings of the District Engineer.

(3) The report contains a very well prepared plan for the
canalization.of the Big bandy River and its two forks, Tug and Levisa,
up to prescribed heads of navigation. Undoubtedly there is a large
potential waterborne traffic in high«grade bituminous coal from the ._
Big Sandy fields. There are tWO factors which determine the total ‘
savings to be expected from the movement of Big Sandy coals by water:
(1) The unit saving per ton over the alternate unit cost of transs , u'
portation; and (2) the tonnage which reasonably can be expected to
move by water as a result of the reduction in transportation costs.

(h) The District Engineer credits the Big Sandy River im-
provement with a unit saving of 29¢ Per ton, based on the difference
between water haul cost of 33¢ per ton on the Big Sandy River and

‘ an existing, but presently unused, proportional rail rate of 55¢ per
ton from the coal fields on Levisa Fork to Catlettsburg plus 7¢ per
ton transfer charge from rail cars to Ohio River barges at Catletts-
burg. He estimates the total average unit saving from origin on The
Big Sandy tgliestination at points on the Ohio and upper Mississippi

.'- 5T-i ' ‘ I .

 I ~

River systems at 89¢ per ton. If the total average unit saving of
89¢ per ton be credited to the Big Sandy River improvement, a move-
ment of only about 3,860,000 t. annually would assure sufficient
annual savings to balance the estimated annual cost of the improve-
ment regardless of the possible future establishment of a terminal
at or in the vicinity of Catlettsburg to advantage of the existing
proportional rail rate, it is believed entirely reasonable to expect
the improvement of the Big Sandy River to result in an average annual
coal movement during the economic life of the improvement well in ex-
cess of 3,860,000 t., in addition to any rail-river movement which
may develop through the Ohio River terminal. Such a water movement
of 0081 by use of an improved Big Sandy RiVer would constitute an
entirely new waterway movement with respect to the Ohio and Mississ-
ippi River systems, which could develop only by reason of improve-
ment of the Big Sandy. Therefore, the