ments shall not be made in the park by the Secretary unless expenditures therefor are reasonably justified by the benefits expected to accrue therefrom prior to the time when the lands proposed to be developed are likely to be needed for such works as the Congress may hereafter authorize for municipal and domestic water supply, navigation, flood control, drainage, hydroelectric power, or other beneficial purposes. Subject to the limitations, purposes, and general requirements of this Act, the Secretary shall administer the park under the general laws and requirements governing areas of the national park system in such manner as to preserve and interpret the historic, scenic, and recreational values and features thereof.

SEC. 5. The enactment of this Act shall not affect adversely any valid rights now existing within the areas established pursuant to this Act as the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park and Parkway.

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPIN ALL,

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Washington, D.C., March 20, 1959.

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your request for the views of the Department of the Army with respect to H.R. 953, 86th Congress, a bill to establish the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park and to provide for the administration and maintenance of a parkway in the State of Maryland, and for other purposes.

The general purpose of the above-mentioned bill is to establish the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park, Md., between the terminus of the George Washington Memorial Parkway above the Great Falls of the Potomac River and a point near the city of Cumberland.

The Department of the Army, through the Corps of Engineers, has long been concerned with the development of the water resources of the Potomac River Basin for the benefit of the public in general. The Department is in full accord with the overall objectives of H.R. 953, to preserve and develop the public recreational potentialities of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal. These potentialities were recognized and provisions were made therefor in a report submitted to the Congress by the Secretary of the Army on May 22, 1946, on a preliminary examination and survey of the Potomac River and tributaries, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania, published as House Document No. 622, 79th Congress.

Under the authority of a resolution adopted on January 26, 1956, by the Committee on Public Works of the U.S. Senate, the district engineer at Washington, D.C., is conducting a review of the report contained in House Document No. 622 in order to determine whether any modification of the recommendations therein is advisable at this time, with a view to preparation of a comprehensive plan for control of floods and the development and conservation of the water and related resources of the basin, with paricular emphasis on present and future needs for water supply and pollution abatement. In making this study, the Corps of Engineers is coordinating fully with the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, and with the States of Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia, and with the National Capital Regional Planning Council and other Federal agencies concerned, to insure full consideration of all views and requirements.

This study will consider all elements of water resource development. Every plan that has so far been contemplated for economic development of the water resources of the Potomac has included reservoirs as a primary component of the plan. Reservoir storage is considered essential for development of a dependable and adequate water supply for the increasing needs of the Washington area and such reservoirs as are ultimately found indispensable may occupy part of the lands encompassed in the proposed work.

The Department of the Army believes that action on H.R. 953 should be deferred pending completion of the overall study of development of the water resources of the basin now underway. However, should the committee determine to proceed with this legislation, the Department would not interpose objection thereto if the bill were modified to include at the end of section 3(a) the following additional proviso, which is contained in a companion bill, S. 77: "And provided further, That designation of lands for Chesapeake and Ohio

Canal National Historical Park purposes shall not debar, or limit, or abridge its use for such works as Congress may in the future authorize for improvement and extension of navigation, or for flood control, or irrigation, or drainage, or for the development of hydroelectric power or other purposes."

Inasmuch as the committee has requested that this report be available at the time of scheduled hearings on the bill, the report is submitted without a determination by the Bureau of the Budget as to whether or not it conforms to the program of the President. As soon as such advice is received, it will be forwarded to the committee.

Sincerely yours,

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL,

WILBER M. BRUCKER,

Secretary of the Army.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Washington, D.C., March 20, 1959.

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your request for the views of the Department of the Army with respect to H.R. 2331, 86th Congress, a bill to establish the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park and to provide for the administration and maintenance of a parkway, in the State of Maryland, and for other purposes.

The general purpose of the above-mentioned bill is to establish the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park, Md., between the terminus of the George Washington Memorial Parkway above the Great Falls of the Potomac River and a point near the city of Cumberland.

The Department of the Army, through the Corps of Engineers, has long been concerned with the development of the water resources of the Potomac River Basin for the benefit of the public in general. The Department is in full accord with the overall objectives of H.R. 2331, to preserve and develop the public recreational potentialities of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal. These potentialities were recognized and provisions were made therefor in a report submitted to the Congress by the Secretary of the Army on May 22, 1946, on a preliminary examination and survey of the Potomac River and tributaries, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, published as House Document 622, 79th Congress.

Under the authority of a resolution adopted on January 26, 1956, by the Committee on Public Works of the U.S. Senate, the district engineer at Washington, D.C. is conducting a review of the report contained in House Document 622 in order to determine whether any modification of the recommendations therein is advisable at this time, with a view to preparation of a comprehensive plan for control of floods and the development and conservation of the water and related resources of the basin, with particular emphasis on present and future needs for water supply and pollution abatement. In making this study, the Corps of Engineers is coordinating fully with the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, and with the States of Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia, and with the National Capital Regional Planning Council and other Federal agencies concerned, to insure full consideration of all views and requirements.

This study will consider all elements of water resources development. Every plan that has so far been contemplated for economic development of the water resources of the Potomac has included reservoirs as a primary component of the plan. Reservoir storage is considered essential for development of a dependable and adequate water supply for the increasing needs of the Washington area and such reservoirs as are ultimately found indispensable may occupy part of the lands encompassed in the proposed park.

The Department of the Army believes that action on H.R. 2331 should be deferred pending completion of the overall study of development of the water resources of the basin now underway. However, should the committee determine to proceed with this legislation, the Department would not interpose objection thereto in view of the provision at lines 12-17, page 5, of the bill that the designation of the lands for park purposes shall not debar, limit, or abridge the use of the area for such water resource development as might be authorized in the future by Congress.

Inasmuch as the committee has requested that this report be available at the time of scheduled hearings on the bill, the report is submitted without a determination by the Bureau of the Budget as to whether or not it conforms to the program of the President. As soon as such advice is received, it will be forwarded to the committee.

Sincerely yours,

WILBER M. BRUCKER,

Secretary of the Army.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Washington, D.C., March 20, 1959.

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your request for the views of the Department of the Army with respect to H.R. 5194, 86th Congress, a bill to establish the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal National Historical Park and to provide for the administration and maintenance of a parkway, in the State of Maryland, and for other purposes.

The purpose of H.R. 5194 is to establish a national historial park along the route of the abandoned Chesapeake & Ohio Canal between the terminus of the George Washington Memorial Parkway and a point near the city of Cumberland; Md., to provide for the acquisition of lands in the vicinity of the canal; to establish a scenic parkway facilitating access to the park; to provide for the development of a comprehensive plan for the Potomac River Basin by the Secretary of the Army and for coordination of such plan with plans for the park prepared by the Secretary of the Interior; to insure that establishment of the park will not bar or prejudice the subsequent carrying out of works for domestic water supply, navigation, flood control, drainage, hydroelectric power, or other beneficial purposes, and to provide for continuing consultation and coordination by the Secretary of the Interior with the Secretary of the Army and the Commissioners of the District of Columbia.

Section 3 of the bill recognizes that the Corps of Engineers of this Department is preparing a comprehensive and unified plan for the development, utilization, and conservation of the water and related resources of the Potomac River Basin, with the cooperation of interested Federal, State, and other agencies. It also recognizes the need for coordination between this basinwide plan and the plan for the proposed national historical park. To insure such coordination the bill directs the Secretary of the Army to complete and submit the comprehensive plan for the Potomac Basin within 3 years after the bill is enacted.

The Department of the Army agrees that a comprehensive plan for the basin should be completed before a plan for the proposed park is finally approved, and also that the two plans should be carefully coordinated. Moreover, it is felt that the basinwide plan should be completed as soon as possible. It is pointed out, however, that the date of completion will depend upon the rate at which appropriations are made available by the Congress, and that this would not be determined by the proposed legislation. It would be desirable, therefore, to amend section 3 of the bill by deleting the clause, "not more than three years after enactment of this Act", appearing in line 23 and 24 of page 5.

Amendment of the bill to eliminate the difficulty pointed out above would make it fully acceptable to the Department of the Army.

Inasmuch as the committee has requested that this report be available at the time of the scheduled hearings on the bill, the report is submitted without a determination by the Bureau of the Budget as to whether or not it conforms to the program of the President. As soon as such advice is received, it will be forwarded to the committee.

Sincerely yours,

WILBER M. BRUCKER,
Secretary of the Army.

GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

EXECUTIVE OFFICE, Washington, D.C., March 17, 1959.

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

MY DEAR MR. ASPINALL: The Commissioners of the District of Columbia have for report H.R. 953, 86th Congress, a bill to establish the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park and to provide for the administration and maintenance of a parkway in the State of Maryland, and for other purposes, and H.R. 2331 and H.R. 5194, 86th Congress, bills to establish the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park and to provide for the administration and maintenance of a parkway in the State of Maryland, and for other purposes. Although the three bills on which the Commissioners are reporting are not identical bills, they are similar in certain respects, and accordingly the Commissioners are submitting a single report covering the three bills.

The first section of each of the three bills establishes a park to be known as the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park, comprised of not to exceed 4,800 acres of federally owned property, to which may be added additional land for a total area of not more than 15,000 acres. The park is to extend from a point above the Great Falls on the Potomac River to a point within or in the vicinity of Cumberland, Md.

Although all of the proposed park is to be located in the State of Maryland and outside the boundaries of the District of Columbia, the Commissioners desire to emphasize that the District of Columbia has a vital interest in the establishment of the park, inasmuch as the presence of the park could operate to restrict or preempt the future development of the river from the standpoint of supplying water for a rapidly expanding Washington metropolitan area. The Potomac is the only water source for the District of Columbia and Arlington, parts of Fairfax County, and the city of Falls Church, all in Virginia. The river will shortly become a principal source for water used in Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland. It is expected that the population of the Washington metropolitan area will increase in the next 40 years to approximately 4,800,000 persons. Ninety percent of the water required for this population must be provided by the Potomac River. It has been demonstrated that the Potomac River cannot supply the quantity of water demanded by a population of this size without flow regulation. Adequate regulation will require impoundments within the Potomac watershed. Just where and when such impoundments should be placed hav not yet been determined.

The Commissioners are pleased to note, therefore, that the first section of H.R. 5194 provides in part that:

"The designation or acquisition of land for the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park shall not bar or prejudice its use for such works as the Congress may hereafter authorize for municipal and domestic water supply, navigation, flood control, drainage, hydroelectric power, or other beneficial purposes, *

The Commissioners also note that other features of H.R. 5194 are designed to make it possible, should it ever be necessary, for action to be taken with respect to improving the District of Columbia water supply and the general beneficial development of the Potomac River without endangering a large investment in the establishment of the proposed park. This aspect of the problem is taken care of by subsection (b) of section 3 of H.R. 5194, requiring consultation at least once a year with respect to the development of the park and the expenditure of funds for such development, to the end that such expenditures as may be needed are reasonably justified by the benefits to be received as a result of such expenditures. Accordingly, in the belief that H.R. 5194 contains provisions which will have the effect of insuring that the development of the Potomac River for water supply and other beneficial purposes continue paramount while at the same time providing additional recreational facilities for the residents of the metropolitan area of the District of Columbia, the Commissioners favor its enactment.

The Commissioners do not, however, favor the enactment of H.R. 953 and H.R. 2331 in their present form. H.R. 953 does not provide that the development of the Potomac River for water supply and other beneficial purposes would be paramount. H.R. 2331, for its part, contains a provision which purports to protect the future development of the river, but the Commissioners believe that this provision, set forth in the last proviso of subsection (a) of section 3 of the bill, is not

adequate to the need. The Commissioners are of the view, however, that the deficiency they believe to exist in each of these bills, can be remedied by inserting in lieu of the last proviso in section 3(a) in H.R. 2331, and by inserting before the period at the end of section 3(a) in H.R. 953, a proviso which reads as follows:

"And provide further, That (1) designation or acquisition of lands for the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park shall not bar or prejudice its use for such work as the Congress may hereafter authorize for municipal and domestic water supply, navigation, flood control, drainage, hydroelectric power, or other beneficial purposes; (2) the extension of the park shall not bar the Secretary of the Army and the Commissioners of the District of Columbia from causing to be made within it such investigations as, in their judgment, are necessary to determine the feasibility of such work; (3) no funds for development of the park shall be expended by the Secretary until after consultation with the Secretary of the Army and the Commissioners of the District of Columbia which consultation shall be undertaken at least once each year, it being the intent of the Congress that costly installations and improvements shall not be made in the park by the Secretary unless expenditures therefor are reasonably justified by benefits expected to accrue therefrom prior to the time, if any, when utilization of the land within the park is likely to be needed for any of the purposes aforesaid; and (4) the cost to the United States of any lands which it has acquired or shall acquire for the park and which are utilized for works for any of the purposes as aforesaid shall become and be treated as a cost of its works." As the Commissioners have noted earlier in this report, they favor the enactment of H.R. 5194, and would favor the enactment of H.R. 953 and H.R. 2331 if these bills were amended in the manner set forth in this report. If H.R. 953 and H.R. 2331 are not amended in the manner suggested by the Commissioners, they feel it necessary to object to the enactment of either of these bills in their present form.

Time does not permit ascertaining the views of the Bureau of the Budget as to the relationship of this report to the program of the President.

Yours very sincerely,

ROBERT E. MCLAUGHLIN,

President, Board of Commissioners, District of Columbia. Mrs. Prost. For the benefit of the new members, I should like to read into the record a brief summary so that they may know what has previously transpired on the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal legislation. In the 85th Congress S. 77 and H.R. 1145, identical bills to H.R. 953 and H.R. 2331, were introduced to establish the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park and to provide for a parkway in the State of Maryland. S. 77 was amended and passed the Senate August 29, 1957. Hearings were held by the House Subcommittee on Public Lands in June, July, and August of 1958 and the Senate bill was reported to the full committee without further amendment on August 18. No further action was taken.

That was near the end of the session and, therefore, it was too late for us to be able to get a rule and passage by the House.

H.R. 2331 by Mr. Foley is identical to S. 77, 85th Congress, as amended. H.R. 953 by Mr. Saylor is identical to H.R. 1145, 85th Congress. Both would create an historical park along the Potomac River from the terminus of the George Washington Memorial Parkway above Great Falls to a point in or near the city of Cumberland, Md., and a scenic parkway giving access to an isolated area. Provision is made in section 3(a) of H.R. 2331 that the designation of park lands shall not bar their use for future authorized works for navigation and certain other purposes.

H.R. 5194, by Mr. Foley, and H.R. 5344, by Mr. Lankford, differ from H.R. 953 and H.R. 2331 in the following major respects:

1. Section 1(a) prohibits the development or improvement for park purposes of park lands situated from the terminus of the George